SECT. XXX. Henry the First was King of England by as good a Title as any of his Predecessors or Successors.
HAVING made it appear, as I suppose, that the antient Nobi∣lity of England was composed of such men as had bin ennobled by bearing Arms in the defence or enlargement of the Common∣wealth; that the Dukes, Earls, &c. were those who commanded them; that they and their dependents received Lands for such servi∣ces, under an obligation of continuing to render the like, and accord∣ing to their several degrees and proportions, to provide and maintain Horses, Arms and Men for the same uses; it cannot be denied that they were such Gentlemen and Lords of Mannors, as we now call Commoners, together with the Freeholders, and such as in war were found most able to be their Leaders. Of these the Micklege∣mots, Wittenagemots, and other publick Assemblies did consist; and nothing can be more absurd than to assign the names and rights of Duke, Earl and Vicount, which were names of Offices, to those who have not the Offices, and are no way fit for them. If our Author therefore had said, that such as these who had always composed the great Councils of our Nation, had in favour of Henry the First, be∣stowed the Crown upon him, as they had done upon his Father and Brother, I should agree with him: but 'tis the utmost extravagance to say, that he who had neither title nor possession, should give the power to those who had always bin in the possession of it, and exer∣cised it in giving to him whatsoever he had. But I most wonder he should so far forget himself, to call this Henry a Usurper, and detract from the validity of his Acts, because he had no title; whereas there neither is, was, or can be a Usurper if there be any truth in his Doctrine: for he plainly tells us, we are only to look to the power, and not at all to the means and ways by which it is obtained; and making no difference between a King and a Tyrant, enjoins an equal submission to the commands of both. If this were only a slip of his Pen, and he did really take this Henry to be a Usurper because he had not a good title, I should desire to know the marks by which a law∣ful King is distinguished from a Usurper, and in what a just Title dos consist. If he place it in an hereditary Succession, we ought to be informed, whether this right must be deduced from one universal