diff options
Diffstat (limited to '77338-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | 77338-0.txt | 15742 |
1 files changed, 15742 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/77338-0.txt b/77338-0.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..cc0440b --- /dev/null +++ b/77338-0.txt @@ -0,0 +1,15742 @@ +*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 77338 *** + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + + Transcriber’s Note: + +This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects. +Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. + +Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are +referenced. + +Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please +see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding +the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation. + + THE + + ENGLISH WORKS + + OF + + THOMAS HOBBES + + OF MALMESBURY; + + NOW FIRST COLLECTED AND EDITED + + BY + + SIR WILLIAM MOLESWORTH, BART. + + ------- + + VOL. VI. + + ------- + + + + + LONDON: + JOHN BOHN, + HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN. + + -- + + MDCCCXL. + + + + + LONDON: + C. RICHARDS, PRINTER, ST. MARTIN’S LANE. + + + + + + + + + CONTENTS. + + A Dialogue between a Philosopher and a Student of the Common Laws + of England 1 + + + Behemoth: the History of the Causes of the Civil Wars of England 161 + + + The Whole Art of Rhetoric 419 + + + The Art of Rhetoric, plainly set forth with pertinent examples + for the more easy understanding of the same 511 + + + The Art of Sophistry 529 + + + + + A + + DIALOGUE + + BETWEEN + + A PHILOSOPHER & A STUDENT + + OF + + THE COMMON LAWS OF ENGLAND. + + + + + A DIALOGUE + + OF + + THE COMMON LAW. + + ========== + +[Sidenote: Of the law of reason.] + +_Lawyer._ What makes you say, that the study of the law is less rational +than the study of the mathematics? + +_Philosopher._ I say not that; for all study is rational, or nothing +worth: but I say, that the great masters of the _mathematics_ do not so +often err as the great professors of the law. + +_L._ If you had applied your reason to the law, perhaps you would have +been of another mind. + +_P._ In whatsoever study, I examine whether my inference be rational: +and have looked over the titles of the statutes from Magna Charta +downward to this present time. I left not one unread, which I thought +might concern myself; which was enough for me, that meant not to plead +for any but myself. But I did not much examine which of them was more or +less rational; because I read them not to dispute, but to obey them, and +saw in all of them sufficient reason for my obedience, and that the same +reason, though the Statutes themselves were changed, remained constant. +I have also diligently read over Littleton’s book of _Tenures_, with the +commentaries thereupon of the renowned lawyer Sir Edward Coke; in which +I confess I found great subtilty, not of the law, but of inference from +law, and especially from the law of human nature, which is the law of +reason: and I confess that it is truth which he says in the epilogue to +his book, that by arguments and reason in the law, a man shall sooner +come to the certainty and knowledge of the law: and I agree with Sir +Edward Coke, who upon that text farther says, that reason is the soul of +the law; and upon section 138, _nihil, quod est contra rationem, est +licitum_; that is to say, nothing is law that is against reason; and +that reason is the life of the law, nay the common law itself is nothing +else but reason; and upon section 21, _æquitas est perfecta quædam +ratio, quæ jus scriptum interpretatur et emendat, nulla scriptura +comprehensa, sed solum in vera ratione consistens_; _i. e._ Equity is a +certain perfect reason, that interpreteth and amendeth the law written, +itself being unwritten, and consisting in nothing else but right reason. +When I consider this, and find it to be true, and so evident as not to +be denied by any man of right sense, I find my own reason at a stand; +for it frustrates all the laws in the world. For upon this ground any +man, of any law whatsoever, may say it is against reason, and thereupon +make a pretence for his disobedience. I pray you clear this passage, +that we may proceed. + +_L._ I clear it thus, out of Sir Edward Coke (I. Inst. sect. 138), that +this is to be understood of an artificial perfection of reason, gotten +by long study, observation, and experience, and not of every man’s +natural reason; for _nemo nascitur artifex_. This legal reason is _summa +ratio_; and therefore if all the reason that is dispersed into so many +several heads, were united into one, yet could he not make such a law as +the law of England is; because by so many successions of ages it hath +been fined and refined by an infinite number of grave and learned men. + +_P._ This does not clear the place, as being partly obscure, and partly +untrue. That the reason which is the life of the law, should be not +natural, but artificial, I cannot conceive. I understand well enough, +that the knowledge of the law is gotten by much study, as all other +sciences are, which when they are studied and obtained, it is still done +by natural, and not by artificial reason. I grant you, that the +knowledge of the law is an art; but not that any art of one man, or of +many, how wise soever they be, or the work of one or more artificers, +how perfect soever it be, is law. It is not wisdom, but authority that +makes a law. Obscure also are the words _legal reason_. There is no +reason in earthly creatures, but human reason. But I suppose that he +means, that the reason of a judge, or of all the judges together without +the King, is that _summa ratio_, and the very law: which I deny, because +none can make a law but he that hath the legislative power. That the law +hath been fined by grave and learned men, meaning the professors of the +law, is manifestly untrue; for all the laws of England have been made by +the kings of England, consulting with the nobility and commons in +parliament, of which not one of twenty was a learned lawyer. + +_L._ You speak of the statute law, and I speak of the common law. + +_P._ I speak generally of law. + +_L._ Thus far I agree with you, that statute law taken away, there would +not be left, either here, or any where, any law at all that would +conduce to the peace of a nation; yet equity and reason, (laws Divine +and eternal, which oblige all men at all times, and in all places), +would still remain, but be obeyed by few: and though the breach of them +be not punished in this world, yet they will be punished sufficiently in +the world to come. Sir Edward Coke, for drawing to the men of his own +profession as much authority as lawfully he might, is not to be +reprehended; but to the gravity and learning of the judges they ought to +have added in the making of laws, the authority of the King, which hath +the sovereignty: for of these laws of reason, every subject that is in +his wits, is bound to take notice at his peril, because reason is part +of his nature, which he continually carries about with him, and may read +it, if he will. + +_P._ It is very true; and upon this ground, if I pretend within a month +or two to make myself able to perform the office of a judge, you are not +to think it arrogance; for you are to allow to me, as well as to other +men, my pretence to reason, which is the common law, (remember this, +that I may not need again to put you in mind, that reason is the common +law): and for statute law, seeing it is printed, and that there be +indexes to point me to every matter contained in them, I think a man may +profit in them very much in two months. + +_L._ But you will be but an ill pleader. + +_P._ A pleader commonly thinks he ought to say all he can for the +benefit of his client, and therefore has need of a faculty to wrest the +sense of words from their true meaning, and the faculty of _rhetoric_ to +seduce the jury, and sometimes the judge also, and many other arts which +I neither have, nor intend to study. + +_L._ But let the judge, how good soever he thinks his reasoning, take +heed that he depart not too much from the letter of the statute: for it +is not without danger. + +_P._ He may without danger recede from the letter, if he do not from the +meaning and sense of the law; which may be by a learned man, (such as +judges commonly are,) easily found out by the preamble, the time when it +was made, and the incommodities for which it was made. But I pray tell +me, to what end were statute laws ordained, seeing the law of reason +ought to be applied to every controversy that can arise. + +_L._ You are not ignorant of the force of an irregular appetite to +riches, to power, and to sensual pleasures, how it masters the strongest +reason, and is the root of disobedience, slaughter, fraud, hypocrisy, +and all manner of evil habits; and that the laws of man, though they can +punish the fruits of them, which are evil actions, yet they cannot pluck +up the roots that are in the heart. How can a man be indicted of +avarice, envy, hypocrisy, or other vicious habit, till it be declared by +some action which a witness may take notice of? The root remaining, new +fruit will come forth, till you be weary of punishing, and at last +destroy all power that shall oppose it. + +_P._ What hope then is there of a constant peace in any nation, or +between one nation and another? + +_L._ You are not to expect such a peace between two nations; because +there is no common power in this world to punish their injustice. Mutual +fear may keep them quiet for a time; but upon every visible advantage +they will invade one another; and the most visible advantage is then, +when the one nation is obedient to their king, and the other not. But +peace at home may then be expected durable, when the common people shall +be made to see the benefit they shall receive by their obedience and +adhesion to their own sovereign, and the harm they must suffer by taking +part with them, who by promises of reformation, or change of government, +deceive them. And this is properly to be done by divines, and from +arguments not only from reason, but also from the Holy Scripture. + +_P._ This that you say is true, but not very much to that I aim at by +your conversation, which is to inform myself concerning the laws of +England. Therefore I ask you again, what is the end of statute-laws? + +[Sidenote: Of sovereign power.] + +_L._ I say then that the scope of all human law is peace, and justice in +every nation amongst themselves, and defence against foreign enemies. + +_P._ But what is justice? + +_L._ Justice is giving to every man his own. + +_P._ The definition is good, and yet it is Aristotle’s. What is the +definition agreed upon as a principle in the science of the common law? + +_L._ The same with that of Aristotle. + +_P._ See, you lawyers, how much you are beholden to the philosopher; and +it is but reason; for the more general and noble science and law of all +the world, is true philosophy, of which the common law of England is a +very little part. + +_L._ It is so, if you mean by philosophy nothing but the study of +reason; as I think you do. + +_P._ When you say that justice gives to every man his own, what mean you +by his own? How can that be given me, which is my own already? Or, if it +be not my own, how can justice make it mine? + +_L._ Without law, every thing is in such sort every man’s, as he may +take, possess, and enjoy, without wrong to any man; every thing, lands, +beasts, fruits, and even the bodies of other men, if his reason tell him +he cannot otherwise live securely. For the dictates of reason are little +worth, if they tended not to the preservation and improvement of men’s +lives. Seeing then without human law all things would be common, and +this community a cause of encroachment, envy, slaughter, and continual +war of one upon another, the same law of reason dictates to mankind, for +their own preservation, a distribution of lands and goods, that each man +may know what is proper to him, so as none other might pretend a right +thereunto, or disturb him in the use of the same. This distribution is +justice, and this properly is the same which we say is one’s own; by +which you may see the great necessity there was of statute laws, for +preservation of all mankind. It is also a dictate of the law of reason, +that statute laws are a necessary means of the safety and well-being of +man in the present world, and are to be obeyed by all subjects, as the +law of reason ought to be obeyed, both by King and subjects, because it +is the law of God. + +_P._ All this is very rational; but how can any laws secure one man from +another, when the greatest part of men are so unreasonable, and so +partial to themselves as they are, and the laws of themselves are but a +dead letter, which of itself is not able to compel a man to do otherwise +than himself pleaseth, nor punish or hurt him when he hath done a +mischief? + +_L._ By the laws, I mean laws living and armed. For you must suppose, +that a nation that is subdued by war to an absolute submission to a +conqueror, may, by the same arm that compelled it to submission, be +compelled to obey his laws. Also, if a nation choose a man, or an +assembly of men, to govern them by laws, it must furnish him also with +armed men and money, and all things necessary to his office; or else his +laws will be of no force, and the nation remains, as before it was, in +confusion. It is not therefore the word of the law, but the power of a +man that has the strength of a nation, that make the laws effectual. It +was not Solon that made Athenian laws, though he devised them, but the +supreme court of the people; nor, the lawyers of Rome that made the +imperial law in Justinian’s time, but Justinian himself. + +_P._ We agree then in this, that in England it is the King that makes +the laws, whosoever pens them; and in this, that the King cannot make +his laws effectual, nor defend his people against their enemies, without +a power to levy soldiers; and consequently, that he may lawfully, as oft +as he shall really think it necessary to raise an army, (which in some +occasions be very great) I say, raise it, and money to maintain it. I +doubt not but you will allow this to be according to the law, at least +of reason. + +_L._ For my part I allow it. But you have heard how, in and before the +late troubles the people were of another mind. Shall the King, said +they, take from us what he pleases, upon pretence of a necessity whereof +he makes himself the judge? What worse condition can we be in from an +enemy? What can they take from us more than what they list? + +_P._ The people reason ill. They do not know in what condition we were, +in the time of the Conqueror, when it was a shame to be an Englishman; +who, if he grumbled at the base offices he was put to by his Norman +masters, received no other answer than this, _thou art but an +Englishman_. Nor can the people, nor any man that humours their +disobedience, produce any example of a King that ever raised any +excessive sums, either by himself or by the consent of his Parliament, +but when they had great need thereof; nor can show any reason that might +move any of them so to do. The greatest complaint by them made against +the unthriftiness of their Kings, was for the enriching now and then a +favourite, which to the wealth of the kingdom was inconsiderable, and +the complaint but envy. But in this point of raising soldiers, what is, +I pray you, the statute law? + +_L._ The last statute concerning it, is 13 _Car._ II. cap. 6, by which +the supreme government, command, and disposing of the militia of +England, is delivered to be, and always to have been, the ancient right +of the Kings of England. But there is also in the same act a proviso, +that this shall not be construed for a declaration, that the King may +transport his subjects, or compel them to march out of the kingdom; nor +is it, on the contrary, declared to be unlawful. + +_P._ Why is not that also determined? + +_L._ I can imagine cause enough for it, though I may be deceived. We +love to have our King amongst us, and not to be governed by deputies, +either of our own or another nation. But this I verily believe, that if +a foreign enemy should either invade us, or put himself into a readiness +to invade either England, Ireland, or Scotland, no Parliament then +sitting, and the King send English soldiers thither, the Parliament +would give him thanks for it. The subjects of those Kings who affect the +glory, and imitate the actions, of Alexander the Great, have not always +the most comfortable lives, nor do such Kings usually very long enjoy +their conquests. They march to and fro perpetually, as upon a plank +sustained only in the midst; and when one end rises, down goes the +other. + +_P._ It is well. But where soldiers, in the judgment of the King’s +conscience, are indeed necessary, as in an insurrection, or rebellion at +home; how shall the kingdom be preserved without a considerable army +ready and in pay? How shall money be raised for this army, especially +when the want of public treasure inviteth neighbour Kings to encroach, +and unruly subjects to rebel? + +_L._ I cannot tell. It is matter of polity, not of law. But I know, that +there be statutes express, whereby the King hath obliged himself never +to levy money upon his subjects without the consent of his Parliament. +One of which statutes is 25 _Edw._ I. c. 6, in these words: _We have +granted for us, and our heirs, as well to archbishops, bishops, abbots, +priors, and other folk of holy Church, as also to earls, barons, and to +all the commonalty of the land, that for no business from henceforth, we +shall take such aids, tasks, or prizes, but by the common consent of the +realm_. There is also another statute of _Edward_ I. (34 _Edw._ I. stat. +4) in these words: _No tallage, or aid shall be taken or levied by us or +our heirs in our realm, without the good will and assent of the +archbishops, bishops, earls, barons, knights, burgesses, and other +freemen of the land_; which statutes have been since that time confirmed +by divers other Kings, and lastly by the King that now reigneth. + +_P._ All this I know, and am not satisfied. I am one of the common +people, and one of that almost infinite number of men, for whose welfare +Kings and other sovereigns were by God ordained: for God made Kings for +the people, and not people for Kings. How shall I be defended from the +domineering of proud and insolent strangers that speak another language, +that scorn us, that seek to make us slaves, or how shall I avoid the +destruction that may arise from the cruelty of factions in a civil war, +unless the King, to whom alone, you say, belongeth the right of levying +and disposing of the militia by which only it can be prevented, have +ready money, upon all occasions, to arm and pay as many soldiers, as for +the present defence, or the peace of the people, shall be necessary? +Shall not I, and you, and every man be undone? Tell me not of a +Parliament, when there is no Parliament sitting, or perhaps none in +being, which may often happen. And when there is a Parliament, if the +speaking and leading men should have a design to put down monarchy, as +they had in the Parliament which began to sit the third of November, +1640, shall the King, who is to answer to God Almighty for the safety of +the people, and to that end is intrusted with the power to levy and +dispose of the soldiery, be disabled to perform his office, by virtue of +these acts of Parliament which you have cited? If this be reason, it is +reason also that the people be abandoned, or left at liberty to kill one +another, even to the last man; if it be not reason, then you have +granted it is not law. + +_L._ It is true, if you mean _recta ratio_; but _recta ratio_, which I +grant to be law, as Sir Edward Coke says, (1 _Inst._ sect. 138), is an +artificial perfection of reason, gotten by long study, observation, and +experience, and not every man’s natural reason; for _nemo nascitur +artifex_. This legal reason is _summa ratio_; and therefore, if all the +reason that is dispersed into so many several heads, were united into +one, yet could he not make such a law as the law of England is, because +by many successions of ages it hath been fined and refined by an +infinite number of grave and learned men. And this is it, he calls the +common law. + +_P._ Do you think this to be good doctrine? Though it be true, that no +man is born with the use of reason, yet all men may grow up to it as +well as lawyers; and when they have applied their reason to the laws, +(which were laws before they studied them, or else it was not law they +studied), may be as fit for and capable of judicature, as Sir Edward +Coke himself, who whether he had more or less use of reason, was not +thereby a judge, but because the King made him so. And whereas he says, +that a man who should have as much reason as is dispersed in so many +several heads, could not make such a law as this law of England is; if +one should ask him who made the law of England, would he say a +succession of English lawyers or judges made it, or rather a succession +of kings? And that upon their own reason, either solely, or with the +advice of the Lords and Commons in Parliament, without the judges or +other professors of the law? You see therefore that the King’s reason, +be it more or less, is that _anima legis_, that _summa lex_, whereof Sir +Edward Coke speaketh, and not the reason, learning, or wisdom of the +judges. But you may see, that quite through his _Institutes of Law_, he +often takes occasion to magnify the learning of the lawyers, whom he +perpetually termeth the sages of the Parliament, or of the King’s +council. Therefore unless you say otherwise, I say, that the King’s +reason, when it is publicly upon advice and deliberation declared, is +that _anima legis_; and that _summa ratio_ and that equity, which all +agree to be the law of reason, is all that is or ever was law in +England, since it became Christian, besides the Bible. + +_L._ Are not the Canons of the Church part of the law of England, as +also the imperial law used in the Admiralty, and the customs of +particular places, and the by-laws of corporations and courts of +judicature? + +_P._ Why not? For they were all constituted by the Kings of England; and +though the civil law used in the Admiralty were at first the statutes of +the Roman empire, yet because they are in force by no other authority +than that of the King, they are now the King’s laws, and the King’s +statutes. The same we may say of the Canons; such of them as we have +retained, made by the Church of Rome, have been no law, nor of any force +in England, since the beginning of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, but by +virtue of the great seal of England. + +_L._ In the said statutes that restrain the levying of money without +consent of Parliament, is there any thing you can take exceptions to? + +_P._ No. I am satisfied that the kings that grant such liberties, are +bound to make them good, so far as it may be done without sin: but if a +King find that by such a grant he be disabled to protect his subjects, +if he maintain his grant, he sins; and therefore may, and ought to take +no notice of the said grant. For such grants, as by error or false +suggestion are gotten from him, are, as the lawyers do confess, void and +of no effect, and ought to be recalled. Also the King, as is on all +hands confessed, hath the charge lying upon him to protect his people +against foreign enemies, and to keep the peace betwixt them within the +kingdom: if he do not his utmost endeavour to discharge himself thereof, +he committeth a sin, which neither King nor Parliament can lawfully +commit. + +_L._ No man, I think, will deny this. For if levying of money be +necessary, it is a sin in the Parliament to refuse; if unnecessary, it +is a sin both in King and Parliament to levy. But for all that, it may +be, and I think it is, a sin in any one that hath the sovereign power, +be he one man or one assembly, being intrusted with the safety of a +whole nation, if rashly, and relying upon his own natural sufficiency, +he make war or peace, without consulting with such, as by their +experience and employment abroad, and intelligence by letters, or other +means, have gotten the knowledge in some measure of the strength, +advantages, and designs of the enemy, and the manner and the degree of +the danger that may from thence arise. In like manner, in case of +rebellion at home, if he consult not with those of military condition; +which if he do, then I think he may lawfully proceed to subdue all such +enemies and rebels; and that the soldiers ought to go on without +inquiring whether they be within the country, or without. For who shall +suppress rebellion, but he that hath right to levy, command, and dispose +of the militia? The last Long Parliament denied this. But why? Because +by the major part of their votes the rebellion was raised with the +design to put down monarchy, and to that end maintained. + +_P._ Nor do I hereby lay any aspersion upon such grants of the King and +his ancestors. Those statutes are in themselves very good for the King +and the people, as creating some kind of difficulty for such Kings as, +for the glory of conquest, might spend one part of their subjects' lives +and estates in molesting other nations, and leave the rest to destroy +themselves at home by factions. That which I here find fault with, is +the wresting of those, and other such statutes, to the binding of our +Kings from the use of their armies in the necessary defence of +themselves and their people. The late Long Parliament, that in 1648 +murdered their King, (a King that sought no greater glory upon earth, +but to be indulgent to his people, and a pious defender of the Church of +England,) no sooner took upon them the sovereign power, than they levied +money upon the people at their own discretion. Did any of their subjects +dispute their power? Did they not send soldiers over the sea to subdue +Ireland, and others to fight against the Dutch at sea; or made they any +doubt but to be obeyed in all that they commanded, as a right absolutely +due to the sovereign power in whomsoever it resides? I say not this as +allowing their actions, but as a testimony from the mouths of those very +men that denied the same power to him whom they acknowledged to have +been their sovereign immediately before; which is a sufficient proof, +that the people of England never doubted of the King’s right to levy +money for the maintenance of his armies, till they were abused in it by +seditious teachers, and other prating men, on purpose to turn the State +and Church into popular government, where the most ignorant and boldest +talkers do commonly obtain the best preferments. Again, when their new +republic returned into monarchy by Oliver, who durst deny him money upon +any pretence of _Magna Charta_, or of these other acts of Parliament +which you have cited? You may therefore think it good law, for all your +books, that the King of England may at all times, that he thinks in his +conscience it will be necessary for the defence of his people, levy as +many soldiers and as much money as he please, and that himself is judge +of the necessity. + +_L._ Is there nobody hearkening at the door? + +_P._ What are you afraid of? + +_L._ I mean to say the same that you say: but there be very many yet, +that hold their former principles, whom neither the calamities of the +civil wars, nor their former pardon, have thoroughly cured of their +madness. + +_P._ The common people never take notice of what they hear of this +nature, but when they are set on by such as they think wise; that is, by +some sorts of preachers, or some that seem to be learned in the laws, +and withal speak evil of the governors. But what if the King, upon the +sight or apprehension of any great danger to his people, (as when their +neighbours are borne down by the current of a conquering enemy), should +think his own people might be involved in the same misery; may he not +levy, pay, and transport soldiers to help those weak neighbours, by way +of prevention to save his own people and himself from servitude? Is that +a sin? + +_L._ First, if the war upon our neighbour be just, it may be questioned +whether it be equity or no to assist them against the right. + +_P._ For my part, I make no question of that at all, unless the invader +will, and can, put me in security, that neither he nor his successors +shall make any advantage of the conquest of my neighbour, to do the same +to me in time to come. But there is no common power to bind them to the +peace. + +_L._ Secondly, when such a thing shall happen, the Parliament will not +refuse to contribute freely to the safety of themselves and the whole +nation. + +_P._ It may be so, and it may be not; for if a Parliament then sit not, +it must be called; that requires six weeks' time; debating and +collecting what is given requires as much, and in this time the +opportunity perhaps is lost. Besides, how many wretched souls have we +heard to say in the late troubles; what matter is it who gets the +victory? We can pay but what they please to demand, and so much we pay +now. And this they will murmur, as they have ever done, whosoever shall +reign over them, as long as their covetousness and ignorance hold +together; which will be till doomsday, if better order be not taken for +their instruction in their duty, both from reason and religion. + +_L._ For all this I find it somewhat hard, that a King should have right +to take from his subjects, upon the pretence of necessity, what he +pleaseth. + +_P._ I know what it is that troubles your conscience in this point. All +men are troubled at the crossing of their wishes; but it is our own +fault. First, we wish impossibilities; we would have our security +against all the world upon right of property, without paying for it; +this is impossible. We may as well expect that fish and fowl should +boil, roast, and dish themselves, and come to the table, and that grapes +should squeeze themselves into our mouths, and have all other the +contentments and ease which some pleasant men have related of the land +of Cocagne. Secondly, there is no nation in the world where he or they +that have the sovereignty, do not take what money they please for the +defence of those respective nations, when they think it necessary for +their safety. The late Long Parliament denied this; but why? Because +there was a design amongst them to depose the King. Thirdly, there is no +example of any King of England that I have read of, that ever pretended +any such necessity for levying money against his conscience. The +greatest sums that ever were levied, comparing the value of money, as it +was at that time, with what it is now, were levied by King Edward III +and King Henry V; kings in whom we glory now, and think their actions +great ornaments to the English history. Lastly, as to the enriching now +and then a favourite, it is neither sensible to the kingdom, nor is any +treasure thereby conveyed out of the realm, but so spent as it falls +down again upon the common people. To think that our condition being +human should be subject to no incommodity, were injuriously to quarrel +with God Almighty for our own faults. + +_L._ I know not what to say. + +_P._ If you allow this that I have said, then say, that the people never +were, shall be, or ought to be, free from being taxed at the will of one +or other; that if civil war come, they must levy all they have, and that +dearly, from the one or from the other, or from both sides. Say, that +adhering to the King, their victory is an end of their trouble; that +adhering to his enemies there is no end; for the war will continue by a +perpetual subdivision, and when it ends, they will be in the same estate +they were before. That they are often abused by men who to them seem +wise, when then their wisdom is nothing else but envy of those that are +in grace and in profitable employments; and that those men do but abuse +the common people to their own ends, that set up a private man’s +propriety against the public safety. But say withal, that the King is +subject to the laws of God, both written and unwritten, and to no other; +and so was William the Conqueror, whose right is all descended to our +present King. + +_L._ As to the law of reason, which is equity, it is sure enough there +is but one legislator, which is God. + +_P._ It followeth, then, that which you call the common law, distinct +from statute law, is nothing else but the law of God. + +_L._ In some sense it is; but it is not Gospel, but natural reason, and +natural equity. + +_P._ Would you have every man to every other man allege for law his own +particular reason? There is not amongst men a universal reason agreed +upon in any nation, besides the reason of him that hath the sovereign +power. Yet though his reason be but the reason of one man, yet it is set +up to supply the place of that universal reason, which is expounded to +us by our Saviour in the Gospel; and consequently our King is to us the +legislator both of statute-law, and of common-law. + +_L._ Yes, I know that the laws spiritual, which have been law in this +kingdom since the abolishing of popery, are the King’s laws, and those +also that were made before. For the Canons of the Church of Rome were no +laws, neither here, nor anywhere else without the Pope’s temporal +dominions, farther than kings and states in their several dominions +respectively did make them so. + +_P._ I grant that. But you must grant also, that those spiritual laws +were made by the legislators of the spiritual law. And yet not all kings +and states make laws by consent of the Lords and Commons; but our King +here is so far bound to their assents, as he shall judge conducing to +the good and safety of his people. For example, if the Lords and Commons +should advise him to restore those laws spiritual, which in Queen Mary’s +time were in force, I think the King were by the law of reason obliged, +without the help of any other law of God, to neglect such advice. + +_L._ I grant you that the King is sole legislator; but with this +restriction, that if he will not consult with the Lords of Parliament, +and hear the complaints and informations of the Commons, that are best +acquainted with their own wants, he sinneth against God, though he +cannot be compelled to any thing by his subjects by arms and force. + +_P._ We are agreed upon that already. Since therefore the King is sole +legislator, I think it also reason he should be sole supreme judge. + +[Sidenote: The King is the supreme judge.] + +_L._ There is no doubt of that; for otherwise there would be no +congruity of judgments with the laws. I grant also that he is the +supreme judge over all persons, and in all causes civil and +ecclesiastical within his own dominions; not only by act of Parliament +at this time, but that he has ever been so by the common law. For the +judges of both the Benches have their offices by the King’s +letters-patent; and so as to judicature have the bishops. Also the Lord +Chancellor hath his office by receiving from the King the Great Seal of +England. And, to say all at once, there is no magistrate, or +commissioner for public business, neither of judicature nor execution, +in State or Church, in peace or war, but he is made so by authority from +the King. + +_P._ It is true; but perhaps you may think otherwise, when you read such +acts of parliament, as say, that the King shall have power and authority +to do this or that by virtue of that act, as _Elizabeth_ c. I. “that +your highness, your heirs, and successors, Kings, or Queens of this +realm, shall have full power and authority, by virtue of this act, by +letters-patent under the great seal of England, to assign, &c.” Was it +not this Parliament that gave this authority to the Queen? + +_L._ No. For the statute in this clause is no more than, as Sir Edward +Coke useth to speak, an affirmance of the common-law. For she being head +of the Church of England, might make commissioners for the deciding of +matters ecclesiastical, as freely as if she had been Pope, who did, you +know, pretend his right from the law of God. + +_P._ We have hitherto spoken of laws without considering anything of the +nature and essence of a law; and now unless we define the word _law_, we +can go no farther without ambiguity and fallacy, which will be but loss +of time; whereas, on the contrary, the agreement upon our words will +enlighten all we have to say hereafter. + +_L._ I do not remember the definition of _law_ in any statute. + +_P._ I think so: for the statutes were made by authority, and not drawn +from any other principles than the care of the safety of the people. +Statutes are not philosophy, as is the common-law, and other disputable +arts, but are commands or prohibitions, which ought to be obeyed, +because assented to by submission made to the Conqueror here in England, +and to whosoever had the sovereign power in other commonwealths; so that +the positive laws of all places are statutes. The definition of law was +therefore unnecessary for the makers of statutes, though very necessary +to them whose work it is to teach the sense of the law. + +_L._ There is an accurate definition of a law in Bracton, cited by Sir +Edward Coke: _Lex est sanctio justa, jubens honesta, et prohibens +contraria_. + +_P._ That is to say, law is a just statute, commanding those things +which are honest, and forbidding the contrary. From whence it followeth, +that in all cases it must be the honesty or dishonesty that makes the +command a law; whereas you know that but for the law we could not, as +saith St. Paul, have known what is sin. Therefore this definition is no +ground at all for any farther discourse of law. Besides, you know the +rule of honest and dishonest refers to honour, and that it is justice +only, and injustice, that the law respecteth. But that which I most +except against in this definition, is, that it supposes that a statute +made by the sovereign power of a nation may be unjust. There may indeed +in a statute-law, made by men, be found iniquity, but not injustice. + +_L._ This is somewhat subtile. I pray deal plainly. What is the +difference between injustice and iniquity? + +_P._ I pray you tell me first, what is the difference between a court of +justice, and a court of equity? + +_L._ A court of justice is that which hath cognizance of such causes as +are to be ended by the positive laws of the land; and a court of equity +is that, to which belong such causes as are to be determined by equity; +that is to say, by the law of reason. + +_P._ You see then that the difference between injustice and iniquity is +this; that injustice is the transgression of a statute-law, and iniquity +the transgression of the law of reason. But perhaps you mean by +common-law, not the law itself, but the manner of proceeding in the law, +as to matter of fact, by twelve men, freeholders; though those twelve +men are no court of equity, nor of justice, because they determine not +what is just or unjust, but only whether it be done or not done; and +their judgment is nothing else but a confirmation of that which is +properly the judgment of the witnesses. For to speak exactly, there +cannot possibly be any judge of fact besides the witnesses. + +_L._ How would you have a law defined? + +_P._ Thus; a law is the command of him or them that have the sovereign +power, given to those that be his or their subjects, declaring publicly +and plainly what every of them may do, and what they must forbear to do. + +_L._ Seeing all judges in all courts ought to judge according to equity, +which is the law of reason, a distinct court of equity seemeth to me to +be unnecessary, and but a burthen to the people, since common-law and +equity are the same law. + +_P._ It were so indeed, if judges could not err; but since they may err, +and that the King is not bound to any other law but that of equity, it +belongs to him alone to give remedy to them that, by the ignorance or +corruption of a judge, shall suffer damage. + +_L._ By your definition of a law, the King’s proclamation under the +Great Seal of England is a law; for it is a command, and public, and of +the sovereign to his subjects. + +_P._ Why not, if he think it necessary for the good of his subjects? For +this is a maxim at the common-law alleged by Sir Edward Coke himself, (I +Inst. sect. 306), _Quando lex aliquid concedit, concedere videtur et id +per quod devenitur ad illud_. And you know out of the same author, that +divers Kings of England have often, to the petitions in Parliament which +they granted, annexed such exceptions as these, _unless there be +necessity, saving our regality_; which I think should be always +understood, though they be not expressed; and are understood so by +common lawyers, who agree that the King may recall any grant wherein he +was deceived. + +_L._ Again, whereas you make it of the essence of a law to be publicly +and plainly declared to the people, I see no necessity for that. Are not +all subjects bound to take notice of all acts of Parliament, when no act +can pass without their consent? + +_P._ If you had said that no act could pass without their knowledge, +then indeed they had been bound to take notice of them; but none can +have knowledge of them but the members of the houses of Parliament; +therefore the rest of the people are excused. Or else the knights of the +shire should be bound to furnish people with a sufficient number of +copies, at the people’s charge, of the acts of Parliament, at their +return into the country; that every man may resort to them, and by +themselves, or friends, take notice of what they are obliged to. For +otherwise it were impossible they should be obeyed: and that no man is +bound to do a thing impossible, is one of Sir Edward Coke’s maxims at +the common-law. I know that most of the statutes are printed; but it +does not appear that every man is bound to buy the book of statutes, nor +to search for them at Westminster or at the Tower, nor to understand the +language wherein they are for the most part written. + +_L._ I grant it proceeds from their own faults; but no man can be +excused by ignorance of the law of reason, that is to say, by ignorance +of the common-law, except children, madmen, and idiots. But you exact +such a notice of the statute-law, as is almost impossible. Is it not +enough that they in all places have a sufficient number of the penal +statutes? + +_P._ Yes; if they have those penal statutes near them. But what reason +can you give me why there should not be as many copies abroad of the +statutes, as there be of the Bible? + +_L._ I think it were well that every man that can read, had a +statute-book; for certainly no knowledge of those laws, by which men’s +lives and fortunes can be brought into danger, can be too much. I find a +great fault in your definition of law; which is, that every law either +forbiddeth or commandeth something. It is true that the moral law is +always a command or a prohibition, or at least implieth it. But in the +Levitical law, where it is said that he that stealeth a sheep shall +restore fourfold, what command or prohibition lieth in these words? + +_P._ Such sentences as that are not in themselves general, but +judgments; nevertheless, there is in those words implied a commandment +to the judge, to cause to be made a fourfold restitution. + +_L._ That is right. + +_P._ Now define what justice is, and what actions and men are to be +called just. + +_L._ Justice is the constant will of giving to every man his own; that +is to say, of giving to every man that which is his right, in such +manner as to exclude the right of all men else to the same thing. A just +action is that which is not against the law. A just man is he that hath +a constant will to live justly; if you require more, I doubt there will +no man living be comprehended within the definition. + +_P._ Seeing then that a just action, according to your definition, is +that which is not against the law; it is manifest that before there was +a law, there could be no injustice; and therefore laws are in their +nature antecedent to justice and injustice. And you cannot deny but +there must be law-makers, before there were any laws, and consequently +before there was any justice, (I speak of human justice); and that +law-makers were before that which you call _own_, or property of goods +or lands, distinguished by _meum_, _tuum_, _alienum_. + +_L._ That must be granted; for without statute-laws, all men have right +to all things; and we have had experience, when our laws were silenced +by civil war, there was not a man, that of any goods could say assuredly +they were his own. + +_P._ You see then that no private man can claim a propriety in any +lands, or other goods, from any title from any man but the King, or them +that have the sovereign power; because it is in virtue of the +sovereignty, that every man may not enter into and possess what he +pleaseth; and consequently to deny the sovereign anything necessary to +the sustaining of his sovereign power, is to destroy the propriety he +pretends to. The next thing I will ask you is, how you distinguish +between law and right, or _lex_ and _jus_. + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke in divers places makes _lex_ and _jus_ to be the +same, and so _lex communis_ and _jus communis_, to be all one; nor do I +find that he does in any place distinguish them. + +_P._ Then will I distinguish them, and make you judge whether my +distinction be not necessary to be known by every author of the +common-law. For law obligeth me to do, or forbear the doing of +something; and therefore it lays upon me an obligation. But my right is +a liberty left me by the law to do any thing which the law forbids me +not, and to leave undone any thing which the law commands me not. Did +Sir Edward Coke see no difference between being bound and being free? + +_L._ I know not what he saw, but he has not mentioned it. Though a man +may dispense with his own liberty, he cannot do so with the law. + +_P._ But what are you better for your right, if a rebellious company at +home, or an enemy from abroad, take away the goods, or dispossess you of +the lands you have a right to? Can you be defended or repaired, but by +the strength and authority of the King? What reason therefore can be +given by a man that endeavours to preserve his propriety, why he should +deny or malignly contribute to the strength that should defend him or +repair him? Let us see now what your books say to this point, and other +points of the right of sovereignty. Bracton, the most authentic author +of the common law, (fol. 55), saith thus: _Ipse Dominus Rex habet omnia +jura in manu sua, sicut Dei vicarius; habet etiam ea quæ sunt pacis; +habet etiam coercionem, ut delinquentes puniat; item habet in potestate +sua leges. Nihil enim prodest jura condere, nisi sit qui jura tueatur._ +That is to say: Our Lord the King hath all right in his own hands; is +God’s vicar; he has all that concerns the peace; he has the power to +punish delinquents; all the laws are in his power: to make laws is to no +purpose, unless there be somebody to make them obeyed. If Bracton’s law +be reason, as I and you think it is, what temporal power is there which +the King hath not? Seeing that at this day all the power spiritual, +which Bracton allows the Pope, is restored to the crown; what is there +that the King cannot do, excepting sin against the law of God? The same +Bracton, (_lib._ ii. _c._ 8, fol. 5), saith thus: _Si autem a Rege +petatur, cum breve non currat contra ipsum, locus erit supplicationi +quod factum suum corrigat et emendet; quod quidem si non fecerit, satis +sufficit ei ad pœnam, quod Dominum expectet ultorem: nemo quidem de +factis suis præsumat disputare, multo fortius contra factum suum +venire_. That is to say: If any thing be demanded of the King, seeing a +writ lieth not against him, he is put to his petition, praying him to +correct and amend his own fact; which if he will not do, it is a +sufficient penalty for him, that he is to expect a punishment from the +Lord: no man may presume to dispute of what he does, much less to resist +him. You see by this, that this doctrine concerning the rights of +sovereignty, so much cried down by the Long Parliament, is the ancient +common-law, and that the only bridle of the Kings of England, ought to +be the fear of God. And again, Bracton, (_lib._ ii. _c._ 24, fol. 55), +says, that the rights of the Crown cannot be granted away: _Ea vero quæ +jurisdictionis sunt et pacis, et ea quæ sunt justitiæ et paci annexa, ad +nullum pertinent nisi ad coronam et dignitatem Regiam, nec a corona +separari poterunt, nec a privata persona possideri_. This is to say: +those things which belong to jurisdiction and peace, and those things +that are annexed to justice and peace, appertain to none but to the +crown and dignity of the King, nor can be separated from the crown, nor +be possessed by a private person. Again, you will find in Fleta, a +law-book written in the time of Edward II, that liberties, though +granted by the King, if they tend to the hinderance of justice, or +subversion of the regal power, were not to be used, nor allowed; for in +that book, (_lib._ i. c. 20, §54) concerning articles of the crown, +which the justices itinerant are to enquire of, the 54th article is +this: You shall inquire, _de libertatibus concessis quæ impediunt +communem justitiam, et Regiam potestatem subvertunt_. Now what is a +greater hinderance to common justice, or a greater subversion of the +regal power, than a liberty in subjects to hinder the King from raising +money necessary to suppress or prevent rebellions, which doth destroy +justice, and subvert the power of the sovereignty? Moreover, when a +charter is granted by the King in these words: “_Dedita etc. ... coram +etc. ... pro me et hæredibus meis_:” the grantor by the common-law, as +Sir Edward Coke says in his Commentaries on Littleton, is to warrant his +gift; and I think it reason, especially if the gift be upon +consideration of a price paid. Suppose a foreign state should lay claim +to this kingdom, (it is no matter as to the question I am putting, +whether the claim be unjust), how would you have the King to warrant to +every freeholder in England the lands they hold of him by such a +charter? If he cannot levy money, their estates are lost, and so is the +King’s estate; and if the King’s estate be gone, how can he repair the +value due upon the warranty? I know that the King’s charters are not so +merely grants, as that they are not also laws; but they are such laws as +speak not to all the King’s subjects in general, but only to his +officers; implicitly forbidding them to judge or execute any thing +contrary to the said grants. There be many men that are able judges of +what is right reason, and what not; when any of these shall know that a +man has no superior nor peer in the kingdom, he will hardly be persuaded +he can be bound by any law of the kingdom, or that he who is subject to +none but God, can make a law upon himself, which he cannot also as +easily abrogate as he made it. The main argument, and that which so much +taketh with the throng of people, proceedeth from a needless fear put +into their minds by such men as mean to make use of their hands to their +own ends. For if, say they, the King may notwithstanding the law do what +he please, and nothing to restrain him but the fear of punishment in the +world to come, then, in case there come a king that fears no such +punishment, he may take away from us, not only our lands, goods, and +liberties, but our lives also if he will. And they say true; but they +have no reason to think he will, unless it be for his own profit; which +cannot be, for he loves his own power; and what becomes of his power +when his subjects are destroyed or weakened, by whose multitude and +strength he enjoys his power, and every one of his subjects his fortune? +And lastly, whereas they sometimes say the King is bound, not only to +cause his laws to be observed, but also to observe them himself; I think +the King causing them to be observed is the same thing as observing them +himself. For I never heard it taken for good law, that the King may be +indicted, or appealed, or served with a writ, till the Long Parliament +practised the contrary upon the good King Charles; for which divers of +them were executed, and the rest by this our present King pardoned. + +_L._ Pardoned by the King and Parliament. + +_P._ By the King in Parliament if you will, but not by the King and +Parliament. You cannot deny, but that the pardoning of injury belongs to +the person that is injured; treason, and other offences against the +peace and against the right of the sovereign, are injuries done to the +King; and therefore whosoever is pardoned any such offence, ought to +acknowledge he owes his pardon to the King alone: but as to such +murders, felonies, and other injuries as are done to any subject how +mean soever, I think it great reason that the parties endamaged ought to +have satisfaction before such pardon be allowed. And in the death of a +man, where restitution of life is impossible, what can any friend, heir, +or other party that may appeal, require more than reasonable +satisfaction some other way? Perhaps he will be content with nothing but +life for life; but that is revenge, and belongs to God, and under God to +the King, and none else; therefore if there be reasonable satisfaction +tendered, the King without sin, I think, may pardon him. I am sure, if +the pardoning him be a sin, that neither King, nor Parliament, nor any +earthly power can do it. + +_L._ You see by this your own argument, that the Act of _Oblivion_, +without a Parliament, could not have passed; because, not only the King, +but also most of the Lords, and abundance of common people had received +injuries; which not being pardonable but by their own assent, it was +absolutely necessary that it should be done in Parliament, and by the +assent of the Lords and Commons. + +_P._ I grant it; but I pray you tell me now what is the difference +between a general pardon, and an act of _oblivion_? + +_L._ The word Act of _Oblivion_ was never in our books before; but I +believe it is in yours. + +_P._ In the state of Athens long ago, for the abolishing of the civil +war, there was an act agreed on; that from that time forward, no man +should be molested for anything before that act done, whatsoever, +without exception; which act the makers of it called an act of +_oblivion_; not that all injuries should be forgotten (for then we could +never have had the story), but that they should not rise up in judgment +against any man. And in imitation of this act, the like was propounded, +though it took no effect, upon the death of Julius Cæsar, in the senate +of Rome. By such an act you may easily conceive that all accusations for +offences past were absolutely dead and buried; and yet we have no great +reason to think, that the objecting one to another of the injuries +pardoned, was any violation of those acts, except the same were so +expressed in the act itself. + +_L._ It seems then that the act of _oblivion_ was here no more, nor of +other nature, than a general pardon. + +[Sidenote: Of Courts.] + +_P._ Since you acknowledge that in all controversies, the judicature +originally belongeth to the King, and seeing that no man is able in his +own person to execute an office of so much business: what order is taken +for deciding of so many and so various controversies? + +_L._ There be divers sorts of controversies, some of which are +concerning men’s titles to lands and goods; and some goods are +corporeal, as lands, money, cattle, corn, and the like, which may be +handled or seen; and some incorporeal, as privileges, liberties, +dignities, offices, and many other good things, mere creatures of the +law, and cannot be handled or seen; and both of these kinds are +concerning _meum_ and _tuum_. Others there are concerning crimes +punishable divers ways: and amongst some of these, part of the +punishment is some fine or forfeiture to the King; and then it is called +a plea of the Crown, in case the King sue the party; otherwise it is but +a private plea, which they call an appeal. And though upon judgment in +an appeal the King shall have his forfeiture, yet it cannot be called a +plea of the Crown, but when the Crown pleadeth for it. There be also +other controversies concerning the government of the Church, in order to +religion and virtuous life. The offences both against the Crown and +against the laws of the Church, are crimes: but the offences of one +subject against another, if they be not against the Crown, the King +pretendeth nothing in those pleas but the reparation of his subjects +injured. + +_P._ A crime is an offence of any kind whatsoever, for which a penalty +is ordained by the law of the land: but you must understand that damages +awarded to the party injured, has nothing common with the nature of a +penalty, but is merely a restitution or satisfaction, due to the party +grieved by the law of reason, and consequently is no more a punishment +than is the paying of a debt. + +_L._ It seems by this definition of a crime, you make no difference +between a crime and a sin. + +_P._ All crimes are indeed sins, but not all sins crimes. A sin may be +in the thought or secret purpose of a man, of which neither a judge, nor +a witness, nor any man can take notice; but a crime is such a sin as +consists in an action against the law, of which action he can be +accused, and tried by a judge, and be convinced or cleared by witnesses. +Farther; that which is no sin in itself, but indifferent, may be made +sin by a positive law: as when the statute was in force that no man +should wear silk in his hat, after the statute such wearing of silk was +a sin, which was not so before. Nay, sometimes an action that is good in +itself, by the statute law may be made a sin; as if a statute should be +made to forbid the giving of alms to a strong and sturdy beggar, such +alms, after that law, would be a sin, but not before; for then it was +charity, the object whereof is not the strength or other quality of the +poor man, but his poverty. Again, he that should have said in Queen +Mary’s time, that the Pope had no authority in England, should have been +burnt at a stake; but for saying the same in the time of Queen +Elizabeth, should have been commended. You see by this, that many things +are made crimes, and no crime, which are not so in their own nature, but +by diversity of law, made upon diversity of opinion or of interest by +them which have authority: and yet those things, whether good or evil, +will pass so with the vulgar, if they hear them often with odious terms +recited, for heinous crimes in themselves, as many of those opinions, +which are in themselves pious and lawful, were heretofore, by the Pope’s +interest therein, called detestable heresy. Again, some controversies +are of things done upon the sea, others of things done upon the land. +There need be many courts to the deciding of so many kinds of +controversies. What order is there taken for their distribution? + +_L._ There be an extraordinary great number of courts in England. First, +there be the King’s courts, both for law and equity, in matters +temporal; which are the Chancery, the King’s Bench, the Court of Common +Pleas; and, for the King’s revenue, the Court of the Exchequer: and +there be subjects' courts by privilege, as the Courts in London and +other privileged places. And there be other courts of subjects, as the +Court of Landlords, called the Court of Barons, and the Courts of +Sheriffs. Also the Spiritual Courts are the King’s courts at this day, +though heretofore they were the Pope’s courts. And in the King’s courts, +some have their judicature by office, and some by commission; and some +authority to hear and determine, and some only to inquire, and to +certify into other courts. Now for the distribution of what pleas every +court may hold, it is commonly held, that all the pleas of the Crown, +and of all offences contrary to the peace, are to be holden in the +King’s Bench, or by commissioners. For Bracton saith: _Sciendum est, +quod si actiones sunt criminales, in Curia Domini Regis debent +determinari; cum sit ibi pœna corporalis infligenda, et hoc coram ipso +rege, si tangat personam suam, sicut crimen læsæ majestatis, vel coram +justitiariis ad hoc specialiter assignatis_: that is to say, that if the +plea be criminal, it ought to be determined in the Court of our Lord the +King, because there they have power to inflict corporal punishment; and +if the crime be against his person, as the crime of treason, it ought to +be determined before the King himself; or if it be against a private +person, it ought to be determined by justices assigned, that is to say, +before commissioners. It seems by this, that heretofore Kings did hear +and determine pleas of treason against themselves, by their own persons; +but it has been otherwise a long time, and is now; for it is now the +office of the Lord Steward of England, in the trial of a peer, to hold +that plea by a commission especially for the same. In causes concerning +_meum_ and _tuum_, the King may sue, either in the King’s Bench, or in +the Court of Common Pleas; as it appears by Fitzherbert in his <cite +lang="la">Natura Brevium_, at the writ of escheat. + +_P._ A king perhaps will not sit to determine of causes of treason +against his person, lest he should seem to make himself judge in his own +cause; but that it shall be judged by judges of his own making can never +be avoided, which is all one as if he were judge himself. + +_L._ To the King’s Bench also, I think, belongeth the hearing and +determining of all manner of breaches of the peace whatsoever, saving +always to the King that he may do the same, when he pleaseth, by +commissioners. In the time of Henry III and Edward I (when Bracton +wrote) the King did usually send down every seven years into the +country, commissioners called justices itinerant, to hear and determine +generally all causes temporal, both criminal and civil; whose places +have been now a long time supplied by the justices of assize, with +commissions of the peace of _oyer_ and _terminer_, and of gaol-delivery. + +_P._ But why may the King only sue in the King’s Bench or Court of +Common Pleas, which he will, and no other person may do the same? + +_L._ There is no statute to the contrary, but it seemeth to be the +common-law. For Sir Edward Coke (IV_th Instit._), setteth down the +jurisdiction of the King’s Bench; which, he says, has: first, +jurisdiction in all pleas of the Crown. Secondly, the correcting of all +manner of errors of other justices and judges, both of judgments and +process, except of the Court of Exchequer, which, he says, is to this +court _proprium quarto modo_. Thirdly, that it has power to correct all +misdemeanours _extrajudicial_, tending to the breach of the peace, or +oppression of the subjects, or raising of factions, controversies, +debates, or any other manner of misgovernment. Fourthly, it may hold +plea by writ out of the Chancery of all trespasses done _vi et armis_. +Fifthly, it hath power to hold plea by bill for debt, detenue, covenant, +promise, and all other personal actions. But of the jurisdiction of the +King’s Bench in actions real he says nothing; save, that if a writ in a +real action be abated by judgment in the Court of Common Pleas, and that +the judgment be by a writ of error reversed in the King’s Bench, then +the King’s Bench may proceed upon the writ. + +_P._ But how is the practice? + +_L._ Real actions are commonly decided, as well in the King’s Bench, as +in the Court of Common Pleas. + +_P._ When the King by authority in writing maketh a Lord Chief Justice +of the King’s Bench; does he not set down what he makes him for? + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke sets down the letters-patent, whereby of ancient +time the Lord Chief Justice was constituted, wherein is expressed to +what end he hath his office; _viz. pro conservatione nostra et +tranquillitatis regni nostri, et ad justitiam universis et singulis de +regno nostro exhibendam, constituimus dilectum et fidelem nostrum_ P.B. +_Justitiarium Angliæ, quamdiu nobis placuerit, Capitalem, etc._: that is +to say, for the preservation of ourself, and of the peace of our realm, +and for the doing of justice to all and singular our subjects, we have +constituted our beloved and faithful P. B. during our pleasure, Chief +Justice of England, &c. + +_P._ Methinks it is very plain by these letters-patent, that all causes +temporal within the kingdom, except the pleas that belong to the +Exchequer, should be decidable by this Lord Chief Justice. For as for +causes criminal, and that concern the peace, it is granted him in these +words, “for the conservation of our self, and peace of the kingdom,” +wherein are contained all pleas criminal; and, in the doing of justice +to all and singular the King’s subjects are comprehended all pleas +civil. And as to the Court of Common Pleas, it is manifest it may hold +all manner of civil pleas, except those of the Exchequer, by _Magna +Charta_, cap. ii. So that all original writs concerning civil pleas are +returnable into either of the said courts. But how is the Lord Chief +Justice made now? + +_L._ By these words in their letters-patent: _Constituimus vos +Justitiarium nostrum Capitalem ad placita coram nobis tenenda, durante +beneplacito nostro_: that is to say, we have made you our Chief Justice, +to hold pleas before ourself, during our pleasure. But this writ, though +it be shorter, does not at all abridge the power they had by the former. +And for the letters-patent for the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, +they go thus: _Constituimus dilectum et fidelem, etc., Capitalem +Justitiarium de Communi Banco, habendum, etc., quamdiu nobis placuerit, +cum vadiis et fœdis ab antiquo debitis et consuetis. Id est_, We have +constituted our beloved and faithful, &c., Chief Justice of the Common +Bench, to have, &c., during our pleasure, with the ways and fees +thereunto heretofore due, and usual. + +_P._ I find in history, that there have been in England always a +Chancellor and a Chief Justice of England, but of a Court of Common +Pleas there is no mention before _Magna Charta_. Common pleas there were +ever both here, and, I think, in all nations; for common pleas and civil +pleas I take to be the same. + +_L._ Before the statute of _Magna Charta_, common pleas, as Sir Edward +Coke granteth, (2 _Inst._ p. 21), might have been holden in the King’s +Bench; and that court being removeable at the King’s will, the returns +of writs were _Coram nobis ubicunque fuerimus in Anglia_; whereby great +trouble of jurors ensued, and great charges of the parties, and delay of +justice; and for these causes it was ordained, that the common pleas +should not follow the King, but be held in a place certain. + +_P._ Here Sir Edward Coke declares his opinion, that no common plea can +be holden in the King’s Bench, in that he says they might have been +holden then. And yet this doth not amount to any probable proof, that +there was any Court of Common Pleas in England before _Magna Charta_. +For this statute being to ease the jurors, and lessen the charges of +parties, and for the expedition of justice, had been in vain, if there +had been a Court of Common Pleas then standing; for such a court was not +necessarily to follow the King, as was the Chancery and the King’s +Bench. Besides, unless the King’s Bench, wheresoever it was, held plea +of civil causes, the subject had not at all been eased by this statute. +For supposing the King at York, had not the King’s subjects about +London, jurors and parties, as much trouble and charge to go to York, as +the people about York had before to go to London? Therefore I can by no +means believe otherwise, than that the erection of the Court of Common +Pleas was the effect of that statute of _Magna Charta_, cap. 11; and +before that time not existent, though I think that for the multiplicity +of suits in a great kingdom there was need of it. + +_L._ Perhaps there was not so much need of it as you think. For in those +times the laws, for the most part, were in settling, rather than +settled; and the old Saxon laws concerning inheritances were then +practised, by which laws speedy justice was executed by the King’s +writs, in the courts of Barons, which were landlords to the rest of the +freeholders; and suits of barons in County courts; and but few suits in +the King’s courts, but when justice could not be had in those inferior +courts. But at this day there be more suits in the King’s courts, than +any one court can despatch. + +_P._ Why should there be more suits now, than formerly? For I believe +this kingdom was as well peopled then as now. + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke (4 _Inst._ p. 76) assigneth for it six causes: 1. +Peace. 2. Plenty. 3. The dissolution of religious houses, and dispersing +of their lands among so many several persons. 4. The multitude of +informers. 5. The number of concealers. 6. The multitude of attorneys. + +_P._ I see Sir Edward Coke has no mind to lay any fault upon the men of +his own profession, and that he assigns for causes of the mischiefs, +such things as would be mischief and wickedness to amend. For if peace +and plenty be the cause of this evil, it cannot be removed but by war +and beggary; and the quarrels arising about the lands of religious +persons cannot arise from the lands, but from the doubtfulness of the +laws. And for informers, they were authorized by statutes; to the +execution of which statutes they are so necessary, as that their number +cannot be too great; and if it be too great, the fault is in the law +itself. The number of concealers are indeed a number of cozeners, which +the law may easily correct. And lastly, for the multitude of attorneys, +it is the fault of them that have the power to admit or refuse them. For +my part, I believe that men at this day have better learned the art of +cavilling against the words of a statute, than heretofore they had, and +thereby encourage themselves and others to undertake suits upon little +reason. Also the variety and repugnancy of judgments of common-law, do +oftentimes put men to hope for victory in causes whereof in reason they +had no ground at all: also the ignorance of what is equity in their own +causes, which equity not one man in a thousand ever studied. And the +lawyers themselves seek not for their judgments in their own breasts, +but in the precedents of former judges: as the ancient judges sought the +same, not in their own reason, but in the laws of the empire. Another, +and perhaps the greatest cause of multitude of suits, is this, that for +want of registering of conveyances of land, which might easily be done +in the townships where the lands lay, a purchase cannot easily be had +which will not be litigious. Lastly, I believe the covetousness of +lawyers was not so great in ancient time, which was full of trouble, as +they have been since in time of peace; wherein men have leisure to study +fraud, and get employment from such men as can encourage to contention. +And how ample a field they have to exercise this mystery in, is manifest +from this, that they have a power to scan and construe every word in a +statute, charter, feoffment, lease, or other deed, evidence, or +testimony. But to return to the jurisdiction of this Court of the King’s +Bench, where, as you say, it hath power to correct and amend the errors +of all other judges, both in process and in judgments; cannot the judges +of the Common Pleas correct error in process in their own courts, +without a writ of error from another court? + +_L._ Yes; and there be many statutes which command them so to do. + +_P._ When a writ of error is brought out of the King’s Bench, be it +either error in process or in law, at whose charge is it to be done? + +_L._ At the charge of the client. + +_P._ I see no reason for that; for the client is not in fault, who never +begins a suit but by the advice of his counsel, learned in the law, whom +he pays for his counsel given. Is not this the fault of his counsellor? +Nor when a judge in the Common Pleas hath given an erroneous sentence, +is it always likely that the judge of the King’s Bench will reverse the +judgment, (though there be no question, but as you may find in Bracton +and other learned men, he has power to do it); because being professors +of the same common-law, they are persuaded, for the most part, to give +the same judgments. For example: if Sir Edward Coke, in the last term +that he sat as Lord Chief Justice in the Court of Common Pleas, had +given an erroneous judgment, is it likely that when he was removed, and +made Lord Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, he would therefore have +reversed the said judgment? It is possible he might, but not very +likely. And therefore I do believe there is some other power, by the +King constituted, to reverse erroneous judgments, both in the King’s +Bench and in the Court of Common Pleas. + +_L._ I think not; for there is a statute to the contrary, made 4 _Henry +IV_, cap. 23, in these words: Whereas, as well in plea real, as in plea +personal, after judgment in the court of our Lord the King, the parties +be made to come upon grievous pain sometimes before the King himself, +sometimes before the King’s council, and sometimes to the Parliament, to +answer thereof anew, to the great impoverishing of the parties +aforesaid, and to the subversion of the common-law of the land, it is +ordained and established, that after judgment given in the court of our +Lord the King, the parties and their heirs shall be there in peace, +until the judgment be undone by attaint, or by error, if there be error, +as hath been used by the laws in the times of the King’s progenitors. + +_P._ This statute is so far from being repugnant to that I say, as it +seemeth to me to have been made expressly to confirm the same. For the +substance of the statute is, that there shall be no suit made by either +of the parties for anything adjudged, either in the King’s Bench, or +Court of Common Pleas, before the judgment be undone by error, or +corruption proved; and that this was the common-law before the making of +this statute, which could not be, except there were before this statute +some courts authorized to examine and correct such errors as by the +plaintiff should be assigned. The inconvenience which by this statute +was to be remedied was this, that often judgment given in the King’s +courts, by which are meant in this place the King’s Bench and Court of +Common Pleas, the party against whom the judgment was given, did begin a +new suit, and cause his adversary to come before the King himself. Here, +by the King himself must be understood the King in person: for though in +a writ by the words _coram nobis_ is understood the King’s Bench, yet in +a statute it is never so; nor is it strange, seeing in those days the +King did usually sit in court with his council to hear causes, as +sometimes King James. And sometimes the same parties commenced their +suit before the Privy Council, though the King were absent, and +sometimes before the Parliament, the former judgment yet standing. For +remedy whereof, it was ordained by this statute, that no man should +renew his suit till the former judgment was undone by attaint or error; +which reversing of a judgment had been impossible, if there had been no +court besides the aforesaid two courts, wherein the errors might be +assigned, examined, and judged; for no court can be esteemed, in law or +reason, a competent judge of its own errors. There was therefore before +this statute, some other court existent for the hearing of errors, and +reversing of erroneous judgments. What court this was, I inquire not +yet; but I am sure it could not be either the Parliament or the Privy +Council, or the court wherein the erroneous judgment was given. + +_L._ The _Doctor and Student_ discourses of this statute (cap. 18 et +seq.) much otherwise than you do. For the author of that book saith, +that against an erroneous judgment all remedy is by this statute taken +away. And though neither reason, nor the office of a King, nor any law +positive, can prohibit the remedying of any injury, much less of an +unjust sentence; yet he shows many statutes, wherein a man’s conscience +ought to prevail above the law. + +_P._ Upon what ground can he pretend, that all remedy in this case is by +this statute prohibited? + +_L._ He says it is thereby enacted, that judgment given by the King’s +Courts shall not be examined in the Chancery, Parliament, nor elsewhere. + +_P._ Is there any mention of Chancery in this act? It cannot be examined +before the King and his council, nor before the Parliament; but you see +that before the statute it was examined somewhere, and that this statute +will have it examined there again. And seeing the Chancery was +altogether the highest office of judicature in the kingdom for matter of +equity, and that the Chancery is not here forbidden to examine the +judgments of all other courts, at least it is not taken from it by this +statute. But what cases are there in this chapter of the Doctor and +Student, by which it can be made probable, that when law and conscience, +or law and equity, seem to oppugn one another, the written law should be +preferred? + +_L._ If the defendant wage his law in an action of debt brought upon a +true debt, the plaintiff hath no means to come to his debt by way of +compulsion, neither by _subpœna_, nor otherwise; and yet the defendant +is bound in conscience to pay him. + +_P._ Here is no preferring, that I see, of the law above conscience or +equity. For the plaintiff in this case loseth not his debt for want +either of law, or equity, but for want of proof; for neither law nor +equity can give a man his right, unless he prove it. + +_L._ Also if the grand jury in attaint affirm a false verdict given by +the petty jury, there is no further remedy, but the conscience of the +party. + +_P._ Here again the want of proof is the want of remedy. For if he can +prove that the verdict given was false, the King can give him remedy +such way as himself shall think best, and ought to do it, in case the +party shall find surety, if the same verdict be again affirmed, to +satisfy his adversary for the damage and vexation he puts him to. + +_L._ But there is a statute made since, _viz._ 27 _Eliz._ c. 8, by which +that statute of 4 _Hen. IV._ 23, is in part taken away. For by that +statute, erroneous judgments given in the King’s Bench, are by a writ of +error to be examined in the Exchequer-chamber, before the justices of +the Common Bench and the Barons of the Exchequer; and by the preamble of +this act it appears, that erroneous judgments are only to be reformed by +the High Court of Parliament. + +_P._ But here is no mention, that the judgments given in the Court of +Common Pleas should be brought in to be examined in the +Exchequer-chamber. Why therefore may not the Court of Chancery examine a +judgment given in the Court of Common Pleas? + +_L._ You deny not but, by the ancient law of England, the King’s Bench +may examine the judgment given in the Court of Common Pleas. + +_P._ It is true. But why may not also the Court of Chancery do the same, +especially if the fault of the judgment be against equity, and not +against the letter of the law? + +_L._ There is no necessity of that; for the same court may examine both +the letter and the equity of the statute. + +_P._ You see by this, that the jurisdiction of courts cannot easily be +distinguished, but by the King himself in his Parliament. The lawyers +themselves cannot do it; for you see what contention there is between +courts, as well as between particular men. And whereas you say, that law +of 4 _Hen. IV._ 23, is by that of 27 _Eliz._ c. 8, taken away, I do not +find it so. I find indeed a diversity of opinion between the makers of +the former and the latter statute, in the preamble of the latter and +conclusion of the former. The preamble of the latter is, forasmuch as +erroneous judgments given in the Court called the King’s Bench, are only +to be reformed in the High Court of Parliament; and the conclusion of +the former is, that the contrary was law in the times of the King’s +progenitors. These are no parts of those laws, but opinions only +concerning the ancient custom in that case, arising from the different +opinions of the lawyers in those different times, neither commanding nor +forbidding anything; though of the statutes themselves, the one forbids +that such pleas be brought before the Parliament, the other forbids it +not. But yet, if after the act of _Hen. IV._ such a plea had been +brought before the Parliament, the Parliament might have heard and +determined it. For the statute forbids not that; nor can any law have +the force to hinder the Parliament of any jurisdiction whatsoever they +please to take upon them, seeing it is a court of the King and of all +the people together, both Lords and Commons. + +_L._ Though it be, yet seeing the King (as Sir Edward Coke affirms, 4 +_Inst._ p. 71) hath committed all his power judicial, some to one court, +and some to another, so as if any man would render himself to the +judgment of the King, in such case where the King hath committed all his +power judicial to others, such a render should be to no effect. And p. +73, he saith farther: that in this court, the Kings of this realm have +sitten on the high bench, and the judges of that court on the lower +bench, at his feet; but judicature belongeth only to the judges of that +court, and in his presence they answer all motions. + +_P._ I cannot believe that Sir Edward Coke, how much soever he desired +to advance the authority of himself and other justices of the +common-law, could mean that the King in the King’s Bench sat as a +spectator only, and might not have answered all motions, which his +judges answered, if he had seen cause for it. For he knew that the King +was supreme judge then in all causes temporal, and is now in all causes +both temporal and ecclesiastical; and that there is an exceeding great +penalty ordained by the laws for them that shall deny it. But Sir Edward +Coke, as he had (you see) in many places before, hath put a fallacy upon +himself, by not distinguishing between committing and transferring. He +that transferreth his power, hath deprived himself of it: but he that +committeth it to another to be exercised in his name and under him, is +still in the possession of the same power. And therefore, if a man +render himself, that is to say, appealeth to the King from any judge +whatsoever, the King may receive his appeal; and it shall be effectual. + +_L._ Besides these two courts, the King’s Bench for Pleas of the Crown, +and the Court of Common Pleas for causes civil, according to the +common-law of England, there is another court of justice, that hath +jurisdiction in causes both civil and criminal, and is as ancient a +court at least as the Court of Common Pleas, and this is the Court of +the Lord Admiral; but the proceedings therein are according to the laws +of the Roman empire, and the causes to be determined there are such as +arise upon the marine sea: for so it is ordained by divers statutes, and +confirmed by many precedents. + +_P._ As for the statutes, they are always law, and reason also; for they +are made by the assent of all the kingdom; but precedents are judgments, +one contrary to another; I mean divers men in divers ages, upon the same +case give divers judgments. Therefore I will ask your opinion once more +concerning any judgments besides those of the King, as to their validity +in law. But what is the difference between the proceedings of the Court +of Admiralty, and the Court of Common-law? + +_L._ One is, that the Court of Admiralty proceeded by two witnesses, +without any either grand-jury to indict, or petty to convict; and the +judge giveth sentence according to the laws imperial, which of old time +were in force in all this part of Europe, and now are laws, not by the +will of any other Emperor or foreign power, but by the will of the Kings +of England that have given them force in their own dominions; the reason +whereof seems to be, that the causes that arise at sea are very often +between us, and people of other nations, such as are governed for the +most part by the self-same laws imperial. + +_P._ How can it precisely enough be determined at sea, especially near +the mouth of a very great river, whether it be upon the sea, or within +the land? For the rivers also are, as well as their banks, within or a +part of one country or other. + +_L._ Truly the question is difficult; and there have been many suits +about it, wherein the question has been, whose jurisdiction it is in. + +_P._ Nor do I see how it can be decided but by the King himself, in case +it be not declared in the Lord Admiral’s letters-patent. + +_L._ But though there be in the letters-patent a power given to hold +plea in some certain cases, not contrary to any of the statutes +concerning the Admiralty, the justices of the common-law may send a +prohibition to that court, to proceed in the plea, though it be with a +_non-obstante_ of any statute. + +_P._ Methinks that that should be against the right of the Crown, which +cannot be taken from it by any subject. For that argument of Sir Edward +Coke’s, that the King has given away all his judicial power, is worth +nothing: because, as I have said before, he cannot give away the +essential rights of his Crown, and because by a _non-obstante_ he +declares he is not deceived in his grant. + +_L._ But you may see by the precedents alleged by Sir Edward Coke, the +contrary has been perpetually practised. + +_P._ I see not that perpetually. For who can tell but there may have +been given other judgments, in such cases, which have either been not +preserved in the records, or else by Sir Edward Coke, because they were +against his opinion, not alleged? For this is possible, though you will +not grant it to be very likely. Therefore I insist only upon this, that +no record of a judgment is a law, save only to the party pleading until +he can by law reverse the former judgment. And as to the proceeding +without juries, by two sufficient witnesses, I do not see what harm can +proceed from it to the commonwealth, nor consequently any just quarrel +that the justice of the common-law can have against their proceedings in +the Admiralty. For the proof of the fact in both courts lieth merely on +the witnesses; and the difference is no more, but that in the imperial +law, the judge of the court judgeth of the testimony of the witnesses, +and the jury doth it in a court of common-law. Besides, if a court of +common-law should chance to encroach upon the jurisdiction of the +Admiral, may not he send a prohibition to the court of common-law to +forbid their proceeding? I pray you tell me what reason there is for the +one, more than for the other? + +_L._ I know none but long custom, for I think it was never done. The +highest ordinary court in England is the Court of Chancery, wherein the +Lord Chancellor, or otherwise Keeper of the Great Seal, is the only +judge. This court is very ancient, as appears by Sir Edward Coke, 4 +_Inst._ p. 78, where he nameth the Chancellors of King Edgar, King +Etheldred, King Edmund, and King Edward the Confessor. His office is +given to him, without letters-patent, by the King’s delivery to him of +the Great Seal of England; and whosoever hath the keeping of the Great +Seal of England, hath the same, and the whole jurisdiction that the Lord +Chancellor ever had by the statute of 5 _Eliz._ _c._ 18, wherein it is +declared, that such is, and always has been the common-law. And Sir +Edward Coke says, he has his name of Chancellor from the highest point +of his jurisdiction, viz. a _cancellando_; that is, from cancelling the +King’s letters-patent, by drawing strokes through it like a lattice. + +_P._ Very pretty. It is well enough known that _Cancellarius_ was a +great officer under the Roman empire, whereof this island was once a +member, and that the office came into this kingdom, either with, or in +imitation of the Roman government. Also, it was long after the time of +the twelve Cæsars, that this officer was created in the state of Rome. +For till after Septimius Severus his time, the emperors did diligently +enough take cognizance of all causes and complaints for judgments given +in the Courts of the Prætors, which were in Rome the same that the +judges of the common-law are here. But by the continual civil wars in +after times for the choosing of Emperors, that diligence by little and +little ceased. And afterwards, as I have read in a very good author of +the Roman civil law, the number of complaints being much increased, and +being more than the Emperor could dispatch, he appointed an officer as +his clerk, to receive all such petitions; and that this clerk caused a +partition to be made in a room convenient, in which partition-wall, at +the heighth of a man’s reach, he placed at convenient distances certain +bars; so that when a suitor came to deliver his petition to the clerk, +who was sometimes absent, he had no more to do but to throw in his +petition between those bars, which in Latin are called properly +_cancelli_; not that any certain form of those bars, or any bars at all +were necessary, for they might have been thrown over, though the whole +space had been left open; but because they were _cancelli_, the clerk +attendant, and keeping his office there, was called _Cancellarius_. And +any court bar may properly enough be called _cancelli_, which does not +signify a lattice; for that is but a mere conjecture grounded upon no +history nor grammar, but taken up at first, as is likely, by some boy +that could find no other word in the dictionary for a lattice, but +_cancelli_. The office of this Chancellor was at first but to breviate +the matter of the petitions, for the easing of the Emperor; but +complaints increasing daily, they were too many, considering other +businesses more necessary for the Emperor to determine; and this caused +the Emperor to commit the determination of them to the Chancellor again. +What reason doth Sir Edward Coke allege to prove, that the highest point +of the Chancellor’s jurisdiction is to cancel his master’s +letters-patent, after they were sealed with his master’s seal; unless he +hold plea concerning the validity of them, or of his master’s meaning in +them, or of the surreptitious getting of them, or of the abusing of +them, which are all causes of equity? Also, seeing the Chancellor hath +his office only by the delivery of the Great Seal, without any +instruction, or limitation of the process of his court to be used; it is +manifest, that in all causes whereof he has the hearing, he may proceed +by such manner of hearing and examining of witnesses, with jury or +without jury, as he shall think fittest for the exactness, expedition, +and equity of the decrees. And therefore, if he think the custom of +proceeding by jury, according to the custom of England in Courts of +common-law, tend more to equity, which is the scope of all the judges in +the world, or ought to be, he ought to use that method; or if he think +better of another proceeding, he may use it, if it be not forbidden by a +statute. + +_L._ As for this reasoning of yours, I think it well enough. But there +ought to be had also a reverend respect to customs not unreasonable; and +therefore, I think, Sir Edward Coke says not amiss, that in such cases +where the Chancellor will proceed by the rule of the common-law, he +ought to deliver the record in the King’s Bench; and also it is +necessary for the Lord Chancellor to take care of not exceeding as it is +limited by statutes. + +_P._ What are the statutes by which his jurisdiction is limited? I know +that by the 27 _Eliz._ _c._ 8, he cannot reverse a judgment given in the +King’s Bench for debt, detinue, &c.; nor before the statute could he +ever, by virtue of his office, reverse a judgment in pleas of the Crown, +given by the King’s Bench, that hath the cognizance of such pleas. Nor +need he; for the judges themselves, when they think there is need to +relieve a man oppressed by ill witnesses, or power of great men +prevailing on the jury, or by error of the jury, though it be in case of +felony, may stay the execution and inform the King, who will in equity +relieve him. As to the regard we ought to have to custom, we will +consider of it afterwards. + +_L._ First, in a Parliament holden the 13th of Richard II, the Commons +petitioned the King, that neither the Chancellor, nor other Chancellor, +do make any order against the common-law, nor that any judgment be given +without due process of law. + +_P._ This is no unreasonable petition; for the common-law is nothing +else but equity: and by this statute it appears, that the Chancellors, +before that statute, made bolder with the Courts of common-law than they +did afterward; but it does not appear that common-law in this statute +signifies any thing else but generally the law temporal of the realm, +nor was this statute ever printed, that such as I might take notice of +it. But whether it be a statute or not, I know not, till you tell me +what the Parliament answered to this petition. + +_L._ The King’s answer was, the usages heretofore shall stand, so as the +King’s royalty be saved. + +_P._ This is flatly against Sir Edward Coke, concerning the Chancery. + +_L._ In another Parliament, 17 _Rich. II_, it is enacted, at the +petition of the Commons, that forasmuch as people were compelled to come +before the King’s Council, or in Chancery, by writs grounded upon untrue +suggestions, the Chancellor for the time being, presently after such +suggestions be duly found and proved untrue, shall have power to ordain +and award damages according to his discretion, to him which is so +travelled unduly as is aforesaid. + +_P._ By this statute it appears, that when a complaint is made in +Chancery upon undue suggestions, the Chancellor shall have the +examination of the said suggestions, and as he may award damages when +the suggestions are untrue, so he may also proceed by process to the +determining of the cause, whether it be real or personal, so it be not +criminal. + +_L._ Also the Commons petitioned in a Parliament of 2 _Hen. IV_, (not +printed) that no writs, nor privy seals, be sued out of Chancery, +Exchequer, or other places, to any man to appear at a day upon a pain, +either before the King and his Council, or in any other place, contrary +to the ordinary course of common-law. + +_P._ What answer was given to this petition by the King? + +_L._ That such writs should not be granted without necessity. + +_P._ Here again, you see, the King may deny or grant any petitions in +Parliament, either as he thinks it necessary, as in this place, or as he +thinks it prejudicial or not prejudicial to his royalty; as in the +answer of the former petition, which is a sufficient proof that no part +of his legislative power, or any other essential part of royalty, can be +taken from him by a statute. Now seeing it is granted that equity is the +same thing with the law of reason, and seeing Sir Edward Coke (1 _Inst._ +sec. xxi.), defines equity to be a certain reason comprehended in no +writing, but consisting only in right reason, which interpreteth and +amendeth the written law; I would fain know to what end there should be +any other Court of Equity at all, either before the Chancellor or any +other person, besides the Judges of the Civil or Common Pleas? Nay, I am +sure you can allege none but this, that there was a necessity for a +higher Court of Equity than the Courts of common-law, to remedy the +errors in judgment given by the justices of inferior courts; and the +errors in Chancery were irrevocable, except by Parliament, or by special +commission appointed thereunto by the King. + +_L._ But Sir Edward Coke says, that seeing matters of fact by the +common-law are triable by a jury of twelve men, this court should not +draw the matter _ad aliud examen_, that is, to another kind of +examination, _viz._ deposition of witnesses, which should be but +evidence to a jury. + +_P._ Is the deposition of witnesses any more or less, than evidence to +the Lord Chancellor? It is not therefore another kind of examination; +nor is a jury more capable of duly examining witnesses than a Lord +Chancellor. Besides, seeing all courts are bound to judge according to +equity, and that all judges in a case of equity may sometimes be +deceived, what harm is there to any man, or to the state, if there be a +subordination of judges in equity, as well as of judges in common-law? +Seeing it is provided by an Act of Parliament, to avoid vexation, that +_subpœnas_ shall not be granted till surety be found to satisfy the +party so grieved and vexed for his damages and expenses, if so be the +matter may not be made good which is contained in the bill. + +_L._ There is another statute of 31 _Hen. VI._ c. 2, wherein there is a +proviso cited by Sir Edward Coke in these words: “_Provided that no +matter determinable by the laws of the realm, shall be by the said Act +determined in other form, than after the course of the same law in the +King’s Courts, having the determination of the same law_.” + +_P._ This law was made but for seven years, and never continued by any +other Parliament, and the motive of this law was the great riots, +extortions, oppressions, &c. used during the time of the insurrection of +John Cade, and the indictments and condemnations wrongfully had by this +usurped authority. And thereupon the Parliament ordained, that for seven +years following no man should disobey any of the King’s writs under the +Great Seal, or should refuse to appear upon proclamation before the +King’s Council, or in the Chancery, to answer to riots, extortions, &c.; +for the first time he should lose, &c. Wherein there is nothing at all +concerning the jurisdiction of the Chancery or any other court, but an +extraordinary power given to the Chancery, and to the King’s Privy +Council, to determine of those crimes, which were not before that time +triable but only by the King’s Bench or special commission. For the Act +was made expressly for the punishment of a great multitude of crimes +committed by those who had acted under the said Cade’s authority; to +which Act the proviso was added which is here mentioned, that the +proceedings in those Courts of Chancery, and of the King’s Council, +should be such as should be used in the courts, to which the said +causes, before this Act was made, do belong: that is to say, such causes +as were criminal, should be after the order of the King’s Bench; and +such causes as were not criminal, but only against equity, should be +tried after the manner of the Chancery, or in some cases according to +the proceedings in the Exchequer. I wonder why Sir Edward Coke should +cite a statute, as this is, above two hundred years before expired, and +other two petitions, as if they were statutes, when they were not passed +by the King; unless he did it on purpose to diminish, as he endeavours +to do throughout his Institutes, the King’s authority, or to insinuate +his own opinions among the people for the law of the land; for that also +he endeavours by inserting Latin sentences, both in his text and in the +margin, as if they were principles of the law of reason, without any +authority of ancient lawyers, or any certainty of reason in themselves, +to make men believe they are the very grounds of the law of England. Now +as to the authority you ascribe to custom, I deny that any custom of its +own nature can amount to the authority of a law. For if the custom be +unreasonable, you must, with all other lawyers, confess that it is no +law, but ought to abolished; and if the custom be reasonable, it is not +the custom, but the equity that makes it law. For what need is there to +make reason law by any custom how long soever, when the law of reason is +eternal? Besides, you cannot find it in any statute, though _lex et +consuetudo_ be often mentioned as things to be followed by the judges in +their judgments, that _consuetudines_, that is to say, customs or +usages, did imply any long continuance of former time; but that it +signified such use and custom of proceeding, as was then immediately in +being before the making of such statute. Nor shall you find in any +statute the word common-law, which may not be there well interpreted for +any of the laws of England temporal; for it is not the singularity of +process used in any court that can distinguish it, so as to make it a +different law from the law of the whole nation. + +_L._ If all the courts were, as you think, courts of equity, would it +not be incommodious to the commonwealth? + +_P._ I think not; unless perhaps you may say, that seeing the judges, +whether they have many or few causes to be heard before them, have but +the same wages from the King, they may be too much inclined to put off +the causes they use to hear, for the easing of themselves, to some other +court, to the delay of justice, and damage of the parties suing. + +_L._ You are very much deceived in that; for on the contrary, the +contention between the courts for jurisdiction is, of who shall have +most causes brought before them. + +_P._ I cry you mercy, I smelt not that. + +_L._ Seeing also all judges ought to give their sentence according to +equity, if it should chance that a written law should be against the law +of reason, which is equity, I cannot imagine in that case how any +judgment can be righteous. + +_P._ It cannot be that a written law should be against reason; for +nothing is more reasonable than that every man should obey the law which +he hath himself assented to. But that is not always the law, which is +signified by _grammatical_ construction of the letter, but that which +the legislature thereby intended should be in force; which intention, I +confess, is a very hard matter many times to pick out of the words of +the statute, and requires great ability of understanding, and greater +meditations and consideration of such conjuncture of occasions and +incommodities, as needed a new law for a remedy. For there is scarce +anything so clearly written, that when the cause thereof is forgotten, +may not be wrested by an ignorant grammarian, or a cavilling logician, +to the injury, oppression, or perhaps destruction of an honest man. And +for this reason the Judges deserve that honour and profit they enjoy. +Since the determination of what particular causes every particular court +should have cognizance, is a thing not yet sufficiently explained, and +is in itself so difficult, as that the sages of the law themselves, (the +reason Sir Edward Coke will leave to law itself), are not yet agreed +upon it; how is it possible for a man who is no professed or no profound +lawyer, to take notice in what court he may lawfully begin his suit, or +give counsel in it to his client? + +_L._ I confess that no man can be bound to take notice of the +jurisdiction of courts, till all the courts be agreed upon it amongst +themselves; but what rule to give judgment by, a judge can have, so as +never to contradict the law written, nor displease his legislator, I +understand not. + +_P._ I think he may avoid both, if he take care by his sentence that he +neither punish an innocent man, nor deprive him of his damages due from +one that maliciously sueth him without reasonable cause, which to the +most of rational men and unbiassed, is not, in my opinion, very +difficult. And though a judge should, as all men may do, err in his +judgment, yet there is always such power in the laws of England, as may +content the parties, either in the Chancery, or by commissioners of +their own choosing, authorized by the King; for every man is bound to +acquiesce in the sentence of the judges he chooseth. + +_L._ In what cases can the true construction of the letter be contrary +to the meaning of the lawmaker? + +_P._ Very many, whereof Sir Edward Coke nameth three: fraud, accident, +and breach of confidence. But there be many more; for there be a very +great many reasonable exceptions almost to every general rule, which the +makers of the rule could not foresee; and very many words in every +statute, especially long ones, that are, as to _grammar_, of ambiguous +signification, and yet to them that know well to what end the statute +was made, perspicuous enough; and many connexions of doubtful reference, +which by a _grammarian_ may be cavilled at, though the intention of the +lawmaker be never so perspicuous. And these are the difficulties which +the judges ought to master, and can do it in respect of their ability +for which they are chosen, as well as can be hoped for; and yet there +are other men can do the same, or else the judges' places could not be +from time to time supplied. The bishops commonly are the most able and +rational men, and obliged by their profession to study equity, because +it is the law of God; and are therefore capable of being judges in a +court of equity. They are the men that teach the people what is sin; +that is to say, they are the doctors in cases of conscience. What reason +then can you show me, why it is unfit and hurtful to the commonwealth +that a bishop should be a Chancellor; as they were most often before the +time of Henry VIII, and since that time once in the reign of King James? + +_L._ But Sir Edward says, that soon after that a Chancellor was made +which was no professor of the law, he finds in the rolls of the +Parliament a grievous complaint by the whole body of the realm, and a +petition that the most wise and able men within the realm might be +chosen Chancellors. + +_P._ That petition was reasonable; but it does not say which are the +abler men, the judges of the common-law, or the bishops. + +_L._ That is not the great question as to the ability of a judge; both +of one and the other, there are able men in their own way. But when a +judge of equity has need, almost in every case, to consider as well the +statute-law, as the law of reason, he cannot perform his office +perfectly, unless he be also ready in the statutes. + +_P._ I see no great need he has to be ready in the statutes. In the +hearing of a cause, do the judges of the common-law inform the counsel +at the bar what the statute is, or the counsel the judges? + +_L._ The counsel inform the judges. + +_P._ Why may they not as well inform the Chancellor? Unless you will +say, that a bishop understands not as well as a lawyer what is sense, +when he hears it read in English. No, no; both the one and the other are +able enough: but to be able enough is not enough, when not the +difficulty of the case only, but also the passion of the judge is to be +conquered. I forgot to tell you of the statute of 36 _Edw.III_, c. 9, +that if any person thinking himself grieved contrary to any of the +articles above-written, or others contained in divers statutes, will +come to the Chancery, or any for him, and thereof make his complaint, he +shall presently there have remedy by force of the said articles and +statutes, without elsewhere pursuing to have remedy. By the words of +this statute it is very apparent, in my opinion, that the Chancery may +hold plea upon the complaint of the party grieved, in any case triable +at the common-law; because the party shall have present remedy in that +court, by force of this Act, without pursuing for remedy elsewhere. + +_L._ Yes; but Sir Edward Coke (4 _Inst._ p. 82) answers this objection +in this manner. These words, says he, _he shall have remedy_, signify no +more but that he shall have presently there a remedial writ grounded +upon those statutes, to give him remedy at the common-law. + +_P._ Very like Sir Edward Coke thought, as soon as the party had his +writ, he had his remedy, though he kept the writ in his pocket without +pursuing his complaint elsewhere: or else he thought, that the +Common-bench was not elsewhere than in the Chancery. + +_L._ Then there is the Court of—— + +_P._ Let us stop here; for this which you have said satisfies me, that +seek no more than to distinguish between justice and equity; and from it +I conclude, that justice fulfils the law, and equity interprets the law, +and amends the judgments given upon the same law. Wherein I depart not +much from the definition of equity cited in Sir Edward Coke (1 _Inst._ +sec. xxi.); _viz._ equity is a certain perfect reason, that interpreteth +and amendeth the law written; though I construe it a little otherwise +than he would have done; for no one can mend a law but he that can make +it, and therefore I say it amends not the law, but the judgments only +when they are erroneous. And now let us consider of crimes in +particular, the pleas whereof are commonly called the Pleas of the +Crown, and of the punishments belonging to them. And first of the +highest crime of all, which is high-treason. Tell me, what is +high-treason? + +[Sidenote: Of crimes capital.] + +_L._ The first statute that declareth what is high-treason, is the +statute of the 25 _Edw. III_, in these words: “Whereas divers opinions +have been before this time, in what case treason shall be said, and in +what not; the King, at the request of the Lords and of the Commons, hath +made declaration in the manner as hereafter follows: that is to say, +when a man doth compass or imagine the death of our Lord the King, of +our Lady the Queen, or of their eldest son and heir; or if a man doth +violate the King’s companion, or the King’s eldest daughter unmarried, +or the wife of the King’s eldest son and heir; or if a man do levy war +against our Lord the King in his realm, or be adherent to the King’s +enemies in his realm, giving to them aid and comfort in the realm or +elsewhere; and thereof be provably attainted by open deed by people of +their condition: and if a man counterfeit the King’s Great or Privy +Seal, or his money: and if a man bring false money into this realm +counterfeit to the money of England, as the money called Lushburgh, or +other like to the said money of England, knowing the money to be false, +to merchandize, and make payment in deceit of our said Lord the King, +and of his people: and if a man slay the Chancellor, Treasurer, or the +King’s Justices of one Bench or the other, Justices in Eyre, or Justices +of Assizes, and all other justices assigned to hear and determine, being +in their places and doing their offices. And is to be understood in the +cases above rehearsed, that that ought to be adjudged treason, which +extends to our royal Lord the King, and his royal Majesty; and of such +treason the forfeiture of the escheats pertains to our Lord the King, as +well the lands and tenements holden of others, as himself. And moreover +there is another manner of treason; that is to say, when a servant +slayeth his master, or a wife her husband; or when a man, secular or +religious, slayeth his prelate, to whom he oweth faith and obedience; +and of such treason the escheats ought to pertain to every Lord of his +own fee. And because many other like cases of treason may happen in time +to come, which a man cannot think nor declare at this present time, it +is accorded, that if any case supposed treason, which is not above +specified, doth happen before any justices, the justices shall tarry +without giving any judgment of the treason, till the cause be showed and +declared before the King and his Parliament, whether it ought to be +adjudged treason or other felony.” + +_P._ I desired to understand what treason is, wherein no enumeration of +facts can give me satisfaction. Treason is a crime of itself, _malum in +se_, and therefore a crime at the common-law; and high-treason the +highest crime at the common-law that can be. And therefore not the +statute only, but reason without a statute makes it a crime. And this +appears by the preamble, where it is intimated, that all men, though of +divers opinions, did condemn it by the name of treason, though they knew +not what treason meant, but were forced to request the King to determine +it. That which I desire to know is, how treason might have been defined +without the statute, by a man that has no other faculty to make the +definition of it, than by mere natural reason. + +_L._ When none of the lawyers have done it, you are not to expect that I +should undertake it on such a sudden. + +_P._ You know that _salus populi_ is _suprema lex_, that is to say, the +safety of the people is the highest law; and that the safety of the +people of a kingdom consisteth in the safety of the King, and of the +strength necessary to defend his people, both against foreign enemies +and rebellious subjects. And from this I infer, that to compass, that +is, to design, the death of the then present King, was high treason +before the making of this statute, as being a designing of a civil war +and the destruction of the people. 