THE ART OF LAW-GIVING: In III BOOKS.

THE FIRST, Shewing the Foundations and Superstructures of all the kinds of Government.

THE SECOND, Shewing the Frames of the Commonwealths of Israel and of the Jewes.

THE THIRD, Shewing a Model fitted unto the present State, or Balance of this Nation.

To which is added an Appendix CONCERNING An House of PEERS.

By J. HARRINGTON.

Psal. 115.16. The heaven, even the heavens are the Lords; but the earth hath he given unto the sons of men.

LONDON, Printed by J. C. for Henry Fletcher, at the three Gilt Cups in Pauls Churchyard, near the West-end. 1659.

Reader,

IT was intended that there should have been an Epistle Dedicatory of this Book: but while reason and honesty must be—, it is no time for such a Client to expect a Patron. It sheweth you what Commonwealths-Men say is that which could be done; expect greater things when others do what they cannot say. It may be thought, if you be a friend, cold comfort to tell you, that you shall have what you wish, when you can have nothing else; yet is this all, and e­nough. Security enough to you; and reason enough for me (how unseasonable soever it may be thought) to let go this Piece: in which I intreat you to correct the errours, as is shewn at the end, or at least to take notice of them there before you begin. In [Page] the mean time, whereas writings of this kind are not looked upon with a single eye, as men should look in reasoning, but the Au­thors of them are looked upon with a single eye as men look in shooting; I am no enemy of Monarchists: if Common­wealths-Men were no wiser then I, they should never be striven withall, but freely have the whole honour of ruining them­selves; in this state of affairs, the certain end. At least, so am I confirmed in this point, that I exhort all Com­monwealths-Men to seek peace and insue it, as the readiest way unto their own good; and you Reader to bear witness, that I am no incendiary nor mal-con­tent, but have spoken with Reli­gion and Reason; which if this age fail me, shall be testifi'd by another. And so if I perish, I perish.

The Order of the Work.

The First Book.

  • THe Preface, considering the Principles, or Nature of Fa­mily-Governments.
  • CHAP. I. Considering the Prin­ciples, or Balance of National Governments, with the different kinds of the same.
  • CHAP. II. Shewing the varia­tion of the English balance.
  • CHAP. III. Of fixation of the Balance, or of Agrarian Laws.
  • CHAP. IV. Shewing the Super­structures of Goververnments.
  • [Page]The Conclusion, observing that the Principles of Humane Prudence being good without proof out of Scripture, are nevertheless such as are provable out of Scripture.

The Second Book.

  • THe Preface, Shewing that there were Commonwealths before that of Israel.
  • CHAP. I. Shewing that Israel was a Commonwealth.
  • CHAP. II. Shewing what Com­monwealth Israel was.
  • CHAP. III. Shewing the Anar­chy or state of the Israelites under their Judges.
  • CHAP. IV. Shewing the state of the Israelites under their Kings to the captivity.
  • CHAP. V. Shewing the state of the Jews in captivity, and after their return from captivity; or the frame of the Jewish Common­wealth: [Page] and in that, the original of Ordination.
  • CHAP. VI. Shewing how Ordi­nation was brought into the Chri­stian Church, and the diverse waies of the same at divers times in use with the Apostles.
  • The Conclusion, Shewing that not God, nor Christ, nor the Apostles ever instituted any government Ecclesiastical or Civil, upon other principles then those onely of Hu­mane Prudence.

The Third Book.

  • THe Preface, Containing a Mo­del of popular Government proposed notionally.
  • CHAP. I. Containing the civil part of the model proposed practi­cably.
  • CHAP. II. Containing the re­ligious part of the Model proposed practicably.
  • [Page]CHAP. III. Containing the Mi­litary part of the Model propo­sed practicably.
  • CHAP. IV. Containing the pro­vincial part of the Model proposed practicably.
  • The Conclusion, Shewing how the Model may be proved or exami­ned; and giving a brief Answer to Mr. Wren's last book, inti­tled Monarchy asserted, &c.
THE FIRST BOOK: SHEW …

THE FIRST BOOK: SHEWING THE FOUNDATIONS AND SUPERSTRUCTURES Of all the Kinds of GOVERNMENT.

PSAL. 11.3.

If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righ­teous do? Or, when foundations are destroyed, what have the righteous done?

LONDON, Printed by J. C. for Henry Fletcher, at the three Gilt Cups in Pauls Churchyard, near the West-end. 1658.

The Order of the First Book.

  • THe Preface, Considering the principles or nature of Fa­mily-Governments.
  • Chap. I. Considering the Princi­ples or Balance of National-Go­vernments, with the different kinds of the same.
  • Chap. II. Shewing the variation of the English-balance.
  • Chap. III. Of fixation of the Ba­lance, or of Agrarian Laws.
  • Chap. IV. Shewing the Super­structures of Governments.
  • [Page]The Conclusion, Observing that the Principles of Humane Pru­dence being good without proof out of Scripture, are neverthe­lesse such as are provable out of Scripture.

THE PREFACE:

Considering the Principles or Nature of Family-Government.

DIvines, and like studious Asser­tors of Monarchy, have ta­ken their rise, not so fairly while they have concealed one part, from the right of Paternity, or from the Government of Families; which may be of two kinds, whereof they have taken notice but of one. For Family-Government may be as ne­cessary popular in some cases, as Mo­narchical in others.

To shew the nature of the Monar­chical Family:Monarchi­cal Family. Put the case a man have one thousand pounds a year, or so; he marrieth a Wife, hath Chil­dren, [Page 2] hath Servants depending upon him at his good will, in the distributi­on of his Estate for their livelyhood. Suppose then that this Estate come to be spent or lost, where is the Monar­chy of this Family? But if the Ma­ster were no otherwise Monarchical then by vertue of his Estate, then the foundation or balance of his Empire was in the thousand pounds a year.

That from these principles there may also be a popular Family,Popular Family. is appa­rent: for suppose six or ten having each three hundred pounds a year, or so, shall agree to dwell together as one Family; can any one of these pre­tend to be Lord and Master of the same, or to dispose of the Estates of all the rest? Or do they not agree together upon such orders, unto which they consent equally to submit? But if so, then certainly must the Govern­ment of this Family, be a Govern­ment of Laws or Orders, and not a Government of a Man, or of some three or four of these men.Govern­ment of Laws, and Govern­ment of m [...]n.

Not but that the one man in the Mo­narchical Family giving Laws, and the many in the popular Family doing no more, it may in this sense be indiffe­rently [Page 3] said, That all Laws are made by men: But that where the Law is made by one man, there it may be unmade by one man; so that the man is not go­verned by the Law, but the Law by the man; which amounteth unto the Go­vernment of the man, and not of the Law: whereas the Law being not to be made but by the many, no man is go­verned by another man, but by that onely which is the common interest; by which means this amounteth unto a Government of Laws, and not of men.

That the Politicks may not be thought an unnecessary or difficult Art,The facility that is in true Poli­ticks. if these principles be less then ob­vious and undenyable, even unto any woman that knows what belongs to house-keeping, I confess that I have no more to say. But in case what hath been said, be unto all sorts and all ca­pacities undenyable, it is most humbly submitted unto Princes and Parlia­ments, whether, without violence or moving of propriety, they can make a popular Family of the Monarchical, or a Monarchical Family of the popu­lar; or whether that be practicable or possible in a Nation upon like Ba­lance [Page 4] or foundation in propriety, which is not in a Family; a Family being but a smaller society or Nation, and a Nation but a greater society or fami­ly.

The diffe­rence be­tween a So­veraign Lord, and a Magi­strate, though su­preme.That which is usually answered at this point, is, That the six or ten thus agreeing to make one family, must have some steward; and to make such a steward in a Nation, is to make a king. But this is to resolve that the steward of a Family is not answerable unto the Masters of it, or to them upon whose Estates, and not upon his own, he defrays the whole charge; for otherwise this stewardship cannot amount unto Dominion, but must come onely unto the true nature of Magistracy, and indeed of annual Ma­gistracy in a Commonwealth; for­asmuch as such accounts in the years end at the farthest use to be cast up, and the Steward, body and estate, to be answerable for the same unto the pro­prietors or Masters; who also have the undoubted right of constituting such other steward or stewards as to them shall seem good, or of prolong­ing the Office of the same.

Now where a Nation is cast by the unseen ways of Providence,Where the art of Law-giving is necessary. into disor­der of Government, the duty of such especially as are elected by the peo­ple, is not so much to regard what hath been, as to provide for the su­preme Law, or for the safety of the people, which consisteth in the true Art of Law-giving.

The Art of Law-giving is of two kinds;The art of Law-gi­ving is of two kinds. the one (as I may say) un­true, the other true. The untrue consisteth in the reduction of the Ba­lance unto Arbitrary Superstructures; which requireth violence, as being contrary unto Nature. The other, in the erecting necessary Superstructures, that is, such as are conformable unto the Balance or Foundation; which being purely natural, requireth that all interposition of force be removed.

CHAP. I.

Considering the Principles or Balance of national Governments; with the different kinds of the same.

Ps. 115.16. The Origi­nal of pro­priety. THe heaven (saith David) even the heavens, are the Lords: but the earth hath he given un­to the children of men: Yet saith God unto the Father of these Children,Gen. 3.19. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread. Dii laborantibus sua munera vendunt. The Donation of the earth by God unto man, cometh unto a kind of selling it for industry, a treasure which seemeth to purchase of God: from the different kinds and successes of this industry, whether in arms, or in other exercise of the mind or body, deriveth the natural equity of domi­nion or propriety; and from the legal establishment or distribution of this propriety, (be it more or less ap­proaching towards the natural equity [Page 7] of the same) deriveth all Govern­ment.

The distribution of propriety,The balance of Empire in propriety. so far forth as it regardeth the nature or procreation of Government, lieth in the over-balance of the same: af­ter the manner, that a man who hath two thousand pounds a year, may have a retinue, and so a strength, that is three times greater then his who hath but five hundred pounds a year. Not to speak at this time of Money, which in small Territories may be of like effect; but to insist upon the main, which is Propriety in Land, the over-balance of this, as it was at first constituted, or cometh insensibly to be changed in a Nation, may be espe­cially of three kinds; that is, in One, in the Few, or in the Many.

The over-balance of Land three to one or thereabouts,The genera­tion of ab­solute Mo­narchy. Gen. 47.19. in one man against the whole people, createth absolute Monarchy; as when Joseph had pur­chased all the lands of the Egyptians for Pharaoh. The constitution of a people in which and like cases, is ca­pable of intire servitude. Buy us and our land for bread, and we and our land will be servants unto Pharaoh.

The genera­tion of re­gulated Monarchy.The over-balance of Land unto the like proportion, in the Few a­gainst the whole people, createth A­ristocracy, or regulated Monarchy, as of late in England: and hereupon saith Samuel unto the people of Is­rael when they would have a King, He will take your fields, 1 Sam. 8. even the best of them, Nec totam libertatem nec totam servitutem pati pos­sunt. Tacit. The genera­tion of Po­pular Go­vernment. and give them unto his servants. The constitution of a people in this and in like cases, is neither capable of intire liberty, nor of intire ser­vitude.

The over-balance of Land unto the like proportion in the people, or where neither one nor the few over-balance the whole people, createth Popular Government; as in the divi­sion of the Land of Canaan unto the whole people of Israel by lot. The constitution of a people in which and like cases, is capable of intire free­dom: Nay, not capable of any other settlement; it being certain, that if a Monarch or single Person, in such a State, through the taint or improvi­dence of Counsels, should carry it; yet through the irresistable force of na­ture, or the reason alledged by Moses, I am not able to bear all this people a­lone, Numb. 11.14. [Page 9] because it is too heavy for me, he could not carry it; but out of the deep waters would cry unto them, whose feet he had stucken in the mire.

Where-ever the balance of a Go­vernment be,Of the Mi­litia, and of the Nega­tive voice. there naturally is the Militia of the same; and against him or them where the Militia is natural­ly, there can be no negative vote.

If a Prince hold the over-balance, as in Turky, in him is the Militia, as the Janizaries and Timariots. If a Nobility hold the over-balance, the Militia is in them, as among us was seen in the Barons Wars, and those of York and Lancaster; and in France is seen, when any considerable part of that Nobility flying out, they are not to be reduced, but by the major part of their order remaining unto the King.

If a People have the over-balance, as in Israel, the Militia is in them,Judg. 20. as in the four hundred thousand first de­creeing, and then waging War against Benjamin; where it may be enquired what power there was on earth, ha­ving a negative voice unto this As­sembly. This, where there is settle­ment, [Page 10] or where a Government is na­tural. Where there is no settlement, or where the Government is unna­tural, it ariseth from one of two causes; either imperfection in the balance, or such corruption in the Law-Givers, whereby a Government is instituted contrary unto the ba­lance.

Imperfect Govern­ment.Imperfections of the balance, that is, where it is not good or down-weight, cause imperfect Governments: as those of the Roman and of the Flo­rentine people, and those of the He­brew Kings and Roman Emperours, being each exceeding bloudy, or at the least stormy.

Tyranny, O­ligarchy, Anarchy.Government against the balance, in One, is Tyranny, as that of the Athe­nian Pisistratus; in the Few, is Oligar­chy, as that of the Roman Decemvirs; in the Many, is Anarchy, as that un­der the Neapolitan Mazinello.

The Divine right of Go­vernment.Where through causes unforeseen by Humane Providence, the balance cometh to be intirely changed, it is the more immediately to be attributed unto Divine Providence: and where­as God cannot will the necessary cause, but he must also will the neces­sary [Page 11] effect or consequence; what Go­vernment soever is in the necessary direction of the balance, the same is of Divine right: wherefore though of the Israelites God saith,Hos. 8.4. They have set up kings, and not by me; they have made princes, and I knew it not: Yet to the small Countries adjoyning un­to the Assyrian Empire, he saith, Now have I given all these lands into the hand of the king of Babylon my ser­vant—Serve the king of Babylon, Jer. 27.6.17. and live.

CHAP. II.

Shewing the variation of the English Balance.

THe Lands in the hold of the Nobility and Clergy of Eng­land, till Hen. 7. cannot be esteemed to have over-balanced those in the hold of the people less then four to one. Whereas in our daies, the Clergy being destroyed, the [Page 12] Lands in hold of the people over-ba­lance those in the hold of the Nobili­ty, at the least nine in ten. In shewing how this change came about, some would have it that I assume unto my self more then my share; albeit they find not me delivering that which must rely upon authority, and not vouching my authours. But Henry the seventh being conscious of infirmity in his ti­tle, yet finding with what strength and vigour he was brought in by the Nobility, conceived jealousies of like power in case of decay or change of affections. (Nondum orbis adorave­rat Romam.) The Lords yet led coun­trey-lives, their houses were open to retainers, men experienced in Mi­litary affairs, and capable of leading; their hospitality was the delight of their Tenants, by their tenures or dependence obliged to follow their Lords in arms. So that this being the Militia of the Nation, a few Noble­men discontented could at any time levy a great Army; the effect where­of, both in the Barons Wars, and those of York and Lancaster, had been well known unto diverse Kings. This state of affairs was that at which [Page 13] Henry the seventh made advantage of troubled times, and frequent un­ruliness of retainers to take his aym, while under pretence of curbing riots, he obtained the passing of such Laws as cut off retainers, in which the No­bility lost their Officers. Then whereas the dependence of the Peo­ple upon their Lords was of a strict tie or nature, he found means to loosen this also, by Laws which he obtained upon as fair a pretence, even that of population:Verulam. H. 7. thus Farmes were so brought unto a standard, that the houses being kept up, each of them did of necessity inforce a dweller; and the proportion of Land laid unto each house, did of necessity inforce that dweller not to be a beggar or cottager, but a man able to keep servants, and set the plough on going. By which means a great part of the Lands of this Nation came in effect to be amortized unto the hold of the Yeo­manry or middle people, whereof con­sisted the main body of the Militia, hereby incredibly advanced, & which henceforth like cleaner underwood less choaked by their staddles, began to grow exceedingly. But the Nobili­ty, who by the former Laws had lost [Page 14] their Offices, by this lost their Soul­diery. Yet remained unto them their estates, till the same Prince in­troducing the Statutes for Alienati­ons, these also became loose; and the Lords less taken (for the reasons shewn) with their Countrey-lives, where their trains were clipped, by degrees became Courtiers, where greater pompe and expence by the Statutes of Alienations began to plume them of their Estates. The Court was yet at Bridewell, nor rea­ched London any farther then Tem­ple-bar. The latter growth of this City, and in that, the declining of the Balance unto popularity, deri­veth from the decay of the Nobility, and of the Clergy. In the Reign of the succeeding King were Abbies (then which nothing more dwarfs a people) demolished. I did not, I do not attribute the effects of these things thus far unto my own parti­cular observation, but alwaies did and do attribute a sense thereof un­to the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, and the wisdom of her Council: There is yet living testimony, that the ruine of the English Monarchy, through the [Page 15] causes mentioned, was frequently at­tributed unto Henry the seventh by Sir Henry Wotton; which tradition is not unlike to have descended upon him from the Queens Council: But there is difference between having a sense of a thing, and making a right use of that sense. Let a man read Plutarch in the lives of Agis, and of the Gracchi, there can be no plainer demonstration of the Lacedemonian or Roman Balance; yet read his dis­course of Government in his Morals, and he hath forgotten it; he maketh no use, no mention at all of any such thing. Who could have been plai­ner upon this point then Sir Walter Raleigh, where to prove that the Kings of Egypt were not elective but hereditary, he alledgeth that if the Kings of Egypt had been elective, The children of Pharaoh must have been more mighty then the King, Hist. of the World, part 1. p. 200. as Land­lords of all Egypt, and the King himself their tenant? Yet when he cometh to speak of Government, he hath no re­gard unto, no remembrance of any such principle. In Mr. Seldens Titles of Honour, he hath demonstrated the English Balance of the Peerage, [Page 16] without making any application of it, or indeed perceiving it, there, or in times when the defect of the same came to give so full a sense of it. The like might be made apparent in Ari­stotle, in Machiavil, in my Lord Verulam, in all, in any Politician; there is not one of them in whom may not be found as right a sense of this principle as in this present Nar­rative, or in whom may be found a righter use of it then was made by any of the parties thus far concerned in this story, or by Queen Elizabeth and her Council. If a Prince (saith a great Authour) to reform a Govern­ment were obliged to depose himself, M. D. L. 1. B. 10. he might in neglecting of it, be capable of some excuse; but reformation of Go­vernment being that with which a Prin­cipality may stand, he deserveth no ex­cuse at all. It is indeed not observed by this Authour, that where through declination of the Balance unto po­pularity, the State requireth refor­mation in the Superstructures, there the Prince cannot rightly reform, un­less from Soveraign power he descend unto a Principality in a Common­wealth; nevertheless upon like oc­casions [Page 17] this faileth not to be found so in Nature and Experience. The growth of the people of England since the ruines mentioned of the Nobility and the Clergy, came in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth to more then stood with the interest, or indeed the nature or possibility of well-founded or durable Monarchy; as was pru­dently perceived, but withall tempo­rized, by her Council, who (if the truth of her Government be rightly weighed) seem rather to have put her upon the exercise of Principality in a Commonwealth, then of Sove­raign power in a Monarchy. Cer­tain it is, that she courted not her No­bility, nor gave her mind, as Mo­narchs seated upon the like order, to Balance her great men, or reflect up­on their power now inconsiderable; but ruled wholly (with an art she had unto high perfection) by humoring and blessing her people. For this but shadow of a Commonwealth, is she yet famous, and shall ever be; though had she introduced the full perfection of the orders requisite unto Popular Government; First, it had established such Principality unto her successors, [Page 18] as they might have held. Secondly, this Principality (the Common­wealth (as Rome of Romulus) being borne of such a Parent) might have re­tained the Royal Dignity and Re­venue to the full,The great Council of Venice hath the So­veraign power, and the Duke the Sove­raign Dig­nity. improved and discharged of all envy. Thirdly, it had saved all the bloud and confusion, which through this neglect in her, and her successours, hath ensued. Fourthly, it had bequeathed unto the people a light not so naturally by them to be discovered, which is pity; For even as the Many through the dif­ference of opinions that must needs a­bound among them, M. D. L. 1. C. 9. are not apt to in­troduce a Government, as not under­standing the good of it: so the Many having by trial or experience once at­tained unto this understanding, agree not to quit such a Government. And Lastly, it had estated this Nation in that full facility, which so far as con­cerneth meer prudence, is in the ca­pacity of humane nature. To this Queen succeeded King James, who likewise regardless of this point (in which nevertheless he was so seen, as not seldom to prophecie sad things unto his successours) neither his new [Page 19] Peerage (which in abundance he crea­ted) nor the old, availed him against that dread, wherein more freely then prudently he discovered himself to stand of Parliaments, as now meer Po­pular Councils, & running unto popu­larity of Government, like a boul down the hill; not so much (I may say) of ma­lice perpensed, as of natural instinct; whereof the Petition of Right, well heeded, is sufficient testimony. All perswasion of Court-Eloquence, all patience for such as but looked that way, was now lost. There remained no­thing unto the destruction of a Mo­narchy retaining but the name, more then a Prince who by striving should make the people to feel those advan­tages which they could not see. And this happened in the next King, who too secure in that undoubted right whereby he was advanced unto a Throne which had no foundation, da­red to put this unto unseasonable try­al; on whom therefore fell the Tower in Silo. Nor may we think that they upon whom this Tower fell, were sinners above all men; but that we, unless we repent, and look better unto foundations, must likewise perish. We [Page 20] have had latter Princes, latter Parli­aments; in what have they excell'd, or where are they? The balance not heeded, no effectual work can be made as to settlement; and heeded (as it now stands in England) requireth un­to settlement no less then the Super­structures natural unto Popular Go­vernment: and the Superstructures natural unto Popular Government, require no less then the highest skill or art that is in Political Architecture. The sum of which particulars amount­eth unto this, That the safety of the people of England is now plainly cast upon skill or sufficiency in Political Architecture: it is not enough, that there are honest men addicted unto all the good ends of a Common­wealth, unless there be skill also in the fo [...]mation of those proper means whereby such ends may be attained unto. Which is as sad, as a true ac­count; this being in all experience, and in the judgement of all Politici­ans, that whereof the Many are in­capable. And though the meanest Citizen, not informing the Com­monwealth of what he knoweth, or conceiveth to concern her safety, [Page 21] commit an hainous crime against God and his Country; such is the temper of later times, that a man having offer'd any ayd at this loss, hath scaped well if he be scorned and not ruined.

