Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

to invite him thither, on condition of his giving satisfaction concerning the security

premacy, the vow and protestation, the solemn league and covenant, and engagement of the whole kingdom to the king, his heirs, successors and posterity for ever." It was farther said, "it would involve the nation in endless wars with the family of the late king, and the nobility; and engage Scotland and Ireland to unite with the young kings foreign friends and allies against England; and finally, that the erection of a commonwealth would sink the nation into contempt in the eyes of those around them, and expose its subjects to the worst treatment." Other writers followed; who plainly declared the commonwealth to be an usurpation, and consequently to be without right to obedience. In support hereof, it was alleged,

"1. That as all lawful power is founded on the wills of those over whom it is set; contrariwise, usurpation is built upon the will and power of them that hold the government : more especially when a party owing obedience and subjection to a long-continued, and undoubted lawful power, and solemnly sworn to submit to and support that government, shall rise up, and presume to thrust out the possessors, and invest itself, yea, and not only seize on the power, but of its own mind and will, or by its force alone, abolish the settled, and set up a new mould of government, this is usurpation, to the culmen or height of it.

"2. No obedience is due to usurpers. For I cannot (if I would) yeeld up myself in obedience to him that hath no authority over me. Take him as a usurper, and my allegiance is incompatible to him. Obedience and authority, magistrate and subject, are terms of

of religion, the union of the two kingdoms, and the good and peace of that kingdom,

relation, and doe se mutuo ponere & tollere: they are inseparable from one another; if there be no magistracy in him, there can be no obedience properly and formally in me to him. I may (either warrantably or unwarrantably) doe an act possibly which he commanded; but that cannot be truly and properly said to be an act of obedience to him. His authority is null, of no reality. He is no magistrate, but a private person; my fellow subject (if one of the nation), or a foreigner to me. His commanding over me and others, is, as if a private soldier should take upon him to give orders to his company, or an inferior officer to an army; or a servant should offer to rule over his fellow servants.

"3. I may not (if I could) yeild up myself as a subject to the usurper; in so doing I should take away the right of the lawful magistrate which he hath over me, and injure him in the allegiance which I stand tyed in to him, and he still retaineth the claim of at my hands. The magistrate is (in the case in hand) granted to be in being; he is but deprived of possession and enjoyment, not of property or title; he is yet standing in the relation of a magistrate to me, and is only outed of his station per force. The obedience of a subject is not so arbitrary or loose a thing, as that I may place and remove it at pleasure, or as affairs go; but it is a debt which I must render to him unto whom it is due. Neither is sovereignty so common, ambulatory, or prostitute a matter, as that its title ceaseth unto him that is violently extruded or dispossessed of it, and becometh any ones that by force captivates it to himself; the expulsed magistrate still standing upon his

according to the national covenant, and the solemn league and covenant. These

claim and right, and the power in possession having no title but his injurious and forcible entrance; the subject is not disobliged from him that is expelled, nor at his choice to transfer his obedience to another, neither can the violent intruder challenge it."-These were the principal reasons alleged against taking the engagement, reasons which must operate against all new governments, and render them unsafe, and their subjects unhappy. But the commonwealth wanted not its advocates, who understood government well, and pointed out the lawfulness of submission. With regard to the authority that imposed the engagement, it was asked, "Why is not this effectually a parliament, seeing it is the supream present power of the whole nation, no part excluded? which in this controversy is the very term of the question. I hope he means no criticism by the word parliament; if he doth, it signifies only a public speaking or consulting together for the public. Moreover the author would be, I am sure, much perplext, if I should ask him, how he knoweth so indubitably that this is not a parliament or supream power requisite for the kingdom, according to the mind of God? He must pardon us if we think forms no more than persons are to last here always; or that the changes which have been, and still are to be of both, must never be done, but according to the customary formalities of a quiet people, but rather according to the extreme necessity of a state. For if he ask me, what it is forms in-organiz'd people into a govern

2 An Exercitation concerning Usurped Powers, 4to. 1650, without name or place,

conditions were far enough from being acceptable to the king or his counsellors.

[ocr errors]

ment, of what sort soever? I answer, necessity. If, what makes or takes away a law in a government established? I answer, necessity. If, what takes away a government itself? I answer, that which first gave it being, viz. necessity. Of which there are several degrees; for in a peaceable state, a word inay take away that which in a disturb'd state must be taken away by the sword: after which it is but equal that he who gives the last blow, should in that quarrel give the last word, and leave us to a peremptory obedience, unless we would have no quarter in the world, or be like the old Servati in bello, who were sold, confin'd to chains all their lives, or condemn'd to dig perpetually in mines. They who sit at top in the state, are tanquam in nubibus to the eyes of us of the people. We know not how they manage their counsels, nor contrive their transactions; that is best determined by and amongst themselves. It is enough for us if they be of a number competent to act, and be persons who enter by virtue of free election, and sit in legal place. For in a case where five are chosen to a business, and that any three of them are to be of the quorum, though two of them be never so accidentally or violently detained, yet what the other three do, is to all intents and purposes valid.— As for the will of the major part of the people, how will he prove, that they had not rather obey this present power, than seek to be rid of it by the hazards and calamities of another war? They usually look after nothing but their rents, markets and reasonable subsistence. They are the luxurious and the ambitious part only which pretends to new troubles. The

For they hated the covenant, as an engine of mischief to their late master; nor did

peoples question therefore is not how the change was made, but, an sit, whether it be so changed or no? For, if according to its formalitie that be not rightly done, it concerneth not their consciences no more than the thunder and lightning over their heads doth, which are things totally out of their power, much less may they desolate neighbours for them ""

[ocr errors]

The same argument was urged by the celebrated Marchamont Nedham, in his "Case of the Commonwealth stated"." In this pamphlet he sets himself to prove, that governments have their revolutions and fatal periods; that the power of the sword is, and ever hath been, the foundation of all titles to government ; and that non-submission to government justly deprives men of the benefit of its protection. Under this head, he says, “private and particular persons have no right to question how those came by their power that are in authority over them; for if that were once admitted, there would be no end of disputes in the world touching titles. It is ground enough for the submission of particular persons in things of political equity, that those which have gotten the power are irresistable, and able to force it if they refuse. For as touching this case (saith the most excellent Grotius), private persons ought not to take upon them to meddle with these controversies in point of title, but rather to follow them that are in possession."-As to the alleged usurpation of the present governors, they having no call from the people-he answers, "That if only a call

The Bounds and Bonds of Publique Obedience, p. 4, 10, 11. 4to. Lond. 1650.. b. Nedham's Case of the Commonwealth stated, 4to. Lond. 1650.

« AnteriorContinuar »