2. That the design to kill the King’s +wife, or to violate her chastity, as also to violate the chastity of the +King’s heir-apparent, or of his eldest daughter unmarried, as tending to +the destruction of the certainty of the King’s issue, and by consequence +to the raising of contentions about the Crown, and destruction of the +people in succeeding time by civil war, was therefore high-treason +before this statute. 3. That to levy war against the King within the +realm, and aiding the King’s enemies, either within or without the +realm, are tending to the King’s destruction or disherison, and was +high-treason, before this statute, by the common-law. 4. That +counterfeiting the principal seals of the kingdom, by which the King +governeth his people, tendeth to the confusion of government, and +consequently to the destruction of the people, and was therefore treason +before the statute. 5. If a soldier design the killing of his general or +other officer in time of battle, or a captain hover doubtfully with his +troops, with intention to gain the favour of him that shall chance to +get the victory, it tendeth to the destruction both of King and people, +whether the King be present or absent, and was high-treason before the +statute. 6. If any man had imprisoned the King’s person, he had made him +incapable of defending his people, and it was therefore high-treason +before the statute. 7. If any man had, with design to raise rebellion +against the King, by words written or advisedly uttered, denied the King +regnant to be their lawful King, he that wrote, preached, or spoke such +words, living then under the protection of the King’s laws, it had been +high-treason before the statute, for the reasons aforesaid. And perhaps +there may be some other cases upon this statute, which I cannot +presently think upon. But the killing of a justice or other officer, as +is determined by the statute, is not otherwise high-treason, but by the +statute. And to distinguish that which is treason by the common-law from +all other inferior crimes, we are to consider, that if such high-treason +should take effect, it would destroy all laws at once; and being done by +a subject, it is a return to hostility by treachery; and consequently, +such as are traitors may, by the law of reason, be dealt withal as +ignoble and treacherous enemies: but the greatest of other crimes, for +the most part, are breaches of one only, or at least of very few laws. + +_L._ Whether this you say be true or false, the law is now +unquestionable, by a statute made in the 1st and 2nd years of _Queen +Mary_, whereby there is nothing to be esteemed treason, besides those +few offences specially mentioned in the act of 25 _Edward III_. + +_P._ Amongst these great crimes the greatest is that which is committed +by one that has been trusted and loved by him whose death he so +designeth: for a man cannot well take heed of those whom he thinks he +hath obliged, whereas an open enemy gives a man warning before he +acteth. And this it is for which the statute hath declared, that it is +another kind of treason, when a servant killeth his master or mistress, +or a wife killeth her husband, or a clerk killeth his prelate. And I +should think it petty treason also, though it be not within the words of +the statute, when a tenant in fee, that holdeth by homage and fealty, +shall kill the lord of his fee; for fealty is an oath of allegiance to +the lord of the fee; saving he may not keep his oath in any thing sworn +to, if it be against the King. For homage, as it is expressed in a +statute of 17 _Edw. II_, is the greatest submission that is possible to +be made to one man by another. For the tenant shall hold his hands +together between the hands of his landlord, and shall say thus; I become +your man from this day forth for life, for member, and for worldly +honour, and shall owe that my faith for the lands that I shall hold of +you, saving the faith that I owe unto our Sovereign Lord the King, and +to many other lords. Which homage, if made to the King, is equivalent to +a promise of simple obedience, and if made to another lord, there is +nothing excepted but the allegiance to the King; and that which is +called fealty, is but the same confirmed by an oath. + +_L._ But Sir Edward Coke, (4 _Inst._ p. 11), denies that a traitor is in +legal understanding the King’s enemy. For enemies, saith he, be those +that be out of the allegiance of the King. And his reason is, because, +if a subject join with a foreign enemy, and come into England with him, +and be taken prisoner here, he shall not be ransomed, or proceeded with +as an enemy shall, but he shall be taken as a traitor to the King. +Whereas an enemy coming in open hostility, and taken, shall either be +executed by martial law, or ransomed; for he cannot be indicted of +treason, for that he never was in the protection and ligeance of the +King; and the indictment of the treason saith, _contra ligeantiam suam +debitam_. + +_P._ This is not an argument worthy of the meanest lawyer. Did Sir +Edward Coke think it impossible for a King lawfully to kill a man, by +what death soever, without an indictment, when it is manifestly proved +he was his open enemy? Indictment is a form of accusation peculiar to +England, by the command of some King of England, and retained still, and +therefore a law to this country of England. But if it were not lawful to +put a man to death otherwise than by an indictment, no enemy could be +put to death at all in other nations, because they proceed not, as we +do, by indictment. Again, when an open enemy is taken and put to death +by judgment of martial-law; it is not the law of the general or council +of war, that an enemy shall be thus proceeded with, but the law of the +King contained in their commissions; such as from time to time the Kings +have thought fit, in whose will it always resteth, whether an open +enemy, when he is taken, shall be put to death, or no, and by what +death; and whether he shall be ransomed, or no, and at what price. Then +for the nature of treason by rebellion; is it not a return to hostility? +What else does rebellion signify? William the Conqueror subdued this +kingdom; some he killed; some upon promise of future obedience he took +to mercy, and they became his subjects, and swore allegiance to him. If +therefore they renew the war against him, are they not again open +enemies? Or if any of them lurking under his laws, seek occasion thereby +to kill him secretly, and come to be known, may he not be proceeded +against as an enemy, who, though he had not committed what he designed, +yet had certainly a hostile design? Did not the Long Parliament declare +all those for enemies to the state, that opposed their proceedings +against the late King? But Sir Edward Coke does seldom well distinguish, +when there are two divers names for one and the same thing: though one +contain the other, he makes them always different; as if it could not be +that one and the same man should be both an enemy and a traitor. But now +let us come to his comment upon this statute. The statute says (as it is +printed in English) when a man doth compass, or imagine, the death of +our Lord the King, &c. What is the meaning of the word compassing, or +imagining? + +_L._ On this place Sir Edward Coke says, that before the making of this +act, _voluntas reputabatur pro facto_, the will was taken for the deed. +And so saith Bracton; _spectatur voluntas, et non exitus; et nihil +interest utrum quis occidat, aut causam præbeat_, that is to say, the +cause of the killing. Now Sir Edward Coke says, this was the law before +the statute; and that to be a cause of the killing, is to declare the +same by some open deed tending to the execution of his intent, or which +might be cause of death. + +_P._ Is there any Englishman can understand, that to cause the death of +a man, and to declare the same, is all one thing? And if this were so, +and that such was the common-law before the statute, by what words in +the statute is it taken away? + +_L._ It is not taken away, but the manner how it must be proved is thus +determined, that it must be proved by some open deed, as providing of +weapons, powder, poison, assaying of armour, sending of letters, &c. + +_P._ But what is the crime itself, which this statute maketh treason? +For as I understand the words, to compass or imagine the King’s death, +&c. the compassing (as it is in the English) is the only thing which is +made high-treason. So that not only the killing, but the design, is made +high-treason; or, as it is in the French record, _fait compasser_, that +is to say, the causing of others to compass or design the King’s death +is high-treason; and the words _par overt fait_, are not added as a +specification of any treason, or other crime, but only of the proof that +is required by the law. Seeing then the crime is the design and purpose +to kill the King, or cause him to be killed, and lieth hidden in the +breast of him that is accused; what other proof can there be had of it +than words spoken or written? And therefore, if there be sufficient +witness that he by words declared that he had such a design, there can +be no question, but that he is comprehended within the statute. Sir +Edward Coke doth not deny, but, that if he confess this design, either +by word or writing, he is within the statute. As for that common saying, +that bare words may make a heretic but not a traitor, which Sir Edward +Coke on this occasion maketh use of, they are to little purpose; seeing +that this statute maketh not the words high-treason, but the intention, +whereof the words are but a testimony: and that common saying is false +as it is generally pronounced. For there were divers statutes made +afterwards, though now expired, which made bare words to be treason +without any other deed; as, 1 _Eliz. c. 6_, and 13 _Eliz. c. 1_, if a +man should publicly preach that the King were an usurper, or that the +right of the crown belonged to any other than the King that reigned, +there is no doubt but it were treason, not only within this statute of +Edward III, but also within the statute of 1 _Edw. VI, c. 12_, which are +both still in force. + +_L._ Not only so; but if a subject should counsel any other man to kill +the King, Queen, or heir-apparent to the Crown, it would at this day be +adjudged high-treason; and yet it is no more than bare words. In the +third year of King James, Henry Garnet, a Jesuit priest, to whom some of +the gunpowder traitors had revealed their design by way of confession, +gave them absolution without any caution taken for their desisting from +their purpose, or other provision against the danger, and was therefore +condemned and executed as a traitor, though such absolution was nothing +else but bare words. Also I find in the reports of Sir John Davis, +Attorney-General for Ireland, that in the time of King Henry VI, a man +was condemned of treason for saying the King was a natural fool, and +unfit to govern. But yet this clause in the statute of _Edw. III_, viz. +that the compassing there mentioned ought to be proved by some _overt +act_, was by the framers of the statute not without great wisdom and +providence inserted; for as Sir Edward Coke very well observeth, when +witnesses are examined concerning words only, they never, or very +rarely, agree precisely about the words they swear to. + +_P._ I deny not but that it was wisely enough done. But the question is +not here of the treason, which is either fact or design, but of the +proof, which when it is doubtful, is to be judged by a jury of twelve +lawful men. Now whether think you is it a better proof of a man’s +intention to kill, that he declare the same with his own mouth, so as it +may be witnessed, or that he provide weapons, powder, poison, or assay +arms? If he utter his design by words, the jury has no more to do than +to consider the legality of the witnesses, the harmony of their +testimonies, or whether the words were spoken advisedly. For they might +have been uttered in a disputation, for exercise only; or when he that +spake them, had not the use of reason, nor perhaps any design or wish at +all, towards the execution of what he talked of. But how a jury, from +providing or buying of armour, or buying of gunpowder, or from any other +overt act, not treason in itself, can infer a design of murdering the +King, unless there appear some words also signifying to what end he made +such provision, I cannot easily conceive. Therefore, as the jury on the +whole matter, words and deeds, shall ground their judgment concerning +design or not design, so, in reason, they ought to give verdict. But to +come to the treason of counterfeiting the great or privy-seal, seeing +there are so many ways for a cheating fellow to make use of these seals, +to the cozening of the King and his people; why are not all such abuses +high-treason, as well as the making of a false seal? + +_L._ So they are; for Sir Edward Coke produceth a record of one that was +drawn and hanged for taking the great seal from an expired patent, and +fastening it to a counterfeit commission to gather money. But he +approveth not the judgment, because it is the judgment for petty +treason: also, because the jury did not find him guilty of the offence +laid in the indictment, which was, the counterfeiting of the great seal, +but found the special matter, for which the offender was drawn and +hanged. + +_P._ Seeing this crime of taking the great seal from one writing, and +fastening it to another, was not found high-treason by the jury, nor +could be found upon special matter to be the other kind of treason +mentioned in the same statute; what ground had either the jury to find +it treason, or the judge to pronounce sentence upon it? + +_L._ I cannot tell. Sir Edward Coke seems to think it a false record; +for hereupon he saith, by way of admonition to the reader, that hereby +it appeareth how dangerous it is to report a case by the ear. + +_P._ True; but he does not make it apparent that this case was untruly +reported; but on the contrary, confesseth that he had perused the same +record; and a man may, if it may be done without proof of the falsity, +make the same objection to any record whatsoever. For my part, seeing +this crime produced the same mischief that ariseth from counterfeiting, +I think it reason to understand it as within the statute; and for the +difference between the punishments, which are both of them capital, I +think it is not worthy to be stood upon; seeing death, which is _ultimum +supplicium_, is a satisfaction to the law, as Sir Edward Coke himself +hath in another place affirmed. But let us now proceed to other crimes. + +_L._ Appendant to this is another crime, called misprision of treason; +which is the concealing of it by any man that knows it; and is called +misprision from the French _mespriser_, which signifies to contemn or +undervalue. For it is no small crime in any subject, so little to take +to heart a known danger to the King’s person, and consequently to the +whole kingdom, as not to discover not only what he knows, but also what +he suspecteth of the same, that the truth therefore may be examined. But +for such discovery, though the thing prove false, the discoverer shall +not, as I think, be taken for a false accuser; if for what he directly +affirms, he produce a reasonable proof, and some probability for his +suspicion. For else the concealment will seem justifiable by the +interest, which is to every man allowed, in the preservation of himself +from pain and damage. + +_P._ This I consent to. + +_L._ All other crimes merely temporal, are comprehended under felony or +trespass. + +_P._ What is the meaning of the word felony? Does it signify anything +that is in its own nature a crime, or that only which is made a crime by +some statute? For I remember some statutes that make it felony to +transport horses, and some other things, out of the kingdom; which +transportation, before such statutes were made, and after the repealing +of the same, was no greater crime than any other usual traffic of a +merchant. + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke derives the word felony from the Latin word _fel_, +the gall of a living creature; and accordingly defines felony to be an +act done _animo felleo_; that is to say, a bitter, a cruel act. + +_P._ Etymologies are no definitions, and yet when they are true, they +give much light towards the finding out of a definition. But this of Sir +Edward Coke’s carries with it very little of probability; for there be +many things made felony by the statute law, that proceed not from any +bitterness of mind at all, and many that proceed from the contrary. + +_L._ This is matter for a critic, to be picked out of the knowledge of +history and foreign languages, and you may perhaps know more of it than +I do. + +_P._ All that I, or I think any other, can say in this matter, will +amount to no more than a reasonable conjecture, insufficient to sustain +any point of controversy in law. The word is not to be found in any of +the old Saxon laws, set forth by Mr. Lambard, nor in any statute printed +before that of Magna Charta; there it is found. Now Magna Charta was +made in the time of Henry III, grandchild to Henry II, Duke of Anjou, a +Frenchman born, and bred in the heart of France, whose language might +very well retain many words of his ancestors the German Franks, as ours +doth of the German Saxons; as also many words of the language of the +Gauls, as the Gauls did retain many words of the Greek colony planted at +Marseilles. But certain it is, the French lawyers at this day use the +word felon, just as our lawyers use the same; whereas the common people +of France use the word _filou_ in the same sense. But _filou_ +signifieth, not the man that hath committed such an act as they call +felony, but the man that maketh it his trade to maintain himself by the +breaking and contemning of all laws generally; and comprehendeth all +those unruly people called cheaters, cutpurses, picklocks, catchcloaks, +coiners of false money, forgers, thieves, robbers, murderers, and +whosoever make use of iniquity on land or sea as a trade or living. The +Greeks upon the coast of Asia, where Homer lived, were they that planted +the colony of Marseilles. They had a word that signified the same with +felon, which was φιλήτης, _filetes_; and this _filetes_ of Homer +signifies properly the same that a felon signifies with us. And +therefore Homer makes Apollo to call Mercury φιλήτην, _fileteen_, and +ἄρχον φιλήτων. I insist not upon the truth of this etymology, but it is +certainly more rational than the _animus felleus_ of Sir Edward Coke. +And for the matter itself, it is manifest enough, that which we now call +murder, robbery, theft, and other practices of felons, are the same that +we call felony, and crimes in their own nature without the help of +statute. Nor is it the manner of punishment, that distinguisheth the +nature of one crime from another; but the mind of the offender and the +mischief he intendeth, considered together with the circumstances of +person, time, and place. + +_L._ Of felonies, the greatest crime is murder. + +_P._ And what is murder? + +_L._ Murder is the killing of a man upon malice forethought, as by a +weapon, or by poison, or any way, if it be done upon antecedent +meditation; or thus, murder is the killing of a man in cold blood. + +_P._ I think there is a good definition of murder set down by statute, +52 _Henry III, c. 25_, in these words: Murder, from henceforth, shall +not be judged before our justices, where it is found misfortune only, +but it shall take place in such as are slain by felony, and not +otherwise. And Sir Edward Coke interpreting this statute, 2 _Inst._ p. +148, saith, that the mischief before this statute was, that he that +killed a man by misfortune, as by doing any act that was not against +law, and yet against his intent the death of a man ensued, this was +adjudged murder. But I find no proof of that he allegeth, nor find I any +such law among the laws of the Saxons set forth by Mr. Lambard. For the +word, it is, as Sir Edward Coke noteth, old Saxon, and amongst them it +signified no more than a man slain in the field or other place, the +author of his death not known. And according hereunto, Bracton, who +lived in the time of Magna Charta, defineth it, fol. 134, thus: Murder +is the secret killing of a man, when none besides the killer and his +companions saw or knew it; so that it was not known who did it, nor +fresh suit could be made after the doer. Therefore, every such killing +was called murder, before it could be known whether it could be by +felony or not; for a man may be found dead that kills himself, or was +lawfully killed by another. This name of murder came to be the more +horrid, when it was secretly done, for that it made every man to +consider of their own danger, and him that saw the dead body, to boggle +at it, as a horse will do at a dead horse. And to prevent the same, they +had laws in force, to amerce the hundred where it was done, in a sum +defined by law to be the price of his life. For in those days, the lives +of all sorts of men were valued by money, and the value set down in +their written laws. And therefore Sir Edward Coke was mistaken, in that +he thought that killing a man by misfortune before the statute of +Marlebridge, was adjudged murder. And those secret murders were +abominated by the people, for that they were liable to so great a +pecuniary punishment for suffering the malefactor to escape. But this +grievance was by Canutus, when he reigned, soon eased. For he made a +law, that the county in this case should not be charged, unless he were +an Englishman that was so slain; but if he were a Frenchman, (under +which name were comprehended all foreigners, and especially the +Normans,) though the slayer escaped, the county was not to be amerced. +And this law, though it were very hard and chargeable, when an +Englishman was so slain, for his friend to prove he was an Englishman, +and also unreasonable to deny the justice to a stranger, yet was it not +repealed till the 14th _Edw. III_. By this you see that murder is +distinguished from homicide by the statute laws, and not by any +common-law without the statute; and that it is comprehended under the +general name of felony. + +_L._ And so also is petit treason: and I think so is high-treason also. +For in the abovesaid statute in the 25th _Edw. III_, concerning +treasons, there is this clause: And because that many other like cases +of treason may happen in time to come, which a man cannot think or +declare at the present time; it is accorded, that if any other case, +supposed treason, which is not above specified, doth happen before any +of the justices, the justices shall tarry without any going to judgment +of the treason, till the cause be shewed and declared before the King +and his Parliament, whether it be treason or other felony. Which thereby +shews that the King and Parliament thought that treason was one of the +sorts of felony. + +_P._ And so think I. + +_L._ But Sir Edward Coke denies it to be so at this day. For (_1 Inst. +sec. 745_) at the word felony, he saith, that in ancient time this word +_felony_ was of so large an extent, as that it included high-treason; +but afterwards it was resolved, that in the King’s pardon or charter, +this word _felony_ should extend only to common felonies; and at this +day, under the word felony, by law is included petite treason, murder, +homicide, burning of houses, burglary, robbery, rape, &c. chance medley, +_se defendendo_, and petite larceny. + +_P._ He says it was resolved: but by whom? + +_L._ By the justices of assize in the time of Henry IV, as it seems in +the margin. + +_P._ Have justices of assize any power by their commission to alter the +language of the land and the received sense of words? Or in the question +in what case felony shall be said, is it referred to the judges to +determine; as in the question in what case treason shall be said, it is +referred by the statute of Edward III to the Parliament? I think not; +and yet perhaps they may be obliged to disallow a pardon of treason, +when mentioning all felonies it nameth not treason, nor specifies it by +any description of the fact. + +_L._ Another kind of homicide there is, simply called so, or by the name +of manslaughter, and is not murder: and that is, when a man kills +another man upon sudden quarrel, during the heat of blood. + +_P._ If two meeting in the street chance to strive who shall go nearest +to the wall, and thereupon fighting, one of them kills the other, I +believe verily he that first drew his sword, did it of malice +forethought, though not long forethought; but whether it be felony or +no, it may be doubted. It is true, that the harm done is the same as if +it had been done by felony; but the wickedness of the intention was +nothing near so great. And supposing it had been done by felony, then it +is manifest, by the statute of Marlebridge, that it was very murder. And +when a man for a word or a trifle shall draw his sword and kill another +man, can any man imagine that there was not some precedent malice? + +_L._ It is very likely there was malice, more or less: and therefore the +law hath ordained for it a punishment equal to that of murder, saving +that the offender shall have the benefit of his clergy. + +_P._ The benefit of clergy comes in upon another account, and importeth +not any extenuation of the crime. For it is but a relic of the old +usurped papal privilege, which is now by many statutes so pared off, as +to spread but to few offences, and is become a legal kind of conveying +mercy, not only to the clergy, but also to the laity. + +_L._ The work of a judge, you see, is very difficult, and requires a man +that hath a faculty of well distinguishing of dissimilitudes in such +cases as common judgments think to be the same. A small circumstance may +make a great alteration; wherefore a man that cannot well discern, ought +not to take upon him the office of a judge. + +_P._ You say very well; for if judges were to follow one another’s +judgments in precedent cases, all the justice in the world would at +length depend upon the sentence of a few learned, or unlearned, ignorant +men, and have nothing at all to do with the study of reason. + +_L._ A third kind of homicide is when a man kills another, either by +misfortune, or in the necessary defence of himself, or of the King, or +of his laws; for such killing is neither felony nor crime, saving, as +Sir Edward Coke says (_3 Inst. p. 56_), that if the act that a man is +doing, when he kills another man, be unlawful, then it is murder. As, if +A meaning to steal a deer in the park of B, shooteth at the deer, and by +the glance of the arrow killeth a boy that is hidden in a bush, this is +murder, for that the act was unlawful; but if the owner of the park had +done the like, shooting at his own deer, it had been by misadventure, +and no felony. + +_P._ This is not so distinguished by any statute, but is the +_common-law_ only of Sir Edward Coke. I believe not a word of it. If a +boy be robbing an appletree, and falleth thence upon a man that stands +under it and breaks his neck, but by the same chance saveth his own +life, Sir Edward Coke, it seems, will have him hanged for it, as if he +had fallen of prepensed malice. All that can be called crime in this +business is but a simple trespass, to the damage perhaps of sixpence or +a shilling. I confess the trespass was an offence against the law, but +the falling was none, nor was it by the trespass but by the falling that +the man was slain; and as he ought to be quit of the killing, so he +ought to make restitution for the trespass. But I believe the cause of +Sir Edward Coke’s mistake was his not well understanding of Bracton, +whom he cites in the margin. For, fol. 120 b. lib. iii. cap. 4, he saith +thus: _Sed hic erit distinguendum, utrum quis dederit operam rei licitæ, +vel illicitæ; si illicitæ, ut si lapidem projiciebat quis versus locum +per quem consueverunt homines transitum facere, vel dum insequitur quis +equum vel bovem, et aliquis a bove vel equo percussus fuerit, et +hujusmodi, hoc imputatur ei_. That is: But here we are to distinguish +whether a man be upon a lawful or unlawful business; if an unlawful, as +he that throws a stone into a place where men use to pass; or if he +chase a horse or an ox, and thereby the man be stricken by the horse or +the ox; this shall be imputed to him. And it is most reasonable; for the +doing of such an unlawful act as is here meant, is a sufficient argument +of a felonious purpose, or at least a hope to kill somebody or other, +and he cared not whom, which is worse than to design the death of a +certain adversary, which nevertheless is murder. Also, on the contrary, +though the business a man is doing be lawful, and it chanceth sometimes +that a man be slain thereby, yet may such killing be felony. For if a +carman drive his cart through Cheapside in a throng of people, and +thereby he kill a man, though he bare him no malice, yet because he saw +there was very great danger, it may reasonably be inferred, that he +meant to adventure the killing of somebody or other, though not of him +that was killed. + +_L._ He is a felon also that killeth himself voluntarily, and is called, +not only by common lawyers, but also in divers statute laws, _felo de +se_. + +_P._ And it is well so; for names imposed by statutes are equivalent to +definitions. But I conceive not how any man can bear _animum felleum_, +or so much malice towards himself, as to hurt himself voluntarily, much +less to kill himself. For naturally and necessarily the intention of +every man aimeth at somewhat which is good to himself, and tendeth to +his preservation. And therefore, methinks, if he kill himself, it is to +be presumed that he is not _compos mentis_, but by some inward torment +or apprehension of somewhat worse than death, distracted. + +_L._ Nay, unless he be _compos mentis_, he is not _felo de se_, as Sir +Edward Coke saith, _3 Inst. p. 54_; and therefore he cannot be judged a +_felo de se_, unless it be first proved he was _compos mentis_. + +_P._ How can that be proved of a man dead; especially if it cannot be +proved by any witness, that a little before his death he spake as other +men used to do? This is a hard place; and before you take it for +common-law, it had need to be cleared. + +_L._ I will think on it. There is a statute of _3 Hen. VII, c. 14_, +which makes it felony in any of the King’s household servants, under the +degree of a Lord, to compass the death of any of the King’s Privy +Council. The words are these: That from henceforth the steward, +treasurer, and comptroller of the King’s house for the time being, or +one of them, have full authority and power, to inquire by twelve staid +men and discreet persons of the chequer-roll of the King’s honourable +household, if any servant, admitted to be his servant sworn, and his +name put into the chequer-roll, whatsoever he be, serving in any manner, +office, or room, reputed, had, or taken under the estate of a Lord, make +any confederacies, compassings, conspiracies, or imaginations with any +person, to destroy or murder the King, or any Lord of this realm, or any +other person sworn of the King’s council, steward, treasurer, or +comptroller of the King’s house. And if such misdoers shall be found +guilty by confession, or otherwise, that the said offence shall be +judged felony. + +_P._ It appears by this statute, that not only the compassing the death, +as you say, of a privy-councillor, but also of any Lord of this realm, +is felony; if it be done by any of the King’s household servants, that +is not a Lord. + +_L._ No; Sir Edward Coke upon these words, _any Lord of this realm, or +other person sworn of the King’s council_, infers (_3 Inst. p. 38_), +that it is to be understood of such a Lord only as is a +privy-councillor. + +_P._ For barring of the Lords of Parliament from this privilege, he +strains this statute a little farther, in my opinion, than it reacheth +of itself. But how are such felonies to be tried? + +_L._ The indictment is to be found before the steward, treasurer, and +comptroller of the King’s house, or one of them, by twelve of the King’s +household servants. The petit jury for the trial must be twelve other of +the King’s servants. And the judges are again the steward, treasurer, +and comptroller of the King’s house, or two of them; and yet I see that +these men are not usually great students of the law. + +_P._ You may hereby be assured, that either the King and Parliament were +very much overseen in choosing such officers perpetually for the time +being to be judges in a trial at the common-law, or else that Sir Edward +Coke presumes too much to appropriate all the judicature, both in law +and equity, to the common lawyers; as if neither lay persons, men of +honour, nor any of the Lords spiritual who are the most versed in the +examination of equity and cases of conscience, when they hear the +statutes read and pleaded, were fit to judge of the intention and +meaning of the same. I know that neither such great persons, nor +bishops, have ordinarily so much spare time from their ordinary +employment, as to be so skilful as to plead causes at the bar; but +certainly they are, especially the bishops, the best able to judge of +matters of reason, that is to say (by Sir Edward Coke’s confession) of +matters, except of blood, at the common-law. + +_L._ Another sort of felony, though without manslaughter, is robbery; +and by Sir Edward Coke (_3 Inst. p. 68_), defined thus: Robbery by the +common-law is a felony committed by a violent assault upon the person of +another, by putting him in fear, and taking away from him his money, or +other goods of any value whatsoever. + +_P._ Robbery is not distinguished from theft by any statute. +_Latrocinium_ comprehendeth them both, and both are felony, and both +punished with death. And therefore to distinguish them aright is the +work of reason only. And the first difference, which is obvious to all +men, is that robbery is committed by force or terror, of which neither +is in theft. For theft is a secret act, and that which is taken by +violence or terror, either from his person, or in his presence, is still +robbery. But if it be taken secretly, whether it be by day or night, +from his person, or from his fold, or from his pasture, then it is +called theft. It is force and fraud only, that distinguisheth between +theft and robbery; both which are, by the pravity only of the intention, +felony in their nature. But there be so many evasions of the law found +out by evil men, that I know not, in this predicament of felony, how to +place them. For suppose I go secretly, by day or night, into another +man’s field of wheat, ripe and standing, and loading my cart with it I +carry it away: is it theft or robbery? + +_L._ Neither, it is but trespass. But if you first lay down the wheat +you have cut, and then throw it into your cart, and carry it away, then +it is felony. + +_P._ Why so? + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke tells you the reason of it (_3 Inst. p. 107_). For +he defineth theft to be, by the common-law, a felonious and fraudulent +taking and carrying away, by any man or woman, of the mere personal +goods of another, not from the person, nor by night in the house of the +owner. From this definition, he argues thus, p. 109: Any kind of corn or +grain, growing upon the ground, is a personal chattel, and the executors +of the owner shall have them, though they be not severed; but yet no +larceny can be committed of them, because they are annexed to the +realty; so it is of grass standing on the ground, or of apples, or of +any fruit upon the trees, &c.; so it is of a box or chest of charters, +no larceny can be committed of them, because the charters concern the +realty, and the box or chest though it be of great value, yet shall it +be of the same nature the charters are of; _et omne magis dignum trahit +ad se minus_. + +_P._ Is this definition drawn out of any statute, or is it in Bracton or +Littleton, or any other writer upon the science of the laws? + +_L._ No, it is his own: and you may observe by the logic sentences +dispersed through his works, that he was a logician sufficient enough to +make a definition. + +_P._ But if his definitions must be the rule of law, what is there that +he may not make felony or not felony, at his pleasure? But seeing it is +not statute law that he says, it must be very perfect reason, or else no +law at all; and to me it seems so far from reason, as I think it +ridiculous. But let us examine it. There can, says he, be no larceny of +corn, grass, or fruits that are growing, that is to say, they cannot be +stolen. But why? Because they concern the realty; that is, because they +concern the land. It is true, that the land cannot be stolen, nor the +right of a man’s tenure; but corn, and trees, and fruit, though growing, +may be cut down, and carried away secretly and feloniously, in contempt +and despite of the law. And are they not then stolen? And is there any +act which is feloniously committed, that is not more than trespass? Can +any man doubt of it, that understands the English tongue? It is true, +that if a man pretend a right to the land, and on that pretence take the +fruits thereof by way of taking possession of his own, it is no more +than a trespass, unless he conceal the taking of them. For in that one +case, he but puts the man that was in possession before, to exhibit his +complaint, which purpose is not felonious, but lawful; for nothing makes +a distinction between felony and not felony, but the purpose. I have +heard, that if a man slander another with stealing of a tree standing, +there lies no action for it. And that upon this ground: to steal a +standing tree is impossible; and that the cause of the impossibility is, +that a man’s freehold cannot be stolen; which is a very obvious fallacy. +For freehold signifieth, not only the tenement, but also the tenure; and +though it be true that a tenure cannot be stolen, yet every man sees +that the standing trees and corn may easily be stolen. And so far forth +as trees, &c. are part of the freehold, so far forth also, they are +personal goods. For whatsoever is freehold is inheritance, and descended +to the heir, and nothing can descend to the executors but what is merely +personal. And though a box or case of evidences are to descend to the +heir, yet unless you can shew me positive law to the contrary, they +shall be taken into the executors' hands to be delivered to the heir. +Besides, how unconscionable a thing is it, that he that steals a +shilling’s worth of wood, which the wind hath blown down, or which lieth +rotting on the ground, should be hanged for it, and he that takes a +tree, worth twenty or forty shillings, should answer only for the +damage! + +_L._ It is somewhat hard, but it has been so practised time out of mind. +Then follows sodomy, and rape, both of them felonies. + +_P._ I know that, and that of the former he justly says it is +detestable, being in a manner an apostacy from human nature: but in +neither of them is there anything of _animus felleus_. The statutes +which make them felony, are exposed to all men’s reading. But because +Sir Edward Coke’s commentaries upon them are more diligent and accurate +than to be free from all uncleanness, let us leap over them both; +observing only by the way, that he leaves an evasion for an impotent +offender, though his design be the same, and pursued to the utmost of +his power. + +_L._ Two other great felonies are, breaking and burning of houses; +neither of which are defined by any statute. The former of them is by +Sir Edward Coke (_3 Inst. p. 63_), defined thus:—Burglary is by the +common-law, the breaking and entering into the mansion-house of another, +in the night, with intent to kill some reasonable creature, or to commit +some other felony within the same, whether his intent be executed or +not. And he defineth night to be then, when one man cannot know +another’s face by daylight. And for the parts of a mansion-house, he +reckoneth all houses that belong to house-keeping, as barns, stables, +dairyhouses, buttery, kitchen, chambers, &c. But breaking of a house by +day, though felony, and punished as burglary, is not within the statute. + +_P._ I have nothing to say against his interpretations here; but I like +not that any private man should presume to determine, whether such or +such a fact done be within the words of a statute or not, where it +belongs only to a jury of twelve men to declare in their verdict, +whether the fact laid open before them, be burglary, robbery, theft, or +other felony. For this is to give a leading judgment to the jury, who +ought not to consider any private lawyer’s institutes, but the statutes +themselves pleaded before them for directions. + +_L._ Burning, as he defines it (ibid. p. 66), is a felony at the +common-law, committed by any that maliciously and voluntarily, in the +night or day, burneth the house of an other. And he hereupon infers, if +a man set fire to the house, and it takes not, that then it is not +within the statute. + +_P._ If a man should secretly and maliciously lay a quantity of +gunpowder under another man’s house, sufficient to blow it up, and set a +train of powder in it, and set fire to the train, and some accident +hinder the effect, is not this burning? Or what is it? What crime? It is +neither treason, nor murder, nor burglary, nor robbery, nor theft, nor +(no damage being made) any trespass, nor contrary to any statute. And +yet, seeing the common-law is the law of reason, it is a sin, and such a +sin as a man may be accused of, and convicted; and consequently a crime +committed of malice prepensed. Shall he not then be punished for the +attempt? I grant you that a judge has no warrant from any statute-law, +common-law, or commission, to appoint the punishment; but surely the +King has power to punish him, on this side of life or member, as he +please; and with the assent of Parliament, if not without, to make the +crime for the future capital. + +_L._ I know not. Besides these crimes, there is conjuration, witchcraft, +sorcery and enchantment; which are capital by the statute _1 James, c. +12_. + +_P._ But I desire not to discourse of that subject. For though without +doubt there is some great wickedness signified by those crimes; yet I +have ever found myself too dull to conceive the nature of them, or how +the devil hath power to do many things which witches have been accused +of. Let us now come to crimes not capital. + +_L._ Shall we pass over the crime of heresy, which Sir Edward Coke +ranketh before murder? But the consideration of it will be somewhat +long. + +_P._ Let us defer it till the afternoon. + +[Sidenote: Of heresy.] + +_L._ Concerning heresy, Sir Edward Coke (3 _Inst._ p. 39) says, that +five things fall into consideration. 1. Who be the judges of heresy. 2. +What shall be judged heresy. 3. What is the judgment upon a man +convicted of heresy. 4. What the law alloweth him to save his life. 5. +What he shall forfeit by judgment against him. + +_P._ The principal thing to be considered, which is the heresy itself, +he leaveth out, viz. what it is; in what fact or words it consisteth; +what law it violateth, statute-law or the law of reason. The cause why +he omitteth it, may perhaps be this; that it was not only out of his +profession, but also out of his other learning. Murder, robbery, theft, +&c. every man knoweth to be evil, and are crimes defined by the +statute-law, so that any man may avoid them, if he will. But who can be +sure to avoid heresy, (if he but dare to give an account of his faith), +unless he know beforehand what it is? + +_L._ In the preamble of the statute of _2 Hen. IV, c. 15_, heresy is +laid down, as a preaching or writing of such doctrine as is contrary to +the determination of Holy Church. + +_P._ Then it is heresy at this day to preach or write against +worshipping of Saints, or the infallibility of the Church of Rome, or +any other determination of the same Church. For Holy Church, at that +time, was understood to be the Church of Rome, and now with us the Holy +Church I understand to be the Church of England; and the opinions in +that statute are now, and were then, the true Christian faith. Also the +same statute of _Hen. IV_ declareth, by the same preamble, that the +Church of England had never been troubled with heresy. + +_L._ But that statute is repealed. + +_P._ Then also is that declaration or definition of heresy repealed. + +_L._ What, say you, is heresy? + +_P._ I say, heresy is a singularity of doctrine or opinion contrary to +the doctrine of another man, or men; and the word properly signifies the +doctrine of a sect, which doctrine is taken upon trust of some man of +reputation for wisdom, that was the first author of the same. If you +will understand the truth hereof, you are to read the histories and +other writings of the ancient Greeks, whose word it is; which writings +are extant in these days, and easy to be had. Wherein you will find, +that in and a little before the time of Alexander the Great, there lived +in Greece many excellent wits, that employed their time in search of the +truth in all manner of sciences worthy of their labour, and which to +their great honour and applause published their writings; some +concerning justice, laws, and government, some concerning good and evil +manners, some concerning the causes of things natural and of events +discernible by sense, and some of all these subjects. And of the authors +of these, the principal were Pythagoras, Plato, Zeno, Epicurus and +Aristotle, men of deep and laborious meditation, and such as did not get +their bread by their philosophy, but were able to live of their own, and +were in honour with princes and other great personages. But these men, +though above the rest in wisdom, yet their doctrine in many points did +disagree; whereby it came to pass, that such men as studied their +writings, inclined some to Pythagoras, some to Plato, some to Aristotle, +some to Zeno, and some to Epicurus. But philosophy itself was then so +much in fashion, as that every rich man endeavoured to have his children +educated in the doctrine of some or other of these philosophers, which +were for their wisdom so much renowned. Now those that followed +Pythagoras, were called _Pythagoreans_; those that followed Plato, +_Academics_; those that followed Zeno, _Stoics_; those that followed +Epicurus, _Epicureans_; and those that followed Aristotle, +_Peripatetics_; which are the names of heresy in Greek, which signifies +no more but taking of an opinion; and the said _Pythagoreans_, +_Academics_, _Stoics_, _Peripatetics_, _&c._ were termed by the names of +so many several heresies. All men, you know, are subject to error, and +the ways of error very different; and therefore it is no wonder if these +wise and diligent searchers of the truth did, notwithstanding their +excellent parts, differ in many points amongst themselves. But this +laudable custom of great wealthy persons to have their children at any +price to learn philosophy, suggested to many idle and needy fellows an +easy and compendious way of maintenance; which was to teach the +philosophy, some of Plato, some of Aristotle, &c: whose books to that +end they read over, but without capacity or much endeavour to examine +the reasons of their doctrines, taking only the conclusions, as they +lay. And setting up with this, they soon professed themselves +philosophers, and got to be the school-masters to the youth of Greece. +But by competition for such employment, they hated and reviled one +another with all the bitter terms they could invent; and very often, +when upon occasion they were in civil company, fell first to +disputation, and then to blows, to the great trouble of the company and +their own shame. Yet amongst all their reproachful words, the name of +_heretic_ came never in, because they were all equally heretics, their +doctrine not being theirs, but taken upon trust from the aforesaid +authors. So that though we find heresy often mentioned in Lucian and +other heathen authors, yet we shall not find in any of them _hæreticus_ +for a heretic. And this disorder among the philosophers continued a long +time in Greece, and infecting also the Romans, was at the greatest in +the times of the apostles and in the primitive Church, till the time of +the Nicene Council, and somewhat after. But at last the authority of the +Stoics and Epicureans was not much esteemed, only Plato’s and +Aristotle’s philosophy were much in credit; Plato’s with the better +sort, that founded their doctrine upon the conceptions and ideas of +things, and Aristotle’s with those that reasoned only from the names of +things, according to the scale of the _categories_. Nevertheless, there +were always, though not new sects of philosophy, yet new opinions +continually arising. + +_L._ But how came the word heretic to be a reproach? + +_P._ Stay a little. After the death of our Saviour, his apostles and his +disciples, as you know, dispersed themselves into several parts of the +world to preach the Gospel, and converted much people, especially in +Asia the Less, in Greece, and Italy, where they constituted many +churches; and as they travelled from place to place, left bishops to +teach and direct those their converts, and to appoint presbyters under +them to assist them therein, and to confirm them by setting forth the +life and miracles of our Saviour, as they had received them from the +writings of the apostles and evangelists; whereby, and not by the +authority of Plato, or Aristotle, or any other philosopher, they were to +be instructed. Now you cannot doubt but that among so many heathens +converted in the time of the apostles, there were men of all professions +and dispositions, and some that had never thought of philosophy at all, +but were intent upon their fortunes or their pleasures; and some that +had a greater, some a less use of reason; and some that had studied +philosophy, but professed it not, which were commonly the men of the +better rank; and some had professed it only for their better abstinence, +and had it not farther than readily to talk and wrangle; and some were +Christians in good earnest, and others but counterfeit, intending to +make use of the charity of those that were sincere Christians, which in +those times was very great. Tell me now, of these sorts of Christians, +which was the most likely to afford the fittest men to propagate the +faith by preaching and writing, or public or private disputation; that +is to say, who were fittest to be made presbyters and bishops. + +_L._ Certainly those who, _cæteris paribus_, could make the best use of +Aristotle’s rhetoric and logic. + +_P._ And who were the most prone to innovation? + +_L._ They that were most confident of Aristotle’s and Plato’s (their +former masters) natural philosophy. For they would be the aptest to +wrest the writings of the apostles and all Scriptures to the doctrines +in which their reputation was engaged. + +_P._ And from such bishops and priests and other sectaries it was, that +heresy, amongst the Christians, first came to be a reproach. For no +sooner had one of them preached or published any doctrine that +displeased either the most, or the most leading men of the rest, but it +became such a quarrel as not to be decided but by a Council of the +bishops in the province where they lived; wherein he that would not +submit to the general decree, was called a heretic, as one that would +not relinquish the philosophy of his sect. The rest of the Council gave +themselves the name of Catholics, and to their Church the name of +Catholic Church. And thus came up the opposite terms of catholic and +heretic. + +_L._ I understand how it came to be a reproach, but not how it follows +that every opinion condemned by a Church that is, or calls itself +catholic, must needs be an error or a sin. The Church of England denies +that consequence, and that such doctrine as they hold cannot be proved +to be erroneous but by the Scripture, which cannot err; but the Church, +being but men, may both err and sin. + +_P._ In this case we must consider also that error, in its own nature, +is no sin. For it is impossible for a man to err on purpose; he cannot +have an intention to err; and nothing is sin unless there be a sinful +intention: much less are such errors sins, as neither hurt the +commonwealth nor any private man, nor are against any law positive or +natural; such errors as were those for which men were burnt, in the time +when the Pope had the government of this Church. + +_L._ Since you have told me how heresy came to be a name, tell me also +how it came to be a crime; and what were the heresies that first were +made crimes. + +_P._ Since the Christian Church could declare, and none else, what +doctrines were heresies, but had no power to make statutes for the +punishment of heretics before they had a Christian King, it is manifest +that heresy could not be made a crime before the first Christian +Emperor, which was Constantine the Great. In his time, one Arius, a +priest of Alexandria, in dispute with his bishop publicly denied the +divinity of Christ, and maintained it afterwards in the pulpit, which +was the cause of a sedition and much bloodshed both of citizens and +soldiers in that city. For the preventing of the like for the time to +come, the Emperor called a general Council of bishops to the city of +Nice; who being met, he exhorted them to agree upon a confession of the +Christian faith, promising that whatsoever they agreed on he would cause +to be observed. + +_L._ By the way, the Emperor, I think, was here a little too +indifferent. + +_P._ In this Council was established so much of the creed we now use and +call the Nicene creed, as reacheth to the words, _I believe in the Holy +Ghost_. The rest was established by the three general Councils next +succeeding. By the words of which creed almost all the heresies then in +being, and especially the doctrine of Arius, were condemned; so that now +all doctrines published by writing or by word, and repugnant to this +confession of the first four general Councils, and contained in the +Nicene creed, were, by the imperial law forbidding them, made crimes; +such as are that of Arius, denying the divinity of Christ; that of +Eutiches, denying the two natures of Christ; that of the Nestorians, +denying the divinity of the Holy Ghost; that of the Anthropomorphites, +that of the Manichees, that of the Anabaptists, and many other. + +_L._ What punishment had Arius? + +_P._ At the first, for refusing to subscribe, he was deprived and +banished; but afterwards having satisfied the Emperor concerning his +future obedience (for the Emperor caused this confession to be made, not +for the regard of truth of doctrine, but for the preserving of the +peace, especially among his Christian soldiers, by whose valour he had +gotten the empire, and by the same was to preserve it), he was received +again into grace, but died before he could repossess his benefice. But +after the time of those Councils, the imperial law made the punishment +for heresy to be capital, though the manner of the death was left to the +prefects in their several jurisdictions; and thus it continued till +somewhat after the time of the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa. But the +papacy having gotten the upper hand of the Emperor, brought in the use +of burning both heretics and apostates; and the Popes from time to time +made heresies of many other points of doctrine (as they saw it conduce +to the setting up of the chair above the throne), besides those +determined in the Nicene creed, and brought in the use of burning; and +according to this papal law, there was an apostate burnt at Oxford, in +the time of William the Conqueror, for turning Jew. But of a heretic +burnt in England, there is no mention made till after the statute of 2 +_Hen. IV_, whereby some followers of Wicliff, called Lollards, were +afterwards burned; and that for such doctrines as by the Church of +England, ever since the first year of Queen Elizabeth, have been +approved for godly doctrines, and no doubt were godly then. And so you +see how many have been burnt for godliness. + +_L._ It was not well done. But it is no wonder we read of no heretics +before the time of Henry IV: for in the preamble to that statute it is +intimated, that before those Lollards there never was any heresy in +England. + +_P._ I think so too; for we have been the tamest nation to the Pope of +all the world. But what statutes concerning heresy have there been made +since? + +_L._ The statute of 2 _Hen. V_, _c._ 7, which adds to the burning the +forfeiture of lands and goods; and then no more till the 25 _Hen. VIII_, +_c._ 14, which confirms the two former, and giveth some new rules +concerning how they shall be proceeded with. But by the statute of 1 +_Edw. VI_, _c._ 12, all acts of Parliament formerly made to punish any +manner of doctrine concerning religion, are repealed. For therein it is +ordained, after divers Acts specified, that all and every other Act or +Acts of Parliament concerning doctrine or matters of religion, and all +and every branch, article, sentence, and matter, pains and forfeitures +contained, mentioned, or anywise declared in the same Acts of Parliament +or statutes, shall be from henceforth repealed, utterly void, and of +none effect. So that in the time of King Edward VI, not only all +punishments of heresy were taken away, but also the nature of it was +changed to what originally it was, a private opinion. Again, in 2 _Phil. +& M._ those former statutes of 2 _Hen. IV_, _c._ 15, 2 _Hen. V_, _c._ +17, 25 _Hen. VIII_, _c._ 14, are revived; and the branch of 1 _Edw. VI_, +_c._ 12, touching doctrine, though not specially named, seemeth to be +this, that the same statute confirmeth the statute of 25 _Edw. III_, +concerning treasons. Lastly, in the first year of Queen Elizabeth, _c. +1_, the aforesaid statutes of Queen Mary are taken away, and thereby the +statute of 1 _Edw. VI_, _c._ 12, revived; so as there was no statute +left for the punishment of heretics. But Queen Elizabeth by the advice +of her Parliament gave a commission, which was called the High +Commission, to certain persons, amongst whom were very many of the +bishops, to declare what should be heresy for the future, but with a +restraint that they should judge nothing to be heresy, but what had been +so declared in the first four general Councils. + +_P._ From this which you have showed me, I think we may proceed to the +examination of the learned Sir Edward Coke concerning heresy. In his +chapter of heresy, 3 _Inst._ p. 40, he himself confesseth that no +statute against heresy stood then in force, when in the 9th year of King +James, Bartholomew Legat was burnt for Arianism; and that from the +authority of the act of 2 _Hen. IV_, _c._ 15, and other acts cited in +the margin, it may be gathered that the diocesan hath the jurisdiction +of heresy. This I say is not true: for as to acts of Parliament, it is +manifest, that from acts repealed, that is to say, from things that have +no being, there can be gathered nothing. And as to the other authorities +in the margin, Fitzherbert and the Doctor and Student, they say no more +than what was law in the time when they writ; that is, when the Pope’s +usurped authority was here obeyed. But if they had written this in the +time of King Edward VI or Queen Elizabeth, Sir Edward Coke might as well +have cited his own authority, as theirs; for their opinions had no more +the force of laws than his. Then he cites this precedent of Legat, and +another of Hammond in the time of Queen Elizabeth; but precedents prove +only what was done, and not what was well done. What jurisdiction could +the diocesan then have of heresy, when by the statute of _Edw. VI_, _c._ +12, then in force, there was no heresy, and all punishment for opinions +was forbidden? For heresy is a doctrine contrary to the determination of +the Church; but then the Church had not determined any thing at all +concerning heresy. + +_L._ But seeing the high-commissioners had power to correct and amend +heresies, they must have power to cite such as were accused of heresy to +appear before them; or else they could not execute their commission. + +_P._ If they had first made and published a declaration of what articles +they made heresy, that when one man heard another speak against their +declaration, he might thereof inform the commissioners, then indeed they +had had power to cite and imprison the person accused. But before they +can know what should be heresy, how was it possible that one man should +accuse another? And before he be accused, how can he be cited? + +_L._ Perhaps it was taken for granted, that whatsoever was contrary to +any of the four first general Councils, was to be judged heresy. + +_P._ That granted, yet I see not how one man might accuse another any +the better for those Councils. For not one man of ten thousand had ever +read them, nor were they ever published in English, that a man might +avoid offending against them; nor perhaps are they extant. Nor if those +that we have printed in Latin, are the very acts of the Councils, which +is yet much disputed amongst divines, do I think it fit they were put in +the vulgar tongues. But it is not likely that the makers of the statutes +had any purpose to make heresy of whatsoever was repugnant to those four +general Councils. For if they had, I believe the Anabaptists, of which +there was great plenty in those times, would one time or other have been +questioned upon this article of the Nicene Creed, _I believe one baptism +for the remission of sins_. Nor was the commission itself for a long +time after registered, that men might in such uncertainty take heed and +abstain, for their better safety, from speaking of religion anything at +all. But by what law was this heretic Legat burnt? I grant he was an +Arian, and his heresy contrary to the determination of the Church of +England, in the highest points of Christianity. But seeing there was no +statute-law to burn him, and no penalty forbidding, by what law, by what +authority was he burnt? + +_L._ That this Legat was accused of heresy, was no fault of the +high-commissioners; but when he was accused, it had been a fault in them +not to have examined him, or having examined him and found him an Arian, +not to have judged him so, or not to have certified him so. All this +they did, and this was all that belonged unto them; they meddled not +with his burning, but left him to the secular power to do with him what +they pleased. + +_P._ Your justification of the commissioners is nothing to the question. +The question is by what law was he burnt? The spiritual-law gives no +sentence of temporal punishment; and Sir Edward Coke confesseth that he +could not be burned; and burning being forbidden by statute-law, by what +law then was he burned? + +_L._ By the common-law. + +_P._ What is that? It is not custom. For before the time of Henry IV, +there was no such custom in England; for if there had, yet those laws +that came after were but confirmations of the custom, and therefore the +repealing of those laws was a repealing of the custom. For when King +Edward VI and Queen Elizabeth abolished those statutes, they abolished +all pains, and consequently burning, or else they had abolished nothing. +And if you will say he was burnt by the law of reason, you must tell me +how there can be proportion between doctrine and burning; there can be +no equality, nor majority, nor minority assigned between them. The +proportion that is between them, is the proportion of the mischief which +the doctrine maketh, to the mischief to be inflicted on the doctor; and +this is to be measured only by him that hath the charge of governing the +people; and consequently the punishing of offences can be determined by +none but by the King, and that, if it extend to life or member, with the +assent of Parliament. + +_L._ He does not draw any argument for it from reason, but allegeth for +it this judgment executed upon Legat, and a story out of Holinshed and +Stow. But I know that neither history nor precedent will pass with you +for law. And though there be a writ _de hæretico comburendo_ in the +register, as you may read in Fitzherbert, grounded upon the statutes of +2 _Hen. IV_, _c._ 15, and 2 _Hen. V_, _c._ 7; yet seeing those statutes +are void, you will say the writ is also void. + +_P._ Yes, indeed will I. Besides this, I understand not how that it is +true that he saith, that the diocesan hath jurisdiction of heresy, and +that so it was put in use in all Queen Elizabeth’s reign; whereas by the +statute it is manifest, that all jurisdiction spiritual was given under +the Queen to the high-commissioners. How then could any one diocesan +have any part thereof without deputation from them, which by their +letters-patent they could not grant? Nor was it reasonable they should; +for the trust was not committed to the bishops only, but also to divers +lay persons, who might have an eye upon their proceedings, lest they +should encroach upon the power temporal. But at this day there is +neither statute nor any law to punish doctrine, but the ordinary power +ecclesiastical, and that according to the canons of the Church of +England, only authorized by the King, the high-commission being long +since abolished. Therefore let us come now to such causes criminal as +are not capital. + +[Sidenote: Of premunire.] + +_L._ The greatest offence not capital, is that which is done against the +statute of provisors. + +_P._ You have need to expound this. + +_L._ This crime is not unlike to that for which a man is outlawed, when +he will not come in and submit himself to the law; saving that in +outlawries there is a long process to precede it, and he that is +outlawed is put out of the protection of the law. But for the offence +against the statute of provisors (which is called _præmunire facias_, +from the words in the original writ), if the offender submit not himself +to the law within the space of two months after notice, he is presently +an outlaw. And this punishment, if not capital, is equivalent to +capital. For he lives secretly at the mercy of those that know where he +is, and cannot, without the like peril to themselves, but discover him. +And it has been much disputed, before the time of Queen Elizabeth, +whether he might not be lawfully killed by any man that would, as one +might kill a wolf. It is like the punishment amongst the old Romans, of +being barred the use of fire and water; and like the great +excommunication in the papacy, when a man might not eat nor drink with +the offender without incurring the like penalty. + +_P._ Certainly the offence for which this punishment was first ordained +was some abominable crime, or extraordinary mischief. + +_L._ So it was. For the Pope, you know, from long before the Conquest, +encroached every day upon the power temporal. Whatsoever could be made +to seem to be _in ordine ad spiritualia_, was in every commonwealth +claimed and haled to the jurisdiction of the Pope; and for that end, in +every country he had his court ecclesiastical, and there was scarce any +cause temporal which he could not, by one shift or other, hook into his +jurisdiction, in such sort as to have it tried in his own courts at +Rome, or in France, or in England itself. By which means the King’s laws +were not regarded, judgments given in the King’s courts were avoided, +and presentations to bishoprics, abbeys, and other benefices, founded +and endowed by the Kings and nobility of England, were bestowed by the +Pope upon strangers, or such as with money in their purses could travel +to Rome to provide themselves of such benefices. And suitably hereunto, +when there was a question about a tithe, or a will, though the point +were merely temporal, yet the Pope’s court here would fetch them in, or +else one of the parties would appeal to Rome. Against these injuries of +the Roman Church, and to maintain the right and dignity of the Crown of +England, Edward III made a statute concerning provisors, that is, such +as provide themselves with benefices here from Rome. For in the +twenty-fifth year of his reign he ordained, in a full Parliament, that +the right of election of bishops, and right of advowsons and +presentations, belonged to himself, and to the nobility that were the +founders of such bishoprics, abbeys, and other benefices. And he enacted +further, that if any clerk which he or any of his subjects should +present, should be disturbed by any such provisor, that such provisor or +disturber should be attached by his body, and if convicted, lie in +prison till he were ransomed at the King’s will, and had satisfied the +party grieved, renounced his title, and found sureties not to sue for it +any further; and that if they could not be found, then exigents should +go forth to outlawry, and the profits of the benefice in the mean time +be taken into the King’s hands. And the same statute is confirmed in the +twenty-seventh year of King Edward III; which statute alloweth to these +provisors two months to appear: but if they appear before they be +outlawed, they shall be received to make answer; but if they render not +themselves, they shall forfeit all their lands, goods, and chattels, +besides that they stand outlawed. The same law is confirmed again by 16 +_Rich. II_, _c._ 5; in which is added, because these provisors obtained +sometimes from the Pope, that such English bishops, as according to the +law were instituted and inducted by the King’s presentees, should be +excommunicated, that for this also both they, and the receivers and +publishers of such papal process, and the procurers, should have the +same punishment. + +_P._ Let me see the statute itself of 27 _Edw. III_. + +_L._ It lies there before you, set down _verbatim_ by Sir Edward Coke +himself, both in English and French. + +_P._ It is well. We are now to consider what it means, and whether it be +well or ill interpreted by Sir Edward Coke. And first it appeareth by +the preamble, which Sir Edward Coke acknowledgeth to be the best +interpreter of the statute, that this statute was made against the +encroachments only of the Church of Rome upon the right of the King, and +other patrons, to collate bishoprics and other benefices within the +realm of England, and against the power of the courts spiritual to hold +plea of controversies determinable in any of the courts of the King, or +to reverse any judgment there given, as being things that tend to the +disherison of the King and destruction of the common-law of the realm +always used. Put the case now, that a man had procured the Pope to +reverse a decree in chancery. Had he been within the danger of +præmunire? + +_L._ Yes, certainly. Or if the judgment had been given in the Court of +the Lord Admiral, or in any other King’s court whatsoever, either of law +or equity. For courts of equity are most properly courts of the +common-law of England, because equity and common-law, as Sir Edward Coke +says, are all one. + +_P._ Then the word common-law is not in this preamble restrained to such +courts only where the trial is by juries, but comprehends all the King’s +temporal courts, if not also the courts of those subjects that are lords +of great manors. + +_L._ It is very likely, yet I think it will not by every man be granted. + +_P._ The statute also says, that they who draw men out of the realm in +plea, whereof the cognizance pertaineth to the King’s court, or of +things whereof judgment is given in the King’s court, are within the +cases of præmunire. But what if one man draw another to Lambeth in plea, +whereof judgment is already given at Westminster. Is he by this clause +involved in a præmunire? + +_L._ Yes. For though it be not out of the realm, yet it is within the +meaning of the statute; because the Pope’s court, not the King’s court, +was then perhaps at Lambeth. + +_P._ But in Sir Edward Coke’s time the King’s court was at Lambeth, and +not the Pope’s. + +_L._ You know well enough that the spiritual Court has no power to hold +pleas of common-law. + +_P._ I do so; but I know not for what cause any simple man, that +mistakes his right court, should be out of the King’s protection, lose +his inheritance and all his goods, personal and real, and if taken, be +kept in prison all his life. This statute cannot be by Sir Edward Coke’s +torture made to say it. Besides, such men are ignorant in what courts +they are to seek their remedy; and it is a custom confirmed by perpetual +usage, that such ignorant men should be guided by their counsel at law. +It is manifest, therefore, that the makers of the statute intended not +to prohibit men from suing for their right, neither in the Chancery, nor +in the Admiralty, nor in any other court, except the Ecclesiastical +courts, which had their jurisdiction from the Church of Rome. Again, +where the statute says, “which do sue in any other court, or defeat a +judgment in the King’s court”: what is the meaning of another court? +Another court than what? Is it here meant the King’s Bench, or Court of +Common Pleas? Does a præmunire lie for every man that sues in Chancery +for that which might be remedied in the Court of Common Pleas? Or can a +præmunire lie by this statute against the Lord Chancellor? The statute +lays it only on the party that sueth, not upon the judge which holdeth +the plea. Nor could it be laid, either by this statute or by the statute +of 16 _Rich. II_, upon the judges, which were then punishable only by +the Pope’s authority. Seeing then the party suing has a just excuse upon +the counsel of his lawyer, and the temporal judge and the lawyer both +are out of the statute, the punishment of the præmunire can light upon +nobody. + +_L._ But Sir Edward Coke in this same chapter bringeth two precedents to +prove, that though the spiritual courts in England be now the King’s +courts, yet whosoever sueth in them for any thing triable by the +common-law, shall fall into a præmunire. One is, that whereas in the +twenty-second year of _Hen. VIII_ all the clergy of England in a +convocation by public instrument acknowledged the King to be supreme +head of the Church of England; yet after this, viz. 24 _Hen. VIII_, this +statute was in force. + +_P._ Why not? A convocation of the clergy could not alter the right of +supremacy; their courts were still the Pope’s courts. The other +precedent, in the twenty-fifth year of _Hen. VIII_, of the Bishop of +Norwich, may have the same answer. For the King was not declared head of +the Church by Act of Parliament till the twenty-sixth year of his reign. +If he had not mistrusted his own law, he would not have laid hold on so +weak a proof as these precedents. And as to the sentence of præmunire +upon the Bishop of Norwich, neither doth this statute nor that other of +Richard II warrant it. He was sentenced for threatening to excommunicate +a man which had sued another before the mayor. But this statute forbids +not that, but forbids the bringing in or publishing of excommunications, +or other process from Rome, or any other place. Before the twenty-sixth +year of Henry VIII, there is no question but that for a suit in the +spiritual court here in a temporal cause there lay a præmunire. And if +perhaps some judge or other hath since that time judged otherwise, his +judgment was erroneous. + +_L._ Nay, but by the statute of 16 _Rich. II._ _c._ 5, it appeareth to +the contrary, as Sir Edward Coke here will show you. The effect, saith +he, of the statute of Richard II is, that if any pursue, or cause to be +pursued, in the Court of Rome or elsewhere, anything which toucheth the +King, against him, his crown, or regality, or his realm, they, their +notaries, &c. shall be out of the King’s protection. + +_P._ I pray you let me know the very words of the statute as they lie. + +_L._ Presently. The words are, _If any man purchase or pursue, or cause +to be purchased or pursued, in the Court of Rome or elsewhere, any such +translations, processes and sentences of excommunication, bulls, +instruments, or any other things whatsoever, which touch the King, +against him, his crown, and his regality, or his realm, as is aforesaid, +&c._ + +_P._ If a man bring a plea of common-law into the spiritual court, which +is now the King’s court, and the judge of this spiritual court hold plea +thereof: by what construction can you draw it within the compass of the +words you have now read? To sue for my right in the King’s court, is no +pursuing of translations of bishoprics, made or procured in the Court of +Rome, or any place else, but only in the court of the King; nor is this +the suit against the King, nor his crown, nor his regality, nor his +realm, but the contrary. Why then is it a præmunire? No. He that brings +in or setteth out a writing in any place whatsoever, wherein is +contained, that the King hath so given away his jurisdiction, as that if +a subject be condemned falsely, his submission to the King’s judgment is +of none effect; or that the King upon no necessity whatsoever can out of +Parliament-time raise money for the defence of the kingdom, is, in my +opinion, much more within the statute of provisors, than they which +begin suit for a temporal matter in a court spiritual. But what argument +has he for this law of his, since the statute-law fails him, from the +law of reason? + +_L._ He says, _they are called other courts, either because they proceed +by the rules of other laws, as by the canon or civil law, or by other +trials than the common-law doth warrant. For the trial warranted by the +law of England for matter of fact, is by verdict of twelve men before +the judges of the common-law, in matters pertaining to the common-law, +and not upon examination of witnesses, as in the Court of Equity. So +that alia curia is either that which is governed per aliam legem, or +which draweth the party ad aliud examen. For if_— + +_P._ Stop there. Let us consider of this you have read: _for the trial +warranted by the law of England is by verdict of twelve men_. What means +he here by the law of England? Does it not warrant the trials in +Chancery, and in the Court of Admiralty, by witnesses? + +_L._ By the law of England he means the law used in the King’s Bench; +that is to say, the common-law. + +_P._ This is just as if he had said, that two courts did warrant their +own way of trial; but other courts not so, but were warranted by the +King: only the courts of common-law were warrants to themselves. You see +that _alia curia_ is this way ill expounded. In the courts of common-law +all trials are by twelve men, who are judges of the fact; and the fact +known and proved, the judges are to pronounce the law; but in the +spiritual court, the Admiralty, and in all the courts of Equity, there +is but one judge, both of fact and of law; this is all the difference. +If this difference be intended by the statute by _alia curia_, there +would be a præmunire for suing in a court, being not the King’s Court. +The King’s Bench and Court of Common Pleas may also be different kinds +of courts, because the process is different. But it is plain that this +statute doth not distinguish courts otherwise than into the courts of +the King, and into the courts of the foreign states and princes. And +seeing you stand upon the name of a jury for the distinguishing of +courts, what difference do you find between the trials at the +common-law, and the trials in other courts? You know that in trials of +fact naturally, and through all the world, the witnesses are judges, and +it is impossible to be otherwise. What then in England can a jury judge +of, except it be of the sufficiency of the testimony? The justices have +nothing to judge of or do, but after the fact is proved, to declare the +law; which is not judgment, but jurisdiction. Again, though the trial be +in Chancery, or in the Court of civil law, the witnesses are still +judges of the fact, and he that hath the commission to hear the cause, +hath both the parts, that is to say, of a jury to judge of the +testimony, and of a justice to declare the law. In this, I say, lies all +the difference: which is indeed enough to make a dispute (as the world +goes) about jurisdiction! But seeing it tends neither to the disherison +of the King, nor of the people, nor to the subversion of the law of +reason, that is of common-law, nor to the subversion of justice, nor to +any harm of the realm, without some of which these statutes are not +broken; it cannot be a præmunire. + +_L._ Let me read on. _For if the freehold, inheritances, goods and +chattels, debts and duties, wherein the King and subject have right and +property by the common-law, should be judged per aliam legem, or be +drawn ad aliud examen, the three mischiefs afore expressed would follow; +viz. the destruction of the King and his crown, the disherison of his +people, and the undoing and destruction of the common-law always used._ + +_P._ That is to say, of the law of reason. From hence it follows, that +where there are no juries, and where there are different laws from ours, +that is to say, in all the world besides, neither King nor people have +any inheritance, nor goods, nor any law of reason. I will examine his +doctrine concerning cases criminal no further. He nowhere defineth a +crime, that we may know what it is: an odious name sufficeth him to make +a crime of any thing. He hath put heresy among the most odious crimes, +not knowing what it signifies; and upon no other cause, but because the +Church of Rome, to make their usurped power the more terrible, had made +it, by long preaching against it, and cruelty shown towards many godly +and learned men of this and other reformed Churches, appear to common +people a thing detestable. He puts it in as a plea of the crown in the +time of Queen Elizabeth; whereas in her time there was no doctrine +heresy. But Justice Stamford leaves it out, because, when heresy was a +crime, it was a plea of the _mitre_. I see also in this catalogue of +causes criminal, he inserteth costly feeding, costly apparel, and costly +building, though they were contrary to no statute. It is true, that by +evil circumstances they become sins; but these sins belong to the +judgment of the pastors spiritual. A justice of the temporal law (seeing +the intention only makes them sins) cannot judge whether they be sins or +no, unless he have power to take confessions. Also he makes flattery of +the King to be a crime. How could he know when one man had flattered +another? He meant therefore that it was a crime to please the King: and +accordingly he citeth divers calamities of such as had been in times +past in great favour of the Kings they served; as the favourites of +Henry III, Edward II, Richard II, Henry VI; which favourites were some +imprisoned, some banished, and some put to death by the same rebels that +imprisoned, banished, and put to death the same King, upon no better +ground than the Earl of Strafford, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and +King Charles the First, by the rebels of that time. Empson and Dudley +were no favourites of Henry the seventh, but spunges, which King Henry +the eighth did well squeeze. Cardinal Wolsey was indeed for divers years +a favourite of Henry the eighth, but fell into disgrace, not for +flattering the King, but for not flattering him in the business of +divorce from Queen Katherine. You see his reasoning here; see also his +passion in the words following: we will for some causes descend no +lower: _Qui eorum vestigiis insistunt, eorum exitus perhorrescant._ This +is put in for the favourite, that then was, of King James. But let us +give over this, and speak of the legal punishments to these crimes +belonging. + +[Sidenote: Of punishments.] + +And in the first place I desire to know who it is that hath the power, +for an offence committed, to define and appoint the special manner of +punishment. For I suppose you are not of the opinion of the Stoics in +old time, that all faults are equal, and that there ought to be the same +punishment for killing a man, and for killing a hen. + +_L._ The manner of punishment in all crimes whatsoever, is to be +determined by the common-law. That is to say, if it be a statute that +determines it, then the judgment must be according to the statute; if it +be not specified by the statute, then the custom in such cases is to be +followed: but if the case be new, I know not why the judge may not +determine it according to reason. + +_P._ But according to whose reason? If you mean the natural reason of +this or that judge authorized by the King to have cognizance of the +cause, there being as many several reasons, as there are several men, +the punishment of all crimes will be uncertain, and none of them ever +grow up to make a custom. Therefore a punishment certain can never be +assigned, if it have its beginning from the natural reasons of deputed +judges; no, nor from the natural reason of the supreme judge. For if the +law of reason did determine punishments, then for the same offences +there should be, through all the world and in all times, the same +punishments; because the law of reason is immutable and eternal. + +_L._ If the natural reason neither of the King, nor of any else, be able +to prescribe a punishment, how can there be any lawful punishment at +all? + +_P._ Why not? For I think that in this very difference between the +rational faculties of particular men, lieth the true and perfect reason +that maketh every punishment certain. For, but give the authority of +defining punishments to any man whatsoever, and let that man define +them, and right reason has defined them, suppose the definition be both +made, and made known before the offence committed. For such authority is +to trump in card playing, save that in matter of government, when +nothing else is turned up, clubs are trumps. Therefore seeing every man +knoweth by his own reason what actions are against the law of reason, +and knoweth what punishments are by this authority for every evil action +ordained; it is manifest reason, that for breaking the known laws he +should suffer the known punishments. Now the person to whom this +authority of defining punishments is given, can be no other, in any +place of the world, but the same person that hath the sovereign power, +be it one man or one assembly of men. For it were in vain to give it to +any person that had not the power of the militia to cause it to be +executed; for no less power can do it, when many offenders be united and +combined to defend one another. There was a case put to King David by +Nathan, of a rich man that had many sheep, and of a poor man that had +but one, which was a tame lamb: the rich man had a stranger in his +house, for whose entertainment, to spare his own sheep he took away the +poor man’s lamb. Upon this case the King gave judgment, “Surely the man +that hath done this shall die.” What think you of this? Was it a royal, +or tyrannical judgment? + +_L._ I will not contradict the canons of the Church of England, which +acknowledge the King of England within his own dominions hath the same +rights, which the good Kings of Israel had in theirs; nor deny King +David to have been one of those good Kings. But to punish with death +without a precedent law, will seem but a harsh proceeding with us, who +unwillingly hear of arbitrary laws, much less of arbitrary punishments, +unless we were sure that all our Kings would be as good as David. I will +only ask you, by what authority the clergy may take upon them to +determine or make a canon concerning the power of their own King, or to +distinguish between the right of a good and an evil King. + +_P._ It is not the clergy that make their canons to be law, but it is +the King that doth it by the great seal of England; and it is the King +that giveth them power to teach their doctrines, in that, that he +authorized them publicly to teach and preach the doctrine of Christ and +his apostles, according to the Scriptures, wherein this doctrine is +perspicuously contained. But if they had derogated from the royal power +in any of their doctrines published, then certainly they had been to +blame; nay, I believe that they had been more within the statute of +præmunire of 16 _Rich. II_, _c._ 5, than any judge of a Court of Equity +for holding pleas of common-law. I cite not this precedent of King +David, as approving the breach of the great charter, or justifying the +punishment with loss of life or member, of every man that shall offend +the King; but to show you that before the charter was granted, in all +cases where the punishments were not prescribed, it was the King only +that could prescribe them; and that no deputed judge could punish an +offender but by force of some statute, or by the words of some +commission, and not _ex officio_. They might for a contempt of their +courts, because it is a contempt of the King, imprison a man during the +King’s pleasure, or fine him to the King according to the greatness of +the offence: but all this amounteth to no more, than to leave him to the +King’s judgment. As for cutting off of ears, and for the pillory, and +the like corporal punishments usually inflicted heretofore in the +Star-chamber, they were warranted by the statute of _Hen. VII_, that +giveth them power to punish sometimes by discretion. And generally it is +a rule of reason, that every judge of crimes, in case the positive law +appoint no punishment, and he have no other command from the King, then +do consult the King before he pronounce sentence of any irreparable +damage on the offender: for otherwise he doth not pronounce the law, +which is his office to do, but makes the law, which is the office of the +King. And from this you may collect, that the custom of punishing such +and such a crime, in such and such a manner, hath not the force of law +in itself, but from an assured presumption that the original of the +custom was the judgment of some former King. And for this cause the +judges ought not to run up, for the customs by which they are warranted, +to the time of the Saxon Kings, nor to the time of the Conquest. For the +most immediate antecedent precedents are the fairest warrants of their +judgments; as the most recent laws have commonly the greatest vigour, as +being fresh in the memory of all men, and tacitly confirmed, because not +disapproved, by the sovereign legislator. What can be said against this? + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke, (3 _Inst._ _p._ 210), in the chapter of judgments +and executions, saith, that of judgments some are by the common-law, +some by statute-law, and some by custom; wherein he distinguisheth +common-law both from statute-law and from custom. + +_P._ But you know, that in other places he makes the common-law, and the +law of reason, to be all one; as indeed they are, when by it is meant +the King’s reason. And then his meaning in this distinction must be, +that there be judgments by reason without statute-law, and judgments +neither by statute-law nor by reason, but by custom without reason. For +if a custom be reasonable, then, both he and other learned lawyers say, +it is common-law; and if unreasonable, no law at all. + +_L._ I believe Sir Edward Coke’s meaning was no other than yours in this +point, but that he inserted the word _custom_, because there be not many +that can distinguish between customs reasonable and unreasonable. + +_P._ But custom, so far forth as it hath the force of a law, hath more +of the nature of a statute, than of the law of reason, especially where +the question is not of lands and goods, but of punishments, which are to +be defined only by authority. Now to come to particulars, what +punishment is due by law for high-treason? + +_L._ To be drawn upon a hurdle from the prison to the gallows, and there +to be hanged by the neck, and laid upon the ground alive, and have his +bowels taken out and burnt whilst he is yet living; to have his head cut +off, his body to be divided into four parts, and his head and quarters +to be placed as the King shall assign. + +_P._ Seeing a judge ought to give judgment according to the law, and +that this judgment is not appointed by any statute, how does Sir Edward +Coke warrant it by reason, or how by custom? + +_L._ Only thus: reason it is, that his body, lands, goods, posterity, +&c. should be torn, pulled asunder, and destroyed, that intended to +destroy the majesty of government. + +_P._ See how he avoids the saying the majesty of the King. But does not +this reason make as much for punishing a traitor, as Mettius Fuffetius +in old time was executed by Tullus Hostilius, King of Rome, or as +Ravaillac, not many years ago in France, who were torn in pieces by four +horses, as it does for drawing, hanging, and quartering? + +_L._ I think it does. But he confirms it also in the same chapter, by +holy Scripture. Thus Joab for treason (1 _Kings_ ii. 28), was drawn from +the horns of the altar; that is proof for drawing upon a hurdle: _Esth._ +ii. 22; Bigthan for treason was hanged; there is proof for hanging: +_Acts_ i. 18; Judas hanged himself and his bowels were poured out; there +is for hanging and embowelling alive: 2 _Sam._ xviii. 