The prerogative of popular government. A politicall discourse in two books. The former containing the first præliminary of Oceana, inlarged, interpreted, and vindicated from all such mistakes or slanders as have been alledged against it under the notion of objections. The second concerning ordination, against Dr. H. Hamond, Dr. L. Seaman, and the authors they follow. In which two books is contained the whole commonwealth of the Hebrews, or of Israel, senate, people, and magistracy, both as it stood in the institution by Moses, and as it came to be formed after the captivity. As also the different policies introduced into the Church of Christ, during the time of the Apostles. By James Harrington.

An Answer to three Objections against Popular government, that were given me after these two Books were Printed.

Object. 1.

MOnarchical government is more Natural, be∣cause wee see even in Commonwealths that they have recourse unto this, as Lacedemon in her Kings; Rome both in her Consuls and Dictators, and Venice in her Dukes.

Answer. Government whether Popular or Monarchical is equally artificial; wherefore to know which is the more natural, we must consider what piece of Art cometh nearest unto Nature; as for example, whether a Ship or an House be the more natural, and then it will be easie to resolve that a Ship is the more natural at Sea, and an House at Land. In like manner where one man or a few men are the Landlords, Monarchy must doubtlesly be the more natural, and where the whole people are the Landlords, a Commonwealth; for how can we un∣derstand that it should be natural unto a people that can live of themselves, to give away the means of their livelyhood to one or a few men that they may serve or obey? Each government is equally artificial in effect or in it self, and equally natural in the cause, or the matter upon which it is founded.

A Commonwealth consists of the Senate propo∣sing,

the People resolving, and the Magistracy exe∣cuting; so the power of the Magistrates (whether, Kings as in Lacedemon, Consuls as in Rome, or Dukes as in Venice) is but barely executive, but to a Monarch belongs both the Result and Execu∣tion too; wherefore that there have been Dukes, Consuls, or Kings in Common wealths, which were quite of another nature, is no Argument that Mo∣narchical government is for this cause the more natural.

And if a man shall instance in a mixed govern∣ment, as King and Parliament, to say, that the King in this was more natural then the Parliament, must be a strange Affirmation.

To argue from the Roman Dictator, an imperfe∣ction which ruin'd that Commonwealth and was not to be found in any other, that all Common∣wealths have had the like recourse in exigences unto the like remedy, is quite contrary to the uni∣versal testimony of Prudence or Story.

A man who considers that the Commonwealth of Venice hath stood one thousand years, which never any Monarchy did, and yet shall affirm that Monarchical government is more natural then Popular, must affirm that a thing which is less na∣tural may be more durable and permanent then a thing that is more natural.

Whether is a government of Laws less natural then a government of Men? or is it more natural unto a Prince to govern by Laws or by Will? Compare the violences and bloody rapes perpetu∣ally made upon the Crown, or Royal dignity in the Monarchies of the Hebrews and the Romans, with the State of the government under either Commonwealth, and tell me which was less vio∣lent

or whether that which is more violent must therefore be more natural.

Object. 2.

The government of Heaven is a Monarchy, so is the government of Hell.

Answer. In this (saith Machiavel) Princes lose themselvesand their Empire that they neither know how to be perfectly good nor intirely wicked. He might as well have said, that a Prince is always subject to error and misgovernment, because he is a Man, and not a God nor a Divel. A shepherd unto his flock, a plough-man to his team is a better Na∣ture, and so not only an absolute Prince but as it were a God. The government of a better or of a superior Nature, is to a worse or inferior as the go∣vernment of God. The Creator is another and a better nature then the creature, the government in Heaven is of the Creator over his creatures that have their whole dependence upon him and subsi∣stence in him. Where the Prince or the Few have the whole Lands, there is some what of dependence resembling this; so the government there, must of necessity be Monarchical or Aristocratical; But where the people have no such dependence, the causes of that Government which is in Heaven are not in Earth; for neither is the Prince a distinct or better Nature then the people, nor have they their subsistence by him; and there∣fore there can be no such effect. If a man were good as God, there is no question but he would be not only a Prince but a God, would go∣vern by love and be not only obeyed but wor∣shipped: or if he were ill as the Divel, and had as much power to do mischief, he would be dreaded

as much and so govern by fear. To which later the nature of man hath so much nearer approaches, that albeit we never saw upon Earth a Monarchy like that of Heaven, yet it is certain the perfection of the Turkish Policy lies in this, that it cometh nearest to that of Hell.

Object. 3.

God instituted a Monarchy, namely in Melchizedec, before he instituted a Commonwealth.

Answer. If Melchizedec were a King so was Abraham too,though one that paid him tithes, or was his subject; for Abraham made War or had the power of the Sword, as the rest of the Fathers of Families he fought against; So if Canaan were a Monarchy in those days, it was such an one as Germany is in these, where the Princes also have as much the right of the Sword as the Emperor, which comes rather (as hath been shewn already) to a Com∣monwealth; but whether it were a Monarchy or a Commonwealth we may see by the present state of Germany, that it was of no great good Example, nor was Melchizedec otherwise made a King by God then the Emperor; that is as an Ordinance of Man.

FINIS.