An argument proving, that the abrogation of King James by the people of England from the regal throne, and the promotion of the Prince of Orange, one of the royal family, to throne of the kingdom in his stead, was according to the constitution of the English government, and prescribed by it in opposition to all the false and treacherous hypotheses, of usurpation, conquest, desertion, and of taking the powers that are upon content / by Samuel Johnson.

AN ARGUMENT PROVING, That the Abrogation of King Iames by the People of England from the Regal Throne, and the Promotion of the Prince of Orange, one of the Royal Family, to the Throne of the Kingdom in his stead, was according to the Constitution of the English Government, and Prescribed by it.

THE Argument.

IN this ensuing Argument, which will be very short, I have but these two Points to clear;

• The one of Fact.
• The other of Right.

First, That the People of England did actually Abrogate or Dethrone King James the Second for Misgovernment, and promoted the Prince of Orange in his stead.

Secondly, That this Proceeding of theirs, was

according to the English Constitution, and pre∣scribed by it.

First, This Matter of Fact being so fresh in our Memory, needs not to be so industriously proved. The Act 1^o William and Mary, decla∣ring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, and settling the Succession of the Crown, recites the very Instrument of Conveyance of the Crown to the Prince and Princess; which be∣gins in these words: Whereas the late King James the Second, by the Assistance of divers Evil Counsellors, Iudges and Ministers imployed by him, did endeavour to Subvert and Extirpate the Protestant Religion, and the Laws and Liberties of this King∣dom: which is there made out, by an enumera∣tion of sundry Particulars. And not long after there are these words: And whereas the late King James the Second, having Abdicated the Government, and the Throne being thereby Vacant, the two Houses of Parliament do thereupon invest the Prince and Princess of Orange with the Crown.

King Iames endeavoured to subvert the Govern∣ment, as they favourably word it; or rather, he had long before wholly subverted and over∣thrown the Government, as the Prince of O∣range's Declaration speaks, (which this very Act has annex'd, and made parcel of the Crown, and expresses to be the only Means of Redressing that Mischief).

There is but one doubtful Word in all that I have recited, which some People make a hard Word; and that is, King Iames's Abdi∣cating the Government; which no Man would stumble at, who had read Tully in his third Philippick, who says thus concerning Mark An∣thony, that for his offering a Crown to Caesar,

Eo die non modo Consulatu sed etiam Li∣bertate se Abdicavit, esset enim ipsi certè statim serviendum, si Caesar ab eo Regni insigne accipere voluisset. At that time he not only Abdicated his Consulship, but his Liberty; for if Caesar would have accepted the Crown, Mark Anthony must present∣ly have turned Slave.

Now Mark Antho∣ny by this Action did not expresly re∣nounce

his Consulship or Liberty, or run a∣way from both of them, but he did that which was inconsistent with them both, HE FORFEITED THEM BOTH; which is the true im∣port of that Phrase.

The second thing is the Point of Right; That this Proceeding of the People of England was agreeable to the English Constitution, and prescribed by it.

To make this out, I need only recite the De∣claration of the Lords and Commons, 10th Rich. 2. in their Message to the King then at Eltham. Knyghton, pag. 2683.

Domine Rex,

SET & unum aliud de nuncio nostro su∣perest Nobis ex parte Populi vestri Vo∣bis intimare. Habent enim ex antiquo Sta∣tuto & de facto non longe retroactis tempo∣ribus experienter quod dolendum est habito, Si Rex maligno consilio quocunque, vel in∣epta contumacia aut contemptu, seu pro∣terva voluntate singulari, aut quovis modo irregulari, se alienaverit à Populo suo, nec

voluerit per Jura Regni & Statuta & lauda∣biles Ordinationes, cum salubri Consilio Do∣minorum & Procerum Regni gubernari & regulari; set capitose in suis insanis Consiliis propriam voluntatem suam singularem pro∣terve exercere; Ex tunc licitum est eis cum Com∣muni assensu & consensu Populi Regni, ipsum Re∣gem de regali Solio abrogare, ET PROPINQUIO∣REM ALIQUEM DE STIRPE REGIA, LOC•• EJUS IN REGNI SOLIO SUBLIMARE.

Our Lord the King —

BUT there is moreover one part of our Message still left to acquaint you with∣all, in the Name of your People. They have it by ancient Statute, and by a late dole∣ful Instance, that in case the King shall alie∣nate himself from his People by any bad Advice whatsoever, or foolish Contumacy or Contempt, or Self-will, or any other ir∣regular Way; and will not be govern'd and ruled by the Laws, Statutes and lau∣dable Ordinances of the Realm, with the wholesom Advice of the Lords and Peers of the Realm; but in a Head-strong

way will exercise his own Self-will, From thence-forward it is lawful for them, with the common Assent and Consent of the People of the Realm, to Depose the King from the Regal Throne, and to promote some K insman of his of the Royal Family, to the Throne of the Kingdom in his stead.