14; Joab pierced +Absalom’s heart; that is proof for pulling out a traitor’s heart: _Sam._ +xx. 22; Sheba the son of Bichri had his head cut off; which is proof +that a traitor’s head ought to be cut off: 2 _Sam._ iv. 12; they slew +Baanah and Rechab, and hung up their heads over the pool of Hebron; this +is for setting up of quarters: and lastly for forfeiture of lands, and +goods, _Psalms_ cix. 9-15: _Let their children be driven out, and beg, +and other men make spoil of their labours, and let their memory be +blotted out of the land._ + +_P._ Learnedly said; and no record is to be kept of the judgment. Also +the punishments divided between those traitors, must be joined in one +judgment for a traitor here. + +_L._ He meant none of this, but intended (his hand being in) to show his +reading, or his chaplain’s, in the Bible. + +_P._ Seeing then for the specifying of the punishment in case of +treason, he brings no argument from natural reason, that is to say, from +the common-law; and that it is manifest that it is not the general +custom of the land, the same being rarely or never executed upon any +peer of the realm, and that the King may remit the whole penalty, if he +will: it follows, that the specifying of the punishment depends merely +upon the authority of the King. But this is certain, that no judge ought +to give other judgment, than has been usually given and approved either +by a statute, or by consent express or implied of the sovereign power. +For otherwise it is not the judgment of the law, but of a man subject to +the law. + +_L._ In petit treason the judgment is, to be drawn to the place of +execution, and hanged by the neck; or if it be a woman, to be drawn and +burnt. + +_P._ Can you imagine that this so nice a distinction can have any other +foundation than the wit of a private man? + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke upon this place says, that she ought not to be +beheaded or hanged. + +_P._ No, not by the judge, who ought to give no other judgment than the +statute or the King appoints; nor the sheriff to make other execution +than the judge pronounceth; unless he have a special warrant from the +King. And this I should have thought he had meant, had he not said +before, that the King had given away all his right of judicature to his +courts of justice. + +_L._ The judgment for felony is— + +_P._ Heresy is before felony in the catalogue of the pleas of the Crown. + +_L._ He has omitted the judgment against a heretic, because, I think, no +jury can find heresy, nor no judge temporal did ever pronounce judgment +upon it. For the statute of 2 _Hen. V_, _c._ 7, was, that the bishop +having convicted any man of heresy, should deliver him to the sheriff, +and that the sheriff should believe the bishop. The sheriff therefore +was bound by the statute of 2 _Hen. IV_, after he was delivered to him, +to burn him; but that statute being repealed, the sheriff could not burn +him, without a writ _de heretico comburendo_, and therefore the sheriff +burnt Legat (9 King James) by that writ, which was granted by the judges +of the common-law at that time, and in that writ the judgment is +expressed. + +_P._ This is strange reasoning. When Sir Edward Coke knew and confessed, +that the statutes upon which the writ _de hæretico comburendo_ was +grounded, were all repealed, how could he think the writ itself could be +in force? Or that the statute, which repealeth the statutes for burning +heretics, was not made with an intent to forbid such burning? It is +manifest he understood not his books of common-law. For in the time of +Henry IV and Henry V, the word of the bishop was the sheriff’s warrant, +and there was need of no such writ; nor could be till the 25 _Hen. +VIII_, when those statutes were repealed, and a writ made for that +purpose and put into the register, which writ Fitzherbert cites in the +end of his <cite lang="la">Natura Brevium_. Again, in the latter end of +the reign of Queen Elizabeth, was published a correct register of +original and judicial writs, and the writ _de hæretico comburendo_ left +out; because that statute of 25 _Hen. VIII_, and all statutes against +heretics, were repealed, and burning forbidden. And whereas he citeth +for the granting of this writ, in the ninth year of James I, the Lord +Chief Justice, the Lord Chief Baron, and two Justices of the +Common-Pleas, it is, as to all but the Lord Chief Justice, against the +law. For neither the judges of Common-Pleas, nor of the Exchequer, can +hold pleas of the Crown without special commission; and if they cannot +hold plea, they cannot condemn. + +_L._ The punishment for felony is, that the felon be hanged by the neck +till he be dead. And to prove that it ought to be so, he cites a +sentence, from whence I know not, _Quod non licet felonem pro felonia +decollare._. + +_P._ It is not indeed lawful for the sheriff of his own head to do it, +or to do otherwise than is commanded in the judgment, nor for the judge +to give any other judgment than according to statute-law, or the usage +consented to by the King; but this hinders not the King from altering +his law concerning judgments, if he see good cause. + +_L._ The King may do so, if he please: and Sir Edward Coke tells you how +he altered particular judgments in case of felony, and showeth that +judgment being given upon a lord in Parliament, that he should be +hanged, he was nevertheless beheaded; and that another lord had the like +judgment for another felony, and was not hanged but beheaded: and withal +he shows you the inconveniency of such proceeding, because, saith he, if +hanging might be altered to beheading, by the same reason it might be +altered to burning, stoning to death, &c. + +_P._ Perhaps there might be inconveniency in it; but it is more than I +see, or he shows, nor did there happen any inconveniency from the +execution he citeth: besides he granteth, that death, being _ultimum +supplicium_, is a satisfaction to the law. But what is all this to the +purpose, when it belongeth not to consider such inconveniences of +government but to the King and Parliament? Or who, from the authority of +a deputed judge, can derive a power to censure the actions of a King +that hath deputed him? + +_L._ For the death of a man by misfortune, there is, he saith, no +express judgment, nor for killing a man in one’s own defence; but he +saith, that the law hath in both cases given judgment that he, that so +killeth a man, shall forfeit all his goods and chattels, debts and +duties. + +_P._ If we consider what Sir Edward Coke saith (1 _Inst._ _sec._ 745), +at the word _felony_, these judgments are very favourable; for there he +saith, that killing a man by _chance medley_, or _se defendendo_, is +_felony_. His words are: “wherefore by the law at this day, under the +word _felony_ in commissions, &c. is included petite treason, murder, +homicide, burning of houses, burglary, robbery, rape, &c. +_chance-medley_, and _se defendendo_.” But if we consider only the +intent of him that killeth a man by misfortune or in his own defence, +the same judgments will be thought both cruel and sinful judgments. And +how they can be _felony_, at this day cannot be understood, unless there +be a statute to make them so. For the statute of 25 _Hen. III_, _c._ 25, +the words whereof, “murder from henceforth shall not be judged before +our justices, where it is found misfortune only, but it shall take place +in such as are slain by felony, and not otherwise,” make it manifest, if +they be felonies, they must also be murders, unless they have been made +felonies by some later statute. + +_L._ There is no such later statute, nor is it to say in commission; nor +can a commission, or anything but another statute, make a thing felony +that was not so before. + +_P._ See what it is for a man to distinguish _felony_ into several +sorts, before he understands the general name of felony, what it +meaneth. But that a man, for killing another man by misfortune only, +without any evil purpose, should forfeit all his goods and chattels, +debts and duties, is a very hard judgment, unless perhaps they were to +be given to the kindred of the man slain, by way of amends for damage. +But the law is not that. Is it the common-law, which is the law of +reason, that justifies this judgment, or the statute-law? It cannot be +called the law of reason, if the case be mere misfortune. If a man be +upon his appletree to gather his apples, and by ill-fortune fall down, +and lighting on the head of another man, kill him, and by good fortune +save himself; shall he for this mischance be punished with the +forfeiture of his goods to the King? Does the law of reason warrant +this? He should, you will say, have looked to his feet; that is true; +but so should he, that was under, have looked up to the tree. Therefore +in this case the law of reason, as I think, dictates that they ought +each of them to bear his own misfortune. + +_L._ In this case I agree with you. + +_P._ But this case is the true case of mere misfortune, and a sufficient +reprehension of the opinion of Sir Edward Coke. + +_L._ But what if this had happened to be done by one, that had been +stealing apples upon the tree of another man? Then, as Sir Edward Coke +says (3 _Inst._ _p._ 56), it had been murder. + +_P._ There is indeed great need of good distinction in a case of killing +by misfortune. But in this case the unlawfulness of stealing apples +cannot make it murder, unless the falling itself be unlawful. It must be +a voluntary unlawful act that causeth the death, or else it is no murder +by the law of reason. Now the death of the man that was under the tree, +proceeded not from that, that the apples were not his that fell, but +from the fall. But if a man shoot with a bow or a gun at another man’s +deer, and by misfortune kill a man, such shooting being both voluntary +and unlawful, and also the immediate cause of the man’s death, may be +drawn, perhaps well enough sometimes, to murder by a judge of the +common-law. So likewise if a man shoot an arrow over a house, and by +chance kill a man in the street, there is no doubt but by the law of +reason it is murder: for though he meant no malice to the man slain, yet +it is manifest that he cared not whom he slew. In this difficulty of +finding out what it is that the law of reason dictates, who is it that +must decide the question? + +_L._ In the case of misfortune, I think it belongs to the jury; for it +is matter of fact only. But when it is doubtful whether the action from +which the misfortune came, were lawful or unlawful, it is to be judged +by the judge. + +_P._ But if the unlawfulness of the action, as the stealing of the +apples, did not cause the death of the man; then the stealing, be it +trespass or felony, ought to be punished alone, as the law requireth. + +_L._ But for the killing of a man _se defendendo_, the jury, as Sir +Edward Coke here says, shall not in their verdict say it was _se +defendendo_, but shall declare the manner of the fact in special, and +clear it to the judge to consider how it is to be called, whether _se +defendendo_, manslaughter, or murder. + +_P._ One would think so; for it is not often within the capacity of a +jury, to distinguish the signification of the different hard names which +are given by lawyers to the killing of a man: as murder and felony, +which neither the laws, nor the makers of the laws, have yet defined. +The witnesses say, that thus and thus the person did, but not that it +was murder or felony; no more can the jury say, who ought to say nothing +but what they hear from the witnesses or from the prisoner. Nor ought +the judge to ground his sentence upon anything else besides the special +matter found, which, according as it is contrary or not contrary to the +statute, ought to be pronounced. + +_L._ But I have told you, that when the jury has found misfortune or _se +defendendo_, there is no judgment at all to be given, and the party is +to be pardoned of course, saving that he shall forfeit his goods and +chattels, debts and duties, to the King. + +_P._ But I understand not how there can be a crime for which there is no +judgment, nor how any punishment can be inflicted without a precedent +judgment, nor upon what ground the sheriff can seize the goods of any +man, till it be judged that they be forfeited. I know that Sir Edward +Coke saith, that in the judgment of hanging, the judgment of forfeiture +is implied, which I understand not; though I understand well enough, +that the sheriff by his office may seize the goods of a felon convicted; +much less do I conceive how the forfeiture of goods can be implied in a +no-judgment; nor do I conceive, that when the jury has found the special +manner of the fact to be such as is really no other than _se +defendendo_, and consequently no fault at all, why he should have any +punishment at all. Can you show me any reason for it? + +_L._ The reason lies in the custom. + +_P._ You know that unreasonable customs are not law, but ought to be +abolished; and what custom is there more unreasonable, than that a man +should be punished without a fault? + +_L._ Then see the statute of 24 _Hen. VIII_, _c._ 5. + +_P._ I find here, that at the making of this statute there was a +question amongst the lawyers, in case one man should kill another, that +attempted feloniously to rob or murder him in or near any common +highway, courtway, horseway, or footway, or in his mansion, messuage, or +dwelling place; whether for the death of such a man one shall forfeit +his goods and chattels, as a man should do for killing another by chance +medley or in his own defence. This is the preamble, and penned as well +as Sir Edward Coke could have wished. But this statute does not +determine that a man should forfeit his goods for killing a man _se +defendendo_, or for killing him by misfortune; but supposeth it only +upon the opinion of the lawyers that then were. The body of the statute +is, that if a man be indicted or appealed for the death of such person +so attempting as aforesaid, and the same by verdict be so found and +tried, he shall not forfeit anything, but shall be discharged as if he +had been found not guilty. You see the statute; now consider thereby, in +the case of killing _se defendendo_. First, if a man kill another in his +own defence, it is manifest that the man slain did either attempt to +rob, or to kill, or to wound him; for else it were not done in his own +defence. If then it were done in the street, or near the street, as in a +tavern, he forfeits nothing, because the street is a highway. So +likewise it is to be said of all other common-ways. In what place +therefore can a man kill another in his own defence, but that this +statute will discharge him of the forfeiture? + +_L._ But the statute says the attempt must be felonious. + +_P._ When a man assaults me with a knife, sword, club, or other mortal +weapon, does any law forbid me to defend myself, or command me to stay +so long as to know whether he have a felonious intent, or no? Therefore +by this statute, in case it be found _se defendendo_, the forfeiture is +discharged; if it be found otherwise, it is capital. If we read the +statute of _Glocester_, _cap._ 9, I think it will take away the +difficulty. For by that statute, in case it be found by the country that +he did it in his own defence or by misfortune, then by the report of the +justices to the King, the King shall take him to his grace, if it please +him. From whence it followeth, first, that it was then thought law, that +the jury may give the general verdict of _se defendendo_; which Sir +Edward Coke denies. Secondly, that the judge ought to report especial +matter to the King. Thirdly, that the King may take him to his grace, if +he please; and consequently, that his goods are not to be seized, till +the King, after the report of the judge heard, give the sheriff command +to do it. Fourthly, that the general verdict of the King hinders not the +King but that he may judge of it upon the special matter; for it often +happens that an ill-disposed person provokes a man with words or +otherwise, on purpose to make him draw his sword, that he may kill him, +and pretend it done in his own defence; which appearing, the King may, +without any offence to God, punish him, as the cause shall require. +Lastly, contrary to the doctrine of Sir Edward Coke, he may in his own +person be judge in the case, and annul the verdict of the jury; which a +deputed judge cannot do. + +_L._ There be some cases wherein a man, though by the jury he be found +not guilty, shall nevertheless forfeit his goods and chattels to the +King. For example; a man is slain, and one A, hating B, giveth out that +it was B that slew him; B hearing thereof, fearing if he be tried for +it, that through the great power of A, and others that seek his hurt, he +should be condemned, flieth, and afterwards is taken and tried; and upon +sufficient evidence is by the jury found not guilty; yet because he +fled, he shall forfeit his goods and chattels, notwithstanding there be +no such judgment given by the judge, nor appointed by any statute; but +the law itself authoriseth the sheriff to seize them to the use of the +King. + +_P._ I see no reason (which is common-law) for it, and am sure it is +grounded upon no statute. + +_L._ See Sir Edward Coke, 1 _Inst._ _s._ 709, and read. + +_P._ “If a man that is innocent be accused of felony, and for fear +flieth for the same; albeit that he be judicially acquitted of the +felony, yet if it be found that he fled for the same, he shall, +notwithstanding his innocence, forfeit all his goods and chattels, debts +and duties.” O unchristian and abominable doctrine! which also he in his +own words following contradicteth: “for,” saith he, “as to the +forfeiture of them, the law will admit no proof against the presumption +of the law grounded upon his flight, and so it is in many other cases: +but that the general rule is, _Quod stabitur præsumptioni, donec +probetur in contrarium_; but you see it hath many exceptions.” This +general rule contradicts what he said before; for there can be no +exceptions to a general rule in law, that is not expressly made an +exception by some statute, and to a general rule of equity there can be +no exception at all. + +[Sidenote: Of pardoning.] + +From the power of punishing, let us proceed to the power of pardoning. + +_L._ Touching the power of pardoning, Sir Edward Coke says, (3 _Inst._ +_p._ 236), that no man shall obtain charter of pardon out of Parliament; +and cites for it the statute of 2 _Edw. III_, _c._ 2; and says further, +that accordingly in a Parliament roll it is said, that for the peace of +the land it would help that no pardon were granted but by Parliament. + +_P._ What lawful power would he have left to the King, that thus +disableth him to practise mercy? In the statute which he citeth, to +prove that the King ought not to grant charters of pardon but in +Parliament, there are no such words, as any man may see; for that +statute is in print; and that which he says is in the Parliament roll, +is but a wish of he tells not whom, and not a law; and it is strange +that a private wish should be enrolled among acts of Parliament. If a +man do you an injury, to whom, think you, belongeth the right of +pardoning it? + +_L._ Doubtless to me alone, if to me alone be done that injury; and to +the King alone, if to him alone be done the injury; and to both +together, if the injury be done to both. + +_P._ What part then has any man in the granting of a pardon, but the +King and the party wronged. If you offend no member of either House, why +should you ask their pardon? It is possible that a man may deserve a +pardon; or he may be such a one sometimes as the defence of the kingdom +hath need of. May not the King pardon him, though there be no Parliament +then sitting? Sir Edward Coke’s law is too general in this point; and I +believe, if he had thought on it, he would have excepted some persons, +if not all the King’s children and his heir-apparent; and yet they are +all his subjects, and subject to the law as other men. + +_L._ But if the King shall grant pardons of murder and felony of his own +head, there would be very little safety for any man, either out of his +house or in it, either by night or by day. And for that very cause there +have been many good statutes provided, which forbid the justices to +allow of such pardons as do not specially name the crime. + +_P._ Those statutes, I confess, are reasonable, and very profitable, +which forbid the judge to pardon murders. But what statute is there that +forbids the King to do it? There is a statute of 13 _Rich. II_, _c._ 1, +wherein the King promiseth not to pardon murder; but there is in it a +clause for the saving of the King’s regality. From which may be inferred +that the King did not grant away that power, when he thought good to use +it for the commonwealth. Such statutes are not laws to the King, but to +his judges, and though the judges be commanded by the King not to allow +pardons in many cases, yet if the King by writing command the judges to +allow them, they ought to do it. I think, if the King think in his +conscience it be for the good of the commonwealth, he sinneth not in it: +but I hold not that the King may pardon him without sin, if any other +man be damnified by the crime committed, unless he cause reparation to +be made as far as the party offending can do it. And howsoever, be it +sin or not sin, there is no power in England that may resist him or +speak evil of him lawfully. + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke denies not that; and upon that ground it is that +the King, he says, may pardon high-treason; for there can be no +high-treason but against the King. + +_P._ That is well; therefore he confesseth, that whatsoever the offence +be, the King may pardon so much of it as is an injury to himself, and +that by his own right, without breach of any law positive or natural, or +of any grant, if his conscience tell him that it be not to the damage of +the commonwealth; and you know that to judge of what is good or evil to +the commonwealth, belongeth to the King only. Now tell me, what it is +which is said to be pardoned? + +_L._ What can it be, but only the offence? If a man hath done a murder, +and be pardoned for the same, is it not the murder that is pardoned? + +_P._ Nay, by your favour, if a man be pardoned for murder or any other +offence, it is the man that is pardoned; the murder still remains +murder. But what is pardon? + +_L._ Pardon, as Sir Edward Coke says, (3 _Inst._ _p._ 233), is derived +of _per_ and _dono_, and signifies thoroughly to remit. + +_P._ If the King remit the murder, and pardon not the man that did it, +what does the remission serve for? + +_L._ You know well enough that when we say a murder, or any thing else, +is pardoned, all Englishmen understand thereby, that the punishment due +to the offence is the thing remitted. + +_P._ But for our understanding of one another, you ought to have said so +at first. I understand now, that to pardon murder or felony is +thoroughly to save the offender from all the punishment due unto him by +the law for his offence. + +_L._ Not so; for Sir Edward Coke in the same chapter, p. 238, saith +thus: “a man commits felony, and is attainted thereof, or is abjured; +the King pardoneth the felony without any mention of the attainder or +abjuration: the pardon is void.” + +_P._ What is it to be attainted? + +_L._ To be attainted is, that his blood be held in law as stained and +corrupted; so that no inheritance can descend from him to his children, +or to any that make claim by him. + +_P._ Is this attaint a part of the crime or of the punishment? + +_L._ It cannot be a part of the crime, because it is none of his own +act; it is therefore a part of the punishment, viz. a disherison of the +offender. + +_P._ If it be a part of the punishment due, and yet not pardoned +together with the rest, then a pardon is not a thorough remitting of the +punishment, as Sir Edward Coke says it is. And what is abjuration? + +_L._ When a clerk heretofore was convicted of felony, he might have +saved his life by abjuring the realm; that is, by departing the realm +within a certain time appointed, and taking an oath never to return. But +at this day all statutes for abjuration are repealed. + +_P._ That also is a punishment, and by a pardon of the felony pardoned, +unless a statute be in force to the contrary. There is also somewhat in +the statute of 13 _Rich. II_, _c._ 1, concerning the allowance of +charters of pardons, which I understand not well. The words are these: +“No charter of pardon for henceforth shall be allowed before our +justices for murder, or for the death of a man by await, or malice +prepensed, treason, or rape of a woman, unless the same be specified in +the same charter.” For I think it follows thence, that if the King say +in his charter that he pardoneth the murder, then he breaketh not the +statute, because he specifies the offence: or if he saith he pardoneth +the killing by await or of malice prepensed, he breaketh not the +statute, he specifies the offence. Also if he say so much as that the +judge cannot doubt of the King’s meaning to pardon him, I think the +judge ought to allow it, because the statute saveth the King’s liberty +and regality in that point; that is to say, the power to pardon him, +such as are these words, “notwithstanding any statute to the contrary,” +are sufficient to cause the charter to be allowed; for these words make +it manifest that the charter was not granted upon surprise, but to +maintain and claim the King’s liberty and power to show mercy when he +seeth cause. The like meaning have these words, _perdonavimus omnimodam +interfectionem_; that is to say, we have pardoned the killing, in what +manner soever it was done. But here we must remember that the King +cannot pardon, without sin, any damage thereby done to another man, +unless he causes satisfaction to be made as far as the offender possibly +can; but he is not bound to satisfy men’s thirst of revenge; for all +revenge ought to proceed from God, and under God from the King. Now, +besides in charters, how are these offences specified? + +_L._ They are specified by their names, as treason, petite treason, +murder, rape, felony, and the like. + +_P._ Petite treason is felony, murder is felony; so is rape, robbery, +and theft; and, as Sir Edward Coke says, petite larceny is felony. Now +if in a Parliament-pardon, or in a Coronation-pardon, all felonies be +pardoned, whether is petite larceny pardoned, or not? + +_L._ Yes, certainly, it is pardoned. + +_P._ And yet you see it is not specified; and yet it is a crime that +hath less in it of the nature of felony, than there is in robbery. Do +not therefore rape, robbery, theft, pass under the pardon of all +felonies? + +_L._ I think they are all pardoned by the words of the statute, but +those that are by the same statute excepted; so that specification is +needful only in charters of pardon, but in general pardons not so. For +the statute 13 _Rich. II_, _c._ 1, forbids not the allowance of +Parliament-pardons, or Coronation-pardons; and therefore the offences +pardoned need not be specified, but may pass under the general word of +_all felonies_. Nor is it likely that the members of the Parliament, who +drew up their own pardons, did not mean to make them as comprehensive as +they could. And yet Sir Edward Coke (1 _Inst._ _sec._ 745), at the word +_felony_, seemeth to be of another mind. For piracy is one species of +felony; and yet when certain Englishmen had committed piracy in the last +year of Queen Elizabeth, and came home into England in the beginning of +the reign of King James, trusting to his coronation-pardon of all +felonies, they were indicted (Sir Edward Coke was then Attorney-general) +of the piracy before commissioners, according to the statute of 28 _Hen. +VIII_, and being found guilty were hanged. The reason he allegeth for it +is, that it ought to have been specified by the name of _piracy_ in the +pardon, and therefore the pardon was not to be allowed. + +_P._ Why ought it to have been specified more than any other felony? He +should therefore have drawn his argument from the law of reason. + +_L._ Also he does that; for the trial, he says, was by the common-law, +and before commissioners, not in the Court of the Lord Admiral, by the +civil law; therefore, he says, it was an offence whereof the common-law +could not take any notice, because it could not be tried by twelve men. + +_P._ If the common-law could not, or ought not, to take notice of such +offences, how could the offenders be tried by twelve men, and found +guilty, and hanged as they were? If the common-law take no notice of +piracy, what other offence was it for which they were hanged? Is piracy +two felonies, for one of which a man shall be hanged by the civil-law, +and for the other by the common-law? Truly I never read weaker reasoning +in any author of the law of England, than in Sir Edward Coke’s +Institutes, how well soever he could plead. + +_L._ Though I have heard him much reprehended by others as well as by +you, yet there be many excellent things, both for subtilty and for +truth, in these his Institutes. + +_P._ No better things than other lawyers have, that write of the law as +of a science. His citing of Aristotle, and of Homer, and of other books +which are commonly read by gownmen, do, in my opinion, but weaken his +authority; for any man may do it by a servant. But seeing the whole +scene of that time is gone and past, let us proceed to somewhat else. +Wherein doth an _Act of Oblivion_ differ from a Parliament-pardon? + +_L._ This word _Act of Oblivion_ was never in our law-books before the +12 _Car. II._ _c._ 11, and I wish it may never come again; but from +whence it came, you may better know perhaps than I. + +_P._ The first and only Act of Oblivion that ever passed into a law, in +any state that I have read of, was that _amnestia_ or _oblivion_ of all +quarrels between any of the citizens of Athens, at any time before that +act, without all exception of crime or person. The occasion whereof was +this. The Lacedæmonians having totally subdued the Athenians, entered +into the city of Athens, and ordained that the people should choose +thirty people of their own city to have the sovereign power over them. +These being chosen, behaved themselves so outrageously, as caused a +sedition, in which the citizens on both sides were daily slain. There +was then a discreet person that propounded to each of the parties this +proposition, that every man should return to his own and forget all that +was past; which proposition was made, by consent on both sides, into a +public act, which for that cause was called an _oblivion_. Upon the like +disorder happening in Rome by the murder of Julius Cæsar, the like act +was propounded by Cicero, and indeed passed, but was within a few days +after broken again by Marcus Antonius. In imitation of this act was made +the act of 12 _Car. II._ _c._ 11. + +_L._ By this it seems, that the Act of Oblivion made by King Charles was +no other than a Parliament-pardon, because it containeth a great number +of exceptions, as the other Parliament-pardons do, and the act of Athens +did not. + +_P._ But yet there is a difference between the late Act of Oblivion made +here, and an ordinary Parliament-pardon. For concerning a fault pardoned +in Parliament by a general word, a suit in law may arise about this, +whether the offender be signified by the word or not, as whether the +pardon of all felonies be a pardon of piracy or not. For you see by Sir +Edward Coke’s reports, that notwithstanding a pardon of felony, a +sea-felony, when he was Attorney-General, was not pardoned. But by the +late Act of Oblivion, which pardoned all manner of offences committed in +the late civil war, no question could arise concerning crimes excepted. +First, because no man can by law accuse another man of a fact, which by +law is to be forgotten. Secondly, because all crimes may be alleged as +proceeding from the licentiousness of the time, and from the silence of +the law occasioned by the civil war, and consequently (unless the +offender’s person also were excepted, or unless the crime were committed +before the war began) are within the pardon. + +_L._ Truly I think you say right. For if nothing had been pardoned but +what was done by the occasion of the war, the raising of the war itself +had not been pardoned. + +[Sidenote: Of the laws of _meum_ and _tuum_.] + +_P._ I have done with crimes and punishments; let us come now the laws +of _meum_ and _tuum_. + +_L._ We must then examine the statutes. + +_P._ We must so, what they command and forbid; but not dispute of their +justice. For the law of reason commands that every one observe the law +which he hath assented to, and obey the person to whom he hath promised +obedience and fidelity. Then let us consider next the commentaries of +Sir Edward Coke upon Magna Charta and other statutes. For the +understanding of Magna Charta it will be very necessary to run up into +ancient times, as far as history will give us leave, and consider not +only the customs of our ancestors the Saxons, but also the law of +nature, the most ancient of all laws, concerning the original of +government and acquisition of property, and concerning courts of +judicature. And first, it is evident that dominion, government, and +laws, are far more ancient than history or any other writing, and that +the beginning of all dominion amongst men was in families. In which, +first, the father of the family by the law of nature was absolute lord +of his wife and children: secondly, made what laws amongst them he +pleased: thirdly, was judge of all their controversies: fourthly, was +not obliged by any law of man to follow any counsel but his own: +fifthly, what land soever the lord sat down upon and made use of for his +own and his family’s benefit, was his propriety by the law of first +possession, in case it was void of inhabitants before, or by the law of +war, in case they conquered it. In this conquest what enemies they took +and saved, were their servants. Also such men as wanting possessions of +lands, but furnished with arts necessary for man’s life, came to dwell +in the family for protection, became their subjects, and submitted +themselves to the laws of the family. And all this is consonant, not +only to the law of nature, but also to the practice of mankind set forth +in history, sacred and profane. + +_L._ Do you think it lawful for a lord, that is the sovereign ruler of +his family, to make war upon another like sovereign lord, and dispossess +him of his lands? + +_P._ It is lawful or not lawful, according to the intention of him that +does it. For, first, being a sovereign ruler, he is not subject to any +law of man; and as to the law of God, where the intention is +justifiable, the action is so also. The intention may be lawful in +divers cases by the right of nature; one of those cases is, when he is +constrained to it by the necessity of subsisting. So the children of +Israel, besides that their leaders, Moses and Joshua, had an immediate +command from God to dispossess the Canaanites, had also a just pretence +to do what they did, from the right of nature which they had to preserve +their lives, being unable otherwise to subsist. And as their +preservation, so also is their security a just pretence of invading +those whom they have just cause to fear, unless sufficient caution be +given to take away their fear: which caution, for anything I can yet +conceive, is utterly impossible. Necessity and security are the +principal justifications before God, of beginning war. Injuries received +justify a war defensive; but for reparable injuries, if reparation be +tendered, all invasion upon that title is iniquity. If you need +examples, either from Scripture or other history, concerning this right +of nature in making war, you are able enough of your own reading to find +them out at your leisure. + +_L._ Whereas you say, that the lands so won by the sovereign lord of a +family, are his in propriety, you deny, methinks, all property to the +subjects, how much soever any of them have contributed to the victory. + +_P._ I do so; nor do I see any reason to the contrary. For the subjects, +when they come into the family, have no title at all to demand any part +of the land, or anything else but security: to which also they are bound +to contribute their whole strength, and, if need be, their whole +fortunes. For it cannot be supposed that any one man can protect all the +rest with his own single strength; and for the practice, it is manifest, +in all conquests the land of the vanquished is in the sole power of the +victor, and at his disposal. Did not Joshua and the High-priest divide +the land of Canaan in such sort among the tribes of Israel as they +pleased? Did not the Roman and Grecian princes and states, according to +their own discretion, send out the colonies to inhabit such provinces as +they had conquered? Is there at this day among the Turks, any inheritor +of land besides the Sultan? And was not all the land in England once in +the hands of William the Conqueror? Sir Edward Coke himself confesses +it. Therefore it is an universal truth, that all conquered lands, +presently after victory, are the lands of him that conquered them. + +_L._ But you know that all sovereigns are said to have a double +capacity, viz. a natural capacity, as he is a man; and a politic +capacity, as a king. In his politic capacity, I grant you, that King +William the Conqueror was the proper and only owner once of all the land +in England; but not in his natural capacity. + +_P._ If he had them in his politic capacity, then they were so his own, +as not to dispose of any part thereof but only to the benefit of his +people; and that must be either by his own, or by the people’s +discretion, that is, by Act of Parliament. But where do you find that +the Conqueror disposed of his lands (as he did some to Englishmen, some +to Frenchmen, and some to Normans, to be holden by divers tenures, as +knight-service, soccage, &c.) by Act of Parliament? Or that he ever +called a Parliament, to have the assent of the Lords and Commons of +England in disposing of those lands he had taken from them? Or for +retaining of such and such lands in his own hands, by the name of +forrests, for his own recreation or magnificence? You have heard perhaps +that some lawyers, or other men reputed wise and good patriots, have +given out that all the lands which the Kings of England have possessed, +have been given them by the people, to the end that they should +therewith defray the charges of their wars, and pay the wages of their +ministers; and that those lands were gained by the people’s money. For +that was pretended in the late civil war, when they took from the King +his town of Kingston-upon-Hull. But I know you do not think that the +pretence was just. It cannot therefore be denied but that the lands, +which King William the Conqueror gave away to Englishmen and others, and +which they now hold by his letters-patent and other conveyances, were +properly and really his own, or else the titles of them that now hold +them, must be invalid. + +_L._ I assent. As you have showed me the beginning of monarchies, so let +me hear your opinion concerning their growth. + +_P._ Great monarchies have proceeded from small families. First, by war, +wherein the victor not only enlarged his territory, but also the number +and riches of his subjects. As for the other forms of commonwealths, +they have been enlarged other ways. First, by a voluntary conjunction of +many lords of families into one great aristocracy. Secondly, from +rebellion proceeded first anarchy, and from anarchy proceeded any form +that the calamities of them that lived therein did prompt them to; +whether it were, that they chose an hereditary King, or an elective King +for life; or that they agreed upon a council of certain persons, which +is _aristocracy_; or a council of the whole people to have the sovereign +power, which is _democracy_. After the first manner, which is by war, +grew up all the greatest kingdoms in the world, viz. the Egyptian, +Assyrian, Persian, and the Macedonian monarchy; and so did the great +kingdoms of England, France, and Spain. The second manner, was the +original of the Venetian Aristocracy. By the the third way, which is +rebellion, grew up divers great monarchies, perpetually changing from +one form to another: as in Rome, rebellion against Kings produced +democracy, upon which the senate usurped under Sylla, and the people +again upon the senate under Marius, and the Emperor usurped upon the +people under Cæsar and his successors. + +_L._ Do you think the distinction between natural and politic capacity +is insignificant? + +_P._ No. If the sovereign power be in an assembly of men, that assembly, +whether it be _aristocratical_ or _democratical_, may possess lands; but +it is in their politic capacity: because no natural man has any right to +those lands, or any part of them. In the same manner, they can command +an act by plurality of commands; but the command of any one of them is +of no effect. But when the sovereign power is in one man, the natural +and politic capacity are in the same person, and as to possession of +lands, undistinguishable. But as to the acts and commands, they may be +well distinguished in this manner. Whatsoever a monarch does command or +do, by consent of the people of his kingdom, may properly be said to be +done in his politic capacity; and whatsoever he commands by word of +mouth only, or by letters signed with his hand, or sealed with any of +his private seals, is done in his natural capacity. Nevertheless, his +public commands, though they be made in his politic capacity, have their +original from his natural capacity. For in the making of laws, which +necessarily requires his assent, his assent is natural. Also those acts +which are done by the King previously to the passing of them under the +Great Seal of England, either by word of mouth, or warrant under his +signet or private seal, are done in his natural capacity; but when they +have passed the Seal of England, they are to be taken as done in his +politic capacity. + +_L._ I think verily your distinction is good. For natural capacity and +politic capacity signify no more than private and public right. +Therefore, leaving this argument, let us consider in the next place, as +far as history will permit, what were the laws and customs of our +ancestors. + +_P._ The Saxons, as also all the rest of Germany not conquered by the +Roman Emperors nor compelled to use the imperial laws, were a savage and +heathen people, living only by war and rapine, and as some men learned +in the Roman antiquities affirm, had their name of Germans from that +their ancient trade of life, as if _Germans_ and _hommes de guerre_ were +all one. Their rule over their family, servants, and subjects, was +absolute; their laws, no other than natural equity; written law they had +little or none; and very few there were in the time of the Caesars that +could write or read. The right to the government was either paternal, or +by conquest, or by marriages. Their succession to lands was determined +by the pleasure of the master of the family, by gift or deed in his +lifetime; and what land they disposed not of in their lifetime, +descended after their death to their heirs. The heir was the eldest son. +The issue of the eldest son failing, they descended to the younger sons +in their order; and, for want of sons, to the daughters jointly as to +one heir, or to be divided amongst them, and so to descend to their +heirs in the same manner. And children failing, the uncle by the +father’s or mother’s side, according as the lands had been the father’s +or the mother’s, succeeded to the inheritance, and so continually to the +next of blood. And this was a natural descent, because naturally the +nearer in blood the nearer in kindness, and was held for the law of +nature, not only amongst the Germans, but also in most nations before +they had a written law. The right of government, which is called _jus +regni_, descended in the same manner, except only that after the sons it +came to the eldest daughter first, and her heirs; the reason whereof +was, that government is indivisible. And this law continues still in +England. + +_L._ Seeing all the land, which any sovereign lord possessed, was his +own in propriety, how came a subject to have a propriety in their lands? + +_P._ There be two sorts of propriety. One is, when a man holds his land +from the gift of God only, which lands civilians call _allodial_; which +in a kingdom, no man can have but the King. The other is, when a man +holds his land from another man, as given him in respect of service and +obedience to that man, as a fee. The first kind of propriety is +absolute; the other is in a manner conditional, because given for some +service to be done unto the giver. The first kind of propriety excludes +the right of all others; the second excludes the right of all other +subjects to the same land, but not the right of the sovereign, when the +common good of the people shall require the use thereof. + +_L._ When those kings had thus parted with their lands, what was left +them for the maintenance of their wars, either offensive or defensive; +or for the maintenance of the royal family in such manner as not only +becomes the dignity of a sovereign king, but is also necessary to keep +his person and people from contempt? + +_P._ They have means enough; and besides what they gave their subjects, +had much land remaining in their own hands, afforrested for their +recreation. For you know very well that a great part of the land of +England was given for military service to the great men of the realm, +who were for the most part of the King’s kindred or great favourites; +much more land than they had need of for their own maintenance; but so +charged with one or many soldiers, according to the quantity of land +given, as there could be no want of soldiers at all times ready to +resist an invading enemy: which soldiers those lords were bound to +furnish, for a time certain, at their own charges. You know also, that +the whole land was divided into hundreds, and those again into +decennaries; in which decennaries all men, even to children of twelve +years of age, were bound to take the oath of allegiance. And you are to +believe, that those men that hold their land by the service of +husbandry, were all bound with their bodies and fortunes to defend the +kingdom against invaders, by the law of nature. And so also such as they +called villains, and as held their land by baser drudgery, were obliged +to defend the kingdom to the utmost of their power. Nay, women and +children, in such a necessity, are bound to do such service as they can, +that is to say, to bring weapons and victuals to them that fight, and to +dig. But those that hold their land by service military, have lying upon +them a greater obligation. For read and observe the form of doing +homage, according as it is set down in the statute of 17 _Edw. II_, +which you doubt not was in use before that time, and before the +Conquest. + +_L._ _I become your man for life, for member, and for worldly honour, +and shall owe you my faith for the lands that I hold of you._ + +_P._ I pray you expound it. + +_L._ I think it is as much as if you should say, I promise you to be at +your command, to perform with the hazard of my life, limbs, and all my +fortune, as I have charged myself in the reception of the lands you have +given me, and to be ever faithful to you. This is the form of homage +done to the King immediately. But when one subject holdeth land of +another by the like military service, then there is an exception added, +viz. _saving the faith I owe to the King_. + +_P._ Did he not also take an oath? + +_L._ Yes, which is called the oath of fealty: _I shall be to you both +faithful, and lawfully shall do such customs and services, as my duty is +to you at the terms assigned, so help me God and all his Saints_. But +both these services, and the services of husbandry, were quickly after +turned into rents, payable either in money, as in England, or in corn or +other victuals, as in Scotland and France. When the service was +military, the tenant was for the most part bound to serve the King in +his wars, with one or more persons, according to the yearly value of the +land he held. + +_P._ Were they bound to find horsemen, or footmen? + +_L._ I do not find any law that requires any man, in respect of his +tenancy, to serve on horseback. + +_P._ Was the tenant bound, in case he were called, to serve in person? + +_L._ I think he was so in the beginning. For when lands were given for +service military, and the tenant dying left his son and heir, the lord +had the custody both of body and lands till the heir was twenty-one +years old. And the reason thereof was, that the heir, till that age of +twenty-one years, was presumed to be unable to serve the King in his +wars; which reason had been insufficient, if the heir had not been bound +to go to the wars in person. Which, methinks, should ever hold for law, +unless by some other law it come to be altered. These services, together +with other rights, as wardships, first possession of his tenants' +inheritance, licenses for alienation, felons' goods, felons' lands (if +they were holden of the King), and the first year’s profit of the lands, +of whomsoever they were holden, forfeitures, amercements, and many other +aids, could not but amount to a very great yearly revenue. Add to this +all that which the King might reasonably have imposed upon artificers +and tradesmen; for all men, whom the King protecteth, ought to +contribute towards their own protection; and consider then whether the +Kings of those times had not means enough, and to spare (if God were not +their enemy), to defend their people against foreign enemies, and also +to compel them to keep the peace amongst themselves. + +_P._ And so had had the succeeding Kings, if they had never given their +rights away, and their subjects always kept their oaths and promises. In +what manner proceeded those ancient Saxons, and other nations of +Germany, especially the northern parts, to the making of their laws? + +_L._ Sir Edward Coke, out of divers Saxon laws, gathered and published +in Saxon and Latin by Mr. Lambard, inferreth that the Saxon Kings, for +the making of their laws, called together the Lords and Commons, in such +manner as is used at this day in England. But by those laws of the +Saxons published by Mr. Lambard, it appeareth, that the Kings called +together the bishops, and a great part of the wisest and discreetest men +of the realm, and made laws by their advice. + +_P._ I think so. For there is no King in the world, being of ripe years +and sound mind, that made any law otherwise. For it concerns them in +their own interest to make such laws as the people can endure, and may +keep them without impatience, and live in strength and courage to defend +their King and country, against their potent neighbours. But how was it +discerned, and by whom was it determined, who were those wisest and +discreetest men? It is a hard matter to know who is wisest in our times. +We know well enough who chooseth a knight of the shire, and what towns +are to send burgesses to the Parliament. Therefore if it were determined +also in those days, who those wise men should be, then I confess that +the Parliaments of the old Saxons, and the Parliaments of England since, +are the same thing, and Sir Edward Coke is in the right. Tell me +therefore, if you can, when those towns, which now send burgesses to the +Parliament, began to do so, and upon what cause one town had this +privilege, and another town, though much more populous, had not. + +_L._ At what time began this custom I cannot tell; but I am sure it is +more ancient than the city of Salisbury. Because there come two +burgesses to Parliament for a place near to it, called Old Sarum, which, +as I rid in sight of it, if I should tell a stranger that knew not what +the word burgess meant, he would think it were a couple of rabbits; the +place looketh so like a long cony-borough. And yet a good argument may +be drawn from thence, that the townsmen of every town were the electors +of their own burgesses, and judges of their discretion; and that the +law, whether they be discreet or not, will suppose them to be discreet, +till the contrary be apparent. Therefore where it is said, that the King +called together the more discreet men of his realm; it must be +understood of such elections as are now in use. By which it is manifest, +that those great and general moots assembled by the old Saxon Kings, +were of the same nature with the Parliaments assembled since the +Conquest. + +_P._ I think your reason is good. For I cannot conceive, how the King, +or any other but the inhabitants of the boroughs themselves, can take +notice of the discretion or sufficiency of those they were to send to +the Parliament. And for the antiquity of the burgess-towns, since it is +not mentioned in any history or certain record now extant, it is free +for any man to propound his conjecture. You know that this land was +invaded by the Saxons at several times, and conquered by pieces in +several wars; so that there were in England many Kings at once, and +every of them had his Parliament. And therefore according as there were +more, or fewer walled towns within each King’s dominion, his Parliament +had the more or fewer burgesses. But when all these lesser kingdoms were +joined into one, then to that one Parliament came burgesses from all the +boroughs of England. And this perhaps may be the reason, why there be so +many more such boroughs in the west, than in any other part of the +kingdom; the west being more populous, and also more obnoxious to +invaders, and for that cause having greater store of towns fortified. +This I think may be the original of that privilege which some towns +have, to send burgesses to the Parliament, and others have not. + +_L._ The conjecture is not improbable, and for want of greater +certainty, may be allowed. But seeing it is commonly received, that for +the making of a law, there ought to be had the assent of the Lords +spiritual and temporal; whom do you account in the Parliaments of the +old Saxons for Lords temporal, and whom for Lords spiritual? For the +book called _The mode of holding Parliaments_, agreeth punctually with +the manner of holding them at this day, and was written, as Sir Edward +Coke says, in the time of the Saxons, and before the Conquest. + +_P._ Mr. Selden, a greater antiquary than Sir Edward Coke, in the last +edition of his book of _Titles of Honour_, says, that that book called +_The mode of holding Parliaments_, was not written till about the time +of Richard II, and seems to me to prove it. But howsoever that be, it is +apparent by the Saxon laws set forth by Mr. Lambard, that there were +always called to the Parliament certain great persons called Aldermen, +_alias_ Earls. And so you have a House of Lords, and a House of Commons. +Also you will find in the same place, that after the Saxons had received +the faith of Christ, those bishops that were amongst them, were always +at the great moots in which they made their laws. Thus you have a +perfect English Parliament, saving that the name of Barons was not +amongst them, as being a French title, which came in with the Conqueror. + + + + + BEHEMOTH: + + THE HISTORY OF THE CAUSES + + OF + + THE CIVIL WARS OF ENGLAND, + + AND OF THE COUNSELS AND ARTIFICES BY WHICH + + THEY WERE CARRIED ON FROM THE + + YEAR 1640 TO THE YEAR 1660. + + --- + + “Bella per Angliacos plusquam civilia campos, + Jusque datum sceleri loquimur.——” + + + + + THE BOOKSELLER TO THE READER. + + +My duty, as well to the public as to the memory of Mr. Hobbes, has +obliged me to procure with my utmost diligence, that these tracts should +come forth with the most correct exactness.[A] + +I am compelled by the force of truth to declare, how much both the world +and the memory of Mr. Hobbes have been abused by the several spurious +editions of the _History of the Civil Wars_; wherein, by various and +unskilful transcriptions, are committed above a thousand faults, and in +above a hundred places whole lines left out, as I can make appear. + +I must confess Mr. Hobbes, upon some considerations, was averse to the +publishing thereof; but since it is impossible to suppress it, no book +being more commonly sold by all booksellers, I hope I need not fear the +offence of any man by doing right to the world and this work, which I +now publish from the original manuscript, done by his own amanuensis, +and given me by himself above twelve years since. + +To this I have joined the treatise against Archbishop Bramhall, to +prevent the like prejudice, which must certainly have fallen on it, +there being so many false copies abroad, if not thus prevented; as also +the Discourse of Heresy from a more correct copy; and have likewise +annexed his Physical Problems, as they were translated by himself and +presented to his Majesty, with the epistle prefixed, in the year 1662, +at the same time they came forth in Latin. + +These things premised, there remains nothing but to wish for myself good +sale, to the buyer much pleasure and satisfaction. + + Your humble servant, + WILLIAM CROOKE. + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ +Footnote A: + + This preface is prefixed to the edition of 1682, in which the + _Behemoth_ is printed along with the _Answer to Archbishop Bramhall_, + the _Discourse of Heresy_, and the _Physical Problems_. + + + + + BEHEMOTH, + + OR THE EPITOME OF + + THE CIVIL WARS OF ENGLAND. + + + ========== + + +_A._ If in time, as in place, there were degrees of high and low, I +verily believe that the highest of time would be that which passed +between 1640 and 1660. For he that thence, as from the Devil’s Mountain, +should have looked upon the world and observed the actions of men, +especially in England, might have had a prospect of all kinds of +injustice, and of all kinds of folly, that the world could afford, and +how they were produced by their hypocrisy and self-conceit, whereof the +one is double iniquity, and the other double folly. + +_B._ I should be glad to behold that prospect. You that have lived in +that time and in that part of your age, wherein men used to see best +into good and evil, I pray you set me, that could not see so well, upon +the same mountain, by the relation of the actions you then saw, and of +their causes, pretensions, justice, order, artifice, and event. + +_A._ In the year 1640, the government of England was monarchical; and +the King that reigned, Charles, the first of that name, holding the +sovereignty, by right of a descent continued above six hundred years, +and from a much longer descent King of Scotland, and from the time of +his ancestor Henry II, King of Ireland; a man that wanted no virtue, +either of body or mind, nor endeavoured anything more than to discharge +his duty towards God, in the well governing of his subjects. + +_B._ How could he then miscarry, having in every county so many trained +soldiers, as would, put together, have made an army of 60,000 men, and +divers magazines of ammunition in places fortified? + +_A._ If those soldiers had been, as they and all other of his subjects +ought to have been, at his Majesty’s command, the peace and happiness of +the three kingdoms had continued as it was left by King James. But the +people were corrupted generally, and disobedient persons esteemed the +best patriots. + +_B._ But sure there were men enough, besides those that were +ill-affected, to have made an army sufficient to have kept the people +from uniting into a body able to oppose him. + +_A._ Truly, I think, if the King had had money, he might have had +soldiers enough in England. For there were very few of the common people +that cared much for either of the causes, but would have taken any side +for pay or plunder. But the King’s treasury was very low, and his +enemies, that pretended the people’s ease from taxes, and other specious +things, had the command of the purses of the city of London, and of most +cities and corporate towns in England, and of many particular persons +besides. + +_B._ But how came the people to be so corrupted? And what kind of people +were they that did so seduce them? + +_A._ The seducers were of divers sorts. One sort were ministers; +ministers, as they called themselves, of Christ; and sometimes, in their +sermons to the people, God’s ambassadors; pretending to have a right +from God to govern every one his parish, and their assembly the whole +nation. + +Secondly, there were a very great number, though not comparable to the +other, which notwithstanding that the Pope’s power in England, both +temporal and ecclesiastical, had been by Act of Parliament abolished, +did still retain a belief that we ought to be governed by the Pope, whom +they pretended to be the vicar of Christ, and, in the right of Christ, +to be the governor of all Christian people. And these were known by the +name of Papists; as the ministers I mentioned before, were commonly +called Presbyterians. + +Thirdly, there were not a few, who in the beginning of the troubles were +not discovered, but shortly after declared themselves for a liberty in +religion, and those of different opinions one from another. Some of +them, because they would have all congregations free and independent +upon one another, were called Independents. Others that held baptism to +infants, and such as understood not into what they are baptized, to be +ineffectual, were called therefore Anabaptists. Others that held that +Christ’s kingdom was at this time to begin upon the earth, were called +Fifth-monarchy-men; besides divers other sects, as Quakers, Adamites, +&c., whose names and peculiar doctrines I do not well remember. And +these were the enemies which arose against his Majesty from the private +interpretation of the Scripture, exposed to every man’s scanning in his +mother-tongue. + +Fourthly, there were an exceeding great number of men of the better +sort, that had been so educated, as that in their youth having read the +books written by famous men of the ancient Grecian and Roman +commonwealths concerning their polity and great actions; in which books +the popular government was extolled by that glorious name of liberty, +and monarchy disgraced by the name of tyranny; they became thereby in +love with their forms of government. And out of these men were chosen +the greatest part of the House of Commons, or if they were not the +greatest part, yet by advantage of their eloquence, were always able to +sway the rest. + +Fifthly, the city of London and other great towns of trade, having in +admiration the prosperity of the Low Countries after they had revolted +from their monarch, the King of Spain, were inclined to think that the +like change of government here, would to them produce the like +prosperity. + +Sixthly, there were a very great number that had either wasted their +fortunes, or thought them too mean for the good parts they thought were +in themselves; and more there were, that had able bodies, but saw no +means how honestly to get their bread. These longed for a war, and hoped +to maintain themselves hereafter by the lucky choosing of a party to +side with, and consequently did for the most part serve under them that +had greatest plenty of money. + +Lastly, the people in general were so ignorant of their duty, as that +not one perhaps of ten thousand knew what right any man had to command +him, or what necessity there was of King or Commonwealth, for which he +was to part with his money against his will; but thought himself to be +so much master of whatsoever he possessed, that it could not be taken +from him upon any pretence of common safety without his own consent. +King, they thought, was but a title of the highest honour, which +gentleman, knight, baron, earl, duke, were but steps to ascend to, with +the help of riches; they had no rule of equity, but precedents and +custom; and he was thought wisest and fittest to be chosen for a +Parliament, that was most averse to the granting of subsidies or other +public payments. + +_B._ In such a constitution of people, methinks, the King is already +ousted of his government, so as they need not have taken arms for it. +For I cannot imagine how the King should come by any means to resist +them. + +_A._ There was indeed very great difficulty in the business. But of that +point you will be better informed in the pursuit of this narration. + +_B._ But I desire to know first, the several grounds of the pretences, +both of the Pope and of the Presbyterians, by which they claim a right +to govern us, as they do, in chief: and after that, from whence and when +crept in the pretences of that Long Parliament, for a democracy. + +_A._ As for the Papists, they challenge this right from a text in +_Deut._ xvii. 12, and other like texts, according to the old Latin +translation in these words: _And he that out of pride shall refuse to +obey the commandment of that priest, which shall at that time minister +before the Lord thy God, that man shall by the sentence of the judge be +put to death_. And because, as the Jews were the people of God then, so +is all Christendom the people of God now, they infer from thence, that +the Pope, whom they pretend to be the high-priest of all Christian +people, ought also to be obeyed in all his decrees by all Christians, +upon pain of death. Again, whereas in the New Testament (Matth. xxviii. +18-20) Christ saith: _All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth; +go therefore and teach all nations, and baptize them in the name of the +Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and teach them to observe +all these things which I have commanded you_: from thence they infer, +that the command of the apostles was to be obeyed, and by consequence +the nations were bound to be governed by them, and especially by the +prince of the apostles, St. Peter, and by his successors the Popes of +Rome. + +_B._ For the text in the Old Testament, I do not see how the commandment +of God to the Jews, to obey their priests, can be interpreted to have +the like force in the case of other nations Christian, more than upon +nations unchristian (for all the world are God’s people); unless we also +grant, that a king cannot of an infidel be made Christian, without +making himself subject to the laws of that apostle, or priest, or +minister, that shall convert him. The Jews were a peculiar people of +God, a sacerdotal kingdom, and bound to no other law but what first +Moses, and afterwards every high-priest, did go and receive immediately +from the mouth of God in Mount Sinai, in the tabernacle of the ark, and +in the _sanctum sanctorum_ of the temple. And for the text in St. +Matthew, I know the words in the Gospel are not _go teach_, but _go and +make disciples_; and that there is a great difference between a subject +and a disciple, and between teaching and commanding. And if such texts +as these must be so interpreted, why do not Christian kings lay down +their titles of majesty and sovereignty, and call themselves the Pope’s +lieutenants? But the doctors of the Romish Church seem to decline that +title of absolute power, in their distinction of power spiritual and +temporal; but this distinction I do not very well understand. + +_A._ By spiritual power they mean the power to determine points of +faith, and to be judges in the inner court of conscience of moral +duties, and a power to punish those men, that obey not their precepts, +by ecclesiastical censure, that is, by excommunication. And this power, +they say, the Pope hath immediately from Christ, without dependence upon +any king or sovereign assembly, whose subjects they be that stand +excommunicate. But for the power temporal, which consists in judging and +punishing those actions that are done against the civil laws, they say, +they do not pretend to it directly, but only indirectly, that is to say, +so far forth as such actions tend to the hindrance or advancement of +religion and good manners, which they mean when they say _in ordine ad +spiritualia_. + +_B._ What power then is left to Kings and other civil sovereigns, which +the Pope may not pretend to be his _in ordine ad spiritualia_? + +_A._ None, or very little. And this power not only the Pope pretends to +in all Christendom; but some of his bishops also, in their several +dioceses, _jure divino_, that is, immediately from Christ, without +deriving it from the Pope. + +_B._ But what if a man refuse obedience to this pretended power of the +Pope and his bishops? What harm can excommunication do him, especially +if he be the subject of another sovereign? + +_A._ Very great harm. For by the Pope’s or bishop’s signification of it +to the civil power, he shall be punished sufficiently. + +_B._ He were in an ill case then, that adventured to write or speak in +defence of the civil power, that must be punished by him whose rights he +defended, like Uzza, that was slain because he would needs, unbidden, +put forth his hand to keep the ark from falling. But if a whole nation +should revolt from the Pope at once, what effect could excommunication +have upon the nation? + +_A._ Why, they should have no more mass said, at least by any of the +Pope’s priests. Besides, the Pope would have no more to do with them, +but cast them off, and so they would be in the same case as if a nation +should be cast off by their king, and left to be governed by themselves, +or whom they would. + +_B._ This would not be taken so much for a punishment to the people, as +to the King; and therefore when a Pope excommunicates a whole nation, +methinks he rather excommunicates himself than them. But I pray you tell +me, what were the rights that the Pope pretended to in the kingdoms of +other princes? + +_A._ First, an exemption of all priests, friars, and monks, in criminal +causes, from the cognizance of civil judges. Secondly, collation of +benefices on whom he pleased, native or stranger, and exaction of +tenths, first fruits, and other payments. Thirdly, appeals to Rome in +all causes where the Church could pretend to be concerned. Fourthly, to +be the supreme judge concerning lawfulness of marriage, that is +concerning the hereditary succession of Kings, and to have the +cognizance of all causes concerning adultery and fornication. + +_B._ Good! A monopoly of women. + +_A._ Fifthly, a power of absolving subjects of their duties, and of +their oaths of fidelity to their lawful sovereigns, when the Pope should +think fit for the extirpation of heresy. + +_B._ This power of absolving subjects of their obedience, as also that +other of being judge of manners and doctrine, is as absolute a +sovereignty as is possible to be; and consequently there must be two +kingdoms in one and the same nation, and no man be able to know which of +his masters he must obey. + +_A._ For my part, I should rather obey that master that had the right of +making laws and of inflicting punishments, than him that pretendeth only +to a right of making canons, that is to say, rules, and no right of +co-action, or otherwise punishing, but by excommunication. + +_B._ But the Pope pretends also that his canons are laws; and for +punishing, can there be greater than excommunication; supposing it true, +as the Pope saith it is, that he that dies excommunicate is damned? +Which supposition, it seems, you believe not; else you would rather have +chosen to obey the Pope, that would cast your body and soul into hell, +than the King, that can only kill the body. + +_A._ You say true. For it were very uncharitable in me to believe that +all Englishmen, except a few Papists, that have been born and called +heretics ever since the Reformation of Religion in England, should be +damned. + +_B._ But for those that die excommunicate in the Church of England at +this day, do you not think them also damned? + +_A._ Doubtless, he that dies in sin without repentance is damned, and he +that is excommunicate for disobedience to the King’s laws, either +spiritual or temporal, is excommunicate for sin; and therefore, if he +die excommunicate and without desire of reconciliation, he dies +impenitent. You see what follows. But to die in disobedience to the +precepts and doctrines of those men that have no authority or +jurisdiction over us, is quite another case, and bringeth no such danger +with it. + +_B._ But what is this heresy, which the Church of Rome so cruelly +persecutes, as to depose Kings that do not, when they are bidden, turn +all heretics out of their dominions? + +_A._ Heresy is a word which, when it is used without passion, signifies +a private opinion. So the different sects of the old philosophers, +Academians, Peripatetics, Epicureans, Stoics, &c., were called heresies. +But in the Christian Church, there was in the signification of that +word, comprehended a sinful opposition to him, that was chief judge of +doctrines in order to the salvation of men’s souls; and consequently +heresy may be said to bear the same relation to the power spiritual, +that rebellion doth to the power temporal, and is suitable to be +persecuted by him that will preserve a power spiritual and dominion over +men’s consciences. + +_B._ It would be very well, (because we are all of us permitted to read +the Holy Scriptures, and bound to make them the rule of our actions, +both public and private), that heresy were by some law defined, and the +particular opinions set forth, for which a man were to be condemned and +punished as a heretic; for else, not only men of mean capacity, but even +the wisest and devoutest Christian, may fall into heresy without any +will to oppose the Church; for the Scriptures are hard, and the +interpretations different of different men. + +_A._ The meaning of the word heresy, is by law declared in an Act of +Parliament in the first year of Queen Elizabeth; wherein it is ordained, +that the persons who had by the Queen’s letters-patent the authority +spiritual, meaning the High Commission, shall not have authority to +adjudge any matter or cause to be heresy, but only such as heretofore +have been adjudged to be heresy by the authority of the canonical +Scriptures, or by the first four general Councils, or by any other +general Council, where the same was declared heresy by the express and +plain words of the said canonical Scriptures, or such as hereafter shall +be adjudged heresy by the high court of Parliament of this realm, with +the assent of the clergy in their convocation. + +_B._ It seems therefore, if there arise any new error that hath not yet +been declared heresy, (and many such may arise), it cannot be judged +heresy without a Parliament. For how foul soever the error be, it cannot +have been declared heresy neither in the Scriptures nor in the Councils; +because it was never before heard of. And consequently there can be no +error, unless it fall within the compass of blasphemy against God or +treason against the King, for which a man can in equity be punished. +Besides, who can tell what is declared by the Scripture, which every man +is allowed to read and interpret to himself? Nay more, what Protestant, +either of the laity or clergy, if every general Council can be a +competent judge of heresy, is not already condemned? For divers Councils +have declared a great many of our doctrines to be heresy, and that, as +they pretend, upon the authority of the Scriptures. + +_A._ What are those points, that the first four general Councils have +declared heresy? + +_B._ The first general Council, held at Nicæa, declared all to be heresy +which was contrary to the Nicene Creed, upon occasion of the heresy of +Arius, which was the denying the divinity of Christ. The second general +Council, held at Constantinople, declared heresy the doctrine of +Macedonius; which was that the Holy Ghost was created. The third +Council, assembled at Ephesus, condemned the doctrine of Nestorius, that +there were two persons in Christ. The fourth, held at Chalcedon, +condemned the error of Eutyches, that there was but one nature in +Christ. I know of no other points condemned in these four Councils, but +such as concern church-government, or the same doctrines taught by other +men in other words. And these Councils were all called by the Emperors, +and by them their decrees confirmed at the petition of the Councils +themselves. + +_A._ I see by this, that both the calling of the Council, and the +confirmation of their doctrine and church-government, had no obligatory +force but from the authority of the Emperor. How comes it then to pass, +that they take upon them now a legislative power, and say their canons +are laws? That text, _all power is given to me in heaven and earth_, had +the same force then as it hath now, and conferred a legislative power on +the Councils, not only over Christian men, but over all nations in the +world. + +_B._ They say no; for the power they pretend to is derived from this, +that when a king was converted from Gentilism to Christianity, he did by +that very submission to the bishop that converted him, submit to the +bishop’s government and became one of his sheep; which right therefore +he could not have over any nation that was not Christian. + +_A._ Did Sylvester, which was Pope of Rome in the time of Constantine +the Great, converted by him, tell the Emperor, his new disciple, +beforehand, that if he became a Christian he must be the Pope’s subject? + +_B._ I believe not. For it is likely enough, if he had told him so +plainly, or but made him suspect it, he would either have been no +Christian at all, or but a counterfeit one. + +_A._ But if he did not tell him so, and that plainly, it was foul play, +not only in a priest, but in any Christian. And for this derivation of +their right from the Emperor’s consent, it proceeds only from this, that +they dare not challenge a legislative power, nor call their canons laws +in any kingdom in Christendom, further than the kings make them so. But +in Peru, when Atabalipa was King, the friar told him, that Christ being +King of all the world, had given the disposing of all the kingdoms +therein to the Pope, and that the Pope had given Peru to the Roman +Emperor Charles the Fifth, and required Atabalipa to resign it; and for +refusing it, seized upon his person by the Spanish army there present, +and murdered him. You see by this how much they claim, when they have +power to make it good. + +_B._ When began the Popes to take this authority upon them first? + +_A._ After the inundation of the northern people had overflowed the +western parts of the empire, and possessed themselves of Italy, the +people of the city of Rome submitted themselves, as well in temporals as +spirituals, to their bishop; and then first was the Pope a temporal +prince, and stood no more in so great fear of the Emperors, which lived +far off at Constantinople. In this time it was that the Pope began, by +pretence of his power spiritual, to encroach upon the temporal rights of +all other princes of the west; and so continued gaining upon them, till +his power was at the highest in that three hundred years, or thereabout, +which passed between the eighth and eleventh century, that is, between +Pope Leo the Third and Pope Innocent the Third. For in this time Pope +Zachary the First deposed Chilperic, then King of France, and gave the +kingdom to one of his subjects, Pepin; and Pepin took from the Lombards +a great part of their territory and gave it to the Church. Shortly +after, the Lombards having recovered their estate, Charles the Great +retook it, and gave it to the Church again; and Pope Leo the Third made +Charles Emperor. + +_B._ But what right did the Pope then pretend for the creating of an +Emperor? + +_A._ He pretended the right of being Christ’s vicar; and what Christ +could give, his vicar might give; and you know that Christ was King of +all the world. + +_B._ Yes, as God; and so he gives all the kingdoms of the world, which +nevertheless proceed from the consent of people, either for fear or +hope. + +_A._ But this gift of the empire was in a more special manner, in such a +manner as Moses had the government of Israel given him; or rather as +Joshua had it given him, to go in and out before the people as the +high-priest should direct him. And so the empire was understood to be +given him, on condition to be directed by the Pope. For when the Pope +invested him with the regal ornaments, the people all cried out _Deus +dat_, that is to say, it is God that gives it; and the Emperor was +contented so to take it. And from that time, all or most of the +Christian Kings do put into their titles the words _Dei gratia_, that +is, by the gift of God; and their successors use still to receive the +crown and sceptre from a bishop. + +_B._ It is certainly a very good custom, for Kings to be put in mind by +whose gift they reign; but it cannot from that custom be inferred that +they receive the kingdom by mediation of the Pope, or by any other +clergy; for the Popes themselves received the Papacy from the Emperor. +The first that ever was elected Bishop of Rome after Emperors were +Christians, and without the Emperor’s consent, excused himself by +letters to the Emperor with this: that the people and clergy of Rome +forced him to take it upon him, and prayed the Emperor to confirm it, +which the Emperor did; but with reprehension of their proceedings, and +the prohibition of the like for the time to come. The Emperor was +Lotharius, and the Pope Calixtus the First. + +_A._ You see by this the Emperor never acknowledged this gift of God was +the gift of the Pope, but maintained, the Popedom was the gift of the +Emperor. But in process of time, by the negligence of the Emperors, (for +the greatness of Kings makes them that they cannot easily descend into +the obscure and narrow mines of an ambitious clergy), they found means +to make the people believe, there was a power in the Pope and clergy, +which they ought to submit unto, rather than to the commands of their +own Kings, whensoever it should come into controversy: and to that end +devised and decreed many new articles of faith, to the diminution of the +authority of kings, and to the disjunction of them and their subjects, +and to a closer adherence of their subjects to the Church of Rome; +articles either not at all found in, or not well founded upon the +Scriptures; as first; that it should not be lawful for a priest to +marry. + +_B._ What influence could that have upon the power of Kings? + +_A._ Do you not see, that by this the King must of necessity either want +the priesthood, and therewith a great part of the reverence due to him +from the most religious part of his subjects, or else want lawful heirs +to succeed him: by which means, being not taken for the head of the +Church, he was sure, in any controversy between him and the Pope, that +his subjects would be against him? + +_B._ Is not a Christian King as much a bishop now, as the heathen Kings +were of old? for among them _episcopus_ was a name common to all Kings. +Is not he a bishop now, to whom God hath committed the charge of all the +souls of his subjects, both of the laity and the clergy? And though he +be in relation to our Saviour, who is the chief pastor, but a sheep, +yet, compared to his own subjects, they are all sheep, both laic and +cleric, and he only shepherd. And seeing a Christian bishop is but a +Christian endued with power to govern the clergy, it follows that every +Christian king is not only a bishop, but an arch-bishop, and his whole +dominion his diocese. And though it were granted, that imposition of +hands is necessary from a priest; yet seeing Kings have the government +of the clergy, that are his subjects even before baptism; the baptism +itself, wherein he is received as a Christian, is a sufficient +imposition of hands, so that whereas before he was a bishop, now he is a +Christian bishop. + +_A._ For my part I agree with you: this prohibition of marriage to +priests came in about the time of Pope Gregory the Seventh, and William +the First, King of England; by which means the Pope had in England, what +with secular and what with regular priests, a great many lusty bachelors +at his service. + +Secondly, that auricular confession to a priest was necessary to +salvation. It is true, that before that time, confession to a priest was +usual, and performed for the most part by him that confessed, in +writing. But that use was taken away about the time of King Edward III, +and priests commanded to take confessions from the mouth of the +confitent: and men did generally believe, that without confession and +absolution before their departure out of the world, they could not be +saved; and having absolution from a priest, that they could not be +damned. You understand by this, how much every man would stand in awe of +the Pope and clergy, more than they would of the King; and what +inconvenience it is to a state for their subjects to confess their +secret thoughts to spies. + +_B._ Yes, as much as eternal torture is more terrible than death, so +much they would fear the clergy more than the King. + +_A._ And though perhaps the Roman clergy will not maintain, that a +priest hath power to remit sins absolutely, but only with a condition of +repentance, yet the people were never so instructed by them; but were +left to believe, that whensoever they had absolution, their precedent +sins were all discharged, when their penance, which they took for +repentance, was performed. Within the same time began the article of +transubstantiation. For it had been disputed a long time before, in what +manner a man did eat the body of our Saviour Jesus Christ, as being a +point very difficult for a man to conceive and imagine clearly; but now +it was made very clear, that the bread was transubstantiated into +Christ’s body, and so was become no more bread, but flesh. + +_B._ It seems then that Christ had many bodies, and was in as many +places at once, as there were communicants. I think the priests then +were so wanton, as to insult upon the dulness, not only of common +people, but also of kings and their councillors. + +_A._ I am now in a narration, not in a disputation; and therefore I +would have you at this time to consider nothing else, but what effect +this doctrine would work upon kings and their subjects, in relation to +the clergy, who only were able of a piece of bread to make our Saviour’s +body, and thereby at the hour of death to save their souls. + +_B._ For my part, it would have an effect on me, to make me think them +gods, and to stand in awe of them as of God himself, if he were visibly +present. + +_A._ Besides these, and other articles tending to the upholding of the +Pope’s authority, they had many fine points in their ecclesiastical +polity, conducing to the same end; of which I will mention only such as +were established within the same time. For then it was the order came up +of preaching friars, that wandered up and down, with power to preach in +what congregation they pleased, and were sure enough to instil into the +people nothing that might lessen the obedience to the Church of Rome; +but, on the contrary, whatsoever might give advantage to it against the +civil power. Besides, they privately insinuated themselves with women +and men of weak judgment, confirming their adherence to the Pope, and +urging them, in the time of their sickness, to be beneficial to it by +contribution of money, or building religious houses, or pious works and +necessary for the remission of their sins. + +_B._ I do not remember that I have read of any kingdom or state in the +world, where liberty was given to any private man to call the people +together, and make orations frequently to them, or at all, without first +making the state acquainted, except only in Christendom. I believe the +heathen Kings foresaw, that a few such orators would be able to make a +great sedition. Moses did indeed command to read the Scriptures and +expound them in the Synagogues every Sabbath-day. But the Scriptures +then were nothing else but the laws of the nation, delivered unto them +by Moses himself. And I believe it would do no hurt, if the laws of +England also were often read and expounded in the several congregations +of Englishmen, at times appointed, that they may know what to do; for +they know already what to believe. + +_A._ I think that neither the preaching of friars nor monks, nor of +parochial priests, tended to teach men what, but whom to believe. For +the power of the mighty hath no foundation but in the opinion and belief +of the people. And the end which the Pope had in multiplying sermons, +was no other but to prop and enlarge his own authority over all +Christian Kings and States. + +Within the same time, that is, between the time of the Emperor Charles +the Great and of King Edward the Third of England, began their second +polity; which was, to bring religion into an art, and thereby to +maintain all the decrees of the Roman Church by disputation; not only +from the Scriptures, but also from the philosophy of Aristotle, both +moral and natural. And to that end the Pope exhorted the said Emperor by +letter, to erect schools of all kinds of literature; and from thence +began the institution of universities; for not long after, the +universities began in Paris and in Oxford. It is true, that there were +schools in England before that time, in several places, for the +instruction of children in the Latin tongue, that is to say, in the +tongue of the Church. But for an university of learning, there was none +erected till that time; though it be not unlikely there might be then +some that taught philosophy, logic, and other arts, in divers +monasteries, the monks having little else to do but to study. After some +colleges were built to that purpose, it was not long time before many +more were added to them, by the devotion of princes and bishops, and +other wealthy men: and the discipline therein was confirmed by the Popes +that then were; and abundance of scholars sent thither by their friends +to study, as to a place from whence the way was open and easy to +preferment both in Church and Commonwealth. The profit the Church of +Rome expected from them, and in effect received, was the maintenance of +the Pope’s doctrine, and of his authority over kings and their subjects, +by school-divines; who striving to make good many points of faith +incomprehensible, and calling in the philosophy of Aristotle to their +assistance, wrote great books of school-divinity, which no man else, nor +they themselves, were able to understand; as any man may perceive that +shall consider the writings of Peter Lombard, or Scotus, or of him that +wrote commentaries upon him, or of Suarez, or any other school-divine of +later times. Which kind of learning nevertheless hath been much admired +by two sorts of men, otherwise prudent enough. The one of which sorts +were of those that were already devoted and really affectionate to the +Roman Church; for they believed the doctrine before, but admired the +arguments because they understood them not, and yet found the +conclusions to their mind. The other sort were negligent men, that had +rather admire with others, than take the pains to examine. So that all +sorts of people were fully resolved, that both the doctrine was true, +and the Pope’s authority no more than what was due to him. + +_B._ I see that a Christian king, or state, how well soever provided he +be of money and arms, where the Church of Rome hath such authority, will +have but a hard match of it, for want of men. For their subjects will +hardly be drawn into the field and fight with courage against their +consciences. + +_A._ It is true that great rebellions have been raised by Church-men in +the Pope’s quarrel against kings, as in England against King John, and +in France against King Henry IV. Wherein the Kings had a more +considerable part on their sides, than the Pope had on his; and shall +always have so, if they have money. For there are but few whose +consciences are so tender as to refuse money when they want it. But the +great mischief done to kings upon pretence of religion is, when the Pope +gives power to one king to invade another. + +_B._ I wonder how King Henry the Eighth could then so utterly extinguish +the authority of the Pope in England, and that without any rebellion at +home, or any invasion from abroad. + +_A._ First, the priests, monks, and friars, being in the height of their +power, were now for the most part grown insolent and licentious; and +thereby the force of their arguments was now taken away by the scandal +of their lives, which the gentry and men of good education easily +perceived: and the Parliament consisting of such persons, were therefore +willing to take away their power: and generally the common people, which +from a long custom had been in love with Parliaments, were not +displeased therewith. Secondly, the doctrine of Luther beginning a +little before, was now by a great many men of the greatest judgment so +well received, as that there was no hope to restore the Pope to his +power by rebellion. Thirdly, the revenue of abbeys and all other +religious houses, falling thereby into the King’s hands, and by him +being disposed of to the most eminent gentlemen in every county, could +not but make them do their best to confirm themselves in the possession +of them. Fourthly, King Henry was of a nature quick and severe in the +punishing of such as should be the first to oppose his designs. Lastly, +as to invasion from abroad, in case the Pope had given the kingdom to +another prince, it had been in vain; for England is another manner of +kingdom than Navarre. Besides, the French and Spanish forces were +employed at that time one against another: and though they had been at +leisure, they would have found perhaps no better success than the +Spaniards found afterwards in 1588. Nevertheless, notwithstanding the +insolence, avarice, and hypocrisy of the then clergy, and +notwithstanding the doctrine of Luther, if the Pope had not provoked the +King by endeavouring to cross his marriage with his second wife, his +authority might have remained in England till there had risen some other +quarrel. + +_B._ Did not the bishops, that then were, and had taken an oath, wherein +was, amongst other things, that they should defend and maintain the +legal rights of St. Peter: (the words are, _Regalia Sancti Petri_, which +nevertheless some have said are _regulas Sancti Petri_, that is to say, +St. Peter’s rules or doctrine; and that the clergy afterward did read +it, being perhaps written in short-hand, by a mistake to the Pope’s +advantage _regalia_): did not, I say, the bishops oppose that Act of +Parliament against the Pope, and against the taking of the oath of +supremacy? + +_A._ No, I do not find that the bishops did many of them oppose the +King; for having no power without him, it had been great imprudence to +provoke his anger. There was besides a controversy in those times +between the Pope and the bishops, most of which did maintain that they +exercised their jurisdiction episcopal in the right of God, as +immediately as the Pope himself did exercise the same over the whole +Church. And because they saw that by this Act of the King in Parliament +they were to hold their power no more of the Pope, and never thought of +holding it of the King, they were perhaps better content to let that Act +of Parliament pass. In the reign of King Edward VI the doctrine of +Luther had taken so great root in England, that they threw out also a +great many of the Pope’s new articles of faith; which Queen Mary +succeeding him restored again, together with all that had been abolished +by Henry VIII, saving that which could not be restored, the religious +houses; and the bishops and clergy of King Edward were partly burnt for +heretics, partly fled, and partly recanted. And they that fled betook +themselves to those places beyond sea, where the reformed religion was +either protected or not persecuted; who, after the decease of Queen +Mary, returned again to favour and preferment under Queen Elizabeth, +that restored the religion of her brother King Edward. And so it hath +continued till this day, excepting the interruption made in this late +rebellion of the presbyterians and other democratical men. But though +the Romish religion were now cast out by the law, yet there were +abundance of people, and many of them of the nobility, that still +retained the religion of their ancestors, who as they were not much +molested in points of conscience, so they were not by their own +inclination very troublesome to the civil government; but by the secret +practice of the Jesuits and other emissaries of the Roman Church, they +were made less quiet than they ought to have been; and some of them to +venture on the most horrid act that ever had been heard of before, I +mean the Gunpowder Treason. And upon that account, the Papists of +England have been looked upon as men that would not be sorry for any +disorders here that might possibly make way to the restoring of the +Pope’s authority. And therefore I named them for one of the distempers +of the state of England in the time of our late King Charles. + +_B._ I see that Monsieur Mornay du Plessis, and Dr. Morton, Bishop of +Durham, writing of the progress of the Pope’s power, and intituling +their books, one of them, _The Mystery of Iniquity_, the other, _The +Grand Imposture_, were both in the right. For I believe there was never +such another cheat in the world, and I wonder that the Kings and States +of Christendom never perceived it. + +_A._ It is manifest they did perceive it. How else durst they make war +against the Pope, and some of them take him out of Rome itself and carry +him away prisoner? But if they would have freed themselves from his +tyranny, they should have agreed together, and made themselves every +one, as Henry VIII did, head of the Church within their own respective +dominions. But not agreeing, they let his power continue, every one +hoping to make use of it, when there should be cause, against his +neighbour. + +_B._ Now, as to that other distemper by Presbyterians, how came their +power to be so great, being of themselves, for the most part, but so +many poor scholars? + +_A._ This controversy between the Papist and the Reformed Churches, +could not choose but make every man, to the best of his power, examine +by the Scriptures, which of them was in the right; and to that end they +were translated into vulgar tongues; whereas before, the translation of +them was not allowed, nor any man to read them but such as had express +license so to do. For the Pope did concerning the Scriptures the same +that Moses did concerning Mount Sinai. Moses suffered no man to go up to +it to hear God speak or gaze upon him, but such as he himself took with +him; and the Pope suffered none to speak with God in the Scriptures, +that had not some part of the Pope’s spirit in him, for which he might +be trusted. + +_B._ Certainly Moses did therein very wisely, and according to God’s own +commandment. + +_A._ No doubt of it, and the event itself hath made it appear so. For +after the Bible was translated into English, every man, nay, every boy +and wench, that could read English, thought they spoke with God +Almighty, and understood what he said, when by a certain number of +chapters a day they had read the Scriptures once or twice over. The +reverence and obedience due to the Reformed Church here, and to the +bishops and pastors therein, was cast off, and every man became a judge +of religion, and an interpreter of the Scriptures to himself. + +_B._ Did not the Church of England intend it should be so? What other +end could they have in recommending the Bible to me, if they did not +mean I should make it the rule of my actions? Else they might have kept +it, though open to themselves, to me sealed up in Hebrew, Greek, and +Latin, and fed me out of it in such measure as had been requisite for +the salvation of my soul and the Church’s peace. + +_A._ I confess this licence of interpreting the Scripture was the cause +of so many several sects, as have lain hid till the beginning of the +late King’s reign, and did then appear to the disturbance of the +commonwealth. But to return to the story. Those persons that fled for +religion in the time of Queen Mary, resided, for the most part, in +places where the Reformed religion was professed and governed by an +assembly of ministers; who also were not a little made use of, for want +of better statesmen, in points of civil government. Which pleased so +much the English and Scotch Protestants that lived amongst them, that at +their return they wished there were the same honour and reverence given +to the ministry in their own countries. In Scotland, King James being +then young, soon with the help of some of the powerful nobility they +brought it to pass. Also they that returned into England in the +beginning of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, endeavoured the same here, +but could never effect it till this last rebellion, nor without the aid +of the Scots. And it was no sooner effected, but they were defeated +again by the other sects, which, by the preaching of the Presbyterians +and private interpretation of Scripture, were grown numerous. + +_B._ I know indeed that in the beginning of the late war, the power of +the Presbyterians was so very great, that, not only the citizens of +London were almost all of them at their devotion, but also the greatest +part of all other cities and market-towns of England. But you have not +yet told me by what art and what degrees they became so strong. + +_A._ It was not their own art alone that did it, but they had the +concurrence of a great many gentlemen, that did no less desire a popular +government in the civil state than these ministers did in the Church. +And as these did in the pulpit draw the people to their opinions, and to +a dislike of the Church-government, Canons, and Common-prayer-book, so +did the other make them in love with democracy by their harangues in the +Parliament, and by their discourses and communication with people in the +country, continually extolling liberty and inveighing against tyranny, +leaving the people to collect of themselves that this tyranny was the +present government of the state. And as the Presbyterians brought with +them into their churches their divinity from the universities, so did +many of the gentlemen bring their politics from thence into the +Parliament; but neither of them did this very boldly in the time of +Queen Elizabeth. And though it be not likely that all of them did it out +of malice, but many of them out of error, yet certainly the chief +leaders were ambitious ministers and ambitious gentlemen; the ministers +envying the authority of bishops, whom they thought less learned; and +the gentlemen envying the privy-council, whom they thought less wise +than themselves. For it is a hard matter for men, who do all think +highly of their own wits, when they have also acquired the learning of +the university, to be persuaded that they want any ability requisite for +the government of a commonwealth, especially having read the glorious +histories and the sententious politics of the ancient popular +governments of the Greeks and Romans, amongst whom kings were hated and +branded with the name of tyrants, and popular government (though no +tyrant was ever so cruel as a popular assembly) passed by the name of +liberty. The Presbyterian ministers, in the beginning of the reign of +Queen Elizabeth, did not, because they durst not, publicly preach +against the discipline of the Church. But not long after, by the favour +perhaps of some great courtier, they went abroad preaching in most of +the market-towns of England, as the preaching friars had formerly done, +upon working-days in the morning; in which sermons, these and others of +the same tenets, that had charge of souls, both by the manner and matter +of their preaching, applied themselves wholly to the winning of the +people to a liking of their doctrines and good opinion of their persons. + +And first, for the manner of their preaching; they so framed their +countenance and gesture at their entrance into the pulpit, and their +pronunciation both in their prayer and sermon, and used the Scripture +phrase (whether understood by the people or not), as that no tragedian +in the world could have acted the part of a right godly man better than +these did; insomuch that a man unacquainted with such art, could never +suspect any ambitious plot in them to raise sedition against the state, +as they then had designed; or doubt that the vehemence of their voice +(for the same words with the usual pronunciation had been of little +force) and forcedness of their gesture and looks, could arise from +anything else but zeal to the service of God. And by this art they came +into such credit, that numbers of men used to go forth of their own +parishes and towns on working-days, leaving their calling, and on +Sundays leaving their own churches, to hear them preach in other places, +and to despise their own and all other preachers that acted not so well +as they. And as for those ministers that did not usually preach, but +instead of sermons did read to the people such homilies as the Church +had appointed, they esteemed and called them dumb dogs. + +Secondly, for the matter of their sermons, because the anger of the +people in the late Roman usurpation was then fresh, they saw there could +be nothing more gracious with them than to preach against such other +points of the Romish religion as the bishops had not yet condemned; that +so receding further from popery than they did, they might with glory to +themselves leave a suspicion on the bishops, as men not yet well purged +from idolatry. + +Thirdly, before their sermons, their prayer was or seemed to be +_extempore_, which they pretended to be dictated by the spirit of God +within them, and many of the people believed or seemed to believe it. +For any man might see, that had judgment, that they did not take care +beforehand what they should say in their prayers. And from hence came a +dislike of the common-prayer-book, which is a set form, premeditated, +that men might see to what they were to say _amen_. + +Fourthly, they did never in their sermons, or but lightly, inveigh +against the lucrative vices of men of trade or handicraft; such as are +feigning, lying, cozening, hypocrisy, or other uncharitableness, except +want of charity to their pastors and to the faithful: which was a great +ease to the generality of citizens and the inhabitants of market-towns, +and no little profit to themselves. + +Fifthly, by preaching up an opinion that men were to be assured of their +salvation by the testimony of their own private spirit, meaning the Holy +Ghost dwelling within them. And from this opinion the people that found +in themselves a sufficient hatred towards the Papists, and an ability to +repeat the sermons of these men at their coming home, made no doubt but +that they had all that was necessary, how fraudulently and spitefully +soever they behaved themselves to their neighbours that were not +reckoned amongst the saints, and sometimes to those also. + +Sixthly, they did, indeed, with great earnestness and severity, inveigh +often against two sins, carnal lusts and vain swearing; which, without +question, was very well done. But the common people were thereby +inclined to believe, that nothing else was sin, but that which was +forbidden in the third and seventh commandments (for few men do +understand by the name of lust any other concupiscence, than that which +is forbidden in that seventh commandment; for men are not ordinarily +said to lust after another man’s cattle, or other goods or possessions): +and therefore never made much scruple of the acts of fraud and malice, +but endeavoured to keep themselves from uncleanness only, or at least +from the scandal of it. And, whereas they did, both in their sermons and +writings, maintain and inculcate, that the very first motions of the +mind, that is to say, the delight men and women took in the sight of one +another’s form, though they checked the proceeding thereof so that it +never grew up to be a design, was nevertheless a sin, they brought young +men into desperation and to think themselves damned, because they could +not (which no man can, and is contrary to the constitution of nature) +behold a delightful object without delight. And by this means they +became confessors to such as were thus troubled in conscience, and were +obeyed by them as their spiritual doctors in all cases of conscience. + +_B._ Yet divers of them did preach frequently against oppression. + +_A._ It is true, I had forgot that; but it was before such as were free +enough from it; I mean the common people, who would easily believe +themselves oppressed, but never oppressors. And therefore you may reckon +this among their artifices, to make the people believe they were +oppressed by the King, or perhaps by the bishops, or both; and incline +the meaner sort to their party afterwards, when there should be +occasion. But this was but sparingly done in the time of Queen +Elizabeth, whose fear and jealousy they were afraid of. Nor had they as +yet any great power in the Parliament-house, whereby to call in question +her prerogative by petitions of right and other devices, as they did +afterwards, when democratical gentlemen had received them into their +counsels for the design of changing the government from monarchical to +popular, which they called liberty. + +_B._ Who would think that such horrible designs as these could so easily +and so long remain covered with the cloak of godliness? For that they +were most impious hypocrites, is manifest enough by the war these +proceedings ended in, and by the impious acts in that war committed. But +when began first to appear in Parliament the attempt of popular +government, and by whom? + +_A._ As to the time of attempting the change of government from +monarchical to democratical, we must distinguish. They did not challenge +the sovereignty in plain terms, and by that name, till they had slain +the King; nor the rights thereof altogether by particular heads, till +the King was driven from London by tumults raised in that city against +him, and retired for the security of his person to York; where he had +not been many days, when they sent unto him nineteen propositions, +whereof above a dozen were demands of several powers, essential parts of +the power sovereign. But before that time they had demanded some of them +in a petition which they called a Petition of Right; which nevertheless +the King had granted them in a former