To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
He go's on next to shew, that there is no repugnance out of the part of my neighbour; I will wait upon that with which he begin's this pag. 100. This we have proved (saith he) that man hath right to the use and possession of all things which lack reason. I answer, man hath, but no particular man: But (saith he) since my neighbour is con∣stituted
in the same dignity which God would have me sustain (is his word) he ought to enjoy the same privilege which I do, therefore to him should belong a like and equal right ••ver all creatures, neither out of the respect of the crea∣tures is one part allotted to him, another to me.
* 1.1This seem's by him to be an introduction to what follow's, but indeed contain's a main Argument against him; for two, much less two millions of men, particu∣lar men, cannot have a right to the same thing. There∣fore, saith he, we must seek somewhere else to find what por∣tion is allotted to him, what to me, and then, saith he, let the adversaries turn which way they will, they must confess that the distinction of these creatures ariseth onely out of Covenant; this pag. 101. and this, saith he, they do suf∣ficiently declare, who teach, that in extreme necessity the an∣cient right doth revive, and the use of those things is made lawful which they by Covenant had disposed away before. Thus far he.
The case, which he speak's of, may be thus put; A man ready to starve,* 1.2 for want of food or clothes, take's a piece of bread, or meat, or a warm garment, which be∣long's to another man, to supply his extremity; here, say his Authors, in this extremity his right to these things revived: therefore, saith this Writer, he had right to all creatures before, or else his instance is weak: I an∣swer, the consequence is very infirm; he may have right to such parcels of the world, yet not to all; he, who hath right to little pieces in a field, hath not right to the whole; I have sh••wed in my former piece, which I now defend, that no right, but by some Law; the Law of hu∣manity, give's him right to this; by which we may, and ought to suppose, that men should do as they would be done unto; and, when necessity compell's a man to such
an extremity, he need not stay to ask for it (which in that necessity he cannot do) but take that leave which humane nature give's one to another, and by which he is entite∣led to those poor fragments; but what hath this to do with the universe, to the partition of which neither he nor any man living conferr'd to divide?
The equality of right no ar∣gument that each man hath a right to all.
The case of necessity im∣ply's no such universal right.