But to proceed: if the balance, or state of propriety in a Nation, be the effici­ent cause of Government, and the Balance being not fixed, the Govern­ment (as by the present Narrative is evinced) must remain inconstant or floting, then the process in formation of a Government, must be first by fixation of the Balance, and next by erecting such Superstructures as to the nature thereof are necessary.

CHAP. III.

Of Fixation of the Balance, or of A­grarian Laws.

FIxation of the Balance of proprie­ty, is not to be provided for but by Laws; and the Laws whereby such provision is made, are commonly called [Page 22] Agrarian Laws. Now as Govern­ments through the diverse balance of propriety are of diverse or contrarie natures, that is, Monarchical or Po­pular; so are such Laws. Monar­chy requires of the standard of pro­priety, that it be vast or great; and of Agriarian Laws, that they bar recess or diminution, at least in so much as is thereby entailed upon the honour. But Popular Government requires that her standard be moderate, and that her Agrarian bar accumulation.It is at pre­sent in more hands, but without fixation may come into fewer. In a Territory not exceeding England in revenue, if the balance be in more hands then three hundred, it is upon swaying from Monarchy; and if it be in fewer then five thousand hands, it is swaying from a Commonwealth: which as to this point may suffice at present.

CHAP. IV.

Shewing the Superstructures of Go­vernments.

THat the Policy or Superstructures of all absolute Monarchs,The Super­structures of absolute Monarchy. more particularly of the Eastern Empires, are not only contained, but meliorated in the Turkish Government, requi­reth no farther proof then to compare them: but because such a work would not lie in a small compass, it shall suf­fice for this time to say, that such Su­perstructures of Government as are natural unto an absolute Prince, or sole Landlord of a large Territory, re­quire, for the first story, that what demeasnes he shall think fit to reserve being set apart, the rest be divided in­to horse-quarters, or Military Farmes, for life or at will, and not otherwise. And that every Tenant for every hundred pounds a year so holden,Timariots. be by condition of his tenure, obliged to [Page 24] attend his Soveraign Lord in person, in arms, and at his proper cost and charges, with one horse, so often, and so long as he shall be commanded up­on service. These among the Turkes are called Timariots.

The second Story of this building requireth,Beglerbegs that these Horse-quarters or Military Farmes, be divided by convenient Precincts or Proportions into distinct Provinces; and that each Province have one Governour or Commander in chief of the same, at the will and pleasure of his grand Sig­nior, or for three years and no longer. Such among the Turks (unless by ad­ditional honours they be called Ba­shaws or Viziers) are the Begler­begs.

Janizaries and Spa­hies.For the third Story, there must of necessity be a Mercenary Army con­sisting both of horse and foot, for the Guard of the Princes person, and for the Guard of his Empire, by keep­ing the Governours of Provinces so divided, that they be not suffered to lay their arms or heads together, or to hold correspondence or intelli­gence each with other. Which Mer­cenary Army ought not to be consti­tuted [Page 25] of such as have already contra­cted some other interest, but to con­sist of men so educated from their very childhood, as not to know that they have any other Parent, or native Country, then the Prince and his Em­pire. Such among the Turks are the foot called Janizaries, and the horse called Spahies.

The Prince accommodated with a Privy Council,The Divan and the Grand Sig­nior. consisting of such as have been Governours of Provinces, is the Top-stone. This Council a­mong the Turks is called the Divan, and this Prince the Grand Signior.

The Superstructures proper unto regulated Monarchy,The Super­structures of Regula­ted Monar­chy. or unto the Go­vernment of a Prince some three or four hundred of whose Nobility, or of whose Nobility and Clergy hold three parts in four of the Territory, must either be by his personal influ­ence upon the balance, or by vertue of orders.

If a Prince by easing his Nobility of Taxes, and feeding them with such as are extorted from the people, can so accommodate their ambition and avarice with great Offices and Com­mands, that a party flying out, he can [Page 26] over-balance and reduce them by a greater part of their own order, he may have greater power and less se­curity, as at present in France.

The safer way of this Government is by orders: and the orders proper hereunto, consist especially of an He­reditary Senate of the Nobility, ad­mitting also of the Clergy, and of a Representative of the People made up of their menial servants, or such as by tenure and for livelihood have immediate dependence upon them, as formerly in England.

An Aristocracy, or State of Nobili­ty,No such thing as pure Aristo­cracy, or pure Demo­cracy. to exclude the people, must Go­vern by a King; or to exclude a King, must Govern by the People. Nor is there without a Senate or mixture of Aristocracy, any Popular Govern­ment. Whence though for discourse sake Politicians speak of pure Aristo­cracy, and pure Democracy, there is no such thing as either in Nature, Art, or Example.

Where the people are not over-balanced by one man or by the Few,The Super­structures of Popular Govern­ment. they are not capable of any other Su­perstructures of Government, or of any other just and quiet settlement [Page 27] whatsoever, then of such only as con­sisteth of a Senate as their Counsel­lours, of themselves or their Repre­sentatives as Soveraign Lords, and of a Magistracy answerable unto the people as distributers and executio­ners of the Laws made by the people: and thus much is of absolute necessity unto any or every Government, that is or can be properly called a Com­monwealth, whether it be well or ill ordered.

But the necessary definition of a Commonwealth any thing well or­der'd, is,Definition of a well ordered Common­wealth. That it is a Government consisting of the Senate proposing, the People resolving, and the Magi­stracy executing.

Magistracy is a stile proper unto the executive part;Distinction of Magi­stracy. yet because in discourse of this kind it is hardly a­voidable, but such as are of the Pro­posing or Resolving Assemblies, will be sometime [...]prized under this name or stile, it shall be enough for excuse to say, that Magistracy may be esteemed of two kinds; the one pro­per or Executive, the other improper or Legislative.

A Senate may consist of an Heredi­tarySenat [...]s an [...] [...]. [Page 28] order, elective for life by it self, or by some Magistrate or Magistrates of the same; as the Senate of Rome consisted of the Patrician or­der thereinto eligible, first by the Consuls, and then by the Censors. A Senate may consist of Senators e­lected by the People for life, as that of Lacedemon. It may consist of Se­nators eligible by the people for terms without vacation or interval, as the Senate of Venice; or with interval, as the Senate of Athens, which also for another difference was elected by lot.

A Popular Assembly may consist of the whole people,Popular Assemblies, and their kinds. as the great Coun­cil of Venice (for the Venetians, though called in respect of their Sub­jects, Nobility, are all that free peo­ple, which is comprized in that Com­monwealth) or of a Representive, as in Israel. Again, a Representative of the people may be for life, as in the particular Cities or Soveraignties of Holland, improperly called Senates; or it may be upon Rotation, that is to say, by changes or courses, as that of Israel, and the present Representa­tive in England; it may also be by lot, as the Roman Tribes called the [Page 29] Prerogative and the Jure vocatae.

To speak of Magistrates in a Com­monwealth, and all their kinds,Supream Magi­strates, and their kinds. were to begin an endless discourse: the present I shall therefore confine to such only as may be called Supream Magistrates. The Supream Magistra­cy of a Commonwealth may be in one or more; and it may be for life, or for terms and vacations. In one e­lective by the people for life; as in the Duke of Venice, whose function is Civil and not Military. In two Hereditarily; as in the two Kings of Lacedemon, whose function was ra­ther Military then Civil. In nine annually elective by the people; as in the nine Princes or Archontes of Athens. In two annually elected by the people; as the Roman Consuls, whose power was both Military and Civil. In fine, it may be whether in one or more, for life, or for terms and vacations, as shall best suit with the occasion.

Some Commonwealths consist of distinct Soveraignties,Other dif­ferences in Common­wealths. as Switz and Holland; others are collected into one and the same Soveraignty, as most of the rest. Again, some Common­wealths [Page 30] have been upon Rotation or courses in the Representative only, as Israel. Others in the Magistracy only, as Rome: some in the Senate and in the Magistracy, as Athens and Venice. Others in some part of the Magi­stracy, and in others not; as as Lacedemon in the Ephori, and not in the Kings; and Venice not in the Duke not in the Procuratori, but in all the rest. Holland, except in the e­lection of States Provincial (which is emergent) admitteth not of any rota­tion or courses. There may be a Commonwealth admitting of Rotati­on throughout, as in the Senate, in the Representative, and in the Magistra­cy; as that proposed in Oceana.

Rotation or courses.Rotation, if it be perfect, is equal election by, and succession of the whole people unto Magistracy by terms and vacations.

Equal election may be by lot, as that of the Senate of Athens; Popular Election. by suf­frage, as that of Lacedemon; or by Balot, as that of Venice; which of all other is the most equal.

The Balott.The Balot as it is used in Venice, consisteth of a lot; whence deriveth the right of proposing, and of an [Page 31] unseen way of suffrage or of resol­ving.

From the wonderfull variety of parts and difference of mixture,The diffe­rent Genius of Common­wealths. hi­therto scarce touched, result those admirable differences that are in the constitution and Genius of Popular Governments; some being for de­fence, some for encrease; some more equal, others unequal; some turbulent and seditious, others like soft streams in perpetual tranquillity.

That which causeth innate sedition in a Commonwealth, is inequality;The cause of sedition in a Common­wealth. as in Rome, where the Senate opprest the people. But if a Commonwealth be perfectly equal, she is void of sedition, and hath attained unto perfection, as being void of all internal causes of dissolution.

An equal Commonwealth is a Go­vernment founded upon a balance which is perfectly Popular,Definition of as equal Common­wealth. and well fixed by a suitable Agrarian; and which from the balance through the free suffrage of the people given by the Balot, amounteth in the Super­structures unto a Senate debating and proposing, a Representative of the people resolving, and a Magistracy ex­ecuting [Page 32] each of these three orders▪ being upon courses or Rotation; that is, elected for certain terms, enjoyning like intervals.

The diffe­rence be­tween Laws and Orders.Such constitutions in a Govern­ment as regard the frame or Model of it, are called Orders; and such things as are enacted by the Legislative or­ders, are called Laws.

To undertake the binding of a Prince from invading liberty, and yet not to introduce the whole orders necessary unto Popular Government, is to undertake a flat contradiction, or plain impossibility.

Hazard through the want of principles.A People or Assembly not discer­ning of true principles, give least cre­dit unto the best orders, and so come to cast themselves upon men: for where orders are not credited, there men must be trusted; and where men are trusted, they find themselves so well, that they are either for bring­ing in a Commonwealth by degrees, or not at all. The desire of bringing in a Commonwealth by degrees, ari­seth from want of consideration, that the whole of a Commonwealth, as to charge or trouble is less then the half. He who hath a journey to go, doth not [Page 33] choose to have but half a bridle, or but one boot or stirrup, though these be fewer things, and come but unto half the charge; because this would but necessitate unto more things, and more chargeable or dangerous things.

Optimus ille animi vindex, laedentia pectus
Vincula qui rupit, dedoluitque semel.

The Conclusion:

Observing that the principles of Hu­mane Prudence being good with­out proof out of Scripture, are ne­vertheless such as are provable out of Scripture.

WHo imagineth that the Romans Governed by proof out of Scripture? Yet saith Peter, Submit your selves unto (humane prudence,1 Pet. 2.13. or) every or­dinance of man; which relateth more particularly unto the Government of the Romans. The most frequent comparison of a Commonwealth, is to a Ship; but who imagineth that a ship ought not to be built accor­ding to the Art of the Ship-Wright, or Governed according unto the Compasse, unlesse these be pro­ved out of Scripture? Neverthe­less, as hitherto I have proved the principles of Humane Prudence in [Page 35] the parts out of holy Scripture; so I undertake to vindicate them in the whole, as to the intire frame of Po­pular Government, in the insuing Book, by the same Authority, and undeniable evidence.

THE SECOND BOOK, Con …

THE SECOND BOOK, Containing the COMMONWEALTHS OF THE HEBREWS: As namely, ELOHIM, OR THE Commonwealth of Israel; AND CABALA, OR THE Commonwealth of the Jewes.

I have said ye are Gods—but ye shall dye like men, and fall like one of the Princes. Psal. 82.

LONDON, Printed by J. C. for Henry Fletcher, at the three Gilt Cups in Pauls Churchyard, near the West-end. 1659.

The Order of the Second Book.

  • THe Preface, Shewing that there were Commonwealths be­fore that of Israel.
  • Chap. I. Shewing that Israel was a Commonwealth.
  • Chap. II. Shewing what Common­wealth Israel was.
  • Chap. III. Shewing the Anarchy or state of the Israelites under their Judges.
  • Chap. IV. Shewing the state of the Israelites under their Kings to the captivity.
  • Chap. V. Shewing the state of the Jews in captivity, & after their re­turn from captivity; or the frame of the Jewish Commonwealth: and in that, the originall of Ordination.
  • [Page]Chap. VI. Shewing how Ordinati­on was brought into the Christian church, and the diverse ways of the same at divers times in use with the Apostles.
  • The Conclusion: Shewing that not God, nor Christ, nor the Apostles ever instituted any government Ecclesiastical or Civil upon other principles then those onely of Hu­mane Prudence.

Advertisement to the Reader.

VVHereas the Senate or seventy Elders of Is­rael are most properly called the Sanhedrim or [...], I shall use this word, first because it is the Scripture word throughout those places in the New Testa­ment where it is translated the Council; and secondly, because there being many Councils, this translation of the word causeth confusion. So doth that of the word [...] which though in other commonwealths it signifie the Senate, yet in the Jewish commonwealth is taken for the Presbytery. To give an instance of the necessity I am put upon in this advertisement; Our transla­tours say thus: The high priest came, Acts 5.21. a [...]d they that were with him, & called t [...] cou [...]cil and all the Senate of the [Page] children of Israel: which words are not to be understood. I shall crave leave therefore to render them thus: The high Priest came and called the Sanhedrim, and all the Presbytery of the children of Israel: which sense is exactly conforma­ble unto the originall of the text, and unto the orders of the Jew­ish Commonwealth. For the Sanhedrim and the Presbytery, were in the Jewish Common­wealth the Senate and the Peo­ple.

THE SECOND BOOK, Containing the Commonwealth of Israel.

The Preface;

shewing that there were Commonwealths before that of Israel.

