The aphorismes of the kingdome. 1. The Parliament is the moderation of monarchy. ... 2. The power of it is sufficient to prevent and restraine tyranny. ... 3. The essence of the law is the free consent of the law-makers. ... 4. The sole reason of the King is not the sound judgement of the kingdome. ... 5. All the votes in Parliament are directive to the law, none destructive. ... 6. The vote that is directive and coactive, is no wayes nomotheticall. ... 7. The negative vote of a King is no more than the dissent of one man. ... 8. The affirmative vote of a King makes not the law; ergo, the negative cannot destroy it. ... 9. He that cannot destroy a law made, cannot destroy it in the making. ... 10. The power that makes lawes, repeales and revives them as reason requires. ... 11. Kings that doe good to their subjects of bountie, would be free of the obligation. ... 12. Laws are the best directions and obligations for all men to follow. To submit the principality to the laws is more than the crowne. ...

The Illustration by Examples.

SAVL and David were both anointed by Samuel, and yet had not the crowne till the people consented, and David was twentie yeers with∣out it, and Saul returned to his trade, 1. Sam. 11. 5. And fought one battell before his creation in Gilgal. He was anointed at Ramah, cho∣sen by lot at Mizpeh, and crowned at Gilgal. When Samuel told him that God had appointed him not to seeke asses but men, 1. Sam. 9. 20. He in his simplicitie or hypocrisie excuseth himselfe by three arguments, v. 21. First that his Tribe was the smallest in Israel, having not yet recovered that losse and slaugh∣ter of their men, which they received in the battell with Israel, which was enough to make the Tribe infamous, and all the Tribes to remember an old injurie, (and scorne, as some did, to receive any Ruler from them.) Secondly, his fathers house was of small account in that Tribe. Thirdly, himselfe the least in his fathers house. Modestè regna recusavit,—he modestly refused the Kingdome, as Bishops do, (viz) Episcopare nolo—I will not be a Bishop. But it may be said of them, as it may be said of our Cavalliers, Nolunt occidere quenquam, posse volunt,—they have a will, when they Nil the thing. It may be Saul was in good earnest, and he had cause enough, if he had knowne the burden, and little benefit he had by his King∣dome. Veracitèr se excusavit de honore Regni, saith Iunius,—hee did in good earnest excuse himselfe of the honour of the Kingdome. And truely his reasons of refusall are pithie and well heaped together, and his conclusion an earnest and vehement interrogation, Wherefore then speakest thou so unto me? David was also anointed by Samuel not long after Sauls creation, and yet lived many yeers under Saul as a son and servant. He was anointed at Bethlehem, 1. Sam. 16. 4. and many yeers after that crowned at Hebron. First by his owne Tribe, 12. Sam. 2. 4. Secondly, by all Israel seaven yeers after, 2. Sam. 5. 3. And heere David is said to be anointed againe, as an happy signe that God and man joyfully conspired together to make him King, and that he was as carefull to receive the consent of the people, as the Unction of God, and it is most certaine to be the minde of God, that Kings must neither lay hold of their crownes, nor make lawes nor use Armes, but by the free consent of their people. He that writ the observations taxeth the King that with the originall grant of heaven, he makes no mention of the consent of his peo∣ple, and in truth it is the errour of our King to think he holds all from God, and no∣thing from his Subjects: with God he joyns the Law, and that is his second errour, if he understand it of the Laws of the Kingdom, for they are made by common consent; and if he have his Royalty by them, then the people give it him: and the Observator sayes truely, That the Law by the which Kings raigne, is the pacti∣on and agreement that any Politicall Corporation or Society of men make with him, even of those that are pricked by God, and declared from heaven to be his Mi∣nisters, as Saul and David are; His Prophet anoints them both, and then the peo∣ple being certified of Gods will▪ are not forced to follow their guide, but have their freedom to contract and covenant with him. Abner in his Message to David; speaks of both rights, 2 Sam. 3. 12. First, That God had by his anointing, given him the Kingdom. Secondly, That he could not take it by that right, without a league, and he requires David to make ir with him, and is confident to bring him