Parliament, though he deprived +himself thereby, not only of the power to levy money without their +consent, but also of his ordinary revenue by custom of tonnage and +poundage, and of the liberty to put into custody such men as he thought +likely to disturb the peace and raise sedition in the kingdom. As for +the men that did this, it is enough to say they were members of the last +Parliament, and of some other Parliaments in the beginning of King +Charles and the end of King James his reign; to name them all is not +necessary, further than the story shall require. Most of them were +members of the House of Commons; some few also, of the Lords; but all, +such as had a great opinion of their sufficiency in politics, which they +thought was not sufficiently taken notice of by the King. + +_B._ How could the Parliament, when the King had a great navy, and a +great number of trained soldiers, and all the magazines of ammunition in +his power, be able to begin the war? + +_A._ The King had these things indeed in his right; but that signifies +little, when they that had the custody of the navy and magazines, and +with them all the trained soldiers, and in a manner all his subjects, +were, by the preaching of Presbyterian ministers, and the seditious +whisperings of false and ignorant politicians, made his enemies; and +when the King could have no money but what the Parliament should give +him, which you may be sure should not be enough to maintain his regal +power, which they intended to take from him. And yet, I think, they +never would have ventured into the field, but for that unlucky business +of imposing upon the Scots, who were all Presbyterians, our book of +Common-prayer. For I believe the English would never have taken well +that the Parliament should make war upon the King, upon any provocation, +unless it were in their own defence, in case the King should first make +war upon them; and, therefore, it behoved them to provoke the King, that +he might do something that might look like hostility. It happened in the +year 1637, that the King, by the advice, as it is thought, of the +Archbishop of Canterbury, sent down a book of Common-prayer into +Scotland, not differing in substance from ours, nor much in words +besides the putting of the word Presbyter for that of Minister, +commanding it to be used, for conformity to this kingdom, by the +ministers there, for an ordinary form of Divine service. This being read +in the church at Edinburgh, caused such a tumult there, that he that +read it had much ado to escape with his life; and gave occasion to the +greatest part of the nobility and others to enter, by their own +authority, into a covenant amongst themselves, which impudently they +called a covenant with God, to put down episcopacy, without consulting +with the King: which they presently did, animated thereto by their own +confidence, or by assurance from some of the democratical Englishmen +that in former Parliaments had been the greatest opposers of the King’s +interest, that the King would not be able to raise an army to chastise +them without calling a Parliament, which would be sure to favour them. +For the thing which those democraticals chiefly then aimed at, was to +force the King to call a Parliament, which he had not done for ten years +before, as having found no help, but hindrance to his designs in the +Parliaments he had formerly called. Howsoever, contrary to their +expectation, by the help of his better-affected subjects of the nobility +and gentry, he made a shift to raise a sufficient army to have reduced +the Scots to their former obedience, if it had proceeded to battle. And +with this army he marched himself into Scotland; where the Scotch army +was also brought into the field against him, as if they meant to fight. +But then the Scotch sent to the King for leave to treat by commissioners +on both sides; and the King, willing to avoid the destruction of his own +subjects, condescended to it. The issue was peace; and the King +thereupon went to Edinburgh, and passed an Act of Parliament there to +their satisfaction. + +_B._ Did he not then confirm episcopacy? + +_A._ No, but yielded to the abolishing of it: but by this means the +English were crossed in their hope of a Parliament. But the said +democraticals, formerly opposers of the King’s interest, ceased not to +endeavour still to put the two nations into a war; to the end the King +might buy the Parliament’s help at no less a price than sovereignty +itself. + +_B._ But what was the cause that the gentry and nobility of Scotland +were so averse from the episcopacy? For I can hardly believe that their +consciences were extraordinarily tender, nor that they were so very +great divines, as to know what was the true Church-discipline +established by our Saviour and his apostles; nor yet so much in love +with their ministers, as to be over-ruled by them in the government +either ecclesiastical or civil. For in their lives they were just as +other men are, pursuers of their own interests and preferments, wherein +they were not more opposed by the bishops than by their Presbyterian +ministers. + +_A._ Truly I do not know; I cannot enter into other men’s thoughts, +farther than I am led by the consideration of human nature in general. +But upon this consideration I see first, that men of ancient wealth and +nobility are not apt to brook, that poor scholars should (as they must, +when they are made bishops) be their fellows. Secondly, that from the +emulation of glory between the nations, they might be willing to see +this nation afflicted by civil war, and might hope, by aiding the rebels +here, to acquire some power over the English, at least so far as to +establish here the Presbyterian discipline; which was also one of the +points they afterwards openly demanded. Lastly, they might hope for, in +the war, some great sum of money, as a reward of their assistance, +besides great booty, which they afterwards obtained. But whatsoever was +the cause of their hatred to bishops, the pulling of them down was not +all they aimed at: if it had, now that episcopacy was abolished by act +of Parliament, they would have rested satisfied, which they did not. For +after the King was returned to London, the English Presbyterians and +democraticals, by whose favour they had put down bishops in Scotland, +thought it reason to have the assistance of the Scotch for the pulling +down of bishops in England. And in order thereunto, they might perhaps +deal with the Scots secretly, to rest unsatisfied with that +pacification, which they were before contented with. Howsoever it was, +not long after the King was returned to London, they sent up to some of +their friends at court a certain paper, containing, as they pretended, +the articles of the said pacification; a false and scandalous paper, +which was by the King’s command burnt, as I have heard, publicly. And so +both parties returned to the same condition they were in, when the King +went down with his army. + +_B._ And so there was a great deal of money cast away to no purpose. But +you have not told me who was general of that army. + +_A._ I told you the King was there in person. He that commanded under +him was the Earl of Arundel, a man that wanted not either valour or +judgment. But to proceed to battle or to treaty, was not in his power, +but in the King’s. + +_B._ He was a man of a most noble and loyal family, and whose ancestors +had formerly given a great overthrow to the Scots, in their own country; +and in all likelihood he might have given them the like now, if they had +fought. + +_A._ He might indeed: but it had been but a kind of superstition to have +made him general upon that account, though many generals heretofore have +been chosen for the good luck of their ancestors in like occasions. In +the long war between Athens and Sparta, a general of the Athenians by +sea won many victories against the Spartans; for which cause, after his +death, they chose his son for general with ill success. The Romans that +conquered Carthage by the valour and conduct of Scipio, when they were +to make war again in Afric against Cæsar, chose another Scipio for +general; a man valiant and wise enough, but he perished in the +employment. And to come home to our own nation, the Earl of Essex made a +fortunate expedition to Cadiz; but his son, sent afterwards to the same +place, could do nothing. It is but a foolish superstition, to hope that +God has entailed success in war upon a name or family. + +_B._ After the pacification broken, what succeeded next? + +_A._ The King sent Duke Hamilton with commission and instructions into +Scotland, to call a Parliament there, and to use all the means he could +otherwise; but all was to no purpose. For the Scots were now resolved to +raise an army and to enter into England, to deliver, as they pretended, +their grievances to his majesty in a petition; because the King, they +said, being in the hands of evil councillors, they could not otherwise +obtain their right. But the truth is, they were animated to it by the +democratical and Presbyterian English, with a promise of reward and hope +of plunder. Some have said, that Duke Hamilton also did rather encourage +them to, than deter them from, the expedition; as hoping by the disorder +of the two kingdoms, to bring to pass that which he had formerly been +accused to endeavour, to make himself King of Scotland. But I take this +to have been a very uncharitable censure, upon so little ground to judge +so hardly of a man, that afterwards lost his life in seeking to procure +the liberty of the King his master. This resolution of the Scots to +enter England being known, the King wanting money to raise an army +against them, was now, as his enemies here wished, constrained to call a +parliament, to meet at Westminster the 13th day of April 1640. + +_B._ Methinks a Parliament of England, if upon any occasion, should +furnish the King with money now in war against the Scots, out of an +inveterate disaffection to that nation that had always anciently taken +part with their enemies the French, and which always esteemed the glory +of England for an abatement of their own. + +_A._ It is indeed commonly seen that neighbour nations envy one +another’s honour, and that the less potent bears the greater malice; but +that hinders them not from agreeing in those things which their common +ambition leads them to. And therefore the King found not the more, but +the less help from this Parliament: and most of the members thereof, in +their ordinary discourses, seemed to wonder why the King should make a +war upon Scotland; and in that Parliament sometimes called them _their +brethren the Scots_. But instead of taking the King’s business, which +was the raising of money, into their consideration, they fell upon the +redressing of grievances, and especially such ways of levying money as +in the late intermission of Parliaments the King had been forced to use; +such as were ship-money, for knighthood, and such other vails (as one +may call them) of the regal office, which lawyers had found justifiable +by the ancient records of the kingdom. Besides, they fell upon the +actions of divers ministers of state, though done by the King’s own +command and warrant. Insomuch, that before they were to come to the +business for which they were called, the money which was necessary for +this war (if they had given any, as they never meant to do) had come too +late. It is true, there was mention of a sum of money to be given the +King, by way of bargain, for the relinquishing of his right to +ship-money, and some other of his prerogatives, but so seldom, and +without determining any sum, that it was in vain for the King to hope +for any success; and therefore upon the 5th of May following he +dissolved it. + +_B._ Where then had the King money to raise and pay his army? + +_A._ He was forced the second time to make use of the nobility and +gentry, who contributed some more, some less, according to the greatness +of their estates; but amongst them all they made up a very sufficient +army. + +_B._ It seems then that the same men, that crossed his business in the +Parliament, now out of Parliament advanced it all they could. What was +the reason of that? + +_A._ The greatest part of the Lords in Parliament, and of the gentry +throughout England, were more affected to monarchy than to a popular +government, but so as not to endure to hear of the King’s absolute +power; which made them in time of Parliament easily to condescend to +abridge it, and bring the government to a mixed monarchy, as they called +it; wherein the absolute sovereignty should be divided between the King, +the House of Lords, and the House of Commons. + +_B._ But how, if they cannot agree? + +_A._ I think they never thought of that; but I am sure they never meant +the sovereignty should be wholly either in one or both houses. Besides, +they were loath to desert the King, when he was invaded by foreigners; +for the Scotch were esteemed by them as a foreign nation. + +_B._ It is strange to me, that England and Scotland being but one +island, and their language almost the same, and being governed by one +King, should be thought foreigners to one another. The Romans were +masters of many nations, and to oblige them the more to obey the edicts +and laws sent unto them from the city of Rome, they thought fit to make +them all Romans; and out of divers nations, as Spain, Germany, Italy, +and France, to advance some, that they thought worthy, even to be +senators of Rome, and to give every one of the common people the +privileges of the city of Rome, by which they were protected from the +contumelies of other nations where they resided. Why were not the Scotch +and English in like manner united into one people? + +_A._ King James at his first coming to the crown of England did +endeavour it, but could not prevail. But for all that, I believe the +Scotch have now as many privileges in England as any nation had in Rome, +of those which were so as you say made Romans. For they are all +naturalized, and have right to buy land in England to themselves and +their heirs. + +_B._ It is true of them, that were born in Scotland after the time that +King James was in possession of the kingdom of England. + +_A._ There be very few now that were born before. But why have they a +better right that were born after, than they that were born before? + +_B._ Because they were born subjects to the King of England, and the +rest not. + +_A._ Were not the rest born subjects to King James? And was not he King +of England? + +_B._ Yes, but not then. + +_A._ I understand not the subtilty of that distinction. But upon what +law is that distinction grounded? Is there any statute to that purpose? + +_B._ I cannot tell; I think not; but it is grounded upon equity. + +_A._ I see little equity in this; that those nations that are bound to +equal obedience to the same King, should not have equal privileges. And +now seeing there be so very few born before King James’s coming in, what +greater privilege had those ingrafted Romans by their naturalization in +the state of Rome, or in the state of England the English themselves, +more than the Scotch? + +_B._ Those Romans, when any of them were in Rome, had their voice in the +making of laws. + +_A._ And the Scotch have their Parliaments, wherein their assent is +required to the laws there made, which is as good. Have not many of the +provinces of France their several parliaments and several constitutions? +And yet they are all equally natural subjects of the King of France. And +therefore for my part I think they were mistaken, both English and +Scotch, in calling one another foreigners. Howsoever that be, the King +had a very sufficient army, wherewith he marched towards Scotland; and +by the time he was come to York, the Scotch army was drawn up to the +frontiers and ready to march into England; which also they presently +did; giving out all the way, that their march should be without damage +to the country, and that their errand was only to deliver a petition to +the King, for the redress of many pretended injuries they had received +from such of the court, whose counsel the King most followed. So they +passed through Northumberland quietly, till they came to a ford in the +river of Tyne, a little above Newcastle, where they found some little +opposition from a party of the King’s army sent thither to stop them, +whom the Scotch easily mastered; and as soon as they were over, seized +upon Newcastle, and coming further on, upon the city of Durham; and sent +to the King to desire a treaty, which was granted; and the commissioners +on both sides met at Ripon. The conclusion was, that all should be +referred to the Parliament, which the King should call to meet at +Westminster on the 3rd of November following, being in the same year +1640; and thereupon the King returned to London. + +_B._ So the armies were disbanded? + +_A._ No; the Scotch army was to be defrayed by the counties of +Northumberland and Durham, and the King was to pay his own, till the +disbanding of both should be agreed upon in Parliament. + +_B._ So in effect both the armies were maintained at the King’s charge, +and the whole controversy to be decided by a Parliament almost wholly +Presbyterian, and as partial to the Scotch as themselves could have +wished. + +_A._ And yet for all this they durst not presently make war upon the +King: there was so much yet left of reverence to him in the hearts of +the people, as to have made them odious, if they had declared what they +intended. They must have some colour or other to make it believed that +the King made war first upon the Parliament. And besides, they had not +yet sufficiently disgraced him in sermons and pamphlets, nor removed +from about him those they thought could best counsel him. Therefore they +resolved to proceed with him like skilful hunters; first to single him +out, by men disposed in all parts to drive him into the open field; and +then in case he should but seem to turn head, to call that a making of +war against the Parliament. + +And first they called in question such as had either preached or written +in defence of any of those rights, which, belonging to the Crown, they +meant to usurp, and take from the King to themselves: whereupon some few +preachers and writers were imprisoned, or forced to fly. The King not +protecting these, they proceeded to call in question some of the King’s +own actions in his ministers, whereof they imprisoned some, and some +went beyond sea. And whereas certain persons, having endeavoured by +books and sermons to raise sedition, and committed other crimes of high +nature, had therefore been censured by the King’s council in the +Star-chamber, and imprisoned; the Parliament by their own authority, to +try, it seems, how the King and the people would take it, (for their +persons were inconsiderable), ordered their setting at liberty; which +was accordingly done, with great applause of the people, that flocked +about them in London, in manner of a triumph. This being done without +resistance, the King’s right to ship-money— + +_B._ Ship-money! what’s that? + +_A._ The Kings of England, for the defence of the sea, had power to tax +all the counties of England, whether they were maritime or not, for the +building and furnishing of ships; which tax the King had then lately +found cause to impose, and the Parliament exclaimed against it as an +oppression. And by one of their members that had been taxed but 20_s._ +(mark the oppression; a Parliament-man of 500_l._ a year, land-taxed at +20_s._!) they were forced to bring it to a trial at law, he refusing +payment; and he was cast. Again, when all the judges of Westminster were +demanded their opinions concerning the legality of it, of twelve that +there are, it was judged legal by ten; for which though they were not +punished, yet they were affrighted by the Parliament. + +_B._ What did the Parliament mean, when they did exclaim against it as +illegal? Did they mean it was against statute-law, or against the +judgments of lawyers given heretofore, which are commonly called +reports; or did they mean it was against equity, which I take to be the +same with the law of nature? + +_A._ It is a hard matter, or rather impossible, to know what other men +mean, especially if they be crafty: but sure I am, equity was not their +ground for this pretence of immunity from contributing to the King but +at their own pleasure. For when they have laid the burthen of defending +the whole kingdom, and governing it, upon any person whatsoever, there +is very little equity he should depend on others for the means of +performing it; or if he do, they are his Sovereign, not he theirs. And +as for the common law contained in reports, they have no force but what +the King gives them. Besides, it were more unreasonable, that a corrupt +or foolish judge’s unjust sentence should by any time, how long soever, +obtain the authority and force of a law. But amongst the statute laws +there is one, called Magna Charta, or the Great Charter of the liberties +of Englishmen, in which there is one article, wherein a King heretofore +hath granted that no man shall be distrained, that is, have his goods +taken from him, otherwise than by the law of the land. + +_B._ Is not that a sufficient ground for their purpose? + +_A._ No: that leaves us in the same doubt, which you think it clears. +For where was that law of the land then? Did they mean another Magna +Charta, that was made by some King more ancient yet? No: that statute +was made, not to exempt any man from payments to the public, but for +securing every man from such as abused the King’s power by +surreptitiously obtaining the King’s warrants, to the oppressing of +those against whom he had any suit in law. But it was conducing to the +ends of some rebellious spirits in this Parliament, to have it +interpreted in the wrong sense, and suitable enough to the understanding +of the rest, or most part of them, to let it pass. + +_B._ You make the members of that Parliament very simple men; and yet +the people chose them for the wisest of the land. + +_A._ If craft be wisdom, they were wise enough. But wise, as I define +it, is he that knows how to bring his business to pass, without the +assistance of knavery and ignoble shifts, by the sole strength of his +good contrivance. A fool may win from a better gamester by the advantage +of false dice, and packing of cards. + +_B._ According to your definition, there be few wise men now-a-days. +Such wisdom is a kind of gallantry, that few are brought up to, and most +think folly. Fine cloaths, great feathers, civility towards men that +will not swallow injuries, and injury towards them that will, is the +present gallantry. But when the Parliament afterwards, having gotten the +power into their hands, levied money for their own use; what said the +people to that? + +_A._ What else, but that it was legal and to be paid, as being imposed +by consent of Parliaments. + +_B._ I have heard often that they ought to pay what was imposed by +consent of Parliaments to the use of the King, but to their own use +never before. I see by this, it is easier to gull the multitude, than +any one man amongst them. For what one man, that has not his natural +judgment depraved by accident, could be so easily cozened in a matter +that concerns his purse, had he not been passionately carried away by +the rest to change of government, or rather to a liberty of every one to +govern himself? + +_A._ Judge then, what kind of men such a multitude of ignorant people +were like to elect for their burgesses and knights of shires. + +_B._ I can make no other judgment, but that they who were then elected, +were just such as had been elected for former Parliaments, and as are +like to be elected for Parliaments to come. For the common people have +been, and always will be, ignorant of their duty to the public, as never +meditating any thing but their particular interest; in other things +following their immediate leaders; which are either the preachers, or +the most potent of the gentlemen that dwell amongst them: as common +soldiers for the most part follow their immediate captains, if they like +them. If you think the late miseries have made them wiser, that will +quickly be forgot, and then we shall be no wiser than we were. + +_A._ Why may not men be taught their duty, that is, the science of just +and unjust, as divers other sciences have been taught, from true +principles and evident demonstration; and much more easily than any of +those preachers and democratical gentlemen could teach rebellion and +treason? + +_B._ But who can teach what none have learned? Or, if any man hath been +so singular, as to have studied the science of justice and equity; how +can he teach it safely, when it is against the interest of those that +are in possession of the power to hurt him? + +_A._ The rules of just and unjust sufficiently demonstrated, and from +principles evident to the meanest capacity, have not been wanting; and +notwithstanding the obscurity of their author, have shined, not only in +this, but also in foreign countries, to men of good education. But they +are few, in respect of the rest of the men, whereof many cannot read; +many, though they can, have no leisure; and of them that have leisure, +the greatest part have their minds wholly employed and taken up by their +private businesses or pleasures. So that it is impossible that the +multitude should ever learn their duty, but from the pulpit and upon +holidays; but then, and from thence, it is, that they learned their +disobedience. And, therefore, the light of that doctrine has been +hitherto covered and kept under here by a cloud of adversaries, which no +private man’s reputation can break through, without the authority of the +Universities. But out of the Universities, came all those preachers that +taught the contrary. The Universities have been to this nation, as the +wooden horse was to the Trojans. + +_B._ Can you tell me why and when the Universities here, and in other +places, first began? + +_A._ It seems, for the time, they began in the reign of the Emperor +Charles the Great. Before which time, I doubt not, but that there were +many grammar schools for the Latin tongue, which was the natural +language of the Roman Church; but for Universities, that is to say, +schools for the sciences in general, and especially for divinity, it is +manifest that the institution of them was recommended by the Pope’s +letter to the Emperor Charles the Great, and recommended further by a +Council held in his time, I think, at Chalons-sur-Saone; and not long +after was erected an University at Paris, and the college called +University College at Oxford. And so by degrees several bishops, +noblemen, and rich men, and some Kings and Queens, contributing +thereunto, the Universities obtained at last their present splendour. + +_B._ But what was the Pope’s design in it? + +_A._ What other design was he like to have, but what you heard before, +the advancement of his own authority in the countries where the +Universities were erected? There they learned to dispute for him, and +with unintelligible distinctions to blind men’s eyes, whilst they +encroached upon the rights of kings. And it was an evident argument of +that design, that they fell in hand with the work so quickly. For the +first Rector of the University of Paris, as I have read somewhere, was +Peter Lombard, who first brought in them the learning called +School-divinity; and was seconded by John Scot of Duns, who lived in, or +near the same time; whom any ingenious reader, not knowing what was the +design, would judge to have been two of the most egregious blockheads in +the world, so obscure and senseless are their writings. And from these +the schoolmen that succeeded, learnt the trick of imposing what they +list upon their readers, and declining the force of true reason by +verbal forks; I mean, distinctions that signify nothing, but serve only +to astonish the multitude of ignorant men. As for the understanding +readers, they were so few, that these new sublime doctors cared not what +they thought. These schoolmen were to make good all the articles of +faith, which the Popes from time to time should command to be believed: +amongst which, there were very many inconsistent with the rights of +kings, and other civil sovereigns, as asserting to the Pope all +authority whatsoever they should declare to be necessary _in ordine ad +spiritualia_, that is to say, in order to religion. + +From the Universities also it was, that all preachers proceeded, and +were poured out into city and country, to terrify the people into an +absolute obedience to the Pope’s canons and commands, which, for fear of +weakening kings and princes too much, they durst not yet call laws. + +From the Universities it was, that the philosophy of Aristotle was made +an ingredient in religion, as serving for a salve to a great many absurd +articles, concerning the nature of Christ’s body, and the estate of +angels and saints in heaven; which articles they thought fit to have +believed, because they bring, some of them profit, and others reverence +to the clergy, even to the meanest of them. For when they shall have +made the people believe that the meanest of them can make the body of +Christ; who is there that will not both show them reverence, and be +liberal to them or to the Church, especially in the time of their +sickness, when they think they make and bring unto them their Saviour? + +_B._ But, what advantage to them, in these impostures, was the doctrine +of Aristotle? + +_A._ They have made more use of his obscurity than of his doctrine. For +none of the ancient philosophers' writings are comparable to those of +Aristotle, for their aptness to puzzle and entangle men with words, and +to breed disputation, which must at last be ended in the determination +of the Church of Rome. And yet in the doctrine of Aristotle, they made +use of many points; as, first, the doctrine of separated essences. + +_B._ What are separated essences? + +_A._ Separated beings. + +_B._ Separated from what? + +_A._ From every thing that is. + +_B._ I cannot understand the being of any thing, which I understand not +to be. But what can they make of that? + +_A._ Very much, in questions concerning the nature of God, and +concerning the estate of man’s soul after death, in heaven, hell, and +purgatory; by which you and every man know, how great obedience, and how +much money they gain from the common people. Whereas Aristotle holdeth +the soul of man to be the first giver of motion to the body, and +consequently to itself; they make use of that in the doctrine of free +will. What, and how they gain by that, I will not say. He holdeth forth, +that there be many things that come to pass in this world from no +necessity of causes, but mere contingency, casuality, and fortune. + +_B._ Methinks, in this they make God stand idle, and to be a mere +spectator of the games of fortune; for what God is the cause of, must +needs come to pass, and, in my opinion, nothing else. But, because there +must be some ground for the justice of the eternal torment of the +damned; perhaps it is this, that men’s wills and propensions are not, +they think, in the hands of God, but of themselves; and in this also I +see somewhat conducing to the authority of the Church. + +_A._ This is not much; nor was Aristotle of such credit with them, but +that when his opinion was against theirs, they could slight him. +Whatsoever he says is impossible in nature, they can prove well enough +to be possible, from the Almighty power of God, who can make many bodies +to be in one and the self-same place, and one body to be in many places +at the same time, if the doctrine of transubstantiation require it, +though Aristotle deny it. I like not the design of drawing religion into +an art, whereas it ought to be a law; and though not the same in all +countries, yet in every country indisputable; nor that they teach it +not, as arts ought to be taught, by shewing first the meaning of their +terms, and then deriving from them the truth they would have us believe: +nor that their terms are for the most part unintelligible; though, to +make it seem rather want of learning in the reader, than want of fair +dealing in themselves, they are, for the most part, Latin and Greek +words, wryed a little at the point, towards the native language of the +several countries where they are used. But that which is most +intolerable is, that all clerks are forced to make as if they believed +them, if they mean to have any Church preferment, the keys whereof are +in the Pope’s hands; and the common people, whatsoever they believe of +those subtile doctrines, are never esteemed better sons of the Church +for their learning. There is but one way there to salvation; that is, +extraordinary devotion and liberality to the Church, and readiness for +the Church’s sake, if it be required, to fight against their natural and +lawful sovereigns. + +_B._ I see what use they make of Aristotle’s logic, physics, and +metaphysics; but I see not yet how his politics can serve their turn. + +_A._ Nor I. It has, I think, done them no good, though it has done us +here much hurt by accident. For men, grown weary at last of the +insolence of the priests, and examining the truth of these doctrines +that were put upon them, began to search the sense of the Scriptures, as +they are in the learned languages; and consequently studying Greek and +Latin, became acquainted with the democratical principles of Aristotle +and Cicero, and from the love of their eloquence fell in love with their +politics, and that more and more, till it grew into the rebellion we now +talk of, without any other advantage to the Roman Church but that it was +a weakening to us, whom, since we broke out of their net in the time of +Henry VIII, they have continually endeavoured to recover. + +_B._ What have they gotten by the teaching of Aristotle’s ethics? + +_A._ It is some advantage to them, that neither the morals of Aristotle, +nor of any other, have done them any harm, nor us any good. Their +doctrines have caused a great deal of dispute concerning virtue and +vice, but no knowledge of what they are, nor any method of obtaining +virtue nor of avoiding vice. The end of moral philosophy is, to teach +men of all sorts their duty, both to the public and to one another. They +estimate virtue, partly by a mediocrity of the passions of men, and +partly by that that they are praised. Whereas, it is not the much or +little praise that makes an action virtuous, but the cause; nor much or +little blame that makes an action vicious, but its being unconformable +to the laws in such men as are subject to the law, or its being +unconformable to equity or charity in all men whatsoever. + +_B._ It seems you make a difference between the ethics of subjects, and +the ethics of sovereigns. + +_A._ So I do. The virtue of a subject is comprehended wholly in +obedience to the laws of the commonwealth. To obey the laws, is justice +and equity, which is the law of nature, and, consequently, is civil law +in all nations of the world; and nothing is injustice or iniquity, +otherwise, than it is against the law. Likewise, to obey the laws, is +the prudence of a subject; for without such obedience the commonwealth +(which is every subject’s safety and protection) cannot subsist. And +though it be prudence also in private men, justly and moderately to +enrich themselves, yet craftily to withhold from the public or defraud +it of such part of their wealth, as is by law required, is no sign of +prudence, but of want of knowledge of what is necessary for their own +defence. + +The virtues of sovereigns are such as tend to the maintenance of peace +at home, and to the resistance of foreign enemies. Fortitude is a royal +virtue; and though it be necessary in such private men as shall be +soldiers, yet, for other men, the less they dare, the better it is both +for the commonwealth and for themselves. Frugality (though perhaps you +will think it strange) is also a royal virtue: for it increases the +public stock, which cannot be too great for the public use, nor any man +too sparing of what he has in trust for the good of others. Liberality +also is a royal virtue: for the commonwealth cannot be well served +without extraordinary diligence and service of ministers, and great +fidelity to their Sovereign; who ought therefore to be encouraged, and +especially those that do him service in the wars. In sum, all actions +and habits are to be esteemed good or evil by their causes and +usefulness in reference to the commonwealth, and not by their +mediocrity, nor by their being commended. For several men praise several +customs, and that which is virtue with one, is blamed by others; and, +contrarily, what one calls vice, another calls virtue, as their present +affections lead them. + +_B._ Methinks you should have placed among the virtues that, which, in +my opinion, is the greatest of all virtues, religion. + +_A._ So I have, though, it seems, you did not observe it. But whither do +we digress from the way we were in? + +_B._ I think you have not digressed at all; for I suppose, your purpose +was, to acquaint me with the history, not so much of those actions that +passed in the time of the late troubles, as of their causes, and of the +councils and artifice by which they were brought to pass. There be +divers men that have written the history, out of whom I might have +learned what they did, and somewhat also of the contrivance; but I find +little in them of what I would ask. Therefore, since you were pleased to +enter into this discourse at my request, be pleased also to inform me +after my own method; and for the danger of confusion that may arise from +that, I will take care to bring you back to the place from whence I drew +you; for I well remember where it was. + +_A._ Well then, to your question concerning religion, inasmuch as I told +you, that all virtue is comprehended in obedience to the laws of the +commonwealth, whereof religion is one, I have placed religion amongst +the virtues. + +_B._ Is religion then the law of a commonwealth? + +_A._ There is no nation in the world, whose religion is not established, +and receives not its authority from the laws of that nation. It is true, +that the law of God receives no evidence from the laws of men. But +because men can never by their own wisdom come to the knowledge of what +God hath spoken and commanded to be observed, nor be obliged to obey the +laws whose author they know not, they are to acquiesce in some human +authority or other. So that the question will be, whether a man ought in +matter of religion, that is to say, when there is question of his duty +to God and the King, to rely upon the preaching of his fellow-subjects +or of a stranger, or upon the voice of the law? + +_B._ There is no great difficulty in that point. For there are none that +preach here or anywhere else, or at least ought to preach, but such as +have authority so to do from him or them that have the sovereign power. +So that if the King gives us leave, you or I may as lawfully preach as +they that do; and I believe we should perform that office a great deal +better, than they that preached us into the rebellion. + +_A._ The Church morals are in many points very different from these, +that I have here set down, for the doctrine of virtue and vice; and yet +without any conformity with that of Aristotle. For in the Church of +Rome, the principal virtues are, to obey their doctrine, though it be +treason, and that is to be religious; to be beneficial to the clergy, +that is their piety and liberality; and to believe upon their word that +which a man knows in his conscience to be false, which is the faith they +require. I could name a great many more such points of their morals, but +that I know you know them already, being so well versed in the cases of +conscience written by their schoolmen, who measure the goodness and +wickedness of all actions, by their congruity with the doctrine of the +Roman clergy. + +_B._ But what is the moral philosophy of the Protestant clergy in +England? + +_A._ So much as they show of it in their life and conversation, is for +the most part very good, and of very good example; much better than +their writings. + +_B._ It happens many times that men live honestly for fear, who, if they +had power, would live according to their own opinions; that is, if their +opinions be not right, unrighteously. + +_A._ Do the clergy in England pretend, as the Pope does, or as the +Presbyterians do, to have a right from God immediately, to govern the +King and his subjects in all points of religion and manners? If they do, +you cannot doubt but that if they had number and strength, which they +are never like to have, they would attempt to obtain that power, as the +others have done. + +_B._ I would be glad to see a system of the present morals, written by +some divine of good reputation and learning, of the late King’s party. + +_A._ I think I can recommend unto you the best that is extant, and such +a one as (except a few passages that I mislike) is very well worth your +reading. The title of it is, _The whole Duty of Man laid down in a plain +and familiar way_. And, yet, I dare say, that if the Presbyterian +ministers, even those of them which were the most diligent preachers of +the late sedition, were to be tried by it, they would go near to be +found not guilty. He has divided the duty of man into three great +branches; which are, his duty to God, to himself, and to his neighbour. +In his duty to God, he puts the acknowledgment of him in his essence and +his attributes, and in the believing of his word. His attributes are +omnipotence, omniscience, infiniteness, justice, truth, mercy, and all +the rest that are found in Scripture. Which of these did not those +seditious preachers acknowledge equally with the best of Christians? The +word of God are the books of Holy Scripture, received for canonical in +England. + +_B._ They receive the word of God; but it is according to their own +interpretation. + +_A._ According to whose interpretation was it received by the bishops +and the rest of the loyal party, but their own? He puts for another +duty, obedience and submission to God’s will. Did any of them, nay, did +any man living, do any thing, at any time, against God’s will? + +_B._ By God’s will, I suppose, he means there his revealed will, that is +to say, his commandments, which I am sure they did most horribly break, +both by their preaching and otherwise. + +_A._ As for their own actions, there is no doubt but all men are guilty +enough, if God deal severely with them, to be damned. And for their +preaching, they will say, they thought it agreeable to God’s revealed +will in the Scriptures. If they thought it so, it was not disobedience, +but error. And how can any man prove they thought otherwise? + +_B._ Hypocrisy hath this great prerogative above other sins, that it +cannot be accused. + +_A._ Another duty he sets down is, to honour Him in his house (that is, +the Church), in his possessions, in his day, in his word and sacraments. + +_B._ They perform this duty as well, I think, as any other ministers, I +mean the loyal party; and the Presbyterians have always had an equal +care to have God’s house free from profanation; to have tithes duly +paid, and offerings accepted; to have the sabbath day kept holy, the +word preached, and the Lord’s supper and baptism duly administered. But +is not keeping of the feasts and fasts, one of those duties that belong +to the honour of God? If it be, the Presbyterians fail in that. + +_A._ Why so? They kept some holidays, and they had fasts amongst +themselves, though not upon the same days that the Church ordains, but +when they thought fit; as when it pleased God to give the King any +notable victory. And they governed themselves in this point by the Holy +Scripture, as they pretend to believe. And who can prove they do not +believe so? + +_B._ Let us pass over all other duties, and come to that duty which we +owe to the King, and consider whether the doctrine taught by those +divines which adhered to the King, be such in that point, as may justify +the Presbyterians, that incited the people to rebellion. For that is the +thing you call in question. + +_A._ Concerning our duty to our rulers, he hath these words: “An +obedience we must pay, either active or passive; the active, in the case +of all lawful commands, that is, whenever the magistrate commands +something which is not contrary to some command of God, we are then +bound to act according to that command of the magistrate, to do the +things he requires; but when he enjoins any thing contrary to what God +hath commanded, we are not then to pay him this active obedience; we +may, nay we must, refuse thus to act (yet, here we must be very well +assured, that the thing is so contrary, and not pretend conscience for a +cloak of stubbornness); we are, in that case, to obey God rather than +men; but even this is a season for the passive obedience; we must +patiently suffer what he inflicts on us for such refusal, and not, to +secure ourselves, rise up against him.” + +_B._ What is there in this, to give colour to the late rebellion? + +_A._ They will say they did it in obedience to God, inasmuch as they did +believe it was according to the Scripture; out of which they will bring +examples, perhaps of David and his adherents, that resisted King Saul, +and of the prophets afterward, that vehemently from time to time +preached against the idolatrous Kings of Israel and Judah. Saul was +their lawful King, and yet they paid him neither active nor passive +obedience; for they did put themselves into a posture of defence against +him, though David himself spared his person. And so did the +Presbyterians put into their commissions to their general, that they +should spare the King’s person. Besides, you cannot doubt but that they, +who in the pulpit did animate the people to take arms in the defence of +the then Parliament, alleged Scripture, that is, the word of God for it. +If it be lawful then for subjects to resist the King, when he commands +anything that is against the Scripture, that is, contrary to the command +of God, and to be judge of the meaning of the Scripture, it is +impossible that the life of any King, or the peace of any Christian +kingdom, can be long secure. It is this doctrine that divides a kingdom +within itself, whatsoever the men be, loyal or rebels, that write or +preach it publicly. And thus you see that if those seditious ministers +be tried by this doctrine, they will come off well enough. + +_B._ I see it; and wonder at people that have never spoken with God +Almighty, nor knowing one more than another what he hath said, when the +laws and the preacher disagree, should so keenly follow the minister, +(for the most part an ignorant, though a ready-tongued, scholar), rather +than the laws, that were made by the King with the consent of the peers +and the commons of the land. + +_A._ Let us examine his words a little nearer. First, concerning passive +obedience. When a thief hath broken the laws, and according to the law +is therefore executed, can any man understand that this suffering of his +is in obedience to the law? Every law is a command to do, or to forbear: +neither of these is fulfilled by suffering. If any suffering can be +called obedience, it must be such as is voluntary; for no involuntary +action can be counted a submission to the law. He that means that his +suffering should be taken for obedience, must not only not resist, but +also not fly, nor hide himself to avoid his punishment. And who is there +amongst them that discourse of passive obedience, when his life is in +extreme danger, that will voluntarily present himself to the officers of +justice? Do not we see that all men, when they are led to execution, are +both bound and guarded, and would break loose if they could, and get +away? Such is their passive obedience. Christ saith (Matth. xxiii, 2, +3): _The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' chair; all therefore, +whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do_: which is a doing +an active obedience. And yet the Scribes and Pharisees appear not by the +Scripture to have been such godly men, as never to command any thing +against the revealed will of God. + +_B._ Must tyrants also be obeyed in every thing actively? Or is there +nothing wherein a lawful King’s command may be disobeyed? What if he +should command me with my own hands to execute my father, in case he +should be condemned to die by the law? + +_A._ This is a case that need not be put. We never have read nor heard +of any King or tyrant so inhuman as to command it. If any did, we are to +consider whether that command were one of his laws. For by disobeying +Kings, we mean the disobeying of his laws, those his laws that were made +before they were applied to any particular person; for the King, though +as a father of children, and a master of domestic servants, yet he +commands the people in general never but by a precedent law, and as a +politic, not a natural person. And if such a command as you speak of +were contrived into a general law (which never was, nor never will be), +you were bound to obey it, unless you depart the kingdom after the +publication of the law, and before the condemnation of your father. + +_B._ Your author says further, in refusing active obedience to the King, +that commanded anything contrary to God’s law, we must be very well +assured that the thing is so contrary. I would fain know how it is +possible to be assured. + +_A._ I think you do not believe that any of those refusers do, +immediately from God’s own mouth, receive any command contrary to the +command of the King, who is God’s lieutenant, nor any other way than you +and I do, that is to say, than by the Scriptures. And because men do, +for the most part, rather draw the Scripture to their own sense, than +follow the true sense of the Scripture, there is no other way to know, +certainly, and in all cases, what God commands, or forbids us to do, but +by the sentence of him or them that are constituted by the King to +determine the sense of the Scripture, upon hearing of the particular +case of conscience which is in question. And they that are so +constituted, are easily known in all Christian commonwealths, whether +they be bishops, or ministers, or assemblies, that govern the Church +under him or them that have the sovereign power. + +_B._ Some doubts may be raised from this that you now say. For if men be +to learn their duty from the sentence which other men shall give +concerning the meaning of the Scriptures, and not from their own +interpretation, I understand not to what end they were translated into +English, and every man not only permitted, but also exhorted, to read +them. For what could that produce, but diversity of opinion, and +consequently, as man’s nature is, disputation, breach of charity, +disobedience, and at last rebellion? Again, since the Scripture was +allowed to be read in English, why were not the translations such as +might make all that is read, understood even by mean capacities? Did not +the Jews, such as could read, understand their law in the Jewish +language, as well as we do our statute laws in English? And as for such +places of the Scripture, as had nothing of the nature of a law, it was +nothing to the duty of the Jews, whether they were understood or not, +seeing nothing is punishable but the transgression of some law. The same +question I may ask concerning the New Testament. For, I believe, that +those men to whom the original language was natural, did understand +sufficiently what commands and councils were given them by our Saviour +and his apostles, and his immediate disciples. Again, how will you +answer that question which was put by St. Peter and St. John (_Acts_ iv, +19), when by Annas the high-priest, and others of the Council of +Jerusalem, they were forbidden to teach any more in the name of Jesus: +_Whether it is right in the sight of God, to hearken unto you more than +unto God?_ + +_A._ The case is not the same. Peter and John had seen and daily +conversed with our Saviour; and by the miracles he wrought, did know he +was God, and consequently knew certainly that their disobedience to the +high-priest’s present command was just. Can any minister now say, that +he hath immediately from God’s own mouth received a command to disobey +the King, or know otherwise than by the Scripture, that any command of +the King, that hath the form and nature of a law, is against the law of +God, which in divers places, directly and evidently, commandeth to obey +him in all things? The text you cite does not tell us, that a minister’s +authority, rather than a Christian King’s, shall decide the questions +that arise from the different interpretations of the Scripture. And +therefore, where the King is head of the Church, and by consequence (to +omit that the Scripture itself was not received but by the authority of +Kings and States) chief judge of the rectitude of all interpretations of +the Scripture, to obey the King’s laws and public edicts, is not to +disobey, but to obey God. A minister ought not to think that his skill +in the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew tongues, if he have any, gives him a +privilege to impose upon all his fellow subjects his own sense, or what +he pretends to be his sense, of every obscure place of Scripture: nor +ought he, as oft as he hath found out some fine interpretation, not +before thought on by others, to think he had it by inspiration: for he +cannot be assured of that; no, nor that his interpretation, as fine as +he thinks it, is not false: and then all his stubbornness and contumacy +towards the King and his laws, is nothing but pride of heart and +ambition, or else imposture. And whereas you think it needless, or +perhaps hurtful, to have the Scriptures in English, I am of another +mind. There are so many places of Scripture easy to be understood, that +teach both true faith and good morality (and that as fully as is +necessary to salvation), of which no seducer is able to dispossess the +mind of any ordinary reader, that the reading of them is so profitable +as not to be forbidden without great damage to them and the +commonwealth. + +_B._ All that is required, both in faith and manners, for man’s +salvation, is, I confess, set down in Scripture as plainly as can be. +_Children obey your parents in all things: Servants obey your masters: +Let all men be subject to the higher powers, whether it be the King or +those that are sent by him_: _Love God with all your soul, and your +neighbour as yourself_: are words of the Scripture, which are well +enough understood; but neither children, nor the greatest part of men, +do understand why it is their duty to do so. They see not that the +safety of the commonwealth, and consequently their own, depends upon +their doing it. Every man by nature, without discipline, does in all his +actions look upon, as far as he can see, the benefit that shall redound +to himself from his obedience. He reads that covetousness is the root of +all evil; but he thinks, and sometimes finds, it is the root of his +estate. And so in other cases the Scripture says one thing, and they +think another, weighing the commodities or incommodities of this present +life only, which are in their sight, never putting into the scales the +good and evil of the life to come, which they see not. + +_A._ All this is no more than happens where the Scripture is sealed up +in Greek and Latin, and the people taught the same things out of them by +preachers. But they that are of a condition and age fit to examine the +sense of what they read, and that take a delight in searching out the +grounds of their duty, certainly cannot choose but by their reading of +the Scriptures come to such a sense of their duty, as not only to obey +the laws themselves, but also to induce others to do the same. For +commonly men of age and quality are followed by their inferior +neighbours, that look more upon the example of those men whom they +reverence, and whom they are unwilling to displease, than upon precepts +and laws. + +_B._ These men, of the condition and age you speak of, are, in my +opinion, the unfittest of all others to be trusted with the reading of +the Scriptures. I know you mean such as have studied the Greek or Latin, +or both tongues, and that are withal such as love knowledge, and +consequently take delight in finding out the meaning of the most hard +texts, or in thinking they have found it, in case it be new and not +found out by others. These are therefore they, that prætermitting the +easy places which teach them their duty, fall to scanning only of the +mysteries of religion. Such as are: _How it may be made out with wit, +that there be three that bear rule in heaven, and those three but one? +How the Deity could be made flesh? How that flesh could be really +present in many places at once? Where is the place, and what the +torments, of hell?_ And other metaphysical doctrines: _Whether the will +of man be free, or governed by the will of God? Whether sanctity comes +by inspiration or education? By whom Christ now speaks to us, whether by +the King, or by the clergy, or by the Bible, to every man that reads it +and interprets it to himself, or by a private spirit to every private +man?_ These and the like points are the study of the curious, and the +cause of all our late mischief, and the cause that makes the plainer +sort of men, whom the Scripture had taught belief in Christ, love +towards God, obedience to the King, and sobriety of behaviour, forget it +all, and place their religion in the disputable doctrines of these your +wise men. + +_A._ I do not think these men fit to interpret the Scripture to the +rest, nor do I say that the rest ought to take their interpretation for +the word of God. Whatsoever is necessary for them to know, is so easy, +as not to need interpretation: whatsoever is more, does them no good. +But in case any of those unnecessary doctrines shall be authorized by +the laws of the King or other state, I say it is the duty of every +subject not to speak against them: in as much as it is every man’s duty +to obey him or them that have the sovereign power, and the wisdom of all +such powers to punish such as shall publish or teach their private +interpretations, when they are contrary to the law, and likely to +incline men to sedition or disputing against the law. + +_B._ They must punish then the most of those that have had their +breeding in the Universities. For such curious questions in divinity are +first started in the Universities, and so are all those politic +questions concerning the rights of civil and ecclesiastic government; +and there they are furnished with arguments for liberty out of the works +of Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, Seneca, and out of the histories of Rome +and Greece, for their disputation against the necessary power of their +sovereigns. Therefore I despair of any lasting peace amongst ourselves, +till the Universities here shall bend and direct their studies to the +settling of it, that is, to the teaching of absolute obedience to the +laws of the King, and to his public edicts under the Great Seal of +England. For I make no doubt, but that solid reason, backed with the +authority of so many learned men, will more prevail for the keeping of +us in peace within ourselves, than any victory can do over the rebels. +But I am afraid that it is impossible to bring the Universities to such +a compliance with the actions of state, as is necessary for the +business. + +_A._ Seeing the Universities have heretofore from time to time +maintained the authority of the Pope, contrary to all laws divine, +civil, and natural, against the right of our Kings, why can they not as +well, when they have all manner of laws and equity on their side, +maintain the rights of him that is both sovereign of the kingdom, and +head of the Church? + +_B._ Why then were they not in all points for the King’s power, +presently after that King Henry VIII was in Parliament declared head of +the Church, as much as they were before for the authority of the Pope? + +_A._ Because the clergy in the Universities, by whom all things there +are governed, and the clergy without the Universities, as well bishops +as inferior clerks, did think that the pulling down of the Pope was the +setting up of them, as to England, in his place, and made no question, +the greatest part of them, but that their spiritual power did depend not +upon the authority of the King, but of Christ himself, derived to them +by a successive imposition of hands from bishop to bishop; +notwithstanding they knew that this derivation passed through the hands +of popes and bishops whose authority they had cast off. For though they +were content that the divine right, which the Pope pretended to in +England, should be denied him, yet they thought it not so fit to be +taken from the Church of England, whom they now supposed themselves to +represent. It seems they did not think it reasonable that a woman, or a +child, or a man that could not construe the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin +Bible, nor know perhaps the declensions and conjugations of Greek or +Latin nouns and verbs, should take upon him to govern so many learned +doctors in matters of religion; meaning matters of divinity: for +religion has been for a long time, and is now by most people, taken for +the same thing with divinity, to the great advantage of the clergy. + +_B._ And especially now amongst the Presbyterians. For I see few that +are by them esteemed very good Christians, besides such as can repeat +their sermons, and wrangle for them about the interpretation of the +Scripture, and fight for them also with their bodies or purses, when +they shall be required. To believe in Christ is nothing with them, +unless you believe as they bid you. Charity is nothing with them, unless +it be charity and liberality to them, and partaking with them in +faction. How we can have peace while this is our religion, I cannot +tell. _Hæret lateri lethalis arundo._ The seditious doctrine of the +Presbyterians has been stuck so hard in the people’s heads and memories, +(I cannot say into their hearts; for they understand nothing in it, but +that they may lawfully rebel), that I fear the commonwealth will never +be cured. + +_A._ The two great virtues, that were severally in Henry VII and Henry +VIII, when they shall be jointly in one King, will easily cure it. That +of Henry VII was, without much noise of the people to fill his coffers; +that of Henry VIII was an early severity; but this without the former +cannot be exercised. + +_B._ This that you say looks, methinks, like an advice to the King, to +let them alone till he have gotten ready money enough to levy and +maintain a sufficient army, and then to fall upon them and destroy them. + +_A._ God forbid that so horrible, unchristian, and inhuman a design +should ever enter into the King’s heart. I would have him have money +enough readily to raise an army able to suppress any rebellion, and to +take from his enemies all hope of success, that they may not dare to +trouble him in the reformation of the Universities; but to put none to +death without the actual committing such crimes as are already made +capital by the laws. The core of rebellion, as you have seen by this, +and read of other rebellions, are the Universities; which nevertheless +are not to be cast away, but to be better disciplined: that is to say, +that the politics there taught be made to be, as true politics should +be, such as are fit to make men know, that it is their duty to obey all +laws whatsoever that shall by the authority of the King be enacted, till +by the same authority they shall be repealed; such as are fit to make +men understand, that the civil laws are God’s laws, as they that make +them are by God appointed to make them; and to make men know, that the +people and the Church are one thing, and have but one head, the King; +and that no man has title to govern under him, that has it not from him; +that the King owes his crown to God only, and to no man, ecclesiastic or +other; and that the religion they teach there, be a quiet waiting for +the coming again of our blessed Saviour, and in the mean time a +resolution to obey the King’s laws, which also are God’s laws; to injure +no man, to be in charity with all men, to cherish the poor and sick, and +to live soberly and free from scandal; without mingling our religion +with points of natural philosophy, as freedom of will, incorporeal +substance, everlasting nows, ubiquities, hypostases, which the people +understand not, nor will ever care for. When the Universities shall be +thus disciplined, there will come out of them, from time to time, +well-principled preachers, and they that are now ill-principled, from +time to time fall away. + +_B._ I think it a very good course, and perhaps the only one that can +make our peace amongst ourselves constant. For if men know not their +duty, what is there that can force them to obey the laws? An army, you +will say. But what shall force the army? Were not the trained bands an +army? Were they not the janissaries, that not very long ago slew Osman +in his own palace at Constantinople? I am therefore of your opinion, +both that men may be brought to a love of obedience by preachers and +gentlemen that imbibe good principles in their youth at the +Universities, and also that we never shall have a lasting peace, till +the Universities themselves be in such manner, as you have said, +reformed; and the ministers know they have no authority but what the +supreme civil power gives them; and the nobility and gentry know that +the liberty of a state is not an exemption from the laws of their own +country, whether made by an assembly or by a monarch, but an exemption +from the constraint and insolence of their neighbours. + +And now I am satisfied in this point, I will bring you back to the place +from whence my curiosity drew you to this long digression. We were upon +the point of ship-money; one of those grievances which the Parliament +exclaimed against as tyrannical and arbitrary government; thereby to +single out, as you called it, the King from his subjects, and to make a +party against him, when they should need it. And now you may proceed, if +it please you, to such other artifices as they used to the same purpose. + +_A._ I think it were better to give over here our discourse of this +business, and refer it to some other day that you shall think fit. + +_B._ Content. That day I believe is not far off. + + + + + PART II. + + ========== + +_A._ You are welcome; yet, if you had staid somewhat longer, my memory +would have been so much the better provided for you. + +_B._ Nay, I pray you give me now what you have about you; for the rest I +am content you take what time you please. + +_A._ After the Parliament had made the people believe that the exacting +of ship-money was unlawful, and the people thereby inclined to think it +tyrannical; in the next place, to increase their disaffection to his +Majesty, they accused him of a purpose to introduce and authorize the +Roman religion in this kingdom: than which nothing was more hateful to +the people; not because it was erroneous, which they had neither +learning nor judgment enough to examine, but because they had been used +to hear it inveighed against in the sermons and discourses of the +preachers whom they trusted to. And this was indeed the most effectual +calumny, to alienate the people’s affections from him, that could +possibly be invented. The colour they had for this slander was, first, +that there was one Rosetti, Resident, at and a little before that time, +from the Pope, with the Queen; and one Mr. George Con, Secretary to the +Cardinal Francisco Barberini, nephew to Pope Urban VIII, sent over, +under favour and protection of the Queen, as was conceived, to draw as +many persons of quality about the court, as he should be able, to +reconcile themselves to the Church of Rome: with what success I cannot +tell; but it is likely he gained some, especially of the weaker sex; if +I may say, they were gained by him, when not his arguments, but hope of +favour from the Queen, in all probability prevailed upon them. + +_B._ In such a conjuncture as that was, it had perhaps been better they +had not been sent. + +_A._ There was exception also taken at a convent of friars-capucins in +Somerset-House, though allowed by the articles of marriage: and it was +reported, that the Jesuits also were shortly after to be allowed a +convent in Clerkenwell. And in the mean time, the principal secretary, +Sir Francis Windebank, was accused for having by his warrant set at +liberty some English Jesuits, that had been taken and imprisoned for +returning into England after banishment, contrary to the statute which +had made it capital. Also the resort of English Catholics to the Queen’s +chapel, gave them colour to blame the Queen herself, not only for that, +but also for all the favours that had been shown to the Catholics; in so +much that some of them did not stick to say openly, that the King was +governed by her. + +_B._ Strange injustice! The Queen was a Catholic by profession, and +therefore could not but endeavour to do the Catholics all the good she +could: she had not else been truly that which she professed to be. But +it seems they meant to force her to hypocrisy, being hypocrites +themselves. Can any man think it a crime in a devout lady, of what sect +soever, to seek the favour and benediction of that Church whereof she is +a member? + +_A._ To give the Parliament another colour for their accusation on foot +of the King, as to introducing of Popery, there was a great controversy +between the Episcopal and Presbyterian clergy about free-will. The +dispute began first in the Low Countries, between Gomar and Arminius, in +the time of King James, who foreseeing it might trouble the Church of +England, did what he could to compose the difference. And an assembly of +divines was thereupon got together at Dort, to which also King James +sent a divine or two, but it came to nothing; the question was left +undecided, and became a subject to be disputed of in the universities +here. All the Presbyterians were of the same mind with Gomar: but a very +great many others not; and those were called here Arminians, who, +because the doctrine of free-will had been exploded as a Papistical +doctrine, and because the Presbyterians were far the greater number, and +already in favour with the people, were generally hated. It was easy, +therefore, for the Parliament to make that calumny pass currently with +the people, when the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Laud, was for +Arminius, and had a little before, by his power ecclesiastical, +forbidden all ministers to preach to the people of predestination; and +when all ministers that were gracious with him, and hoped for any Church +preferment, fell to preaching and writing for free-will, to the +uttermost of their power, as a proof of their ability and merit. +Besides, they gave out, some of them, that the Archbishop was in heart a +Papist; and in case he could effect a toleration here of the Roman +religion, was to have a cardinal’s hat: which was not only false, but +also without any ground at all for a suspicion. + +_B._ It is a strange thing, that scholars, obscure men that could +receive no clarity but from the flame of the state, should be suffered +to bring their unnecessary disputes, and together with them their +quarrels, out of the universities into the commonwealth; and more +strange, that the state should engage in their parties, and not rather +put them both to silence. + +_A._ A state can constrain obedience, but convince no error, nor alter +the mind of them that believe they have the better reason. Suppression +of doctrines does but unite and exasperate, that is, increase both the +malice and power of them that have already believed them. + +_B._ But what are the points they disagree in? Is there any controversy +between Bishop and Presbyterian concerning the divinity or humanity of +Christ? Do either of them deny the Trinity, or any article of the creed? +Does either party preach openly, or write directly, against justice, +charity, sobriety, or any other duty necessary to salvation, except only +the duty to the King; and not that neither, but when they have a mind +either to rule or destroy the King? Lord have mercy upon us! Can nobody +be saved that understands not their disputations? Or is there more +requisite, either of faith or honesty, for the salvation of one man than +another? What needs so much preaching of faith to us that are no +heathens, and that believe already all that Christ and his apostles have +told us is necessary to salvation, and more too? Why is there so little +preaching of justice? I have indeed heard righteousness often +recommended to the people, but I have seldom heard the word justice in +their sermons; nay, though in the Latin and Greek Bible the word justice +occur exceeding often, yet in the English, though it be a word that +every man understands, the word righteousness (which few understand to +signify the same, but take it rather for rightness of opinion, than of +action or intention), is put in the place of it. + +_A._ I confess I know very few controversies amongst Christians, of +points necessary to salvation. They are the questions of authority and +power over the Church, or of profit, or of honour to Churchmen, that for +the most part raise all the controversies. For what man is he, that will +trouble himself and fall out with his neighbours for the saving of my +soul, or the soul of any other than himself? When the Presbyterian +ministers and others did so seriously preach sedition, and animate men +to rebellion in these late wars; who was there that had not a benefice, +or having one feared not to lose it, or some other part of his +maintainance, by the alteration of the Government, that did voluntary, +without any eye to reward, preach so earnestly against sedition, as the +other party preached for it? I confess, that for aught I have observed +in history, and other writings of the heathens, Greek and Latin, that +those heathens were not at all behind us in point of virtue and moral +duties, notwithstanding that we have had much preaching, and they none +at all. I confess also, that considering what harm may proceed from a +liberty that men have, upon every Sunday and oftener, to harangue all +the people of a nation at one time, whilst the state is ignorant of what +they will say; and that there is no such thing permitted in all the +world out of Christendom, nor therefore any civil wars about religion; I +have thought much preaching an inconvenience. Nevertheless, I cannot +think that preaching to the people the points of their duty, both to God +and man, can be too frequent; so it be done by grave, discreet, and +ancient men, that are reverenced by the people; and not by light +quibbling young men, whom no congregation is so simple as to look to be +taught by (as being a thing contrary to nature), or to pay them any +reverence, or to care what they say, except some few that may be +delighted with their jingling. I wish with all my heart, there were +enough of such discreet and ancient men, as might suffice for all the +parishes of England, and that they would undertake it. But this is but a +wish; I leave it to the wisdom of the State to do what it pleaseth. + +_B._ What did they next? + +_A._ Whereas the King had sent prisoners into places remote from London, +three persons that had been condemned for publishing seditious doctrine, +some in writing, some in public sermons; the Parliament (whether with +his Majesty’s consent or no, I have forgotten), caused them to be +released and to return to London; meaning, I think, to try how the +people would be pleased therewith, and, by consequence, how their +endeavours to draw the people’s affections from the King had already +prospered. When these three came through London, it was a kind of +triumph, the people flocking together to behold them, and receiving them +with such acclamations, and almost adoration, as if they had been let +down from heaven; insomuch as the Parliament was now sufficiently +assured of a great and tumultuous party, whensoever they should have +occasion to use it. On confidence whereof they proceeded to their next +plot, which was to deprive the King of such ministers as by their +wisdom, courage, and authority, they thought most able to prevent, or +oppose their further designs against the King. And first, the House of +Commons resolved to impeach the Earl of Strafford, Lord Lieutenant of +Ireland, of high-treason. + +_B._ What was that Earl of Strafford before he had that place? And how +had he offended the Parliament or given them cause to think he would be +their enemy? For I have heard that in former Parliaments he had been as +parliamentary as any other. + +_A._ His name was Sir Thomas Wentworth, a gentleman both by birth and +estate very considerable in his own county, which was Yorkshire; but +more considerable for his judgment in the public affairs, not only of +that county, but generally of the kingdom; and was therefore often +chosen for the Parliament, either as burgess for some borough, or knight +of the shire. For his principles of politics, they were the same that +were generally proceeded upon by all men else that were thought fit to +be chosen for the Parliament; which are commonly these: to take for the +rule of justice and government the judgments and acts of former +Parliaments, which are commonly called precedents; to endeavour to keep +the people from being subject to extra-parliamentary taxes of money, and +from being with parliamentary taxes too much oppressed; to preserve to +the people their liberty of body from the arbitrary power of the King +out of Parliament; to seek redress of grievances. + +_B._ What grievances? + +_A._ The grievances were commonly such as these; the King’s too much +liberality to some favourite; the too much power of some minister or +officer of the commonwealth; the misdemeanour of judges, civil or +spiritual; but especially all unparliamentary raising of money upon the +subjects. And commonly of late, till such grievances be redressed, they +refuse, or at least make great difficulty, to furnish the King with +money necessary for the most urgent occasions of the commonwealth. + +_B._ How then can a King discharge his duty as he ought to do, or the +subject know which of his masters he is to obey? For here are manifestly +two powers, which, when they chance to differ, cannot both be obeyed. + +_A._ It is true; but they have not often differed so much to the danger +of the commonwealth, as they have done in this Parliament, 1640. In all +the Parliaments of the late King Charles before the year 1640, my Lord +of Strafford did appear in opposition to the King’s demands as much as +any man, and was for that cause very much esteemed and cried up by the +people as a good patriot, and one that courageously stood up in defence +of their liberties; and for the same cause was so much the more hated, +when afterwards he endeavoured to maintain the royal and just authority +of his Majesty. + +_B._ How came he to change his mind so much as it seems he did? + +_A._ After the dissolution of the Parliament holden in the years 1627 +and 1628, the King, finding no money to be gotten from Parliaments which +he was not to buy with the blood of such servants and ministers as he +loved best, abstained a long time from calling any more, and had +abstained longer if the rebellion of the Scotch had not forced him to +it. During that Parliament the King made Sir Thomas Wentworth a baron, +recommended to him for his great ability, which was generally taken +notice of by the disservice he had done the King in former Parliaments, +but which might be useful for him in the times that came on: and not +long after he made him of the Council, and after that again Lieutenant +of Ireland, which place he discharged with great satisfaction and +benefit to his Majesty, and continued in that office, till, by the envy +and violence of the Lords and Commons of that unlucky Parliament of +1640, he died. In which year he was made general of the King’s forces +against the Scots that then entered into England, and the year before, +Earl of Strafford. The pacification being made, and the forces on both +sides disbanded, and the Parliament at Westminster now sitting, it was +not long before the House of Commons accused him to the House of Lords +for high-treason. + +_B._ There was no great probability of his being a traitor to the King, +from whose favour he had received his greatness, and from whose +protection he was to expect his safety. What was the treason they laid +to his charge? + +_A._ Many articles were drawn up against him, but the sum of them was +contained in these two: first, that he had traitorously endeavoured to +subvert the fundamental laws and government of the realm; and in stead +thereof to introduce an arbitrary and tyrannical government against law: +secondly, that he had laboured to subvert the rights of Parliaments, and +the ancient course of Parliamentary proceedings. + +_B._ Was this done by him without the knowledge of the King? + +_A._ No. + +_B._ Why then, if it were treason, did not the King himself call him in +question by his attorney? What had the House of Commons to do, without +his command, to accuse him in the House of Lords? They might have +complained to the King, if he had not known it before. I understand not +this law. + +_A._ Nor I. + +_B._ Had this been by any former statutes made treason? + +_A._ Not that I ever heard of; nor do I understand how anything can be +treason against the King, that the King, hearing and knowing, does not +think treason. But it was a piece of that Parliament’s artifice, to put +the word _traiterously_ to any article exhibited against any man whose +life they meant to take away. + +_B._ Was there no particular instance of action or words, out of which +they argued that endeavour of his to subvert the fundamental laws of +Parliament, whereof they accused him? + +_A._ Yes; they said he gave the King counsel to reduce the Parliament to +their duty by the Irish army, which not long before my Lord of Strafford +himself had caused to be levied there for the King’s service. But it was +never proved against him, that he advised the King to use it against the +Parliament. + +_B._ What are those laws that are called fundamental? For I understand +not how one law can be more fundamental than another, except only that +law of nature that binds us all to obey him, whosoever he be, whom +lawfully and for our own safety, we have promised to obey; nor any other +fundamental law to a King, but _salus populi_, the safety and well-being +of his people. + +_A._ This Parliament, in the use of their words, when they accused any +man, never regarded the signification of them, but the weight they had +to aggravate their accusation to the ignorant multitude, which think all +faults heinous that are expressed in heinous terms, if they hate the +person accused, as they did this man not only for being of the King’s +party, but also for deserting the Parliament’s party as an apostate. + +_B._ I pray you tell me also what they meant by arbitrary government, +which they seemed so much to hate? Is there any governor of a people in +the world that is forced to govern them, or forced to make this and that +law, whether he will or no? I think not: or if any be, he that forces +him does certainly make laws, and govern arbitrarily. + +_A._ That is true; and the true meaning of the Parliament was, that not +the King, but they themselves, should have the arbitrary government, not +only of England, but of Ireland, and, as it appeared by the event, of +Scotland also. + +_B._ How the King came by the government of Scotland and Ireland by +descent from his ancestors, everybody can tell; but if the King of +England and his heirs should chance (which God forbid) to fail, I cannot +imagine what title the Parliament of England can acquire thereby to +either of those nations. + +_A._ Yes; they will say they had been conquered anciently by the English +subjects' money. + +_B._ Like enough, and suitable to the rest of their impudence. + +_A._ Impudence in democratical assemblies does almost all that is done; +it is the goddess of rhetoric, and carries proof with it. For what +ordinary man will not, from so great boldness of affirmation, conclude +there is great probability in the thing affirmed? Upon this accusation +he was brought to his trial in Westminster Hall before the House of +Lords, and found guilty, and presently after declared traitor by a bill +of attainder, that is, by Act of Parliament. + +_B._ It is a strange thing that the Lords should be induced, upon so +light grounds, to give a sentence, or give their assent to a bill, so +prejudicial to themselves and their posterity. + +_A._ It was not well done, and yet, as it seems, not ignorantly; for +there is a clause in the bill, that it should not be taken hereafter for +an example, that is for a prejudice, in the like case hereafter. + +_B._ That is worse than the bill itself, and is a plain confession that +their sentence was unjust. For what harm is there in the examples of +just sentences? Besides, if hereafter the like case should happen, the +sentence is not at all made weaker by such a provision. + +A, Indeed I believe that the Lords, most of them, were not of themselves +willing to condemn him of treason; they were awed to it by the clamour +of common people that came to Westminster, crying out, _Justice, Justice +against the Earl of Strafford!_ The which were caused to flock thither +by some of the House of Commons, that were well assured, after the +triumphant welcome of Prynne, Burton, and Bastwick, to put the people +into tumult upon any occasion they desired. They were awed unto it +partly also by the House of Commons itself, which if it desired to undo +a Lord, had no more to do but to vote him a delinquent. + +_B._ A delinquent; what is that? A sinner is it not? Did they mean to +undo all sinners? + +_A._ By delinquent they meant only a man to whom they would do all the +hurt they could. But the Lords did not yet, I think, suspect they meant +to cashier their whole House. + +_B._ It is a strange thing the whole House of Lords should not perceive +that the ruin of the King’s power, and the weakening of it, was the +ruin, or weakening of themselves. For they could not think it likely +that the people ever meant to take the sovereignty from the King to give +it to them, who were few in number, and less in power than so many +Commoners, because less beloved by the people. + +_A._ But it seems not so strange to me. For the Lords, for their +personal abilities, as they were no less, so also they were no more +skilful in the public affairs, than the knights and burgesses. For there +is no reason to think, that if one that is to-day a knight of the shire +in the lower House, be to-morrow made a Lord and a member of the higher +House, he is therefore wiser than he was before. They are all, of both +Houses, prudent and able men as any in the land, in the business of +their private estates, which require nothing but diligence and natural +wit to govern them. But for the government of a commonwealth, neither +wit, nor prudence, nor diligence, is enough, without infallible rules +and the true science of equity and justice. + +_B._ If this be true, it is impossible any commonwealth in the world, +whether monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy, should continue long +without change, or sedition tending to change, either of the government +or of the governors. + +_A._ It is true; nor have any the greatest commonwealths in the world +been long free from sedition. The Greeks had for awhile their petty +kings, and then by sedition came to be petty commonwealths; and then +growing to be greater commonwealths, by sedition again became +monarchies; and all for want of rules of justice for the common people +to take notice of; which if the people had known in the beginning of +every of these seditions, the ambitious persons could never have had the +hope to disturb their government after it had been once settled. For +ambition can do little without hands, and few hands it would have, if +the common people were as diligently instructed in the true principles +of their duty, as they are terrified and amazed by preachers, with +fruitless and dangerous doctrines concerning the nature of man’s will, +and many other philosophical points that tend not at all to the +salvation of the soul in the world to come, nor to their ease in this +life, but only to the direction towards the clergy of that duty which +they ought to perform to the King. + +_B._ For aught I see, all the states of Christendom will be subject to +these fits of rebellion, as long as the world lasteth. + +_A._ Like enough; and yet the fault, as I have said, may be easily +mended, by mending the Universities. + +_B._ How long had the Parliament now sitten? + +_A._ It began November the 3d, 1640. My Lord of Strafford was impeached +of treason before the Lords, November the 12th, sent to the Tower +November the 22d, his trial began March the 22d, and ended April the +13th. After his trial he was voted guilty of high-treason in the House +of Commons, and after that in the House of Lords, May the 6th, and on +the 12th of May beheaded. + +_B._ Great expedition; but could not the King, for all that, have saved +him by a pardon? + +_A._ The King had heard all that passed at his trial, and had declared +he was unsatisfied concerning the justice of their sentence. And, I +think, notwithstanding the danger of his own person from the fury of the +people, and that he was counselled to give way to his execution, not +only by such as he most relied on, but also by the Earl of Strafford +himself, he would have pardoned him, if that could have preserved him +against the tumult raised and countenanced by the Parliament itself, for +the terrifying of those they thought might favour him. And yet the King +himself did not stick to confess afterwards, that he had done amiss, in +that he did not rescue him. + +_B._ It was an argument of good disposition in the King. But I never +read that Augustus Cæsar acknowledged that he had done a fault, in +abandoning Cicero to the fury of his enemy Antonius: perhaps because +Cicero, having been of the contrary faction to his father, had done +Augustus no service at all out of favour to him, but only out of enmity +to Antonius, and out of love to the senate, that is indeed out of love +to himself that swayed the senate; as it is very likely the Earl of +Strafford came over to the King’s party for his own ends, having been so +much against the King in former Parliaments. + +_A._ We cannot safely judge of men’s intentions. But, I have observed +often, that such as seek preferment, by their stubbornness have missed +of their aim; and on the other side, that those princes that with +preferment are forced to buy the obedience of their subjects, are +already, or must be soon after, in a very weak condition. For in a +market where honour and power is to be bought with stubbornness, there +will be a great many as able to buy as my Lord Strafford was. + +_B._ You have read, that when Hercules fighting with the Hydra, had cut +off any one of his many heads, there still arose two other heads in its +place; and yet at last he cut them off all. + +_A._ The story is told false. For Hercules at first did not cut off +those heads, but bought them off; and afterwards, when he saw it did him +no good, then he cut them off, and got the victory. + +_B._ What did they next? + +_A._ After the first impeachment of the Earl of Strafford, the House of +Commons, upon December the 18th, accused the Archbishop of Canterbury +also of high-treason, that is, of design to introduce arbitrary +government, &c.; for which he was, February the 18th, sent to the Tower; +but his trial and execution were deferred a long time, till January the +10th, 1643, for the entertainment of the Scots, that were come into +England to aid the Parliament. + +_B._ Why did the Scots think there was so much danger in the Archbishop +of Canterbury? He was not a man of war, nor a man able to bring an army +into the field; but he was perhaps a very great politician. + +_A._ That did not appear by any remarkable event of his counsels. I +never heard but he was a very honest man for his morals, and a very +zealous promoter of the Church-government by bishops, and that desired +to have the service of God performed, and the house of God adorned, as +suitably as was possible to the honour we ought to do to the Divine +Majesty. But to bring, as he did, into the State his former +controversies, I mean his squabblings in the University about free-will, +and his standing upon punctilios concerning the service-book and its +rubrics, was not, in my opinion, an argument of his sufficiency in +affairs of state. About the same time they passed an act, which the King +consented to, for a triennial Parliament, wherein was enacted, that +after the present Parliament there should be a Parliament called by the +King within the space of three years, and so from three years to three +years, to meet at Westminster upon a certain day named in the act. + +_B._ But what if the King did not call it, finding it perhaps +inconvenient, or hurtful to the safety or peace of his people, which God +hath put into his charge? For I do not well comprehend how any sovereign +can well keep a people in order when his hands are tied, or when he hath +any other obligation upon him than the benefit of those he governs; and +at this time, for any thing you have told me, they acknowledged the King +for their sovereign. + +_A._ I know not; but such was the act. And it was further enacted, that +if the King did it not by his own command, then the Lord Chancellor or +the Lord Keeper for the time being, should send out the writs of +summons; and if the Chancellor refused, then the Sheriffs of the several +counties should of themselves, in their next county-courts before the +day set down for the Parliament’s meeting, proceed to the election of +the members for the said Parliament. + +_B._ But what if the sheriffs refused? + +_A._ I think they were to be sworn to it: but for that, and other +particulars, I refer you to the act. + +_B._ To whom should they be sworn, when there is no Parliament? + +_A._ No doubt but to the King, whether there be a Parliament sitting or +no. + +_B._ Then the King may release them of their oath. + +_A._ Besides, they obtained of the King the putting down the +Star-chamber, and the High-Commission Courts. + +_B._ Besides, if the King, upon the refusal, should fall upon them in +anger; who shall (the Parliament not sitting) protect either the +Chancellor or the sheriffs in their disobedience? + +_A._ I pray you do not ask me any reason of such things I understand no +better than you. I tell you only an act passed to that purpose, and was +signed by the King in the middle of February, a little before the +Archbishop was sent to the Tower. Besides this bill, the two Houses of +Parliament agreed upon another, wherein it was enacted, that the present +Parliament should continue till both the Houses did consent to the +dissolution of it; which bill also the King signed the same day he +signed the warrant for the execution of the Earl of Strafford. + +_B._ What a great progress made the Parliament towards the ends of the +most seditious Members of both Houses in so little time! They sat down +in November, and now it was May; in this space of time, which is but +half a year, they won from the King the adherence which was due to him +from his people; they drove his faithfullest servants from him; beheaded +the Earl of Strafford; imprisoned the Archbishop of Canterbury; obtained +a triennial Parliament after their own dissolution, and a continuance of +their own sitting as long as they listed: which last amounted to a total +extinction of the King’s right, in case that such a grant were valid; +which I think it is not, unless the Sovereignty itself be in plain terms +renounced, which it was not. But what money, by way of subsidy or +otherwise, did they grant the King, in recompense of all these his large +concessions? + +_A._ None at all; but often promised they would make him the most +glorious King that ever was in England; which were words that passed +well enough for well meaning with the common people. + +_B._ But the Parliament was contented now? For I cannot imagine what +they should desire more from the King, than he had now granted them. + +_A._ Yes; they desired the whole and absolute sovereignty, and to change +the monarchical government into an oligarchy; that is to say, to make +the Parliament, consisting of a few Lords and about four hundred +Commoners, absolute in the sovereignty, for the present, and shortly +after to lay the House of Lords aside. For this was the design of the +Presbyterian ministers, who taking themselves to be, by divine right, +the only lawful governors of the Church, endeavoured to bring the same +form of Government into the civil state. And as the spiritual laws were +to be made by their synods, so the civil laws should be made by the +House of Commons; who, as they thought, would no less be ruled by them +afterwards, than they formerly had been: wherein they were deceived, and +found themselves outgone by their own disciples, though not in malice, +yet in wit. + +_B._ What followed after this? + +_A._ In August following, the King supposing he had now sufficiently +obliged the Parliament to proceed no further against him, took a journey +into Scotland, to satisfy his subjects there, as he had done here; +intending, perhaps, so to gain their good wills, that in case the +Parliament here should levy arms against him, they should not be aided +by the Scots: wherein he also was deceived. For though they seemed +satisfied with what he did, whereof one thing was his giving way to the +abolition of episcopacy; yet afterwards they made a league with the +Parliament, and for money, when the King began to have the better of the +Parliament, invaded England in the Parliament’s quarrel. But this was a +year or two after. + +_B._ Before you go any further, I desire to know the ground and original +of that right, which either the House of Lords, or House of Commons, or +both together, now pretend to. + +_A._ It is a question of things so long past, that they are now +forgotten. Nor have we any thing to conjecture by, but the records of +our own nation, and some small and obscure fragments of Roman histories: +and for the records, seeing they are of things done only, sometimes +justly, sometimes unjustly, you can never by them know what right they +had, but only what right they pretended. + +_B._ Howsoever, let me know what light we have in this matter from the +Roman histories. + +_A._ It would be too long, and an useless digression, to cite all the +ancient authors that speak of the forms of those commonwealths, which +were amongst our first ancestors the Saxons and other Germans, and of +other nations, from whom we derive the titles of honour now in use in +England; nor will it be possible to derive from them any argument of +right, but only examples of fact, which, by the ambition of potent +subjects, have been oftener unjust than otherwise. And for those Saxons +or Angles, that in ancient times by several invasions made themselves +masters of this nation, they were not in themselves one body of a +commonwealth, but only a league of divers petty German lords and states, +such as was the Grecian army in the Trojan war, without other obligation +than that which proceeded from their own fear and weakness. Nor were +those lords, for the most part, the sovereigns at home in their own +country, but chosen by the people for the captains of the forces they +brought with them. And therefore it was not without equity, when they +had conquered any part of the land, and made some one of them king +thereof, that the rest should have greater privileges than the common +people and soldiers: amongst which privileges, a man may easily +conjecture this to be one; that they should be made acquainted, and be +of council, with him that hath the sovereignty in matter of government, +and have the greatest and most honourable offices both in peace and war. +But because there can be no government where there is more than one +sovereign, it cannot be inferred that they had a right to oppose the +King’s resolutions by force, nor to enjoy those honours and places +longer than they should continue good subjects. And we find that the +Kings of England did, upon every great occasion, call them together by +the name of discreet and wise men of the kingdom, and hear their +counsel, and make them judges of all causes, that during their sitting +were brought before them. But as he summoned them at his own pleasure, +so had he also ever the power at his pleasure to dissolve them. The +Normans also, that descended from the Germans, as we did, had the same +customs in this particular; and by this means, this privilege of the +lords to be of the King’s great council, and when they were assembled, +to be the highest of the King’s courts of justice, continued still after +the Conquest to this day. But though there be amongst the lords divers +names or titles of honour, yet they have their privilege only by the +name of baron, a name received from the ancient Gauls; amongst whom, +that name signified the King’s man, or rather one of his great men: by +which it seems to me, that though they gave him counsel when he required +it, yet they had no right to make war upon him if he did not follow it. + +_B._ When began first the House of Commons to be part of the King’s +great council? + +_A._ I do not doubt but that before the Conquest some discreet men, and +known to be so by the King, were called by special writ to be of the +same council, though they were not lords; but that is nothing to the +House of Commons. The knights of shires and burgesses were never called +to Parliament, for aught that I know, till the beginning of the reign of +Edward I, or the latter end of the reign of Henry III, immediately after +the misbehaviour of the barons; and, for aught any man knows, were +called on purpose to weaken that power of the lords, which they had so +freshly abused. Before the time of Henry III, the lords were descended, +most of them, from such as in the invasions and conquests of the Germans +were peers and fellow-kings, till one was made king of them all; and +their tenants were their subjects, as it is at this day with the lords +of France. But after the time of Henry III, the kings began to make +lords in the place of them whose issue failed, titulary only, without +the lands belonging to their title; and by that means, their tenants +being no longer bound to serve them in the wars, they grew every day +less and less able to make a party against the King, though they +continued still to be his great council. And as their power decreased, +so the power of the House of Commons increased; but I do not find they +were part of the King’s council at all, nor judges over other men; +though it cannot be denied, but a King may ask their advice, as well as +the advice of any other. But I do not find that the end of their +summoning was to give advice, but only, in case they had any petitions +for redress of grievances, to be ready there with them whilst the King +had his great council about him. But neither they nor the lords could +present to the King, as a grievance, that the King took upon him to make +the laws; to choose his own privy-counsellors; to raise money and +soldiers; to defend the peace and honour of the kingdom; to make +captains in his army; to make governors of his castles, whom he pleased. +For this had been to tell the King, that it was one of their grievances +that he was King. + +_B._ What did the Parliament do, whilst the King was in Scotland? + +_A._ The King went in August; after which, the Parliament, September the +8th, adjourned till the 20th of October; and the King returned about the +end of November following. In which time the most seditious of both +Houses, and which had designed the change of government and to cast off +monarchy, but yet had not wit enough to set up any other government in +its place, and consequently left it to the chance of war, made a cabal +amongst themselves; in which they projected how, by seconding one +another, to govern the House of Commons, and invented how to put the +kingdom, by the power of that House, into a rebellion, which they then +called a posture of defence against such dangers from abroad, as they +themselves should feign and publish. Besides, whilst the King was in +Scotland, the Irish Papists got together a great party, with an +intention to massacre the Protestants there, and had laid a design for +the seizing, on October the 23rd, of Dublin Castle, where the King’s +officers of the government of that country made their residence; and had +effected it, had it not been discovered the night before. The manner of +the discovery, and the murders they committed in the country afterwards, +I need not tell you, since the whole story of it is extant. + +_B._ I wonder they did not expect and provide for a rebellion in +Ireland, as soon as they began to quarrel with the King in England. For +was there any body so ignorant, as not to know that the Irish Papists +did long for a change of religion there, as well as the Presbyterians in +England? Or, that in general, the Irish nation did hate the name of +subjection to England, nor would longer be quiet, than they feared an +army out of England to chastise them? What better time then could they +take for their rebellion than this, wherein they were encouraged, not +only by our weakness caused by this division between the King and his +Parliament, but also by the example of the Presbyterians, both of the +Scotch and English nation? But what did the Parliament do upon this +occasion, in the King’s absence? + +_A._ Nothing; but consider what use they might make of it to their own +ends; partly, by imputing it to the King’s evil counsellors, and partly, +by occasion thereof to demand of the King the power of pressing and +ordering soldiers; which power whosoever has, has also, without doubt, +the whole sovereignty. + +_B._ When came the King back? + +_A._ He came back the 25th of November; and was welcomed with the +acclamations of the common people, as much as if he had been the most +beloved of all the Kings that were before him; but found not a reception +by the Parliament, answerable to it. They presently began to pick new +quarrels against him, out of every thing he said to them. December the +2nd, the King called together both Houses of Parliament, and then did +only recommend unto them the raising of succours for Ireland. + +_B._ What quarrel could they pick out of that? + +_A._ None: but in order thereto, as they may pretend, they had a bill in +agitation to assert the power of levying and pressing soldiers to the +two Houses of the Lords and Commons; which was as much as to take from +the King the power of the militia, which is in effect the whole +sovereign power. For he that hath the power of levying and commanding +the soldiers, has all other rights of sovereignty which he shall please +to claim. The King, hearing of it, called the Houses of Parliament +together again, on December the 14th, and then pressed again the +business of Ireland: (as there was need; for all this while the Irish +were murdering the English in Ireland, and strengthening themselves +against the forces they expected to come out of England): and withal, +told them he took notice of the bill in agitation for pressing of +soldiers, and that he was contented it should pass with a _salvo jure_ +both for him and them, because the present time was unseasonable to +dispute it in. + +_B._ What was there unreasonable in this? + +_A._ Nothing: what is unreasonable is one question, what they quarrelled +at is another. They quarrelled at this: that his Majesty took notice of +the bill, while it was in debate in the House of Lords, before it was +presented to him in the course of Parliament; and also that he showed +himself displeased with those that propounded the said bill; both which +they declared to be against the privileges of Parliament, and petitioned +the King to give them reparation against those by whose evil counsel he +was induced to it, that they might receive condign punishment. + +_B._ This was cruel proceeding. Do not the Kings of England use to sit +in the Lords' House when they please? And was not this bill in debate +then in the House of Lords? It is a strange thing that a man should be +lawfully in the company of men, where he must needs hear and see what +they say and do, and yet must not take notice of it so much as to the +same company; for though the King was not present at the debate itself, +yet it was lawful for any of the Lords to make him acquainted with it. +Any one of the House of Commons, though not present at a proposition or +debate in the House, nevertheless hearing of it from some of his +fellow-members, may certainly not only take notice of it, but also speak +to it in the House of Commons: but to make the King give up his friends +and counsellors to them, to be put to death, banishment, or +imprisonment, for their good-will to him, was such a tyranny over a +king, no king ever exercised over any subject but in cases of treason or +murder, and seldom then. + +_A._ Presently hereupon began a kind of war between the pens of the +Parliament and those of the secretaries, and other able men that were +with the King. For upon the 15th of December they sent to the King a +paper called _A Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdom_, and with it a +petition; both which they caused to be published. In the remonstrance +they complained of certain mischievous designs of a malignant party, +then, before the beginning of the Parliament, grown ripe; and did set +forth what means had been used for the preventing of it by the wisdom of +the Parliament; what rubs they had found therein; what course was fit to +be taken for restoring and establishing the ancient honour, greatness, +and safety, of the Crown and nation. + +And first, of these designs the promoters and actors were, they said, +Jesuited Papists: + +Secondly, the bishops, and that part of the clergy that cherish +formality as a support of their own ecclesiastical tyranny and +usurpation: + +Thirdly, counsellors and courtiers, that for private ends, they said, +had engaged themselves to further the interests of some foreign princes. + +_B._ It may very well be, that some of the bishops, and also some of the +court, may have, in pursuit of their private interest, done something +indiscreetly, and perhaps wickedly. Therefore I pray you tell me in +particular what their crimes were: for methinks the King should not have +connived at anything against his own supreme authority. + +_A._ The Parliament were not very keen against them that were against +the King; they made no doubt but all they did was by the King’s command; +but accused thereof the bishops, counsellors, and courtiers, as being a +more mannerly way of accusing the King himself, and defaming him to his +subjects. For the truth is, the charge they brought against them was so +general as not to be called an accusation, but railing. As first, they +said they nourished questions of prerogative and liberty between the +King and his people, to the end that seeming much addicted to his +Majesty’s service, they might get themselves into places of greatest +trust and power in the kingdom. + +_B._ How could this be called an accusation, in which there is no fact +for any accusers to apply their proofs to, or their witnesses. For +granting that these questions of prerogative had been moved by them, who +can prove that their end was to gain to themselves and friends the +places of trust and power in the kingdom? + +_A._ A second accusation was, that they endeavoured to suppress the +purity and power of religion. + +_B._ That is canting; it is not in man’s power to suppress the power of +religion. + +_A._ They meant that they suppressed the doctrine of the Presbyterians; +that is to say, the very foundation of the then Parliament’s treacherous +pretensions. + +A third, that they cherished Arminians, Papists, and libertines (by +which they meant the common Protestants, which meddle not with +disputes), to the end they might compose a body fit to act according to +their counsels and resolutions. + +A fourth, that they endeavoured to put the King upon other courses of +raising money, than by the ordinary way of Parliaments. + +Judge whether these may be properly called accusations, or not rather +spiteful reproaches of the King’s government. + +_B._ Methinks this last was a very great fault. For what good could +there be in putting the King upon an odd course of getting money, when +the Parliament was willing to supply him, as far as to the security of +the kingdom, or to the honour of the King, should be necessary? + +_A._ But I told you before, they would give him none, but with a +condition he should cut off the heads of whom they pleased, how +faithfully soever they had served him. And if he would have sacrificed +all his friends to their ambition, yet they would have found other +excuses for denying him subsidies; for they were resolved to take from +him the sovereign power to themselves; which they could never do without +taking great care that he should have no money at all. In the next +place, they put into the remonstrance, as faults of them whose counsel +the King followed, all those things which since the beginning of the +King’s reign were by them misliked, whether faults or not, and whereof +they were not able to judge for want of knowledge of the causes and +motives that induced the King to do them, and were known only to the +King himself and such of his privy-council as he revealed them to. + +_B._ But what were those particular pretended faults? + +_A._ 1. The dissolution of his first Parliament at Oxford. 