HƲmane prudence, in the first cause, is a creature of God; and in the second, as anci­ent as humane nature: nor is it so much younger in any of those ef­fects or ends why it was ordained of God, that we should think Israel to have been the first commonwealth, or the first popular government that was, or that was planted in Canaan; for of the like in the countries thereabout, there were both before and at the same time. It was [Page 2] in Canaan, that Melchisedec king and priest of Salem, or of Jerusalem, had reigned during the time of Abraham, who pay'd him tithes of all that he had. Now tythes before Israel and the insti­tution of the Levites,Tythes ori­ginally be­longsng to kings. 1 Sam. 8.15.17. The com­monwealth of Salem. belong'd not to any clergy, but unto the Prince or State. Whence Samuel in the description of a king, telleth the people that he will take the tenth of their goods. Thus Abra­ham in paying tythes to Melchisedec, ac­knowledgeth him for his prince. Yet had Abraham the right of the sword, and made war with kings, as those of So­dom, at his own discretion; whence Ca­naan may seem to have been a common­wealth in those dayes, much after the manner of Germany in these.The com­monwealth of the Phi­listins. The five Lords (perhaps five Tribunes) of the Philistins, must needs have been some Aristocracy at least of Princes joyning in one body or commonwealth. So Venice in her first age was under Lords or Tri­bunes. It is little to be doubted, but the Government of Jethro, king and priest of Midian, The com­monwealth of Midian. was of like nature with that of Melchisedec, or of the Lacedemoni­an kings, who were also priests; or that the counsel he gave unto Moses (being for the institution of such judicatories as [Page 3] are not proper in Monarchy) was other then according unto the orders of his own commonwealth. And lest these governments should seem lesse popular, the Embassadours of the Gibeonites coming unto Josua, say thus,The com­monwealth of the Gi­beonites. Joshua 9.11. Our El­ders (or our Senate) and all the inha­bitants of our country (or the popular assembly of the same) spake unto us say­ing—Go meet them, and say unto them, We are your servants: there­fore now make ye a league with us. To make a league with a forrain nation, evinceth soveraign power; and that this league was made by the Senate and the people, evinceth Gibeon to have been a popular government. Such a thing then as Popular government most undeniably there was, before Israel. Now whether Israel were a popular government or no, I shall refer my self to tryall by the ensuing chapter.

CHAP. I.

Shewing that Israel was a Common­wealth.

Sect. 1. The rise of the Israeli­tish go­vernment. Of the Prin­ces of the Tribes, and of the Princes of families.

IT is said of the Israelites that went first into E­gypt, Exod. 1.5. All the souls that came out of the loynes of Jacob were seventy soules: These becoming so many fathers of families, and go­verning their own families by pater­nall right, it followed that at first they so governed the whole people, yet not with any soveraign power, (as may be easily thought) in a country that had a prince of her own, but by way onely of direction and advice. The people being thus accustomed un­to a way, as any of these seventy came to dye, supply'd his place with ano­ther of their election; at least for the probability of this opinion, we find mention of Moses, Exod. 24.9. Nadab, Abihu, and [Page 5] seventy of the elders, before the insti­tution of the Israelitish Senate or San­hedrim.Haec est lex quam Moses proposuit. Deut. 4.44. and where­as betwixt a precept & a command there is large diffe­rence; in pla­ces more then I can stand to number, where the Latine hath it, praecepit Moses; the English hath it, Moses comman­ded. Joseph. ant. l. 4. c. 2. Unto these and unto the peo­ple Moses proposed his Lawes. So I am sure in the Latine it is expresly said, where by our English translation it is thus rendred: This is the law (and by the law here, is meant no lesse then the whole book of Deuteronomy) which Moses set before the children of Israel, whose assemblies were not al­wayes without faction; For Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, with two hun­dred princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown, ban­ded themselves against Moses, and his intended election of his brother Aa­ron unto the hereditary Priesthood, upbraiding him (saith Josephus) that he went about to dispose of this ho­nour without the suffrage of the con­gregation, thereby affecting Tyranny, and fly usurpation of the liberty of the people: which sense also is im­ply'd by their reproaching him in Scri­pture;Num. 16.13. Is it a small thing that thou hast brought us up out of the land that flow­eth with milk and hony, to kill us in the wildernesse? except thou make thy self altogether a prince over us. But where­as [Page 6] the Scripture in all this presumes these incendiaries to have bely'd Mo­ses; That Moses was no king. some will have all they thus layd unto his charge, to be no more, but lesse then truth; in that they will needs have Moses not only to have been a King, but to have been a King exercising arbitrary power, and such arbitrary power as being without any bounds, amounteth fully unto Tyran­ny.

Sect. 2. That Moses proposed his laws to the people and their suffrage.

The word King is not a sufficient definition of the Magistrate so styled: Between a Lacedemonian King and a Persian King, or between either of these and a King of England, there was vast difference. Both the Kings in Lacedemon were but as one Duke in Venice. The Venetians therefore, if it had so pleased them, might as well have called their Duke King. Certain it is, that he is not so much in the Commonwealth, as are a few of his Counsellours; and yet all acts of the Commonwealth run in his name, as if there were no Commonwealth.

Deut. 34.4. In what sense Moses may be cald a king.It is said (according to our transla­tion) Moses commanded us a law, &c. according to the Original, Moses (proposed, or) gave us a law, which [Page 7] is an inheritance unto the congregation of Jacob. The Duke of Venice hath right to propose or give law in the congregation or great councill of Ve­nice; where he who seeth him sitting, would believe he were a King. And if Moses were King in Jesurun (or Israel) it was when the heads of the peo­ple and the Tribes of Israel were ga­thered together. Paul, Acts 11. epitomizing the story of the people of Israel, in his Sermon to the Antiochian Jewes; sheweth how God chose their fa­thers, exalted the people, destroyed (for their sakes) seven nations in the land of Canaan, and divided their land to them by lots: but speaketh no word of any king given unto them, till ex­presly after their Judges. But if Mo­ses were a king, yet that he not pro­posed, but commanded of his power the laws which he gave unto Israel, doth not follow. For David was a King, who neverthelesse did no other­wise make any law then by propositi­on unto the people, and their free suffrage thereupon. David consulted with the captains of thousands, 1 Chron. 13. and hun­dreds, and with every leader, (of which Military discipline of the congregation [Page 8] of Israel, more in due place will be shewn) and David said unto all the congregation, If it seem good unto you, and that it be of the Lord our God, (though he were a king, and a man after Gods own heart, he maketh the people judges what was of God) let us send abroad unto our brethren every where that are left in all the land of Israel, and with them also to the Priests and Levites that are in their cities and suburbs, that they (to the end this thing may be performed with the greatest solemnity) may gather themselves to us; and let us bring the Ark of God to us: for we inquired not at it in the days of Saul. In the days of Eli the Ark was taken by the Phili­stims:1 Sam. 4. who being smitten till there was a deadly destruction throughout all the city, and their Divines attribu­ting the cause thereof unto detention of the Ark, after seven moneths sent it to Bethshemesh, whence it was brought unto Kirjah-jearim, and there lodged in the house of Aminadab, before Saul was king, where it re­mained till such time as David propo­sed in the manner shewn unto the people, for reduction of the same. [Page 9] Upon this proposition, the people gi­ving suffrage are unanimous in their result; All the congregation said, 1 Chron. 13.4. that they would do so (not that they could do no otherwise by a king, for they did not the like by Rehoboam, but that) the thing was right in the eyes of all the people. Moreover, Chap. 25. David and the captains of the host separated to the service of the sons of Asaph, and of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should pro­phesy with harps, with Psalteries and with cymbals; that is, proposed these laws for Church-discipline, or offices of the Priests and Levites, unto the same representative of the people: of which more in other places. Thus much in this, to shew, that if Moses were a king, it doth not follow that he proposed not his laws unto a con­gregation of the people having the power of result. To say that the laws proposed by Moses were the dictate of God, is not to evade, but to con­firme the necessity of proposing them unto the people, seeing the laws or dictates of God or of Christ, can no otherwise be effectually received or imbraced by a people, or by a private man, then by the free suffrage of soul or conscience.

Sect. 3. That there lay no ap­peal from the 70 El­ders to Mo­ses.

But for another way, such an one as it is of crowning Moses, some are positive that there lay an appeal from the seventy Elders unto Moses. Now the command of God unto Mo­ses for the institution of the seventy, is this:Num. 11.16. Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel— that they may stand with thee. Upon which words let me aske whether had Moses thenceforth a distinct or a joynt politi­call capacity? If the seventy stood with Moses, or it were a joynt capaci­ty, then Moses was no king in their sense; and if it were distinct, then lay there unto Moses no appeal, even by his own law: for thus in the case of appeals it is by him directed.Deut. 6. If there arise a controversy too hard for thee in judgment— thou shalt come unto the Priests and Levites (that is, to the se­venty Elders)— According to the sen­tence of the law which they—shall tell thee, thou shalt do— And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken—even that man shall dye. In which words all colour of appeal from the seventy elders is excluded.

Sect. 4.

But whether Moses were a king or no king, either his power was more [Page 11] then that of king David, or without proposition unto, and result of the people, it is plain that he could passe no law. Now the Senate, Sanhedrim, or seventy Elders, came in the place of Moses, or stood with him; therefore their power could be no more then was that of Moses. If the power then of Moses were never more in the matter of lawgiving, then to pro­pose unto the people; the power of the Sanhedrim could be no more in the matter of lawgiving, then to pro­pose unto the people: nor will it be found in Scripture that the Sanhe­drim ever made any law without the people, yet it is found in Scripture that the people made law without the Sanhedrim, or levy'd war without them, which is all one: for where there is the power to levy war, there will be the power to make law. And the occasi­on upon which this is found, is the war levy'd against Benjamin by the con­gregation consisting of four hundred thousand. Again,Judg. 20. if the Sanhedrim inherited the vvhole power of Moses, and yet had no larger power in law-making then to propose unto the peo­ple, then had Moses never any larger [Page 12] power in law - making then to pro­pose unto the people. Now vvhere there is no king, or no king in a di­stinct capacity from the Senate, and the Senate hath no farther power in law-making, then to propose unto the free suffrage of the people; the go­vernment is a commonwealth. Thus having shewn that Israel was a Com­monwealth, I come to shew vvhat commonwealth Israel was.

CHAP. II.

Shewing what Commonwealth Israel was.

Sect. 1. Division of the children of Israel first Genea­logical.

ALL Political Methods that are collective of the people, must necessarily begin vvith distribution or division of the people.

For the division of the people of Is­rael, it vvas first Genealogical, and then Local. Now these are the names (of the ancestours of the Tribes,Exod. 1. or) of the children of Israel which came in­to Egypt, every man and his houshold came with Jacob. Reuben, Simeon, Le­vi, [Page 13] and Judah, Issachar, Zebu [...]un, and Benjamin, Dan, and Naphtali, Gad, and Asher. These being eleven in Number, were the sons of Jacob, who had also one more, namely Joseph. And unto Joseph were born two sons be­fore the years of famine came: Gen. 41.50.51.52. which Asenah the daughter of Poti-pherah priest of On, bare unto him. And Joseph called the name of the first born Ma­nasseh—and the name of the second cal­led he Ephraim. Which two (though but grandchildren) were adopted by Jacob for his sons, in these words: Let my name be named on them, Gen. 48.16 and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac, and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth. From which addition unto the former, came the Tribes of Israel, Genealogically rec­koned, to be in number thirteen. In the genealogical distribution of the Tribes, there vvere also obser­ved certain ranks, qualities, or de­grees, as appears by the poll made of Israel in the wildernesse of Sinai, Num. 1. and in the tabernacle of the congregation by Moses. These degrees vvere of two sorts: first, Phylarches, or Princes of Tribes; and secondly, Patriarches, or [Page 14] Princes of families; all hereditary ho­nours, and appertaining unto the first born of the Tribe or of the family respectively. That this Poll be more perfectly understood, will be usefull: for vvhich cause, I shall be somewhat more particular. First, for the Phy­larches, or princes of the Tribes, and then for the Patriarches, or princes of families. To begin with the Prin­ces of the Tribes.

Sect. 2. Of the Prin­ces of Tribes: or the muster-roll in Si­nai.

Moses and Aaron—assembled the congregation (or political convention of the people) together on the first day of the second moneth, 17. 18. after their fa­milies, by the house of their fathers, ac­cording to the number of the names, from twenty years old and upwards by the poll. Where every Phylarch or prince of a Tribe, vvith the number of men at the age mentioned, and upwards, throughout his Tribe, are listed much after this manner.

1. Of the Tribe of Reuben, Eli­zur, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, forty six thou­sand five hundred.

2. Of the Tribe of Simeon, Shela­miel, Prince. The men of military [Page 15] age in his Tribe, fifty nine thou­sand three hundred.

3. Of the Tribe of Judah, Nashon, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, threescore and fourteen thousand six hundred.

4. Of the Tribe of Issachar, Netha­niel, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, fifty four thousand four hundred.

5. Of the Tribe of Zebulun, Eliab, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, fifty seven thousand four hundred.

6. Of the Tribe of Ephraim, Elisha­ma, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, forty thousand five hundred.

7. Of the Tribe of Manasseh, Gema­liel, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, thirty two thou­sand two hundred.

8. Of the Tribe of Benjamin, Abidan, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, thirty five thousand four hundred.

9. Of the Tribe of Dan, Ahiezer, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, threescore and two thou­sand seven hundred.

[Page 16]10. Of the Tribe of Asher, Pagiel, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, forty one thousand five hundred.

11. Of the Tribe of Gad, Eliasaph, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, forty five thousand six hundred and fifty.

12. Of the Tribe of Naphtali, Ahi­ra, Prince. The men of military age in his Tribe, fifty three thou­sand four hundred.

The total summe of which muster-roll in the twelve Tribes, amount­eth unto Princes twelve, and men of military age six hundred three thousand five hundred and fifty: besides the Levites.

Sect. 3. The Levites call, order, or Tribe.

All the first born (saith God) are mine. Num. 3.12.13. In which words is imply'd, that the priesthood, or right of preaching, instructing, or administring divine things, belongeth, as it vvere, of natu­ral right, unto fathers of families, or the first born; till the Lord took the Levites from among the children of Is­rael, instead of the first born. These being thus taken, were set apart, and so listed by themselves (to omit their [Page 17] several families, functions, and orders in the service of the tabernacle, and afterwards of the temple, vvhich would ask a volume) much after this manner.

Of the Tribe of Levi, Aaron high Priest. The number of all the males of this Tribe,v. 39. from a moneth old and upwards, twenty and two thousand. The manner how God took the Levites, is thus expressed:Num. 8.9, 10, 11, 12. 1 Chr. 25. Thou shalt bring the Levites before the tabernacle of the con­gregation, and thou shalt gather the whole assembly together— and the chil­dren of Israel (after the manner that the Levites lay their hands upon the bullocks, or sacrifice) shall put their hands upon the Levites, in token that they are sacrificed by the free suffrage of the people unto the Lord. For lest the suffrage of the people be thought hereby to have been excluded; So David and the captains of the host (which host was the representative of the people) separated to the ser­vice of the sons of Asaph, of He­man, and of Jeduthun,—who should prophesie with harps. But of the congregations of the people, more in due place.

Sect. 4. The milita­ry orders.

The hereditary right more especi­ally belonging unto the Phylarches, Grot. ad Num. 10. or Princes of the Tribes, consisted (as that of the Kings of Lacedemon, of Athens, and of Rome) in the leading of the armies of the Commonwealth; which was distributed unto them in this manner. The twelve Tribes were divided into four brigades, every brigade consisting of three Tribes. The leading of the first brigade ap­pertained unto Judah, who in his stan­dard bore a lion. The leading of the second brigade belonged unto Reu­ben, who in his standard bore a man. The leading of the third brigade be­longed unto Ephraim, who in his stan­dard bore an ox. The leading of the fourth brigade belonged unto Dan, who in his standard bore an eagle. These four by the text are termed standards of the Camp, Num. 10.14.18, 22, 25. which were as the Roman eagles. Farthermore, as the subdivisions of the Roman Legi­ons had their proper ensignes, so the Tribes here, which had not the lead­ing of a brigade of the camp. The ensignes of these Tribes were called Staves; as the staff of the children of Issachar, the staff of the Tribe of Ze­bulun, [Page 19] which followed the standard of Judah. The staff of the Tribe of Simeon, the staff of the Tribe of Gad, which followed the standard of Reu­ben. The staff of the Tribe of Ma­nasseh, the staff of the Tribe of Benja­min, which follow'd the standard of Ephraim. The staff of the Tribe of Asher, the staff of the Tribe of Naph­tali, which follow'd the standard of Dan. All which ensignes or staves in our English translation are rendred hosts.

In the midst of these four squadrons or brigades, stood the Tabernacle,Num. 3. with the Levites divided, and distri­buted by their distinct families, unto the several uses and carriages of the same, and lodged upon the four quar­ters.

When the Ark set forward, or the camp removed, these words were with solemnity pronounced by the General, or by the high Priest;Num. 10.35. Rise up Lord, and let thine enemies be scat­tered, and let them that hate thee flee before thee.

Of the Martial discipline in which the youth in Israel were educated unto these ends, there was certainly [Page 20] more then is remaining in story. But that their popular assemblies were all held in Military order and discipline, and that deserters of the Militia were Anathematized, confiscated, or put unto the sword, will in due time be made sufficiently apparent. For the present, you have the Israelitish mu­ster-roll, being of like nature with that in Athens, called Lexiarcha; and that in Rome, called Census. Nor hath any Commonwealth been well or­der'd in her Militia, which hath not been diligent in the institution and preservation of like Military rolls or registers. Hitherto of the Phy­larches, or Princes of the Tribes; the next rank or quality in this go­vernment, was that of the Patriarches, or Princes of families.

Sect. 5. The Patri­archs, chief of the fa­thers, or Princes of families; with a ca­talogue of the same.

The word family in many places of Scripture, is not to be taken for a sin­gle houshold, but as we take the word in Heraldry, that is, for a li­neage, or kindred. The Patriarches in Israel, taken in this sense, were such as till of late yeares in Scotland, were they that could lead the whole name, or kindred, and be follow'd by them. The families in Israel of this kind, [Page 21] that vvere greatest about the planta­tion of the Commonwealth, were of Reuben, the Henochites, the Phalluites, Num. 26. the Hesronites, and the Charmites.

Of Simeon, the Namuelites, the Jamnites, the Jachenites, the Zarites, and the Shaulites.

Of Gad, the Zephronites, the Hag­gites, the Shunites, the Oznites, the Erites, the Arodites, and the Are­lites.

Of Judah, the Shelanites, the Phar­zites, the Zarhites, the Hesronites, and the Hamulites.

Of Issachar, the Tholaites, the Pu­nites, the Shuhites, and the Shimra­nites.

Of Zabulun, the Sardites, the Elo­nites, and the Jahleelites.

Of Manasseh, the Machirites, the Galeadites, the Jeezzrites, the Helekites, the Asrielites, the Seche­mites, the Shemidaites, and the He­pherites.

Of Ephraim, the Shuthalaites, the Bachtites, the Tahanites, and the Era­nites.