Here the Parliament laid down the Law be∣fore the King, and gave him fair Warning thir∣teen Years before they thought of putting it in Execution; for this was in the Tenth of his Reign, and he reigned three and twenty Years. And as for the Statute they quote, it must needs be a very ancient Statute, because the Deposing of Edw. 2. (who was his Great-Grandfather) in comparison of that, is represented but as of Yesterday.

This Declaration of the Lords and Com∣mons, the King could not gain-say; and they gained their Point upon him by it, to bring him to Parliament. And it is not to be believed that the Parliament of England would affirm they had such an Ancient Sta∣tute

when they had not. It remains there∣fore to consider how we come by this Re∣cord, seeing it is not upon the Rolls in the Tower: but 'tis no strange thing it should not be there, because it is the four and twentieth Article in the Charge against Richard the Se∣cond, afterwards in the three and twentieth Year of his Reign;

Et praeterea Rotulos Re∣cordorum Statum & gubernationem Regni sui tangentium, praedictus Rex deleri & abradi fecit, in magnum praejudicium Po∣puli, & exhaeredationem Coronae Regni praedicti, & ut verisimiliter creditur in fa∣vorem & sustentationem sui mali Regimi∣nis. And besides the said King caused the Rolls of the Records, touching the State and Government of his Realm, to be defac'd and razed, to the great preju∣dice of his People, and disherison of the Crown of the said Realm; and as is cre∣dibly thought, in favour and support of his Male-Administration.

The only means left us in such a Case, where the Records of the Tower fail us, is

to have recourse to the undoubted Histo∣ry of that Age, which was written upon the Spot: Such is Knyghton's Authority, whose History was both written, and finish∣ed, and closed up in that very Reign.

And though this should be Scare-Crow-Doctrine to the Passive-Obedience-Men, yet it is the Tenor of all Antiquity; It is the Do∣ctrine of the Mirror in very many places. It is the Doctrine of the Sevententh Chap∣ter of King Edward the Confessor's Laws. It is the Sense of King Alfred's Stile, Dei gra∣tia, & benevolentia West-Saxonicae Gentis. That he was King by the Favour of God, and the Good-Will of the English Nation. It is the Doctrine of the great Lawyers since the Norman Times; as particularly Bracton:

Rex au∣tem habet Superiorem Deum; Item Le∣gem, per quam factus est Rex; Item Cu∣riam suam; videlicet, Comites, Barones, qui Comites dicuntur quasi Socii Regis; & qui habet Socium, habet Magistrum, & ideo si Rex fuerit sine fraeno, i. e. sine Lege, debent ei fraenum ponere, nisi ipsi∣met

fuerint cum Rege sine fraeno, & tunc clamabunt subditi & dicent, Domine Ihesu Christe in chamo & fraeno maxillas eorum constringe, ad quos Dominus, vocabo super eos gentem robustam & longinquam & ignotam, cujus linguam ignorabunt, quae destruet eos, & evellet radices eorum de terra, & a talibus judicabuntur, quia sub∣ditos noluerunt juste judicare, & in fine, ligatis Manibus & Pedibus eorum, mittet eos in caminum ignis & tenebras exterio∣res, ubi erit fletus & stridor dentium.

Bra∣cton. Lib. 2. cap. 16. Sect. 3.

The King hath three Superiors, God, and the Law, by which he is made King; and his Court, namely the Earls and Barons, because they are called Comites, as being the Com∣panions of the King; and he that hath a Companion, hath a Master: and there∣fore if the King shall be unbridled, that is Lawless, they ought to bridle him, unless they themselves with their King shall be unbridled and lawless too; and then the Subject shall cry out and say, Lord Jesus

Christ, hold in their Jaws with Bit and Bri∣dle: to whom the Lord shall say, I will bring in upon them a Robustious and Fo∣reign and unknown Nation, whose Lan∣guage they shall not understand: Which Na∣tion shall destroy them, and shall pluck up the Roots of them from the Earth; and by such they themselves shall be judged, because they would not justly judg the English Subjects. And in conclusion, being bound Hand and Foot, the Lord shall throw them into a Fur∣nace of Fire, and outer Darkness, where there shall be weeping and gnashing of Teeth.

So that if the Parliament of England neglect to do their Duty in this Case, in not restrain∣ing their King from Lawless and Arbitrary Courses, They do it at their utmost Peril; for they are threatned with Destruction for it in this World, and will dearly answer it in the next.