in all Israel upon the same condition, and does it, who first acknowledge Gods grant, 2 Sam. 5. 1. 2. Secondly, Require their own right. v. 3. Saul had done Da∣vid wrong in taking from him his wife, and therefore justly requires to have her re∣stored, 1 S••m. 3. 13, 14. The King may call for his own without consent; and though she had an husband, yet he had no right in her against the lawfull owner. David owns not the Kingdom and Michal alike, which may teach the King ano∣ther errour, that will have all our Nation to be his without consent, as his own wife is his, and the Parliament should do him wrong to take her from him, or the Hol∣landers to hold her where she is; but they may as lawfully keep his Kingdom from him, as Abner and Israel did, without his league, and compact with them: If he say he hath made it with them, then let him so hold it, or not complain of them for holding it as he doth. The Observator hath done him no wrong; but they that would make him hold his Monarchy by an absolute right, which in true love they cannot perswade him unto, but in extreme hatred to our Realm and Religion, knowing our Parliament so fast set against them, and yet for him in his due right, which is the way to make him the most honourable Monarch in the world, as Da∣vid was; and the other is to make him like Saul, a Tyrant. He meddles no further with the Observations as good for him, but onely in this, That the beginning of his book destroyes Monarchy, which at the first reading I thought he did; and some words are dāgerous, to make the King wholly dependant upon the people; but I deal plainly (as my title is) That he is Gods anomted, and so iure personae, in the right of his person, exempt from all men; but he is the peoples appointed, & so iure Coronae, in the right of his crown, can do nothing without them; and this is our present case. The Parliament would secure the person of the King, and yet maintain his Lawes which good intention of theirs if he cannot see it, they must sorrow for him, but not sacrifice the whole Kingdom to his will. It is a wholsom Maxime in the Law, That the King may do onely that which is iust; and a false Aphorism, That all is iust he doth. A King may abhorre to do evill, and as much abhor to be limited to do good, It is not dishonourable to a Prince to do his duty, but he counts it most ignoble to be under any Law or Obligation: David is bound not to touch the Lords Anointed, and was not Saul by the same reason obliged not to hurt David? David arms him∣self and his men to defend themselves, but not to kill Saul; was it not a sin for Saul to take up Arms to kill his subject? David gives way to the people to crown him, and pleads not his Coronation by any other Right; and shall men that are more weakly declared to be Kings, presume they have it because they are heirs? It were injustice to deny him his Coronation, that hath it by divine Unction and de∣signation, and yet by violence of the peoples Right, he shall offend as much on the other hand. Votes in Parliament have the most vigorous power in them to make Laws; and here also the Maxime is, That summa potestas fundata est in voluntate, The chiefe power is placed in the will, yea, all power that is free; as for coactive power, that is over mens bodies, and may be found in beasts that can bear down one another. Now I demand what power His Majesty would have in Parlia∣ment? coercive or directive, violent or voluntary, by counsell or command, con∣sent or compulsion? There is no power to force men to Laws; but in the Forrest, as among Beasts, the Lion will be their King, and the Fox is the freest, and wisely fore-sees that all foot-steps that go forward finde no return, and therefore wisely keeps himself out of the Lions Den. Will His Majesty make his Parliament the

Lyons Den to hold his Subjects doing, and to do nothing out what he likes, They will be strang Votes that that are all forced to one mans Vote, and an absolute negative voice to make▪ voyd all affirmatives, or one affirmative to co••mand all negatives. but His Majestie will say to the making of a Law his affirmative Vote with the most makes a Law, but his negative Vote against all or the most destroys ir so that we shall have no more Laws than he pleaseth I would ••ut aske this one question, whether sufficient consent is not the essence of the Law? It will be answered so the Kings consent be in it, otherwise the Law will want essence, I must aske again in the freedom of the will. what is more in the Kings consent than in another man that hath as much power to consent as the King himself? will you say power? I must aske again what power: certainly it must be a free power, and then no difference for the meanest man in Parliament is as free, as the King to give his Vote, and no Law can be made without consent so qualified, and he that will command the making of a Law, is to his Subjects as the Law is obligatory to all, and so all the Parliament men are as much obliged in the Le∣gislat••ve power to the King, as all the Kingdom is to the Law when it is made by such a power; and there••ore the whole power of the Law is in the King, and the Parliament men are but Cypners, or if they be to counsell the King, they may not consent, to the Law, or if they may, it must not be to the making of it, or if to that, it must be to the Kings consent, not as consul∣tive with the rest, but coactive to all, for one may consent to another, as in the Raigne of Edw. the third, the Commons desired they might not give counsell in a commotion, but that the King with his Counsell would give it, as the more knowing men, and at the last they gave both counsell and consent, and the King would suffer nothing to be done without them, and he says, Lex notissima, et provida circumspectione stabilita, &c. It is a Law well known and by the most provident circumspection established, that all men should consent to that which concerned them, now if the Kings consent be mandatory in the Law to them that make it, as well as they which obey it, they are not free but must be observant to do as the King commands them, a thing never heard of in Israel, as I shall shew in the sequell in all their Court. As the Parliament suffers so does the whole Kingdom with them, and that for a Militia denyed to them and granted to Oppressors. The Parliament hath made it plain to us that the Commission of Array is not warranted by any Act of Parliament, and I am con∣tent to reason from the same as the King does, that the Ordinance of Parliament is not onely without any one warrantable President of former times, as he believeth, but as he is well as∣sured, void in Law, His Majestie hath lost by his Argument in all the parts of it. First we know no president warrantable that are alledged against the Parliament, for it hath power to repeale Laws, which His Majesty hath not, and his Commission of Array being repealed he cannot revive it, and to walke by presidents as he doth, is against Law, and to carry them to the conquest, is against his contract, and to shew he means to rule by the sword and not by his Laws. Secondly, he says an Ordinance in Parliament is void in Law, and of this He is well assured, and I suppose his reason is because it wants his consent; To this I can answer strongly, that his consent is no sufficient reason either to make it void or of force and value▪ Not void in Law because it hath the consent of the most, and in that consists the be••ng of the Law; for if his consent cannot make it a Law, when the most are against it, his dissent cannot make it void when most are for it, for contrariorum contraria est ratio, for if his af∣firmative Vote prevaile not against the most to make a Law, his negative Vote cannot make it void when most have consented to it, and if His Majesty desire to learn from the wisest, even God himself, he shall soon be instructed, that the Almightie granted no such negative Vote to any King in Israel, or any other judge in any Consultation or Counsell, but the Votes alwayes went with the most, even from the Counsell of 3 Iudges to seventy one or seventy three.

