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. 13.

At the bottom of the 110. page he enter's into ano∣ther discourse against a Conclusion which I have been engaged in, and must therefore undertake: his Argu∣ment is thus, Prima occupatio,* 1.1 The first occupancy before Covenant shew's no right of my neighbour in any creature: his main reason is this, because then in no right, in any case of necessity, they can return to me again, because that right is onely in such things which are yield••d or forsaken; which is a language I remember I have used, and therefore do think this reflect's upon me.

First, to observe the weakness of this Argument,* 1.2 consider that this Argument fight's equally against himself, as against me; for he hold's, a right is obtained by covenant, and yet that right yield's to extreme neces∣sity, therefore a man may say that it follow's with no more force against Occupancy, then against Covenant.* 1.3 Se∣condly, I deny that the right return's in this condition, but a supposed right of humanity invade's all mankind in such states, so that although a particular man have oc∣cupancy, yet that Law, which dictate's, Do as you would be done unto, appoint's the owner to relieve the necessitous

person, yet I have delivered, and that truly, that men in general have right to all things as citizens of the world; but when any thing is appropriated by occupancy or civil Laws, it belong's onely to that person: Certainly, saith he, ye shall find nothing here but gentium institutio, the institution of nations, which give's the occupant right, but not to him in whose view it come's first. My answer will be short and clear, there is not the same reason for detection to give right,* 1.4 as there is for the other of occu∣pancy; first, an hundred may see the Countre••, yea ten thousand, yet cannot all these have any title to it, which must be in one. If a man had right to what he see's, any man's estate might be his; but whosoever hath a possession hath an interest. Many men see the same bird fly, the same fish in the Sea, yet it is onely his who catch∣eth and get's possession of it; not sight, but occupancy, yield's title and right. He give's a third reason towards the 111. page, Finge, feign, saith he, two men, the one swift of foot,* 1.5 the other slow, it appear's how unequal this pair of men are in acquiring dominion: I believe they are, and it is so in all conditions, one is strong, another weak; one cunning, another foolish; and these may, by those abilities, according to his method, get right from ano∣ther; why then not the swift from the slow, as well as in the other disparities? His Conclusion therefore from these premisses is exceeding weak, when he bring's it in with a Therefore; Therefore, saith he, to the first occupa∣tion out of nature no right is due; the vanity of which con∣clusion is evident out of what hath been said.

What he add's next, concerning misery and charity, is not worth the considering; nor his fighting with imagi∣nary Arguments which succeed. I shall endeavour now to assist the Reader with some spectacles, whereby he

may more easily see through those mists which he hath cast befo•••• these truths; and first, he may consider, that these two Propositions,* 1.6 That a man now existing in the world (for of such he must dispute) hath a right to all things in the world; and the second, That first occupancy give's no right, are of such an horrid nature, so destru∣ctive to humane society and friendship, that although fallacious arguing might deceive a man's Reason, yet men ought to abhorre them: For if it be true, that each particular man hath right to all things, whatsoever a man get's by secure fraud, or force, is but a lawful recovery of his own; For if he ought to bestow his whole endea∣vours for the advancement of his own contentment, and he hath right to every thing, his secure obtaining is just and right, be it which way it will; Nor can he answer this out of his own principles, and much less out of Mr. Hobbes, who conceiving (as he doth) that this is the right of nature, so Mr. Hobbes expresly, no man can di∣est himself of it, (and sure no man can put off that which naturally belong's to him) then it must follow, that such things may be acted carefully.* 1.7 Then let us consider, the second Proposition, were it received amongst men, how might it spoil all commerce betwixt Merchants, betwixt men of divers nations; for if occu∣pancy give no title, it may be lawful for men to defraud, to get by force what they could from an Indian, because I know of no title they have but of occupancy.

No man can discern what title any Subjects have in those goods they enjoy,* 1.8 who is not thoroughly ac∣quainted with the Laws of those several nations, nor then, unless he can survey their deeds and evidences, by which those goods were conveyed to them: Surely they are not to be wrested out of any man's hands, but by

such courses as may first evince his title, and therefore possession, quiet possession, with prescription, is an undoubted just title any where.* 1.9 And if we will have peace, which is the labour of all Politicks, we must allow Occupancy to be a sacred title. And this is evident out of that which was delivered in the 13. and 14 ch. of Leviathan; For it is not possible to think that Ham in the 9. of Ge∣nesis did consent to his subjection to Shem or Japhet ei∣ther, but each would, and might, take their possession in what quarter of the world they would, and the Provi∣dence of God would so dispose affairs, that it should come to pass according to that Prophecy. All the sons of Noah were thrust into the Common of the world, when any one seised upon any thing unpossessed, it was his, and must be so, or else men and all things in the world would be in a confusion.

Notes

• * 1.1

  His argument against the right of Occu∣pancy.
• * 1.2

  Which the Bi∣shop shew's to hold well a∣gainst Cove∣nant.
• * 1.3

  What is the r••ght in neces∣sity.
• * 1.4

  Discovery 〈◊〉〈◊〉 not an equal right with Occu∣pancy.
• * 1.5

  The imparity of swift and slow not consi∣derable in the case.
• * 1.6

  The Author's two Propositi∣ons destructive to humane So∣ciety;
• * 1.7

  and Trade.
• * 1.8

  The difficulty of discerning different titles to goods and estates.
• * 1.9

  Little peace to be expected if that of Occu∣pancy be not allowed.