Of Benjamin, the Belaites, the Ashbelites, the Ahiramites,, the Shuphamites, the Huphamites, the [Page 22] Ardites, the Heredites, the Naa­mites.

Of Dan, the Suhamites.

Of Asher, the Jimnites, the Jessu­ites, the Briits, the Heberites, and the Melchielites.

Of Naphtali, the Jazrielites, the Gunites, the Jeserites, and the Shille­mites.

Of Levi, the Gersonites, the Caha­rites, and the Merarites. The heads of these were such as are called Patri­arches, Princes, heads of families, or chie [...] of the fathers.

Families, though far lesse subject then in other governments to de­cay or increase, might at diverse times be different in Israel; as after Benjamin was destroy'd, or after Da­vid had raised his own and many o­ther: but thus were the families at this time sixty; the tribes being as was shewn before, thirteen.

In the first institution of the Tribes of Rome, that is, the Ramnenses, Titien­ses, and the Luceri, they were also genealogical, but long it held not so; genealogical divisions in a Common­vvealth, being for the most part of greater danger then use: but whether [Page 23] genealogies be observ'd or not ob­serv'd, the local vvay of division is of absolute necessity.

Sect. 6. Of the lot or ballot of Israel.

To insert the Geography of the Israelitish Tribes, vvould be as bur­densome both to the reader and my self, as needlesse unto either. But the manner how the Tribes became local, was through the distribution of the land of Canaan by lot and intayling; the lands so distributed, unto the pro­prietors and their heirs for ever, with­out power of alienation, in any such manner as to deprive their posterity. The lot or ballot in Israel was especi­ally of three uses; one for election of magistrates, another for the discovery of some secret malefactor, and a third for the division of lands: to which three heads I hope to reduce the vvhole history of the government: and this work once performed, it will be easie to represent the Common­wealth in her Political method.

To begin with the election of Ma­gistrates, it vvas performed sometimes by the lot, without suffrage; and sometime by the ballot, that is, by a mixture of lot and suffrage. For the clearer discovery of the order in ele­ctions, [Page 24] I must invert the order of the Magistrates elected, and begin with the King; then proceed unto the Judge, and come last of all unto the Sanhedrim, and the inferiour courts.

The instruments used upon these occasions, were first lots, some blanks and some prizes: then Urnes (that is, pots) into vvhich these lots were cast, and out of which they were af­terwards drawn, or given forth; by what officers, or with what farther solemnity, doth not appear.

Sect. 7. The manner of electing the king.

When the people would needs have a King, Samuel being their Judge, did that, though against his will, which neverthelesse was no more then his duty:1 Sam. 8.7.22. 1 Sam. 10.17. that is, First, hearken­ed unto the voice of the people: or o­bey'd their vote. Secondly, called the people together unto the Lord to Mizpeh. The political assembly, or congregation of the people of Israel, was called (Ecclesia Dei) the congre­gation of the Lord, Judg. 20. as it ought to have been expressed in the tryal of Benja­min, and is in some place expressed by our translation:Deut. 23. as where, An Eu­nuch, (or one unfit for marriage with a daughter of Israel, vvhich capacity [Page 25] vvas necessary unto being enrolled of a Tribe) a bastard (as dishonourable) an Ammonite, or Moabite, (as de­scended of perfidious nations) shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord: That is, shall not have right of suffrage with the people of Israel. So Samuel, by calling the congregation of the Lord, or the people together unto the Lord in Mizpeh, the place,For the as­sembly of the congre­gation at Mizpeh, see Judg. 10.17. Judg. 11.11. Judg. 20.1. Judg. 21.1. 1 Sam. 7.6.16.17. before the taking of Jerusalem, vvhere they alwayes held their Parliaments, or political assemblies, did the office of like magistrates in Commonwealths. The people being thus assembled, (for to be brief, I must proceed with con­jectures, vvhich at the first sight will seem bolder then they are) Samuel caused the urnes to be set forth, pronounced the solemn form of words in use upon like occasion, which were these.1 Sam. 10.19. The Milita­ry order of Political congregati­ons in Is­rael. see Chap. 3. Present your selves before the Lord, by your Tribes, and by your thousands. The Political assemblies of the children of Israel, vvere held, or gathered (as vve say) with drums beating, and colours flying: and if it were an extraordinary congregation, that is, a congregation consisting of the whole people, as this, and that for [Page 26] the tryal of Benjamin; the Princes of the Tribes with their Staves, and Standards of the Camp, (in the order shewn) led up the people unto the urnes, or ballot. Wherefore upon these words of Samuel, the Princes marched in their known discipline unto the urnes. The urnes were two: in the one vvere tvvelve lots inscri­bed with the names of the twelve Trihes: in the other, were also twelve other lots, vvhereof eleven vvere blanks, and the twelfth inscribed with some vvord. What the Israelitish word was, doth not appear. The Ro­man word upon like occasion, was Prerogative: wherefore seeing that which is lost must have been of like nature, we may for discourse sake, pre­sume it to have been the same in Is­rael, V. 20. The Prero­gative Tribe as in Rome. And when Samuel had caused all the Tribes of Israel to come near, the Tribe of Benjamin was taken. That is, the name of this Tribe being drawn out of the one urne, unto it was drawn the word prerogative out of the other urne; which being done, the urnes were changed, or at least, the lots: and whereas in the enumeration of the Patriarches, I [Page 27] shew'd by catalogue of their names, that the whole Tribe of Benjamin con­sisted of seven families; seven names by that account, should have been cast into the one urne, and as many lots into the other; one of them being in­scribed with the word Prerogative, and the other six being blanks. But both the names, and the number of families at this ballot, are most likely to have been quite otherwise then in the ca­talogue;Judg. 20.2. because since that time the Tribe of Benjamin had in the far greater part been destroyed, and pie­ced up again out of a remnant: so for the number of the families, or the names of them, I can say nothing. But the urnes being thus prepared, came Benjamin, as now the Preroga­tive Tribe, unto the urnes by families. And when Samuel had caused the Tribe of Benjamin to come near by their fa­milies, the family of Matri (which is a new one) was taken: that is, light­ing in the manner shewn, upon the prize, became the Prerogative family. This done, the lots were again chan­ged, and so many other, as there were housholds in the family of Matri, Josh. 7.14, 16, 17, 18. (for so you will find it in the tryal of Achan) [Page 28] were cast into the urnes. Thus the houshold of Kish coming to be the prerogative-houshold, and so many lots as there were men of that houshold, being cast into the urnes, whereof the prize was inscribed King; came the houshold of Kish, man by man, and Saul the Son of Kish was ta­ken.

Sect. 8. That mira­culous de­signation of Magistrates in a Com­monwealth, was never understood to exclude th [...] free suffrage of the people in their ele­ction.

We find it recorded by Livy, of Tarquinius Priscus, and of Servius Tullius, that before either of them was King, the one had his hat taken off, and carried up by an Eagle; the other a flame sitting upon his forehead: by which it was firmly believed, that each of them was designed of the Gods to be King: yet was this never so understood by themselves, or any other, as to exclude the right of popu­lar suffrage in their election, by which Priscus raigned; or to create an opi­nion that any man ought to be King of Rome, whom the people had not first commanded to raign over them: to whose election therefore, Servius, though in possession of the throne, thought it his best way to refer him­self. Far be it from me to compare prodigies among heathens, to mira­cles [Page 29] in the Church: But each people had of each like opinion. Both Israel and the Heathens began their popu­lar assemblies with sacrifice. In order unto the election of Solomon, the re­presentative of Israel sacrificed sa­crifices unto the Lord—even a thousand bullocks, a thousand rams, 1 Chr. 29.21, 22. and a thou­sand lambes, with their drink-offerings, and sacrifices in abundance, for all Is­rael. And when they had thus done, what Magistrates soever the Israelites, or the heathens elected, they alwayes understood to be elected by God. The lot is cast into the lap, Pro. 10.33. but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord. And in­deed, whereas in this manner they made Solomon king, and Zadoc to be priest, if we will hold otherwise, we must think, that neither the King nor the Priest was elected by God. A man that is elected unto some great office, by a king rightly qualify'd, must have little religion, or hold himself to be raised up by God. Why then should it be otherwise, when a Magistrate is elected by a people rightly qualify'd? or what consequence is there in say­ing, that Saul was anoynted by Sa­muel, before he was elected by the [Page 30] people: or that God raised them up Judges; therefore neither Saul nor the Judges were elected by the peo­ple? That God elected the Kings in Is­rael, is certain; and that the people no lesse for that, did also elect the Kings, is as certain.Deut. 17.15. One from among thy bre­thren shalt thou (that is, thou, the peo­ple of Israel) set king over thee. That God raised up Judges in Israel, is cer­tain; and that the people no lesse for that, did also elect the Judges, is as certain. When the children of Am­mon made war against Israel, Israel assembled themselves together, and en­camped in Mizpeh, Judg. 10.17. Judg. 11.5, 11. whence the el­ders of Gilead went to fetch Jephta out of the land of Tob.— Then Jephta went with the elders of Gilead, and the people made him head, and captain over them: and Jephta uttered all his words before the Lord in Mizpeh. But that Solomon was elected by the lot, I do not affirm; it being most proba­ble, that it was by suffrage onely, Da­vid proposing, and the people resol­ving. Nor whether Jephta were elected by suffrage, or by the bal­lot, is it material. Howbeit, that the ordinary Magistrates were elected [Page 31] by the ballot, I little doubt.

Sect. 9. Election of Senators and Judges of inferiour Courts.

The ordinary Magistrates of this Commonwealth (as shall hereafter be more fully opened) were the Sanhe­drim, or the seventy Elders; and the inferiour courts or Judges, in the gates of the cities. For the instituti­on, and election of these, Moses proposed unto the people, or the con­gregation of the Lord, in this manner. Take ye wise men, and understanding, Deut. 1.13. and known among your Tribes, ( [...]) and I will make (or constitute) them rulers over you. Where, by the way, lest Moses in these words be thought to assume power, Solon, saith Aristotle, ( [...]) made, or constituted the popular govern­ment of Athens. In which he im­plyeth, not that Solon was a king, or had soveraign power, but that he was a lawgiver, and had authority to pro­pose unto the people. Nor is there more in the words of Moses; upon whose proposition, say Jewish writers, each of the twelve Tribes, by free suffrages, elected six competitors, and wrote their names in scrols, which they delivered unto Moses. Moses having thus presented unto him, by [Page 32] the twelve Tribes, seventy and two competitors, for seventy Magistracies, had by consequence, two more com­petitors, then were capable of the preferment whereunto they were ele­cted by the people: Wherefore Mo­ses took two urns; into the one, he cast the seventy two names presented by the people; into the other, seventy two lots, whereof two were blanks, the rest inscribed with the word Elder. This done, he called the competitors unto the urn, where the seventy, un­to whose names came forth the prizes, went up unto the tabernacle, the Ses­sion-house being there provided;See Num. 11.26. and the two that drew the blanks, name­ly, Eldad, and Medad, though of them that were elected, and written by the Tribes, went not up unto the Taber­nacle, but remained in the camp; as not having attained unto Magistracy. Thus, if this place in Scripture admit of no other interpretation, so much as I have cited out of the Talmud, (though otherwise, for the most part, but a fabulous and indigested heap) must needs be good, and valid. In this manner, one or more Senators happening to dye, it was easie for [Page 33] each Tribe, choosing one, or more competitors, accordingly, out of them­selves, to decide at the urn, which competitor so chosen, should be the Magistrate, without partiality, or cause of fewd; which, if a man consider this constitution, was not perhaps so rea­dily to be done otherwise. The like, no doubt, was done for the inferiour courts, save that such elections (the Commonwealth being once setled) were more particular, and performed by that Tribe only, in whose gates that court was sitting.

Sect. 10. The story of the Sanhe­drim, and of the infe­rior Courts, as to their first institu­tion.

The first institution of these courts came to passe in manner following. Exod. 18.24, 25. Before the people were under orders, the whole Judicature lay upon the shoulders of Moses; who being over-burdened, was advised by Jethro. And Moses hearkened unto the voice of his father in law— and chose (after the manner shewn) able men out of all Is­rael, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. The number of which rulers, compared with the number of the people, as in the muster-roll at Sinai, must in all have amounted to about six [Page 34] thousand. These thus instituted, while Israel was an Army, came to be the same, when the army was a Common­wealth;Deut. 16.18. whereof it is said, Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God gi­veth thee, throughout thy Tribes; and they shall judge the people with just judgment. Each of these courts, by the practice of the Jewish Commonwealth, consisted of twenty three Elders. But Jethro in his advice to Moses, addeth concer­ning these judicatories, this caution; Let them judge the people at all seasons: Exod. 18.22. and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: So shall it be easier for thy self, and they shall bear the burden with thee. Which ne­verthelesse follow'd not according to Jethro's promise, the appeales being such to Moses, that he goes with this complaint unto God:Num. 11.14, 16. I am not able to bear all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me. Whereupon the Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me seven­ty men, of the Elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be Elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the Tabernacle of the congregation, [Page 35] that they may stand with thee— (but Crownes will have no rivals)—and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not alone. (But a Monarch is one that must be alone.) And Moses went out, V. 24. and told the people the words of the Lord, (which a Monarch needed not to have done) and gathered the seventy men of the Elders of the people. The manner whereof is already shewn. Jethro be­ing an heathen, informeth Moses of the orders of his own Common­wealth, which also was heathenish. Yet in Scripture, is both Jethro joyn­ed with Moses, and the Common­wealth of Midian with the Com­monwealth of Israel. How then com­eth it to be irreverent, or Atheisti­cal, as some say, in Polititians, (and while political discourses can no o­therwise be ma [...]ged) to compare (though but by way of illustration) other Legislators, or Polititians, as Lycurgus, Solon, with Moses; or other Commonwealths, as Rome, and Venice, with that of Israel? But the authours of like objections, had better have minded, that the burden Moses here complained of, could in no wise [Page 36] be that of ordinary Judicature, of which he was eased before, by the ad­vice of Jethro; and therefore must have been that of appeales onely: so either the Sanhedrim bore no burden at all with Moses, or they bore that of appeales with Moses. And if so, how say they that there lay an appeal from the seventy Elders to Moses?

Sect. 11. Lot Ordel, or inquisi­tion by Lot.

But I said the Lot was of use also to­ward the discovery of concealed male­factors. Of this we have an example in the detection of Achan. The words of the law whereby the fact of Achan was criminal, are these: If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, Deut. 13.12, &c. which the Lord thy God hath given thee, to dwell therein, say­ing, Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known: then shalt thou enquire, & make search, & ask diligent­ly: and behold, if it be truth, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought among you; thou shalt surely smite the in­habitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattel thereof with the edge of the sword. And thou shalt gather all the spoil of iit into the [Page 37] midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof, every whit, for the Lord thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever, it shall not be built again, and there shall cleave nought of the accursed thing unto thine hand. Among the cities that were given by God unto Israel, was Jericho. Now though against this city, before it was taken,Josh. 6.17. Joshua had so­lemnly, and publickly, denounced the Anathema, or curses, contained in the foregoing law; and after the taking of it, had in all appearance, executed upon it the whole of the Anathema so pronounced: Yet through subse­quent losses before the city of Ai, be­ing sore afflicted, he entred into suspi­tion, that there might have been some faylure in the performance of the law. Whereupon he rent his clothes, Josh. 7.6. and fell to the earth upon his face, before the Ark of the Lord, untill the even-tide, he, and the Elders (or Sanhedrim of Israel,) and put dust on their heads. The Sanhedrim, in difficult cases of the law, enquired of God by Urim; and the Sanhedrim, or the people, in (rebus arduis) cases of high concern­ment to the State, as in the war against [Page 38] Benjamin, enquired of the Ark. When God was enquired of by Urim, he gave his oracle by the shining of cer­tain stones, or jewels, in the breast-plate of the high priest. When he was enquired of by the Ark, he gave his oracle vocally, from the Mercy-seat, which was placed upon the Ark of the Covenant. Whence, he who sat between the cherubims, thus an­swered Joshua: Josh. 7.10. Get thee up; wherefore lyest thou thus upon thy face? Israel hath sinned — they have even taken of the accursed thing. Joshua thus infor­med of the crime, but not so particu­larly of the malefactor, as to know where to charge it,Josh. 7.17. calleth the whole people unto the urnes; in one of which it may be thought that there were eleven white stones, or lots, with one black one; and in the other, the twelve names of the Tribes. So Israel coming first by Tribes unto the urns, the Tribe of Judah was taken; that is, this Tribe, lighting upon the black lot, was denoted for the Guilty Tribe. VVhich consisting (as appeared by the catalogue) of five families, where­of the Zarhites were one, came next by families unto the urne; wherein [Page 39] there might be sour vvhite lots, and one black, by which the Zarhites were taken. In like manner, came the fa­mily of the Zarhites, by housholds, and the houshold of Zabdi was ta­ken: last of all, came the houshold of Zabdi, man by man, and Achan was taken. This kind of inquisition vvas performed with such religion and so­lemnity, that a man thus taken, if he had any guilt, could have no face to conceal it; or if there were any wit­nesses of his crime, they could not any longer dissemble it: and vvhether he were convict by testimony, or by his own confession (as now Achan) he was put to death. The like pro­ceeding, in part, is imply'd to have been in the case of Jonathan; 1 Sam. 14. though in this, by agreement thereupon, be­tween Saul and the people, it should seem as if but two lots were put into the urne, whereof Saul and Jonathan, on the one part, drew the black; or the Prince of the Tribe of Judah, drawing for the whole people, on the other part, drew the vvhite one: and that the same being put into the urne again, to decide it between Saul and Jonathan, Jonathan drew the black; [Page 40] whereupon, he being questioned, con­fessed the fact; and, but that the peo­ple rescued him from Saul, had been put to death.

Sect. 12. Distribution of lands, and Agra­rian lawes in Israel.

To conclude vvith the use of the lot, in the division of the land of Ca­naan. This (as implying the founda­tion, or balance of the government) ought to have been the first in order, but happeneth here to come last; for that these orders were instituted in the vvildernesse, and so before the people had any lands to divide. Ne­verthelesse, this also was proposed by Moses, Josh. 14.2. and resolved by the people. By lot was their inheritance, as the Lord commanded Moses; and now cometh, as it was, or should have been put in execution by Joshua, to be con­sidered.

It may be true, that the Roman people were the wisest that have been; and it is true, that they onely of a peo­ple, did labour to introduce Agrarian lawes, though without effect. Other­wise, levelling vvas never introduced, but by the wisdome, and providence of some great man, as a Moses, a Jo­shua, or a Lycurgus; or by some acci­dent, or accidents, bringing a nobili­ty [Page 41] unto ruine, as the lawes of Hen. 7. and the vvays of Henry the 8th in England.