I have here quoted a knocking Sentence of a Lord Chief Justice of England in the Time of

Henry the Third, four hundred and fifty Years ago, whose Authority hath been so far valued by both Sides, as to be strove for. The Prero∣gative-Men quote such Sayings as these; Rex non habet Parem in Regno suo; quia Par in Parem, non habet Imperium. Nemo de Factis ejus praesumat di∣sputare; multo magis contra Factum ejus ire. And in the very Context of the former large Quota∣tion, Item nec factum Regis nec Chartam potest quis judicare, ita quod factum Domini Regis irritetur. Now these and the like Sayings, which are of∣ten to be met with in Bracton, are to be under∣stood concerning the ordinary Administration of Justice, and not to limit the Transcendent Power of Parliaments which he has so fully display'd in this place; and his Rule in other places, where there is a new Case, or any thing too weighty for the Judges, is this, Respectue∣tur ad Magnam Curiam, which is the Key of Bra∣cton's whole Book.

This Doctrine is agreeable to Fortescue, who says, That the People are the Fountain of Power, in that Expression, Rex à Populo Potestatem Ef∣fluxam habet. And in another place he says,

That an Arbitrary Power to oppress the Subjects, could not proceed from the People themselves; and yet if it had not been from themselves, such a King as the King of England could have had no manner of Power at all over them: For the truth of it is, it is a Contradiction to deny, that all Civil Power is Originally in the People: For what is Civil Power in English, but the City's Power, and derived from the Community? And this either limited; or enlarged, as they please. The Intention of the People (as Fortescue tells us) is the Heart-Blood of the Government, and is the Primum Vi∣vidum in the Body Politick, as the Heart is in the Body Natural. And it is impossible to be other∣wise; The Nation must make their King, for I am sure the King cannot make the Nation. And as Sir William Temple very well observes, The Basis of Governmen•• is the People, though the King be at the Top of it; and to found the Government upon a King, is to invert the Pyramid, and set it upon the Pinacle, where it will never stand.

This Doctrine is agreeable to the Original Contract, which is in the Mirror of Iustice, fol. 8.

upon the Election of the First English Mo∣narch, which Contract is still continued in the Coronation Oath, and the Oath of Allegiance: Which Oath of Allegiance doth depend upon the King's taking the Coronation Oath first, which was ever practised till the Reign of Henry the Fifth, to whom Homage and Allegiance was sworn before he was Crown'd; which was a singular Courtesy, and done on presumption of the Goodness of his future Reign.

I might speak of the Curtana Sword; the Power of the Lord High Steward, and other great Officers of the Kingdom, and draw all the Lines of the Government to this Center: But I have been heretofore forc'd to destroy all the Reading of my whole Life with my own hands, and have not since had Health enough to retrieve it; and now a late Calamity hath fal∣len upon me that I can do nothing.

Only I must answer one Objection, and that is, That our Ancient Statute is not pra∣cticable: for the King having the Prerogative of Calling and Dissolving Parliaments, will

never assemble them, nor suffer them to sit for such a purpose. But such an Objection as this betrays great Ignorance of the Constitution of English Parliaments. We will allow that the King hath a Prerogative of Calling Parlia∣ments, but he hath no Prerogative of Not Cal∣ling them: For not to mention our Right of having Stationary Parliaments, not only Annual, but Anniversary, which sat down constantly at the Calends of May, as appears by the Laws of William the First. It is plain likewise, that they were not dissolvable at Pleasure; but that even as low as Henry the Fourth's Time, Proclamation used to be made to know whether there were any Petitions that were to be answer'd in Parlia∣ment. The first Abusion of Law, as the Mir∣ror tells us, is for the King to be above Law, to which he ought to be subject, as is contained in his Oath. And the second Abusion of the Law, next to this First and Soveraign Abusi∣on, is for Parliaments to be a la Volunt d' Roy, at the King's Pleasure.

One of the Ancientest Remains that we have concerning the English Parliaments, is in the Mir∣ror;

where he says, in King Alfred's Time, it was made for a perpetual Law, that the Coun∣ties of England should assemble themselves twice a Year [in Temps d' Paix, in Time of Peace] at London, pour Parliamenter, to hold Parliament. Now I conceive that these words [in Time of Peace] do let us into the Reason why this perpetual Law hath been broken, and how it comes to pass that Parliaments could not be punctual either as to Time or Place; for we had many Wars and Invasions after that Time, and the Danes had the Pos∣session of London; and consequently it was impossible for them to meet there, or indeed to keep their Times of meeting any where else: whereupon there was a Necessity for the King to assemble them, when and where they could meet in safety; from whence arose the Prerogative (as I believe) of Calling Par∣liaments; which if a Prince uses Honestly, is ra∣ther a trouble to him than any thing else.

If any Person shall vouchsafe to give an Answer to any thing I have here said, I de∣sire him to do it fairly, by setting his Name to it, as I have done; for I hate to have my Books Answer'd (as they lately were) in a Midnight Vizor-Masque.

FINIS.