Observations, censures, and confutations of notorious errours in Mr. Hobbes his Leviathan and other his bookes to which are annexed occasionall anim-adversions on some writings of the Socinians and such hæreticks of the same opinion with him / by William Lucy ...

Sect. 5.

I know it may be objected,* 1.1 how that the Children of Israel dispossessed the Canaanites; and it is clearly answe∣red, that God, who gave men their titles,* 1.2 never gave them so absolutely, no not in any Commission by the law of Nature its self, but he reserved a prerogarive to dispose of any thing otherwise, when it should please him; and that God, by that prerogative, did give to the Children of Israel their title to that land, to the Egypti∣ans goods, to many other things; which gift of Gods if any man can shew to any thing which is anothers, it ceaseth to be that others, and becomes his; for the earth is the Lords, he is the absolute Proprietor, our pro∣priety is but usu-fructuary, and that dum Domino placue∣rit; yet untill his will is revealed to dispose otherwise of it, it is injustice to take any mans estate from him. For

these proprieties, although no man can shew an univer∣sal peremptory command of Gods, that thus or thus these or those worldly goods shall be appropriated to th••se or those men, yet men in the very first plantation of the world did apprehend God that granted this power of ••ppropriating some parts peculiar to themselves in the Charter of entercommoning. So it appeares, that Noah,* 1.3 understood it in the 9. Chap of Genesis, presently upon the sin of Cham verse 27. God shall enlarge Iaephet, and he shall dwell in the Tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant; which could not be, but that there must be a propriety in Shem. So that then it seemes evident to me, that both the rights of Common and propriety were passed in the same deed, because as the other was expressed in the beginning of the Chapter; so this im∣plyed or supposed in the latter end; I think I have said enough of this Conclusion, how Nature gave all things to all men. If you will have a Law-phrase, they had juc ad rem, not in re, they had a title to the thing, to any thing, a remote title, every man is capable to have any thing; and if the true Proprietor desert it, it may be his; but they have only a title in re, which have lawfull possession of it, to enjoy and make use of it: He proceeds.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Obj. Ans.
• * 1.2

  The Children of Israel dis∣possess'd the Canaanites by Gods prero∣gative which he had re∣ceiv'd
• * 1.3

  The first gene∣ration of men underst••od their titles of prop••iety without Gods peremptory command.