Between the muster-roll in Sinai, Num. 1.46. Num. 26.51. vvhereby the men of military age, as vvas shewn, amounted to six hundred and three thousand five hundred and fifty, in the twelve Tribes; and the law for division of the land of Canaan, there happened a plague, by vvhich, the number of the people, upon a new poll, came but to six hundred and one thousand seven hundred and thirty. Upon this poll was the law made, vvhich runneth thus:v. 53.54.55.56. Ʋnto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance, according to the number of names. To many, thou shalt give the more inheri­tance; and to fewer, thou shalt give the lesse inheritance: to every one shall his inheritance be given, according unto those that were numbred of him. Not­withstanding, the land shall be divided by lot: according to the names of the Tribes of their fathers, they shall inhe­rit; according to the lot, shall the pos­session thereof be divided, unto many, and few. This law, in another place, is repeated thus:Num. 33.54. Yee shall divide the land by lot, for an inheritance among [Page 42] your families; and to the mo, you shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer, ye shall give the lesse inheri­tance: every mans inheritance shall be in the place where his lot falleth, accor­ding to the Tribes of your fathers ye shall inherit.

In the making of these lots, consi­deration was as well had of the good­nesse of the land, as of the measure. Now supposing this law to have been in the vvhole, and methodically exe­cuted, the Canaanites must first have been totally rooted out of the land of Canaan; which land, in that case (as some affirm) vvould have afforded un­to this Commonwealth a root, or ba­lance,Hecateus apud Jo­seph. cont. Ap. consisting of three millions of acres. These, reckoning the whole people in the twelve Tribes, at six hundred and two thousand, (which is more then upon the later poll they came to) would have afforded unto every man four acres; to every one of the Patriarches (upon the poll of the foregoing catalogue, where they are sixty one) four thousand acres: to every one of the Princes of the Tribes, fourteen thousand acres: to the Levitical cities (being forty eight, [Page 43] each with her suburbs, of four thou­sand cubits diameter) one hundred thousand acres; and yet for extraor­dinary donations, as to Joshua, and Caleb, (of which kind there were but few) some eighty thousand acres might remain. Now it is true, four acres to a man may seem but a small lot; yet the Roman people, under Ro­mulus, and long after, had but two: and it may very well be, that one acre in Canaan, was vvorth two in Italy, especially about Rome; and four in England, though of the best sort: and if so it were, that four acres in Palestine vvere vvorth sixteen of our best; such a lot, at our account, might be worth some thirty or forty pounds a year; which for a popular share, holding that rate through the whole body of a people, was a large proportion. By this estimate, or vvhat possibly could be allow'd unto the princes of the Tribes, and of the families, their share came not unto a sixth of the vvhole: so the rest remaining unto the people, the balance of this govern­ment must have been purely popular. It is true, that in the vvhole, this law of Moses for the division of the land, [Page 44] vvas never executed. But that in the parts, some like course was taken, is plain; for example, in the division un­to seven Tribes, vvhere Joshua pro­poseth unto the people in this man­ner:Josh. 18.4. Give out from among you three men for each Tribe— and they shall go through the land and describe it. The people having resolved accor­dingly, these went, and passed through the land, and described it by cities, into seven parts, in a book, and came again to Joshua, to the host at Shiloh. And Joshua cast lots for them in Shiloh, be­fore the Lord: and there Joshua divi­ded the land unto the children of Israel according to their divisions. It were absurd to think that this lot determi­ned of proportions; for so a mean man might have come to be richer then the Prince of his Tribe; but the propor­tions allotted unto Tribes, being sta­ted, though at first but by guesse, and entred into the lot-book of the sur­veyours, (vvho, saith Josephus, were most expert in Geometry) the Prin­ces came first unto the urnes, whereof the one contained the names of the Tribes that vvere to draw; the other, the names of those parcels of land [Page 45] that vvere to be drawn first unto a vvhole Tribe. Thus the name of a Tribe, for example, Benjamin, being drawn out of one urne, unto that name a parcel vvas drawn out of the other urne; for example, the coun­try lying between Jericho and Beth­aven. This being done, and the Prince of the Tribe having chosen in vvhat one place he would take his stated and agreed proportion, vvhether of fourteen thousand acres, or the like; the rest of the Country vvas subdivi­ded in the lot-book, according to the number of families in the Tribe of this Prince; and the parcels subdivided, being cast into the one urne, the names of the Patriarches into the o­ther, the same Tribe came again by families: thus every Patriarch ma­king choice in vvhat one part of this lot he vvould take his agreed propor­tion, vvhether of four thousand acres, or the like; the remainder vvas again subdivided in the lot-book, according to the number of names in his family: if they vvere more then the parcel vvould furnish, at four acres a man, then vvas that defect amended by addition out of the next parcel: [Page 46] and if they were fewer, then the over­plus vvas cast unto the next parcel. By such meanes the people came, or might have come, in the whole, and in every part, unto the lot of their in­heritance; vvhile every Tribe that was thus planted, became Local, without remove.Num. 36.3. Neither shall the inheritance remove from one Tribe to another Tribe; but every one of the Tribes of the children of Israel, shall keep himself to his own inheritance.

Sect. 13. The Portion of Levi.

The Tribes thus planted, or to have been planted, vvere twelve. The thirteenth, or that of Levi, came in like manner unto the lot, for their forty eight cities,Josh. 21.4, 5, [...]. Num. 18.20. Deut. 10.9. Deut. 18.1. vvith their suburbs, and received them accordingly; as the lot came forth for the families of the Kohathites, and the rest. These Israel gave unto the Levites out of their inheritance; that is, these vvere such as the twelve Tribes, before di­vision, set apart for the Levites, vvith the Tythes, and the Offerings: which though this Tribe had no other lands, made their portion by far the best. The Tribes being henceforth reckon­ed by their locality, and these forty eight cities being scattered through­out [Page 47] the twelve Tribes, that of Levi was no more computed as a distinct Tribe, but lost, as it were, the name, yet with advantage: for unto their promiscuous abode, they had the right of promiscuous marriage; no more in this point, being enjoyned any of them,Ezek. 44.22. then to take maidens of the seed of Israel, or at least the wi­dowes of Priests. And as in the Tribes where they dwelt, they had promis­cuous marriage, so had they right of promiscuous election; that is, of ele­cting, and being elected, into all the magistracies and offices of the Com­monwealth; which they so frequent­ly enjoy'd, that the Sanhedrim is sometimes understood by their names. If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, Deut. 17.8 thou shalt come unto the Priests the Levites. Between the law, and the religion of this govern­ment, there was no difference; whence all Ecclesiastical persons were also Political persons, of which the Levites were an intire Tribe, set more peculiarly apart unto God, the king of this Commonwealth, from all other cares, then that onely of his government. Thus Moses did that [Page 48] with the safety of liberty in Israel, which Lycurgus could not do in Lace­demon, but by condemning the He­lots unto perpetual slavery: for where­as without these to be tillers of the ground, the citizens of Lacedemon could not be at leisure for the Com­monwealth; the children of Israel might imploy themselves in their do­mestick affaires, as they required, with safety, while the Levites bore the burden of the government; or in case either their private affaires permitted, or their ambition prompted, were e­qually capable of Magistracy.

Sect. 14. Cities of Refuge.

Of the Levitical cities, three be­yond, Num. 35. and three on this side Jordan, were cities of refuge. If a man were slain, the next of kindred, by the laws of Israel, was the Avenger of blood; and unto the avenger of blood it was lawfull to slay him that slew his kinsman, where ever he could find him, except only in a city of refuge. For this cause, if a man had slain ano­ther, he fled forthwith unto one of these Sanctuaries: whence neverthe­lesse, the Judges in the gates, within whose proper verge the crime was committed, caused the malefactour to [Page 49] be brought before them, by a guard, and judged between the slayer, and the avenger of blood. If that which we call murder, or man-slaughter, were proved against him by two wit­nesses, he was put to death: but if it were found, as we say, Chance-medley; he was remanded with a guard unto the city of refuge: whence, if before the death of the high Priest, he were found wandring, it vvas lawfull, not onely for the avenger of blood, but for any man else, to slay him. The high Priest being dead, he returned not home onely, but to his inheri­tance, with liberty and safety. If a priest had slain a man, his refuge was the Sanctuary: whence neverthelesse, he was taken by the Sanhedrim; and, if upon tryal, he were found guilty of wilful murder, put to death.Exod. 21.14. If a man come presumptuously upon his neigh­bour, to slay him with guile, thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may dye.

Sect. 15. The Jubilee.

Inheritances, being thus introdu­ced by the lot, were immoveably in­tayled upon the proprietors, and their heires for ever, by the institution of the Jubilee; or the return of lands how [Page 50] ever sold, or ingaged, once in fifty yeares, unto the ancient proprietor, or his lawful heire. Yet remained there two vvayes, whereby lots might be accumulated; the one, by casual inheritance; the other, by marriage with an heiresse: as in the case of Zelophehad, Num. 36. or of his daughters.

Sect. 16. The Model of the Com­monwealth of Israel.

Now to bring the whole result of these historical parts, thus proved, un­to the true Political method, or form; the Commonwealth instituted by Mo­ses, was of this Model.

The whole people of Israel, through a popular distribution of the land of Canaan among themselves by lot, and a fixation of such popular ba­lance, by their Agrarian law, or Iubile, entayling the inheritance of each pro­prietor upon his heirs for ever, was Locally divided into twelve Tribes.

Every Tribe had a double capa­city; the one military, the other ci­vil.

A Tribe in her military capacity, consisted of one Staff, or Standard of the camp, under the leading of her distinct and hereditary Prince, as commander in chief; and of her [Page 51] Princes of families, or chief fathers, as captaines of thousands, and cap­taines of hundreds.

A Tribe in her political capacity, was next and immediately under the government of certain Iudicatories, sitting in the gates of her cities; each of which consisted of twenty three Elders, elected for life, by her free suffrage.

The Soveraign power, and com­mon ligament of the twelve Tribes, was the Sanhedrim of Israel, and the (Ecclesia Dei) or congregation of the Lord.

The Sanhedrim was a Senate, consisting of seventy Elders, for life; so instituted, by the free election of six competitors, in and by each Tribe; every Elder or Senator of the San­hedrim, being taken out of this num­ber of competitors, by the lot.

The congregation of the Lord, was a representative of the people of Israel, consisting of twenty four thousand, for the terme of one moneth; and perpetuated by the monethly ele­ction of two thousand deputies of the people, in each Tribe.

The Sanhedrim, upon law made, [Page 52] was a standing Iudicatory of appeal from the courts in the gates, through­out the Tribes; and in law to be made, whatever was proposed by the Sanhedrim, and resolved in the affir­mative by the Congregation of the Lord, was an Act of the Parliament of Israel.

Deut. 4.5, 6.Of this Frame, saith Moses unto the people, as well he might: Be­hold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither you go to possesse it. Keep therefore, and do them: for this is your wisdom, and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say; Sure­ly this great nation is a wise and under­standing people. In another place, upon the peoples observing this form, he pronounceth all the choicest bles­sings; and in case of violation of the same, a long enumeration of most dreadfull curses, amongst which he hath this:Deut. 28.36. The Lord shall bring thee, and thy king which thou shalt set over thee, unto a nation, which neither thou, nor thy fathers have known, and there [Page 53] shalt thou serve other gods, wood and stone. In which words, first he char­geth the king upon the people, as a creature of their own; and next, op­poseth his forme, point-blank unto Monarchy: as is farther apparent in the whole Antithesis running through­out that Chapter. To the neglect of these orders, may be apply'd those words of David: I have said that ye are gods— but ye shall dye like men, and fall like one of the Princes. But this government can with no countenance of reason, or testimony of story, give any man ground to argue from the frame thus instituted by Moses, that a commonwealth, rightly ordered, and established, may by any internal cause, arising from such orders, be broken, or dissolved; it being most apparent, that this was never established in any such part, as could possibly be hold­ing. Moses dyed in the wildernesse; and though Joshua, bringing the peo­ple into the promised land, did what he could, during his life, towards the establishment of the form designed by Moses; yet the hands of the people, especially after the death of Joshua, grew slack, and they rooted not out [Page 54] the Canaanites, which they were so often commanded to do; and without which, it was impossible that their Commonwealth should take any root. Neverthelesse, setled as it could be, it was in parts longer lived, then any other government hath yet been; as having continued in some sort, from Moses, unto the dispersion of the Jewes, in the raign of the Emperour Adrian; being about one thousand seven hundred yeares. But that it was never established according un­to the necessity of the forme, or the true intent of Moses, is that which must be made farther apparent, throughout the sequel of the present book; and first, in the state of the Israelites under their Judges.

CHAP. III.

Shewing the Anarchy, or State of the Israelites under their Jud­ges.

Sect. 1. A full de­scription of the Repre­sentative of the peo­ple of Isra­el.

THe frame of that which I take to have been the ordinary con­gregation, or representative of the people of Israel, is not perfectly shewn in Scripture, till the time of David; when, though it have nothing in it of a Monarchical institution, it is found intirely remaining, and per­fectly described in these words:1 Chr. 27. Now the children of Israel after their num­ber; to wit, the chief fathers, and cap­taines of thousands, and hundreds, and their officers that served the king, in any matter of the courses, which came in, and went out, moneth by moneth, throughout all the moneths in the year; of every course, were twenty and four thousand men. The polls of the peo­ple, as they have been hitherto shewn, were taken before their plantation in Canaan, where ere they had kings, they [Page 56] had grown (according to the account of Paul) four hundred and fifty years; Acts 13.20. during which time, that they were exceedingly increased, appeareth by the poll of military age, taken by Da­vid, 2 Sam. 24.9. and amounting unto one million three hundred thousand: yet could this assembly of the children of Israel after their number, in one year, by monethly rotation, take in the whole body of them. How these, being a representative of the people, and thus changeable, could be otherwise col­lected, then by the monethly election of two thousand in each Tribe, is not imaginable. And that both a repre­sentative of the people they were, and thus changeable, is by the clear words of Scripture, and the nature of the businesse upon which occasion they are described, undeniably evin­ced: for David proposing, and the peo­ple resolving,1 Chr. 29.22. they make Solomon King, and Zadoc Priest. This assembly (be­sides the military discipline thereof, in which it differed little from the customes of such other Common­wealths, as have been great and mar­tial) had not onely a civil, but a mi­litary office or function, as the stand­ing [Page 57] guard, or army of this country: which, though small, and lying in the very teeth of her enemies, could thus, by taking every man in but for one moneth in a vvhole year, so equally distribute a burden, to have been otherwise intolerable unto all, that it might be borne by a few, and scarce felt by any one. This epitome of that body, already described, under the leading of the several Princes of the Tribes, with their Staves, and Stan­dards of the camp, seemeth to have been commanded by Lieutenants of the Princes, or Tribunes of the respe­ctive Tribes. For,v. 2.3. Over the first course for the first moneth, was Jashobeam the son of Zabdiel (of the children of Perez, or of the family of the Phar­zites, in the catalogue of Judah) and of his course, were four and twenty thousand.

In this case, the Princes did not lead in person, but resided in their Tribes, for the government of the same; whence, upon extraordinary occasions, they sent extraordinary re­cruits; or in case of solemn war, or some weighty affair, as the tryal of a Tribe, or the like, led up in person; [Page 58] with their Staves, and Standards: an ordinance, whether we regard the military or civil use of it, never e­nough to be admired.

Sect. 2. That this representa­tive was used in the time of the Judges.

It is true, while the whole people being an army, Judg. 2.6. Moses could propose to them in body, or under their Staves, and Standards of the camp; as he needed not, so he used not any repre­sentative. But when Joshua had let the people go (and) the children of Is­rael went every man unto his inheri­tance, to possesse the land; how was it possible they should possesse any thing,Judg. 3.3. while the five Lords of the Phi­listims, and all the Canaanites, and the Sidonians, and the Hivites, remained yet among them unconquered; with­out the wing of some such guard or army as this, under which to shelter themselves? How was it equal, or possible, that a few of the people up­on the guard of the whole, should be without relief, or sustain all the bur­den? Or how could every man be said to go unto his inheritance, to pos­sesse it, unlesse they performed this, or the like duty, by turnes or courses? These things considered, there is little doubt, but this congregation was ac­cording [Page 59] unto the institution of Moses, and put in ure by Joshua.

Sect. 3. The dissolu­tion of the Mosaical Common­wealth.

Thus stood both the Sanhedrim, and the congregation, with the infe­rior courts, and all the superstructures of the Mosaical Commonwealth, du­ring the life of Joshua, and the Elders of the Sanhedrim, that out-lived him; but without any sufficient root for the possible support of it, (the Canaa­nites not being destroyed) or with such roots onely, as were full of wormes. Wherefore,Judg. 2.7, 11. though the peo­ple served the Lord all the dayes of Jo­shua, and all the dayes of the Elders that out-lived Joshua; yet after the death of these, they did evil in the sight of the Lord. Judg. 2.1, 2. And an angel (a messenger or Prophet) of the Lord, came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you go up out of the land of Egypt, and have brought you into the land which I sware unto your fa­thers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. Deut. 7.2.12.2. And ye shall make no league with the inhabitants of this land, ye shall throw down their al­tars: but ye have not obey'd my voice; why have you done this? Josh. 23.3. Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from [Page 60] before you: Exod. 23.33.34.12. but they shall be as thornes in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare to you. Upon the several con­tents of which places,Antiq. l. 5. c. 2. saith Josephus, The Israelites (after the death of Jo­shua, and the Elders that out-lived him) neglecting their armes, betook them­selves unto tillage; and effeminated with peace, gave their minds rather to what was easie and pleasing, then what was se­cure or honourable: forgetful of the lawes of God, and of their discipline. Whereupon, God being moved unto anger, admonished them by a Prophet, that in sparing the Canaanites, they had diso­beyed him; and that in case they per­sisted, for his mercies neglected, they should taste of his justice. But they, though terrify'd with the oracle, were altogether averse unto the war; both because they were bribed by the Canaa­nites, and through luxury, were be­come unapt for labour: the form of their Commonwealth being now depra­ved, and the Aristocratical part there­of invalid: while neither the Senate was elected, nor the solemne Magistrates created as formerly. In which words, the not electing of the Senate, as formerly, being laid as a crime by Jo­sephus, [Page 61] unto the people; he is first clear enough for his part, that the Senate was formerly elected by the people, and ought to have been so still. And secondly, that henceforth the election of the Senate, or Sanhe­drim, was neglected by the people. So this Commonwealth, which through the not rooting out of the Canaanites, had never any foundation; came now to fail also in her superstru­ctures: for proof whereof, the te­stimony of Scripture is no lesse pre­gnant, in divers places.Judg. 1.3.27, 29, &c. As where Judah said unto Simeon his brother, Come up with me into my lot, that we may fight against the Canaanites, and I likewise will go with thee into thy lot. So Simeon went with him. In which words, you have a league made by two Tribes, and a war managed by them, while other Tribes, that is, Ephraim, Manasseh, with the rest, sat still: whereas, if there had been now any common ligament, as while the San­hedrim was in being; such leaguing, and such warring by particular Tribes, at their own discretion, could not have been. Again, whereas to judge a Tribe appertained unto the Sanhe­drim; [Page 62] in the judgment given against Benjamin, Judg. 20. by the congregation of four hundred thousand, there is no men­tion of the Sanhedrim at all.