2. The +dissolution of his second Parliament, being in the second year of his +reign. 3. The dissolution of his Parliament in the fourth year of his +reign. 4. The fruitless expedition against Calais. 5. The peace made +with Spain, whereby the Palatine’s cause was deserted, and left to +chargeable and hopeless treaties. 6. The sending of commissions to raise +money by way of loan. 7. Raising of ship-money. 8. Enlargement of +forests, contrary to Magna Charta. 9. The design of engrossing all the +gunpowder into one hand, and keeping it in the Tower of London. 10. A +design to bring in the use of brass money. 11. The fines, imprisonments, +stigmatizings, mutilations, whippings, pillories, gags, confinements, +and banishments, by sentence in the Court of Star-chamber. 12. The +displacing of judges. 13. Illegal acts of the Council-table. 14. The +arbitrary and illegal power of the Earl Marshal’s Court. 15. The abuses +in Chancery, Exchequer-chamber, and Court of Wards. 16. The selling of +titles of honour, of judges, and serjeants' places, and other offices. +17. The insolence of bishops and other clerks, in suspensions, +excommunications, deprivations, and degradations, of divers painful, and +learned, and pious ministers. + +_B._ Were there any such ministers degraded, deprived, or +excommunicated? + +_A._ I cannot tell. But I remember I have heard threatened divers +painful, unlearned, and seditious ministers. + +18. The excess of severity of the High Commission-Court. 19. The +preaching before the King against the property of the subject, and for +the prerogative of the King above the law. And divers other petty +quarrels they had to the government, which though they were laid upon +this faction, yet they knew they would fall upon the King himself in the +judgment of the people, to whom, by printing, it was communicated. + +Again, after the dissolution of the Parliament May the 5th, 1640, they +find other faults; as the dissolution itself; the imprisoning some +members of both Houses; a forced loan of money attempted in London; the +continuance of the Convocation, when the Parliament was ended; and the +favour shewed to Papists by Secretary Windebank and others. + +_B._ All this will go current with common people for misgovernment, and +for faults of the King, though some of them were misfortunes; and both +the misfortunes and the misgovernment, if any were, were the faults of +the Parliament; who, by denying to give him money, did both frustrate +his attempts abroad, and put him upon those extraordinary ways, which +they call illegal, of raising money at home. + +_A._ You see what a heap of evils they have raised to make a show of +ill-government to the people, which they second with an enumeration of +the many services they have done the King in overcoming a great many of +them, though not all, and in divers other things; and say, that though +they had contracted a debt to the Scots of 220,000_l._ and granted six +subsidies, and a bill of poll-money worth six subsidies more, yet that +God had so blessed the endeavours of this Parliament, that the kingdom +was a gainer by it: and then follows the catalogue of those good things +they had done for the King and kingdom. For the kingdom they had done, +they said, these things: they had abolished ship-money; they had taken +away coat and conduct money, and other military charges, which, they +said, amounted to little less than the ship-money; that they suppressed +all monopolies, which they reckoned above a million yearly saved by the +subject; that they had quelled living grievances, meaning evil +counsellors and actors, by the death of my Lord of Strafford, by the +flight of the Chancellor Finch, and of Secretary Windebank, by the +imprisonment of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and of Judge Bartlet, and +the impeachment of other bishops and judges; that they had passed a bill +for a triennial Parliament, and another for the continuance of the +present Parliament, till they should think fit to dissolve themselves. + +_B._ That is to say, for ever, if they be suffered. But the sum of all +these things, which they had done for the kingdom, is, that they had +left it without government, without strength, without money, without +law, and without good counsel. + +_A._ They reckoned, also, putting down of the High-Commission, and the +abating of the power of the Council-table, and of the bishops and their +courts; the taking away of unnecessary ceremonies in religion; removing +of ministers from their livings, that were not of their faction, and +putting in such as were. + +_B._ All this was but their own, and not the kingdom’s business. + +_A._ The good they had done the King, was first, they said, the giving +of 25,000_l._ a month for the relief of the northern counties. + +_B._ What need of relief had the northern counties, more than the rest +of the counties of England? + +_A._ Yes; in the northern counties were quartered the Scotch army, which +the Parliament called in to oppose the King, and consequently their +quarter was to be discharged. + +_B._ True; but by the Parliament that called them in. + +_A._ But they say no; and that this money was given to the King, because +he is bound to protect his subjects. + +_B._ He is no further bound to that, than they to give him money +wherewithal to do it. This is very great impudence; to raise an army +against the King, and with that army to oppress their fellow-subjects; +and then require that the King should relieve them, that is to say, be +at the charge of paying the army that was raised to fight against him. + +_A._ Nay, further; they put to the King’s account the 300,000_l._ given +to the Scots, without which they would not have invaded England; besides +many other things, that I now remember not. + +_B._ I did not think there had been so great impudence and villainy in +mankind. + +_A._ You have not observed the world long enough to see all that is ill. +Such was their remonstrance, as I have told you. With it they sent a +petition, containing three points: 1. That his Majesty would deprive the +bishops of their votes in Parliament, and remove such oppressions in +religion, church-government, and discipline, as they had brought in; 2. +That he should remove from his council all such as should promote the +people’s grievances, and employ in his great and public affairs such as +the Parliament should confide in; 3. That he would not give away the +lands escheated to the Crown by the rebellion in Ireland. + +_B._ This last point, methinks, was not wisely put in at this time: it +should have been reserved till they had subdued the rebels, against whom +there were yet no forces sent over. It is like selling the lion’s skin +before they had killed him. But what answer was made to the other two +propositions? + +_A._ What answer should be made, but a denial? About the same time the +King himself exhibited articles against six persons of the Parliament, +five whereof were of the House of Commons and one of the House of Lords, +accusing them of high-treason; and upon the 4th of January, went himself +to the House of Commons to demand those five of them. But private notice +having been given by some treacherous person about the King, they had +absented themselves; and by that means frustrated his Majesty’s +intentions. And after he was gone, the House making a heinous matter of +it, and a high breach of their privileges, adjourned themselves into +London, there to sit as a general committee, pretending they were not +safe at Westminster: (for the King, when he went to the House to demand +those persons, had somewhat more attendance with him, but not otherwise +armed than his servants used to be, than he ordinarily had): and would +not be pacified, though the King did afterwards waive the prosecution of +those persons, unless he would also discover to them those that gave him +counsel to go in that manner to the Parliament House, to the end they +might receive condign punishment; which was the word they used instead +of cruelty. + +_B._ This was a harsh demand. Was it not enough that the King should +forbear his enemies, but also that he must betray his friends? If they +thus tyrannize over the King before they have gotten the sovereign power +into their hands, how will they tyrannize over their fellow subjects +when they have gotten it? + +_A._ So as they did. + +_B._ How long stayed that committee in London? + +_A._ Not above two or three days; and then were brought from London to +the Parliament House by water in great triumph, guarded with a +tumultuous number of armed men, there to sit in security in despite of +the King, and make traitorous acts against him, such and as many as they +listed; and under favour of these tumults, to frighten away from the +House of Peers all such as were not of their own faction. For at this +time the rabble was so insolent, that scarce any of the bishops durst go +to the House for fear of violence upon their persons: in so much as +twelve of them excused themselves of coming thither; and by way of +petition to the King, remonstrated that they were not permitted to go +quietly to the performance of that duty, and protesting against all +determinations, as of none effect, that should pass in the House of +Lords during their forced absence. Which the House of Commons taking +hold of, sent up to the Peers one of their members, to accuse them of +high-treason. Whereupon ten of them were sent to the Tower; after which +time there were no more words of their high-treason; but there passed a +bill by which they were deprived of their votes in Parliament, and to +this bill they got the King’s assent. And, in the beginning of September +after, they voted that the bishops should have no more to do in the +government of the Church; but to this they had not the King’s assent, +the war being now begun. + +_B._ What made the Parliament so averse to episcopacy; and especially +the House of Lords, whereof the bishops were members? For I see no +reason why they should do it to gratify a number of poor parish priests, +that were Presbyterians, and that were never likely any way to serve the +Lords; but, on the contrary, to do their best to pull down their power, +and subject them to their synods and classes. + +_A._ For the Lords, very few of them did perceive the intentions of the +Presbyterians; and, besides that, they durst not, I believe, oppose the +Lower House. + +_B._ But why were the Lower House so earnest against them? + +_A._ Because they meant to make use of their tenets, and with pretended +sanctity to make the King and his party odious to the people, by whose +help they were to set up democracy and depose the King, or to let him +have the title only so long as he should act for their purposes. But not +only the Parliament, but in a manner all the people of England, were +their enemies, upon the account of their behaviour, as being, they said, +too imperious. This was all that was colourably laid to their charge; +the main cause of pulling them down, was the envy of the Presbyterians, +that incensed the people against them, and against episcopacy itself. + +_B._ How would the Presbyterians have the Church to be governed? + +_A._ By national and provincial synods. + +_B._ Is not this to make the national assembly an archbishop, and the +provincial assemblies so many bishops? + +_A._ Yes; but every minister shall have the delight of sharing the +government, and consequently of being able to be revenged on them that +do not admire their learning and help to fill their purses, and win to +their service them that do. + +_B._ It is a hard case, that there should be two factions to trouble the +commonwealth, without any interest in it of their own, other than every +particular man may have; and that their quarrels should be only about +opinions, that is, about who has the most learning; as if their learning +ought to be the rule of governing all the world. What is it they are +learned in? Is it politics and rules of state? I know, it is called +divinity; but I hear almost nothing preached but matter of philosophy. +For religion in itself admits no controversy. It is a law of the +kingdom, and ought not to be disputed. I do not think they pretend to +speak with God and know his will by any other way than reading the +Scriptures, which we also do. + +_A._ Yes, some of them do, and give themselves out for prophets by +extraordinary inspiration. But the rest pretend only, for their +advancement to benefices and charge of souls, a greater skill in the +Scriptures than other men have, by reason of their breeding in the +Universities, and knowledge there gotten of the Latin tongue, and some +also of the Greek and Hebrew tongues, wherein the Scripture was written; +besides their knowledge of natural philosophy, which is there publicly +taught. + +_B._ As for the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues, it was once, to the +detection of Roman fraud, and to the ejection of the Romish power, very +profitable, or rather necessary; but now that is done, and we have the +Scripture in English, and preaching in English, I see no great need of +Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. I should think myself better qualified by +understanding well the languages of our neighbours, French, Dutch, and +Italian. I think it was never seen in the world, before the power of +popes was set up, that philosophy was much conducing to power in a +commonwealth. + +_A._ But philosophy, together with divinity, have very much conduced to +the advancement of the professors thereof to places of the greatest +authority, next to the authority of kings themselves, in most of the +ancient kingdoms of the world; as is manifestly to be seen in the +history of those times. + +_B._ I pray you cite me some of the authors and places. + +_A._ First, what were the Druids of old time in Britanny and France? +What authority these had you may see in Cæsar, Strabo, and others, and +especially in Diodorus Siculus, the greatest antiquary perhaps that ever +was; who speaking of the Druids, whom he calls Sarovides, in France, +says thus:—“There be also amongst them certain philosophers and +theologians, that are exceedingly honoured, whom they also use as +prophets. These men, by their skill in augury and inspection into the +bowels of the beasts sacrificed, foretell what is to come, and have the +multitude obedient to them.” And a little after,—“It is a custom amongst +them, that no man may sacrifice without a philosopher; because, say +they, men ought not to present their thanks to the Gods, but by them +that know the divine nature, and are as it were of the same language +with them; and that all good things ought by such as these to be prayed +for.” + +_B._ I can hardly believe that those Druids were very skilful, either in +natural philosophy, or moral. + +_A._ Nor I; for they held and taught the transmigration of souls from +one body to another, as did Pythagoras; which opinion whether they took +from him, or he from them, I cannot tell. + +What were the Magi in Persia, but philosophers and astrologers? You know +how they came to find our Saviour by the conduct of a star, either from +Persia itself, or from some country more eastward than Judea. Were not +these in great authority in their country? And are they not in most +parts of Christendom thought to have been Kings? + +Egypt hath been thought by many, the most ancient kingdom and nation of +the world, and their priests had the greatest power in civil affairs, +that any subjects ever had in any nation. And what were they but +philosophers and divines? Concerning whom, the same Diodorus Siculus +says thus: “The whole country of Egypt being divided into three parts, +the body of the priests have one, as being of most credit with the +people both for their devotion towards the Gods, and also for their +understanding gotten by education;” and presently after, “For generally +these men, in the greatest affairs of all, are the King’s counsellors, +partly executing, and partly informing and advising; foretelling him +also, by their skill in astrology and art in the inspection of +sacrifices, the things that are to come, and reading to him out of their +holy books such of the actions there recorded as are profitable for him +to know. It is not there as in Greece, one man or one woman that has the +priesthood; but they are many that attend the honours and sacrifices of +the Gods, and leave the same employment to their posterity, which, next +to the King, have the greatest power and authority.” + +Concerning the judicature amongst the Egyptians, he saith thus: “From +out of the most eminent cities, Hieropolis, Thebes, and Memphis, they +choose judges, which are a council not inferior to that of Areopagus in +Athens, or that of the senate in Lacedæmon. When they are met, being in +number thirty, they choose one from amongst themselves to be +chief-justice, and the city whereof he is, sendeth another in his +place.” This chief-justice wore about his neck, hung in a gold chain, a +jewel of precious stones, the name of which jewel was _truth_; which, +when the chief-justice had put on, then began the pleading, &c.; and +when the judges had agreed on the sentence, then did the chief-justice +put this jewel of truth to one of the pleas. You see now what power was +acquired in civil matters by the conjuncture of philosophy and divinity. + +Let us come now to the commonwealth of the Jews. Was not the priesthood +in a family, namely, the Levites, as well as the priesthood of Egypt? +Did not the high-priest give judgment by the breast-plate of Urim and +Thummim? Look upon the kingdom of Assyria, and the philosophers and +Chaldeans. Had they not lands and cities belonging to their family, even +in Abraham’s time, who dwelt, you know, in Ur of the Chaldeans. Of these +the same author says thus: “The Chaldeans are a sect in politics, like +to that of the Egyptian priests; for being ordained for the service of +the Gods, they spend the whole time of their life in philosophy; being +of exceeding great reputation in astrology, and pretending much also to +prophecy, foretelling things to come by purifications and sacrifices, +and to find out by certain incantations the preventing of harm, and the +bringing to pass of good. They have also skill in augury, and in the +interpretation of dreams and wonders, nor are they unskilful in the art +of foretelling by the inwards of beasts sacrificed; and have their +learning not as the Greeks; for the philosophy of the Chaldeans goes to +their family by tradition, and the son receives it from his father.” + +From Assyria let us pass into India, and see what esteem the +philosophers had there. “The whole multitude,” says Diodorus, “of the +Indians, is divided into seven parts; whereof the first, is the body of +philosophers; for number the least, but for eminence the first; for they +are free from taxes, and as they are not masters of others, so are no +others masters of them. By private men they are called to the sacrifices +and to the care of burials of the dead, as being thought most beloved of +the Gods and skilful in the doctrine concerning hell; and for this +employment receive gifts and honours very considerable. They are also of +great use to the people of India; for being taken at the beginning of +the year into the great assembly, they foretell them of great droughts, +great rains, also of winds, and of sicknesses, and of whatsoever is +profitable for them to know beforehand.” + +The same author, concerning the laws of the Æthiopians, saith thus: “The +laws of the Æthiopians seem very different from those of other nations, +and especially about the election of their Kings. For the priests +propound some of the chief men amongst them, named in a catalogue, and +whom the God (which, according to a certain custom, is carried about to +feastings) does accept of; him the multitude elect for their King, and +presently adore and honour him as a God, put into the government by +divine providence. The King being chosen, he has the manner of his life +limited to him by the laws, and does all other things according to the +custom of the country, neither rewarding nor punishing any man otherwise +than from the beginning is established amongst them by law. Nor use they +to put any man to death, though he be condemned to it, but to send some +officer to him with a token of death; who seeing the token, goes +presently to his house, and kills himself presently after. But the +strangest thing of all is, that which they do concerning the death of +their Kings. For the priests that live in Meroe, and spend their time +about the worship and honour of the Gods, and are in greatest authority; +when they have a mind to it, send a messenger to the King to bid him +die, for that the Gods have given such order, and that the commandments +of the immortals are not by any means to be neglected by those who are, +by nature, mortal; using also other speeches to him, which men of simple +judgment, and that have not reason enough to dispute against those +unnecessary commands, as being educated in an old and indelible custom, +are content to admit of. Therefore in former times the Kings did obey +the priests, not as mastered by force and arms, but as having their +reason mastered by superstition. But in the time of Ptolemy II, +Ergamenes, King of the Æthiopians, having had his breeding in philosophy +after the manner of the Greeks, being the first that durst dispute their +power, took heart as befitted a King; came with soldiers to a place +called Abaton, where was then the golden temple of the Æthiopians; +killed all the priests, abolished the custom, and rectified the kingdom +according to his will.” + +_B._ Though they that were killed were most damnable impostors, yet the +act was cruel. + +_A._ It was so. But were not the priests cruel, to cause their Kings, +whom a little before they adored as Gods, to make away themselves? The +King killed them, for the safety of his person; they him, out of +ambition or love of change. The King’s act may be coloured with the good +of his people; the priests had no pretence against their kings, who were +certainly very godly, or else would never have obeyed the command of the +priests by a messenger unarmed, to kill themselves. Our late King, the +best King perhaps that ever was, you know, was murdered, having been +first persecuted by war, at the incitement of Presbyterian ministers; +who are therefore guilty of the death of all that fell in that war; +which were, I believe, in England, Scotland, and Ireland, near 100,000 +persons. Had it not been much better that those seditious ministers, +which were not perhaps 1000, had been all killed before they had +preached? It had been, I confess, a great massacre; but the killing of +100,000 is a greater. + +_B._ I am glad the bishops were out of this business. As ambitious as +some say they are, it did not appear in that business, for they were +enemies to them that were in it. + +_A._ But I intend not by these quotations to commend either the divinity +or the philosophy of those heathen people; but to show only what the +reputation of those sciences can effect among the people. For their +divinity was nothing but idolatry; and their philosophy, (excepting the +knowledge which the Egyptian priests, and from them the Chaldeans, had +gotten by long observation and study in astronomy, geometry, and +arithmetic), very little; and that in great part abused in astrology and +fortune-telling. Whereas the divinity of the clergy of this nation, +(considered apart from the mixture that has been introduced by the +Church of Rome, and in part retained here, of the babbling philosophy of +Aristotle and other Greeks, that has no affinity with religion, and +serves only to breed disaffection, dissension, and finally sedition and +civil war, as we have lately found by dear experience in the differences +between the Presbyterians and Episcopals), is the true religion. But for +these differences both parties, as they came in power, not only +suppressed the tenets of one another, but also whatsoever doctrine +looked with an ill aspect upon their interest; and consequently all true +philosophy, especially civil and moral, which can never appear +propitious to ambition, or to an exemption from their obedience due to +the sovereign power. + +After the King had accused the Lord Kimbolton, a member of the House of +Lords, and Hollis, Haslerigg, Hampden, Pym, and Stroud, five members of +the Lower House, of high-treason; and after the Parliament had voted out +the bishops from the House of Peers; they pursued especially two things +in their petitions to his Majesty. The one was, that the King would +declare who were the persons that advised him to go, as he did, to the +Parliament-house to apprehend them, and that he would leave them to the +Parliament to receive condign punishment; and this they did, to stick +upon his Majesty the dishonour of deserting his friends, and betraying +them to his enemies. The other was, that he would allow them a guard out +of the city of London, to be commanded by the Earl of Essex; for which +they pretended, they could not else sit in safety; which pretence was +nothing but an upbraiding of his Majesty for coming to Parliament better +accompanied than ordinary, to seize the said five seditious members. + +_B._ I see no reason, in petitioning for a guard, they should determine +it to the city of London in particular, and the command by name to the +Earl of Essex, unless they meant the King should understand it for a +guard against himself. + +_A._ Their meaning was, that the King should understand it so, and, as I +verily believe, they meant he should take it for an affront: and the +King himself understanding it so, denied to grant it; though he were +willing, if they could not otherwise be satisfied, to command such a +guard to wait upon them as he would be responsible for to God Almighty. +Besides this, the city of London petitioned the King (put upon it, no +doubt, by some members of the Lower House) to put the Tower of London +into the hands of persons of trust, meaning such as the Parliament +should approve of, and to appoint a guard for the safety of his Majesty +and the Parliament. This method of bringing petitions in a tumultuary +manner, by great multitudes of clamorous people, was ordinary with the +House of Commons, whose ambition could never have been served by way of +prayer and request, without extraordinary terror. + +After the King had waived the prosecution of the five members, but +denied to make known who had advised him to come in person to the House +of Commons, they questioned the Attorney-General, who by the King’s +command had exhibited the articles against them, and voted him a breaker +of the privilege of Parliament; and no doubt had made him feel their +cruelty, if he had not speedily fled the land. + +About the end of January, they made an order of both Houses of +Parliament, to prevent the going over of popish commanders into Ireland; +not so much fearing that, as that by this the King himself choosing his +commanders for that service, might aid himself out of Ireland against +the Parliament. But this was no great matter, in respect of a petition +they sent his Majesty about the same time, that is to say, about the +27th or 28th of January, 1641,^† [Sidenote: † Feb. 2nd, 1641.] wherein +they desired in effect the absolute sovereignty of England; though by +the name of sovereignty they challenged it not whilst the King was +living. For to the end that the fears and dangers of this kingdom might +be removed, and the mischievous designs of those who are enemies to the +peace of it, might be prevented, they pray, that his Majesty would be +pleased to put forthwith, first, the Tower of London, second, all other +forts, third, the whole militia of the kingdom, into the hands of such +persons as should be recommended to him by both the Houses of +Parliament. And this they style a necessary petition. + +_B._ Were there really any such fears and dangers generally conceived +here? Or did there appear any enemies at that time with such designs as +are mentioned in the petition? + +_A._ Yes. But no other fear of danger, but such as any discreet and +honest man might justly have of the designs of the Parliament itself; +who were the greatest enemies to the peace of the kingdom that could +possibly be. It is also worth observing, that this petition began with +these words, _Most gracious Sovereign_: so stupid they were as not to +know, that he that is master of the militia, is master of the kingdom, +and consequently is in possession of a most absolute sovereignty. The +King was now at Windsor, to avoid the tumults of the common people +before the gates of Whitehall, together with their clamours and affronts +there. The 9th of February after, he came to Hampton Court, and thence +he went to Dover with the Queen, and the Princess of Orange, his +daughter; where the Queen with the Princess of Orange embarked for +Holland, but the King returned to Greenwich, whence he sent for the +Prince of Wales and the Duke of York, and so went with them towards +York. + +_B._ Did the Lords join with the Commons in this petition for the +militia? + +_A._ It appears so by the title; but I believe they durst not but do it. +The House of Commons took them but for a cypher; men of title only, +without real power. Perhaps also the most of them thought, that the +taking of the militia from the King would be an addition to their own +power; but they were very much mistaken, for the House of Commons never +intended they should be sharers in it. + +_B._ What answer made the King to this petition? + +_A._ The following: “His Majesty having well considered of this +petition, and being desirous to express how willing he is to apply a +remedy, not only to your _dangers_, but even to your _doubts_ and +_fears_, he therefore returns this answer, That when he shall know the +extent of power which is intended to be established in those persons, +whom you desire to be the commanders of the militia in the several +counties, and likewise to what time it shall be limited, that no power +shall be executed by his Majesty alone without the advice of Parliament, +then he will declare, that (for the securing you from all dangers or +jealousies of any) his Majesty will be content to put in all the places, +both of forts and militia in the several counties, such persons as both +the Houses of Parliament shall either approve, or recommend unto him; so +that you declare before unto his Majesty the names of the persons whom +you approve or recommend, unless such persons shall be named, against +whom he shall have just and unquestionable exception.” + +_B._ What power, for what time, and to whom, did the Parliament grant, +concerning the militia? + +_A._ The same power which the King had before planted in his lieutenants +and deputy-lieutenants, in the several counties, and without other +limitation of time but their own pleasure. + +_B._ Who were the men that had this power? + +_A._ There is a catalogue of them printed. They are very many, and most +of them lords; nor is it necessary to have them named; for to name them +is, in my opinion, to brand them with the mark of disloyalty or of +folly. When they had made a catalogue of them, they sent it to the King, +with a new petition for the militia. Also presently after, they sent a +message to his Majesty, praying him to leave the Prince at Hampton +Court; but the King granted neither. + +_B._ Howsoever, it was well done of them to get hostages, if they could, +of the King, before he went from them. + +_A._ In the meantime, to raise money for the reducing of Ireland, the +Parliament invited men to bring in money by way of adventure, according +to these propositions. 1. That two millions and five hundred thousand +acres of land in Ireland, should be assigned to the adventurers, in this +proportion: + + For an adventure of 200_l._ 1,000 acres Ulster. + in + + 300_l._ 1,000 acres in Connaught. + + 450_l._ 1,000 acres in Munster. + + 600_l._ 1,000 acres in Leinster. + +All according to English measure, and consisting of meadow, arable, and +profitable pasture; bogs, woods, and barren mountains, being cast in +over and above. 2. A revenue was reserved to the Crown, from one penny +to three-pence on every acre. 3. That commissions should be sent by the +Parliament, to erect manors, settle wastes, and commons, maintain +preaching ministers, create corporations, and regulate plantations. The +rest of the propositions concern only the times and manner of payment of +the sums subscribed by the adventurers. And to these propositions his +Majesty assented; but to the petition of the militia, his Majesty denied +his assent. + +_B._ If he had not, I should have thought it a great wonder. What did +the Parliament after this? + +_A._ They sent him another petition, which was presented to him when he +was at Theobald’s, in his way to York; wherein they tell him plainly, +that unless he be pleased to assure them by those messengers then sent, +that he would speedily apply his royal assent to the satisfaction of +their former desires, they shall be enforced, for the safety of his +Majesty and his kingdoms, to dispose of the militia by the authority of +both Houses, &c. They petition his Majesty also to let the Prince stay +at St. James’s, or some other of his Majesty’s houses near London. They +tell him also, that the power of raising, ordering, and disposing of the +militia, cannot be granted to any corporation, without the authority and +consent of the Parliament, and that those parts of the kingdom, which +have put themselves into a posture of defence, have done nothing therein +but by direction of both Houses, and what is justifiable by the laws of +this kingdom. + +_B._ What answer made the King to this? + +_A._ It was a putting of themselves into arms, and under officers such +as the Parliament should approve of. 4. They voted that his Majesty +should be again desired that the Prince might continue about London. +Lastly, they voted a declaration to be sent to his Majesty by both the +Houses; wherein they accuse his Majesty of a design of altering +religion, though not directly him, but them that counselled him; whom +they also accused of being the inviters and fomenters of the Scotch war, +and framers of the rebellion in Ireland; and upbraid the King again for +accusing the Lord Kimbolton and the five members, and of being privy to +the purpose of bringing up his army, which was raised against the Scots, +to be employed against the Parliament. To which his Majesty sent his +answer from Newmarket. Whereupon it was resolved by both Houses, that in +this case of extreme danger and of his Majesty’s refusal, the ordinance +agreed upon by both Houses for the militia doth oblige the people by the +fundamental laws of this kingdom; and also, that whosoever shall execute +any power over the militia, by colour of any commission of lieutenancy, +without consent of both Houses of Parliament, shall be accounted a +disturber of the peace of the kingdom. Whereupon his Majesty sent a +message to both Houses from Huntingdon, requiring obedience to the laws +established, and prohibiting all subjects, upon pretence of their +ordinance, to execute anything concerning the militia which is not by +those laws warranted. Upon this, the Parliament vote a standing to their +former votes; as also, that when the Lords and Commons in Parliament, +which is the supreme court of judicature in the kingdom, shall declare +what the law of the land is, to have this not only questioned, but +contradicted, is a high breach of the privilege of Parliament. + +_B._ I thought that he that makes the law, ought to declare what the law +is. For what is it else to to make a law, but to declare what it is? So +that they have taken from the King, not only the militia, but also the +legislative power. + +_A._ They have so; but I make account that the legislative power, and +indeed all power possible, is contained in the power of the militia. +After this, they seize such money as was due to his Majesty upon the +bill of tonnage and poundage, and upon the bill of subsidies, that they +might disable him every way they possibly could. They sent him also many +other contumelious messages and petitions after his coming to York; +amongst which one was: “That whereas the Lord Admiral, by indisposition +of body, could not command the fleet in person, he would be pleased to +give authority to the Earl of Warwick to supply his place;” when they +knew the King had put Sir John Pennington in it before. + +_B._ To what end did the King entertain so many petitions, messages, +declarations and remonstrances, and vouchsafe his answers to them, when +he could not choose but clearly see they were resolved to take from him +his royal power, and consequently his life? For it could not stand with +their safety to let either him or his issue live, after they had done +him so great injuries. + +_A._ Besides this, the Parliament had at the same time a committee +residing at York, to spy what his Majesty did, and to inform the +Parliament thereof, and also to hinder the King from gaining the people +of that county to his party: so that when his Majesty was courting the +gentlemen there, the committee was instigating the yeomanry against him. +To which also the ministers did very much contribute; so that the King +lost his opportunity at York. + +_B._ Why did not the King seize the committee into his hands, or drive +them out of town? + +_A._ I know not; but I believe he knew the Parliament had a greater +party than he, not only in Yorkshire but also in York. Towards the end +of April, the King, upon petition of the people of Yorkshire to have the +magazine of Hull to remain still there, for the greater security of the +northern parts, thought fit to take it into his own hands. He had a +little before appointed governor of that town the Earl of Newcastle. But +the townsmen, having been already corrupted by the Parliament, refused +to receive him, but refused not to receive Sir John Hotham, appointed to +be governor by the Parliament. The King therefore coming before the +town, guarded only by his own servants and a few gentlemen of the +country thereabouts, was denied entrance by Sir John Hotham, that stood +upon the wall; for which act he presently caused Sir John Hotham to be +proclaimed traitor, and sent a message to the Parliament, requiring +justice to be done upon the said Hotham, and that the town and magazine +might be delivered into his hands. To which the Parliament made no +answer, but instead thereof published another declaration, in which they +omitted nothing of their former slanders against his Majesty’s +government, but inserted certain propositions declarative of their own +pretended right: viz. 1. That whatsoever they declare to be law, ought +not to be questioned by the King: 2. That no precedents can be limits to +bound their proceedings: 3. That a Parliament, for the public good, may +dispose of anything wherein the King or subject hath a right; and that +they, without the King, are this Parliament, and the judge of this +public good, and that the King’s consent is not necessary: 4. That no +member of either House ought to be troubled for treason, felony, or any +other crime, unless the cause be first brought before the Parliament, +that they may judge of the fact and give leave to proceed, if they see +cause: 5. That the sovereign power resides in both Houses, and that the +King ought to have no negative voice: 6. That the levying of forces +against the personal commands of the King (though accompanied with his +presence) is not levying war against the King, but the levying war +against his laws and authority (which they have power to declare and +signify), though not against his person, is levying war against the +King; and that treason cannot be committed against his person, otherwise +than as he is entrusted with the kingdom and discharging that trust; and +that they have a power to judge whether he discharge this trust or not: +7. That they may depose the King when they will. + +_B._ This is plain dealing and without hypocrisy. Could the city of +London swallow this? + +_A._ Yes; and more too, if need be. London, you know, has a great belly, +but no palate nor taste of right and wrong. In the Parliament-roll of +Henry IV, amongst the articles of the oath the King at his coronation +took, there is one runs thus: _Concedes justas leges et consuetudines +esse tenendas; et promittes per te eas esse protegendas, et ad honorem +Dei corroborandas, quas vulgus elegerit_. Which the Parliament urged for +their legislative authority, and therefore interpret _quas vulgus +elegerit_, which the people shall choose; as if the King should swear to +protect and corroborate laws before they were made, whether they be good +or bad; whereas the words signify no more, but that he shall protect and +corroborate such laws as they have chosen, that is to say, the Acts of +Parliament then in being. And in the records of the Exchequer it is +thus: _Will you grant to hold and keep the laws and rightful customs +which the commonalty of this your kingdom have, and will you defend and +uphold them? &c._ And this was the answer his Majesty made to that +point. + +_B._ And I think this answer very full and clear. But if the words were +to be interpreted in the other sense, yet I see no reason why the King +should be bound to swear to them. For Henry IV came to the Crown by the +votes of a Parliament not much inferior in wickedness to this Long +Parliament, that deposed and murdered their lawful King; saving that it +was not the Parliament itself, but the usurper that murdered King +Richard II. + +_A._ About a week after, in the beginning of May, the Parliament sent +the King another paper, which they styled the humble petition and advice +of both Houses, containing nineteen propositions; which when you shall +hear, you shall be able to judge what power they meant to leave to the +King more than to any one of his subjects. The first of them is this: + +1. That the Lords and others of his Majesty’s privy-council, and all +great officers of state, both at home and abroad, be put from their +employments and from his council, save only such as should be approved +of by both Houses of Parliament; and none put into their places but by +approbation of the said Houses. And that all privy-councillors take an +oath for the due execution of their places, in such form as shall be +agreed upon by the said Houses. + +2. That the great affairs of the kingdom be debated, resolved, and +transacted only in Parliament; and such as shall presume to do any thing +to the contrary, be reserved to the censure of the Parliament; and such +other matters of the state as are proper for his Majesty’s +privy-council, shall be debated and concluded by such as shall from time +to time be chosen for that place by both Houses of Parliament; and that +no public act concerning the affairs of the kingdom, which is proper for +his Majesty’s privy-council, be esteemed valid, as proceeding from the +royal authority, unless it be done by the advice and consent of the +major part of the council, attested under their hands; and that the +council be not more than twenty-five, nor less than fifteen; and that +when a councillor’s place falls void in the interval of Parliament, it +shall not be supplied without the assent of the major part of the +council; and that such choice also shall be void, if the next Parliament +after confirm it not. + +3. That the Lord High Steward of England, Lord High Constable, Lord +Chancellor, or Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, Lord Treasurer, Lord +Privy-Seal, Earl Marshal, Lord Admiral, Warden of the Cinque Ports, +Chief Governor of Ireland, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Master of the +Wards, Secretaries of State, two Chief Justices and Chief Baron, be +always chosen with the approbation of both Houses of Parliament; and in +the intervals of Parliament, by the major part of the privy-council. + +4. That the government of the King’s children shall be committed to such +as both Houses shall approve of; and in the intervals of Parliament, +such as the privy-council shall approve of; that the servants then about +them, against whom the Houses have just exception, should be removed. + +5. That no marriage be concluded or treated of for any of the King’s +children, without consent of Parliament. + +6. That the laws in force against Jesuits, priests, and popish +recusants, be strictly put in execution. + +7. That the votes of Popish lords in the House of Peers be taken away, +and that a bill be passed for the education of the children of Papists +in the Protestant religion. + +8. That the King will be pleased to reform the Church-government and +liturgy in such manner as both Houses of Parliament shall advise. + +9. That he would be pleased to rest satisfied with that course that the +Lords and Commons have appointed for ordering the militia, and recal his +declarations and proclamations against it. + +10. That such members as have been put out of any place or office since +this Parliament began, may be restored, or have satisfaction. + +11. That all privy-councillors and judges take an oath, (the form +whereof shall be agreed on and settled by act of Parliament), for the +maintaining of the Petition of Right, and of certain statutes made by +the Parliament. + +12. That all the judges and officers placed by approbation of both +Houses of Parliament, may hold their places _quam diu bene se +gesserint._ + +13. That the justice of Parliament may pass upon all delinquents, +whether they be within the kingdom or fled out of it; and that all +persons cited by either House of Parliament, may appear and abide the +censure of Parliament. + +14. That the general pardon offered by his Majesty, be granted with such +exceptions as shall be advised by both Houses of Parliament. + +_B._ What a spiteful article was this! All the rest proceeded from +ambition, which many times well-natured men are subject to; but this +proceeded from an inhuman and devilish cruelty. + +_A._ 15. That the forts and castles be put under the command of such +persons as, with the approbation of the Parliament, the King shall +appoint. + +16. That the extraordinary guards about the King be discharged; and for +the future none raised but according to the law, in case of actual +rebellion or invasion. + +_B._ Methinks these very propositions sent to the King are an actual +rebellion. + +_A._ 17. That his Majesty enter into a more strict alliance with the +United Provinces, and other neighbour Protestant Princes and States. + +18. That his Majesty be pleased, by act of Parliament, to clear the Lord +Kimbolton and the five members of the House of Commons, in such manner +as that future Parliaments may be secured from the consequence of that +evil precedent. + +19. That his Majesty be pleased to pass a bill for restraining peers +made hereafter from sitting or voting in Parliament, unless they be +admitted with consent of both Houses of Parliament. + +These propositions granted, they promise to apply themselves to regulate +his Majesty’s revenue to his best advantage, and to settle it to the +support of his royal dignity in honour and plenty; and also to put the +town of Hull into such hands as his Majesty shall appoint with consent +of Parliament. + +_B._ Is not that to put it into such hands as his Majesty shall appoint +by the consent of the petitioners, which is no more than to keep it in +their hands as it is? Did they want, or think the King wanted, +common-sense, so as not to perceive that their promise herein was worth +nothing? + +_A._ After the sending of these propositions to the King, and his +Majesty’s refusal to grant them, they began, on both sides, to prepare +for war. The King raised a guard for his person in Yorkshire, and the +Parliament, thereupon having voted that the King intended to make war +upon his Parliament, gave order for the mustering and exercising the +people in arms, and published propositions to invite and encourage them +to bring in either ready money or plate, or to promise under their hands +to furnish and maintain certain numbers of horse, horsemen, and arms, +for the defence of the King and Parliament, (meaning by King, as they +had formerly declared, not his person, but his laws); promising to repay +their money with interest of 8_l._ in the 100_l._ and the value of their +plate with twelve-pence the ounce for the fashion. On the other side, +the King came to Nottingham, and there did set up his standard royal, +and sent out commissions of array to call those to him, which by the +ancient laws of England were bound to serve him in the wars. Upon this +occasion there passed divers declarations between the King and +Parliament concerning the legality of this array, which are too long to +tell you at this time. + +_B._ Nor do I desire to hear any mooting about this question. For I +think that general law of _salus populi_, and the right of defending +himself against those that had taken from him the sovereign power, are +sufficient to make legal whatsoever he should do in order to the +recovery of his kingdom, or to the punishing of the rebels. + +_A._ In the meantime the Parliament raised an army, and made the Earl of +Essex general thereof; by which act they declared what they meant +formerly, when they petitioned the King for a guard to be commanded by +the said Earl of Essex. And now the King sends out his proclamations, +forbidding obedience to the orders of the Parliament concerning the +militia; and the Parliament send out orders against the execution of the +commissions of array. Hitherto, though it were a war before, yet there +was no blood shed; they shot at one another nothing but paper. + +_B._ I understand now, how the Parliament destroyed the peace of the +kingdom; and how easily, by the help of seditious Presbyterian ministers +and of ambitious ignorant orators, they reduced this government into +anarchy. But I believe it will be a harder task for them to bring in +peace again, and settle the government, either in themselves, or any +other governor, or form of government. For, granting that they obtained +the victory in this war, they must be beholden for it to the valour, +good conduct, or felicity of those to whom they give the command of +their armies; especially to the general, whose good success will, +without doubt, draw with it the love and admiration of the soldiers; so +that it will be in his power, either to take the government upon +himself, or to place it where himself thinks good. In which case, if he +take it not to himself, he will be thought a fool; and if he do, he +shall be sure to have the envy of his subordinate commanders, who look +for a share either in the present government, or in the succession to +it. For they will say: “Has he obtained his power by his own, without +our danger, valour, and counsel; and must we be his slaves, whom we have +thus raised? Or, is not there as much justice on our side against him, +as was on his side against the King?” + +_A._ They will, and did; insomuch, that it was the reason why Cromwell, +after he had gotten into his own hands the absolute power of England, +Scotland, and Ireland, by the name of Protector, did never dare to take +upon him the title of King, nor was ever able to settle it upon his +children. His officers would not suffer it, as pretending after his +death to succeed him; nor would the army consent to it, because he had +ever declared to them against the government of a single person. + +_B._ But to return to the King. What means had he to pay, what provision +had he to arm, nay, means to levy, an army able to resist the army of +the Parliament, maintained by the great purse of the city of London and +contributions of almost all the towns corporate in England, and +furnished with arms as fully as they could require? + +_A._ It is true, the King had great disadvantages, and yet by little and +little he got a considerable army, with which he so prospered as to grow +stronger every day, and the Parliament weaker, till they had gotten the +Scotch with an army of 21,000 men to come into England to their +assistance. But to enter into the particular narration of what was done +in the war, I have not now time. + +_B._ Well then, we will talk of that at next meeting. + + ------------------------------------ + + + + + PART III. + + ========== + +_B._ We left at the preparations on both sides for war; which when I +considered by myself, I was mightily puzzled to find out what +possibility there was for the King to equal the Parliament in such a +course, and what hopes he had of money, men, arms, fortified places, +shipping, counsel, and military officers, sufficient for such an +enterprise against the Parliament, that had men and money as much at +command, as the city of London, and other corporation towns, were able +to furnish, which was more than they needed. And for the men they should +set forth for soldiers, they were almost all of them spitefully bent +against the King and his whole party, whom they took to be either +papists, or flatterers of the King, or that had designed to raise their +fortunes by the plunder of the city and other corporation towns. And +though I believe not that they were more valiant than other men, nor +that they had so much experience in the war as to be accounted good +soldiers; yet they had that in them, which in time of battle is more +conducing to victory than valour and experience both together; and that +was spite. + +And for arms, they had in their hands the chief magazines, the Tower of +London, and the town of Kingston-upon-Hull; besides most of the powder +and shot that lay in several towns for the use of the trained bands. + +Fortified places, there were not many then in England, and most of them +in the hands of the Parliament. + +The King’s fleet was wholly in their command, under the Earl of Warwick. + +Counsellors, they needed no more than such as were of their own body. + +So that the King was every way inferior to them, except it were, +perhaps, in officers. + +_A._ I cannot compare their chief officers. For the Parliament, the Earl +of Essex, after the Parliament had voted the war, was made general of +all their forces both in England and Ireland, from whom all other +commanders were to receive their commissions. + +_B._ What moved them to make general the Earl of Essex? And for what +cause was the Earl of Essex so displeased with the King, as to accept +that office? + +_A._ I do not certainly know what to answer to either of those +questions; but the Earl of Essex had been in the wars abroad, and wanted +neither experience, judgment, nor courage, to perform such an +undertaking. And besides that, you have heard, I believe, how great a +darling of the people his father had been before him, and what honour he +had gotten by the success of his enterprise upon Calais, and in some +other military actions. To which I may add, that this Earl himself was +not held by the people to be so great a favourite at court as that they +might not trust him with their army against the King. And by this, you +may perhaps conjecture the cause for which the Parliament made choice of +him for general. + +_B._ But why did they think him discontented with the Court? + +_A._ I know not that; nor indeed that he was so. He came to the court, +as other noblemen did, when occasion was, to wait upon the King; but had +no office, till a little before this time, to oblige him to be there +continually. But I believe verily, that the unfortunateness of his +marriages, had so discountenanced his conversation with the ladies, that +the court could not be his proper element, unless he had had some +extraordinary favour there to balance that calamity. But for some +particular discontent from the King, or intention of revenge for any +supposed disgrace, I think he had none, nor that he was any ways +addicted to Presbyterian doctrines, or other fanatic tenets in Church or +State; saving only that he was carried away with the stream, in a +manner, of the whole nation, to think that England was not an absolute, +but a mixed monarchy; not considering that the supreme power must always +be absolute, whether it be in the King or in the Parliament. + +_B._ Who was the general of the King’s army? + +_A._ None yet but himself; nor indeed had he yet any army. But there +coming to him at that time his two nephews, the Princes Rupert and +Maurice, he put the command of his horse into the hands of Prince +Rupert, a man than whom no man living has a better courage, nor was more +active and diligent in prosecuting his commissions; and, though but a +young man then, was not without experience in the conducting of +soldiers, as having been an actor in part of his father’s wars in +Germany. + +_B._ But how could the King find money to pay such an army as was +necessary for him against the Parliament? + +_A._ Neither the King nor Parliament had much money at that time in +their own hands, but were fain to rely upon the benevolence of those +that took their parts. Wherein, I confess, the Parliament had a mighty +great advantage. Those that helped the King in that kind, were only +lords and gentlemen, which, not approving the proceedings of the +Parliament, were willing to undertake the payment, every one, of a +certain number of horse; which cannot be thought any very great +assistance, the persons that payed them being so few. For other moneys +that the King then had, I have not heard of any, but what he borrowed +upon jewels in the Low Countries. Whereas the Parliament had a very +plentiful contribution, not only from London, but generally from their +faction in all other places of England, upon certain propositions, +published by the Lords and Commons in June 1642, (at what time they had +newly voted that the King intended to make war upon them), for bringing +in of money or plate to maintain horse and horsemen, and to buy arms for +the preservation of the public peace, and for the defence of the King +and both Houses of Parliament; for the re-payment of which money and +plate, they were to have the public faith. + +_B._ What public faith is there, when there is no public? What is it +that can be called public, in a civil war, without the King? + +_A._ The truth is, the security was nothing worth, but served well +enough to gull those seditious blockheads, that were more fond of change +than either of their peace or profit. + +Having by this means gotten contributions from those that were +well-affected to their cause, they made use of it afterwards to force +the like contribution from others. For in November following, they made +an ordinance for assessing also of those that had not contributed then, +or had contributed, but not proportionably to their estates. And yet +this was contrary to what the Parliament promised and declared in the +propositions themselves. For they declared, in the first proposition, +that no man’s affections should be measured by the proportion of his +offer, so that he expressed his good will to the service in any +proportion whatsoever. + +Besides this, in the beginning of March following, they made an +ordinance, to levy weekly a great sum of money upon every county, city, +town, place, and person of any estate almost, in England; which weekly +sum, as may appear by the ordinance itself, printed and published in +March 1642 by order of both Houses, comes to almost 33,000_l._, and +consequently to above 1,700,000_l._ for the year. They had, besides all +this, the profits of the King’s lands and woods, and whatsoever was +remaining unpaid of any subsidy formerly granted him, and the tonnage +and poundage usually received by the King; besides the profit of the +sequestrations of great persons, whom they pleased to vote delinquents, +and the profits of the bishops' lands, which they took to themselves a +year, or a little more, after. + +_B._ Seeing then the Parliament had such advantage of the King in money +and arms and multitude of men, and had in their hands the King’s fleet, +I cannot imagine what hope the King could have, either of victory +(unless he resigned into their hands the sovereignty), or subsisting. +For I cannot well believe he had any advantage of them either in +counsellors, conductors, or in the resolutions of his soldiers. + +_A._ On the contrary, I think he had also some disadvantage in that; for +though he had as good officers at least as any then served the +Parliament, yet I doubt he had not so useful counsel as was necessary. +And for his soldiers, though they were men as stout as theirs, yet, +because their valour was not sharpened so with malice as theirs was on +the other side, they fought not so keenly as their enemies did: amongst +whom there were a great many London apprentices, who, for want of +experience in the war, would have been fearful enough of death and +wounds approaching visibly in glistering swords; but, for want of +judgment, scarce thought of such death as comes invisibly in a bullet, +and therefore were very hardly to be driven out of the field. + +_B._ But what fault do you find in the King’s counsellors, lords, and +other persons of quality and experience? + +_A._ Only that fault, which was generally in the whole nation, which +was, that they thought the government of England was not an absolute, +but a mixed monarchy; and that if the King should clearly subdue this +Parliament, that his power would be what he pleased, and theirs as +little as he pleased: which they counted tyranny. This opinion, though +it did not lessen their endeavour to gain the victory for the King in a +battle, when a battle could not be avoided, yet it weakened their +endeavour to procure him an absolute victory in the war. And for this +cause, notwithstanding that they saw that the Parliament was firmly +resolved to take all kingly power whatsoever out of his hands, yet their +counsel to the King was upon all occasions, to offer propositions to +them of treaty and accommodation, and to make and publish declarations; +which any man might easily have foreseen would be fruitless; and not +only so, but also of great disadvantage to those actions by which the +King was to recover his crown and preserve his life. For it took off the +courage of the best and forwardest of his soldiers, that looked for +great benefit by their service out of the estates of the rebels, in case +they could subdue them; but none at all, if the business should be ended +by a treaty. + +_B._ And they had reason: for a civil war never ends by treaty, without +the sacrifice of those who were on both sides the sharpest. You know +well enough how things passed at the reconciliation of Augustus and +Antonius in Rome. But I thought that after they once began to levy +soldiers one against another, that they would not any more have returned +of either side to declarations, or other paper war, which, if it could +have done any good, would have done it long before this. + +_A._ But seeing the Parliament continued writing, and set forth their +declarations to the people against the lawfulness of the King’s +commission of array, and sent petitions to the King as fierce and +rebellious as ever they had done before, demanding of him that he would +disband his soldiers, and come up to the Parliament, and leave those +whom the Parliament called delinquents (which were none but the King’s +best subjects) to their mercy, and pass such bills as they should advise +him; would you not have the King set forth declarations and +proclamations against the illegality of their ordinances, by which they +levied soldiers against him, and answer those insolent petitions of +theirs? + +_B._ No; it had done him no good before, and therefore was not likely to +do him any afterwards. For the common people, whose hands were to decide +the controversy, understood not the reasons of either party; and for +those that by ambition were once set upon the enterprise of changing the +government, they cared not much what was reason and justice in the +cause, but what strength they might procure by reducing the multitude +with remonstrances from the Parliament House, or by sermons in the +churches. And to their petitions, I would not have had any answer made +at all, more than this; that if they would disband their army, and put +themselves upon his mercy, they should find him more gracious than they +expected. + +_A._ That had been a gallant answer indeed, if it had proceeded from him +after some extraordinary great victory in battle, or some extraordinary +assurance of a victory at last in the whole war. + +_B._ Why, what could have happened to him worse than at length he +suffered, notwithstanding his gentle answers and all his reasonable +declarations? + +_A._ Nothing; but who knew that? + +_B._ Any man might see that he was never likely to be restored to his +right without victory: and such his stoutness being known to the people, +would have brought to his assistance many more hands than all the +arguments of law or force of eloquence, couched in declarations and +other writings, could have done by far. And I wonder what kind of men +they were, that hindered the King from taking this resolution? + +_A._ You may know by the declarations themselves, which are very long +and full of quotations of records and of cases formerly reported, that +the penners of them were either lawyers by profession, or such gentlemen +as had the ambition to be thought so. Besides, I told you before, that +those which were then likeliest to have their counsel asked in this +business, were averse to absolute monarchy, as also to absolute +democracy or aristocracy; all which governments they esteemed tyranny, +and were in love with monarchy which they used to praise by the name of +mixed monarchy, though it were indeed nothing else but pure anarchy. And +those men, whose pens the King most used in these controversies of law +and politics, were such, if I have not been misinformed, as having been +members of this Parliament, had declaimed against ship-money and other +extra-parliamentary taxes, as much as any; but who when they saw the +Parliament grow higher in their demands than they thought they would +have done, went over to the King’s party. + +_B._ Who were those? + +_A._ It is not necessary to name any man, seeing I have undertaken only +a short narration of the follies and other faults of men during this +trouble; but not, by naming the persons, to give you, or any man else, +occasion to esteem them the less, now that the faults on all sides have +been forgiven. + +_B._ When the business was brought to this height, by levying of +soldiers and seizing of the navy and arms and other provisions on both +sides, that no man was so blind as not to see they were in an estate of +war one against another; why did not the King, by proclamation or +message, according to his undoubted right, dissolve the Parliament, and +thereby diminish in some part the authority of their levies, and of +other their unjust ordinances? + +_A._ You have forgotten that I told you, that the King himself, by a +bill that he passed at the same time when he passed the bill for the +execution of the Earl of Strafford, had given them authority to hold the +Parliament till they should by consent of both Houses dissolve +themselves. If therefore he had, by any proclamation or message to the +Houses, dissolved them, they would to their former defamations of his +Majesty’s actions have added this, that he was a breaker of his word: +and not only in contempt of him have continued their session, but also +have made an advantage of it to the increase and strengthening of their +own party. + +_B._ Would not the King’s raising of an army against them be interpreted +as a purpose to dissolve them by force? And was it not as great a breach +of promise to scatter them by force, as to dissolve them by +proclamation? Besides, I cannot conceive that the passing of that act +was otherwise intended than conditionally; so long as they should not +ordain any thing contrary to the sovereign right of the King; which +condition they had already by many of their ordinances broken. And I +think that even by the law of equity, which is the unalterable law of +nature, a man that has the sovereign power, cannot, if he would, give +away the right of anything which is necessary for him to retain for the +good government of his subjects, unless he do it in express words, +saying, that he will have the sovereign power no longer. For the giving +away that, which by consequence only, draws the sovereignty along with +it, is not, I think, a giving away of the sovereignty; but an error, +such as works nothing but an invalidity in the grant itself. And such +was the King’s passing of this bill for the continuing of the Parliament +as long as the two Houses pleased. But now that the war was resolved on +on both sides, what needed any more dispute in writing? + +_A._ I know not what need they had. But on both sides they thought it +needful to hinder one another, as much as they could, from levying of +soldiers; and, therefore, the King did set forth declarations in print, +to make the people know that they ought not to obey the officers of the +new militia set up by ordinance of Parliament, and also to let them see +the legality of his own commissions of array. And the Parliament on +their part did the like, to justify to the people the said ordinance, +and to make the commission of array appear unlawful. + +_B._ When the Parliament were levying of soldiers, was it not lawful for +the King to levy soldiers to defend himself and his right, though there +had been no other title for it but his own preservation, and that the +name of commission of array had never before been heard of? + +_A._ For my part, I think there cannot be a better title for war, than +the defence of a man’s own right. But the people, at that time, thought +nothing lawful for the King to do, for which there was not some statute +made by Parliament. For the lawyers, I mean the judges of the courts at +Westminster, and some few others, though but advocates, yet of great +reputation for their skill in the common-laws and statutes of England, +had infected most of the gentry of England with their maxims and cases +prejudged, which they call precedents; and made them think so well of +their own knowledge in the law, that they were very glad of this +occasion to shew it against the King, and thereby to gain a reputation +with the Parliament of being good patriots, and wise statesmen. + +_B._ What was this commission of array? + +_A._ King William the Conqueror had gotten into his hands by victory all +the land in England, of which he disposed some part as forests and +chases for his recreation, and some part to lords and gentlemen that had +assisted him or were to assist him in the wars. Upon which he laid a +charge of service in his wars, some with more men, and some with less, +according to the lands he had given them: whereby, when the King sent +men unto them with commission to make use of their service, they were +obliged to appear with arms, and to accompany the King to the wars for a +certain time at their own charges: and such were the commissions by +which this King did then make his levies. + +_B._ Why then was it not legal? + +_A._ No doubt but it was legal. But what did that amount to with men, +that were already resolved to acknowledge for law nothing that was +against their design of abolishing monarchy, and placing a sovereign and +absolute arbitrary power in the House of Commons. + +_B._ To destroy monarchy, and set up the House of Commons, are two +businesses. + +_A._ They found it so at last, but did not think it so then. + +_B._ Let us now come to the military part. + +_A._ I intended only the story of their injustice, impudence, and +hypocrisy; therefore, for the proceeding of the war, I refer you to the +history thereof written at large in English. I shall only make use of +such a thread as is necessary for the filling up of such knavery, and +folly also, as I shall observe in their several actions. + +From York the King went to Hull, where was his magazine of arms for the +northern parts of England, to try if they would admit him. The +Parliament had made Sir John Hotham governor of the town, who caused the +gates to be shut, and presenting himself upon the walls flatly denied +him entrance: for which the King caused him to be proclaimed traitor, +and sent a message to the Parliament to know if they owned the action. + +_B._ Upon what grounds? + +_A._ Their pretence was this; that neither this nor any other town in +England was otherwise the King’s, than in trust for the people of +England. + +_B._ But what was that to the Parliament? + +_A._ Yes, say they; for we are the representatives of the people of +England. + +_B._ I cannot see the force of this argument: we represent the people, +_ergo_, all that the people has is ours. The mayor of Hull did represent +the King. Is therefore all that the King had in Hull, the mayor’s? The +people of England may be represented with limitations, as to deliver a +petition or the like. Does it follow that they, who deliver the +petition, have right to all the towns in England? When began this +Parliament to be a representative of England? Was it not November 3, +1640? Who was it the day before, that is November 2, that had the right +to keep the King out of Hull and possess it for themselves? For there +was then no Parliament. Whose was Hull then? + +_A._ I think it was the King’s, not only because it was called the +King’s town upon Hull, but because the King himself did then and ever +represent the person of the people of England. If he did not, who then +did, the Parliament having no being? + +_B._ They might perhaps say, the people had then no representative. + +_A._ Then there was no commonwealth; and consequently, all the towns of +England being the people’s, you, and I, and any man else, might have put +in for his share. You may see by this what weak people they were, that +were carried into the rebellion by such reasoning as the Parliament +used, and how impudent they were that did put such fallacies upon them. + +_B._ Surely they were such as were esteemed the wisest men in England, +being upon that account chosen to be of the Parliament. + +_A._ And were they also esteemed the wisest men of England, that chose +them? + +_B._ I cannot tell that. For I know it is usual with the freeholders in +the counties, and the tradesmen in the cities and boroughs, to choose, +as near as they can, such as are most repugnant to the giving of +subsidies. + +_A._ The King in the beginning of August, after he had summoned Hull, +and tried some of the counties thereabout what they would do for him, +sets up his standard at Nottingham; but there came not in thither men +enough to make an army sufficient to give battle to the Earl of Essex. +From thence he went to Shrewsbury, where he was quickly furnished; and +appointing the Earl of Lindsey to be general, he resolved to march +towards London. The Earl of Essex was now at Worcester with the +Parliament’s army, making no offer to stop him in his passage; but as +soon as he was gone by, marched close after him. + +The King, therefore, to avoid being enclosed between the army of the +Earl of Essex and the city of London, turned upon him and gave him +battle at Edgehill: where though he got not an entire victory, yet he +had the better, if either had the better; and had certainly the fruit of +a victory, which was to march on in his intended way towards London: in +which the next morning he took Banbury-castle, and from thence went to +Oxford, and thence to Brentford, where he gave a great defeat to three +regiments of the Parliament’s forces, and so returned to Oxford. + +_B._ Why did not the King go on from Brentford? + +_A._ The Parliament, upon the first notice of the King’s marching from +Shrewsbury, caused all the trained-bands and the auxiliaries of the city +of London (which was so frightened as to shut up all their shops) to be +drawn forth; so that there was a most complete and numerous army ready +for the Earl of Essex, that was crept into London just at the time to +head it. And this was it that made the King retire to Oxford. In the +beginning of February after, Prince Rupert took Cirencester from the +Parliament, with many prisoners and many arms: for it was newly made a +magazine. And thus stood the business between the King’s and the +Parliament’s greatest forces. The Parliament in the meantime caused a +line of communication to be made about London and the suburbs, of twelve +miles in compass; and constituted a committee for the association, and +the putting into a posture of defence, of the counties of Essex, +Cambridge, Suffolk, and some others; and one of these commissioners was +Oliver Cromwell, from which employment he came to his following +greatness. + +_B._ What was done during this time in other parts of the country? + +_A._ In the west, the Earl of Stamford had the employment of putting in +execution the ordinance of Parliament for the militia; and Sir Ralph +Hopton for the King executed the commission of array. Between these two +was fought a battle at Liskeard in Cornwall, wherein Sir Ralph Hopton +had the victory, and presently took a town called Saltash, with many +arms and much ordnance and many prisoners. Sir William Waller in the +meantime seized Winchester and Chichester for the Parliament. In the +north, for the commission of array, my Lord of Newcastle, and for the +militia of the Parliament was my Lord Fairfax. My Lord of Newcastle took +from the Parliament Tadcaster, in which were a great part of the +Parliament’s forces for that country, and had made himself, in a manner, +master of all the north. About this time, that is to say in February, +the Queen landed at Burlington, and was conducted by my Lord of +Newcastle and the Marquis of Montrose to York, and not long after to the +King. Divers other little advantages, besides these, the King’s party +had of the Parliament’s in the north. + +There happened also between the militia of the Parliament and the +Commission of Array in Staffordshire, under my Lord Brook for the +Parliament and my Lord of Northampton for the King, great contention, +wherein both these commanders were slain. For my Lord Brook, besieging +Litchfield-Close, was killed with a shot; notwithstanding which they +gave not over the siege till they were masters of the Close. But +presently after, my Lord of Northampton besieged it again for the King; +which to relieve, Sir William Brereton and Sir John Gell advanced +towards Litchfield, and were met at Hopton Heath by the Earl of +Northampton, and routed. The Earl himself was slain; but his forces with +victory returned to the siege again; and shortly after, seconded by +Prince Rupert, who was then abroad in that country, carried the place. +These were the chief actions of this year, 1642; wherein the King’s +party had not much the worse. + +_B._ But the Parliament had now a better army; insomuch that if the Earl +of Essex had immediately followed the King to Oxford, not yet well +fortified, he might in all likelihood have taken it. For he could not +want either men or ammunition, whereof the city of London, which was +wholly at the Parliament’s devotion, had store enough. + +_A._ I cannot judge of that. But this is manifest, considering the +estate the King was in at his first marching from York, when he had +neither money nor men nor arms enough to put them in hope of victory, +that this year, take it altogether, was very prosperous. + +_B._ But what great folly or wickedness do you observe in the +Parliament’s actions for this first year? + +_A._ All that can be said against them in that point, will be excused +with the pretext of war, and come under one name of rebellion; saving +that when they summoned any town, it was always in the name of King and +Parliament, the King being in the contrary army, and many times beating +them from the siege. I do not see how the right of war can justify such +impudence as that. But they pretended that the King was always virtually +in the two Houses of Parliament; making a distinction between his person +natural and politic; which made the impudence the greater, besides the +folly of it. For this was but an university quibble, such as boys make +use of in maintaining in the schools such tenets as they cannot +otherwise defend. + +In the end of this year they solicited also the Scots to enter England +with an army, to suppress the power of the Earl of Newcastle in the +North; which was a plain confession, that the Parliament’s forces were, +at this time, inferior to the King’s. And most men thought, that if the +Earl of Newcastle had then marched southward, and joined his forces with +the King’s, most of the members of Parliament would have fled out of +England. + +In the beginning of 1643 the Parliament, seeing the Earl of Newcastle’s +power in the North grown so formidable, sent to the Scots to hire them +to an invasion of England, and (to compliment them in the meantime) made +a covenant amongst themselves, such as the Scots had before taken +against episcopacy, and demolished crosses and church-windows, such as +had in them any images of saints, throughout all England. Also in the +middle of the year, they made a solemn league with the nation, which was +called the Solemn League and Covenant. + +_B._ Are not the Scots as properly to be called foreigners as the Irish? +Seeing then they persecuted the Earl of Strafford even to death, for +advising the King to make use of Irish forces against the Parliament, +with what face could they call in a Scotch army against the King? + +_A._ The King’s party might easily here have discerned their design, to +make themselves absolute masters of the kingdom and to dethrone the +King. Another great impudence, or rather a bestial incivility, it was of +theirs, that they voted the Queen a traitor, for helping the King with +some ammunition and English forces from Holland. + +_B._ Was it possible that all this could be done, and men not see that +papers and declarations must be useless; and that nothing could satisfy +them but the deposing of the King, and setting up of themselves in his +place? + +_A._ Yes; very possible. For who was there of them, though knowing that +the King had the sovereign power, that knew the essential rights of +sovereignty? They dreamt of a mixed power, of the King and the two +Houses. That it was a divided power, in which there could be no peace, +was above their understanding. Therefore they were always urging the +King to declarations and treaties, for fear of subjecting themselves to +the King in an absolute obedience; which increased the hope and courage +of the rebels, but did the King little good. For the people either +understand not, or will not trouble themselves with controversies in +writing, but rather, by his compliance and messages, go away with an +opinion that the Parliament was likely to have the victory in the war. +Besides, seeing the penners and contrivers of these papers were formerly +members of the Parliament, and of another mind, and now revolted from +the Parliament because they could not bear that sway in the House which +they expected, men were apt to think they believed not what they writ. + +As for military actions (to begin at the head quarters) Prince Rupert +took Birmingham, a garrison of the Parliament’s. In July after, the +King’s forces had a great victory over the Parliament’s, near Devizes on +Roundway-Down, where they took 2,000 prisoners, four brass pieces of +ordnance, twenty-eight colours, and all their baggage; and shortly +after, Bristol was surrendered to Prince Rupert for the King; and the +King himself marching into the west, took from the Parliament many other +considerable places. + +But this good fortune was not a little allayed by his besieging of +Gloucester, which after it was reduced to the last gasp, was relieved by +the Earl of Essex; whose army was before greatly wasted, but now +suddenly recruited with the trained bands and apprentices of London. + +_B._ It seems not only by this, but also by many examples in history, +that there can hardly arise a long or dangerous rebellion, that has not +some such overgrown city with an army or two in its belly to foment it. + +_A._ Nay more; those great capital cities, when rebellion is upon +pretence of grievances, must needs be of the rebel party: because the +grievances are but taxes, to which citizens, that is, merchants, whose +profession is their private gain, are naturally mortal enemies; their +only glory being to grow excessively rich by the wisdom of buying and +selling. + +_B._ But they are said to be of all callings the most beneficial to the +commonwealth, by setting the poorer sort of people on work. + +_A._ That is to say, by making poor people sell their labour to them at +their own prices; so that poor people, for the most part, might get a +better living by working in Bridewell, than by spinning, weaving, and +other such labour as they can do; saving that by working slightly they +may help themselves a little, to the disgrace of our manufacture. And as +most commonly they are the first encouragers of rebellion, presuming of +their strength; so also are they, for the most part, the first to +repent, deceived by them that command their strength. + +But to return to the war; though the King withdrew from Gloucester, yet +it was not to fly from, but to fight with the Earl of Essex, which +presently after he did at Newbury, where the battle was bloody, and the +King had not the worst, unless Cirencester be put into the scale, which +the Earl of Essex had in his way a few days before surprised. + +But in the north and the west, the King had much the better of the +Parliament. For in the north, at the very beginning of the year, March +29th, the Earls of Newcastle and Cumberland defeated the Lord Fairfax, +who commanded in those parts for the Parliament, at Bramham Moor; which +made the Parliament to hasten the assistance of the Scots. + +In June following the Earl of Newcastle routed Sir Thomas Fairfax, son +to the Lord Fairfax, upon Adderton Heath, and, in pursuit of them to +Bradford, took and killed 2,000 men, and the next day took the town and +2,000 prisoners more (Sir Thomas himself hardly escaping) with all their +arms and ammunition; and besides this, made the Lord Fairfax quit +Halifax and Beverley. Lastly, Prince Rupert relieved Newark, besieged by +Sir John Meldrun for the Parliament with 7,000 men, whereof 1,000 were +slain; the rest upon articles departed, leaving behind them their arms, +bag and baggage. + +To balance in part this success, the Earl of Manchester, whose +lieutenant-general was Oliver Cromwell, got a victory over the royalists +near Horncastle, of whom he slew 400, took 800 prisoners and 1,000 arms, +and presently after took and plundered the city of Lincoln. + +In the West, May the 16th, Sir Ralph Hopton at Stratton, in Cornwall, +had a victory over the Parliamentarians, wherein he took 1700 prisoners, +thirteen brass pieces of ordnance, and all their ammunition, which was +seventy barrels of powder; and the magazine of their other provisions in +the town. + +Again at Lansdown, between Sir Ralph Hopton and the Parliamentarians +under Sir William Waller, was fought a fierce battle, wherein the +victory was not very clear on either side; saving that the +Parliamentarians might seem to have the better, because presently after +Sir William Waller followed Sir Ralph Hopton to Devizes, in Wiltshire, +though to his cost; for there he was overthrown, as I have already told +you. + +After this the King in person marched into the West, and took Exeter, +Dorchester, Barnstable, and divers other places; and had he not at his +return besieged Gloucester, and thereby given the Parliament time for +new levies, it was thought by many he might have routed the House of +Commons. But the end of this year was more favourable to the Parliament. +For in January the Scots entered England, and, March the 1st, crossed +the Tyne; and whilst the Earl of Newcastle was marching to them, Sir +Thomas Fairfax gathered together a considerable party in Yorkshire, and +the Earl of Manchester from Lyn advanced towards York; so that the Earl +of Newcastle having two armies of the rebels behind him, and another +before him, was forced to retreat to York; which those three armies +joining presently besieged. And these are all the considerable military +actions of the year 1643. + +In the same year the Parliament caused to be made a new Great Seal. The +Lord Keeper had carried the former seal to Oxford. Hereupon the King +sent a messenger to the judges at Westminster, to forbid them to make +use of it. This messenger was taken, and condemned at a council of war, +and hanged for a spy. + +_B._ Is that the law of war? + +_A._ I know not: but it seems, when a soldier comes into the enemies' +quarters without address or notice given to the chief commander, that it +is presumed he comes as a spy. The same year, when certain gentlemen at +London received a commission of array from the King to levy men for his +service in that city, being discovered, they were condemned, and some of +them executed. This case is not much unlike the former. + +_B._ Was not the making of a new Great Seal a sufficient proof that the +war was raised, not to remove evil counsellors from the King, but to +remove the King himself from the government? What hope then could there +be had in messages and treaties? + +_A._ The entrance of the Scots was a thing unexpected to the King, who +was made to believe by continual letters from his commissioner in +Scotland, Duke Hamilton, that the Scotch never intended any invasion. +The Duke being then at Oxford, the King, assured that the Scotch were +now entered, sent him prisoner to Pendennis Castle in Cornwall. + +In the beginning of the year 1644, the Earl of Newcastle being, as I +told you, besieged by the joint forces of the Scots, the Earl of +Manchester and Sir Thomas Fairfax, the King sent Prince Rupert to +relieve the town, and as soon as he could to give the enemy battle. +Prince Rupert passing through Lancashire, and by the way having stormed +that seditious town of Bolton, and taken Stockford and Liverpool, came +to York July the 1st, and relieved it; the enemy being risen thence to a +place called Marston Moor, about four miles off; and there was fought +that unfortunate battle, which lost the King in a manner all the north. +Prince Rupert returned by the way he came, and the Earl of Newcastle to +York, and thence with some of his officers over the sea to Hamburgh. + +The honour of this victory was attributed chiefly to Oliver Cromwell, +the Earl of Manchester’s lieutenant-general. The Parliamentarians +returned from the field to the siege of York, which not long after, upon +honourable articles, was surrendered; not that they were favoured, but +because the Parliament employed not much time nor many men in sieges. + +_B._ This was a great and sudden abatement of the King’s prosperity. + +_A._ It was so; but amends was made him for it within five or six weeks +after. For Sir William Waller, after the loss of his army at +Roundway-Down, had another raised for him by the city of London; who for +the payment thereof imposed a weekly tax of the value of one meal’s meat +upon every citizen. This army, with that of the Earl of Essex, intended +to besiege Oxford; which the King understanding, sent the Queen into the +west, and marched himself towards Worcester. This made them to divide +again, and the Earl to go into the west, and Waller to pursue the King. +By this means, as it fell out, both their armies were defeated. For the +King turned upon Waller, routed him at Cropredy-bridge, took his train +of artillery and many officers; and then presently followed the Earl of +Essex into Cornwall, where he had him at such advantage, that the Earl +himself was fain to escape in a small boat to Plymouth; his horse broke +through the King’s quarters by night, but the infantry were all forced +to lay down their arms, and upon condition never more to bear arms +against the King were permitted to depart. + +In October following was fought a second and sharp battle at Newbury. +For this infantry, making no conscience of the conditions made with the +King, being now come towards London as far as Basingstoke, had arms put +again into their hands; to whom some of the trained-bands being added, +the Earl of Essex had suddenly so great an army, that he attempted the +King again at Newbury; and certainly had the better of the day, but the +night parting them, had not a complete victory. And it was observed +here, that no part of the Earl’s army fought so keenly as they who had +laid down their arms in Cornwall. + +These were the most important fights in the year 1644, and the King was +yet, as both himself and others thought, in as good condition as the +Parliament, which despaired of victory by the commanders they then used. +Therefore they voted a new modelling of the army, suspecting the Earl of +Essex, though I think wrongfully, to be too much a royalist, for not +having done so much as they looked for in this second battle at Newbury. +The Earls of Essex and Manchester, perceiving what they went about, +voluntarily laid down their commissions; and the House of Commons made +an ordinance, that no member of either House should enjoy any office or +command, military or civil; with which oblique blow they shook off those +that had hitherto served them too well. And yet out of this ordinance +they excepted Oliver Cromwell, in whose conduct and valour they had very +great confidence (which they would not have done, if they had known him +as well then as they did afterwards), and made him lieutenant-general to +Sir Thomas Fairfax, their new-made general. In the commission to the +Earl of Essex, there was a clause for the preservation of his Majesty’s +person, which in this new commission was left out; though the Parliament +as well as the general were as yet Presbyterian. + +_B._ It seems the Presbyterians also in order to their ends would fain +have had the King murdered. + +_A._ For my part I doubt it not. For a rightful king living, an usurping +power can never be sufficiently secured. + +In this same year the Parliament put to death Sir John Hotham and his +son, for tampering with the Earl of Newcastle about the rendition of +Hull; and Sir Alexander Carew, for endeavouring to deliver up Plymouth, +where he was governor for the Parliament; and the Archbishop of +Canterbury, for nothing but to please the Scots; for the general article +of going about to subvert the fundamental laws of the land, was no +accusation, but only foul words. They then also voted down the Book of +Common-prayer, and ordered the use of a Directory, which had been newly +composed by an Assembly of Presbyterian ministers. They were also then, +with much ado, prevailed with for a treaty with the King at Uxbridge; +where they remitted nothing of their former demands. The King had also +at this time a Parliament at Oxford, consisting of such discontented +members as had left the Houses at Westminster; but few of them had +changed their old principles, and therefore that Parliament was not much +worth. Nay rather, because they endeavoured nothing but messages and +treaties, that is to say, defeating of the soldiers' hope of benefit by +the war, they were thought by most men to do the King more hurt than +good. + +The year 1645 was to the King very unfortunate; for by the loss of one +great battle, he lost all he had formerly gotten, and at length his +life. The new modelled army, after consultation whether they should lay +siege to Oxford or march westward to the relief of Taunton, (then +besieged by the Lord Goring, and defended by Blake, famous afterwards +for his actions at sea), resolved for Taunton; leaving Cromwell to +attend the motions of the King, though not strong enough to hinder him. +The King upon this advantage drew his forces and artillery out of +Oxford. This made the Parliament to call back their general, Fairfax, +and order him to besiege Oxford. The King in the meantime relieved +Chester, which was besieged by Sir William Brereton, and coming back +took Leicester by force; a place of great importance, and well provided +of artillery and provision. + +Upon this success it was generally thought that the King’s party was the +stronger. The King himself thought so; and the Parliament in a manner +confessed the same, by commanding Fairfax to rise from the siege, and +endeavour to give the King battle. For the successes of the King, and +the divisions and treacheries growing now amongst themselves, had driven +them to rely upon the fortune of one day; in which, at Naseby, the +King’s army was utterly overthrown, and no hope left him to raise +another. Therefore after the battle he went up and down, doing the +Parliament here and there some shrewd turns, but never much increasing +his number. + +Fairfax in the meantime first recovered Leicester, and then marching +into the west subdued it all, except only a few places, forcing with +much ado my Lord Hopton upon honourable conditions to disband his army, +and with the Prince of Wales to pass over to Scilly; whence not long +after they went to