The Notation of a Counsell is witty, Consilium dictum a communi intentione, eo quod in unum omnes dirigant mentis ••btuitum: concilia enim occulorum sunt, &c. Isiod. Mer. in suam canon. collect. A C. uncell is derived of Cilia (whence also supercilium) which imports the common or joynt intention, inclination, or bending of the eyes, both of body and minde, to the investigation of the truth in that matter which is proposed in any Assembly. His Majesty would have the castigation, or rather. the casting out of all votes that displease him: and if his power be so great, I wonder he does not discharge them by a diss••lution, or take their con∣sultation, and make his own determination. But the continuation is necessary, and their con∣vocation not to sit and tell the cl••ck as Divines do, of whom we hear nothing in a time where∣in

they might be of great use for th••s great matter of divorce between the King and the Coun∣cell, and labour reconciliation, but above all beware of any provocation. I shall adde a little further, That the Parliament does not wholly proceed without his Majesties consent, Omnia nostra faci••us, quibus nostram ••mpartimur authoritatem; we make that our own Act, and our own Law, to the which we have communicated our own power and authority: Implicitely the Parliament proceeds with the Kings consent, and what they do, he does, Cod. l. 1. de ve∣ter. jure enuc. Iustinian, sancimus v••cem legam obtinere sanctas regulas: we ratifie the holy rules of the Church to before Laws. The Church made them, and the Emperour confi••med them, Novel. 131. cap. 1. and to might his Majesty, if ill counsell did not perswade him, corroporate the Ordinances of Parliament. I would beg another consideration of his Maje∣sty to think on the Parliament and him••elf, what arguments they be. The Parliament is Inte∣grum, the whole entire body of the Kingdom representative: and it is most lively in the Com∣mons, of which the King being no part yet should love it as his own Body.

The Lords are a part too of the Parliament; and I would not be so nice as some are, to say the Representative body is onely of the people, and not at all of the King and Lords, as if the counsell were more vulgar and base than great and honourable, as many take occasion to reproach it; but ill tongues in time may be taught better language: I shall think of the Par∣liament in the parts, and they make but one whole body. Now we have a Rule, That Inte∣grum in majus membris, totum partibus. Hereupon is that rule of the King and his Kingdom, That the King is major singulis, minor universis, and therefore the supremacy of the King, is not above the supremacy of the Parliament: What then have we two supremacies, and one above another? I answer, we have no supreme King but one, neither have we any supreme Councell but one; and as his Majesty hath no subject above him, so let him suffer no Coun∣cell to be above this, or take counsell from any other. Secondly, let him think himself to be lesse than his whole Councell, and that his subjection unto it, is not to be the subject of his subjects, but a servant with them for our good: It is no ill still that God gives him to be his Minister for good. Thirdly, the falling away of the parts of the Parliament, as long as the whole is not dissolved, still it retains the name and nature of the whole, and therefore the per∣sons removed have left their power in the whole, and we are obliged to maintain that, though the desertors of it perish; I except none but your Majesty, and that not in flattery, but good reason, as I shall shew before I leave my Discourse of the present Affaires. Con∣sider the parts one with another, as the King with the Lords and Commons, and them as Subjects, and I must say Rex est Major singulis subditis: but put them into a Body that may truly be called a Parliament, though many parts depart, yet as long as the Body is un∣dissolved we must hold it for our greatest Counsell, follow the directions of it; which to kill their King they have to, not ever will consent unto but to kill them that would destroy all, and have begun to do it: I hope he that loves his King, his Parliament, himself, will not de∣lay to be valiant to the death.