Sect. 4. No King, some Senate; no Senate, some King.

Now government is of such nature, that where there is no Senate,Calavius apud Livi­um. Act 13. Judg. 7.23. there must be some king, or somewhat like a king; such was the Judge of Israel, yet is not their reckoning valid, that from hence compute the Monarchy of the Hebrews. First, because Paul distinguisheth between the Kings and the Judges. Secondly, because Gide­on, when he was Judge, in refusing to be King, doth the like. Thirdly, because the Judges in Israel (as Di­ctators in other Commonwealths) were not of constant election, but up­on emergencies only.Judg. 15.13. Fourthly, be­cause complaint being made unto the men of Judah, of their Judge Sam­son, they deliver'd him unto the Phi­listims, bound; no lesse then did the Romans their Consuls unto the Sam­nites. And lastly, because Samuel di­stinguishing to perfection, between Dictatorian, and Royal power; or between the Magistracy of the Judge, and of the King; sheweth plainly (in that he hearkened unto the voice of the [Page 63] people) that the one being without any balance at all,, was at the discre­tion of the people: and that the o­ther (not to be founded but upon propriety in himself; to which end, he must take the best of their fields, and give them unto his servants) could no otherwise subsist, then by having the people at the discretion of the King. This difference (being no small one) excepted, the office of the King, and of the Judge, was much at one; each consisting in judging the people, and going forth with their ar­mies.

Sect. 5. Besognia vezzaro spegnere.

But what ever be the difference be­tween these Magistracies, the State of the Israelitish Commonwealth un­der the Judges, was both void of her natural superstructures, and of her ne­cessary foundation; so the Israelites, when they were weak, served the Phi­listims, as is imply'd in the speech of the men of Judah, unto their Judge: Knowest thou not, Judg. 15.11. that the Philistims are rulers over us?— And it came to passe when Israel was strong, that they put the Canaanites to tribute, and did not utterly drive them out. Which, as it was contrary unto the command [Page 64] of God, so was it point-blank a­gainst all prudence. For thus nei­ther made they unto themselves friends, nor ruined they their ene­mies: which proceeding, as it fared with this Commonwealth,Livy. and was observed by Herennius, in that of the Samnites, is to the certain perdition of a people.

Sect. 6. The Anar­chy of Isra­el

Of the disorder of this people, up­on the dissolution of the Mosaical Commonwealth, Judg. 17.6 18.1.19.1.21.25. it is often said, that there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. That is, at the times rela­ted unto by these expressions; there was neither Sanhedrim, nor Judge in Israel: so every man, or at least, every Tribe, governed her self as she plea­sed. Which neverthelesse, is not so generally to be understood; but the Tribes (without either Judge or Sanhedrim) marching up with their Standards,Judg. 20. and Staves of the camp, not onely assembled the congregati­on in the usual place, at Mizpeh, but there condemned Benjamin, for the rape of the Levites concubine: and marching thence to put their de­cree in execution, reduced that obsti­nate [Page 65] Tribe; or rather, destroyed it by a civil war.

Sect. 7. The rise of the Hebrew Monarchy.

When in this, and divers other wayes, they had pamper'd their ene­mies, and exhausted themselves; they grew (as well they might) out of love with their policy: especially when after impious expostulation (Where­fore hath the Lord smitten us this day before the Philistims? 1 Sam 4.3.) they had as it were, staked their God, (let us fetch the ark—that it may save us) and the ark being taken by the enemy,1 Sam. 7.3. they they fell to Idolatry. To this it hap­pened, that though upon repentance, successe was better, God having mira­culously discomfited the Philistims before them: Yet Samuel their Judge was old (and had made his two sons, being takers of bribes, and per­verters of judgment) Judges over Is­rael. Whereupon, there was no nay, but a King they must and would have.

CHAP. IIII.

Shewing the State of the Israelites under their Kings, to the capti­vity.

Sect. 1. The Me­thod of this part.

FOr Method in this part, I shall first observe the balance or foun­dation, then the superstructures of the Hebrew Monarchies; and last of all, the Story of the Hebrew Kings.

Sect. 2. The Balance of this Mo­narchy.

The balance necessary unto King­ly government, even where it is re­gulated, or not absolute, is thus de­scribed by Samuel: This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: 1 Sam. 8.11, 14. He will take your fields, your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. That is, there being no pro­vision of this kind for a king, and it being of natural necessity, that a king must have such an Aristocracy, or No­bility, as may be able to support Mo­narchy; which otherwise, to a people having equal shares in propriety, is [Page 67] altogether incompatible; it followes, that he must take your fields, and give them unto his servants, or creatures.

This yet could Saul not do, in whose time the Monarchy attained not unto any balance, but was soon rent from him like the lap of a gar­ment.2 Sam. 8.1. 1 Chr. 11. The Prince who gave that ba­lance unto this Monarchy, which it had, was David: for besides his other conquests, by which he brought the Moabites, the Syrians of Damascus, the Ammonites, the Amalakites, the Edomites unto his obedience, and ex­tended his border unto the river Eu­phrates; he smote the Philistims, and subdued them, and took Gath and her townes, out of the hand of the Philistims. Now this country David thus took, was part of the land given unto the people by God, and which was by the Law of Moses to have been divided by lot unto them. Wherefore if this di­vision follow'd not, but David having taken this country, did hold it in his particular dominion or propriety; then though he took not from the people, any thing whereof they were in actual possession; yet, as to their legal right, took he from them (as [Page 68] Samuel had forewarned) their fields, their vineyards, and their oliveyards, even the best of them, and gave them unto his servants, or unto a nobility, which by this meanes he introduced.

2 Sam. 23. 1 Chr. 11.The first order of the nobility thus instituted, were, as they are termed by our translators, Davids worthies: to these may be added, the great officers of his realm and court, with such as sprang out of both. But however, these things, by advantage of forrain conquest, might be ordered by David, or continued for the time of his next successor; certain it is, that the ba­lance of Monarchy in so small a coun­try, must be altogether insufficient to it self, or destructive to the people.

Sect. 3. A Parallel of the Mo­narchical Balances in Israel and in Lacede­mon Plutarch in Agis and Cleom.

The Commonwealth of Lacede­mon being founded by Lycurgus, upon like lots with these designed by Mo­ses; came, after the spoil of Athens, to be destroyed by purchasers, and brought into one hundred hands: whereupon, the people being rooted out, there remained no more to the two kings, who were wont to go out with great armies, then one hundred Lords; nor any way, if they were in­vaded, to defend themselves, but by [Page 69] mercenaries, or making war upon the peny: which, at the farthest it would go, (not computing the difference in discipline) reach'd not in one third, those forces which the popular ba­lance could at any time have afforded without mony. This some of those kings perceiving, were of all others the most earnest to return unto the Popular balance. What disorders in a country no bigger then was theirs, or this of the Israelites, must, in case the like course be not taken, of neces­sity follow; may be at large perused in the story of Lacedemon; and shall be fully shewn, when I come unto the story of the present Kings.

Sect. 4. The Super­structures of the Hebrew Monarchy.

For the Superstructures of Davids government; it hath been shewn at large, what the congregation of Israel was; and that without the congrega­tion of Israel, and their result, there was not any law made by David. The like in the whole, or for the most part, was observed till Rehoboam; who refusing to redresse the grievances of the people, was deposed by one part of this congregation or Parlia­ment, and set up by another, to the confusion both of Parliament and [Page 70] people. And David (as after him Je­hoshaphat) did restore the Sanhedrim, I will not affirm, by popular election, after the ancient manner: He might do it perhaps, as he made Joab over the host, 1 Sam. 8.15. Jehoshaphat recorder, and Seraiah Scribe. Certain it is, the Jewish writers hold unanimously, that the seventy Elders were in Davids time; and by a good token: for they say, Unto him onely, of all the kings, it was lawfull, or permitted, to enter into the Sanhedrim; which I the ra­ther credit, for the words of David, where he saith;Psa. 111.1. I will praise the Lord with my whole heart, in the council, and in the congregation of the upright: which words relate unto the Senate, and the congregation of Israel. The final cause of the popular congrega­tion in a Commonwealth, is to give such a balance by their result, as may, and must keep the Senate from that faction, and corruption, whereof it is not otherwise curable, or to set it upright. Yet our translation gi­veth the words cited, in this manner: I will praise the Lord with my whole heart, in the assembly of the upright, and in the congregation. There are o­ther [Page 71] allusions in the English Psalmes, of the like nature, shaded in like man­ner. As,Psal. 82.1. God is present in the congre­gation of God, (that is, in the repre­sentative of the people of Israel) he judgeth among the Gods, that is, a­mong the seventy Elders, or in the Sanhedrim. What the orders of the Israelitish Monarchy in the time of David were, though our translators throughout the Bible, have done what they could against popular govern­ment, is clear enough in like places.

Sect. 5. The Story of the Hebrew Kings.

To conclude this chapter with the story of the Hebrew Kings: Till Re­hoboam, and the rent (through the cause mentioned) of the congregati­on in his time, the Monarchy of the Hebrews was one; but came thence­forth to be torn into two: that of Judah consisting of two Tribes, Ju­dah and Benjamin, and that of Israel, consisting of the other ten. From which time, this people thus divided, had little or no rest from the flame of that civil war; which once kindled between the two realmes or factions, could never be extinguished, but in the destruction of both. Nor was ci­vil [Page 72] War of so new a date among them; Saul, whole whole Reign was impo­tent and perverse, being conquered by David; and David invaded by his Son Absalom so strongly, that he fled before him. Solomon, the next Suc­cessour, happened to have a quiet Reign, by settling himself upon his Throne in the Death of Adonijah his elder Brother, and in the deposing of the high Priest Abiathar; yet made he the yoke of the people grie­vous. After him, we have the War between Jeroboam and Rehoboam. Then, the Conspiracy of Baasha against Nadab King of Israel, which endeth in the destruction of Jeroboams house, and the Usurpation of his Trone by Baasha, which Baasha happeneth to leave unto his Son Asa. Against A­sa riseth Zimri, Captain of the Cha­riots; killeth him with all his kindred, reigneth seven days; at the end where­of, he burneth himself for fear of Om­ri, who upon this occasion is made Captain by one part of the people, as is also Tibni by another. The next prize is plaid between Omri and Tibni, and their factions; in which Tibni is slain. Upon this success, Omri out-doing [Page 73] all his Predecessours in Tyran­ny, leaveth his Throne and Vertues unto his Son Ahab. Against Ahab, driveth Jehu furiously, destroyeth him and his family, giveth the flesh of his Queen Jezebel unto the Dogs, and re­ceiveth a present from those of Sama­ria, even seventy Heads of his Masters Sons in Baskets. Unto Asa and Je­hosaphat, Kings of Judah, belongeth much Reverence. But upon this Throne sat Athaliah; who, to reign, mur­dered all her grand-children save one, which was Joash. Joash being hidden by the high Priest, at whose command Athaliah was some time after slain, endeth his reign in being murdered by his Servants. To him succeedeth his Son Amaziah, slain also by his Ser­vants. About the same time Zacha­riah King of Israel was smitten by Shallum, who reigned in his stead. Shal­lum by Manahim, who reigned in his stead. Pekaha the Son of Manahim by Pekah one of his Captains, who reigned in his stead. Pekah by Ho­shea. Hoshea having reigned nine years, is carried by Salmanezer King of Assyria with the ten Tribes into Captivity. Now might it be expected [Page 74] that the Kingdom of Judah should en­joy peace: a good King they had, which was Hezekiah; but to him suc­ceeded his Son Manasseh, a shedder of innocent blood. To Manasseh suc­ceeded his Son Ammon, slain by his servants. Josiah the next, being a good Prince, is succeeded by Jehoahaz, who being carried into Egypt, there dieth a Prisoner, while Jehoiakim his Bro­ther becomes Pharaohs Tributary. The last of these Princes was Zedekiah, in whose reign was Judah led away cap­tive by Nebuchadnezzar. Thus came the whole Enumeration of those dreadful Curses denounced by Moses in this case, to be fulfilled in this peo­ple; of whom it is also said, I gave them a king in my anger, Deut. 28. Hos. 13.11. and took him away in my wrath.

To conclude this Story with the Resemblances or Differences that are between Monarchical and Popular Government: What parallel can there be beyond the Stories whereby each of them are so largely described in Scri­pture? Truth it is, that Ahimele [...] u­surped the Magistracy of Judge in Is­rael, or made himself King by the men [Page 75] of Sichem, that the men of Ephraim fought against Jeptha, and that there was a civil War caused by Benjamin; yet in a popular Government, the ve­ry womb (as they will have it) of tumult, though never so founded, that it could be steady, or take any suffici­ent root, can I find no more of this kind.

Sect. 6. A parallel of the Tri­bunitian Storms with those in the Hebrew Monarchies

But the Tribunes of the people in Rome, or the Romans under the Ma­gistracy of their Trubunes, through­out the whole administration of that Government, were never quiet, but at perpetual strife and enmity with the Senate. It is very true: but first, this happened not from a cause natural unto popular Government, but from a cause unnatural unto popular Go­vernment; yea, so unnatural unto popular Government, that the like hath not been found in any other Commonwealth. Secondly, the cause is undeniably discovered to have been consistent in a faction introduced by the Kings, and fostered by the Nobi­lity, excluding the suffrage of the main body of the people through an Optimacy, or certain rank or num­ber, admitted not by the people or [Page 76] their Election, but by the value of their Estates unto the Legislative Power, as the Commons of that Na­tion. So the State of this people was as if they had two Houses of Lords, and no House of Commons. Thirdly, this danger were in any o­ther Nation, at least in ours, much harder to be incur'd, then Authors hi­therto have made it to be seen in this. And last of all, this enmity, or these factions, were without blood; which in Monarchies they are not, as you saw well in those mentioned; and this Nation in the Barons Wars, and those of York and Lancaster, besides others, hath felt: or if at length they came indeed unto blood, this was not till foundations were destroyed, that is, till the Balance of popular Govern­ment in Rome was totally ruined, which is equally in cases of like na­ture unavoydable, be the Government of what kind soever, as of late years we have been sufficiently informed by our own sad experience.

CHAP. V.

Shewing the state of the Jews in Cap­tivity, and after their return out of it; with the frame of the Jewish Commonwealth.

Sect. 1. The state of the Israel­ites in Cap­vity.

WE left the Children of Is­rael upon a sad march, e­ven into Captivity: what orders had been anciently observed by them during the time they were in Egypt, which for one (as hath been already shewn) was their seventy El­ders, the same so far forth as would be permitted by the Princes whose Ser­vants they were, continued in pra­ctice with them during the time of their Captivity, out of which the ten Tribes never more returned.Jer 25.12. 2 Chr. 36.22. Ezra 1. The two Tribes, when seventy years were accomplished, from the time that they were carryed away by Nebuchadnez­zar, and in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, returned in a good part of [Page 78] them, not onely with the Kings leave and liking, but with restitution of the Plate and Vessels belonging unto the Temple.

Sect. 2. The Balance of the Com­monwealth restored by Zorobabel

The first Colony (as I may say) of the two Tribes, or those that returned under the Conduct of Zorobabel Prince of Judah, Ezra 2. amounted unto for­ty two thousand three hundred and threescore, among which there were about one hundred Patriarchs, or Prin­ces of families. To these, in the reign of Artaxerxes, Ezra 8. came sixteen or twen­ty Princes more with their families. Among whom the Prophets, Haggai, Zacharias and Malachi, were emi­nent. Some of them could not shew their fathers house and their seed, Ezra 2.1. whe­ther they were of Israel. But these were few; for it is said of them in ge­neral, That they went every one unto his own city, or to the inheritance of his Fathers: in which you may note the restitution of the Balance of the Mo­saical Commonwealth; though what this might come to without fixation, the Jubilee being not after the Capti­vity in use, I cannot say; however, for the present, plain it is that the an­cient Superstructures did also ensue: [Page 79] as in order unto the putting away of strange wives which the people in Cap­tivity had taken, is apparent.

Sect. 3. The Super­structures of this Com­monwealth in the time of Ezra & Nehemia.

Their whole progress hitherto is according unto the Law of Moses, they return every man to his inheri­tance by direction of his pedigree, or according unto the house of his Fa­thers; they are led by Princes of their families, and are about to put away strange wives: for what reason then should a man believe that what fol­lows should not be according unto the Orders of the same Law-giver? Now that which follows, in order to the putting away of these strange wives, is, Proclamation was made throughout Ju­dah and Jerusalem, Ezra 10.8, 9. unto all the chil­dren of the captivity, that they should gather themselves unto Jerusalem; and that whosoever would not come within three days, according to the counsel of the princes and elders, all his substance should be forfeited, and himself separa­ted from the congregation of those that had been carryed away. This plainly, by the penalty annexed, is a Law, a Law for banishment; of which kinde there was none made by Moses: and a Law made by the Princes and the El­ders. [Page 80] What doubt then can remain, but these Elders were the Sanhedrim or seventy Elders? But whereas nei­ther the Sanhedrim, nor any other Senate of it self hath been found to make Laws; what can these Princes be that are joyned with the Elders, other then those spoken of before, that is, the Princes of Families, or chief of the Fathers in the Congre­gation of them that had been carry­ed away? So the Princes and the El­ders in this place may be understood of the Sanhedrim and the people; for thus David proposeth unto the con­gregation of Israel,1 Chr. 27.1. to wit, the chief Fathers, and must be understood of them, because there is no such thing throughout the Scripture to be found, as a Law made by the Sanhedrim with­out the people; and if so, then that the Sanhedrim with the people had power to make a Law, is by this place of Scripture undeniably evinced. But besides, the chief Fathers which here are called Rulers of the congregation, Ezra 10.14. and in the time of David were cal­led Captains of thousands and Captains of hundreds, mention is also made of the elders of every city, and the judges [Page 81] thereof: in which words, you have the Judges in the Gates throughout the Tribes of Israel as they were in­stituted by Moses: all which par­ticulars being rightly summed up, come unto this total, That the Com­monwealth restored by Ezra, was the very same that originally was institu­ted by Moses.