Paris. + +In April 1646 General Fairfax began to march back to Oxford. In the +meantime Rainsborough, who besieged Woodstock, had it surrendered. The +King therefore, who was now also returned to Oxford, from whence +Woodstock is but six miles, not doubting but that he should there by +Fairfax be besieged, and having no army, to relieve him, resolved to get +away disguised to the Scotch army about Newark; and thither he came the +4th of May; and the Scotch army, being upon remove homewards, carried +him with them to Newcastle, whither he came May 13th. + +_B._ Why did the King trust himself with the Scots? They were the first +that rebelled. They were Presbyterians, that is, cruel; besides, they +were indigent, and consequently might be suspected would sell him to his +enemies for money. And lastly, they were too weak to defend him, or keep +him in their country. + +_A._ What could he have done better? For he had in the winter before +sent to the Parliament to get a pass for the Duke of Richmond and +others, to bring them propositions of peace; it was denied. He sent +again; it was denied again. Then he desired he might come to them in +person; this also was denied. He sent again and again to the same +purpose; but instead of granting it, they made an ordinance, that the +commanders of the militia of London, in case the King should attempt to +come within the line of communication, should raise what force they +thought fit to suppress tumults, to apprehend such as came with him, and +to secure, that is to imprison, his person from danger. If the King had +adventured to come, and had been imprisoned, what could the Parliament +have done with him? They had dethroned him by their votes, and therefore +could have no security whilst he lived, though in prison. It may be they +would not have put him to death by a high court of justice publicly, but +secretly some other way. + +_B._ He should have attempted to get beyond sea. + +_A._ That had been from Oxford very difficult. Besides, it was generally +believed that the Scotch army had promised him, that not only his +Majesty, but also his friends that should come with him, should be in +their army safe; not only for their persons, but also for their honours +and consciences. It is a pretty trick, when the army and the particular +soldiers of the army are different things, to make the soldiers promise +what the army means not to perform. + +July the 11th the Parliament sent their propositions to the King at +Newcastle; which propositions they pretended to be the only way to a +settled and well grounded peace. They were brought by the Earl of +Pembroke, the Earl of Suffolk, Sir Walter Earle, Sir John Hippisley, Mr. +Goodwin, and Mr. Robinson; whom the King asked if they had power to +treat; and when they said no, why they might not as well have been sent +by a trumpeter. The propositions were the same dethroning ones which +they used to send, and therefore the King would not assent to them. Nor +did the Scots swallow them at first, but made some exceptions against +them; only, it seems, to make the Parliament perceive they meant not to +put the King into their hands gratis. And so at last the bargain was +made between them; and upon the payment of 200,000_l._ the King was put +into the hands of the commissioners, which the English Parliament sent +down to receive him. + +_B._ What a vile complexion has this action, compounded of feigned +religion and very covetousness, cowardice, perjury, and treachery! + +_A._ Now the war, that seemed to justify many unseemly things, is ended, +you will see almost nothing else in these rebels but baseness and +falseness besides their folly. + +By this time the Parliament had taken in all the rest of the King’s +garrisons; whereof the last was Pendennis Castle, whither Duke Hamilton +had been sent prisoner by the King. + +_B._ What was done during this time in Ireland and Scotland? + +_A._ In Ireland there had been a peace made by order from his Majesty +for a time, which by divisions amongst the Irish was ill kept. The +Popish party, the Pope’s nuncio being then there, took this to be the +time for delivering themselves from their subjection to the English. +Besides, the time of the peace was now expired. + +_B._ How were they subject to the English, more than the English to the +Irish? They were subject to the King of England; but so also were the +English to the King of Ireland. + +_A._ This distinction is somewhat too subtile for common understandings. +In Scotland the Marquis of Montrose for the King, with very few men and +miraculous victories, had overrun all Scotland, where many of his +forces, out of too much security, were permitted to be absent for +awhile; of which the enemy having intelligence, suddenly came upon them, +and forced them to fly back into the Highlands to recruit; where he +began to recover strength, when he was commanded by the King, then in +the hands of the Scots at Newcastle, to disband; and he departed from +Scotland by sea. + +In the end of the same year, 1646, the Parliament caused the King’s +Great Seal to be broken; also the King was brought to Holmeby, and there +kept by the Parliament’s commissioners. And here was an end of that war +as to England and Scotland, but not to Ireland. About this time also +died the Earl of Essex, whom the Parliament had discarded. + +_B._ Now that there was peace in England, and the King in prison, in +whom was the sovereign power? + +_A._ The right was certainly in the King, but the exercise was yet in +nobody; but contended for as in a game at cards, without fighting, all +the years 1647 and 1648, between the Parliament and Oliver Cromwell, +lieutenant-general to Sir Thomas Fairfax. + +You must know, that when King Henry VIII abolished the pope’s authority +here, and took upon him to be the head of the Church, the bishops, as +they could not resist him, so neither were they discontented with it. +For whereas before the pope allowed not the bishops to claim +jurisdiction in their diocesses _jure divino_, that is of right +immediately from God, but by the gift and authority of the pope, now +that the pope was ousted, they made no doubt but that the divine right +was in themselves. After this, the city of Geneva, and divers other +places beyond sea, having revolted from the papacy, set up presbyteries +for the government of their several churches. And divers English +scholars, that went beyond sea during the persecution in the time of +Queen Mary, were much taken with this government, and at their return in +the time of Queen Elizabeth, and ever since, have endeavoured, to the +great trouble of the Church and nation, to set up that government here, +wherein they might domineer and applaud their own wit and learning. And +these took upon them not only a Divine right, but also a Divine +inspiration. And having been connived at, and countenanced sometimes in +their frequent preaching, they introduced many strange and many +pernicious doctrines, out-doing the Reformation, as they pretended, both +of Luther and Calvin; receding from the former divinity or church +philosophy (for religion is another thing), as much as Luther and Calvin +had receded from the pope; and distracted their auditors into a great +number of sects, as Brownists, Anabaptists, Independents, +Fifth-monarchy-men, Quakers, and divers others, all commonly called by +the name of fanatics: insomuch as there was no so dangerous an enemy to +the Presbyterians, as this brood of their own hatching. + +These were Cromwell’s best cards, whereof he had a very great number in +the army, and some in the House, whereof he himself was thought one; +though he were nothing certain, but, applying himself always to the +faction that was strongest, was of a colour like it. + +There were in the army a great number, if not the greatest part, that +aimed only at rapine and sharing the lands and goods of their enemies; +and these also, upon the opinion they had of Cromwell’s valour and +conduct, thought they could not any way better arrive at their ends than +by adhering to him. Lastly, in the Parliament itself, though not the +major part, yet a considerable number were fanatics enough to put in +doubts, and cause delay in the resolutions of the House, and sometimes +also by advantage of a thin House to carry a vote in favour of Cromwell, +as they did upon the 26th of July. For whereas on the 4th of May +precedent the Parliament had voted that the militia of London should be +in the hands of a committee of citizens, whereof the Lord Mayor for the +time being should be one; shortly after, the Independents, chancing to +be the majority, made an ordinance, by which it was put into hands more +favourable to the army. + +The best cards the Parliament had, were the city of London and the +person of the King. The General, Sir Thomas Fairfax, was right +Presbyterian, but in the hands of the army, and the army in the hands of +Cromwell; but which party should prevail, depended on the playing of the +game. Cromwell protested still obedience and fidelity to the Parliament; +but meaning nothing less, bethought him and resolved on a way to excuse +himself of all that he should do to the contrary upon the army. +Therefore he and his son-in-law, Commissary-General Ireton (as good at +contriving as himself, and at speaking and writing better), contrive how +to mutiny the army against the Parliament. To this end they spread a +whisper through the army, that the Parliament, now they had the King, +intended to disband them, to cheat them of their arrears, and to send +them into Ireland to be destroyed by the Irish. The army being herewith +enraged, were taught by Ireton to erect a council amongst themselves of +two soldiers out of every troop and every company, to consult for the +good of the army, and to assist at the council of war, and to advise for +the peace and safety of the kingdom. These were called adjutators; so +that whatsoever Cromwell would have to be done, he needed nothing to +make them do it but secretly to put it into the head of these +adjutators. The effect of the first consultation was to take the King +from Holmeby and to bring him to the army. + +The general hereupon, by letter to the Parliament, excuses himself and +Cromwell, and the body of the army, as ignorant of the fact; and that +the King came away willingly with those soldiers that brought him: +assuring them withal, that the whole army intended nothing but peace, +nor opposed Presbytery, nor affected Independency, nor did hold any +licentious freedom in religion. + +_B._ It is strange that Sir Thomas Fairfax could be so abused by +Cromwell as to believe this which he himself here writes. + +_A._ I cannot believe that Cornet Joyce could go out of the army with +1,000 soldiers to fetch the King, and neither the general nor the +lieutenant-general, nor the body of the army take notice of it. And that +the King went willingly, appears to be false by a message sent on +purpose from his Majesty to the Parliament. + +_B._ Here is perfidy upon perfidy: first, the perfidy of the Parliament +against the King, and then the perfidy of the army against the +Parliament. + +_A._ This was the first trick Cromwell played, whereby he thought +himself to have gotten so great an advantage that he said openly, “That +he had the Parliament in his pocket,” as indeed he had, and the city +too. For upon the news of it they were, both one and the other, in very +great disorder, and the more, because there came with it a rumour that +the army was marching up to London. + +The King in the meantime, till his residence was settled at Hampton +Court, was carried from place to place, not without some ostentation; +but with much more liberty, and with more respect shewn him by far, than +when he was in the hands of the Parliament’s commissioners; for his own +chaplains were allowed him, and his children and some friends permitted +to see him. Besides that, he was much complimented by Cromwell, who +promised him, in a serious and seeming passionate manner, to restore him +to his right against the Parliament. + +_B._ How was he sure he could do that? + +_A._ He was not sure; but he was resolved to march up to the city and +Parliament, to set up the King again, and be the second man, unless in +the attempt he found better hope, than yet he had, to make himself the +first man by dispossessing the King. + +_B._ What assistance against the Parliament and the city could Cromwell +expect from the King? + +_A._ By declaring directly for him he might have had all the King’s +party, which were many more now since his misfortune than ever they were +before. For in the Parliament itself, there were many that had +discovered the hypocrisy and private aims of their fellows: many were +converted to their duty by their own natural reason; and their +compassion for the King’s sufferings had begot generally an indignation +against the Parliament: so that if they had been by the protection of +the present army brought together and embodied, Cromwell might have done +what he had pleased, in the first place for the King, and in the second +for himself. But it seems he meant first to try what he could do without +the King; and if that proved enough, to rid his hands of him. + +_B._ What did the Parliament and city do to oppose the army? + +_A._ First, the Parliament sent to the general to redeliver the King to +their commissioners. Instead of an answer to this, the army sent +articles to the Parliament, and with them a charge against eleven of +their members, all of them active Presbyterians: of which articles these +are some: 1. That the House may be purged of those, who, by the +self-denying ordinance, ought not to be there; 2. That such as abused +and endangered the kingdom, might be disabled to do the like hereafter; +3. That a day might be appointed to determine this Parliament; 4. That +they would make an account to the kingdom of the vast sums of money they +had received; 5. That the eleven members might presently be suspended +sitting in the House. These were the articles that put them to their +trumps; and they answered none of them, but that of the suspension of +the eleven members, which they said they could not do by law till the +particulars of the charge were produced: but this was soon answered with +their own proceeding against the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Earl +of Strafford. + +The Parliament being thus somewhat awed, and the King made somewhat +confident, he undertakes the city, requiring the Parliament to put the +militia of London into other hands. + +_B._ What other hands? I do not well understand you. + +_A._ I told you that the militia of London was, on the 4th of May, put +into the hands of the lord-mayor and other citizens, and soon after put +into the hands of other men more favourable to the army. And now I am to +tell you, that on July the 26th, the violence of certain apprentices and +disbanded soldiers forced the Parliament to re-settle it as it was, in +the citizens; and hereupon the two speakers and divers of the members +ran away to the army, where they were invited and contented to sit and +vote in the council of war in nature of a Parliament. And out of the +citizens' hands they would have the militia taken away, and put again +into those hands out of which it was taken the 26th of July. + +_B._ What said the city to this? + +_A._ The Londoners manned their works, viz: the line of communication; +raised an army of valiant men within the line; chose good officers, all +being desirous to go out and fight whensoever the city should give them +order; and in that posture stood expecting the enemy. + +The soldiers in the meantime enter into an engagement to live and die +with Sir Thomas Fairfax, and the Parliament, and the army. + +_B._ That is very fine. They imitate that which the Parliament did, when +they first took up arms against the King, styling themselves the King +and Parliament, maintaining that the King was always virtually in his +Parliament: so the army now, making war against the Parliament, called +themselves the Parliament and the army: but they might, with more +reason, say, that the Parliament, since it was in Cromwell’s pocket, was +virtually in the army. + +_A._ Withal they send out a declaration of the grounds of their march +towards London; wherein they take upon them to be judges of the +Parliament, and of who are fit to be trusted with the business of the +kingdom, giving them the name, not of the Parliament, but of the +gentlemen at Westminster. For since the violence they were under July +the 26th, the army denied them to be a lawful Parliament. At the same +time they sent a letter to the mayor and aldermen of London, reproaching +them with those late tumults; telling them they were enemies to the +peace, treacherous to the Parliament, unable to defend either the +Parliament or themselves; and demanded to have the city delivered into +their hands, to which purpose, they said, they were now coming to them. +The general also sent out his warrants to the counties adjacent, +summoning their trained soldiers to join with them. + +_B._ Were the trained soldiers part of the general’s army? + +_A._ No, nor at all in pay, nor could be without an order of Parliament. +But what might an army not do, after it had mastered all the laws of the +land? The army being come to Hounslow Heath, distant from London but ten +miles, the Court of Aldermen was called to consider what to do. The +captains and soldiers of the city were willing, and well provided, to go +forth and give them battle. But a treacherous officer, that had charge +of a work on Southwark side, had let in within the line a small party of +the enemies, who marched as far as to the gate of London-bridge; and +then the Court of Aldermen, their hearts failing them, submitted on +these conditions: to relinquish their militia; to desert the eleven +members; to deliver up the forts and line of communication, together +with the Tower of London, and all magazines and arms therein, to the +army; to disband their forces and turn out all the reformadoes, that is, +all Essex’s old soldiers; to draw off the guards from the Parliament. +All which was done, and the army marched triumphantly through the +principal streets of the city. + +_B._ It is strange that the mayor and aldermen, having such an army, +should so quickly yield. Might they not have resisted the party of the +enemy at the bridge, with a party of their own; and the rest of the +enemies, with the rest of their own? + +_A._ I cannot judge of that: but to me it would have been strange if +they had done otherwise. For I consider the most part of rich subjects, +that have made themselves so by craft and trade, as men that never look +upon anything but their present profit; and who, to every thing not +lying in that way, are in a manner blind, being amazed at the very +thought of plundering. If they had understood what virtue there is to +preserve their wealth in obedience to their lawful sovereign, they would +never have sided with the Parliament; and so we had had no need of +arming. The mayor and aldermen therefore, being assured by this +submission to save their goods, and not sure of the same by resisting, +seem to me to have taken the wisest course. Nor was the Parliament less +tame than the city. For presently, August the 6th, the general brought +the fugitive speakers and members to the House with a strong guard of +soldiers, and replaced the speakers in their chairs. And for this they +gave the general thanks, not only there in the House, but appointed also +a day for a holy thanksgiving; and not long after made him Generalissimo +of all the forces of England and Constable of the Tower. But in effect +all this was the advancement of Cromwell; for he was the usufructuary, +though the property were in Sir Thomas Fairfax. For the Independents +immediately cast down the whole line of communication; divided the +militia of London, Westminster and Southwark, which were before united; +displaced such governors of towns and forts as were not for their turn, +though placed there by ordinance of Parliament; instead of whom, they +put in men of their own party. They also made the Parliament to declare +null all that had passed in the Houses from July the 26th to August the +6th, and clapped in prison some of the lords, and some of the most +eminent citizens, whereof the lord mayor was one. + +_B._ Cromwell had power enough now to restore the King. Why did he not? + +_A._ His main end was to set himself in his place. The restoring of the +King was but a reserve against the Parliament, which being in his +pocket, he had no more need of the King, who was now an impediment to +him. To keep him in the army was a trouble; to let him fall into the +hands of the Presbyterians had been a stop to his hopes; to murder him +privately, besides the horror of the act, now whilst he was no more than +lieutenant-general, would have made him odious without furthering his +design. There was nothing better for his purpose than to let him escape +from Hampton Court, where he was too near the Parliament, whither he +pleased beyond the sea. For though Cromwell had a great party in the +Parliament House whilst they saw not his ambition to be their master, +yet they would have been his enemies as soon as that had appeared. To +make the King attempt an escape, some of those that had him in custody, +by Cromwell’s direction told him that the adjutators meant to murder +him; and withal caused a rumour of the same to be generally spread, to +the end it might that way also come to the King’s ear, as it did. + +The King, therefore, in a dark and rainy night, his guards being +retired, as it was thought, on purpose, left Hampton Court and went to +the sea-side about Southampton, where a vessel had been bespoken to +transport him but failed; so that the King was forced to trust himself +with Colonel Hammond, then governor of the Isle of Wight; expecting +perhaps some kindness from him, for Dr. Hammond’s sake, brother to the +colonel and his Majesty’s much favoured chaplain. But it proved +otherwise; for the colonel sent to his masters of the Parliament, to +receive their orders concerning him. This going into the Isle of Wight +was not likely to be any part of Cromwell’s design, who neither knew +whither nor which way he would go; nor had Hammond known any more than +other men, if the ship had come to the appointed place in due time. + +_B._ If the King had escaped into France, might not the French have +assisted him with forces to recover his kingdom, and so frustrated the +designs both of Cromwell and all the King’s other enemies? + +_A._ Yes, much; just as they assisted his son, our present most gracious +Sovereign, who two years before fled thither out of Cornwall. + +_B._ It is methinks no great polity in neighbouring princes to favour, +so often as they do, one another’s rebels, especially when they rebel +against monarchy itself. They should rather, first, make a league +against rebellion, and afterwards, if there be no remedy, fight one +against another. Nor will that serve the turn amongst Christian +sovereigns, till preaching be better looked to, whereby the +interpretation of a verse in the Hebrew, Greek, or Latin Bible, is +oftentimes the cause of civil war and the deposing and assassinating of +God’s anointed. And yet, converse with those divinity-disputers as long +as you will, you will hardly find one in a hundred discreet enough to be +employed in any great affair either of war or peace. It is not the right +of the sovereign, though granted to him by every man’s express consent, +that can enable him to do his office; it is the obedience of the +subject, that must do that. For what good is it to promise allegiance, +and then by and by to cry out, as some ministers did in the pulpit, _To +your tents, O Israel!_? Common people know nothing of right or wrong by +their own meditation; they must therefore be taught the grounds of their +duty, and the reasons why calamities ever follow disobedience to their +lawful sovereigns. But to the contrary, our rebels were publicly taught +rebellion in the pulpits; and that there was no sin, but the doing of +what the preachers forbade, or the omission of what they advised. But +now the King was the Parliament’s prisoner, why did not the +Presbyterians advance their own interest by restoring him? + +_A._ The Parliament, in which there were more Presbyterians yet than +Independents, might have gotten what they would of the King during his +life, if they had not by an unconscionable and sottish ambition +obstructed the way to their ends. They sent him four propositions, to be +signed and passed by him as Acts of Parliament; telling him, when these +were granted, they would send commissioners to treat with him of any +other articles. + +The propositions were these: First, that the Parliament should have the +militia, and the power of levying money to maintain it, for twenty +years; and after that term, the exercise thereof to return to the King, +in case the Parliament think the safety of the kingdom concerned in it. + +_B._ The first article takes from the King the militia, and consequently +the whole sovereignty for ever. + +_A._ The second was, that the King should justify the proceedings of the +Parliament against himself; and declare void all oaths and declarations +made by him against the Parliament. + +_B._ This was to make him guilty of the war, and of all the blood spilt +therein. + +_A._ The third was, to take away all titles of honour conferred by the +King since the Great Seal was carried to him in May 1642. + +The fourth was, that the Parliament should adjourn themselves, when, and +to what place, and for what time they pleased. + +These propositions the King refused to grant, as he had reason; but sent +others of his own, not much less advantageous to the Parliament, and +desired a personal treaty with the Parliament for the settling of the +peace of the kingdom. But the Parliament denying them to be sufficient +for that purpose, voted that there should be no more addresses made to +him, nor messages received from him; but that they would settle the +kingdom without him. And this they voted partly upon the speeches and +menaces of the army-faction then present in the House of Commons, +whereof one advised these three points: 1. To secure the King in some +inland castle with guards; 2. To draw up articles of impeachment against +him; 3. To lay him by, and settle the kingdom without him. + +Another said, that his denying of the four bills was the denying +protection to his subjects; and that therefore they might deny him +subjection; and added, that till the Parliament forsook the army, the +army would never forsake the Parliament. This was threatening. + +Last of all, Cromwell himself told them, it was now expected that the +Parliament should govern and defend the kingdom, and not any longer let +the people expect their safety from a man whose heart God had hardened; +nor let those, that had so well defended the Parliament, be left +hereafter to the rage of an irreconcilable enemy, lest they seek their +safety some other way. This again was threatening; as also the laying +his hand upon his sword when he spake it. + +And hereupon the vote of non-addresses was made an ordinance; which the +House would afterwards have recalled, but was forced by Cromwell to keep +their word. + +The Scotch were displeased with it; partly, because their brethren the +Presbyterians had lost a great deal of their power in England; and +partly also, because they had sold the King into their hands. + +The King now published a passionate complaint to his people of this hard +dealing with him; which made them pity him, but not yet rise in his +behalf. + +_B._ Was not this, think you, the true time for Cromwell to take +possession? + +_A._ By no means. There were yet many obstacles to be removed. He was +not general of the army. The army was still for a Parliament. The city +of London discontented about their militia. The Scots expected with an +army to rescue the King. His adjutators were levellers, and against +monarchy, who though they had helped him to bring under the Parliament, +yet, like dogs that are easily taught to fetch, and not easily taught to +render, would not make him king. So that Cromwell had these businesses +following to overcome, before he could formally make himself a sovereign +prince: 1. To be Generalissimo: 2. To remove the King: 3. To suppress +all insurrections here: 4. To oppose the Scots: and lastly, to dissolve +the present Parliament. Mighty businesses, which he could never promise +himself to overcome. Therefore I cannot believe he then thought to be +King; but only by well serving the strongest party, which was always his +main polity, to proceed as far as that and fortune would carry him. + +_B._ The Parliament were certainly no less foolish than wicked, in +deserting thus the King, before they had the army at a better command +than they had. + +_A._ In the beginning of 1648 the Parliament gave commission to Philip +Earl of Pembroke, then made Chancellor of Oxford, together with some of +the doctors there as good divines as he, to purge the University. By +virtue whereof they turned out all such as were not of their faction, +and all such as had approved the use of the Common-prayer-book; as also +divers scandalous ministers and scholars, that is, such as customarily +and without need took the name of God into their mouths, or used to +speak wantonly, or use the company of lewd women: and for this last I +cannot but commend them. + +_B._ So shall not I; for it is just such another piece of piety, as to +turn men out of an hospital because they are lame. Where can a man +probably learn godliness, and how to correct his vices, better than in +the universities erected for that purpose? + +_A._ It may be, the Parliament thought otherwise. For I have often heard +the complaints of parents, that their children were debauched there to +drunkenness, wantonness, gaming, and other vices consequent to these. +Nor is it a wonder amongst so many youths, if they did corrupt one +another in despite of their tutors, who oftentimes were little elder +than themselves. And therefore I think the Parliament did not much +reverence that institution of universities, as to the bringing up of +young men to virtue; though many of them learned there to preach, and +became thereby capable of preferment and maintenance; and some others +were sent thither by their parents, to save themselves the trouble of +governing them at home, during that time wherein children are least +governable. Nor do I think the Parliament cared more for the clergy than +other men did. But certainly an university is an excellent servant to +the clergy; and the clergy, if it be not carefully looked to, by their +dissensions in doctrines and by the advantage to publish their +dissensions, is an excellent means to divide a kingdom into factions. + +_B._ But seeing there is no place in this part of the world, where +philosophy and other human sciences are not highly valued; where can +they be learned better than in the Universities? + +_A._ What other sciences? Do not divines comprehend all civil and moral +philosophy within their divinity? And as for natural philosophy, is it +not removed from Oxford and Cambridge to Gresham College in London, and +to be learned out of their gazettes? But we are gone from our subject. + +_B._ No; we are indeed gone from the greater businesses of the kingdom; +to which, if you please, let us return. + +_A._ The first insurrection, or rather tumult, was that of the +apprentices, on the 9th of April. But this was not upon the King’s +account, but arose from a customary assembly of them for recreation in +Moorfields, whence some zealous officers of the trained soldiers would +needs drive them away by force; but were themselves routed with stones; +and had their ensign taken away by the apprentices, which they carried +about in the streets, and frighted the lord mayor into his house; where +they took a gun called a drake; and then they set guards at some of the +gates, and all the rest of the day childishly swaggered up and down: but +the next day the general himself marching into the city, quickly +dispersed them. This was but a small business, but enough to let them +see that the Parliament was ill-beloved of the people. + +Next, the Welch took arms against them. There were three colonels in +Wales, Langhorne, Poyer, and Powel, who had formerly done the Parliament +good service, but now were commanded to disband; which they refused to +do; and the better to strengthen themselves, declared for the King; and +were about 8,000. + +About the same time, in Wales also, was another insurrection, headed by +Sir Nicholas Keymish, and another under Sir John Owen; so that now all +Wales was in rebellion against the Parliament: and yet all these were +overcome in a month’s time by Cromwell and his officers; but not without +store of bloodshed on both sides. + +_B._ I do not much pity the loss of those men, that impute to the King +that which they do upon their own quarrel. + +_A._ Presently after this, some of the people of Surrey sent a petition +to the Parliament for a personal treaty between the King and Parliament; +but their messengers were beaten home again by the soldiers that were +quartered about Westminster and the mews. And then the Kentish men +having a like petition to deliver, and seeing how ill it was like to be +received, threw it away and took up arms. They had many gallant +officers, and for general the Earl of Norwich; and increased daily by +apprentices and old disbanded soldiers. Insomuch as the Parliament was +glad to restore to the city their militia, and to keep guards on the +Thames side: and then Fairfax marched towards the enemy. + +_B._ And then the Londoners, I think, might easily and suddenly have +mastered, first the Parliament, and next Fairfax his 8,000, and lastly +Cromwell’s army; or at least have given the Scotch army opportunity to +march unfoughten to London. + +_A._ It is true: but the city was never good at venturing; nor were they +or the Scots principled to have a King over them, but under them. +Fairfax marching with his 8,000 against the royalists, routed a part of +them at Maidstone; another part were taking in other places in Kent +further off; and the Earl of Norwich with the rest came to Blackheath, +and thence sent to the city to get passage through it, to join with +those which were risen in Essex under Sir Charles Lucas and Sir George +Lisle; which being denied, the greatest part of his Kentish men deserted +him. With the rest, not above 500, he crossed the Thames into the Isle +of Dogs, and so to Bow, and thence to Colchester. Fairfax having notice +of this, crossed the Thames at Gravesend; and overtaking them, besieged +them in Colchester. The town had no defence but a breastwork, and yet +held out, upon hope of the Scotch army to relieve them, the space of two +months. Upon the news of the defeat of the Scots they were forced to +yield. The Earl of Norwich was sent prisoner to London. Sir Charles +Lucas and Sir George Lisle, two loyal and gallant persons, were shot to +death. There was also another little insurrection, headed by the Earl of +Holland, about Kingston; but quickly suppressed, and he himself taken +prisoner. + +_B._ How came the Scots to be so soon dispatched? + +_A._ Merely, as it is said, for want of conduct. Their army was led by +Duke Hamilton, who was then set at liberty, when Pendennis Castle, where +he was prisoner, was taken by the Parliamentarians. He entered England +with horse and foot 15,000, to which came above 3,000 English royalists. +Against these Cromwell marched out of Wales with horse and foot 11,000, +and near to Preston in Lancashire, in less than two hours, defeated +them. And the cause of it is said to be, that the Scotch army was so +ordered as they could not all come to the fight, nor relieve their +fellows. After the defeat, they had no way to fly but further into +England; so that in the pursuit they were almost all taken, and lost all +that an army can lose; for the few that got home, did not all bring home +their swords. Duke Hamilton was taken, and not long after sent to +London. But Cromwell marched on to Edinburgh, and there, by the help of +the faction which was contrary to Hamilton’s, he made sure not to be +hindered in his designs; the first whereof was to take away the King’s +life by the hand of the Parliament. + +Whilst these things passed in the north, the Parliament, Cromwell being +away, came to itself, and recalling their vote of non-addresses, sent to +the King new propositions, somewhat, but not much, easier than formerly. +And upon the King’s answer to them, they sent commissioners to treat +with him at Newport in the Isle of Wight; where they so long dodged with +him about trifles, that Cromwell was come to London before they had +done, to the King’s destruction. For the army was now wholly at the +devotion of Cromwell, who set the adjutators on work again to make a +remonstrance to the House of Commons, wherein they require: 1. That the +King be brought to justice: 2. That the Prince and the Duke of York be +summoned to appear at a day appointed, and proceeded with, according as +they should give satisfaction: 3. That the Parliament settle the peace +and future government, and set a reasonable period to their own sitting, +and make certain future Parliaments annual or biennial: 4. That a +competent number of the King’s chief instruments be executed. And this +to be done both by the House of Commons and by a general agreement of +the people testified by their subscriptions. Nor did they stay for an +answer, but presently set a guard of soldiers at the Parliament-house +door, and other soldiers in Westminster Hall, suffering none to go into +the House but such as would serve their turns. All others were frighted +away, or made prisoners, and some upon divers quarrels suspended; above +ninety of them, because they had refused to vote against the Scots; and +others, because they had voted against the vote of non-addresses: and +the rest were a House for Cromwell. The fanatics also in the city being +countenanced by the army, pack a new common-council, whereof any forty +was to be above the mayor; and their first work was to frame a petition +for justice against the King, which Tichborne, the mayor, involving the +city in the regicide, delivered to the Parliament. + +At the same time, with the like violence, they took the King from +Newport in the Isle of Wight, to Hurst Castle, till things were ready +for his trial. The Parliament in the meantime, to avoid perjury, by an +ordinance declared void the oaths of supremacy and allegiance, and +presently after made another to bring the King to his trial. + +_B._ This is a piece of law that I understood not before, that when many +swear singly, they may, when they are assembled, if they please, absolve +themselves. + +_A._ The ordinance being drawn up was brought into the House, where +after three several readings it was voted, “that the Lords and Commons +of England, assembled in Parliament, do declare, that by the fundamental +laws of the realm, it is treason in the King of England to levy war +against the Parliament.” And this vote was sent up to the Lords; and +they denying their consent, the Commons in anger made another vote; +“That all members of committees should proceed and act in any ordinance, +whether the Lords concurred or no; and that the people, under God, are +the original of all just power; and that the House of Commons have the +supreme power of the nation; and that whatsoever the House of Commons +enacteth, is law.” All this passed _nemine contradicente_. + +_B._ These propositions fight not only against the King of England, but +against all the kings of the world. It were good they thought on it. But +yet, I believe, under God the original of all laws was in the people. + +_A._ But the people, for them and their heirs, by consent and oaths, +have long ago put the supreme power of the nation into the hands of +their kings, for them and their heirs; and consequently into the hands +of this King, their known and lawful heir. + +_B._ But does not the Parliament represent the people? + +_A._ Yes, to some purposes; as to put up petitions to the King, when +they have leave, and are grieved; but not to make a grievance of the +King’s power. Besides, the Parliament never represents the people but +when the King calls them; nor is it to be imagined that he calls a +Parliament to depose himself. Put the case, every county and borough +should have given this Parliament for a benevolence a sum of money; and +that every county, meeting in their county-court or elsewhere, and every +borough in their town-hall, should have chosen men to carry their +several sums respectively to the Parliament. Had not these men +represented the whole nation? + +_B._ Yes, no doubt. + +_A._ Do you think the Parliament would have thought it reasonable to be +called to account by this representative? + +_B._ No, sure; and yet I must confess the case is the same. + +_A._ This ordinance contained, first, a summary of the charge against +the King, in substance this; that not content with the encroachments of +his predecessors upon the freedom of the people, he had designed to set +up a tyrannical government; and to that end, had raised and maintained +in the land a civil war against the Parliament, whereby the country hath +been miserably wasted, the public treasure exhausted, thousands of +people murdered, and infinite other mischiefs committed. Secondly, a +constitution passed of a high court of justice, that is, of a certain +number of commissioners, of whom any twenty had power to try the King, +and to proceed to sentence according to the merit of the cause, and see +it speedily executed. + +The commissioners met on Saturday, January 20th, in Westminster Hall, +and the King was brought before them; where, sitting in a chair, he +heard the charge read, but denied to plead to it either guilty or not +guilty, till he should know by what lawful authority he was brought +thither. The president told him that the Parliament affirmed their own +authority; and the King still persevered in his refusal to plead. Though +many words passed between him and the president, yet this was the +substance of it all. + +On Monday January 22nd the court met again, and the solicitor moved that +if the King persisted in denying the authority of the court, the charge +might be taken _pro confesso_: but the King still denied their +authority. + +They met again January the 23rd, and then the solicitor moved the court +for judgment; whereupon the King was required to give his final answer; +which was again a denial of their authority. + +Lastly, they met again January the 27th, where the King desired to be +heard before the Lords and Commons in the Painted Chamber, and promising +after that to abide the judgment of the court. The commissioners retired +for half an hour to consider of it, and then returning caused the King +to be brought again to the bar, and told him that what he proposed was +but another denial of the court’s jurisdiction; and that if he had no +more to say, they would proceed. Then the King answering that he had no +more to say, the president began a long speech in justification of the +Parliament’s proceedings, producing the examples of many kings killed or +deposed by wicked Parliaments, ancient and modern, in England, Scotland, +and other parts of the world. All which he endeavoured to justify from +this only principle; that the people have the supreme power, and the +Parliament is the people. This speech ended, the sentence of death was +read; and the same upon Tuesday after, January 30th, executed at the +gate of his own palace of Whitehall. He that can delight in reading how +villainously he was used by the soldiers between the sentence and +execution, may go to the chronicle itself; in which he shall see what +courage, patience, wisdom, and goodness was in this prince, whom in +their charge the members of that wicked Parliament styled tyrant, +traitor, and murderer. + +The King being dead, the same day they made an act of Parliament, that +whereas several pretences might be made to the crown, &c. it is enacted +by this present Parliament and by authority of the same, that no person +presume to declare, proclaim, or publish, or any way promote Charles +Stuart, son of Charles late King of England, commonly called Prince of +Wales, or any other person, to be King of England or Ireland, &c. + +_B._ Seeing the King was dead, and his successor barred; by what +declared authority was the peace maintained? + +_A._ They had, in their anger against the Lords, formerly declared the +supreme power of the nation to be in the House of Commons; and now, on +February the 5th, they vote the House of Lords to be useless and +dangerous. And thus the kingdom is turned into a democracy, or rather an +oligarchy: for presently they made an act, that none of those members, +who were secluded for opposing the vote of non-addresses, should ever be +re-admitted. And these were commonly called the secluded members; and +the rest were by some styled a Parliament, and by others the Rump. + +I think you need not now have a catalogue, either of the vices, or of +the crimes, or of the follies of the greatest part of them that composed +the Long Parliament; than which greater cannot be in the world. What +greater vices than irreligion, hypocrisy, avarice and cruelty; which +have appeared so eminently in the actions of Presbyterian members, and +Presbyterian ministers? What greater crimes than blaspheming and killing +God’s anointed; which was done by the hands of the Independents; but by +the folly and first treason of the Presbyterians who betrayed and sold +him to his murderers? Nor was it a little folly in the Lords, not to see +that by the taking away of the King’s power they lost withal their own +privileges; or to think themselves, either for number or judgment, any +way a considerable assistance to the House of Commons. And for those men +who had skill in the laws, it was no great sign of understanding not to +perceive that the laws of the land were made by the King, to oblige his +subjects to peace and justice, and not to oblige himself that made them. +And lastly and generally, all men are fools which pull down anything +which does them good, before they have set up something better in its +place. He that would set up democracy with an army, should have an army +to maintain it; but these men did it, when those men had the army that +were resolved to pull it down. To these follies I might add the folly of +those fine men, which out of their reading of Tully, Seneca, or other +anti-monarchics, think themselves sufficient politicians, and show their +discontents when they are not called to the management of the state, and +turn from one side to another upon every neglect they fancy from the +King or his enemies. + + + + + PART IV. + + ========== + +_A._ You have seen the Rump in possession, as they believed, of the +supreme power over the two nations of England and Ireland, and the army +their servant; though Cromwell thought otherwise, serving them +diligently for the advancement of his own purposes. I am now therefore +to show you their proceedings. + +_B._ Tell me first, how this kind of government under the Rump or relic +of a House of Commons is to be called? + +_A._ It is doubtless an oligarchy. For the supreme authority must needs +be in one man or in more. If in one, it is monarchy; the Rump therefore +was no monarchy. If the authority were in more than one, it was in all, +or in fewer than all. When in all, it is democracy; for every man may +enter into the assembly which makes the Sovereign Court; which they +could not do here. It is therefore manifest, that the authority was in a +few, and consequently the state was an oligarchy. + +_B._ Is it not impossible for a people to be well governed, that are to +obey more masters than one? + +_A._ Both the Rump and all other sovereign assemblies, if they have but +one voice, though they be many men, yet are they but one person. For +contrary commands cannot consist in one and the same voice, which is the +voice of the greatest part; and therefore they might govern well enough, +if they had honesty and wit enough. + +The first act of the Rump was the exclusion of those members of the +House of Commons, which had been formerly kept out by violence for the +procuring of an ordinance for the King’s trial; for these men had +appeared against the ordinance of non-addresses, and therefore were +excluded, because they might else be an impediment to their future +designs. + +_B._ Was it not rather, because in the authority of few they thought the +fewer the better, both in respect of their shares and also of a nearer +approach in every one of them to the dignity of king? + +_A._ Yes certainly, that was their principal end. + +_B._ When these were put out, why did not the counties and boroughs +choose others in their places? + +_A._ They could not do that without order from the House. + +After this they constituted a council of forty persons, which they +termed a Council of State, whose office was to execute what the Rump +should command. + +_B._ When there was neither King nor House of Lords, they could not call +themselves a Parliament; for a Parliament is a meeting of the King, +Lords, and Commons, to confer together about the businesses of the +commonwealth. With whom did the Rump confer? + +_A._ Men may give to their assembly what name they please, what +signification soever such name might formerly have had; and the Rump +took the name of Parliament, as most suitable to their purpose, and such +a name, as being venerable amongst the people for many hundred years, +had countenanced and sweetened subsidies and other levies of money, +otherwise very unpleasant to the subject. They took also afterwards +another name, which was _Custodes Libertatis Angliæ_, which title they +used only in their writs issuing out of the courts of justice. + +_B._ I do not see how a subject that is tied to the laws, can have more +liberty in one form of government than another. + +_A._ Howsoever to the people, that understand by liberty nothing but +leave to do what they list, it was a title not ingrateful. + +Their next work was to set forth a public declaration, that they were +fully resolved to maintain the fundamental laws of the nation, as to the +preservation of the lives, liberties, and proprieties of the people. + +_B._ What did they mean by the fundamental laws of the nation? + +_A._ Nothing but to abuse the people. For the only fundamental law in +every commonwealth, is to obey the laws from time to time, which he +shall make to whom the people have given the supreme power. How likely +then are they to uphold the fundamental laws, that had murdered him who +was by themselves so often acknowledged for their lawful sovereign? +Besides, at the same time that this declaration came forth, they were +erecting that High Court of Justice which took away the lives of Duke +Hamilton, the Earl of Holland, and the Lord Capel. Whatsoever they meant +by a fundamental law, the erecting of this court was a breach of it, as +being warranted by no former law or example in England. + +At the same time also they levied taxes by soldiers, and to soldiers +permitted free quarter, and did many other actions, which if the King +had done, they would have said had been done against the liberty and +propriety of the subject. + +_B._ What silly things are the common sort of people, to be cozened as +they were so grossly! + +_A._ What sort of people, as to this matter, are not of the common sort? +The craftiest knaves of all the Rump were no wiser than the rest whom +they cozened. For the most of them did believe that the same things +which they imposed upon the generality, were just and reasonable; and +especially the great haranguers, and such as pretended to learning. For +who can be a good subject in a monarchy, whose principles are taken from +the enemies of monarchy, such as were Cicero, Seneca, Cato, and other +politicians of Rome, and Aristotle of Athens, who seldom spake of kings +but as of wolves and other ravenous beasts? You may perhaps think a man +has need of nothing else to know the duty he owes to his governor, and +what right he has to order him, but a good natural wit; but it is +otherwise. For it is a science, and built upon sure and clear +principles, and to be learned by deep and careful study, or from masters +that have deeply studied it. And who was there in the Parliament or in +the nation, that could find out those evident principles, and derive +from them the necessary rules of justice, and the necessary connexion of +justice and peace? The people have one day in seven the leisure to hear +instruction, and there are ministers appointed to teach them their duty. +But how have those ministers performed their office? A great part of +them, namely, the Presbyterian ministers, throughout the whole war, +instigated the people against the King; so did also Independents and +other fanatic ministers. The rest, contented with their livings, +preached in their parishes points of controversy, to religion +impertinent, but to the breach of charity among themselves very +effectual; or else eloquent things, which the people either understood +not, or thought themselves not concerned in. But this sort of preachers, +as they did little good, so they did little hurt. The mischief proceeded +wholly from the Presbyterian preachers, who, by a long practised, +histrionic faculty, preached up the rebellion powerfully. + +_B._ To what end? + +_A._ To the end that the State becoming popular, the Church might be so +too, and governed by an Assembly; and by consequence, as they thought, +seeing politics are subservient to religion, they might govern, and +thereby satisfy not only their covetous humour with riches, but also +their malice with power to undo all men that admired not their wisdom. +Your calling the people silly things, obliged me by this digression to +show you, that it is not want of wit, but want of the science of +justice, that brought them into these troubles. Persuade, if you can, +that man that has made his fortune, or made it greater, or an eloquent +orator, or a ravishing poet, or a subtle lawyer, or but a good hunter or +a cunning gamester, that he has not a good wit; and yet there were of +all these a great many so silly, as to be deceived by the Rump and +members of the same Rump. They wanted not wit, but the knowledge of the +causes and grounds upon which one person has a right to govern, and the +rest an obligation to obey; which grounds are necessary to be taught the +people, who without them cannot live long in peace amongst themselves. + +_B._ Let us return, if you please, to the proceedings of the Rump. + +_A._ In the rest of this year they voted a new stamp for the coin of +this nation. They considered also of agents to be sent to foreign +states; and having lately received applause from the army for their work +done by the High Court of Justice, and encouragement to extend the same +further, they perfected the said High Court of Justice, in which were +tried Duke Hamilton, the Earl of Holland, Lord Capel, the Earl of +Norwich, and Sir John Owen; whereof, as I mentioned before, the three +first were beheaded. This affrighted divers of the King’s party out of +the land; for not only they, but all that had borne arms for the King, +were at that time in very great danger of their lives. For it was put to +the question by the army at a council of war, whether they should be all +massacred or no; where the noes carried it but by two voices. Lastly, +March the 24th, they put the Mayor of London out of his office, fined +him 2,000_l._, disfranchised him, and condemned him to two months +imprisonment in the Tower, for refusing to proclaim the act for +abolishing the kingly power. And thus ended the year 1648 and the +monthly fast; God having granted that which they fasted for, the death +of the King and the possession of his inheritance. By these their +proceedings they had already lost the hearts of the generality of the +people, and had nothing to trust to but the army; which was not in their +power, but in Cromwell’s; who never failed, when there was occasion, to +put them upon all exploits that might make them odious to the people, in +order to his future dissolving them whensoever it should conduce to his +ends. + +In the beginning of 1649 the Scots, discontented with the proceedings of +the Rump against the late King, began to levy soldiers in order to a new +invasion of England. The Irish rebels, for want of timely resistance +from England, were grown terrible; and the English army at home, +infected by the adjutators, were casting how to share the land amongst +the godly, meaning themselves and such others as they pleased, who were +therefore called Levellers. Also the Rump for the present were not very +well provided of money, and, therefore, the first thing they did, was +the laying of a tax upon the people of 90,000_l._ a month for the +maintenance of the army. + +_B._ Was it not one of their quarrels with the King, that he had levied +money without the consent of the people in Parliament? + +_A._ You may see by this, what reason the Rump had to call itself a +Parliament. For the taxes imposed by Parliament were always understood +to be by the people’s consent, and consequently legal. To appease the +Scots, they sent messengers with flattering letters to keep them from +engaging for the present King: but in vain: for they would hear nothing +from a House of Commons, as they called it, at Westminster, without a +King and Lords. But they sent commissioners to the King, to let him know +what they were doing for him: for they were resolved to raise an army of +17,000 foot and 6,000 horse for themselves. + +To relieve Ireland, the Rump had resolved to send eleven regiments +thither out of the army in England. This happened well for Cromwell. For +the levelling soldiers, which were in every regiment many, and in some +the major part, finding that instead of dividing the land at home they +were to venture their lives in Ireland, flatly denied to go; and one +regiment, having cashiered their colonel about Salisbury, was marching +to join with three regiments more of the same resolution; but both the +general and Cromwell falling upon them at Burford, utterly defeated +them, and soon after reduced the whole army to their obedience. And thus +another of the impediments to Cromwell’s advancement was soon removed. +This done, they came to Oxford, and thence to London: and at Oxford, +both the general and Cromwell were made doctors of the civil law; and at +London, feasted and presented by the city. + +_B._ Were they not first made masters, and then doctors? + +_A._ They had made themselves already masters, both of the laws and +Parliament. The army being now obedient, the Rump sent over those eleven +regiments into Ireland, under the command of Dr. Cromwell, intituled +governor of that kingdom, the Lord Fairfax being still general of all +the forces, both here and there. + +The Marquis, now Duke, of Ormond was the King’s lieutenant of Ireland; +and the rebels had made a confederacy amongst themselves; and these +confederates had made a kind of league with the lieutenant, wherein they +agreed, upon liberty given them in the exercise of their religion, to be +faithful to and assist the King. To these also were joined some forces +raised by the Earls of Castlehaven and Clanricarde and my Lord +Inchiquin; so that they were the greatest united strength in the island. +But there were amongst them a great many other Papists, that would by no +means subject themselves to Protestants; and these were called the +Nuntio’s party, as the others were called the confederate party. These +parties not agreeing, and the confederate party having broken their +articles, the lord-lieutenant seeing them ready to besiege him in +Dublin, and not able to defend it, did, to preserve the place for the +Protestants, surrender it to the Parliament of England; and came over to +the King at that time when he was carried from place to place by the +army. From England he went over to the Prince, now King, residing then +at Paris. + +But the confederates, affrighted with the news that the Rump was sending +over an army thither, desired the Prince by letters, to send back my +Lord of Ormond, engaging themselves to submit absolutely to the King’s +authority, and to obey my Lord of Ormond as his lieutenant. And hereupon +he was sent back. This was about a year before the going over of +Cromwell. + +In which time, by the dissensions in Ireland between the confederate +party and the Nuntio’s party, and discontents about command, this +otherwise sufficient power effected nothing; and was at last defeated, +August the 2nd, by a sally out of Dublin, which they were besieging. +Within a few days after arrived Cromwell, who with extraordinary +diligence and horrid executions, in less than a twelvemonth that he +stayed there, subdued in a manner the whole nation; having killed or +exterminated a great part of them, and leaving his son-in-law Ireton to +subdue the rest. But Ireton died there before the business was quite +done, of the plague. This was one step more towards Cromwell’s +exaltation to the throne. + +_B._ What a miserable condition was Ireland reduced to by the learning +of the Roman, as well as England was by the learning of the Presbyterian +clergy. + +_A._ In the latter end of the preceding year the King was come from +Paris to the Hague; and shortly after came thither from the Rump their +agent Dorislaus, doctor of civil law, who had been employed in the +drawing up of the charge against the late King. But the first night he +came, as he was at supper, a company of cavaliers, near a dozen, entered +his chamber, killed him, and got away. Not long after also their agent +at Madrid, one Ascham, one that had written in defence of his masters, +was killed in the same manner. About this time came out two books, one +written by Salmasius, a Presbyterian, against the murder of the King; +another written by Milton, an English Independent, in answer to it. + +_B._ I have seen them both. They are very good Latin both, and hardly to +be judged which is better; and both very ill reasoning, hardly to be +judged which is worse; like two declamations, _pro_ and _con_, made for +exercise only in a rhetoric school by one and the same man. So like is a +Presbyterian to an Independent. + +_A._ In this year the Rump did not much at home; save that in the +beginning they made England a free state by an act which runs thus: “Be +it enacted and declared by this present Parliament, and by the authority +thereof, that the people of England, and all the dominions and +territories thereunto belonging, are, and shall be, and are hereby +constituted, made, and declared a commonwealth and free state, &c.” + +_B._ What did they mean by a free state and commonwealth? Were the +people no longer to be subject to laws? They could not mean that: for +the Parliament meant to govern them by their own laws, and punish such +as broke them. Did they mean that England should not be subject to any +foreign kingdom or commonwealth? That needed not be enacted, seeing +there was no king nor people pretended to be their masters. What did +they mean then? + +_A._ They meant that neither this king, nor any king, nor any single +person, but only that they themselves would be the people’s masters, and +would have set it down in those plain words, if the people could have +been cozened with words intelligible, as easily as with words not +intelligible. + +After this they gave one another money and estates out of the lands and +goods of the loyal party. They enacted also an engagement to be taken by +every man, in these words: _You shall promise to be true and faithful to +the commonwealth of England, as it is now established, without King or +House of Lords._ + +They banished also from within twenty miles of London all the royal +party, forbidding also every one of them to depart more than five miles +from his dwelling-house. + +_B._ They meant perhaps to have them ready, if need were, for a +massacre. But what did the Scots in this time? + +_A._ They were considering of the officers of the army which they were +levying for the King, how they might exclude from command all such as +had loyally served his father, and all Independents, and all such as +commanded in Duke Hamilton’s army; and these were the main things that +passed this year. + +The Marquis of Montrose, that in the year 1645 had with a few men and in +little time done things almost incredible against the late King’s +enemies in Scotland, landed now again, in the beginning of the year +1650, in the north of Scotland, with commission from the present King, +hoping to do him as good service as he had formerly done his father. But +the case was altered; for the Scotch forces were then in England in the +service of the Parliament; whereas now they were in Scotland, and many +more for their intended invasion newly raised. Besides, the soldiers +which the Marquis brought over were few, and foreigners; nor did the +Highlanders come in to him, as he expected; insomuch as he was soon +defeated, and shortly after taken, and, with more spiteful usage than +revenge required, executed by the Covenanters of Edinburgh, May the 2nd. + +_B._ What good could the King expect from joining with these men, who +during the treaty discovered so much malice to him in one of his best +servants? + +_A._ No doubt, their churchmen being then prevalent, they would have +done as much to this King as the English Parliament had done to his +father, if they could have gotten by it that which they foolishly +aspired to, the government of the nation. I do not believe that the +Independents were worse than the Presbyterians: both the one and the +other were resolved to destroy whatsoever should stand in the way to +their ambition. But necessity made the King pass over both this and many +other indignities from them, rather than suffer the pursuit of his right +in England to cool, and be little better than extinguished. + +_B._ Indeed I believe a kingdom, if suffered to become an old debt, will +hardly ever be recovered. Besides, the King was sure, wheresoever the +victory lighted, he could lose nothing in the war but enemies. + +_A._ About the time of Montrose’s death, which was in May, Cromwell was +yet in Ireland, and his work unfinished. But finding, or by his friends +advertised, that his presence in the expedition now preparing against +the Scots would be necessary to his design, he sent to the Rump to know +their pleasure concerning his return. But for all that, he knew, or +thought it was not necessary to stay for their answer, but came away, +and arrived at London the 6th of June following, and was welcomed by the +Rump. Now General Fairfax, who was truly what he pretended to be, a +Presbyterian, had been so catechised by the Presbyterian ministers here, +that he refused to fight against the brethren in Scotland; nor did the +Rump nor Cromwell go about to rectify his conscience in that point. And +thus Fairfax laying down his commission, Cromwell was now made general +of all the forces in England and Ireland; which was another step to the +sovereign power. + +_B._ Where was the King? + +_A._ In Scotland, newly come over. He landed in the north, and was +honourably conducted to Edinburgh, though all things were not yet well +agreed on between the Scots and him. For though he had yielded to as +hard conditions as the late King had yielded to in the Isle of Wight, +yet they had still somewhat to add, till the King, enduring no more, +departed from them towards the north again. But they sent messengers +after him to pray him to return, but they furnished these messengers +with strength enough to bring him back, if he should have refused. In +fine they agreed; but would not suffer either the King, or any royalist, +to have command in the army. + +_B._ The sum of all is, the King was there a prisoner. + +_A._ Cromwell from Berwick sends a declaration to the Scots, telling +them he had no quarrel against the people of Scotland, but against the +malignant party that had brought in the King, to the disturbance of the +peace between the two nations; and that he was willing, either by +conference to give and receive satisfaction, or to decide the justice of +the cause by battle. To which the Scots answering, declare, that they +will not prosecute the King’s interest before and without his +acknowledgment of the sins of his house and his former ways, and +satisfaction given to God’s people in both kingdoms. Judge by this +whether the present King were not in as bad a condition here, as his +father was in the hands of the Presbyterians of England. + +_B._ Presbyterians are everywhere the same: they would fain be absolute +governors of all they converse with; and have nothing to plead for it, +but that where they reign, it is God that reigns, and nowhere else. But +I observe one strange demand, that the King should acknowledge the sins +of his house; for I thought it had been certainly held by all divines, +that no man was bound to acknowledge any man’s sins but his own. + +_A._ The King having yielded to all that the Church required, the Scots +proceeded in their intended war. Cromwell marched on to Edinburgh, +provoking them all he could to battle; which they declining, and +provisions growing scarce in the English army, Cromwell retired to +Dunbar, despairing of success; and intending by sea or land to get back +into England. And such was the condition which this general Cromwell, so +much magnified for conduct, had brought his army to, that all his +glories had ended in shame and punishment, if fortune and the faults of +his enemies had not relieved him. For as he retired, the Scots followed +him close all the way till within a mile of Dunbar. There is a ridge of +hills, that from beyond Edinburgh goes winding to the sea, and crosses +the highway between Dunbar and Berwick, at a village called +Copperspeith, where the passage is so difficult, that had the Scots sent +timely thither a very few men to guard it, the English could never have +gotten home. For the Scots kept the hills, and needed not have fought +but upon great advantage, and were almost two to one. Cromwell’s army +was at the foot of those hills, on the north side; and there was a great +ditch or channel of a torrent between the hills and it; so that he could +never have got home by land, nor without utter ruin of the army +attempted to ship it; nor have stayed where he was, for want of +provisions. Now Cromwell knowing the pass was free, and commanding a +good party of horse and foot to possess it, it was necessary for the +Scots to let them go, whom they bragged they had impounded, or else to +fight; and therefore with the best of their horse they charged the +English, and made them at first shrink a little. But the English foot +coming on, the Scots were put to flight; and the flight of the horse +hindered the foot from engaging; who therefore fled, as did also the +rest of their horse. Thus the folly of the Scottish commanders brought +all their odds to an even lay between two small and equal parties; +wherein fortune gave the victory to the English, who were not many more +in number than those that were killed and taken prisoners of the Scots; +and the Church lost their cannon, bag and baggage, with 10,000 arms, and +almost their whole army. The rest were got together by Lesley to +Stirling. + +_B._ This victory happened well for the King. For had the Scots been +victors, the Presbyterians, both here and there, would have domineered +again, and the King been in the same condition his father was in at +Newcastle, in the hands of the Scottish army. For in pursuit of this +victory, the English at last brought the Scots to a pretty good habit of +obedience for the King, whensoever he should recover his right. + +_A._ In pursuit of this victory the English marched to Edinburgh +(quitted by the Scots), fortified Leith, and took in all the strength +and castles they thought fit on this side the Frith, which now was +become the bound betwixt the two nations. And the Scotch ecclesiastics +began to know themselves better; and resolved in their new army, which +they meant to raise, to admit some of the royalists into command. +Cromwell from Edinburgh marched towards Stirling, to provoke the enemy +to fight, but finding danger in it returned to Edinburgh and besieged +the castle. In the meantime he sent a party into the west of Scotland to +suppress Strachan and Kerr, two great Presbyterians that were there +levying forces for their new army. And in the same time the Scots +crowned the King at Scone. + +The rest of this year was spent in Scotland, on Cromwell’s part, in +taking of Edinburgh Castle and in attempts to pass the Frith, or any +other ways to get over to the Scottish forces; and on the Scots' part, +in hastening their levies for the north. + +_B._ What did the Rump at home during this time? + +_A._ They voted liberty of conscience to the sectaries; that is, they +plucked out the sting of Presbytery, which consisted in a severe +imposing of odd opinions upon the people, impertinent to religion, but +conducing to the advancement of the power of the Presbyterian ministers. +Also they levied more soldiers, and gave the command of them to +Harrison, now made major-general, a Fifth-monarchy-man; and of these +soldiers two regiments of horse and one of foot were raised by the +Fifth-monarchy-men and other sectaries, in thankfulness for this their +liberty from the Presbyterian tyranny. Also they pulled down the late +King’s statue in the Exchange, and in the niche where it stood, caused +to be written these words: _Exit tyrannus, Regum ultimus, etc._ + +_B._ What good did that do them, and why did they not pull down the +statues of all the rest of the Kings? + +_A._ What account can be given of actions that proceed not from reason, +but spite and such-like passions? Besides this, they received +ambassadors from Portugal and from Spain, acknowledging their power. And +in the very end of the year they prepared ambassadors to the Netherlands +to offer them friendship. All they did besides, was persecuting and +executing of royalists. + +In the beginning of the year 1651 General Dean arrived in Scotland; and +on the 11th of April the Scottish Parliament assembled, and made certain +acts in order to a better uniting of themselves, and better obedience to +the King, who was now at Stirling with the Scottish forces he had, +expecting more now in levying. Cromwell from Edinburgh went divers times +towards Stirling to provoke the Scots to fight. There was no ford there +to pass over his men; at last boats being come from London and +Newcastle, Colonel Overton (though it was long first, for it was now +July) transported 1,400 foot of his own, besides another regiment of +foot and four troops of horse, and entrenched himself at Northferry on +the other side; and before any help could come from Stirling, +Major-General Lambert also was got over with as many more. By this time +Sir John Browne was come to oppose them with 4,500 men, whom the English +there defeated, killing about 2,000 and taking prisoners 1,600. This +done, and as much more of the army transported as was thought fit, +Cromwell comes before St. Johnstone’s (from whence the Scottish +Parliament, upon the news of his passing the Frith, was removed to +Dundee) and summons it; and the same day had news brought him that the +King was marching from Stirling towards England; which was true. But +notwithstanding the King was three days' march before him, he resolved +to have the town before he followed him; and accordingly had it the next +day by surrender. + +_B._ What hopes had the King in coming into England, having before and +behind him none, at least none armed, but his enemies? + +_A._ Yes; there was before him the city of London, which generally hated +the Rump, and might easily be reckoned for 20,000 well-armed soldiers; +and most men believed they would take his part, had he come near the +city. + +_B._ What probability was there of that? Do you think the Rump was not +sure of the services of the mayor and those that had command of the city +militia? And if they had been really the King’s friends, what need had +they to stay for his coming up to London? They might have seized the +Rump, if they had pleased, which had no possibility of defending +themselves; at least they might have turned them out of the House. + +_A._ This they did not; but on the contrary, permitted the recruiting of +Cromwell’s army, and the raising of men to keep the country from coming +in to the King. The King began his march from Stirling the last of July, +and August the 22nd came to Worcester by way of Carlisle with a weary +army of about 13,000, whom Cromwell followed, and joining with the new +levies environed Worcester with 40,000, and on the 3rd of September +utterly defeated the King’s army. Here Duke Hamilton, brother of him +that was beheaded, was slain. + +_B._ What became of the King? + +_A._ Night coming on, before the city was quite taken he left it; it +being dark and none of the enemy’s horse within the town to follow him, +the plundering foot having kept the gates shut, lest the horse should +enter and have a share of the booty. The King before morning got into +Warwickshire, twenty-five miles from Worcester, and there lay disguised +awhile, and afterwards went up and down in great danger of being +discovered, till at last he got over into France, from Brighthelmstone +in Sussex. + +_B._ When Cromwell was gone, what was further done in Scotland? + +_A._ Lieutenant-General Monk, whom Cromwell left there with 7,000, took +Stirling August 14th by surrender, and Dundee the 3rd of September, by +storm, because it resisted. This the soldiers plundered, and had good +booty, because the Scots for safety had sent thither their most precious +goods from Edinburgh and St. Johnstone’s. He took likewise by surrender +Aberdeen, and the place where the Scottish ministers first learned to +play the fool, St. Andrew’s. Also in the Highlands, Colonel Alured took +a knot of lords and gentlemen, viz. four earls and four lords and above +twenty knights and gentlemen, whom he sent prisoners into England. So +that there was nothing more to be feared from Scotland: all the trouble +of the Rump being to resolve what they should do with it. At last they +resolved to unite and incorporate it into one commonwealth with England +and Ireland. And to that end sent thither St. John, Vane, and other +commissioners, to offer them this union by public declaration, and to +warn them to choose their deputies of shires and burgesses of towns, and +send them to Westminster. + +_B._ This was a very great favour. + +_A._ I think so: and yet it was by many of the Scots, especially by the +ministers and other Presbyterians, refused. The ministers had given way +to the levying of money for the payment of the English soldiers; but to +comply with the declaration of the English commissioners they absolutely +forbad. + +_B._ Methinks this contributing to the pay of their conquerors was some +mark of servitude; whereas entering into the union made them free, and +gave them equal privilege with the English. + +_A._ The cause why they refused the union, rendered by the Presbyterians +themselves, was this: that it drew with it a subordination of the Church +to the civil state in the things of Christ. + +_B._ This is a downright declaration to all kings and commonwealths in +general, that a Presbyterian minister will be a true subject to none of +them in the things of Christ; which things what they are, they will be +judges themselves. What have we then gotten by our deliverance from the +Pope’s tyranny, if these petty men succeed in the place of it, that have +nothing in them that can be beneficial to the public, except their +silence? For their learning, it amounts to no more than an imperfect +knowledge of Greek and Latin, and an acquired readiness in the Scripture +language, with a gesture and tone suitable thereunto; but of justice and +charity, the manners of religion, they have neither knowledge nor +practice, as is manifest by the stories I have already told you. Nor do +they distinguish between the godly and the ungodly but by conformity of +design in men of judgment, or by repetition of their sermons in the +common sort of people. + +_A._ But this sullenness of the Scots was to no purpose. For they at +Westminster enacted the union of the two nations and the abolition of +monarchy in Scotland, and ordained punishment for those that should +transgress that act. + +_B._ What other business did the Rump this year? + +_A._ They sent St. John and Strickland ambassadors to the Hague, to +offer league to the United Provinces; who had audience March the 3rd; +St. John in a speech showing those states what advantage they might have +by this league in their trade and navigations, by the use of the English +ports and harbours. The Dutch, though they showed no great forwardness +in the business, yet appointed commissioners to treat with them about +it. But the people were generally against it, calling the ambassadors +and their followers, as they were, traitors and murderers, and made such +tumults about their house that their followers durst not go abroad till +the States had quieted them. The Rump advertised hereof, presently +recalled them. The compliment which St. John gave to the commissioners +at their taking leave, is worth your hearing. _You have_, said he, _an +eye upon the event of the affairs of Scotland, and therefore do refuse +the friendship we have offered. Now I can assure you, many in the +Parliament were of opinion that we should not have sent any ambassadors +to you till we had separated those matters between them and that king, +and then expected your ambassadors to us. I now perceive our error, and +that those gentlemen were in the right. In a short time you shall see +that business ended; and then you will come and seek what we have freely +offered, when it shall perplex you that you have refused our proffer._ + +_B._ St. John was not sure that the Scottish business would end as it +did. For though the Scots were beaten at Dunbar, he could not be sure of +the event of their entering England, which happened afterward. + +_A._ But he guessed well: for within a month after the battle at +Worcester, an act passed forbidding the importing of merchandize in +other than English ships. The English also molested their fishing upon +our coast. They also many times searched their ships (upon occasion of +our war with France), and made some of them prize. And then the Dutch +sent their ambassadors hither to desire what they before refused; but +partly also to inform themselves what naval forces the English had +ready, and how the people here were contented with the government. + +_B._ How sped they? + +_A._ The Rump showed now as little desire of agreement as the Dutch did +then; standing upon terms never likely to be granted. First, for the +fishing on the English coast, that they should not have it without +paying for it. Secondly, that the English should have free trade from +Middleburgh to Antwerp, as they had before their rebellion against the +King of Spain. Thirdly, they demanded amends for the old, but never to +be forgotten business of Amboyna. So that the war was already certain, +though the season kept them from action till the spring following. The +true quarrel, on the English part, was that their proffered friendship +was scorned, and their ambassadors affronted; on the Dutch part, was +their greediness to engross all traffic, and a false estimate of our and +their own strength. + +Whilst these things were doing, the relics of the war, both in Ireland +and Scotland, were not neglected, though those nations were not fully +pacified till two years after. The persecution also of royalists still +continued, amongst whom was beheaded one Mr. Love, for holding +correspondence with the King. + +_B._ I had thought a Presbyterian minister, whilst he was such, could +not be a royalist, because they think their assembly have the supreme +power in the things of Christ; and by consequence they are in England, +by a statute, traitors. + +_A._ You may think so still: for though I called Mr. Love a royalist, I +meant it only for that one act for which he was condemned. It was he who +during the treaty at Uxbridge, preaching before the commissioners there, +said, it was as possible for heaven and hell, as for the King and +Parliament, to agree. Both he and the rest of the Presbyterians are and +were enemies to the King’s enemies, Cromwell and his fanatics, for their +own and not for the King’s sake. Their loyalty was like that of Sir John +Hotham’s, that kept the King out of Hull, and afterwards would have +betrayed the same to the Marquis of Newcastle. These Presbyterians +therefore cannot be rightly called loyal, but rather doubly perfidious, +unless you think that as two negatives make an affirmative, so two +treasons make loyalty. + +This year also were reduced to the obedience of the Rump the islands of +Scilly and Man, and the Barbadoes, and St. Christopher’s. One thing fell +out that they liked not, which was, that Cromwell gave them warning to +determine their sitting, according to the bill for triennial +Parliaments. + +_B._ That I think indeed was harsh. + +_A._ In the year 1652, May the 14th, began the Dutch war, in this +manner. Three Dutch men-of-war, with divers merchants from the +straights, being discovered by one Captain Young, who commanded some +English frigates, the said Young sent to their admiral to bid him strike +his flag, a thing usually done in acknowledgment of the English dominion +in the narrow seas; which accordingly he did. Then came up the +vice-admiral, and being called to as the other was, to take down his +flag, he answered plainly he would not: but after the exchange of four +or five broadsides and mischief done on either part, he took it down. +But Captain Young demanded also, either the vice-admiral himself or his +ship to make good the damage already sustained; to which the +vice-admiral answered that he had taken in his flag, but would defend +himself and his ship. Whereupon Captain Young consulting with the +captains of his other ships, lest the beginning of the war in this time +of treaty should be charged upon himself, and night also coming on, +thought fit to proceed no further. + +_B._ The war certainly began at this time. But who began it? + +_A._ The dominion of the seas belonging to the English, there can be no +question but the Dutch began it: and that the said dominion belonged to +the English, it was confessed at first by the admiral himself peaceably, +and at last by the vice-admiral taking in their flags. + +About a fortnight after there happened another fight upon the like +occasion. Van Tromp, with forty-two men-of-war, came to the back of +Goodwin Sands, Major Bourne being then with a few of the Parliament +ships in the Downs, and Blake with the rest further westward; and sent +two captains of his to Bourne, to excuse his coming thither. To whom +Bourne returned this answer, that the message was civil, but that it +might appear real he ought to depart. So Van Tromp departed, meaning, +now Bourne was satisfied, to sail towards Blake, and he did so; but so +did also Bourne, for fear of the worst. When Van Tromp and Blake were +near one another, Blake made a shot over Van Tromp’s ship, as a warning +to him to take in his flag. This he did thrice, and then Van Tromp gave +him a broadside; and so began the fight, (at the beginning whereof +Bourne came in), and lasted from two o’clock till night, the English +having the better, and the flag, as before, making the quarrel. + +_B._ What needs there, when both nations were heartily resolved to +fight, to stand so much upon this compliment of who should begin? For as +to the gaining of friends and confederates thereby, I think it was in +vain; seeing princes and states in such occasions look not much upon the +justice of their neighbours, but upon their own concernment in the +event. + +_A._ It is commonly so; but in this case, the Dutch knowing the dominion +of the narrow seas to be a gallant title, and envied by all the nations +that reach the shore, and consequently that they were likely to oppose +it, did wisely enough in making this point the state of the quarrel. +After this fight the Dutch ambassadors residing in England sent a paper +to the council of state, wherein they styled this last encounter a rash +action, and affirmed it was done without the knowledge and against the +will of their lords the States-general, and desired them that nothing +might be done upon it in heat, which might become irreparable. The +Parliament hereupon voted: 1. That the States-general should pay the +charges they were at, and for the damages they sustained upon this +occasion. 2. That this being paid, there should be a cessation of all +acts of hostility, and a mutual restitution of all ships and goods +taken. 3. And both these agreed to, that there should be made a league +between the two commonwealths. These votes were sent to the Dutch +ambassadors in answer of the said paper; but with a preamble setting +forth the former kindnesses of England to the Netherlands, and taking +notice of their new fleet of 150 men-of-war, without any other apparent +design than the destruction of the English fleet. + +_B._ What answer made the Dutch to this? + +_A._ None. Van Tromp sailed presently to Zealand, and Blake with seventy +men-of-war to the Orkney Islands to seize their busses, and to wait for +five Dutch ships from the East Indies. And Sir George Askew, newly +returned from the Barbadoes, came into the Downs with fifteen +men-of-war, where he was commanded to stay for a recruit out of the +Thames. + +Van Tromp being recruited now to 120 sail, made account to get in +between Sir George Askew and the mouth of the river, but was hindered so +long by contrary winds, that the merchants calling for his convoy he +could stay no longer; and so he went back into Holland, and thence to +Orkney, where he met with the said five East India ships and sent them +home. And then he endeavoured to engage with Blake, but a sudden storm +forced him to sea, and so dissipated his fleet that only forty-two came +home in a body, the rest singly as well as they could. Blake also came +home (but went first to the coast of Holland) with 900 prisoners and six +men-of-war taken, which were part of twelve which he found and took +guarding their busses. This was the first bout after the war declared. + +In August following there happened a fight between De Ruyter, the +admiral of Zealand, with fifty men-of-war, and Sir George Askew, near +Plymouth, with forty, wherein Sir George had the better, and might have +got an entire victory had the whole fleet engaged. Whatsoever was the +matter, the Rump, though they rewarded him, never more employed him +after his return in their service at sea: but voted for the year to come +three generals, Blake that was one already, and Dean, and Monk. + +About this time the Archduke Leopold besieging Dunkirk, and the French +sending a fleet to relieve it, General Blake lighting on the French at +Calais, and taking seven of their ships, was cause of the town’s +surrender. + +In September they fought again, De Witt and De Ruyter commanding the +Dutch, and Blake the English; and the Dutch were again worsted. + +Again, in the end of November, Van Tromp with eighty men-of-war shewed +himself at the back of Goodwin Sands; where Blake, though he had with +him but forty, adventured to fight with him, and had much the worst, and +night parting the fray, retired into the river Thames; whilst Van Tromp +keeping the sea, took some inconsiderable vessels from the English, and +thereupon, as it was said, with a childish vanity hung out a broom from +the main-top-mast, signifying he meant to sweep the seas of all English +shipping. + +After this, in February, the Dutch with Van Tromp were encountered by +the English under Blake and Dean near Portsmouth, and had the worst. And +these were all the encounters between them in this year in the narrow +seas. They fought also once at Leghorn, where the Dutch had the better. + +_B._ I see no great odds yet on either side; if there were any, the +English had it. + +_A._ Nor did either of them the more incline to peace. For the +Hollanders, after they had sent ambassadors into Denmark, Sweden, +Poland, and the Hanse Towns whence tar and cordage are usually had, to +signify the declaration of the war, and to get them to their party, +recalled their ambassadors from England. And the Rump without delay, +gave them their parting audience, without abating a syllable of their +former severe propositions; and presently, to maintain the war for the +next year, laid a tax upon the people of 120,000_l._ _per mensem_. + +_B._ What was done in the mean time at home? + +_A._ Cromwell was now quarrelling with the last and greatest obstacle to +his design, the Rump. And to that end there came out daily from the army +petitions, addresses, remonstrances, and other such papers; some of them +urging the Rump to dissolve themselves and make way for another +Parliament. To which the Rump, unwilling to yield and not daring to +refuse, determined for the end of their sitting the 5th of November +1654. But Cromwell meant not to stay so long. + +In the meantime the army in Ireland was taking submissions, and granting +transportations of the Irish, and condemning whom they pleased in a High +Court of Justice erected there for that purpose. Amongst those that were +executed, was hanged Sir Phelim O’Neale, who first began the rebellion. +In Scotland the English built some citadels for the bridling of that +stubborn nation. And thus ended the year 1652. + +_B._ Come we then to the year 1653. + +_A._ Cromwell wanted now but one step to the end of his ambition, and +that was to set his foot upon the neck of this Long Parliament; which he +did April the 23rd of this present year 1653, a time very seasonable. +For though the Dutch were not mastered yet, they were much weakened; and +what with prizes from the enemy and squeezing the royal party, the +treasury was pretty full, and the tax of 120,000_l._ a month began to +come in; all which was his own in right of the army. + +Therefore, without more ado, attended by the Major-Generals Lambert and +Harrison, and some other officers, and as many soldiers as he thought +fit, he went to the Parliament House, and dissolved them, turning them +out, and locked up the doors. And for this action he was more applauded +by the people than for any of his victories in the war, and the +Parliament men as much scorned and derided. + +_B._ Now that there was no Parliament, who had the supreme power? + +_A._ If by power you mean the right to govern, nobody had it. If you +mean the supreme strength, it was clearly in Cromwell, who was obeyed as +general of all the forces in England, Scotland, and Ireland. + +_B._ Did he pretend that for title? + +_A._ No: but presently after he invented a title, which was this; that +he was necessitated for the defence of the cause, for which at first the +Parliament had taken up arms, that is to say, rebelled, to have recourse +to extraordinary actions. You know the pretence of the Long Parliament’s +rebellion was _salus populi_, the safety of the nation against a +dangerous conspiracy of Papists and a malignant party at home; and that +every man is bound, as far as his power extends, to procure the safety +of the whole nation, which none but the army were able to do, and the +Parliament had hitherto neglected. Was it not then the general’s duty to +do it? Had he not therefore right? For that law of _salus populi_ is +directed only to those that have power enough to defend the people; that +is, to them that have the supreme power. + +_B._ Yes, certainly, he had as good a title as the Long Parliament. But +the Long Parliament did represent the people; and it seems to me that +the sovereign power is essentially annexed to the representative of the +people. + +_A._ Yes, if he that makes a representative, that is in the present case +the King, do call them together to receive the sovereign power, and he +divest himself thereof; otherwise not. Nor was ever the Lower House of +Parliament the representative of the whole nation, but of the commons +only; nor had that House the power to oblige by their acts or +ordinances, any lord or any priest. + +_B._ Did Cromwell come in upon the only title of _salus populi_? + +_A._ This is a title that very few men understand. His way was to get +the supreme power conferred upon him by Parliament. Therefore he called +a Parliament, and gave it the supreme power, to the end that they should +give it to him again. Was not this witty? First, therefore, he published +a declaration of the causes why he dissolved the Parliament. The sum +whereof was, that instead of endeavouring to promote the good of God’s +people, they endeavoured, by a bill then ready to pass, to recruit the +House and perpetuate their own power. Next he constituted a council of +state of his own creatures, to be the supreme authority of England; but +no longer than till the next Parliament should be called and met. +Thirdly, he summoned 142 persons, such as he himself or his trusty +officers made choice of; the greatest part of whom were instructed what +to do; obscure persons, and most of them fanatics, though styled by +Cromwell men of approved fidelity and honesty. To these the council of +state surrendered the supreme authority, and not long after these men +surrendered it to Cromwell. July the 4th this Parliament met, and chose +for their Speaker one Mr. Rous, and called themselves from that time +forward the Parliament of England. But Cromwell, for the more surety, +constituted also a council of state; not of such petty fellows as most +of these were, but of himself and his principal officers. These did all +the business, both public and private; making ordinances, and giving +audiences to foreign ambassadors. But he had now more enemies than +before. Harrison, who was the head of the Fifth-monarchy-men, laying +down his commission, did nothing but animate his party against him; for +which afterwards he was imprisoned. This little Parliament in the +meantime were making of acts so ridiculous and displeasing to the +people, that it was thought he chose them on purpose to bring all ruling +Parliaments into contempt, and monarchy again into credit. + +_B._ What acts were these? + +_A._ One of them was, that all marriages should be made by a justice of +peace, and the banns asked three several days in the next market: none +were forbidden to be married by a minister, but without a justice of +peace the marriage was to be void: so that divers wary couples, to be +sure of one another, howsoever they might repent it afterwards, were +married both ways. Also they abrogated the engagement, whereby no man +was admitted to sue in any court of law that had not taken it, that is, +that had not acknowledged the late Rump. + +_B._ Neither of these did any hurt to Cromwell. + +_A._ They were also in hand with an act to cancel all the present laws +and law-books, and to make a new code more suitable to the humour of the +Fifth-monarchy-men; of whom there were many in this Parliament. Their +tenet being, that there ought none to be sovereign but King Jesus, nor +any to govern under him but the saints. But their authority ended before +this act passed. + +_B._ What is this to Cromwell? + +_A._ Nothing yet. But they were likewise upon an act, now almost ready +for the question, that Parliaments henceforward, one upon the end of +another, should be perpetual. + +_B._ I understand not this; unless Parliaments can beget one another +like animals, or like the phœnix. + +_A._ Why not like the phœnix? Cannot a Parliament at the day of their +expiration send out writs for a new one? + +_B._ Do you think they would not rather summon themselves anew; and to +save the labour of coming again to Westminster, sit still where they +were? Or if they summon the country to make new elections, and then +dissolve themselves, by what authority shall the people meet in their +county courts, there being no supreme authority standing? + +_A._ All they did was absurd, though they knew not that; no nor this, +whose design was upon the sovereignty, the contriver of this act, it +seems, perceived not; but Cromwell’s party in the House saw it well +enough. And therefore, as soon as it was laid, there stood up one of the +members and made a motion, that since the commonwealth was like to +receive little benefit by their sitting, they should dissolve +themselves. Harrison and they of his sect were troubled hereat, and made +speeches against it; but Cromwell’s party, of whom the speaker was one, +left the House, and with the mace before them went to Whitehall, and +surrendered their power to Cromwell that had given it to them. And so he +got the sovereignty by an act of Parliament; and within four days after, +December the 16th, was installed Protector of the three nations, and +took his oath to observe certain rules of governing, engrossed in +parchment and read before him. The writing was called _the instrument_. + +_B._ What were the rules he swore to? + +_A._ One was, to call a Parliament every third year, of which the first +was to begin September the 3rd following. + +_B._ I believe he was a little superstitious in the choice of September +the 3rd, because it was lucky to him in 1650 and 1651, at Dunbar and +Worcester; but he knew not how lucky the same would be to the whole +nation in 1658 at Whitehall. + +_A._ Another was, that no Parliament should be dissolved till it had +sitten five months; and those bills that they presented to him, should +be passed by him within twenty days, or else they should pass without +him. + +A third, that he should have a council of state of not above twenty-one, +nor under thirteen; and that upon the Protector’s death this council +should meet, and before they parted choose a new Protector. There were +many more besides, but not necessary to be inserted. + +_B._ How went on the war against the Dutch? + +_A._ The generals for the English were Blake, and Dean, and Monk; and +Van Tromp for the Dutch; between whom was a battle fought the 2nd of +June, which was a month before the beginning of this little Parliament; +wherein the English had the victory, and drove the enemies into their +harbours, but with the loss of General Dean, slain by a cannon-shot. +This victory was great enough to make the Dutch send over ambassadors +into England, in order to a treaty; but in the meantime they prepared +and put to sea another fleet, which likewise, in the end of July, was +defeated by General Monk, who got now a greater victory than before; and +this made the Dutch descend so far as to buy their peace with the +payment of the charge of the war, and with the acknowledgment, amongst +other articles, that the English had the right of the flag. + +This peace was concluded in March, being the end of this year, but not +proclaimed till April; the money, it seems, being not paid till then. + +The Dutch war being now ended, the Protector sent his youngest son Henry +into Ireland, whom also some time after he made lieutenant there; and +sent Monk lieutenant-general into Scotland, to keep those nations in +obedience. Nothing else worth remembering was done this year at home; +saving the discovery of a plot of royalists, as was said, upon the life +of the Protector, who all this while had intelligence of the King’s +designs from a traitor in his court, who afterwards was taken in the +manner and killed. + +_B._ How came he into so much trust with the King? + +_A._ He was the son of a colonel that was slain in the wars on the late +King’s side. Besides, he pretended employment from the King’s loyal and +loving subjects here, to convey to his Majesty money as they from time +to time should send him; and to make this credible, Cromwell himself +caused money to be sent to him. + +The following year, 1654, had nothing of war, but was spent in civil +ordinances, in appointing of judges, preventing of plots (for usurpers +are jealous), and in executing the King’s friends and selling their +lands. The 3rd of September, according to the instrument, the Parliament +met; in which there was no House of Lords, and the House of Commons was +made, as formerly, of knights and burgesses; but not as formerly, of two +burgesses for a borough and two knights for a county; for boroughs for +the most part had but one burgess, and some counties six or seven +knights. Besides, there were twenty members for Scotland, and as many +for Ireland. So that now Cromwell had nothing else to do but to show his +art of government upon six coach-horses newly presented to him, which, +being as rebellious as himself, threw him out of the coach-box and +almost killed him. + +_B._ This Parliament, which had seen how Cromwell had handled the two +former, the long one and the short one, had surely learned the wit to +behave themselves better to him than those had done? + +_A._ Yes, especially now that Cromwell in his speech at their first +meeting had expressly forbidden them to meddle either with the +government by a single person and Parliament, or with the militia, or +with perpetuating of Parliaments, or taking away liberty of conscience; +and told them also that every member of the House, before they sat, must +take a recognition of his power in divers points. Whereupon, of above +400 there appeared not above 200 at first; though afterwards some +relenting, there sat about 300. Again, just at their sitting down he +published some ordinances of his own, bearing date before their meeting; +that they might see he took his own acts to be as valid as theirs. But +all this could not make them know themselves. They proceeded to debate +of every article of the recognition. + +_B._ They should have debated that before they had taken it. + +_A._ But then they had never been suffered to sit. Cromwell being +informed of their stubborn proceedings, and out of hope of any supply +from them, dissolved them. + +All that passed besides in this year, was the exercise of the High Court +of Justice upon some royalists for plots. + +In the year 1655 the English, to the number of near 10,000, landed in +Hispaniola, in hope of the plunder of the gold and silver, whereof they +thought there was great abundance in the town of Santo Domingo; but were +well beaten by a few Spaniards, and with the loss of near 1,000 men, +went off to Jamaica and possessed it. + +This year also the royal party made another attempt in the west; and +proclaimed there King Charles the Second; but few joining with them, and +some falling off, they were soon suppressed, and many of the principal +persons executed. + +_B._ In these many insurrections, the royalists, though they meant well, +yet they did but disservice to the King by their impatience. What hope +had they to prevail against so great an army as the Protector had ready? +What cause was there to despair of seeing the King’s business done +better by the dissension and ambition of the great commanders in that +army, whereof many had the favour to be as well esteemed amongst them as +Cromwell himself? + +_A._ That was somewhat uncertain. The Protector, being frustrated of his +hope of money at Santo Domingo, resolved to take from the royalists the +tenth part yearly of their estates. And to this end chiefly, he divided +England into eleven major-generalships, with commission to every +major-general to make a roll of the names of all suspected persons of +the King’s party, and to receive the tenth part of their estates within +his precinct; as also to take caution from them not to act against the +state, and to reveal all plots that should come to their knowledge; and +to make them engage the like for their servants. They had commission +also to forbid horse-races and concourse of people, and to receive and +account for this decimation. + +_B._ By this the usurper might easily inform himself of the value of all +the estates in England, and of the behaviour and affection of every +person of quality; which has heretofore been taken for very great +tyranny. + +_A._ The year 1656 was a Parliament-year by the instrument. Between the +beginning of this year and the day of the Parliament’s sitting, which +was September 17, these major-generals, resided in several provinces, +behaving themselves most tyrannically. Amongst other of their tyrannies +was the awing of elections, and making themselves and whom they pleased +to be returned members for the Parliament; which was also thought a part +of Cromwell’s design in their constitution: for he had need of a giving +Parliament, having lately, upon a peace made with the French, drawn upon +himself a war with Spain. + +This year it was that Captain Stainer set upon the Spanish Plate-fleet, +being eight in number, near Cadiz; whereof he sunk two, and took two, +there being in one of them two millions of pieces of eight, which +amounts to 400,000_l._ sterling. + +This year also it was that James Naylor appeared at Bristol, and would +be taken for Jesus Christ. He wore his beard forked, and his hair +composed to the likeness of that in the _Volto Santo_; and being +questioned, would sometimes answer _Thou sayest it_. He had also his +disciples, that would go by his horse’s side to the mid-leg in dirt. +Being sent for by the Parliament, he was sentenced to stand on the +pillory, to have his tongue bored through, and to be marked on the +forehead with the letter B, for blasphemy, and to remain in Bridewell. +Lambert, a great favourite of the army, endeavoured to save him, partly +because he had been his soldier, and partly to curry favour with the +sectaries of the army; for he was now no more in the Protector’s favour, +but meditating how he might succeed him in his power. + +About two years before this, there appeared in Cornwall a prophetess, +much famed for her dreams and visions, and hearkened to by many, whereof +some were eminent officers. But she and some of her accomplices being +imprisoned, we heard no more of her. + +_B._ I have heard of another, one Lilly, that prophecied all the time of +the Long Parliament. What did they to him? + +_A._ His prophecies were of another kind; he was a writer of almanacs, +and a pretender to a pretended art of judicial astrology; a meer cozener +to get maintenance from a multitude of ignorant people; and no doubt had +been called in question, if his prophecies had been any way +disadvantageous to that Parliament. + +_B._ I understand not how the dreams and prognostications of madmen (for +such I take to be all those that foretell future contingencies) can be +of any great disadvantage to the commonwealth. + +_A._ Yes, yes: know, there is nothing that renders human counsels +difficult, but the uncertainty of future time; nor that so well directs +men in their deliberations, as the foresight of the sequels of their +actions; prophecy being many times the principal cause of the event +foretold. If, upon some prediction, the people should have been made +confident that Oliver Cromwell and his army should be, upon a day to +come, utterly defeated; would not every one have endeavoured to assist, +and to deserve well of the party that should give him that defeat? Upon +this account it was that fortune-tellers and astrologers were so often +banished out of Rome. + +The last memorable thing this year, was a motion made by a member of the +House, an alderman of London, that the Protector might be petitioned and +advised by the House to leave the title of Protector, and take upon him +that of King. + +_B._ That was indeed a bold motion, and which would, if prosperous, have +put an end to many men’s ambition, and to the licentiousness of the +whole army. I think the motion was made on purpose to ruin both the +Protector himself and his ambitious officers. + +_A._ It may be so. In the year 1657 the first thing the Parliament did, +was the drawing up of this petition to the Protector, to take upon him +the government of the three nations, with the title of King. As of other +Parliaments, so of this, the greatest part had been either kept out of +the House by force, or else themselves had forborne to sit and become +guilty of setting up this King Oliver. But those few that sat, presented +their petition to the Protector, April the 9th, in the Banquetinghouse +at Whitehall; where Sir Thomas Widdrington, the Speaker, used the first +arguments, and the Protector desired some time to seek God, the business +being weighty. The next day they sent a committee to him to receive his +answer; which answer being not very clear, they pressed him again for a +resolution; to which he made answer in a long speech, that ended in a +peremptory refusal. And so retaining still the title of Protector, he +took upon him the government according to certain articles contained in +the said petition. + +_B._ What made him refuse the title of King? + +_A._ Because he durst not take it at that time; the army being addicted +to their great officers, and amongst their great officers many hoping to +succeed him, and, the succession having been promised to Major-General +Lambert, would have mutinied against him. He was therefore forced to +stay for a more propitious conjuncture. + +_B._ What were those articles? + +_A._ The most important of them were: 1. That he would exercise the +office of chief-magistrate of England, Scotland, and Ireland, under the +title of Protector, and govern the same according to the said petition +and advice: and that he would in his life-time name his successor. + +_B._ I believe the Scots, when they first rebelled, never thought of +being governed absolutely, as they were by Oliver Cromwell. + +_A._ 2. That he should call a Parliament every three years at farthest. +3. That those persons which were legally chosen members, should not be +secluded without consent of the House. In allowing this clause, the +Protector observed not that the secluded members of this same +Parliament, are thereby re-admitted. 