Sect. 4. A transition unto the Ca­listical or Jewish Common­wealth.

Such was the Government restored by Zorobabel, Ezra and Nehemia; now whether the Jewish or Cabalistical Commonwealth, fathered by the Pres­byterian Jews of latter ages upon Moses or Ezra, be the same, shall be shewn, by reducing the invention of these men unto three heads: as first, their Cabala; secondly, their Ordina­tion; and last of all, their great Sy­nagogue.

Sect. 5. The Caba­la.

The Cabala, called also by the Jews the Oral Law, consisteth of certain traditions by them pretended at the institution of the Sanhedrim to have been verbally delivered unto the se­venty Elders by Moses for the Go­vernment of the Commonwealth. These were never written till after the dispersion of the Jews by the Emperour Adrian; when, to save them [Page 82] from being lost, they were digested into those Volumes called the Tal­mud; which they hold to be, and indeed are, as to matter of Fact, the Authen­tick Records of their [...]overnment. Of the Traditions thus recorded, saith one of the Rabbins or Jewish Do­ctors: Think not that the written Law (or the Law of Moses) is funda­mental, Rabbi Corbulen­sis. but that the Oral or Traditio­nal Law is fundamental, it being upon this that God entered into a league with the Israelites, as it is written. After the tenor of these words, Exod. 34.27. I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. A man (saith another) who returneth from the study of the Talmud unto the study of the Bible, In codice juris Cha­giga. can have no quiet conscience, neither was there any peace to him that went out or came in. Zach. 8.10. The like where­unto is the Talmudical way of applying Scripture throughout. And it was the common blessing the Pharisees gave their Children: My son, hearken unto the words of a Scribe or Doctor, rather then unto the Law of Moses. To whom saith Christ hereupon,Mat. 15.6. Ye have made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Sect. 6. Ordination by impositi­on of hands.

Now as true as the Talmud, or as [Page 83] this word of a Scribe, or that Moses delivered the Oral Law unto the se­venty Elders, and to Joshua, so true it is that Moses ordained both the se­venty Elders and Joshua by the impo­sition of hands; and that this ordinati­on by the imposition of hands, toge­ther with the Oral Law, came succes­sively, and hand in hand from the se­venty Elders, and from Joshua down­right unto these Doctors. This indeed is so clear in their Talmud, that there is no denying of it; but that as to the seventy Elders, it is quite contrary unto Scripture, hath already been made sufficiently apparent; for Jo­shua, it is acknowledged that he was ordained by Moses with imposition of hands. But this Argument, besides that the Act of Moses was accompa­nied with miracle, and that it is absurd to think that a thing plainly miracu­lous should or can be received as an order in a Commonwealth, will go no step farther, then that Joshua upon this authority might have elected his suc­cessor by the imposition of hands: let them shew us then that he did so, or indeed that he left any successour at all: for certainly if Joshua left no suc­cessour [Page 84] so ordained, or no successor at all, which is the truth of the case, then descended there upon them no such Ordination from Joshua; and so by con­sequence, none from Moses. Whence it followeth, that the Authority and Vogue of Ordination by the impositi­on of hands among the Jews, deri­veth not from the Law of Moses, but from the Oral Law; which how bad an Authority soever it be unto us of right, is of fact, or of what the exer­cise of Ordination was among the Jews, a good and sufficient testimony. Now thereby the condition of this Or­dination (though in some times of the Commonwealth it were less re­strain'd) was such, that no man not having received the same from the great Sanhedrim, or some one of the inferiour Courts by laying on of hands, by word of mouth, or by writing, could be a Presbyter, or capable of a­ny Judicature or Magistracy in the Commonwealth, or to give counsel in the Law, or any part of the Law, or to be of the assembly of the great Sy­nagogue.

Sect. 7. The great Synagogue.

VVhat the assembly of the Princes and Fathers was in the time of Ezra, [Page 85] hath been shewn, and is left unto judgement. But this is that which the Talmudists and their Ancestors the Cabalistical Jews, among vvhich the Pharisees were of the highest rank, unanimously affirm to have consisted of the seventy Elders, and of a Jun­cta of fifty Presbyters not elected by the people, but by the laying on of hands by the Sanhedrim, or by some other Judicatory. This, they say, was the institution of their great Syna­gogue; where I leave them: but that according to the sense wherein they cite their Authority, the like with them was the constant practice, appeareth not onely by their own Testimony and Records, but is plain in Scripture; as where Christ speaketh of the Jews unto his Apostles in this manner:Grot. ad Mat. 10.17. They will scourge you in their Synagogues; that is, the Jews, having as yet not a­ny Law made whereby they can in­vade the liberty of conscience, or bring you for the practice thereof un­to punishment, will call their great Sy­nagogue, wherein the Priests and the Pharisees, or the Sanhedrim, have at least seven to five the over-ba­lancing vote unto the rest; which al­so [Page 86] are their creatures, and by these will easily carry or make such Laws where­by they may inflict upon you corpo­ral punishment: which interpretation of Christs words, was fulfilled even unto a tittle, or rather with over-mea­sure. For upon this occasion the high Priest,Act. 4.6. and as many as were of the kin­dred of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem. That this same Juncta to be in this case added unto the Sanhedrim, was to consist but of fifty, those fifty not elected by the people, but chosen by the Elders of the Sanhedrim; and not out of the bo­dy of the people, but out of such one­ly as had received Ordination by the Sanhedrim, or by some other Court, or indeed were actually Judges in some other Court, was not enough, unless they might consist also of as many as were of the kindred of the high Priest. Act. 5.21. VVhich Rights and Priviledges being all observed, The high priest came, and they that were with him, and called the Sanhedrim, and all the Presbytery of the Children of Israel: that is, so ma­ny of them, as being assembled in the great Synagogue, represented all the Presbytery of the Children of Israel, [Page 87] or all the children of Israel themselves. In this assembly you have the full de­scription of the great Synagogue: and when (in this Synagogue) they had beaten the Apostles Peter and John, they commanded them that they should not speak in the Name of Jesus, Act. 5.40. and let them go. Upon these proceedings, there are considerations of good im­portance; as first, that the Cabalisti­cal Doctors themselves did never so much as imagine that Moses had in­dued the Sanhedrim alone, or separate­ly considered from the people, with Legislative power; nevertheless, that the Sanhedrim came into the place, and succeeded unto the whole power of Moses, they unanimously held: whence, even upon their principles, it must follow, that in Moses distinctly and separately taken from the people, there could be no power of making a­ny Law. The second thing remar­kable in this proceeding, is, That the most corrupt Commonwealth, and in her most corrupt age, had not yet the face, without some blind, to pretend unto Legislative power in a single Council. The last I shall observe, is, That no possible security is to be given [Page 88] unto liberty of conscience, but in the security of civil liberty, and in that onely, not by Laws which are other­wise as perishing as flowers or fruits, but in the roots or fundamental orders of the Government. What even in these times must have followed as to the liberty of conscience, had there been an equal representative of the people, is apparent, in that the captain and the officers imployed by this Syna­gogue to apprehend the Apostles,Act. 5.26. brought them without violence; for they feared the people, lest they should have been stoned. It is true, there is nothing with us more accustomary, even in the solemnest places, and upon the so­lemnest occasions, then to upbraid the people with giddiness, from the Hosan­na and the Crucifige of the Jews. VVhat may be charged upon a multi­tude not under orders, the fouler crime it be, is the fairer argument for such orders as where they have been once established, the people have not been guilty of such crimes: at least, it should seem, that in this case there is great scarcity of witnesses against them, seeing the Death of Socrates is more laid unto one people, then [Page 89] that of all the Martyrs unto Kings; yet were the false witnesses by whom Socrates suffered, (and by the like whereunto a man in the best Govern­ment may chance to suffer) no sooner discovered, then they were destroyed by the people, who also erected a Sta­tue unto Socrates. And the people who at the arraignment of Christ, cryed, Crucifie him, crucifie him, Mark 15.11. Mat. 21. were such as the chief Priests moved or prompted, and such also as feared the multitude: now that the people which could be prompted by the chief Priests, or the people which could fear the people, could be no other then this preten­ded representative of the people, but indeed Juncta of cousins and retai­ners, is that, which for ought I know, may be possible; and the rather, for what happened before upon the Law called among the Jews The Law of the Zealot, which was instituted by Moses in these words: If thy brother, Deut. 13.6 the son of thy mother—entice thee, saying, Let us go and serve other gods—thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death—and afterwards the hand of all the people. By this Law it is plain, that as to the true intent thereof, it relateth [Page 90] unto no other case then that onely of Idolatry. The execution of the same, according to the Talmud, might be performed by any number of the People, being not under ten, either ap­prehending the Party in the Fact, or upon Testimony of such VVitnesses as had so apprehended him; yet will it not be found to have been executed by the People, but upon instigation of the Priest; as where (they interpreting the Law as they list) Stephen is stoned. Now if the Priests could have made the People do as much against Christ, what needed they have gone unto Pi­late for help? and if they could not, why should we think that the Multi­tude which cryed out, Crucifie Him, crucifie Him, should be other then the great Synagogue?

However, that it was an Oligarchy, consisting of a Senate and a Presby­tery, which not onely scourged the A­postles, but caused Christ to be cruci­fied, is certain. And so much for the great Synagogue.

Sect. 8. The Model of the Jew­ish Common­wealth.

These parts being Historically laid down, and proved, it followeth that the Cabalistical or Jewish Common­wealth was much-what of this Model.

Be the capacity of bearing Magi­stracy, or giving counsel upon the Law, or any part of the Law of this Commonwealth, in no other then such onely as are Presbyters.

Be Presbyters of two sorts: the one general, the other particular.

Be Presbyters general ordained by the laying on of hands of the Prince of the Sanhedrim with the rest of the Elders, or Presbytery of the same, and by no other Court, without a Li­cence from the Prince of the Sanhe­drim; and be those ordained in this manner, eligible by the major vote of the seventy Elders into the San­hedrim, or into any other Court, by the major vote of the Elders or Presby­tery of that Court.

Be Presbyters particular ordained by any Court of Iustice, and be these capable of giving counsel in the Law, or in some particular part of the Law, according unto the gift that is in them by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery.

Be all Presbyters capable of no­mination unto the great Synagogue.

Be the Sanhedrim in Law made [Page 92] the supreme Magistracy or Iudicato­ry; and with a Iuncta of fifty Pres­byters of their Nomination, the great Synagogue.

Be the great Synagogue the Le­gislative power in this Common­wealth.

Such was the Government, where the word of a Scribe or Doctor was a­vowedly held to be of more validity then the Scripture; and where the usual appellation of the people by the Do­ctors and Pharisees, was (populus ter­rae) the Rascal Rabble.

Sect. 9. Ordination in the lesser Synagogue.

Regis ad exemplum totus componitur orbis. There were other Synagogues for other uses, as those wherein the Law was read every Sabbath-day. Each of which also had her Ruler and her Presbytery, with power to ordain o­thers unto this capacity.

CHAP. VI.

Shewing how Ordination was brought into the Christian Church, and the divers ways of the same t [...] were at divers times in use with the Apostles.

Sect. 1. The form introduced by Christ in­to his Church.

VVE do not find that Christ (who gave little coun­tenance unto the tradi­tions of the Jews) ordained his A­postles or Disciples by the imposition of hands: his Apostles were twelve, whom he compareth unto the twelve Princes of the Tribes of Israel; Matth. 19.28. and his Disciples were seventy, in which number it is received by Divines, that he alluded unto the seventy Elders or Sanhedrim of Israel. So thus far the Government of the Church instituted by Christ, was according unto the form instituted by Moses. But Christ in this form was King and Priest, not [Page 94] after the institution of Moses, who se­parated the Levites unto the Priest­hood;Vide Grotium, & videat Grotius, in Epist. ad Hebraeos. but as before Moses, when the Royal and Priestly Function were not separated; and after the order or man­ner of Melchisedec, who came not to the Priesthood by proving his pedi­gree, as the high Priest in Israel by Father, or as the King-priest in Athens by Mother, but without Father and Mother. Or be what hath been said of Melchisedec approved or rejected, such for the rest as hath been shewn, was the form introduced by Christ into his Church.

Sect. 2. The first way of Or­dination.

Christ, being taken up into Heaven, the Disciples in Jerusalem encreased unto about one hundred and twenty names,Act. 1. and the Apostles decreased by one, or by Judas, who was gone unto his place. Peter, whether upon counsel and determination of the eleven A­postles (as is most probable) before­hand, or otherwise, stood up, and spake both unto the Apostles and Disciples assembled upon this occasion, That one out of the present assembly might he ordained an Apostle: and they (that is, the congregation, or why was this proposed to them?) appointed two, by [Page 95] suffrage; for how otherwise can an as­sembly appoint? these were Barsabas and Matthias; which names being written in scrolls, were cast into one urn; two lots, whereof one was a blank, and the other inscribed with the word Apostle, being at the same time cast into another Urn: which done, they prayed that God would shew which of the Competitors by them so made, he had chosen: when they had thus pray­ed, they gave forth their lots, that is, a scroll out of the one urn, and then a name to that scroll out of the other urn: and the lot fell upon Matthias, or Matthias was taken: whereupon Mat­thias was numbred, or rather decreed with the eleven Apostles: for [...]. Pse­phisma, being a word which properly deriveth from such stones or pebbles as popular assemblies of old were wont to ballot with or give suffrage by, not onely signifieth a decree, but especially such a decree as is made by a popular assembly. Now if this were Ordination in the Christian Church, and of Apostolical right, then may there be a way of Ordination in the Christian Church, and of Apostolical right, exactly conformable unto the [Page 96] ballot, or way used by Moses in the in­stitution of the seventy Elders or San­hedrim of Israel.

Sect. 3. The second way of Or­dination.

After the conversion of some thou­sands more,Act. 4.4. most, if not all, of which were Jews, a people though convert­ed, yet so tenacious of their Laws and Customs, that even circumcision (hi­therto not forbidden by the Apostles) was continued among them; the twelve Apostles called the multitude of the Disciples unto them. Act. 6. So Moses, when he had any thing to propose, as­sembled the people of Israel. And when the twelve had thus called the Disciples, they said, Look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. So Mo­ses said unto the congregation of Isra­el, Take ye wise men, and understan­ding, and known among your Tribes, and I will make them rulers over you. And the saying (of the Apostles) pleased the whole multitude. So the people of Israel were wont to answer unto Moses, The thing which thou sayest is good for us to do. This saying of the Apostles being thought good by the whole multitude, the whole mul­titude [Page 97] elected seven men, whom they set before the Apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. To say in this place (as they do) that the act of the people was but a presentation, and that the Apo­stles had power to admit or refuse the persons so presented; is as if one should say, That the act of electing Parliament-men by the people of Eng­land, was but a presentation, and that the King had power to admit or refuse the persons so presented. And seeing the Deacons henceforth had charge of the Word; to say, That by this choice the Deacons received not the charge of the Word, but the care to serve Tables, is as if one should say, That Parliament-men by their Election re­ceived onely the care to levy money or provision for the Kings Table; but if upon such Election they debated also concerning Laws, that power they received from the King onely.

But if this were a way of Ordinati­on in the Christian Church, and of A­postolical right, then there may be a way of Ordination in the Christian Church, and of Apostolical right, consisting in part of the orders of the [Page 98] Israelitish Commonwealth, and in part of the Orders of the Jewish Com­monwealth.

Sect. 4. The third way of Or­dination.

Lastly, Paul writing unto Timothy concerning his Ordination,1 Tim. 4.14 hath in one place this Expression, Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophesie, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. So the Pres­bytery of a Jewish Synagogue laid their hands on the party ordained. And in another place he hath this expressi­on:2 Tim. 1.6. Stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the laying on of my hands. So the Ruler of a Jewish Synagogue did lay his hands also on the party ordain­ed. Moreover, the Apostle in these words, The gift that is in thee by lay­ing on of hands, though in relation unto gifts beyond comparison more excellent, useth the phrase known up­on like occasion to have been com­mon with the Jews. Wherefore if this were a way of Ordination in the Christian Church, and of Apostolical right, then may there be a way of Or­dination in the Christian Church ex­actly conformable unto the Jewish Commonwealth, and yet be of Apo­stolical right. Nor is it so strange that [Page 99] the Apostles in matters of this nature should comply with the Jews, of which so many were converted, seeing it is certain that not onely the Apostles, but all such as in these times were conver­ted, did observe the Jewish Sabbath, nay, and that Paul himself took Ti­mothy and circumcised him, because of the Jews; that is, to comply with them, or to give them no offence. Nor do our Divines any where pretend im­position of hands to be derived from Christ, but unanimously confess, That it was taken up by the Apostles from the Jewish Sanhedrim.

Sect. 5. The provi­dence of God in the different way of A­postolical Ordination.

Now in these several ways of Or­dination, there is a most remarkable providence of God. For whereas States and Princes in receiving of Re­ligion are not at any point so jealous as of encroachment upon their pow­er; the first way of Apostolical Ordi­nation destroyeth Monarchical power: the last wholly excludeth the power of the people; and the second hath a mixture which may be re [...]ived by a Commonwealth, or by a Monarchy. But where it is received by a Com­monwealth, the imposition of hands comes to little; and where it is re­ceived [Page 100] by a Monarchy, the Election of the people cometh to nothing, as may be farther considered in the Ori­ginal and progress of the Conge d' E­lire.

The ways of Ordination or of Church-Government lying thus in Scripture, the not receiving of the Christian Religion is not that where­of any State or Prince through the whole world can be any ways excuse­able

THE CONCLUSION: SHEWING, That not God, nor Christ, nor the Apostles, ever in­stituted any Government Ecclesiastical or Civil up­on other principles then those onely of humane Prudence.

Sect. 1. Uses of this Book.

TO sum up this second Book in the Uses that may be of it: Certain it is of the Greek and Roman Stories, that he who hath not some good Idea or Notion of the Go­vernment whereunto they relate, can­not rightly understand them. If the [Page 102] like hold as to the Scripture-story, some light may be thereunto contributed by this Book. Again, if some gifted men happening to read it, should chance be of like judgment, it is an Argument for acquired learning, in that for the means of acquired lear­ning, and in the means of acquired learning for Universities. For how little soever this be, had it not been the fashion with the English Gentry, in the breeding of their sons, to give them a smack of the Universitie, I should not have done so much.

Sect. 2. The present Use of this Book.