4. The members were qualified. 5. +The power of the other House was defined. 6. That no law should be made +but by act of Parliament. 7. That a constant yearly revenue of a million +of pounds should be settled for the maintenance of the army and navy; +and 300,000_l._ for the support of the government, besides other +temporary supplies as the House of Commons should think fit. 8. That all +the officers of state should be chosen by the Parliament. 9. That the +Protector should encourage the ministry. Lastly, that he should cause a +profession of religion to be agreed on and published. There are divers +others of less importance. Having signed the articles, he was presently +with great ceremony installed anew. + +_B._ What needed that, seeing he was still but Protector? + +_A._ But the articles of this petition were not all the same with those +of his former instrument. For now there was to be another House; and +whereas before, his council was to name his successor, he had power now +to do it himself; so that he was an absolute monarch, and might leave +the succession to his son if he would, and so successively, or transfer +it to whom he pleased. + +The ceremony being ended, the Parliament adjourned to the 20th of +January following; and then the other House also sat with their fellows. + +The House of Commons being now full, took little notice of the other +House, wherein there were not of sixty persons above nine lords; but +fell a questioning all that their fellows had done, during the time of +their seclusion; whence had followed the avoidance of the power newly +placed in the Protector. Therefore, going to the House, he made a speech +to them, ending in these words; _By the living God, I must, and do +dissolve you_. + +In this year, the English gave the Spaniard another great blow at Santa +Cruz, not much less than they had given him the year before at Cadiz. + +About the time of the dissolution of this Parliament, the royalists had +another design against the Protector; which was, to make an insurrection +in England, the King being in Flanders ready to second them with an army +thence. But this also was discovered by treachery, and came to nothing +but the ruin of those that were engaged in it; whereof many in the +beginning of the next year were by a High Court of Justice imprisoned, +and some executed. + +This year also was Major-General Lambert put out of all employment, a +man second to none but Oliver in the favour of the army. But because he +expected by that favour, or by promise from the Protector, to be his +successor in the supreme power, it would have been dangerous to let him +have command in the army; the Protector having designed for his +successor his eldest son Richard. + +In the year 1658, September the 3rd, the Protector died at Whitehall; +having ever since his last establishment been perplexed with fear of +being killed by some desperate attempt of the royalists. + +Being importuned in his sickness by his privy-council to name his +successor, he named his son Richard; who, encouraged thereunto, not by +his own ambition, but by Fleetwood, Desborough, Thurlow, and other of +his council, was content to take it upon him; and presently, addresses +were made to him from the armies in England, Scotland and Ireland. His +first business was the chargeable and splendid funeral of his father. + +Thus was Richard Cromwell seated on the imperial throne of England, +Ireland, and Scotland, successor to his father; lifted up to it by the +officers of the army then in town, and congratulated by all the parts of +the army throughout the three nations; scarce any garrison omitting +their particular flattering addresses to him. + +_B._ Seeing the army approved of him, how came he so soon cast off? + +_A._ The army was inconstant; he himself irresolute, and without any +military glory. And though the two principal officers had a near +relation to him; yet neither of them, but Lambert, was the great +favourite of the army; and by courting Fleetwood to take upon him the +Protectorship, and by tampering with the soldiers, he had gotten again +to be a colonel. He and the rest of the officers had a council at +Wallingford House, where Fleetwood dwelt, for the dispossessing of +Richard; though they had not yet considered how the nations should be +governed afterwards. For from the beginning of the rebellion, the method +of ambition was constantly this, first to destroy, and then to consider +what they should set up. + +_B._ Could not the Protector, who kept his court at Whitehall, discover +what the business of the officers was at Wallingford House, so near him? + +_A._ Yes, he was by divers of his friends informed of it; and counselled +by some of them, who would have done it, to kill the chief of them. But +he had not courage enough to give them such a commission. He took, +therefore, the counsel of some milder persons, which was to call a +Parliament. Whereupon writs were presently sent to those, that were in +the last Parliament, of the other House, and other writs to the sheriffs +for the election of knights and burgesses, to assemble on the 27th of +January following. Elections were made according to the ancient manner, +and a House of Commons now of the right English temper, and about four +hundred in number, including twenty for Scotland and as many for +Ireland. Being met, they take themselves, without the Protector and +other House, to be a Parliament, and to have the supreme power of the +three nations. + +For the first business, they intended the power of that other House: but +because the Protector had recommended to them for their first business +an act, already drawn up, for the recognition of his Protectoral power, +they began with that; and voted after a fortnight’s deliberation, that +an act should be made whereof this act of recognition should be part; +and that another part should be for the bounding of the Protector’s +power, and for the securing the privileges of Parliament and liberties +of the subject; and that all should pass together. + +_B._ Why did these men obey the Protector at first, in meeting upon his +only summons? Was not that as full a recognition of his power as was +needful? Why by this example did they teach the people that he was to be +obeyed, and then by putting laws upon him, teach them the contrary? Was +it not the Protector that made the Parliament? Why did they not +acknowledge their maker? + +_A._ I believe it is the desire of most men to bear rule; but few of +them know what title one has to it more than another, besides the right +of the sword. + +_B._ If they acknowledged the right of the sword, they were neither just +nor wise to oppose the present government, set up and approved by all +the forces of the three kingdoms. The principles of this House of +Commons were, no doubt, the very same with theirs that began the +rebellion; and would, if they could have raised a sufficient army, have +done the same against the Protector; and the general of their army +would, in like manner, have reduced them to a Rump. For they that keep +an army, and cannot master it, must be subject to it as much as he that +keeps a lion in his house. The temper of all the Parliaments, since the +time of Queen Elizabeth, has been the same with the temper of this +Parliament; and shall always be such, as long as the Presbyterians and +men of democratical principles have the like influence upon the +elections. + +_A._ After, they resolved concerning the other House, that during this +Parliament they would transact with it, but without intrenching upon the +right of the peers, to have writs sent to them in all future +Parliaments. These votes being passed, they proceed to another, wherein +they assume to themselves the power of the militia. Also to show their +supreme power, they delivered out of prison some of those that had been, +they said, illegally committed by the former Protector. Other points +concerning civil rights and concerning religion, very pleasing to the +people, were now also under their consideration. So that at the end of +this year the Protector was no less jealous of the Parliament, than of +the council of officers at Wallingford House. + +_B._ Thus it is when ignorant men will undertake reformation. Here are +three parties, the Protector, the Parliament, and the Army. The +Protector against Parliament and army, the Parliament against army and +Protector, and the army against Protector and Parliament. + +_A._ In the beginning of 1659 the Parliament passed divers other acts. +One was, to forbid the meetings in council of the army-officers without +order from the Protector and both houses. Another, that no man shall +have any command or trust in the army, who did not first, under his +hand, engage himself never to interrupt any of the members, but that +they might freely meet and debate in the House. And to please the +soldiers, they voted to take presently into their consideration the +means of paying them their arrears. But whilst they were considering +this, the Protector, according to the first of those acts, forbad the +meeting of officers at Wallingford House. This made the government, +which by the disagreement of the Protector and army was already loose, +to fall in pieces. For the officers from Wallingford House, with +soldiers enough, came over to Whitehall, and brought with them a +commission ready drawn, giving power to Desborough to dissolve the +Parliament, for the Protector to sign; which also, his heart and his +party failing him, he signed. The Parliament nevertheless continued +sitting; but at the end of the week the House adjourned till the Monday +after, being April the 25th. At their coming on Monday morning, they +found the door of the House shut up, and the passages to it filled with +soldiers, who plainly told them they must sit no longer. Richard’s +authority and business in town being thus at an end, he retired into the +country; where within a few days, upon promise of the payment of his +debts, which his father’s funeral had made great, he signed a +resignation of his Protectorship. + +_B._ To whom? + +_A._ To nobody. But after ten days' cessation of the sovereign power, +some of the Rumpers that were in town, together with the old Speaker Mr. +William Lenthal, resolved amongst themselves, and with Lambert, +Hazlerig, and other officers, who were also Rumpers, in all forty-two, +to go into the House; which they did, and were by the army declared to +be the Parliament. + +There were also in Westminster Hall at that time, about their private +business, some few of those whom the army had secluded in 1648, and were +called the secluded members. These knowing themselves to have been +elected by the same authority, and to have the same right to sit, +attempted to get into the House, but were kept out by the soldiers. The +first vote of the Rump reseated was, that such persons as, heretofore +members of this Parliament, have not sitten in this Parliament since the +year 1648, shall not sit in this House till further order of the +Parliament. And thus the Rump recovered their authority May the 7th +1659, which they lost in April 1653. + +_B._ Seeing there had been so many shiftings of the supreme authority, I +pray you, for memory’s sake, repeat them briefly in times and order. + +_A._ First, from 1640 to 1648, when the King was murdered, the +sovereignty was disputed between King Charles I and the Presbyterian +Parliament. Secondly, from 1648 to 1653, the power was in that part of +the Parliament which voted the trial of the King, and declared +themselves, without King or House of Lords, to have the supreme +authority of England and Ireland. For there were in the Long Parliament +two factions, the Presbyterian and Independent; the former whereof +sought only the subjection of the King, not his destruction directly; +the latter sought directly his destruction; and this part is it, which +was called the Rump. Thirdly, from April the 20th to July the 4th, the +supreme power was in the hands of a council of state constituted by +Cromwell. Fourthly, from July the 4th to December the 12th of the same +year, it was in the hands of men called unto it by Cromwell, whom he +termed men of fidelity and integrity, and made them a Parliament; which +was called, in contempt of one of the members, Barebone’s Parliament. +Fifthly, from December the 12th 1653 to September the 3rd 1658, it was +in the hands of Oliver Cromwell, with the title of Protector. Sixthly, +from September the 3rd 1658 to April the 25th 1659, Richard Cromwell had +it as successor to his father. Seventhly, from April the 25th 1659 to +May the 7th of the same year, it was nowhere. Eighthly, from May the 7th +1659, the Rump, which was turned out of doors in 1653, recovered it +again; and shall lose it again to a committee of safety, and again +recover it, and again lose it to the right owner. + +_B._ By whom, and by what art, came the Rump to be turned out the second +time? + +_A._ One would think them safe enough. The army in Scotland, which when +it was in London had helped Oliver to put down the Rump, submitted now, +begged pardon, and promised obedience. The soldiers in town had their +pay mended, and the commanders everywhere took the old engagement, +whereby they had acknowledged their authority heretofore. They also +received their commissions in the House itself from the speaker, who was +generalissimo. Fleetwood was made lieutenant-general, with such and so +many limitations as were thought necessary by the Rump, that remembered +how they had been served by the general, Oliver. Also Henry Cromwell, +lord-lieutenant of Ireland, having resigned his commission by command, +returned into England. + +But Lambert, to whom, as was said, Oliver had promised the succession, +and who as well as the Rump knew the way to the Protectorship by +Oliver’s own footsteps, was resolved to proceed in it upon the first +opportunity; which presented itself presently after. Besides some plots +of royalists, whom after the old fashion they again persecuted, there +was an insurrection made against them by Presbyterians in Cheshire, +headed by Sir George Booth, one of the secluded members. They were in +number about 3,000, and their pretence was for a free Parliament. There +was a great talk of another rising, or endeavour to rise, in Devonshire +and Cornwall at the same time. To suppress Sir George Booth, the Rump +sent down more than a sufficient army under Lambert; which quickly +defeated the Cheshire party, and recovered Chester, Liverpool, and all +the other places they had seized. Divers also of their commanders in and +after the battle were taken prisoners, whereof Sir George Booth himself +was one. + +This exploit done, Lambert, before his return, caressed his soldiers +with an entertainment at his own house in Yorkshire, and got their +consent to a petition to be made to the House, that a general might be +set up in the army; as being unfit that the army should be judged by any +power extrinsic to itself. + +_B._ I do not see that unfitness. + +_A._ Nor I. But it was, as I have heard, an axiom of Sir Henry Vane’s. +But it so much displeased the Rump, that they voted, that the having of +more generals in the army than were already settled, was unnecessary, +burthensome, and dangerous to the commonwealth. + +_B._ This was not Oliver’s method; for though this Cheshire victory had +been as glorious as that of Oliver at Dunbar, yet it was not the victory +that made Oliver general, but the resignation of Fairfax, and the +proffer of it to Cromwell by the Parliament. + +_A._ But Lambert thought so well of himself, as to expect it. Therefore, +at his return to London, he and the other officers assembling at +Wallingford House, drew their petition into form, and called it a +representation; wherein the chief point was to have a general, but many +others of less importance were added; and this they represented to the +House, October the 4th, by Major-General Desborough. And this so far +awed them, as to teach them so much good manners as to promise to take +it presently into debate. Which they did; and October the 12th, having +recovered their spirits, voted “that the commissions of Lambert, +Desborough, and others of the council at Wallingford House, should be +void: item, that the army should be governed by a commission to +Fleetwood, Monk, Hazlerig, Walton, Morley, and Overton, till February +the 12th following.” And to make this good against the force they +expected from Lambert, they ordered Hazlerig and Morley to issue +warrants to such officers as they could trust, to bring their soldiers +next morning into Westminster; which was done somewhat too late. For +Lambert had first brought his soldiers thither, and beset the House, and +turned back the Speaker, which was then coming to it; but Hazlerig’s +forces marching about St. James’s park-wall, came into St. Margaret’s +churchyard; and so both parties looked all day one upon another, like +enemies, but offered not to fight: whereby the Rump was put out of +possession of the House; and the officers continued their meeting as +before, at Wallingford House. + +There they chose from among themselves, with some few of the city, a +committee, which they called a committee of safety, whereof the chief +were Lambert and Vane; who, with the advice of a general council of +officers, had power to call delinquents to trial, to suppress +rebellions, to treat with foreign states, &c. You see now the Rump cut +off, and the supreme power, which is charged with _salus populi_, +transferred to a council of officers. And yet Lambert hopes for it in +the end. But one of their limitations was, that they should within six +weeks present to the army a new model of the government. If they had +done so, do you think they would have preferred Lambert or any other to +the supreme authority therein, rather than themselves? + +_B._ I think not. When the Rump had put into commission, amongst a +few others, for the government of the army, that is to say, for +the government of the three nations, General Monk, already +commander-in-chief of the army in Scotland, and that had done much +greater things in this war than Lambert, how durst they leave him +out of this committee of safety? Or how could Lambert think that +General Monk would forgive it, and not endeavour to fasten the +Rump again? + +_A._ They thought not of him; his gallantry had been shown on remote +stages, Ireland and Scotland. His ambition had not appeared here in +their contentions for the government, but he had complied both with +Richard and the Rump. After General Monk had signified by letter his +dislike of the proceedings of Lambert and his fellows, they were much +surprised, and began to think him more considerable than they had done; +but it was too late. + +_B._ Why? His army was too small for so great an enterprise. + +_A._ The general knew very well his own and their forces, both what they +were then, and how they might be augmented, and what generally city and +country wished for, which was the restitution of the King: which to +bring about, there needed no more but to come with his army, though not +very great, to London: to the doing whereof, there was no obstacle but +the army with Lambert. What could he do in this case? If he had declared +presently for the King or for a free Parliament, all the armies in +England would have joined against him, and assuming the title of a +Parliament would have furnished themselves with money. + +General Monk, after he had thus quarrelled by his letter with the +council-officers, secured first those officers of his own army, which +were Anabaptists and therefore not to be trusted, and put others into +their places; then drawing his forces together, marched to Berwick. +Being there, he indicted a convention of the Scots, of whom he desired +that they would take order for the security of that nation in his +absence, and raise some maintenance for his army in their march. The +convention promised for the security of the nation their best endeavour, +and raised him a sum of money, not great, but enough for his purpose, +excusing themselves upon their present wants. On the other side, the +committee of safety with the greatest and best part of their army sent +Lambert to oppose him; but at the same time, by divers messages and +mediators urged him to a treaty; which he consented to, and sent three +officers to London to treat with as many of theirs. These six suddenly +concluded, without power from the general, upon these articles: that the +King be excluded; a free state settled; the ministry and universities +encouraged; with divers others. Which the general liked not, and +imprisoned one of his commissioners for exceeding his commission. +Whereupon another treaty was agreed on, of five to five. But whilst +these treaties were in hand, Hazlerig, a member of the Rump, seized on +Portsmouth, and the soldiers sent by the committee of safety to reduce +it, instead of that, entered into the town and joined with Hazlerig. +Secondly, the city renewed their tumults for a free Parliament. Thirdly, +the Lord Fairfax, a member also of the Rump, and greatly favoured in +Yorkshire, was raising forces there behind Lambert, who being now +between two armies, his enemies would gladly have fought with the +general. Fourthly, there came news that Devonshire and Cornwall were +listing of soldiers. Lastly, Lambert’s army wanting money, and sure they +should not be furnished from the council of officers, which had neither +authority nor strength to levy money, grew discontented, and for their +free quarters were odious to the northern countries. + +_B._ I wonder why the Scots were so ready to furnish General Monk with +money; for they were no friends to the Rump. + +_A._ I know not; but I believe the Scots would have parted with a +greater sum, rather than the English should not have gone together by +the ears amongst themselves. The council of officers being now beset +with so many enemies, produced speedily their model of government; which +was to have a free Parliament, which should meet December the 15th, but +with such qualifications of no King, no House of Lords, as made the city +more angry than before. To send soldiers into the west to suppress those +that were rising there, they durst not, for fear of the city; nor could +they raise any other for want of money. There remained nothing but to +break, and quitting Wallingford House to shift for themselves. This +coming to the knowledge of their army in the north, they deserted +Lambert; and the Rump, the 26th of December, repossessed the House. + +_B._ Seeing the Rump was now reseated, the business pretended by General +Monk for his marching to London, was at an end. + +_A._ The Rump, though seated, was not well settled, but in the midst of +so many tumults for a free Parliament had as much need of the general’s +coming up now as before. He therefore sent them word, that because he +thought them not yet secure enough, he would come up to London with his +army; which they not only accepted, but also intreated him to do, and +voted him for his services 1000_l._ a year. + +The general marching towards London, the country every where petitioned +him for a free Parliament. The Rump, to make room in London for his +army, dislodged their own. The general for all that, had not let fall a +word in all this time that could be taken for a declaration of his final +design. + +_B._ How did the Rump revenge themselves on Lambert? + +_A._ They never troubled him; nor do I know any cause of so gentle +dealing with him: but certainly Lambert was the ablest of any officer +they had to do them service, when they should have means and need to +employ him. After the general was come to London, the Rump sent to the +city for their part of a tax of 100,000_l._ a month, for six months, +according to an act which the Rump had made formerly before their +disseisin by the committee of safety. But the city, who were adverse to +the Rump, and keen upon a free Parliament, could not be brought to give +their money to their enemies and to purposes repugnant to their own. +Hereupon the Rump sent order to the general to break down the city gates +and their portcullises, and to imprison certain obstinate citizens. This +he performed, and it was the last service he did them. + +About this time the commission, by which general Monk with others had +the government of the army put into their hands by the Rump before the +usurpation of the council of officers, came to expire; which the present +Rump renewed. + +_B._ He was thereby the sixth part of the general of the whole forces of +the commonwealth. If I had been as the Rump, he should have been sole +general. In such cases as this, there cannot be a greater vice than +pinching. Ambition should be liberal. + +_A._ After the pulling down of the city gates, the general sent a letter +to the Rump, to let them know that that service was much against his +nature, and to put them in mind how well the city had served the +Parliament throughout the whole war. + +_B._ Yes. But for the city the Parliament never could have made the war, +nor the Rump ever have murdered the King. + +_A._ The Rump considered not the merit of the city, nor the good-nature +of the general. They were busy. They were giving out commissions, making +of acts for abjuration of the King and his line, and for the old +engagement, and conferring with the city to get money. The general also +desired to hear conference between some of the Rump and some of the +secluded members, concerning the justice of their seclusion, and of the +hurt that could follow from their readmission: and it was granted, after +long conference. The general finding the Rump’s pretences unreasonable +and ambitious, declared himself with the city for a free Parliament, and +came to Westminster with the secluded members, (whom he had appointed to +meet and stay for him at Whitehall), and replaced them in the House +amongst the Rumpers; so that now the same cattle that were in the House +of Commons in 1640, except those that were dead and those that went from +them to the late King at Oxford, are all there again. + +_B._ But this, methinks, was no good service to the King, unless they +had learned better principles. + +_A._ They had learned nothing. The major part was now again +Presbyterian. It is true they were so grateful to General Monk as to +make him general of all the forces in the three nations. They did well +also to make void the engagement; but it was because those acts were +made to the prejudice of their party; but recalled none of their own +rebellious ordinances, nor did anything in order to the good of the +present King; but on the contrary, they declared by a vote, that the +late King began the war against his two Houses. + +_B._ The two Houses considered as two persons, were they not two of the +King’s subjects? If a king raise an army against his subject, is it +lawful for that subject to resist with force, when, as in this case, he +might have had peace upon his submission? + +_A._ They knew they had acted vilely and sottishly; but because they had +always pretended to greater than ordinary wisdom and godliness, they +were loath to confess it. The Presbyterians now saw their time to make a +Confession of their Faith, and presented it to the House of Commons to +show they had not changed their principles; which, after six readings in +the House, was voted to be printed, and once a year to be read publicly +in every church. + +_B._ I say again, this re-establishing of the Long Parliament was no +good service to the King. + +_A._ Have a little patience. They were re-established with two +conditions; one to determine their sitting before the end of March; +another to send out writs before their rising for new elections. + +_B._ That qualifies. + +_A._ That brought in the King: for few of this Long Parliament, the +country having felt the smart of their former service, could get +themselves chosen again. This New Parliament began to sit April the 25th +1660. How soon these called in the King; with what joy and triumph he +was received; how earnestly his Majesty pressed the Parliament for the +act of oblivion, and how few were excepted out of it; you know as well +as I. + +_B._ But I have not yet observed in the Presbyterians any oblivion of +their former principles. We are but returned to the state we were in at +the beginning of the sedition. + +_A._ Not so: for before that time, though the Kings of England had the +right of the militia in virtue of the sovereignty, and without dispute, +and without any particular act of Parliament directly to that purpose; +yet now, after this bloody dispute, the next, which is the present, +Parliament, in proper and express terms hath declared the same to be the +right of the King only, without either of his Houses of Parliament; +which act is more instructive to the people, than any arguments drawn +from the title of sovereign, and consequently fitter to disarm the +ambition of all seditious haranguers for the time to come. + +_B._ I pray God it prove so. Howsoever, I must confess that this +Parliament has done all that a Parliament can do for the security of our +peace: which I think also would be enough, if preachers would take heed +of instilling evil principles into their auditory. I have seen in this +revolution a circular motion of the sovereign power through two +usurpers, from the late King to this his son. For (leaving out the power +of the council of officers, which was but temporary, and no otherwise +owned by them but in trust) it moved from King Charles I to the Long +Parliament; from thence to the Rump; from the Rump to Oliver Cromwell; +and then back again from Richard Cromwell to the Rump; thence to the +Long Parliament; and thence to King Charles II, where long may it +remain. + +_A._ Amen. And may he have as often as there shall be need such a +general. + +_B._ You have told me little of the general till now in the end: but +truly, I think the bringing of his little army entirely out of Scotland +up to London, was the greatest stratagem that is extant in history. + + + ========== + + + + + THE + WHOLE ART OF RHETORIC. + + Di, majorum umbris tenuem, et sine pondere terram, + Spirantesque crocos, et in urna perpetuum ver, + Qui præceptorem sancti voluere parentis + Esse loco. + JUVENAL, VII. 207-210. + + +[The following is the Preface prefixed, in the 8vo. edition of 1681, to + this piece and the Discourse of the Laws of England.] + + ========== + + TO THE READER. + +Although these pieces may appear fully to express their own real +intrinsic value, as bearing the image and inscription of that great man +Mr. Hobbes; yet since common usage has rendered a preface to a book as +necessary as a porch to a church, and that in all things some ceremonies +cannot be avoided, mode and custom in this point is dutifully to be +obeyed. + +That they are genuine, credible testimony might be produced, did not the +peculiar fineness of thought and expression, and a constant undaunted +resolution of maintaining his own opinions, sufficiently ascertain their +author. Besides which, they are now published from his own true copies; +an advantage which some of his works have wanted. + +The first of them, being an abridgment containing the most useful part +of Aristotle’s rhetoric, was written some thirty years since. Mr. Hobbes +in his book of _Human Nature_ had already described man, with an +exactness almost equal to the original draught of nature; and in his +_Elements of Law_ laid down the constitution of government, and shown by +what armed reason it is maintained: and having demonstrated in the state +of nature the primitive art of fighting to be the only medium whereby +men procured their ends, did in this design to show what power in +societies has succeeded to reign in its stead, I mean the art of +speaking; which by use of common places of probability, and knowledge in +the manners and passions of mankind, through the working of belief is +able to bring about whatsoever interest. + +How necessary this art is to that of politic, is clearly evident from +that mighty force whereby the eloquence of the ancient orators +captivated the minds of the people. Mr. Hobbes chose to recommend by his +translation the rhetoric of Aristotle, as being the most accomplished +work on that subject which the world has yet seen; having been admired +in all ages, and in particular highly approved by the father of the +Roman eloquence, a very competent judge. To this he thought fit to add +some small matter relating to that part which concerns tropes and +figures; as also a short discovery of some little tricks of false and +deceitful reasoning. + +The other piece is a discourse concerning the laws of England, and has +been finished many years. Herein he has endeavoured to accommodate the +general notions of his politic to the particular constitution of the +English monarchy: a design of no small difficulty; wherein to have +succeeded deserves much honour; to have perchance miscarried, deserves +easy pardon. It has had the good fortune to be much esteemed by the +greatest men of the profession of the law, and therefore may be presumed +to contain somewhat excellent. However it is not to be expected that all +men should submit to his opinions, yet it is hoped none will be offended +at the present publishing of these papers; since they will not find here +any new fantastic notions, but only such things as have been already +asserted with strength of argument by himself and other persons of +eminent learning. To the public at least this benefit may accrue, that +some able pen may undertake the controversy, being moved with the desire +of that reputation which will necessarily attend victory over so +considerable an adversary. + + + + + THE + + WHOLE ART OF RHETORIC. + + + + + BOOK I. + + + CHAPTER I. + +THAT RHETORIC IS AN ART CONSISTING NOT ONLY IN MOVING THE PASSIONS OF + THE JUDGE, BUT CHIEFLY IN PROOFS: AND THAT THIS ART IS PROFITABLE. + + +We see that all men naturally are able in some sort to _accuse_ and +_excuse_: some by chance; but some by method. This method may be +discovered; and to discover method is all one with teaching an art. If +this art consisted in criminations only, and the skill to stir up the +judge’s anger, envy, fear, pity, or other affections; a rhetorician in +well ordered commonwealths and states, where it is forbidden to digress +from the cause in hearing, could have nothing at all to say. For all +these perversions of the judge are beside the question. And that which +the pleader is to shew, and the judge to give sentence on, is this only: +_It is so_, or _not so_. The rest hath been decided already by the +law-maker; who judging of universals and future things, could not be +corrupted. Besides, it is an absurd thing for a man to make crooked the +ruler he means to use. + +It consisteth therefore chiefly in proofs, which are inferences: and all +inferences being _syllogisms_, a _logician_, if he would observe the +difference between a plain syllogism and an enthymeme, which is a +rhetorical syllogism, would make the best _rhetorician_. For all +syllogisms and inferences belong properly to logic, whether they infer +truth or probability. And because without this art it would often come +to pass that evil men, by the advantage of natural abilities, would +carry an evil cause against a good; it brings with it at least this +profit, that making the pleaders even in skill, it leaves the odds only +in the merit of the cause. Besides, ordinarily those that are judges, +are neither patient, nor capable of long scientifical proofs drawn from +the principles through many syllogisms; and therefore had need to be +instructed by the rhetorical and shorter way. Lastly, it were ridiculous +to be ashamed of being vanquished in exercises of the body, and not to +be ashamed of being inferior in the virtue of well expressing the mind. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER II + + THE DEFINITION OF RHETORIC. + + +Rhetoric is that faculty, by which we understand what will serve our +turn concerning any subject to win belief in the hearer. + +Of those things that beget belief, some require not the help of art, as +witnesses, evidences, and the like, which we invent not, but make use +of; and some require art, and are invented by us. + +The belief that proceeds from our invention, comes partly from the +behaviour of the speaker, partly from the passions of the hearer; but +especially from the proofs of what we allege. + +Proofs are, in rhetoric, either _examples_ or _enthymemes_; as in logic, +_inductions_ or _syllogisms_. For an example is a short induction, and +an enthymeme a short syllogism; out of which are left, as superfluous, +that which is supposed to be necessarily understood by the hearer; to +avoid prolixity, and not to consume the time of public business +needlessly. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER III. + + OF THE SEVERAL KINDS OF ORATIONS: AND OF THE PRINCIPLES OF RHETORIC. + +In all orations, the hearer does either hear only, or judge also. + +If he hear only, that is one kind of oration, and is called +_demonstrative_. + +If he judge, he must judge either of that which is to come, or of that +which is past. + +If of that which is to come, there is another kind of oration, and is +called _deliberative_. + +If of that which is past, then it is a third kind of oration, +_judicial_. + +So there are three kinds of orations; _demonstrative_, _judicial_, and +_deliberative_. + +To which belong their proper times. To the demonstrative, the _present_; +to the judicial, the _past_; and to the deliberative, the _time to +come_. + +And their proper offices. To the deliberative, _exhortation_ and +_dehortation_. To the judicial, _accusation_ and _defence_. And to the +demonstrative, _praising_ and _dispraising_. + +And their proper ends. To the deliberative, to prove a thing +_profitable_ or _unprofitable_. To the judicial, _just_ or _unjust_. To +the demonstrative, _honourable_ or _dishonourable_. + +The principles of rhetoric out of which _enthymemes_ are to be drawn, +are the _common opinions_ that men have concerning _profitable_ and +_unprofitable_; _just_ and _unjust_; _honourable_ and _dishonourable_; +which are the points in the several kinds of orations questionable. For +as in _logic_, where certain and infallible knowledge is the scope of +our proof, the principles must be all _infallible truths_: so in +_rhetoric_ the principles must be _common opinions_, such as the judge +is already possessed with. Because the end of rhetoric is victory; which +consists in having gotten _belief_. + +And because nothing is profitable, unprofitable, just, unjust, +honourable or dishonourable, but what has been _done_, or _is to be +done_; and nothing is _to be done_, that is not _possible_; and because +there be degrees of profitable, unprofitable, just, unjust, honourable +and dishonourable; an orator must be ready in other principles, namely, +of what is _done_ and _not done_, _possible_ and _not possible_, _to +come_ and _not to come_, and what is _greater_ and what is _lesser_, +both in general, and particularly applied to the thing in question; as +what is _more_ and _less_, generally; and what is _more profitable_ and +_less profitable_, &c. particularly. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IV. + +OF THE SUBJECT OF DELIBERATIVES; AND THE ABILITIES THAT ARE REQUIRED OF + HIM THAT WILL DELIBERATE OF BUSINESS OF STATE. + + +In _deliberatives_ there are to be considered the _subject_ wherein, and +the _ends_ whereto, the orator exhorteth, or from which he dehorteth. + +The _subject_ is always something in our own power, the knowledge +whereof belongs not to rhetoric, but for the most part to the politics; +and may be referred in a manner to these five heads. + +1. _Of levying of money._ To which point he that will speak as he ought +to do, ought to know beforehand the revenue of the state, how much it +is, and wherein it consisteth, and also how great are the necessary +charges and expenses of the same. This knowledge is gotten partly by a +man’s own experience, partly by relations and accounts in writing. + +2. _Of peace and war._ Concerning which the counsellor or deliberator +ought to know the strength of the commonwealth, how much it both now is, +and hereafter may be, and wherein that power consisteth. Which knowledge +is gotten, partly by experience and relations at home, and partly by the +sight of wars and of their events abroad. + +3. _Of the safeguard of the country._ Wherein he only is able to give +counsel, that knows the forms, and number, and places of the garrisons. + +4. _Of provision._ Wherein to speak well, it is necessary for a man to +know what is sufficient to maintain the state, what commodities they +have at home growing, what they must fetch in through need, and what +they may carry out through abundance. + +5. _Of making laws._ To which is necessary so much political or civil +philosophy, as to know what are the several kinds of governments, and by +what means, either from without or from within, each of those kinds is +preserved or destroyed. And this knowledge is gotten, partly by +observing the several governments in times past by history, and partly +by observing the government of the times present in several nations, by +travel. + +So that to him that will speak in a council of state, there is necessary +this; history, sight of wars, travel, knowledge of the revenue, +expenses, forces, havens, garrisons, wares, and provisions in the state +he lives in, and what is needful for that state either to export or +import. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER V. + + OF THE ENDS WHICH THE ORATOR IN DELIBERATIVES PROPOUNDETH, WHEREBY TO + EXHORT OR DEHORT. + +An orator, in _exhorting_, always propoundeth _felicity_, or some _part_ +of _felicity_, to be attained by the actions he exhorteth unto: and in +_dehortation_, the contrary. + +By _felicity_ is meant commonly prosperity with virtue, or a continual +content of the life with surety. + +And the _parts_ of it are such things as we call good in _body_, _mind_, +or fortune; such as these that follow. + +1. _Nobility_, which to a state or nation is to have been ancient +inhabitants; and to have had most anciently, and in most number, famous +generals in the wars, or men famous for such things as fall under +emulation. And to a private man, to have been descended lawfully of a +family, which hath yielded most anciently, and in most number, men known +to the world for virtue, riches, or any thing in general estimation. + +2. _Many and good children._ Which is also _public_ and _private_. +_Public_, when there is much youth in the state endued with virtue; +namely, of the _body_, stature, beauty, strength, and dexterity; of the +_mind_, valour and temperance: _private_, when a man hath many such +children, both male and female. The virtues commonly respected in women, +are of the _body_, beauty and stature; of the _mind_, temperance and +housewifery without sordidness. + +3. _Riches._ Which is money, cattle, lands, household-stuff, with the +power to dispose of them. + +4. _Glory._ Which is the reputation of virtue, or of the possession of +such things as all, or most men, or wise men desire. + +5. _Honour._ Which is the glory of benefiting, or being able to benefit +others. _To benefit others_, is to contribute somewhat, not easily had, +to another man’s safety or riches. The parts of _honour_ are sacrifices, +monuments, rewards, dedication of places, precedence, sepulchres, +statues, public pensions, adorations, presents. + +6. _Health._ Which is the being free from diseases, with strength to use +the body. + +7. _Beauty._ Which is to different ages different. To youth, strength of +body and sweetness of aspect. To full men, strength of body fit for the +wars, and countenance sweet with a mixture of terror. To old men, +strength enough for necessary labours, with a countenance not +displeasing. + +8. _Strength._ Which is the ability to move any thing at pleasure of the +mover. To move, is to pull, to put off, to lift, to thrust down, to +press together. + +9. _Stature._ Which is then _just_, when a man in height, breadth, and +thickness of body doth so exceed the most, as nevertheless it be no +hindrance to the quickness of his motion. + +10. _Good old age._ Which is that which comes late, and with the least +trouble. + +11. _Many and good friends._ Which is to have many that will do for his +sake that which they think will be for his good. + +12. _Prosperity._ Which is to have all, or the most, or the greatest of +those goods which we attribute to fortune. + +13. _Virtue._ Which is then to be defined, when we speak of _praise_. + +These are the grounds from whence we _exhort_. + +_Dehortation_ is from the contraries of these. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VI. + + OF THE COLOURS OR COMMON OPINIONS CONCERNING GOOD AND EVIL. + + +In _deliberatives_, the principles or elements from whence we draw our +proofs, are common opinions concerning good and evil. And these +principles are either _absolute_ or _comparative_. And those that are +_absolute_, are either _disputable_ or _indisputable_. + +The _indisputable principles_ are such as these: _Good_, is that which +we love for itself. And that for which we love somewhat else. And that +which all things desire. And that to every man which his reason +dictates. And that which when we have, we are well or satisfied. And +that which satisfies. And the cause or effect of any of these. And that +which preserves any of these. And that which keeps off or destroys the +contrary of any of these. + +Also to take the _good_ and reject the _evil_, is _good_. And to take +the greater _good_, rather than the less; and the lesser _evil_ rather +than the greater. Further, all virtues are _good_. And pleasure. And all +things beautiful. And justice, valour, temperance, magnanimity, +magnificence, and other like habits. And health, beauty, strength, &c. +And riches. And friends. And honour and glory. And ability to say or do: +also towardliness, will, and the like. And whatsoever art or science. +And life. And whatsoever is just. + +The _disputable principles_ are such as follow: + +That is _good_, whose contrary is _evil_. And whose contrary is _good_ +for our enemies. And whose contrary our enemies are glad of. And of +which there cannot be too much. And upon which much labour and cost hath +been bestowed. And that which many desire. And that which is praised. +And that which even our enemies and evil men praise. And what good we +prefer. And what we do advise. And that which is possible, is _good_ to +undertake. And that which is easy. And that which depends on our own +will. And that which is proper for us to do. And what no man else can +do. And whatsoever is extraordinary. And what is suitable. And that +which wants a little of being at an end. And what we hope to master. And +what we are fit for. And what evil men do not. And what we love to do. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VII. + + OF THE COLOURS OR COMMON OPINIONS CONCERNING GOOD AND EVIL, + COMPARATIVELY. + + +The _colours_ of _good comparatively_ depend, partly, upon the following +definitions of _comparatives_. + +1. _More_, is _so much and somewhat besides_. + +2. _Less_, is _that, which and somewhat else is so much_. + +3. _Greater_ and _more in number_ are said only _comparatively_ to +_less_ and _fewer in number_. + +4. _Great_ and _little_, _many_ and _few_, are taken _comparatively_ to +the _most of the same kind_. So that _great_ and _many_, is that which +_exceeds_; _little_ and _few_, is that which is _exceeded by, the most +of the same kind_. + +Partly, from the precedent definitions of _good absolutely_. + +Common opinions concerning _good comparatively_, then are these. + +_Greater good_ is many than fewer, or one of those many. + +And _greater_ is the kind, in which the greatest is greater than the +greatest of another kind. And _greater_ is that good than another good, +whose kind is _greater_ than another’s kind. And _greater_ is that from +which another good follows, than the good which follows. And of two +which exceed a third, _greater_ is that which exceeds it most. And that +which _causes_ the greater good. And that which _proceeds from_ a +greater good. And _greater_ is that which is chosen for itself, than +that which is chosen for somewhat else. And the _end_ greater than that +which is _not_ the end. And that which _less_ needs other things, than +that which _more_. And that which is _independent_, than that which is +_dependent_ of another. And the _beginning_, than _not_ the beginning. + +(Seeing the _beginning_ is a greater good or evil, than that which is +_not_ the beginning; and the _end_, than that which is _not_ the end; +one may argue from this _colour_ both ways: as Leodamas against +Chabrias, would have the actor more to blame than the adviser; and +against Callistratus, the adviser more than the actor.) + +And the _cause_, than _not_ the cause. And that which hath a _greater_ +beginning or cause. And the beginning or cause of a _greater good or +evil_. And that which is _scarce_, greater than that which is +_plentiful_; because harder to get. And that which is _plentiful_, than +that which is _scarce_; because oftener in use. And that which is +_easy_, than that which is _hard_. And that whose _contrary_ is greater. +And that whose _want_ is greater. And _virtue_ than _not_ virtue, a +greater good. _Vice_ than _not_ vice, a greater evil. And greater good +or evil is that, the _effects_ whereof are more _honourable_ or more +_shameful_. And the _effects_ of greater virtues or vices. And the +excess whereof is more tolerable, a greater good. And those things which +may with more honour be desired. And the desire of better things. And +those things whereof the knowledge is better. And the knowledge of +better things. And that which wise men prefer. And that which is in +better men. And that which better men choose. And that which is more, +than that which is less _delightful_. And that which is more, than that +which is less _honourable_. And that which we would have for ourselves +and friends, a greater good; and the contrary, a greater evil. And that +which is _lasting_, than that which is _not_ lasting. And that which is +_firm_, than that which is _not_ firm. And what _many_ desire, than what +_few_. And what the adversary or judge confesseth to be greater, is +greater. And _common_ than _not_ common. And _not_ common than _common_. +And what is more laudable. And that which is more honoured, a greater +good. And that which is more punished, a greater evil. And both good and +evil divided than undivided, _appear_ greater. And compounded than +simple, _appear_ greater. And that which is done with opportunity, age, +place, time, means disadvantageous, greater than otherwise. And that +which is _natural_, than that which is _attained unto_. And the same +part of that which is great, than of that which is less. And that which +is nearest to the end designed. And that which is good or evil to _one’s +self_, than that which is _simply_ so. And _possible_, than _not_ +possible. And that which comes toward the end of our life. And that +which we do _really_, than that which we do _for show_. And that which +we would _be_, rather than what we would _seem_ to be. And that which is +good _for more purposes_, is the greater good. And that which serves us +in great necessity. And that which is joined with less trouble. And that +which is joined with more delight. And of the two, that which added to a +third makes the whole the greater. And that which having, we are more +sensible of. And in every thing, that which we most esteem. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VIII. + + OF THE SEVERAL KINDS OF GOVERNMENTS. + + +Because _hortation_ and _dehortation_ concern the commonwealth, and are +drawn from the elements of good and evil; as we have spoken of them +already in the _abstract_, so we must speak of them also in the +_concrete_, that is, of what is good or evil to each sort of +commonwealth in special. + +The government of a commonwealth is either _democracy_, or +_aristocracy_, or _oligarchy_, or _monarchy_. + +_Democracy_ is that, wherein all men with equal right are preferred to +the highest magistracy by lot. + +_Aristocracy_ is that, wherein the highest magistrate is chosen out of +those that have had the best education, according to what the laws +prescribe for best. + +_Oligarchy_ is that, where the highest magistrate is chosen for wealth. + +_Monarchy_ is that, wherein one man hath the government of all; which +government, if he limit it by law, is called _kingdom_; if by his own +will, _tyranny_. + +The end of _democracy_, or the people’s government, is _liberty_. + +The end of _oligarchy_, is the _riches of those that govern_. + +The end of _aristocracy_, is _good laws_ and _good ordering of the +city_. + +The end of _monarchy_ or _kings_, is _the safety of the people and +conservation of his own authority_. + +_Good_ therefore in each sort of government, is that which conduceth to +these their ends. + +And because _belief_ is not gotten only by _proofs_, but also from +_manners_; the _manners_ of each sort of commonwealth ought to be well +understood by him that undertaketh to persuade or dissuade in matter of +state. Their _manners_ may be known by their _designs_; and their +_designs_ by their _ends_; and their _ends_ by what we see them take +_pleasure_ in. But of this more accurately in the politics. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IX. + + OF THE COLOURS OF HONOURABLE AND DISHONOURABLE. + + +In a demonstrative oration, the subject whereof is _praise_ or +_dispraise_, the proofs are to be drawn from the elements of +_honourable_ and _dishonourable_. + +In this place we anticipate the second way of getting _belief_; which is +from the _manners_ of the speaker. For _praise_, whether it come in as +the principal business, or upon the by, depends still upon the same +_principles_; which are these: + +_Honourable_, is that which we love for itself, and is withal laudable; +and that _good_, which pleaseth us only because it is good; and virtue. + +_Virtue_ is the faculty of getting and preserving that which is good; +and the faculty of doing many and great things well. + +The kinds of it are these: + +1. _Justice_, which is a virtue whereby every man obtains what by law is +his. + +2. _Fortitude_, which is a virtue by which a man carries himself +honourably and according to the laws, in time of danger. + +3. _Temperance_, which is a virtue whereby a man governs himself in +matter of pleasure according to the law. + +4. _Liberality_, which is a virtue by which we benefit others in matter +of money. + +5. _Magnanimity_, which is a virtue by which a man is apt to do great +benefits. + +6. _Magnificence_, which is a virtue by which a man is apt to be at +great cost. + +7. _Prudence_, which is an _intellectual_ virtue, by which a man is able +to deliberate well concerning any good leading to felicity. + +And _honourable_ are the causes and effects of things honourable. And +the works of virtue. And the signs of virtue. And those actions the +reward whereof is _honour_. And the reward whereof is rather _honour_ +than _money_. And that which we do not for our sakes. And what we do for +our country’s good, neglecting our own. And those things are +_honourable_ which, good of themselves, are not so to the owner. And +those things which happen to the dead, rather than to the living. And +what we do for other men, especially for benefactors. And bestowing of +benefits. And the contrary of those things we are ashamed of. And those +things which men strive for earnestly, but without fear of adversary. + +And of the more _honourable_ and better men, the virtues are more +_honourable_. And more _honourable_ are the virtues that tend to other +men’s benefit, than those which tend to one’s own. + +And _honourable_ are those things which are just. And revenge is +_honourable_. And victory. And honour. And monuments. And those things +which happen not to the living. And things that excel. And what none can +do but we. And possessions we reap no profit by. And those things which +are _had in honour_, particularly in several places. And the signs of +praise. And to have nothing of the servile, mercenary, or mechanic. + +And that which _seems_ honourable; namely, such as follow: Vices +confining upon virtue. And the extremes of virtues. And what the +auditors _think_ honourable. And that which is in estimation. And that +which is done according to custom. + +Besides, in a _demonstrative_ oration, the orator must show that he whom +he praiseth, did what he praiseth unconstrainedly and willingly. And he +does so, who does the same often. + +_Praise_ is speech, declaring the magnitude of a virtue, action, or +work. But to praise the work from the virtue of the worker, is a +circular proof. + +_To magnify_ and _to praise_, differ in themselves as _felicity_ and +_virtue_. For praise declares a man’s _virtue_; and _magnifying_ +declares his _felicity_. + +Praise is a kind of inverted precept. For to say, “_Do it because it is +good_,” is a precept; but to say, “_He is good because he did it_,” is +praise. An orator in _praising_, must also use the forms of +_amplification_; such as these: He was the first that did it. The only +man that did it. The special man that did it. He did it with +disadvantage of time. He did it with little help. He was the cause that +the law ordained rewards and honours for such actions. + +Further, he that will _praise_ a man, must compare him with others, and +his actions with the actions of others, especially with such as are +renowned. + +And _amplification_ is more proper to a _demonstrative_ oration, than to +any other. For here the actions are confessed; and the orator’s part is +only this, to contribute unto them magnitude and lustre. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER X. + + OF ACCUSATION AND DEFENCE, WITH THE DEFINITION OF INJURY. + + +In a _judicial_ oration, which consists in _accusation_ and _defence_, +the thing to be proved is, that _injury_ has been done: and the heads +from whence the proofs are to be drawn are these three:— + +1. The causes that move to injury. + +2. The persons apt to do injury. + +3. The persons obnoxious or apt to suffer injury. + +An injury is a voluntary offending of another man contrary to the law. + +_Voluntary_ is that which a man does with knowledge, and without +compulsion. + +The causes of _voluntary_ actions are intemperance, and a vicious +disposition concerning things desirable. As the covetous man does +against the law out of an intemperate desire of money. + +All actions proceed either from the doer’s disposition, or not. Those +that proceed not from the doer’s disposition, are such as he does by +_chance_, by _compulsion_, or by _natural necessity_. Those that proceed +from the doer’s disposition, are such as he does by _custom_, or _upon +premeditation_, or in _anger_, or out of _intemperance_. + +_By chance_ are said to be done those things, whereof neither the cause +nor the scope is evident; and which are done neither orderly, nor +always, nor most commonly after the same manner. + +_By nature_ are said to be done those things, the causes whereof are in +the doer; and are done orderly, and always or for the most part after +the same manner. + +_By compulsion_ are done those things, which are against the appetite +and ordination of the doer. + +_By custom_ those actions are said to be done, the cause whereof is +this, that the doer has done them often. + +_Upon premeditation_ are said to be done those things, which are done +for profit, as the end or the way to the end. + +_In anger_ are said to be done those things, which are done with a +purpose of revenge. + +_Out of intemperance_ are said to be done those things, which are +delightful. + +In sum, every _voluntary_ action tends either to _profit_ or _pleasure_. + +The _colours_ of _profitable_, are already set down. The _colours_ of +that which is _pleasing_, follow next. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XI. + + OF THE COLOURS OR COMMON OPINIONS CONCERNING PLEASURE. + + +_Pleasure_ is a sudden and sensible motion of the soul, towards that +which is natural. _Grief_ is the contrary. + +_Pleasant_ therefore is that, which is the cause of such motion. And to +return to one’s own nature. And customs. And those things that are not +violent. + +_Unpleasant_ are those things which proceed from necessity, as cares, +study, contentions. The contrary whereof, ease, remission from labour +and care, also play, rest, sleep; are _pleasant_. + +_Pleasant_ also is that to which we have an appetite. Also the appetites +themselves, if they be sensual; as thirst, hunger, and lust. Also those +things to which we have an appetite upon persuasion and reason. And +those things we remember, whether they pleased or displeased then when +they were present. And the things we hope for. And anger. And to be in +love. And revenge. And victory: therefore also contentious games; as +tables, chess, dice, tennis, &c.; and hunting; and suits in law. And +honour and reputation amongst men in honour and reputation. And to love. +And to be beloved and respected. And to be admired. And to be flattered. +And a flatterer: for he seems both to love and admire. And the same +thing often. And change or variety. And what we return to afresh. And to +learn. And to admire. And to do good. And to receive good. And to help +up again one that is fallen. And to finish that which is unperfect. And +imitation; and therefore the art of painting; and the art of carving +images; and the art of poetry; and pictures and statues. And other men’s +dangers, so they be near. And to have escaped hardly. + +And things of a kind please one another. And every one himself. And +one’s own pleases him. And to bear sway. And to be thought wise. And to +dwell upon that which he is good at. And ridiculous actions, sayings, +and persons. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XII. + +PRESUMPTIONS OF INJURY DRAWN FROM THE PERSONS THAT DO IT: OR COMMON + OPINIONS CONCERNING THE APTITUDE OF PERSONS TO DO INJURY. + + +Of the _causes_ which move to _injury_, namely, _profit and pleasure_, +has been already spoken (chap. VI, VII, XI). It follows next, to speak +of the _persons_ that are apt to do injury. + +The _doers of injury_ are: such as think they can do it. And such as +think to be undiscovered, when they have done it. And such as think, +though they be discovered, they shall not be called in question for it. +And such as think, though they be called in question for it, that their +mulct will be less than their gain, which either themselves or their +friends receive by the _injury_. + +_Able to do injury_ are: such as are eloquent. And such as are practised +in business. And such as have skill in process. And such as have many +friends. And rich men. And such as have rich friends, or rich servants, +or rich partners. + +_Undiscovered when they have done it_, are: such as are not apt to +commit the crimes whereof they are accused: as feeble men, slaughter; +poor and not beautiful men, adultery. And such as one would think could +not chuse but be discovered. And such as do injuries, whereof there hath +been no example. And such as have none or many enemies. And such as can +easily conceal what they do. And such as have somebody to transfer the +fault upon. + +They that do injury _openly_ are: such, whose friends have been injured. +And such as have the judges for friends. And such as can escape their +trial at law. And such as can put off their trial. And such as can +corrupt the judges. And such as can avoid the payment of their fine. And +such as can defer the payment. And such as cannot pay at all. And such +as by the injury get manifestly much, and presently; when the fine is +uncertain, little, and to come. And such as get by the injury money, by +the penalty shame only. And such on the contrary as get honour by the +injury, and suffer the mulct of money only, or banishment, or the like. +And such as have often escaped or been undiscovered. And such as have +often attempted in vain. And such as consider present pleasure more than +pain to come, and so intemperate men are apt to do injury. And such as +consider pleasure to come more than present pain, and so temperate men +are apt to do injury. And such as may seem to have done it by fortune, +nature, necessity, or custom; and by error, rather than by injustice. +And such as have means to get pardon. And such as want necessaries, as +poor men; or unnecessaries, as rich men. And such as are of very good or +very bad reputation. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIII. + + PRESUMPTIONS OF INJURY DRAWN FROM THE PERSONS THAT SUFFER, AND FROM THE + MATTER OF THE INJURY. + + +Of those that do injury, and why they do it, it hath been already +spoken. Now of the _persons_ that suffer, and of the _matter_ wherein +they suffer, the _common opinions_ are these. + +_Persons_ obnoxious to injury are: such as have the things that we want, +either as necessary, or as delightful. And such as are far from us. And +such as are at hand. And such as are unwary and credulous. And such as +are lazy. And such as are modest. And such as have swallowed many +injuries. And such as we have injured often before; and such as never +before. And such as are in our danger. And such as are ill-beloved +generally. And such as are envied. And our friends; and our enemies. And +such as, wanting friends, have no great ability either in speech or +action. And such as shall be losers by going to law: as strangers and +workmen. And such as have done the injuries they suffer. And such as +have committed a crime, or would have done, or are about to do. And such +as, by doing them an injury, we shall gratify our friends or superiors. +And such whose friendship we have newly left, and accuse. And such as +another would do the injury to, if we should not. And such as by +injuring, we get greater means of doing good. + +The _matters_ wherein men are obnoxious to injury are: those things +wherein all, or most men use to deal unjustly. And those things which +are easily hid, and put off into other hands, or altered. And those +things which a man is ashamed to have suffered. And those things wherein +prosecution of injury, may be thought a love of contention. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIV. + + OF THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO BE KNOWN FOR THE DEFINITION OF + JUST AND UNJUST. + + +When the fact is evident, the next inquiry is, whether it be _just_ or +_unjust_. For the definition of _just_ and _unjust_, we must know what +_law_ is; that is, what the _law of nature_, what the _law of nations_, +what the _law civil_, what _written law_, and what _unwritten law_ is: +and what _persons_, that is, what a _public person_ or the _city_ is, +and what a _private person_ or _citizen_ is. + +_Unjust_, in the opinion of all men, is that which is contrary to the +_law of nature_. + +_Unjust_, in the opinion of all men of those nations which traffic and +come together, is that which is contrary to the _law common to those +nations_. + +_Unjust_, only in one commonwealth, is that which is contrary to the +_law civil_, or law of that commonwealth. + +He that is accused to have done anything against the _public_, or a +_private person_, is accused to do it either _ignorantly_, or +_unwillingly_, or _in anger_, or _upon premeditation_. + +And because the defendant does many times confess the _fact_, but deny +the _unjustice_; as that he _took_, but did not _steal_; and _did_, but +not _adultery_; it is necessary to know the definitions of _theft_, +_adultery_, and all other crimes. + +What facts are contrary to the _written laws_, may be known by the _laws +themselves_. + +Besides _written laws_, whatsoever is _just_ proceeds from _equity_ or +_goodness_. + +From _goodness_ proceeds, that which we are praised or honoured for. + +From _equity_ proceed those actions, which though the written law +command not, yet, being interpreted reasonably and supplied, seems to +require at our hands. + +Actions of _equity_ are such as these:—Not too rigorously to punish +errors, mischances, or injuries. To pardon the faults that adhere to +mankind. And not to consider the _law_, so much as the _law maker’s +mind_; and not the _words_, so much as the _meaning_ of the law. And not +to regard so much the fact, as the intention of the doer; nor part of +the fact, but the whole; nor what the doer _is_, but what he _has been_ +always or for the most part. And to remember better the good received, +than the ill. And to endure injuries patiently. And to submit rather to +the sentence of a judge, than of the sword. And to the sentence of an +arbitrator, rather than of a judge. + + + ========== + + + + + CHAPTER XV. + + OF THE COLOURS OR COMMON OPINIONS CONCERNING INJURIES, COMPARATIVELY. + + +_Common opinions_ concerning injuries _comparatively_, are such as +these. + +Greater is the injury, which proceedeth from greater iniquity. And from +which proceedeth greater damage. And of which there is no revenge. And +for which there is no remedy. And by occasion of which he that hath +received the injury hath done some mischief to himself. + +He does greater injury, that does it first, or alone, or with few; and +he that does it often. + +Greater injury is that, against which laws and penalties were first +made. And that, which is more brutal or more approaching to the actions +of beasts. And that, which is done upon more premeditation. And by which +more laws are broken. And which is done in the place of execution. And +which is of greatest shame to him that receives the injury. And which is +committed against well deservers. And which is committed against the +_unwritten_ law; because good men should observe the law for justice, +and not for fear of punishment. And which is committed against the +_written_ law; because he that will do injury, neglecting the penalty +set down in the _written_ law, is much more likely to transgress the +_unwritten_ law, where there is no penalty at all. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVI. + + OF PROOFS INARTIFICIAL. + + +Of _artificial proofs_ we have already spoken. + +_Inartificial proofs_, which we invent not, but make use of, are of five +sorts. + +1. _Laws._ And those are _civil_ or _written law_: the _law or custom of +nations_; and the _universal law of nature_. + +2. _Witnesses._ And those are such as concern _matter_, and such as +concern _manners_. Also they be _ancient_ or _present_. + +3. _Evidences_ or writings. + +4. _Question_ or torture. + +5. _Oaths._ And those be either _given_ or _taken_, or both, or neither. + +For _laws_, we use them thus: when the _written law_ makes against us, +we appeal to the _law of nature_, alleging that to be greatest justice, +which is greatest equity. That the _law of nature_ is immutable, the +_written law_ mutable. That the _written law_ is but seeming justice; +the _law of nature_ very justice; and justice is among those things +which are, and not which seem to be. That the judge ought to discern +between true and adulterate justice. That they are better men that obey +unwritten than written laws. That the law against us does contradict +some other law. And when the law has a double interpretation, that is +the true one which makes for us. And that the cause of the law being +abolished, the law is no more of validity. + +But when the _written law_ makes for us, and _equity_ for the adversary, +we must allege: That a man may use equity, not as a liberty to judge +against the law; but only as a security against being forsworn, when he +knows not the law. That men seek not equity because it is good simply, +but because good for them. That it is the same thing not to make, and +not to use the law. That as in other arts, and namely, in physic, +fallacies are pernicious; so in a common-wealth it is pernicious to use +pretexts against the law. And that in common-wealths well instituted, to +seem wiser than the laws is prohibited. + +For _witnesses_, we must use them thus. When we have them not, we must +stand for _presumptions_, and say: That in equity, sentence ought to be +given according to the most probability. That presumptions are the +testimony of the things themselves, and cannot be bribed. That they +cannot lie. + +When we have witnesses against him that has them not, we must say: That +presumptions, if they be false, cannot be punished. That if presumptions +were enough, witnesses were superfluous. + +For _writings_, when they favour us, we must say: That _writings_ are +private and particular laws; and he that takes away the use of +evidences, abolisheth the law. That since contracts and negociations +pass by _writings_, he that bars their use dissolves human society. + +Against them, if they favour the adversary, we may say: That since laws +do not bind that are fraudulently made to pass, much less writings; and +that the judge being to dispense justice, ought rather to consider what +is just than what is in the writing. That writings may be gotten by +fraud or force, but justice by neither. That the writing is repugnant to +some law, civil or natural; or to justice; or to honesty. That it is +repugnant to some other writing, before or after. That it crosses some +commodity of the judge; which must not be said directly, but implied +cunningly. + +For the _torture_, if the giving of it make for us, we must say: That it +is the only testimony that is certain. But if it make for the adversary, +we may say: That men enforced by torture, speak as well that which is +false as that which is true. That they, who can endure, conceal the +truth; and they who cannot, say that which is false, to be delivered +from pain. + +For _oaths_, he that will not put his adversary to his oath, may allege: +That he makes no scruple to be forsworn. That by swearing he will carry +the cause, which, not swearing, he must lose. That he had rather trust +his cause in the hands of the judge, than of the adversary. + +He that _refuseth_ to take the oath may say: That the matter is not +worth so much. That if he had been an evil man, he had _sworn_, and +carried his cause. That to try it by _swearing_, for a religious man +against an irreligious is as hard a match, as to set a weak man against +a strong in combat. + +He that is _willing_ to take the oath, may pretend: That he had rather +trust himself, than his adversary; and that it is equal dealing for an +irreligious man to _give_, and for a religious man to _take_ the oath. +That it is his duty to take the oath, since he has required to have +_sworn judges_. + +He that _offers_ the oath, may pretend: That he does piously commit his +cause to the Gods. That he makes his adversary himself judge. That it +were absurd for him not to swear, that has required the judges to be +sworn. + +And of these are to be compounded the forms we are to use, when we would +_give_, and _not take_ the oath; or _take_ and _not give_; or _both +give_ and _take_; or _neither give nor take_. + +But if one have sworn contrary to a former oath, he may pretend: That he +was forced: that he was deceived; and that neither of these is +_perjury_, since _perjury_ is voluntary. + +But if the adversary do so, he may say: That he that stands not to what +he hath _sworn_, subverteth human society. And (turning to the judge): +What reason have we to require, that you should be _sworn_ that judge +our cause; when we will not stand to that we _swear_ ourselves? + +And so much for _proofs inartificial_. + + + + + BOOK II. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER I. + + THE INTRODUCTION. + + +Of _belief_ proceeding from our _invention_, that part which consisteth +in _proof_ is already spoken of. + +The other two parts follow; whereof one ariseth from the _manners_ of +the _speaker_, the other from the _passions_ of the _hearer_. + +The _principles_, _colours_, or _common opinions_ upon which a man’s +belief is grounded concerning the manners of him that speaks, are to be +had, partly out of that which hath before been said of _virtue_ (Book I. +chap. 9); partly out of those things which shall be said by-and-by +concerning the _passions_. For a man is _believed_, either for his +_prudence_ or for his _probity_, which are _virtues_; or for _good +will_, of which among the _passions_. + +The _principles_ concerning belief, arising from the passion of the +hearer, are to be gathered from that which shall now be said of the +several passions in order. + +In every one of which, three things are to be considered. + +1. First, _how_ men are affected. + +2. Secondly, _towards whom_. + +3. Thirdly, _for what_. + + + ========== + + + + + CHAPTER II. + + OF ANGER. + + +_Anger_ is desire of revenge, joined with grief, for that he, or some of +his, is, or seems to be, _neglected_. + +The object of anger is always some particular or individual thing. + +In anger there is also pleasure proceeding from the imagination of +revenge to come. + +To _neglect_, is to esteem little or nothing; and of three kinds: 1 +_Contempt_, 2 _Crossing_, 3 _Contumely_. + +_Contempt_, is when a man thinks another of little worth in comparison +to himself. + +_Crossing_, is the hinderance of another man’s will without design to +profit himself. + +_Contumely_, is the disgracing of another for his own pastime. + +The _common opinions_ concerning anger are therefore such as follow. +They are easily angry, that think they are neglected. That think they +excel others; as the rich with the poor; the noble with the obscure, &c. +And such as think they deserve well. And such as grieve to be hindered, +opposed, or not assisted; and therefore sick men, poor men, lovers, and +generally all that desire and attain not, are angry with those that, +standing by, are not moved by their wants. And such as having expected +good, find evil. + +Those that men are angry with, are: such as mock, deride, or jest at +them. And such as shew any kind of contumely towards them. And such as +despise those things which we spend most labour and study upon; and the +more, by how much we seem the less advanced therein. And our friends, +rather than those that are not our friends. And such as have honoured +us, if they continue not. And such as requite not our courtesy. And such +as follow contrary courses, if they be our inferiors. And our friends, +if they have said or done us evil, or not good. And such as give not ear +to our entreaty. And such as are joyful or calm in our distress. And +such as troubling us, are not themselves troubled. And such as willingly +hear or see our disgraces. And such as neglect us in the presence of our +competitors, of those we admire, of those we would have admire us, of +those we reverence, and of those that reverence us. And such as should +help us, and neglect it. And such as are in jest, when we are in +earnest. And such as forget us, or our names. + +An orator therefore must so frame his judge or auditor by his oration, +as to make him apt to _anger_: and then make his adversary appear such +as men use to be _angry withal_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER III. + + OF RECONCILING, OR PACIFYING ANGER. + +_Reconciliation_ is the appeasing of anger. + +Those to whom men are easily reconciled, are: such as have not offended +out of neglect. And such as have done it against their will. And such as +wish done the contrary of what they have done. And such as have done as +much to themselves. And such as confess and repent. And such as are +humbled. And such as do seriously the same things, that they do +seriously. And such as have done them more good heretofore, than now +hurt. And such as sue to them for any thing. And such as are not +insolent, nor mockers, nor slighters of others in their own disposition. +And generally such as are of a contrary disposition to those whom men +are usually angry withal. And such as they fear or reverence. And such +as reverence them. And such as have offended their anger. + +_Reconcileable_ are: such as are contrarily affected to those, whom we +have said before to be easily angry. And such as play, laugh, make +merry, prosper, live in plenty; and, in sum, all that have no cause of +grief. And such as have given their anger time. + +Men lay down their anger for these causes. Because they have gotten the +victory. Because the offender has suffered more than they meant to +inflict. Because they have been revenged of another. Because they think +they suffer justly. And because they think the revenge will not be felt, +or not known that the revenge was theirs, and for such an injury. And +because the offender is dead. + +Whosoever therefore would _assuage_ the anger of his _auditor_, must +make himself appear such as men use to be _reconciled_ unto: and beget +in his _auditor_ such opinions as make him _reconcileable_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IV. + + OF LOVE AND FRIENDS. + + +To _love_ is to will well to another, and that for others, not for our +own sake. + +A _friend_ is he that _loves_, and he that is _beloved_. + +_Friends_ one to another, are they that naturally _love_ one another. + +A _friend_ therefore is he; that rejoiceth at another’s good. And that +grieves at his hurt. And that wishes the same with us to a third, +whether good or hurt. And that is _enemy_ or _friend_ to the same man. + +We _love_ them: that have done good to us, or ours; especially if much, +readily, or in season. That are our friends' _friends_. That are our +enemies' _enemies_. That are liberal. That are valiant. That are just. +And that we would have love us. And good companions. And such as can +abide jests. And such as break jests. And such as praise us, especially +for somewhat that we doubt of in ourselves. And such as are neat. And +such as upbraid us not with our vices, or with their own benefits. And +such as quickly forget injuries. And such as least observe our errors. +And such as are not of ill tongue. And those that are ignorant of our +vices. And such as cross us not when we are busy or angry. And such as +are officious towards us. And those that are like us. And such as follow +the same course or trade of life, where they impeach not one another. +And such as labour for the same thing, when both may be satisfied. And +such as are not ashamed to tell us freely their faults, so it be not in +contempt of us, and the faults such as the world, rather than their own +consciences, condemns. And such as are ashamed to tell us of their very +faults. And such as we would have honour us, and not envy, but imitate +us. And such as we would do good to, except with greater hurt to +ourselves. And such as continue their friendship to the dead. And such +as speak their mind. And such as are not terrible. And such as we may +rely on. + +The several _kinds_ of _friendship_, are _society_, _familiarity_, +_consanguinity_, _affinity_ _&c._ + +The things that _beget love_, are, the bestowing of benefits, _gratis_; +_unasked_; _privately_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER V. + + OF ENMITY AND HATRED. + +The _colours_ or _common opinions_ concerning _hatred_, are to be taken +from the _contrary_ of those which concern love and friendship. + +_Hatred_ differs from anger in this; that anger regards only what is +done to oneself; but _hatred_ not. And in this, that anger regards +particulars only; the other, universals also. And in this, that anger is +curable; hatred not. And in this, that anger seeks the vexation, hatred +the damage, of one’s adversary. That with anger there is always joined +grief; with hatred, not always. That anger may at length be satiated; +but hatred never. + +Hence it appears how the judge or auditor may be made _friend_ or +_enemy_ to us, and how our adversary may be made appear _friend_ or +_enemy_ to the judge; and how we may answer to our adversary, that would +make us appear _enemies_ to him. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VI. + + OF FEAR. + +_Fear_ is a trouble or vexation of the mind, arising from the +apprehension of an evil at hand, which may hurt or destroy. _Danger_ is +the nearness of the evil feared. + +The _things_ to be feared are: such as have power to hurt. And the signs +of will to do us hurt; as anger and hatred of powerful men. And +injustice joined with power. And valour provoked, joined with power. And +the fear of powerful men. + +The _men_ that are to be feared, are: such as know our faults. And such +as can do us injury. And such as think they are injured by us. And such +as have done us injury. And our competitors in such things as cannot +satisfy both. And such as are feared by more powerful men than we are. +And such as have destroyed greater men than we are. And such as use to +invade their inferiors. And men not passionate, but dissemblers and +crafty, are more to be feared than those that are hasty and free. + +The things _especially_ to be feared, are: such, wherein if we err, the +error cannot be repaired; at least, not according to ours, but our +adversary’s pleasure. And such as admit either none, or not easy help. +And such as being done, or about to be done to others, make us pity +them. + +They that _fear not_ are: such as expect not evil; or not now; or not +this; or not from these. And therefore men fear little in _prosperity_. +And men fear little, that think they have suffered already. + +An orator therefore that would put _fear_ into the auditor, must let him +see that he is obnoxious; and that greater than he do suffer and have +suffered from those, and at those times, they least thought. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VII. + + OF ASSURANCE. + +_Assurance_ is hope, arising from an imagination that the help is near, +or the evil afar off. + +The things therefore that beget assurance are: the remoteness of those +things that are to be feared, and the nearness of their contraries. And +the facility of great or many helps or remedies. And neither to have +done, nor received injury. And to have no competitors, or not great +ones; or if great ones, at least friends, such as we have obliged, or +are obliged to. And that the danger is extended to more or greater than +us. + +_Assured_ or _confident_, are: they that have oft escaped danger. And +they, to whom most things have succeeded well. And they, that see their +equals or inferiors not afraid. And they, that have wherewith to make +themselves feared; as wealth, strength, &c. And such as have done others +no wrong. And such as think themselves in good terms with God Almighty. +And such as think they will speed well, that are gone before. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VIII. + + OF SHAME. + +_Shame_ is a perturbation of the mind arising from the apprehension of +evil, past, present, or to come, to the prejudice of a man’s own, or his +friends' reputation. + +The things therefore which men are _ashamed of_, are those actions which +proceed from vice: as to throw away one’s arms, to run away, signs of +cowardliness. To deny that which is committed to one’s trust, a sign of +injustice. To have lain with whom, where, and when, we ought not, signs +of intemperance. To make gain of small and base things; not to help with +money whom and how much we ought; to receive help from meaner men; to +ask money at use from such as one thinks will borrow of him; to borrow +of him that expects payment of somewhat before lent; and to re-demand +what one has lent, of him that one thinks will borrow more; and so to +praise as one may be thought to ask; signs of wretchedness. To praise +one to his face; to praise his virtues too much, and colour his vices; +signs of flattery. To be unable to endure such labours as men endure +that are elder, tenderer, greater in quality, and of less strength than +he; signs of effeminacy. To be beholden often to another; and to upbraid +those that are beholden to him; signs of pusillanimity. To speak and +promise much of one’s self, more than is due; signs of arrogance. To +want those things which one’s equals, all or most of them, have attained +to, is also a thing to be ashamed of. And to suffer things ignominious; +as to serve about another’s person, or to be employed in his base +actions. + +In actions of intemperance, whether willingly or unwillingly committed, +there is _shame_; in actions of force, only when they are done +unwillingly. + +The men _before whom_ we are ashamed, are such as we respect: namely, +those that admire us. And those whom we desire should admire us. And +those whom we admire. Those that contend with us for honour. Those whose +opinion we contemn not. And therefore men are most ashamed in the +presence: of old and well bred men. Of those we are always to live with. +Of those that are not guilty of the same fault. Of those that do not +easily pardon. And of those that are apt to reveal our faults; such as +are men injured, backbiters, scoffers, comic poets. And of those before +whom we have had always good success. And of those who never asked +anything of us before. And of such as desire our friendship. And of our +familiars, that know none of our crimes. And of such as will reveal our +faults to any of those that are named before. + +But in the presence of such whose judgment most men despise, men are not +ashamed. Therefore we are ashamed also in the presence of those whom we +reverence. And of those who are concerned in our own, or ancestors', or +kinsfolk’s, actions or misfortunes, if they be shameful. And of their +rivals. And of those that are to live with them that know their +disgrace. + +The _common opinions_ concerning _impudence_, are taken from the +contrary of these. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IX. + + OF GRACE OR FAVOUR. + +_Grace_ is that virtue, by which a man is said to do a good turn or to +do service to a man in need, not for his own, but for his cause to whom +he does it. + +_Great_ grace is when the need is great; or when they are hard or +difficult things that are conferred; or when the time is seasonable; or +when he that confers the _favour_, is the only or first man that did it. + +_Need_ is a desire, joined with grief, for the absence of the thing +desired. _Grace_ therefore it is not, if it be done to one that needs +not. Whosoever therefore would prove that he has done a _grace_ or +_favour_, must show that he needeth it to whom it was done. + +_Grace_ it is not, which is done by chance. Nor which is done by +necessity. Nor which has been requited. Nor that which is done to one’s +enemy. Nor that which is a trifle. Nor that which is nought, if the +giver know the fault. + +And in this manner a man may go over the predicaments, and examine a +benefit, whether it be a _grace_ for being _this_, or for being _so +much_, or for being _such_, or for being _now_, &c. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER X. + + OF PITY OR COMPASSION. + +_Pity_ is a perturbation of the mind, arising from the apprehension of +hurt or trouble to another that doth not deserve it, and which he thinks +may happen to himself or his. + +And because it appertains to _pity_ to think that he, or his, may fall +into the misery he pities in others; it follows that they be _most +compassionate_: who have passed through misery. And old men. And weak +men. And timorous men. And learned men. And such as have parents, wife +and children. And such as think there be honest men. + +And that they are _less compassionate_: who are in great despair. Who +are in great prosperity. And they that are angry; for they consider not. +And they that are very confident; for they also consider not. And they +that are in the act of contumely; for neither do these consider. And +they that are astonished with fear. And they that think no man honest. + +The _things_ to be pitied are: such as grieve, and withal hurt. Such as +destroy. And calamities of fortune, if they be great: as none or few +friends, deformity, weakness, lameness, &c. And evil that arrives where +good is expected. And after extreme evil, a little good. And through a +man’s life to have no good offer itself; or being offered, not to have +been able to enjoy it. + +_Men_ to be pitied are: such as are known to us, unless they be so near +to us, as their hurt be our own. And such as be of our own years. Such +as are like us in manners. Such as are of the same, or like stock. And +our equals in dignity. Those that have lately suffered, or are shortly +to suffer injury: and those that have the marks of injury past. And +those that have the words or actions of them that be in present misery. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XI. + + OF INDIGNATION. + +Opposite in a manner to pity in _good_ men, is _indignation_; which is +grief for the prosperity of a man unworthy. + +With _indignation_ there is always joined a joy for the prosperity of a +man worthy; as _pity_ is always with contentment in the adversity of +them that deserve it. + +In _wicked_ men the opposite of pity is _envy_; as also the companion +thereof, _delight in the harm of_ _others_, which the Greeks in one word +have called ἐπιχαιρεκακία. But of these in the next chapter. + +Men conceive _indignation_ against others, not for their virtues, as +justice, &c.; for these make men worthy; and in _indignation_ we think +men unworthy: but for those goods which men indued with virtue, and +noble men, and handsome men are worthy of. And for newly-gotten power +and riches, rather than for ancient; and especially if by these he has +gotten other goods, as by riches, command. The reason why we conceive +greater _indignation_ against new than ancient riches, is that the +former seem to possess that which is none of theirs, but the ancient +seem to have but their own: for with common people, to have been so +long, is to be so by right. And for the bestowing of goods +incongruously: as when the arms of the most valiant Achilles were +bestowed on the most eloquent Ulysses. And for the comparison of the +inferior in the same thing, as when one valiant is compared with a more +valiant; or whether absolutely superior, as when a good scholar is +compared with a good man. + +_Apt_ to indignation are: they that think themselves worthy of the +greatest goods, and do possess them. And they that are good. And they +that are ambitious. And such as think themselves deserve better what +another possesseth, than he that hath it. + +_Least apt_ to indignation are, such as are of a poor, servile, and not +ambitious nature. + +Who they are, that rejoice or grieve not at the adversity of him that +suffers worthily, and in what occasions, may be gathered from the +contrary of what has been already said. + +Whoever therefore would turn away the _compassion_ of the judge, he must +make him apt to _indignation_; and shew that his adversary is unworthy +of the good, and worthy of the evil which happens to him. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XII. + + OF ENVY. + +_Envy_ is grief for the prosperity of such as ourselves, arising not +from any hurt that we, but from the good that they receive. + +Such as ourselves, I call those that are equal to us in blood, in age, +in abilities, in glory, or in means. + +They are apt to _envy_: that are within a little of the highest. And +those that are extraordinarily honoured for some quality that is +singular in them, especially wisdom or good fortune. And such as would +be thought wise. And such as catch at glory in every action. And men of +poor spirits; for every thing appears great to them. + +The _things_ which men envy in others are: such as bring glory. And +goods of fortune. And such things as we desire for ourselves. And things +in the possession whereof we exceed others, or they us, a little. + +Obnoxious to _envy_ are: men of our own time, of our own country, of our +own age, and competitors of our glory; and therefore, those whom we +strive with for honour. And those that covet the same things that we do. +And those that get quickly, what we hardly obtain, or not at all. And +those that attain unto, or do the things that turn to our reproach, not +being done by us. And those that possess what we have possessed +heretofore; so old and decayed men envy the young and lusty. And those +that have bestowed little, are subject to be envied by such as have +bestowed much upon the same thing. + +From the contraries of these may be derived the principles concerning +joy for other men’s hurt. + +He therefore that would not have his enemy prevail, when he craves +_pity_ or other favour, must dispose the judge to _envy_; and make his +adversary appear such as are above described to be subject to the _envy_ +of others. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIII. + + OF EMULATION. + +_Emulation_ is grief arising from that our equals possess such goods as +are had in honour, and whereof we are capable, but have them not; not +because they have them, but because not we also. No man therefore +_emulates_ another in things whereof himself is not capable. + +Apt to _emulate_ are: such as esteem themselves worthy of more than they +have. And young and magnanimous men. And such as already possess the +goods for which men are honoured: for they measure their worth by their +having. And those that are esteemed worthy by others. And those whose +ancestors, kindred, familiars, nation, city, have been eminent for some +good, do _emulate_ others for that good. + +_Objects_ of emulation are, for _things_; virtues. And things whereby we +may profit others. And things whereby we may please others. + +For _persons_: they that possess such things. And such as many desire to +be friends or acquainted with, or like unto. And they whose praises fly +abroad. + +The contrary of _emulation_ is _contempt_. And they that _emulate_ such +as have the goods aforementioned, _contemn_ such as have them not. And +thence it is, that men who live happily enough, unless they have the +goods which men honour, are nevertheless _contemned_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIV. + + OF THE MANNERS OF YOUTH. + +Of _passions_ we have already spoken. We are next to speak of _manners_. + +_Manners_ are distinguished by _passions_, _habits_, _ages_, and +_fortunes_. + +What kind of _manners_ proceed from _passions_, and from _virtues_ and +_vices_, which are _habits_, hath been already shewed. There remains to +be spoken of the _manners_ that are peculiar to several _ages_ and +_fortunes_. + +The _ages_ are _youth_, _middle-age_, _old age_. And first of _youth_. + +_Young men_ are: violent in their desires. Prompt to execute their +desires. Incontinent. Inconstant, easily forsaking what they desired +before. Longing mightily, and soon satisfied. Apt to anger, and in their +anger violent; and ready to execute their anger with their hands. Lovers +of honour and of victory more than money, as having not been yet in +want. Well-natured, as having not been acquainted with much malice. Full +of hope, both because they have not yet been often frustrated, and +because they have by natural heat that disposition that other ages have +by wine; youth being a kind of natural drunkenness; besides, hope is of +the time to come, whereof youth hath much, but of the time past little. +Credulous, because not yet often deceived. Easily deceived, because full +of hope. Valiant, because apt to anger and full of hope; whereof this +begets confidence, the other keeps off fear. Bashful, because they +estimate the honour of actions by the precepts of the law. Magnanimous, +because not yet dejected by the misfortunes of human life. And lovers of +honour more than of profit, because they live more by custom than by +reason; and by reason we acquire profit, but virtue by custom. Lovers of +their friends and companions. Apt to err in the excess rather than the +defect, contrary to that precept of Chilon, _Ne quid nimis_; for they +overdo every thing: they love too much and hate too much; because +thinking themselves wise, they are obstinate in the opinion they have +once delivered. Doers of injury, rather for contumely than for damage. +Merciful, because, measuring others by their own innocence, they think +them better than they be, and therefore less to merit what they suffer; +which is a cause of pity. And lovers of mirth, and by consequence such +as love to jest at others. + +_Jesting_ is witty contumely. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XV. + + OF THE MANNERS OF OLD MEN. + +The manners of _old_ men are in a manner the contraries of those of +_youth_. They determine nothing. They do everything less vehemently than +is fit. They never say, they know; but to everything they say, perhaps +and peradventure; which comes to pass from that, having lived long, they +have often mistaken and been deceived. They are peevish, because they +interpret everything to the worst. And suspicious through incredulity, +and incredulous by reason of their experience. They love and hate, as if +they meant to continue in neither. Are of poor spirits, as having been +humbled by the chances of life. And covetous, as knowing how easy it is +to lose, and how hard to get. And timorous, as having been cooled by +years. And greedy of life; for good things seem greater by the want of +them. And lovers of themselves, out of pusillanimity. And seek profit +more than honour, because they love themselves; and profit is among the +goods that are not simply good, but good for one’s self. And without +bashfulness, because they despise seeming. And hope little; knowing by +experience that many times good counsel has been followed with ill +event; and because also they be timorous. And live by memory rather than +hope; for memory is of the time past, whereof old men have good store. +And are full of talk, because they delight in their memory. And vehement +in their anger, but not stout enough to execute it. They have weak or no +desires, and thence seem temperate. They are slaves to gain. And live +more by reason than custom; because reason leads to profit, as custom to +that which is honourable. And do injury to endamage, and not in +contumely. And are merciful by compassion, or imagination of the same +evils in themselves; which is a kind of infirmity, and not humanity, as +in _young men_, proceeding from a good opinion of those that suffer +evil. And full of complaint, as thinking themselves not far from evil +because of their infirmity. + +Seeing then every man loves such men and their discourses which are most +agreeable to their own manners; it is not hard to collect, how the +orator and his oration may be made acceptable to the hearer, whether +_young_ or _old_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVI. + + OF THE MANNERS OF MIDDLE-AGED MEN. + +The manners of _middle-aged_ men, are between those of _youth_ and _old +men_. And therefore they neither dare, nor fear too much; but both as is +fit. They neither believe all, nor reject all; but judge. They seek not +only what is honourable, nor only what is profitable; but both. They are +neither covetous, nor prodigal; but in the mean. They are neither easily +angry, nor yet stupid; but between both. They are valiant and withal +temperate. + +And in general, whatsoever is divided in _youth_ and _old men_, is +compounded in _middle-age_. And whereof the excess or defect is in +_youth_ or _old men_, the mediocrity is in those of _middle-age_. + +Middle-age for the _body_, I call the time from thirty to five and +thirty years: for the _mind_, the nine-and-fortieth, or thereabouts. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVII. + + OF THE MANNERS OF THE NOBILITY. + +Of manners that proceed from the several _ages_ we have already spoken. +We are next to speak of those that rise from several _fortunes_. + +The manners of the _nobility_ are: to be ambitious. To undervalue their +ancestors' equals; for the goods of fortune seem the more precious for +their antiquity. + +_Nobility_ is the virtue of a stock. And _generosity_, is not to +degenerate from the virtue of his stock. For as in plants, so in the +races of men, there is a certain progress; and they grow better and +better to a certain point; and change, viz. subtile wits into madness, +and staid wits into stupidity and blockishness. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVIII. + + OF THE MANNERS OF THE RICH. + +_Rich_ men are contumelious, and proud; this they have from their +riches; for seeing everything may be had for money, having money they +think they have all that is good. And effeminate: because they have +wherewithal to subminister to their lust. And boasters of their wealth, +and speak in high terms foolishly; for men willingly talk of what they +love and admire, and think others affect the same that they do; and the +truth is, all sorts of men submit to the rich. And think themselves +worthy to command, having that by which men attain command. And in +general they have the manners of fortunate fools. They do injury, with +intention not to hurt, but to disgrace; and partly also through +incontinence. + +There is a difference between _new_ and _ancient_ riches. For they that +are _newly_ come to wealth, have the same faults in a greater degree; +for _new riches_ are a kind of rudeness and apprenticeship of _riches_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIX. + + OF THE MANNERS OF MEN IN POWER, AND OF SUCH AS PROSPER. + +The manners of men _in power_, are the same, or better than those of the +_rich_. They have a greater sense of honour than the rich, and their +manners are more manly. They are more industrious than the rich, for +_power_ is sustained by industry. They are grave, but without +austereness; for being in place conspicuous, they carry themselves the +more modestly; and have a kind of gentle and comely gravity, which the +_Greeks_ call σεμνότης. When they do injuries, they do great ones. + +The manners of men that _prosper_, are compounded of the manners of the +_nobility_, the _rich_, and those that are _in power_; for to some of +these all _prosperity_ appertains. + +_Prosperity_ in children, and goods of the body, make men desire to +exceed others in the goods of fortune. + +Men that _prosper_ have this ill; to be more proud and inconsiderate +than others. And this good; that they worship God, trusting in him, for +that they find themselves to receive more good than proceeds from their +industry. + +The manners of _poor_ men, _obscure_ men, men _without power_, and men +_in adversity_, may be collected from the contrary of what has been +said. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XX. + +COMMON PLACES OR PRINCIPLES CONCERNING WHAT MAY BE DONE, WHAT HAS BEEN + DONE, AND WHAT SHALL BE DONE; OR OF FACT POSSIBLE, PAST AND FUTURE. + ALSO OF GREAT AND LITTLE. + +We have hitherto set down such _principles_ as are peculiar to several +kinds of orations. Now we are to speak of such _places_ as are _common_ +to them all; as these: _possible_, _done_, or _past_, _future_, _great_, +_small_. + +_Possible_ is that: the contrary whereof is possible. And the like +whereof is possible. And than which some harder thing is possible. And +the beginning whereof is possible. And the end whereof is possible. And +the usual consequent whereof is possible. And whatsoever we desire. And +the beginning whereof is in the power of those whom we can either compel +or persuade. And part whereof is possible. And part of the whole that is +possible. And the general, if a particular. And a particular, if the +general. And of relatives, if one, the other. And that which without art +and industry is possible, is much more so with art and industry. And +that which is possible to worse, weaker, and more unskilful men, is much +more so to better, stronger, and more skilful. + +The principles concerning _impossible_ are the contraries of these. + +That _has been done_: than which a harder thing has been done. And the +consequent whereof has been done. And that which being possible, he had +a will to do, and nothing hindered. And that which was possible to him +in his anger. And that which he longed to do. And that which was before +upon the point of doing. And whose antecedent has been done; or that for +which it uses to be done. And if that for whose cause we do this, then +this. + +The principles concerning _not done_ are the contraries of these. + +That _shall be done_: which some man can, and means to do. And which +some man can, and desires to do. And which is in the way, and upon the +point to be done. And the antecedents whereof are past. And the motive +whereof is past. + +Of _great_ and _small_, _more_ and _less_, see Chapter VII. of Book I. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXI. + + OF EXAMPLE, SIMILITUDE, AND FABLES. + +Of the _principles_, both general and special, from whence _proofs_ are +to be drawn, has been already spoken. Now follow the _proofs_ +themselves, which are _examples_ or _enthymemes_. + +An _example_, is either an example _properly so called_, as some action +past; or a _similitude_, which also is called a parable; or a _fable_, +which contains some action feigned. + +An example, _properly so called_, is this: _Darius came not into Greece +till he had first subdued Egypt; Xerxes also conquered Egypt first; then +afterwards crossed the Hellespont; we ought therefore to hinder the King +of Persia from conquering Egypt_. + +A _similitude_, or _parable_, is such as followeth: _They who choose +their magistrates by lot, are like them that choose for their champions +those on whom the lot shall fall, rather than those who have the +greatest strength; and for their pilot, not him that hath skill, but him +whose name is drawn out of the urn_. + +A _fable_ is in this manner: _The horse desiring to drive out the stag +from his common pasture, took a man to assist him; and having received +into his mouth a bridle, and a rider upon his back, obtained his intent, +but became subject to the man. So you of Himera, having, in hope to be +revenged of your enemies, given unto Phalaris sovereign authority, that +is to say, taken a bridle into your mouths; if you shall also give him a +guard to his person, that is, let him get up upon your backs, you become +his slaves presently, past recovery._ + +To find out _examples_, that is, actions done that may serve our +purpose, is therefore hard, because not in our power. But to find +_fables_ and _similitudes_, is easier; because, by conversing in +philosophy, a man may feign somewhat in nature like to the case in hand. + +_Examples_, _similitudes_, and _fables_, where _enthymemes_ are wanting, +may serve us in the beginning of an oration for inductions; otherwise +are to be alleged after enthymemes, for testimonies. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXII. + + OF A SENTENCE. + +A _sentence_ is an universal proposition concerning those things which +are to be desired or avoided in the actions or passions of the common +life. As, _A wise man will not suffer his children to be over-learned_. +And is to an _enthymeme_ in _rhetoric_, as any proposition is to a +_syllogism_ in _logic_. And therefore a _sentence_, if the reason be +rendered, becomes a _conclusion_; and both together make an _enthymeme_. +As for example: _To be over-learned, besides that it begets effeminacy, +procures envy. Therefore he that is wise will not suffer his children to +be over-learned._ + +Of _sentences_ there be four sorts. For they either require proofs or +not, that is, are manifest or not. + +Such as are manifest, are either so as soon as they are uttered; as, +_Health is a great good_. Or as soon as they are considered; as, _Men +use to hate whom they have hurt_. + +Such as are not manifest, are either conclusions of _enthymemes_; as, +_He that is wise will not suffer his children, &c._ Or else are +_enthymematical_; that is, have in themselves the force of an +_enthymeme_; as _Mortal men ought not to carry immortal anger_. + +A _sentence_ not manifest, ought to be either _inferred_ or _confirmed_. +_Inferred_ thus: _It is not good to be effeminately minded, nor to be +envied by one’s fellow-citizens. A wise man, therefore, will not have +his children over-learned._ _Confirmed_ thus: _A wise man will not have +his children over-learned; seeing too much learning both softens a man’s +mind, and procures him envy among his fellow-citizens_. + +If a reason be added to a manifest _sentence_, let it be short. + +_Sentences_ become not every man; but only old men, and such as be +well-versed in business. For to hear a young man speak sentences, is +ridiculous; and to hear an ignorant man speak sentences, is absurd. + +_Sentences_ generally received, when they are for our purpose, ought not +to be neglected; because they pass for truths. And yet they may be +denied, when any laudable custom or humour may thereby be made appear in +the denier. + +The commodities of _sentences_, are two. One proceeding from the vanity +of the hearer, who takes for true universally affirmed, that which he +has found for true only in some particular; and therefore a man ought to +consider in every thing what opinion the hearer holds. Another is, that +sentences do discover the manners and disposition of the speaker; so +that if they be esteemed good sentences, he shall be esteemed a good +man; and if evil, an evil man. + +Thus much of _sentences_, what they be; of how many sorts; how to be +used; whom they become; and what is their profit. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXIII. + + OF THE INVENTION OF ENTHYMEMES. + +Seeing an enthymeme differs from a logical syllogism, in that it neither +concludes out of every thing, nor out of remote principles; the _places_ +of it, from whence a man may argue, ought to be certain and determinate. + +And because whosoever makes a _syllogism_, rhetorical or other, should +know all or the most part of that which is in question; as, whosoever is +to advise the Athenians in the question, whether they are to make war or +no, must know what their revenues be, what and what kind of power they +have: and he that will praise them, must know their acts at Salamis, +Marathon, &c.: it will be necessary for a good speaker to have in +readiness the choicest particulars of whatsoever he foresees he may +speak of. + +He that is to speak _ex tempore_, must comprehend in his speech as much +as he can of what is most _proper_ in the matter in hand. + +_Proper_, I call those things which are least common to others: as, he +that will praise Achilles, is not to declare such things as are common +both to him and Diomedes; as that he was a prince, and warred against +the Trojans: but such things as are proper only to Achilles; as that he +killed Hector and Cygnus; went to the war young and voluntary. + +Let this therefore be one general _place; from that which is proper_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXIV. + + OF THE PLACES OF ENTHYMEMES OSTENSIVE. + +Forasmuch as enthymemes either infer truly, or seem only so to do; and +they which do infer indeed, be either _ostensive_, or such as bring a +man to some _impossibility_; we will first set down the places of +enthymemes _ostensive_. + +An _ostensive_ enthymeme is, wherein a man concludes the question from +somewhat granted. + +That enthymeme which brings a man to an _impossibility_, is an enthymeme +wherein from that which the adversary maintaineth, we conclude that +which is manifestly _impossible_. + +All _places_ have been already set down in a manner in the precedent +propositions of _good_, _evil_, _just_, _unjust_, _honourable_, and +_dishonourable_: namely, they have been set down as applied to +_particular_ subjects, or in _concrete_. Here they are to be set down in +another manner; namely in the _abstract_ or _universal_. + +The first _place_, then, let be from _contraries_; which in the +_concrete_ or particulars is exemplified thus. _If intemperance be +hurtful, temperance is profitable: and if intemperance be not hurtful, +neither is temperance profitable._ + +Another _place_ may be from _cognomination_, or affinity of words: as in +this particular. _If what is just, be good; then what is justly, is +well: but justly to die, is not well: therefore not all that is just, is +good._ + +A third from _relatives_; as, _This man has justly done, therefore the +other has justly suffered._ But this _place_ sometimes deceives; for a +man may suffer _justly_, yet not from _him_. + +A fourth from _comparison_, three ways. + +From the _great to the less_; as, _He has stricken his father; and +therefore this man._ + +From the _less to the greater_: as, _The Gods know not all things; much +less man._ + +From _equality_: as, _If captains be not always the worse esteemed for +losing a victory; why should sophisters?_ + +Another from the time: as Philip to the Thebans: _If I had required to +pass through your country with my army, before I had aided you against +the Phocæans, there is no doubt but you would have promised it me. It is +absurd therefore to deny it me now, after I have trusted you._ + +A sixth from _what the adversary says of himself_: as, _Iphicrates asked +Aristophon, whether he would take a bribe to betray the army; and he +answering no; What, says he, is it likely that Iphicrates would betray +the army, and Aristophon not?_ + +This _place_ would be ridiculous, where the _defendant_ were not in much +more estimation than the _accuser_. + +A seventh from the _definition_; as that of Socrates; _A spirit is +either God, or the creature of God; and therefore he denies not that +there is a God, that confesses there are spirits_. + +An eighth from the _distinction of an ambiguous word_. + +A ninth from _division_: as, _If all men do what they do for one of +three causes, whereof two are impossible; and the accuser charge not the +defendant with the third; it follows that he has not done it_. + +A tenth from _induction_: as, _At Athens, at Thebes, at Sparta, &c.; and +therefore every where_. + +An eleventh from _authority_, or precedent sentence; as that of Sappho, +that _Death is evil; for that the gods have judged it so, in excepting +themselves from mortality_. + +A twelfth from the _consequence_; as, _It is not good to be envied; +therefore neither to be learned. It is good to be wise, therefore also +to be instructed._ + +A thirteenth from _two contrary consequences_; as, _It is not good to be +an orator; because if he speak the truth, he shall displease men, if he +speak falsely, he shall displease God_. + +Here is to be noted, that sometimes this argument may be retorted: as +thus, _If you speak truth, you shall please God; if you speak untruth, +you shall please men; therefore by all means be an orator_. + +A fourteenth from the _quality that men have to praise one thing and +approve another_: as, _We ought not to war against the Athenians upon no +precedent injury; for all men discommend injustice_. Again, _We ought to +war against the Athenians; for otherwise our liberty is at their mercy, +that is, is no liberty: but the preservation of liberty is a thing that +all men will approve_. + +A fifteenth from _proportion_: as, _Seeing we naturalize strangers for +their virtues, why should we not banish this stranger for his vices?_ + +A sixteenth from _the similitude of consequents_: as _He that denies the +immortality of the gods, is no worse than he that has written the +generation of the gods: for the same consequence follows of both, that +sometimes there are none_. + +A seventeenth from that, _that men change their mind_: as, _If when we +were in banishment, we fought to recover our country, why should we not +fight now to retain it?_ + +An eighteenth from _a feigned end_: as that _Diomedes chose Ulysses to +go with him, not as more valiant than another, but as one that would +partake less of the glory_. + +A nineteenth from the _cause_; as if he would infer he did it from this, +_that he had cause to do it_. + +A twentieth from _that which is incredible, but true_: as that _laws may +need a law to mend them, as well as fish bred in the salt water may need +salting_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXV. + + OF THE PLACES OF ENTHYMEMES THAT LEAD TO + + IMPOSSIBILITY. + +Let the first place be from inspection of _times_, _actions_, or +_words_, either of the adversary, or of the speaker, or both. Of the +adversary: as, _He says he loves the people, and yet he was in the +conspiracy of the Thirty_. Of the speaker; as, _He says I am +contentious, and yet I never began suit_. Of both; as, _He never +conferred any thing to the benefit of the commonwealth; whereas I have +ransomed divers citizens with mine own money_. + +A second is from _shewing the cause which seemed amiss_, and serves for +men of good reputation that are accused; as, The mother that was accused +of incest for being seen embracing her son, was absolved as soon as she +made appear that she embraced him upon his arrival from far by way of +salutation. + +A third, from _rendering of the cause_; as, Leodamas, to whom it was +objected, that he had, under the thirty tyrants, defaced the +inscription, which the people had set up in a pillar, of his ignominy; +answered, _He had not done it; because it would have been more to his +commodity to let it stand; thereby to endear himself to the tyrants by +the testimony of the people’s hatred_. + +A fourth from _better counsel_; as _He might have done better for +himself, therefore he did not this_. But this place deceives, when the +_better counsel_ comes to mind after the fact. + +A fifth from _the incompatibility of the things to be done_; as, They +that did deliberate whether they should both mourn and sacrifice at the +funeral of Leucothea, were told that, _if they thought her a goddess, +they ought not to mourn; and if they thought her a mortal, they ought +not to sacrifice_. + +A sixth (which is proper to judicial orations) from an _inference of +error_; as, _If he did it not, he was not wise; therefore he did it_. + +Enthymemes that lead to _impossibility_, please more than _ostensive_. +For they compare and put contraries together, whereby they are the +better set off and more conspicuous to the auditor. + +Of all enthymemes, they be best which we assent to as soon as hear. For +such consent pleaseth us, and makes us favourable to the speaker. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXVI. + + OF THE PLACES OF SEEMING ENTHYMEMES. + +Of _seeming_ enthymemes, one place may be from _the form of speaking_. +As when a man has repeated divers sentences, he brings in his conclusion +as if it followed necessarily, though it do not. + +A second from _an ambiguous word_. + +A third from that which is _true, divided_, to that which is _false, +joined_; as that of Orestes, _It was justice that I should revenge my +father’s death, and it was justice my mother should die for killing my +father: therefore I justly killed my mother_. Or from that which is +_true, joined_, to that which is _false, divided_; as, _one cup of wine, +and one cup of wine, are hurtful; therefore one cup of wine is hurtful_. + +A fourth, from _amplification of the crime_. For neither is the +_defendant_ likely to have committed the crime he _amplifies_; nor does +the _accuser_ seem, when he is passionate, to want ground for his +accusation. + +A fifth from _signs_; as, when a man concludes the doing of the fact +from the manner of his life. + +A sixth from _that which comes by chance_. As if from this, that the +tyranny of Hipparchus came to be overthrown from the love of +Aristogeiton to Harmodius, a man should conclude that in a free +commonwealth loving of boys were profitable. + +A seventh from the _consequence_; as, _Banishment is to be desired, +because a banished man has choice of places to dwell in_. + +An eighth from _making that the cause which is not_; as, _In +Demosthenes' government the war began; therefore Demosthenes governed +well. With the Peloponnesian war began the plague, therefore Pericles, +that persuaded that war, did ill._ + +A ninth from _the omission of some circumstance_; as, _Helen did what +was lawful when she ran away with Paris, because she had her father’s +consent to choose her own husband_; which was true only during the time +that she had not chosen. + +A tenth from that which is _probable_, in _some case_, to that which is +_probable simply_; as, _It is probable he foresaw that if he did it he +should be suspected; therefore it is probable he did it not_. From this +place one may infer both ways that _he did it not_. For if he be not +likely to do it, it may be thought _he did it not_: again, if he were +likely to do it, it may be thought _he did it not_, for this, _that he +knew he should be suspected_. + +Upon this place was grounded the art which was so much detested in +Protagoras, of making the better cause seem the worse, and the worse the +better. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXVII. + + OF THE WAYS TO ANSWER THE ARGUMENTS OF THE ADVERSARY. + +An _argument_ is answered by an _opposite syllogism_, or by an +_objection_. + +The places of _opposite syllogisms_ are the same with the places of +syllogisms, or enthymemes; for a rhetorical syllogism is an enthymeme. + +The places of _objections_ are four. + +First, from _the same_. As, to the adversary that proves love to be good +by an enthymeme, may be _objected_, that, _No want is good, and yet love +is want_; or particularly thus, _The love of Myrrha to her father was +not good_. + +The second from _contraries_. As, if the adversary say, _A good man does +good to his friends_, an _objection_ might be made, that then _an evil +man will do also evil to his friends_. + +The third from _similitude_. As thus, if the adversary say, all men that +are injured do hate those that have injured them, it may be _objected_, +that then _all men that had received benefits should love their +benefactors_, that is to say, be grateful. + +The fourth from the _authority of famous men_. As when a man shall say, +that drunken men ought to be pardoned those acts they do in their +drunkenness, because they know not what they do; the _objection_ may be, +that _Pittacus was of another mind, that appointed for such acts a +double punishment; one for the act, another for the drunkenness_. + +And forasmuch as all enthymemes are drawn from _probability_, or +_example_, or from a _sign fallible_, or from a _sign infallible_: an +enthymeme from _probability_ may be confuted _really_, by showing that +for the most part it falls out otherwise; but _apparently_ or +_sophistically_, by showing only that it does not fall out so always; +whereupon the judge thinks the _probability_ not sufficient to ground +his sentence upon. The reason whereof is this, that the judge, while he +hears the fact proved _probable_, conceives it as true. For the +understanding has no object but _truth_. And therefore, by-and-by, when +he shall hear _an instance_ to the contrary, and thereby find that he +had no necessity to think it _true_, presently changes his opinion, and +thinks it _false_, and consequently not so much as _probable_. For he +cannot at one time think the same thing both _probable_ and _false_; and +he that says a thing is _probable_, the meaning is, he thinks it _true_, +but finds not arguments enough to prove it. + +An enthymeme, from a _fallible sign_, is answered by _showing_ the sign +to be fallible. + +An enthymeme from an _example_, is answered as an enthymeme from +_probability_; _really_ by showing _more examples_ to the contrary; +_apparently_, if he bring _examples_ enough to make it seem _not +necessary_. + +If the adversary have more examples than we, we must make it appear that +they are not applicable to the case. + +An enthymeme from an _infallible_ sign, if the proposition be _true_, is +unanswerable. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XXVIII. + +AMPLIFICATION AND EXTENUATION ARE NOT COMMON PLACES. ENTHYMEMES, BY + WHICH ARGUMENTS ARE ANSWERED, ARE THE SAME WITH THOSE BY WHICH THE + MATTER IN QUESTION IS PROVED OR DISPROVED. OBJECTIONS ARE NOT + ENTHYMEMES. + +The first, that _amplification_ and _extenuation_ are not _common +places_, appears by this, that amplification and extenuation do prove a +fact to be _great_ or _little_; and are therefore enthymemes to be +_drawn from_ common places, and therefore are not the _places_ +themselves. + +The second, that enthymemes, by which arguments are answered, are of the +same kind with those by which the matter in question is proved, is +manifest by this, that these infer the opposite of what was proved by +the other. + +The third, that an _objection_ is no _enthymeme_, is apparent by this, +that an _objection_ is no more but an _opinion_, _example_, or other +_instance_, produced to make appear that the adversary’s argument does +not conclude. + +Thus much of _examples_, _sentences_, _enthymemes_, and generally of all +things that belong to _argumentation_; from what _places_ they may be +drawn or answered. + +There remain _elocution_ and _disposition_ to be spoken of in the next +book. + + + + + BOOK III. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER I. + + OF THE ORIGINAL OF ELOCUTION AND PRONUNCIATION. + +Three things being necessary to an oration, namely _proof_, _elocution_, +and _disposition_; we have done with the first, and shall speak of the +other two in that which follows. + +As for _action_ or _pronunciation_, so much as is necessary for an +orator may be fetched out of the book of the _Art of Poetry_, in which +we have treated of the _action_ of the _stage_. For _tragedians_ were +the first that invented such _action_, and that but of late; and it +consisteth in governing well the _magnitude_, _tone_, and _measure_ of +the _voice_; a thing less subject to _art_, than is either _proof_ or +_elocution_. + +And yet there have been rules delivered concerning it, as far forth as +serve for _poetry_. But _oratorical action_ has not been hitherto +reduced to _art_. And _orators_ in the beginning, when they saw that the +_poets_ in barren and feigned arguments nevertheless attained great +reputation; supposing it had proceeded from the choice or connexion of +words, fell into a style, by imitation of them, approaching to verse, +and made choice of words. But when the _poets_ changed their style, and +laid by all words that were not in common use, the _orators_ did the +same, and lighted at last upon words and a government of the voice and +measures proper to themselves. + +Seeing therefore _pronunciation_ or _action_ are in some degree +necessary also for an _orator_, the precepts thereof are to be fetched +from the _Art of Poetry_. + +In the meantime this may be one general rule. If the _words_, _tone_, +_greatness_ of the voice, _gesture_ of the body and countenance, seem to +proceed all from one passion, then it is well pronounced. Otherwise not. +For when there appear more passions than one at once, the mind of the +speaker appears unnatural and distracted. Otherwise, as the mind of the +speaker, so the mind of the hearer always. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER II. + + OF THE CHOICE OF WORDS AND EPITHETS. + +The virtues of a _word_ are two; the first, that it be _perspicuous_; +the second, that it be _decent_, that is, neither _above_ nor _below_ +the thing signified, or, neither too humble nor too fine. + +_Perspicuous_ are all words that be _proper_. + +_Fine_ words are those, that are _borrowed_, or _translated_ from other +significations; of which in the _Art of Poetry_. + +The reason why _borrowed_ words please, is this. Men are affected with +_words_, as they are with _men_; admiring in both that which is +_foreign_ and _new_. + +To make a _poem_ graceful, many things help; but few an _oration_. For +to a _poet_ it sufficeth, with what _words_ he can, to set out his +_poem_. But an _orator_ must not only do that, but also seem not to do +it: for else he will be thought to speak unnaturally, and not as he +thinks; and thereby be the less believed; whereas _belief_ is the scope +of his oration. + +The _words_ that an _orator_ ought to use are of three sorts; _proper_, +such as are _received_, and _metaphors_. + +_Words_ taken from foreign languages, words compounded, and words new +coined, are seldom to be used. + +_Synonymes_ belong to _poets_, and _equivocal_ words to _sophisters_. + +An orator if he use _proper_ words, and _received_ and _good metaphors_, +shall both make his oration _beautiful_, and not seem to intend it; and +shall speak _perspicuously_. For in a _metaphor_ alone there is +_perspicuity_, _novity_, and _sweetness_. + +Concerning _metaphors_ the rules are these: + +1. He that will make the best of a thing, let him draw his _metaphor_ +from somewhat that is better. As for example, let him call a _crime_ an +_error_. On the other side, when he would make the worst of it, let him +draw his _metaphor_ from somewhat worse; as, calling _error_, _crime_. + +2. A _metaphor_ ought not to be so far-fetched, as that the similitude +may not easily appear. + +3. A _metaphor_ ought to be drawn from the noblest things; as the +_poets_ do, that choose rather to say _rosy-fingered_, than +_red-fingered Aurora_. + +In like manner the rule of _epithets_ is, that he that will adorn, +should use those of the better sort; and he that will disgrace, should +use those of the worse. As Simonides being to write an _ode_ in honour +of the victory gotten in a course by certain mules, being not well paid, +called them by their name, Ἡμιόνους, that signifies their propinquity to +asses: but having received a greater reward, styles them the _sons of +swift-footed coursers_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER III. + + OF THE THINGS THAT MAKE AN ORATION FLAT. + +The things that make an oration _flat_ or _insipid_, are four: + +1. _Words compounded._ And yet a man may compound a word, when the +composition is necessary for want of a simple word, and easy, and seldom +used. + +2. _Foreign words._ As for example, such as are newly derived from the +Latin; which though they were proper among them whose tongue it is, are +foreign in another language: and yet these may be used, so it be +moderately. + +3. _Long_, _impertinent_, and _often epithets_. + +4. _Metaphors indecent_ and _obscure_. _Obscure_ they are, when they are +far-fetched. _Indecent_, when they are _ridiculous_, as in _comedies_; +or _too grave_, as in _tragedies_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IV. + + OF A SIMILITUDE. + +A _similitude_ differs from a _metaphor_ only by such particles of +comparison as these; _as_; _even_ _as_; _so_; _even so_, &c. + +A _similitude_ therefore is a _metaphor dilated_; and a _metaphor_ is a +_similitude contracted_ into one word. + +A _similitude_ does well in an oration, so it be not too frequent; for +it is poetical. + +An example of the _similitude_, is this of Pericles, that said in his +oration, _that the Bœotians were like so many oaks in a wood, that did +nothing but beat one another_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER V. + + OF THE PURITY OF LANGUAGE. + +Four things are necessary to make language pure. + +1. The right rendering of those _particles_, which some antecedent +_particle_ does require; as to a _not only_, a _not also_; and then they +are rendered right, when they are not suspended too long. + +2. _The use of proper words_, rather than _circumlocutions_; unless +there be motive to make one do it of purpose. + +3. That there be nothing of _double construction_, unless there be cause +to do it of purpose; as the prophets of the heathen, who speak in +general terms, to the end they may the better maintain the truth of +their prophecies; which is easier maintained in _generals_, than in +_particulars_. For it is easier to divine whether a number be _even_ or +_odd_, than _how many_; and that a thing _will be_, than _what_ it will +be. + +4. Concordance of gender, number, and person; as not to say _him_ for +_her_, _man_ for _men_, _hath_ for _have_. + +In sum, a man’s language ought to be easy for another to read, +pronounce, and point. + +Besides, to divers _antecedents_, let divers _relatives_, or one common +to them all, be correspondent; as, he _saw_ the colour, he _heard_ the +sound; or he _perceived_ both colour and sound: but by no means, _he +heard or saw_ both. + +Lastly, that which is to be interposed by _parenthesis_, let it be done +quickly: as, _I purposed, having spoken to him_ (_to this, and to this +purpose_), _afterward to be gone_. For to put it off thus; _I resolved, +after I had spoken to him, to be gone; but the subject of my speech was +to this and this purpose_; is vicious. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VI. + + OF THE AMPLITUDE AND TENUITY OF LANGUAGE. + +A man shall add _amplitude_ or _dignity_ to his language, but by such +means as these. + +1. By changing the _name_ with the _definition_, as occasion shall +serve. As, when the _name_ shall be indecent, by using the _definition_; +or contrary. + +2. By _metaphors_. + +3. By using the _plural_ number for the _singular_. + +4. By _privative epithets_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VII. + + OF THE CONVENIENCE OR DECENCY OF ELOCUTION. + +_Elocutions_ are made _decent_: + +1. By speaking _feelingly_; that is, with such passion as is fit for the +matter he is in; as, _angerly_ in matter of _injury_. + +2. By speaking as becomes the _person_ of the _speaker_; as for a +_gentleman_ to speak _eruditely_. + +3. By speaking _proportionably_ to the matter; as of _great affairs_ to +speak in a _high_, and of _mean_, in a _low_ style. + +4. By abstaining from _compounded_, and from _out-landish words_: unless +a man speak _passionately_, and have already moved, and, as it were, +inebriated his hearers; or _ironically_. + +It confers also to persuasion very much, to use these ordinary forms of +speaking; _all men know_, _it is confessed by all_, _no man will deny_, +and the like. For the hearer consents, surprised with the fear to be +esteemed the only ignorant man. + +It is good also, having used a word that signifies more than the matter +requires, to abstain from the _pronunciation_ and _countenance_ that to +such a word belongs; that the disproportion between it and the matter +may the less appear. And when a man has said too much, it will show well +to correct himself: for he will get belief by seeming to consider what +he says. But in this a man must have a care not to be too precise in +showing of this consideration. For the ostentation of carefulness is an +argument oftentimes of lying; as may be observed in such as tell +particularities not easily observed, when they would be thought to speak +more precise truth than is required. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VIII. + + OF TWO SORTS OF STYLES. + +There be two sorts of _styles_. The one _continued_, or to be +_comprehended at once_; the other _divided_, or _distinguished_ by +periods. + +The first sort was in use with ancient writers; but is now out of date. +An example of this _style_ is in the history of Herodotus; wherein there +is no period till the end of the whole history. + +In the other kind of _style_, that is distinguished by periods, a +_period_ is such a part as is perfect in itself; and has such length, as +may easily be comprehended by the understanding. + +This latter kind is pleasant, the former unpleasant; because this +appears finite, the other infinite. In this the hearer has always +somewhat set out, and terminated to him; in the other he foresees no +end, and has nothing finished to him. This may easily be committed to +memory, because of the measure and cadence; which is the cause that +verses be easily remembered: the other not. + +Every sentence ought to end with the _period_, and nothing to be +interposed. + +_Period_ is either _simple_, or _divided into parts_. + +_Simple_, is that which is _indivisible_; as, _I wonder you fear not +their ends, whose actions you imitate_. + +A _period divided_, is that which not only has perfection and length +convenient for respiration, but also _parts_. As, _I wonder you are not +afraid of their ends; seeing you imitate their actions_: where in these +words, _I wonder you are not afraid of their ends_, is one _colon_ or +_part_; and in these, _seeing you imitate their actions_, another: and +both together make the period. + +The _parts or members_, and _periods_, of speech, ought neither be _too +long_, nor _too short_. + +_Too long_, are they which are produced beyond the expectation of the +hearer. _Too short_, are they that end before he expects it. + +Those that be _too long_, leave the hearer behind; like him that walking +goes beyond the usual end of the walk, and thereby out-goes him that +walks with him. + +They that be _too short_, make the hearer stumble; for when he looks far +before him, the end stops him before he be aware. + +A _period_ that is _divided_ into parts, is either _divided only_; or +has also an _opposition_ of the _parts_ one to another. + +_Divided only_ is such as this; _This the senate knows, the consul sees; +and yet the man lives_. + +A _period_ with _opposition of parts_, called also _antithesis_, and the +parts _antitheta_, is when _contrary parts_ are put together, or also +joined by a third. + +Contrary parts are put together as here; _The one has obtained glory, +the other riches; both by my benefit_. + +_Antitheta_ are therefore acceptable, because not only the _parts_ +appear the better for the _opposition_, but also for that they carry +with them a certain appearance of that kind of enthymeme, which leads to +_impossibility_. + +_Parts_ or _members_ of a _period_, are said to be _equal_, when they +have altogether, or almost, equal number of syllables. + +_Parts_ or _members_ of a _period_, are said to be _like_, when they +_begin_ or _end_ alike: and the more _similitudes_, and the greater +_equality_ there is of syllables, the more graceful is the period. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IX. + + OF THOSE THINGS THAT GRACE AN ORATION, AND MAKE IT DELIGHTFUL. + +Forasmuch as there is nothing more delightful to a man, than to find +that he apprehends and learns easily; it necessarily follows, that those +_words_ are most _grateful_ to the ear, that make a man seem to see +before his eyes the things signified. + +And therefore _foreign_ words are unpleasant, because _obscure_; and +_plain_ words, because _too manifest_, making us learn nothing new. But +_metaphors_ please; for they beget in us, by the _genus_, or by some +_common_ thing to that with another, a kind of _science_. As when an +_old man_ is called _stubble_; a man suddenly learns that he grows up, +flourisheth, and withers like grass, being put in mind of it by the +qualities common to _stubble_ and to _old men_. + +That which a _metaphor_ does, a _similitude_ does the same; but with +less _grace_, because with more _prolixity_. + +Such enthymemes are the most _graceful_, which neither are presently +very manifest, nor yet very hard to be understood; but are comprehended +while they are uttering, or presently after, though not understood +before. + +The things that make a speech _graceful_, are these; _antitheta_, +_metaphors_, and _animation_. + +Of _antitheta_ and _antithesis_ hath been spoken in the precedent +chapter. + +Of _metaphors_, the most _graceful_ is that which is drawn from +_proportion_. + +Aristotle, in the twelfth chapter of his _Poetry_, defines a _metaphor_ +to be the translation of a name from one signification to another; +whereof he makes four kinds, 1. From the _general_ to the _particular_. +2. From the _particular_ to the _general_. 3. From one _particular_ to +another. 4. From _proportion_. + +A metaphor from proportion is such as this; _A state without youth, is a +year without a spring_. + +_Animation_ is that expression which makes us seem to see the thing +before our eyes. As he that said, _The Athenians poured out their city +into Sicily_; meaning, they sent thither the greatest army they could +make. And this is the greatest grace of an oration. + +If therefore in the same sentence there concur both _metaphor_ and this +_animation_, and also _antithesis_, it cannot choose but be very +_graceful_. + +That an oration is _graced_ by metaphor, animation, and antithesis, hath +been said: but _how_ it is graced, is to be said in the next chapter. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER X. + + IN WHAT MANNER AN ORATION IS GRACED BY THE THINGS AFORESAID. + +It is graced by _animation_, when the actions of living creatures are +attributed to things without life; as when the _sword_ is said to +_devour_. + +Such _metaphors_ as these come into a man’s mind by the observation of +things that have similitude and proportion one to another. And the more +unlike and unproportionable the things be otherwise, the more _grace_ +hath the _metaphor_. + +A _metaphor_ without _animation_, adds _grace_ then, when the hearer +finds he learns somewhat by such use of the word. + +Also _paradoxes_ are _graceful_, so men inwardly do believe them. For +they have in them somewhat like to those jests that are grounded upon +the similitude of words, which have usually one sense, and in the +present another; and somewhat like to those jests which are grounded +upon the deceiving of a man’s expectation. + +And _paragrams_, that is, allusions of words, are graceful, if they be +well placed, and in periods not too long, and with _antithesis_. For by +these means the ambiguity is taken away. + +And the more of these, namely, _metaphor_, _animation_, _antithesis_, +_equality of members_, a period hath, the more graceful it is. + +_Similitudes_ grace an oration, when they contain also a _metaphor_. + +And _proverbs_ are graceful, because they are _metaphors_, or +translations of words from one species to another. + +And _hyperboles_, because they also are _metaphors_. But they are +youthful, and bewray vehemence; and are used with most grace by them +that be angry; and for that cause are not comely in old men. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XI. + +OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE STYLE TO BE USED IN WRITING, AND THE STYLE + TO BE USED IN PLEADING. + +The _style_ that should be _read_, ought to be more exact and accurate. +But the _style_ of a _pleader_, ought to be suited to action and +pronunciation. + +Orations of them that _plead_, pass away with the hearing. But those +that are _written_, men carry about them, and are considered at leisure; +and consequently must endure to be sifted and examined. + +_Written_ orations appear flat in _pleading_. And orations made for the +_bar_, when the action is away, appear in _reading_ insipid. + +In _written_ orations repetition is justly condemned. But in +_pleadings_, by the help of action, and by some change in the _pleader_, +repetition becomes amplification. + +In _written_ orations disjunctives do ill; as, _I came_, _I found him_, +_I asked him_: for they seem superfluous, and but one thing, because +they are not distinguished by action. But in _pleadings_ it is +amplification; because that which is but one thing, is made to seem +many. + +Of _pleadings_, that which is _judicial_ ought to be more accurate than +that which is _before the people_. + +And an oration _to the people_ ought to be more accommodate to action, +than a _judicial_. + +And of _judicial_ orations, that ought to be more accurate, which is +uttered to _few_ judges; and that ought to be more accommodate to +action, which is uttered to _many_. As in a _picture_, the further he +stands off that beholds it, the less need there is that the colours be +fine; so in _orations_, the further the hearer stands off, the less need +there is for his oration to be elegant. + +Therefore _demonstrative_ orations are most proper for _writing_, the +end whereof is to be _read_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XII. + + OF THE PARTS OF AN ORATION, AND THEIR ORDER. + +The _necessary_ parts of an oration are but two; _propositions_ and +_proof_; which are, as it were, the _problem_ and _demonstration_. + +The _proposition_ is the explication or opening of the matter to be +_proved_. And _proof_ is the _demonstration_ of the matter _propounded_. + +To these _necessary parts_ are sometimes added two other, the _proem_ +and the _epilogue_; neither of which is any _proof_. + +So that in some there be _four parts_ of an oration; the _proem_; the +_proposition_, or as others call it, the _narration_; the _proofs_, +which contain _confirmation_, _confutation_, _amplification_, and +_diminution_; and the _epilogue_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIII. + + OF THE PROEM. + +The _proem_ is the beginning of an oration, and, as it were, the +preparing of the way before one enter into it. + +In some kinds of orations it resembles the _prelude_ of _musicians_, who +first play what they list, and afterwards the tune they intended. In +other kinds it resembles the _prologue_ of a _play_, that contains the +argument. + +Proems of the first sort, are most proper for _demonstrative_ orations; +in which a man is free to foretell, or not, what points he will insist +upon. And for the most part it is better not; because when a man has not +obliged himself to a certain matter, _digression_ will seem _variety_; +but if he have engaged himself, _variety_ will be accounted +_digression_. + +In _demonstratives_, the matter of the _proem_ consisteth in the +_praise_ or _dispraise_ of some _law_ or _custom_, or in _exhortation_ +or _dehortation_, or in something that serves to incline the hearer to +the purpose. + +Proems of the second kind are most proper for _judicial_ orations. For +as the _prologue_ in a _dramatic_, and the _exordium_ in an _epic_ poem, +setteth forth in few words the argument of the poem; so in a _judicial +oration_, the orator ought to exhibit a model of his oration, that the +mind of the hearer may not be suspended, and for want of foresight err +or wander. + +Whatsoever else belongs to a _proem_, is drawn from one of these four: +from the _speaker_, from the _adversary_, from the _hearer_, or from the +_matter_. + +From the _speaker_ and _adversary_, are drawn into proems such +criminations and purgations as belong not to the cause. + +To the _defendant_, it is necessary in the proem to answer to the +accusations of his _adversary_; that those being cleared, he may have a +more favourable entrance to the rest of his oration. + +But to the _plaintiff_, it is better to cast his criminations all into +the _epilogue_; that the judge may the more easily remember them. + +From the _hearer_ and from the _matter_, are drawn into the proem such +things as serve to make the _hearer_ favourable or angry, attentive or +not attentive, as need shall require. + +And _hearers_ use to be attentive to _persons_ that are reputed _good_; +to _things_ that are of _great consequence_, or that _concern +themselves_, or that are _strange_, or that _delight_. + +But to make the _hearer_ attentive, is not the part of the _proem_ only, +but of any other part of the oration, and rather of any other part than +of the proem. For the _hearer_ is everywhere more remiss than in the +beginning. And therefore wheresoever there is need, the orator must make +appear both the _probity_ of his own _person_, and that the _matter_ in +hand is of _great consequence_; or that it concerns the _hearer_, or +that it is _new_, or that it is _delightful_. + +He that will have the hearer attentive to _him_, but not to the _cause_, +must on the other side make it seem that the _matter_ is a _trifle_ +without relation to the _hearer_, _common_ and _tedious_. + +That the _hearer_ may be favourable to the _speaker_, one of two things +is required: that he _love_ him, or that he _pity_ him. + +In _demonstrative_ orations, he that _praises_ shall have the _hearer_ +favourable, if he think himself or his own manners, or course of life, +or anything he loves, comprehended in the same _praise_. + +On the contrary, he that _dispraises_ shall be heard favourably, if the +_hearer_ find his _enemies_, or _their courses_, or anything he _hates_, +involved in the same _dispraise_. + +The _proem_ of a _deliberative_ oration is taken from the same things +from which are taken the _proems_ of _judicial_ orations. For the matter +of a _deliberative_ oration needeth not that natural _proem_, by which +is shown what we are to speak of, for that is already known; the _proem_ +in these being made only for the _speaker’s_ or _adversary’s_ sake, or +to make the _matter_ appear _great_ or _little_, as one would have it; +and is therefore to be taken from the _persons_ of the _plaintiff_ or +_defendant_, or from the _hearer_, or from the _matter_, as in orations +_judicial_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XIV. + + PLACES OF CRIMINATION AND PURGATION. + +One, from the _removal of ill opinion_ in the hearer, imprinted in him +by the adversary or otherwise. + +Another from this: that the thing done is _not hurtful_, or _not to +him_, or _not so much_, or _not unjust_, or _not great_, or _not +dishonourable_. + +A third from the _recompense_: as, _I did him harm, but withal I did him +honour_. + +A fourth from the _excuse_; as, _It was error_, _mischance_, or +_constraint_. + +A fifth from the _intention_; as, _One thing was done, another meant_. + +A sixth from the _comprehension_ of the accuser; as, _What I have done, +the accuser has done the same_, or _his father_, _kinsman_, or _friend_. + +A seventh from the _comprehension_ of those that are in reputation; as, +_What I did, such and such have done the same, who nevertheless are good +men_. + +An eighth from _comparison_ with such as have been falsely accused or +wrongfully suspected, and nevertheless found upright. + +A ninth from _recrimination_; as, _The accuser is a man of ill life, and +therefore not to be believed_. + +A tenth from that the _judgment_ belongs to another place, or time; as, +_I have already answered_, or _am to answer elsewhere to this matter_. + +An eleventh from _crimination_ of the crimination: as, _It serves only +to pervert judgment_. + +A twelfth, which is common both to crimination and purgation, and is +taken from _some sign_; as, _Teucer is not to be believed, because his +mother was Priam’s sister_. On the other side, _Teucer is to be +believed, because his father was Priam’s enemy_. + +A thirteenth, proper to crimination only, from _praise and dispraise +mixed_; as, to praise small things, and blame great ones; or to praise +in many words, and blame with effectual ones; or to praise many things +that are good, and then add one evil, but a great one. + +A fourteenth, common both to _crimination_ and _purgation_, is taken +from the _interpretation of the fact_. For he that _purgeth_ himself, +_interpreteth the fact_ always in the best sense; and he that +_criminates_, always in the worst; as when Ulysses said, _Diomedes chose +him for his companion, as the most able of the Grecians, to aid him in +his exploit_: but his adversary said, _he chose him for his cowardice, +as the most unlikely to share with him in the honour_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XV. + + OF THE NARRATION. + +The _narration_ is not always continued, and of one piece; but +sometimes, as in _demonstratives_, interrupted, and dispersed through +the whole oration. + +For there being in a _narration_, something that falls not under art; as +namely, the actions themselves, which the orator inventeth not; he must +therefore bring in the _narration_ of them where he best may. As for +example, if being to praise a man, you would make a _narration_ of all +his acts immediately from the beginning, and without interruption, you +will find it necessary afterwards to repeat the same acts again, while +from some of them you praise his valour, and from others his wisdom; +whereby your oration shall have less variety, and shall less please. + +It is not necessary always that the _narration_ be short. The true +measure of it must be taken from the _matter_ that is to be laid open. + +In the _narration_, as oft as may be, it is good to insert somewhat +commendable in one’s self, and blameable in one’s adversary: as, _I +advised him, but he would take no counsel_. + +In _narrations_, a man is to leave out whatsoever breeds compassion, +indignation, &c. in the hearer beside the purpose; as Ulysses in Homer, +relating his travels to Alcinous, to move compassion in him, is so long +in it that it consists of divers books: but when he comes home, tells +the same to his wife in thirty verses, leaving out what might make her +sad. + +The _narration_ ought also to be in such words as argue the _manners_, +that is some virtuous or vicious habit in him of whom we speak, although +it be not expressed; as, _setting his arms a-kimbo, he answered, &c._; +by which is insinuated the pride of him that so answered. + +In an _oration_ a man does better to shew his affection than his +judgment; that is, it is better to say, _I like this_, than to say, +_this is better_. For by the one you would seem _wise_, by the other +_good_. But _favour_ follows _goodness_; whereas _wisdom_ procures +_envy_. + +But if this affection seem incredible, then either a reason must be +rendered, as did Antigone. For when she had said, _she loved her brother +better than her husband or children_; she added, _for husband and +children I may have more; but another brother I cannot, my parents being +both dead_. Or else a man must use this form of speaking; _I know this +affection of mine seems strange to you; but nevertheless it is such_. +For it is not easily believed that any man has a mind to do any thing +that is not for his own good. + +Besides in a _narration_, not only the actions themselves, but the +passions and signs that accompany them, are to be discovered. + +And in his _narration_ a man should make himself and his adversary be +considered for such and such, as soon and as covertly as he can. + +A _narration_ may have need sometimes not to be in the beginning. In +_deliberative_ orations, that is, wheresoever the question is of things +to come, a _narration_, which is always of things past, has no place. +And yet things past may be recounted, that men may _deliberate_ better +of the future. But that is not as _narration_, but _proof_; for it is +_example_. + +There may also be _narration_ in _deliberatives_, in that part where +crimination and praise come in. But that part is not _deliberative_, but +_demonstrative_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVI. + + OF PROOF OR CONFIRMATION, AND REFUTATION. + +_Proofs_ are to be applied to something controverted. + +The controversy in _judicial_ orations is, whether it has been _done_; +whether it has been _hurtful_; whether the matter be _so great_; and +whether it be _just, or no_. + +In a question of _fact_, one of the parties of necessity is faulty; for +ignorance of the _fact_ is no excuse; and therefore the _fact_ is +chiefly to be insisted on. + +In _demonstratives_, the _fact_ for the most part is supposed: but the +_honour_ and _profit_ of the fact are to be _proved_. + +In _deliberatives_, the question is, whether the thing _be like to be, +or likely to be so great_; or whether it be _just_; or whether it be +_profitable_. + +Besides the application of the _proof_ to the question, a man ought to +observe whether his adversary have lied in any point without the cause. +For it is a sign he does the same in the cause. + +The _proofs_ themselves are either _examples_, or _enthymemes_. + +A _deliberative_ oration, because it is of things to come, requireth +rather _examples_ than _enthymemes_. + +But a _judicial_ oration, being of things past, which have a necessity +in them, and may be concluded syllogistically, requireth rather +_enthymemes_. + +_Enthymemes_ ought not to come too thick together: for they hinder one +another’s force by confounding the hearer. + +Nor ought a man to endeavour to prove everything by enthymeme, lest like +some philosophers he collect what is _known_, from what is _less known_. + +Nor ought a man to use enthymemes, when he would move the hearer to some +affection. For seeing divers motions do mutually destroy or weaken one +another, he will lose either the _enthymeme_, or the _affection_ that he +would move. + +For the same reason, a man ought not to use enthymemes when he would +express _manners_. + +But whether he would move _affection_, or insinuate his _manners_, he +may withal use _sentences_. + +A _deliberative_ oration is more difficult than a _judicial_, because it +is of the _future_; whereas a _judicial_ is of that which is _past_, and +that consequently may be known; and because it has _principles_, namely, +the _law_; and it is easier to _prove_ from _principles_, than without. + +Besides, a _deliberative_ oration wants those helps of _turning to the +adversary_, of _speaking of himself_, of _raising passion_. + +He therefore that wants matter in a deliberative oration, let him bring +in some person to praise or dispraise. And in demonstratives, he that +has nothing to say in _commendation_ or _discommendation_ of the +_principal party_, let him _praise_ or _dispraise_ somebody else, as his +_father_ or _kinsman_, or the very _virtues_ or _vices_ themselves. + +He that wants not _proofs_, let him not only _prove_ strongly, but also +insinuate his _manners_: but he that has no _proof_, let him +nevertheless insinuate his _manners_. For a _good man_ is as acceptable +as an _exact oration_. + +Of _proofs_, those that _lead to an absurdity_, please better than those +that are _direct_ or _ostensive_; because from the comparison of +contraries, namely, _truth_ and _falsity_, the force of the syllogism +does the better appear. + +_Confutation_ is also a part of _proof_. And he that speaks first, puts +it _after_ his own proofs; unless the controversy contain many and +different matters. And he that speaks last, puts it _before_. For it is +necessary to make way for his own oration, by removing the objections of +him that spake before. For the mind abhors both the man and his oration, +that is damned beforehand. + +If a man desire his _manners_ should appear well, lest speaking of +himself, he become odious, or troublesome, or obnoxious to obtrectation; +or speaking of another, he seem contumelious or scurrilous; let him +introduce another person. + +Last of all, lest he cloy his hearer with _enthymemes_, let him vary +them sometimes with _sentences_, but such as have the same force. As +here is an _enthymeme_: _If it be then the best time to make peace, when +the best conditions of peace may be had; then the time is now, while our +fortune is entire_. And this is a _sentence_ of equal force to it: _Wise +men make peace, while their fortune is entire_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVII. + + OF INTERROGATIONS, ANSWERS, AND JESTS. + +The times when it is fit to ask one’s adversary a _question_, are +chiefly four. + +The first is, when of two propositions that conclude an absurdity, he +has already uttered one; and we would by _interrogation_ draw him to +confess the other. + +The second, when of two propositions that conclude an absurdity, one is +manifest of itself, and the other likely to be fetched out by a +_question_; then the _interrogation_ will be seasonable; and the absurd +conclusion is presently to be inferred without adding that proposition +which is manifest. + +The third, when a man would make appear that his adversary does +contradict himself. + +The fourth, when a man would take from his adversary such shifts as +these: _In some sort, it is so; in some sort, it is not so_. + +Out of these cases, it is not fit to _interrogate_. For he whose +question succeeds not, is thought vanquished. + +To equivocal _questions_ a man ought to answer fully, and not to be too +brief. + +To _interrogations_, which we foresee tend to draw from us an _answer_ +contrary to our purpose, we must, together with our _answer_, presently +give an _answer_ to the objection which is implied in the _question_. + +And where the question exacteth an answer that concludeth against us, we +must, together with our _answer_, presently _distinguish_. + +_Jests_ are dissolved by serious and grave discourse; and grave +discourse is deluded by _jests_. + +The several kinds of _jests_ are set down in the _Art of Poetry_. +Whereof one kind is _ironia_, and tends to please one’s self. The other +is _scurrility_, and tends to please others. + +The latter of these has in it a kind of baseness: the former may become +a man of good breeding. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER XVIII. + + OF THE EPILOGUE. + +The _epilogue_ must consist of one of these four things. + +Either of _inclining the judge to favour his own_, or _disfavour the +adversary’s side_. For then, when all is said in the cause, is the best +season to _praise_ or _dispraise_ the parties. + +Or of _amplification_ or _diminution_. For when it appears what is good +or evil, then is the time to show _how great_ or _how little_ that good +or evil is. + +Or in _moving the judge to anger, love_, or other passion. For when it +is manifest of what kind, and how great the good or evil is, then it +will be opportune to _excite_ the judge. + +Or of _repetition_, that the judge may remember what has been said. + +_Repetition_ consisteth in the _matter_ and the _manner_. For the orator +must show that he has performed what he promised in the beginning of his +oration; and _how_, namely, by comparing his arguments one by one with +his adversary’s, repeating them in the same order they were spoken. + + ========== + + + + + THE + + ART OF RHETORIC + + PLAINLY SET FORTH. + + WITH PERTINENT EXAMPLES + + FOR THE MORE EASY UNDERSTANDING AND + PRACTICE OF THE SAME. + + BY + + THOMAS HOBBES OF MALMSBURY. + + + + + THE + + ART OF RHETORIC. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER I. + +Rhetoric is an art of speaking finely. It hath two parts: + +1. Garnishing of speech, called _elocution_; + +2. Garnishing of the manner of utterance, called _pronunciation_. + +Garnishing of speech is the first part of rhetoric; whereby the speech +itself is beautified and made fine. It is either the fine manner of +words, called a trope; or the fine shape or frame of speech, called a +figure. + +The fine manner of words is a garnishing of speech, whereby one word is +drawn from its first proper signification to another; as in this +sentence: _sin lieth at the door_: where _sin_ is put for the punishment +of sin adjoined unto it: _lieth at the door_, signifieth at hand; as +that which lieth at the door, is ready to be brought in. + +This changing of words was first found out by necessity, for the want of +words; afterwards confirmed by delight, because such words are pleasant +and gracious to the ear. Therefore this change of signification must be +shamefaced, and, as it were, maidenly, that it may seem rather to be led +by the hand to another signification, than to be driven by force unto +the same. + +Yet sometimes this fine manner of speech swerveth from this perfection; +and then it is, either the abuse of this fine speech, called +_katachresis_, or the excess of this fineness, called _hyperbole_. + +_Be not too just nor too wicked_; which speech, although it seem very +hard, yet it doth, not without some fineness of speech, utter thus much; +_That one seek not a righteousness beyond the law of God; and that when +none can live without all sin, yet that they take heed that sin bear not +dominion over them_. + +As, _My tears are my meat day and night. Those that hate me are more in +number than the hairs of my head_. Both which do utter by an express of +speech, a great sorrow, and a great number of enemies. + +The abuse of speech is, when the change of speech is hard, strange, and +unwonted, as in the first example. + +The excess of speech is, when the change of signification is very high +and lofty, as in the second example, and Psalms vi. vii. + +But the excellency or fineness of words or tropes, is most excellent, +when divers are _shut up in one_, or _continued in many_. + +An example of the first sort is in 2 Kings ii. 9: _I pray thee, let me +have a double portion of thy Spirit_: where by _Spirit_ is meant the +gift of the Spirit; and by _thy Spirit_, the gift of the spirit like to +thine. + +The _continuance_ of tropes, called an allegory, is, when one kind of +trope is so continued, as, look with what kind of matter it be begun, +with the same it be ended. So in Psalm xxiii. _the care of God towards +his church_ is set forth in the words proper to _a shepherd_. So in the +whole book of Canticles, _the sweet conference of Christ and his +church_, is set down by the words proper to _the husband and the wife_. +So old age is set down by this garnishing of speech, in Ecclesiastes +xii. 5, 6. + +Hitherto of the properties of a fine manner of words, called a trope. +Now the divers sorts do follow. They are those which note out, 1, no +comparison, or are with some comparison; or, 2, no respect of division, +or some respect. + +The first is double: 1. The change of name, called a _metonymy_. 2. The +mocking speech, called an _irony_. + +The change of name is where the name of a thing is put for the name of a +thing agreeing with it. It is double: 1. When the cause is put for the +thing caused; and contrarywise. 2. When the thing to which anything is +adjoined, is put for the thing adjoined; and contrarywise. + +The change of name of the cause is when either the name of the _maker_, +or the name of the _matter_, is put for the _thing made_. + +Of the _maker_, when the finder out, or the author of the thing, or the +instrument whereby the thing is done, is put for the _thing made_. So +Moses is put for his writings: so love is put for liberality, or +bestowing benefits, the fruit of love; so (Rom. i. 8): faith, the cause, +is put for religious serving of God, the thing caused. So (James iii.) +the tongue, the instrument of speech, is put for the speech itself. +_Rule thy tongue._ + +Of the _matter_: _Thou art dust, and to dust shalt thou return_; that +is, _one made of dust_. + +Now, on the other side, when the thing caused, or the effect, is put for +any of these causes. So _the Gospel of God_ is called _the power of God +to salvation_; that is, the instrument of the power of God. So _love_ is +said to be _bountiful_, because it causeth one to be bountiful. St. Paul +saith, _The bread that we break, is it not in the communion of the body +and blood of Christ?_ That is, an instrument of the communion of the +body of Christ. So _the body_ is said to be an _earthly tabernacle_; +that is, a tabernacle made of earth. + +The change of name, or _metonymy_, where the subject, or that which hath +anything adjoined, is put for the thing adjoined, or adjunct. So the +place is put for those, or that in the place: _set thine house in +order_; that is, thy household matters. _It shall be easier for Sodom +and Gomorrha_; that is, the people in Sodom and Gomorrha. So _Moses' +chair_ is put for the _doctrine_ taught in _Moses' chair_. So _all +Jericho and Jerusalem came out_; that is, all the men in Jericho and +Jerusalem. So before, _sin_ was put for the _punishment of sin_. _Let +his blood rest upon us and our children_; that is, the punishment which +shall follow his death. So Christ said, _This is my body_; that is, a +sign or sacrament of my body. _This wine is the new testament in my +blood_; that is, a sign or seal of the new testament in my blood. So +John saith, _I saw the Spirit descending in the likeness of a dove_; +that is, the sign of the Spirit. + +On the other side, the adjunct is put for the thing to which it is +adjoined. As Christ (1 Tim. i. 1) is called _our hope_; that is, on whom +our hope did depend. So, _we are justified by faith_; that is, by Christ +applied by faith. So, _love is the fulfilling of the law_; that is, +those things to which it is adjoined. _Hope_ for the _things hoped for_; +as Rom. viii. 24. So in the Epistle to the Ephesians, v. 16: _The days +are evil_; that is, the manner, conversation, and deeds of men in the +days. + +Hitherto the _metonymy_, or change of name. Now followeth the mocking +speech, or _irony_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER II. + +The _mocking_ trope is, when one contrary is signified by another; as +God said, _Man is like to one of us_. So Christ saith, _Sleep on_; and +yet by-and-by, _Arise, let us go_. So Paul saith, _You are wise, and I +am a fool_. + +This trope is conceived either by the contrariety of the matter, or the +manner of utterance, or both. So Elijah said to the prophets of Baal, +_Cry aloud_, &c. So the Jews said unto Christ, _Hail, King of the Jews!_ + +Hitherto appertaineth the passing by a thing, which yet with a certain +elegance noteth it. So Philemon 19: _That I say not, thou owest thyself +unto me_. + +Hitherto of the fineness of words which respect no division. Now +followeth that which respecteth division, called _synechdoche_. + +A _synechdoche_ is when the name of the whole is given to the part; or +the name of the part to the whole. And it is double. 1. When the whole +is put for the member, and contrarily. 2. When the general, or whole +kind, is put for the special; or contrarily. + +So St. John: _Not only for our sins, but for the sins of the whole +world_. So righteousness, a member of goodness, is put for all goodness; +so unrighteousness is put for all manner of sins. + +Examples of the second sort, as these: So _Israel_ is put for _those of +Juda_ sometimes. So _nations_ for _the heathen_. _A minister_ of Christ +for _an apostle_ of Christ, as Rom. xv. 16. _A minister_ put for _a +distributer_, as Rom. xii. 7. + +On the other side, one sort or special is put for the whole sort or +general, in the examples following. In the Lord’s prayer, _bread_, _one_ +help of life, is put for _all_ helps; _this day_, _one_ time for _all_ +times. So Solomon saith, _the thing of the day in his day_; that is, the +thing of the time in his time. + +So sometimes less is spoken, and yet more is understood; which is called +diminution, or _meiosis_. As James saith to him _that knoweth how to do +well and doth it not, it is sin_; that is a great sin. So our Saviour +Christ saith, _If they had not known, they had had no sin_; that is, no +such great sin as they have now. Likewise the denial by comparison. + +So Solomon saith, _Receive my words, and not silver_; that is, my words +rather than silver. So Paul saith, _I was sent to preach, and not to +baptize_; that is, not so much to baptize as to preach. + +Hitherto of the fineness of words, which note out no comparison. Now +followeth the fineness of words which noteth out comparison, called a +_metaphor_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER III. + +A _metaphor_ is when the like is signified by the like: as (1 Cor. iii. +13) the Apostle saith, _doctrine must be tried by fire_; that is, the +evidence of the word, spirit, _trying doctrine_, as fire doth metals. So +Christ is said to _baptize with fire_; where _fire_ is put for the power +of the Holy Ghost, purging as fire. So Christ saith, _none shall enter +into the kingdom of God but he that is born of the Holy Ghost and +water_. So Paul calleth himself the _father_ of the Corinthians, and +said, _that he begat them in Christ_. So he calleth Timothy and Titus +his natural _sons in the faith_. + +Hitherto of a trope or garnishing of speech in one word, where the +metaphor is most usual; then the change of name; then the _synechdoche_; +and last of all, the _irony_. Now followeth the fine frame or shape of +speech, called a figure. + +A figure is a garnishing of speech wherein the course of the same is +changed, from the more simple and plain manner of speaking unto that +which is more full of excellency and grace. For as in the fineness of +words, or a trope, words are considered asunder by themselves; so in the +fine shape or frame of speech, or a figure, the apt and pleasant joining +together of many words is noted. + +The garnishing of the shape of speech, or a figure, is garnishing of +speech in words, or in a sentence. + +The garnishing of speech in words, called _figura dictionis_, is wherein +the speech is garnished by the pleasant and sweet sound of words joined +together. + +This is either in the _measure_ of sounds; or in the _repetition_ of +sounds. + +The _measure_ of sounds is belonging either to poets, with us called +rhymers; or orators, with us called eloquent pleaders. + +The first is the measure of sounds by certain and continual spaces; and +it is either rhyme or verse. + +Rhyme is the first sort, containing a certain measure of syllables +ending alike; and these in the mother tongues are most fit for psalms, +songs, or sonnets. + +Verses are the second sort, containing certain feet fitly placed. + +A foot is a measure framed by the length and shortness of syllables; for +the several sorts whereof, as also of the verses of them, because we +have no worthy examples in our English tongue, we judge the large +handling of them should be more curious than necessary. + +The measure of sounds belonging to orators, is that which, as it is not +uncertain, so it differeth altogether from rhyme and verse, and is very +changeable with itself. Therefore in that eloquent speech you must +altogether leave rhyme and verse, unless you allege it for authority and +pleasure. + +In the beginning of the sentence little care is to be had, in the middle +least of all, and in the end chiefest regard is to be had; because the +fall of the sentence is most marked, and therefore lest it fall out to +be harsh and unpleasant both to the mind and ear, there must be most +variety and change. + +Now this change must not be above six syllables from the end, and that +must be set down in feet of two syllables. + +And thus much of garnishing of speech by the _measure_ of sounds, rather +to give some taste of the same to the readers, than to draw any to the +curious and unnecessary practice of it. + +Now followeth the _repeating_ of sounds. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IV. + +_Repetition_ of sounds is either of the _like_, or the _unlike_ sound. + +Of the _like_, is either _continued_ to the end of, or _broken_ off +from, the _same_, or a _diverse_ sentence. + +_Continued_ to the end of the _same_ sentence is, when the same sound is +repeated without anything coming between, except a parenthesis; that is, +something put in, without the which, notwithstanding, the sentence is +full. And it is a joining of the same sound, as Rom. i. 29: _All +unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness_. And in the prayer of Christ, +_My God, my God_. _From men by thine hand, O Lord, from men_, &c. (Psalm +xvii. 14.) + +_Continued_ in a _diverse_ sentence is, either a redoubling, called +_anadyplosis_; or a pleasant climbing, called _climax_. + +Redoubling is when the same sound is repeated in the end of the former +sentence, and the beginning of the sentence following. As Psalm ix. 9: +_The Lord also will be a refuge to the poor, a refuge, I say, in due +time_. Psalm xlviii. 14: _For this God is our God_. But more plain in +Psalm xlviii. 8: _As we have heard, so have we seen in the city of our +God: God will establish it for ever_. + +A pleasant climbing, is a redoubling continued by divers degrees or +steps of the same sounds; as Rom. viii. 17: _If we be children, we be +heirs, even heirs of God, annexed with Christ_. Rom. viii. 30: _Whom he +predestinated, them also he called; and whom he called, them also he +justified; and whom he justified, them also he glorified_. Also Rom. ix. +14, 15. + +And hitherto of the same sound _continued to the end_. Now followeth the +same sound _broken off_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER V. + +The same sound _broken off_, is a repetition of the same in the +_beginning_ or in the _end_. + +In the _beginning_, it is called _anaphora_, a bringing of the same +again; as Rom. viii. 38, 39: _Nor death, nor life, nor angels, &c. nor +any other creature, shall be able to separate us, &c._ So likewise +Ephes. iv. 11: _Some to be apostles, some preachers, &c._ So Galatians +ii. 14: _Nor Jew, Gentile, &c._ So likewise Hebrews xi. 1, 2. + +Repetition of the same sound _in the end_, is called _epistrophe_, a +turning to the same sound in the end. So Ezekiel viii. 15: _Behold +greater abominations than these_. Lament. iii. 41, &c.: _Let us lift up +our hearts with our hands unto God in the heavens; we have sinned and +have rebelled; therefore thou hast not spared_. + +When both of these are joined together, it is called a coupling or +symplote. As 2 Cor. vi. 4-11: _But in all things we approve ourselves as +the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, &c._ See also 2 +Cor. xi. 23. + +Hitherto of the repetitions in the _same place_. Now of those that do +interchange their place. + +They are either _epanalepsis_, which signifieth to take back; or +_epanados_, which signifies the turning to the same tune. + +The first is when the same sound is repeated in the beginning and the +ending; as, 2 Sam. xviii. 33: _My son Absolom, my son_. + +_Epanados_ is when the same sound is repeated in the beginning and the +middle, in the middle and the end. Ezekiel xxxv, 6: _I will prepare thee +unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: except thou hate blood, even +blood shall pursue thee_. And 2 Thes. ii. 4: _So that he that doth sit +as God, in the temple of God, sheweth himself that he is God_. + +Hitherto of the repetition of those sounds which are _like_. Now of +those that are _unlike_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VI. + +_Unlike_; a small changing of the name, as παρονομασια; a small changing +of the end or case, as πολυπτωτον. + +A small change of name is, when a word, by the change of one letter or +syllable, the signification also is changed; as, Rom. v. 4: _Patience, +experience; and experience, hope_. 2 Cor. x. 3: _We walk after the +flesh, not war in the flesh_. 2 Cor. vi. 8-9: _So by honour and +dishonour, as unknown and yet known_. + +A small changing of the end or case, is when words of the same beginning +rebound by divers ends: _Christ being raised from the dead, dieth no +more, death hath no more power over him. He that doth righteousness, is +righteous. If ye know that he is righteous, know ye that he that doeth +righteously, is born of him._ And of both these there are many in the +Scripture; but the translations cannot reach them. + +Hitherto of the garnishing of the shape of speech, in _words_. Now +followeth the garnishing of the shape of speech, in a _sentence_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VII. + +Garnishing of the frame of speech in a _sentence_, is a garnishing of +the shape of speech, or a figure; which for the forcible moving of +affections, doth after a sort beautify the sense and very meaning of a +sentence. Because it hath in it a certain manly majesty, which far +surpasseth the soft delicacy or dainties of the former figures. + +It is either the garnishing of speech _alone_, or _with others_. + +The garnishing of speech _alone_, is when as the sentence is garnished +without speech had to other. And it is either in regard of the _matter_; +or of the _person_. + +In regard of the _matter_; it is either a crying out, called +_exclamation_; or a pulling or calling back of himself, called +_revocation_. + +A crying out, or _exclamation_, is the first, which is set forth by a +word of calling out. Sometimes of wonder, as, Rom. xi. 33: _O the depth +of the judgments of God!_ Psal. viii. 1: _O Lord, how excellent is thy +name!_ Sometimes of pity; also these words, _Behold_, _Alas_, _Oh_, be +signs of this figure, as, _O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which stonest the +prophets_. Sometimes of desperation; as, _My sin is greater than can be +forgiven. Behold, thou drivest me out, &c._ Sometimes of wishing: as, +Psalm lxxxiv. 1: _O Lord of hosts, how amiable are thy tabernacles!_ +Sometimes of disdaining: as, Rom. vii. 24: _O miserable wretch that I +am, who shall deliver me from this body of sin!_ Sometimes of mocking: +as they which said to our Saviour Christ, _Ah, thou that, &c._ Sometimes +of cursing and detestation; as in David, _Let their table be made a +snare, and bow down their back always_. + +Also when this figure is used in the end of a sentence, it is called a +shooting out of the voice or επιφωνημα; as when the sins of Jezebel were +spoken against, this is added at the end, _Seemed it a little to her to +do thus and thus_. + +So after the high setting forth of the name of God, David shutteth up +his praise with this: _Blessed be his glorious name, and let all the +earth be filled with his glory_. Sometimes here is used a certain +liberty of speech, wherein is a kind of secret crying out: as Peter +(Acts iii. 12,) saith: _Ye men of Israel, hear these words_. And Paul, +(2 Cor. xi. 1): _Would to God you could suffer a little my foolishness, +and indeed ye suffer me_. + +Thus much of crying out. Now followeth the figure of calling back, or +_revocation_. + +_Revocation_ is when any thing is called back; and it is as it were a +cooling and quenching of the heat of the exclamation that went before. + +And this is either a _correction_ of one’s self, called επανορθωσις; or +a _holding_ of one’s _peace_, called αποσιωπησις. + +Επανορθωσις is correction, when something is called back that went +before: as Paul correcteth his doubtfulness of Agrippa’s belief, when he +saith, _Believest thou, King Agrippa? I know thou believest._ So, 1 Cor. +xv. 10: _I laboured more abundantly than they all, yet not I_, &c. + +A _keeping of silence_, or αποσιωπησις, is when the course of the +sentence bygone is so stayed, as thereby some part of the sentence, not +being uttered, may be understood. So our Saviour Christ (John xii. 27) +saith, _My soul is heavy: what shall I say?_ + +Thus much of a figure garnishing the speech alone, in regard of the +_matter_. Now followeth the garnishing of the speech alone, in regard of +the _person_. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER VIII. + +Garnishing of the speech alone in regard of the _person_, is double: +either in turning to the person called _apostrophe_; or feigning of the +person, called _prosopopœia_. + +_Apostrophe_, or turning to the person, is when the speech is turned to +another person than the speech appointed did intend or require. And this +_apostrophe_ or turning is diversely seen, according to the diversity of +persons. Sometimes it turneth to a man’s person; as David in the sixth +Psalm, where having gathered arguments of his safety, turneth hastily to +the wicked, saying, _Away from me, all ye workers of iniquity; for the +Lord hath heard the voice of my petition_. + +Sometimes from a man to God, as Psalm iii. 3. David being dismayed with +the number of his enemies, turneth himself to God, saying: _But thou art +my buckler_, &c. + +Sometimes to unreasonable creatures without sense; as Isaiah i. and +Isaiah xxi. + +_Prosopopœia_, or a feigning of the person, is whereby we do feign +another person speaking in our speech. And it is double; _imperfect_ and +_perfect_. + +_Imperfect_ is when the speech of another person is set down lightly and +indirectly. As in Psalm. xi. 1. David bringeth in the wicked, _Who say +unto my soul, fly as the bird unto yonder hill_. + +A perfect _prosopopœia_, is when the whole feigning of the person is set +down in our speech, with a fit entering into the same, and a leaving it +off. So Wisdom, (Prov. viii.); where the entrance is in the first +verses, her speech in the rest of the chapter. + +Hitherto of the figures of sentences concerning one speaking alone. Now +follow the other, which concern the speeches of two. + + + ========== + + + CHAPTER IX. + +They which concern the speeches of two, are either in _asking_, or in +_answering_. + +That of _asking_, is either in _deliberation_; or in _preventing an +objection_. + +_Deliberation_ is when we do every now and then ask, as it were, reasons +of our consultation, whereby the mind of the hearers wavering in doubt, +doth set down some great thing. + +This deliberation is either in _doubting_, or in _communication_. + +A _doubting_ is a deliberating with ourselves, as Paul (1 Philipp. i. +23, 24), doubting whether it were better to die than to live, he +garnisheth his speech in this manner: _For I am greatly in doubt on both +sides, desiring to be loosed, and to be with Christ, which is best of +all: nevertheless, to abide in the flesh is more needful for you_. + +_Communication_ is a deliberation with others. As, Galatians iii. 1, 2: +_O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, &c._ + +And hitherto of the figure of speech between two, called _deliberation_. + +Now followeth the figure of speech between two, called the _preventing +of an objection_, or _occupation_. + +_Occupation_ is, when we do bring an objection, and yield an answer unto +it. Therefore this speech between two, in the first part, is called the +setting down of the objection or occupation: in the latter part, an +answering of the objection or the subjection: as Rom. vi. 1: _What shall +we say then? Shall we continue still in sin, that grace may abound?_ In +which words is set down the objection: the answering in these words, +_God forbid_. And here this must be marked, that the objection is many +times wanting, which must be wisely supplied by considering the occasion +and answer of it: as 1 Tim. v. 11, 12: _They will marry, having +condemnation_. Now lest any might say, what, _for marrying?_ He +answereth: _No, for denying their first faith_. + +Hitherto of the figures of _asking_. Now followeth the figures of +_answering_. They are either in _suffering_ of a deed, called +_permission_; or, _granting_ of an argument, called _concession_. + +_Suffering_ of a deed or permission is, when mockingly we give liberty +to any deed, being never so filthy; as Rev. xxii. 11: _Let him that is +filthy, be filthy still_. And 1 Cor. xiv. 38: _If any be ignorant, let +him be ignorant_. + +Concession or granting of an argument is, when an argument is mockingly +yielded unto, as Ecclesiastes xi. 9: _Rejoice, O young man, in thy +youth, and let thy heart cheer thee, &c._ + + + + + THE ART OF SOPHISTRY. + + + ========== + + +Although the rules of Sophistry be needless for them that be perfect in + logic; yet because the knowledge of them bringeth some profit to the + young beginners, both for the ready answering of the subtle + arguments, and the better practising of logic and rhetoric, we have + thought good to turn it into the English tongue. + +_Sophistry_ is the feigned art of _elenches_, or coloured reasons. + +A coloured reason, or _elench_, is a show of reason to deceive withal. +It is either when the deceit lieth in the _words_; or in the default of +logic, called a _sophism_. + +In _words_, is either when the deceit lieth in _one word_; or in _words +joined together_. _If it were, it should be, whosoever._ + +In _one word_, is either the _darkness_ of a word; or, the +_doubtfulness_ of a word. + +The _darkness_ of a word, or an insolence, deceiveth, when by a reason +the meaning is not understood, whether the strangeness be through the +oldness, newness, or swelling vanity of the words; and of the last sort +is that spoken of in 2 Peter ii. 18. + +By this fallacy the Papists conclude, the Fathers to be on their side +for deserving by good works. + +_Whosoever saith man’s merits are crowned, they say man’s works do +deserve._ + +_But the Fathers say, man’s merits are crowned._ + +_Therefore the Fathers say, man’s works do deserve._ + +Where _merits_ is an old word, put for any works done under the hope of +reward, whether it come by desert or freedom of promise. + +_Doubtfulness_ of a word, _likeness_ of name, is either called +_homonymia_; or by a trope or fineness of speech. + +The _likeness_ of name, or _homonymia_, is when one word is given to +signify divers things: as, + +_He that believeth shall be saved._ + +_The hypocrites to whom our Saviour Christ would not commit himself, +believed,_ + +_Therefore they shall be saved._ + +Where faith doth note out both a justifying faith, and a dead faith. + +Doubtfulness by a trope, is when a word is taken properly, which is +meant figuratively or contrarily: As, _That which Christ saith is true_. + + _Christ saith that bread is his body._ + _Therefore it is true._ + +Where by _body_ is meant the sign or sacrament of his body. + +Unto the first, a perfect logician would answer, that the proposition is +not an axiom necessarily true, according to the rule of truth, because +of the doubtfulness of the old and new signification of _merit_. And if +the word be far worn out of use, that it be not understood, then the +answer must be, I understand it not, or put your axiom in plain words. + +To the second he would answer, that the proposition or first part is not +according to the rule of righteousness, because the proper subject and +adjunct are not joined together: which _hath justifying faith, or +believing sincerely, shall be saved_; and then the assumption being in +the same sense inferred is false. + +Unto the third he would answer, that the assumption is not necessarily +true; because if the word _body_ be taken properly, it is not then true +that is set down; but if it be taken figuratively, it is true, and +therefore would bid him make the assumption necessarily true, and then +say, Christ saith in proper words, _it is my body_; and then it is +false. + +Hitherto of the fallacies in single words. Now of those that are joined +together. + +It is either _amphibolia_, or the doubtfulness of speech: or +_exposition_, or unapt setting down of the reason. + +The first is, when there is doubtfulness in the frame of speech; as +thus, _if any obey not our word by a letter, note him_: where some refer +_by a letter_, to the first part of the sentence, and some to the +latter; where the signification of the word and right pointing doth show +that it must be referred to the first. + +The answer is, that the right and wise placing of the sentence is +perverted. + +Unapt setting down of the reason, is when the parts of the question and +the reasons entreated, are not set down in fit words: as, + +_All sin is evil._ + +_Every child of God doth sin._ + +_Therefore every child of God is evil._ + +Here the answer according to logic, is that the assumption doth not take +the argument out of the proposition, but putteth in another thing; and +so it is no right frame of concluding, as appeareth by the definition of +the assumption. + +Hitherto of the deceits of reason, which lie in _words_. Now of the +default of logic, called _sophism_. + +It is either _general_ or _special_. The _general_ are those which +cannot be referred to any _part of logic_. They are either begging of +the question, called the petition of the principle; or bragging of no +proof. + +Begging of the question, is when nothing is brought to prove but the +question, or that which is doubtful: as, + +_That righteousness, which is both by faith and works, doth justify._ + +_But this righteousness, is inherent righteousness_: Ergo. + +Here the proposition in effect is nothing but a question. + +_If together with the blood of Christ, we must make perfect satisfaction +for our sins before we come to heaven; then there must be purgatory for +them that die without perfection._ + +_But the first is so_: Ergo. + +Where the argument they bring is as doubtful, and needeth as much proof, +as the question. + +The answer is this, out of the definition of the syllogism; that there +is no new argument invented; therefore it cannot be a certain frame of +concluding. + +Bragging of no proof, is when that which is brought is too much, called +_redounding_. + +It is either impertinent to another matter, called _heterogenium_; or a +vain repetition, called _tautologia_. + +Impertinent, or not to the purpose, is when anything is brought for a +proof, which is nothing near to the matter in hand; whereunto the common +proverb giveth answer, _I ask you of cheese, you answer me of chalk_. + +A vain repetition, is when the same thing in effect, though not in +words, is repeated; as they that after a long time of prayer say, _Let +us pray_. And this fallacy our Saviour Christ (Matt. vi. 5) condemneth +in prayer. And this is a fault in method. + +_Special_ are those, which may be referred to certain parts of logic, +and they are of two sorts. Such as are referred to the spring of +reasons, called _invention_; or to judgment. + +Those referred to invention, are when anything is put for a reason, +which is not; as no cause for a cause, no effect for an effect; and so +of the rest. + +In the distribution this is a proper fallacy, when anything simply or +generally granted, thereby is inferred a certain respect or special not +meant nor intended: as, + +_He that saith there are not seven sacraments, saith true._ + +_He that saith there are only three, saith there are not seven._ + +_Therefore he that saith there are three, saith true._ + +The right answer is, that the proposition is not necessarily true; for +there may be a way to say there are not seven, and yet affirm an +untruth. + +Fallacies of judgment, are those that are referred to the judgment of +one sentence, or of more. + +Of one sentence, either to the proprieties of an axiom, or to the sorts. + +To the proprieties, as when a true is put for a false, and contrarily: +an affirmative for a negative, and contrarily. So some take the words of +St. John, _I do not say concerning it, that you shall not pray_, for no +denial; when as it doth deny to pray for that sin. + +To the sorts, are referred either to the simple or compound. + +The first, when the general is taken for the special, and contrarily. So +the Papists, by this fallacy, do answer to that general saying of Paul; +_We are justified with faith without the works of the law_: which they +understand of works done before faith, when that was never called in +doubt. + +The fallacies which are referred to a compound axiom, are those which +are referred either to a _disjoined_, or _knitting_ axiom. To a +_disjoined_ axiom, when the parts indeed are not _disjoined_: as, +_Solomon was either a king, or did bear rule_. + +To a _knitting_ axiom, is when the parts are not necessarily knit +together; as, _If Rome be on fire, the Pope’s chair is burnt_. + +And hitherto of the first sort of fallacies referred to judgment. Now +followeth the second. + +And they be either those that are referred to a _syllogism_; or to +_method_. And they again are _general_, and _special_. _General_, which +are referred to the general properties of a syllogism. It is either when +all the parts are _denied_; or are _particular_. All parts denied: as, + +_No pope is a devil._ + +_No man is a devil._ + +_Therefore no man is a pope._ + +And this must be answered, that it is not according to the definition of +a negative syllogism, which must always have one affirmative. + +All particular: as, _some unlawful thing must be suffered; as, namely, +that which cannot be taken away_, + +_The stews is some unlawful thing._ + +_Therefore the stews must be suffered._ + +This is answered, by the definition of a special syllogism; which is, +that hath one part general. + +The _special_, are those which are simple or compound. + +The _simple_ is of two sorts. The first is more plain. The second less +plain. + +More plain, is when the assumption is denied, or the question is not +particular: as, + +_Every apostle may preach abroad_: + +_Some apostle is not a pope_, + +_Therefore some pope may not preach abroad_. + +Also, _every pope is a lord_: + +_Some pope may give an universal license._ + +_Therefore every lord may give an universal license_. + +Less plain, hath one fallacy in common, when the proposition is special: +as, + +_Some player is a rogue_: + +_Every vagabond is a rogue_, + +_Therefore every player is a vagabond_. + +Also, _some player is a rogue_: + +_Every vagabond is a player_, + +_Therefore every player is a rogue_. + +The fallacy of the first kind, is when all the parts be affirmative: as, + +_All Paul’s bishops were ordained for unity._ + +_All archbishops be ordained for unity._ + +_Therefore all archbishops are Paul’s bishops._ + +The fallacy of the second kind is when the assumption is denied: as, + +_Every puritan is a Christian._ + +_No Lord Bishop is a puritan_, + +_Therefore no Lord Bishop is a Christian_. + +Hitherto of the fallacies referred to a _simple_ syllogism. Now follow +those which are referred to a _compound_; which are those which are +referred either to the _connexive_, or to the _disjoined_. + +Of the first sort, one is when the first part or antecedent is denied, +that the second or consequent may be so likewise: as, + +_If any man have two benefices, he may escape unpunished at the bishop’s +hands._ + +_But he may not have two benefices_, + +_Therefore he may not escape unpunished at the bishop’s hands_. + +The second part is affirmed, that the first may be so also: as, + +_If every ignorant minister were put out of the church, and a preacher +in his place, we should have good order_, + +_But we have good order_. + +_Therefore every ignorant minister is put out of the church, and a +preacher in his place._ + +Of those referred to the disjoined, the first is when all the parts of +the disjunction or proposition are not affirmed: as, + +_Every ignorant minister is to be allowed, or not._ + +_But he is not._ + +_Therefore he is._ + +The second kind, is when the second part of the copulative negative +axiom is denied, that the first may be so: as, + +_A non-resident is either a faithful, or unfaithful minister._ + +_But he is unfaithful. Ergo, &c._ + +And thus much of the fallacies in a syllogism. + +The fallacy in method is when, to deceive withal, the end is set in the +beginning, the special before the general; good order be gone, +confounded; and finally when darkness, length, and hardness, is laboured +after. + + END OF VOL. VI. + +------------------------------------------------------------------------ + + Transcriber’s Note + +In the Table of Contents, the third section of this volume is entitled +“The Whole Art of Rhetoric”. This title also serves as page header at p. +#421. However, at p. 419, the title page contains “The Art of Rhetoric” +(also the title of the following fourth section). To avoid confusion, +the word “WHOLE” has been added to p. 419. + +At 70.34 “_[2. ]That the design...”_ The number ‘2’ has no preceding +‘1’. + +Errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and +are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original. + + 22.18 of the spiritual law[.] Added. + 40.15 which he wi[./l]l, Replaced. + 41.9 as in the Court of Common Pleas[.] Added. + 60.20 there was a ne[e/c]essity Replaced. + 108.5 was this here[it/ti]c Legat burnt? Transposed. + 175.23 It seems therefo[ re,/re, ]if Shifted. + 240.26 St[r]ange injustice! Inserted. + 270.1 frustrate h[sa/is a]ttempts Replaced. + 276.28 _[B./A.]_ But philosophy Replaced. + 293.7 _quas vulgus eleger[e/i]t_ Replaced. + 321.4 most benefica[i]l to the commonwealth Inserted. + 388.33 there was no Parli[r/a]ment Replaced. + 419.1 THE [WHOLE ]ART OF RHETORIC. Added. + 423.9 to _accuse_ and _ex[s/c]use_ Replaced. + +*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 77338 *** |