But letting these pass. If there were Commonwealths, or Govern­ments exercising soveraign power by the Senate and the people, before that of Israel, as namely, Gibeon. If the inferiour Orders and Courts in Israel, as those instituted by Moses after the advice of Jethro a Heathen, were tran­scribed out of another Government though Heathen, as namely, that of Midian. If the order of the Church introduced by Christ in his twelve A­postles and his seventy Disciples, were after the pattern of Israel, namely, in the twelve Princes of the Tribes, and the seventy Elders. If there were [Page 103] three distinct ways of Ordination in­troduced by the Apostles;But they say, Mr. Dean O­wen, to the Parliament at their Fast, was positive That no Govern­ment upon meer hu­mane prin­ciples can be good or lasting. Therefore the Veneti­ans are greater Saints then the English. one exact­ly according unto the Ballot of Isra­el, as namely, in the Ordination of Matthias. Another exactly according to the way of the Jewish Sanhedrim or Synagogue, as namely, that of Ti­mothy. And a third, composed of these two, as namely, that of the Dea­cons. Then is it a clear and undeny­able result of the whole, That not God, nor Christ, nor the Apostles, ever insti­tuted any Government Ecclesiastical or Civil upon other principles then those onely of humane prudence.

Sect. 3. The Conse­quence of this Use.

An Observation of such conse­quence, as, where it hath been rightly heeded, there the truth of Religion and of Government once planted, have taken root and flourished; and where it hath not been rightly heeded, there hath Religion or the pretence of it been the hook and the line, and the State the prey of Impostors and false prophets, as was shewn in the hypo­critical Pharisees, for ever stigmatiz'd by the word of Truth.

And for might, let her be never so much exalted in her self; let her sword be never so dreadfully brandished; the [Page 104] Government not founded upon rea­son, a creature of God, and the crea­ture of God whose undoubted right in this part is by himself undenyably avowed and asserted, is a weapon fra­med against God; and no weapon fra­med against God shall prosper.

Sect. 4. A transition to the next Book.

The principles of humane prudence, and in them the art of Law-giving, being shewn in the first Book, and vin­dicated throughout the whole course of Scripture by this second, I come in the third to shew a Model of Govern­ment, framed according unto the art thus shewn, and the principles thus vindicated.

Mr. Manton, through his undertaking to the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses in Parlia­ment, by his Sermon at their Fast, to prove That the Government instituted by Moses, consisted of King, Lords and Commons, may by them be thought obliged to confute the present Book.

THE THIRD BOOK: CONT …

THE THIRD BOOK: CONTAINING A MODEL OF Popular Government.

Practicably proposed accor­ding to the foregoing Art, Confirmed by the Scripture, and according to the present BALANCE OR STATE of PROPRIETY IN ENGLAND.

Thy youth is renewed like the eagles, Psal. 103.5.

LONDON, Printed by J.C. for Henry Fletcher, at the three Gilt Cups in Pauls Churchyard, near the West-end. 1659.

The Order of the Third Book.

  • THe Preface, Containing a mo­del of popular Government proposed notionally.
  • CHAP. I. Containing the civil part of the model proposed practi­cably.
  • CHAP. II. Containing the re­ligious part of the Model proposed practicably.
  • CHAP. III. Containing the Mi­litary part of the Model propo­sed practicably.
  • CHAP. IV. Containing the pro­vincial [Page 2] part of the Model propo­sed practicably.
  • The Conclusion, Shewing how the Model may be proved or exami­ned; and giving a brief answer to Mr. Wren's last book, intitled Monarchy asserted, &c.

THE PREFACE:

Containing a Model of Popular Go­vernment proposed Notionally.

THere is between the discourses of such as are commonly cal­led natural Philoso­phers, and those of Anatomists, large difference; the former are facile, the later difficult. Philosophers, discour­sing of elements, for example, that the body of man consisteth of fire, air, earth and water, are easily both un­derstood and credited, in that by common experience we see the body of man returneth unto the earth from whence it was taken. Like entertain­ment may befall the elements of go­vernment, as in the first of these books [Page 4] they are stated. But the fearful and wonderful making, the admirable stru­cture and great variety of the parts of mans body, in which the Discourses of Anatomists are altogether conver­sant, are understood by so few, that, I may say, they are not understood by any. Certain it is, that the Delivery of a Model of Government (which either must be of none effect, or em­brace all those Muscles, Nerves, Ar­teries and Bones, which are necessa­ry unto any Function of a well-order­ed Commonwealth) is no less then political Anatomy. If you come short of this, your Discourse is alto­gether ineffectual; if you come home, you are not understood: you may, perhaps, be called A Learned Author; but you are obscure, and your Do­ctrine is inpracticable. Now had I suffered in this, and not the people, I should long since have left them unto their humour; but seeing it is they that suffer by it, and not my self, I will be yet more a fool, or they shall be yet wiser. It comes into my head that I saw long since, upon an Italian Stage, while the Spectators wanted Hoops for their sides. A Country fel­low [Page 5] came with an Apple in his hand; unto which, in strange variety of fa­ces, his Teeth were undoubt­edly threatned, when entered a young Anatomist brim-full of his last Lesson, who staying in good time the hand of this same Country Fellow, would by no means suffer him to go on with so great an Enterprize, till he had first named and described unto him all the Bones, Nerves and Mus­cles which are naturally necessary un­to that motion: at which the good man being with admiration plainly chap-fallen, comes me in a third, who snatching away the apple, devoured it in the presence of them both. If the people in this case whereof I am spea­king, were naturally so well furnished, I had here learnt enough to have kept silence; but their eating in the politi­cal way, of absolute necessity, requi­reth the aid of some political Anato­mist; without which, they may have appetites, but will be chap-fallen. Ex­amples whereof they have had but too many; one I think may be insisted upon without envy.

This is that which was called The Agreement of the People, consisting [Page 6] in sum of these Propositions:

The Anar­chy of the Levellers. That there be a Representative of the Nation consisting of four hundred persons, or not above.

Which Proposition putteth the Bar on the quite contrary side; this being the first example of a Commonwealth, wherein it was conceived, That five hundred thousand men, or more, might be represented by four hundred. The Representation of the people in one man, causeth Monarchy; and in a few, causeth Oligarchy: the Many, can be no otherwise represented in a State of Liberty, then by so many, and so qualified, as may within the compass of that number and nature embrace the interest of the whole people. Government should be established upon a rock, not set upon a precipice: a Representative consisting but of four hundred, though in the nature thereof it be popular, is not in it self a weapon that is fixed, but hath something of the broken Bow, as still apt to start aside unto Monarchy. But the paucity of number, is tempered with the shortness of term, it being farther provided,

That this Representative be bien­nial, [Page 7] and sit not above eight moneths. But seeing a supreme Council in a Comonwealth is neither assembled nor dissolved, but by stated Orders di­recting upwards an irresistable strength from the root, and as one tooth or one nayl is driven out by another; how is it provided that this Biennial Council shall not be a perpetual Council? whereas there is nothing more dangerous in a Commonwealth, then entire Removes of Councils; how is it provided that these shall be men sufficiently experienced for the management of Affairs? And last of all, whereas dissolution unto Sove­raign power is death, unto whom are these after their eight moneths to be­queath the Commonwealth? In this case it is provided,

That there be a Council of State elected by each new Representative, within twenty days after their first meeting, to continue till ten days af­ter the meeting of the next Represen­tative. In which the faults observed in the former Order, are so much worse, as this Council consists of few­er. Thus far this Commonwealth is Oligarchy: but it is provided,

That these Representatives have Soveraign power, save that in some things the people may resist them by arms. Which first is a flat contradi­ction, and next is downright Anarchy. Where the Soveraign power is not as intire and absolute as in Monarchy it self, there can be no Government at all. It is not the limitation of So­veraign power that is the cause of a Commonwealth, but such a libration or poyse of Orders, that there can be in the same no number of men having the interest, that can have the power; nor any number of men having the power that can have the interest to invade or disturb the Government. As the or­ders of Commonwealths are more approaching to, or remote from this Maxime, (of which this of the Le­vellers hath nothing) so are they more quiet or turbulent. In the Re­ligious part onely, proposing a Na­tional Religion and Liberty of Con­science, though without troubling themselves much with the means, they are right in the end.

And for the Military part, they pro­vide,

That no man (even in case of in­vasion) [Page 9] be compellable to go out of the Country where he liveth, if he procure another to serve in his room. Which plainly entayleth upon this Commonwealth a fit guard for such Liberty, even a mercenary Army: for what one doth of this kind, may and (where there is no bar) will be done by all: so every Citizen by money procuring his man, procures his Ma­ster. Now if this be work of that kind which the people in like cases (as those also of Rome, when they insti­tuted their Tribunes) do usually make, then have I good reason not onely to think, but to speak it au­dibly, That to sooth up the people with an opinion of their own suffici­ency in these things, is not to befriend them, but to feed up all hopes of Li­berty unto the slaughter. Yet the Leveller A latter Pamphlet called xxv Queries, u­sing the Balance of pro­priety, which is fair e­nough, refers it to Sir Thomas Smiths 15 Chap. (de Repub popu­li ingenio accommo­danda) where the Au­thor speaketh not one word of propriety; which is very foul., a late Phamphlet, having gather­ed out of Oceana the prin­ciples by him otherwise well insinuated, attributes it unto the Agitators, or that Assembly which fra­med this wooden Agree­ment of the people: That [Page 10] then some of that Council asserted these principles, and the reason of them.

But Railery apart, we are not to think it hath been for nothing that the wisest Nations have in the formation of Go­vernment, as much relyed upon the invention of some one man, as upon themselves: for whereas it cannot be too often inculcated, that Reason consisteth of two parts; the one In­vention, the other Judgment; a peo­ple or an Assembly are not more emi­nent in the matter of Judgment, then voyd of Invention. Nor is there in this any thing at all against the suffi­ciency of a people in the manage­ment of a proper form, being once introduced, though they should never come to a perfect understanding of it. For were the bodies of the people such as they could commonly under­stand, they would be (as I may say) wooden bodies, or such as they could not use; whereas their bodies being such as they understand not, are such in the use whereof they are per­fect.

There are in Models of Govern­ment, things of so facile use, and yet of so difficult understanding, that we must not think them even in Venice, who use their Commonwealth with the greatest prudence and facility, to be all or any considerable number of them such as do perfectly understand the true Reason or Anatomy of that Government; less is not to be pre­sumed, in that not any of those Vene­tians, who have written hitherto of their own form, have brought the truth of it unto any perfect light. The like perhaps (and yet with due acknowledgement unto Livy) might be said of the Romans. The Lace­demonians had not the right under­standing of their Model, till about the time of Aristotle it was first written by Dicearchus one of his Scholars. How egregiously our Ancestors (till those foundations were broken which at length have brought us round) did manage the English sway, is suffici­ently known. Yet by one of the wisest of our Writers (even my Lord Verulam) is Henry the seventh pa­rallelled which the Legislators of An­cient and Heroick times, for the insti­tution [Page 12] of those very lawes, which have now brought the Monarchy unto utter ruine. The Commonwealths upon which Machiavil in his discour­ses is incomparable, are not by him any one of them sufficiently explain­ed or understood, much lesse is it to be expected from a people, that they should overcome like difficulties, through which the wisest nations fin­ding themselves in necessity of a change, or of a new government, have usually done, by such offers as promi­sed fair, or against which they could find no exceptions, as men do by new clothes, that is, put them on, as such which if they be not exactly fit at first, will either fit themselves unto the bo­dy in wearing, or thereby more plain­ly shew wherein they may be mended, even by such as would otherwise prove but bad workmen. Nor hath any like offer been thought to have more pre­sumption, much lesse treason in it, then if one conscious of skill in archi­tecture, should make offer of himself unto the Prince or State to build a more convenient Parliament-house. England is now in such a condition, that he who may be truly said to give [Page 13] her law, shall never govern her; and he who will govern her, shall never give her law. Yet some will have it, that to assert popular power, is to sow the seed of civil war; and object against a Commonwealth, as not to be introduced but by armes: which by the undeniable testimony of la­ter experience, is of all other obje­ctions the most extravagant; for if the good old cause, against the maw even of the army, and of all men well-affected to their country, could be trodden under foot without bloud; what more certain demonstration can there be, that let the deliberations upon, or changes of government, be of what kind soever shall please a Parliament, there is no appearance that they can occasion any civil war? Streames that are stopped, may urge their bankes; but the course of Eng­land into a Commonwealth, is both certain and natural: the wayes of nature require peace. The wayes of peace require obedience unto lawes. Lawes in England cannot be made but by Parliaments. Parliaments in England are come to be meer popular assemblies. The lawes made by popu­lar [Page 14] assemblies, though for a time they may be awed, or deceived; in the end must be popular lawes: and the sum of popular lawes must amount unto a Commonwealth. The whole doubt or hazard of this sequel remaineth upon this one question; Whether a single Council consisting but of four hun­dred, indued both with debate and result; the keyes of whose doores are in the hands of ambitious men; in the croud and confusion of whose ele­ction, the people are as carelesse as tumultuous, and easie, through the want of good orders, to be deluded; while the Clergy (declared and in­veterate enemies of popular power) are there laying about, and sweating in the throng, as if it were in the vine­yard; upon whose benches Lawyers, being feathered, and aimed, like sharp and suddain arrowes, with a private interest, point-blank against the pub­lick, may and frequently do swarm, can indeed be called a popular Coun­cil. This I confesse, may set the whole state of liberty upon the cast of a dy; yet questionlesse is it more then odds, for a Commonwealth in often or long throwing, not through [Page 15] any certain run of Genius or Nature that can be in such a Council, but through the impotence of such Con­clusions as can go awry, and the external force or state of propriety now fully introduced, whence such a Council may wander, but never find any rest or settlement, save onely in that natural and proper form of Go­vernment which is to be erected upon a meer popular Foundation. All other ways of proceeding must be void, as in­evitably guilty of contradiction in the Superstructures unto the Foundation; which hath amounted, & may amount unto discouragement of honest men, but with no other success then to em­broyl or retard business; England be­ing not capable of any other perma­nent form then that onely of a Com­monwealth, though her supreme Council be so constituted, that it may be Monarchically inclined. From this contradiction in the frame, is the frequent rise of contradictory Expostulations and Questions. How, say they, should we have a Common­wealth? Which way is it possible that it should come in? And how, say [Page 16] I, can we fail of a Commonwealth? What possibility is there that we should miss of it?

If a man answer, he answers thus: No Army ever set up a Common­wealth. To the contrary, I instance in the Army of Israel under Moses; in that of Athens about the time of Alcibiades; in that of Rome upon the expulsion of the Tarquins; in those of Switz and of Holland. But, say they, other Armies have not set up Com­monwealths. True, indeed, divers o­ther Armies have not set up Common­wealths: yet is not that any Argument why our Armies should not. For in all Armies that have not set up Com­monwealths, either the Officers have had no fortunes or estates at all, but immediately dependent upon the meer will of the Prince, as the Turkish Ar­mies, and all those of the eastern Coun­tries: or the Officers have been a No­bility commanding their own Tenants. Certain it is, That either of these Ar­mies can set up nothing but Monar­chy. But our Officers have not estates of noble-men, able upon their own Lands to levy Regiments, in which case they would take home their people to [Page 17] plough or make Hay; nor are yet so put to it for their livelyhood, as to depend wholly upon a Prince, in which case they would fall on robbing the people; but have good honest popu­lar estates to them and their heirs for ever. Now an army where the estates of the officers were of this kind, in no reason can, in no experience ever did set up Monarchy. I but, say they, for all that, their pay unto them is more considerable then their estates. But so much more must they be for a Commonwealth, because the Parlia­ment must pay: and they have found by experience, that the pay of a Par­liament is by far better then that of a Prince. But the four hundred being Monarchically inclined, or running upon the interest of those irreconcile­able enemies of popular power, Di­vines and Lawyers, will rather pay an army for commanding, or for support­ing of a Prince, then for obeying. Which may be true, as was acknow­ledged before, in the way; but in the end, or at the long run, for the reasons mentioned, must be of none effect.

These arguments are from the Cause; now for an argument to [Page 18] Sense, and from the effect: if our ar­mies would raise mony of themselves, or which is all one, would make a King, why have they not made a King in so many yeares? why did they not make one yesterday? why do they not to day? nay, why have they ever been, why do they still continue to be of all others in this point the most averse and refra­ctory?

But if so it be with us, that nature runneth wholly unto a Common­wealth, and we have no such force as can withstand nature; why may we not as well have golden dreames of what this Commonwealth may be, as of the Indies, of Flanders, or the Sound? The frame of a Common­wealth may be dreamt on, or proposed two wayes; the one notionally, in which it is of facile understanding, but of difficult practise; the other practi­cably, in which it is of difficult under­standing, but of facile use: one of these wayes is a shooing-horn, and the other the shoo; for which cause I shall propose in both, as first no­tionally, thus:

[Page 19]1.The Model proposed Notionally. That the native territory of the Commonwealth be divided, so equal­ly as with any convenience it may, into fifty Tribes or precincts.

2. That the people in each Tribe be distinguished, first, by their age; and next, by the valuation of their estates: all such as are above eigh­teen, and under thirty, being accoun­ted youth; and all such as are thirty or upwards, being accounted elders: all such as have under one hundred pounds a year in lands, goods or mo­nies, being accounted of the Foot, and all such as have so much or up­wards, being accounted of the Horse.

3. That each Tribe elect annual­ly out of the Horse of their number, two Elders to be Knights; three El­ders out of the same, and four Elders more out of the foot of their number, to be Deputies or Burgesses. That the terme of each knight and bur­gesse, or deputy so elected, be trienni­al; and that whoever hath served his triennial terme in any one of these capacities, may not be re-elected into any one of the same, till a triennial vacation be expired.

4. That in the first yeare of the [Page 20] Commonwealth, there be a Senate so constituted, of three hundred Knights, that the terme of one hun­dred may expire annually; and that the hundred Knights, annually ele­cted by two in each Tribe, take the places in the Senate, of them whose terme cometh thus to be thus annu­ally expired.

5. That in the first year of the Commonwealth there be a repre­sentative of the people, consisting of one thousand and fifty Deputies; four hundred and fifty of them being horse, and the rest foot. That this representative be so constituted, that the terme of two hundred of the foot, and of one hundred and fifty of the horse, expire annually; and that the two hundred foot, and one hundred and fifty horse elected an­nually, by four of the foot, and three of the horse in each Tribe, take the places in this representa­tive, of them whose terme cometh thus annually to be expired.

6. That the Senate have the whole authority of Debate; that the Representative have the whole power of result, in such manner, that what­ever [Page 21] having been debated by the Se­nate, shall by their authority be pro­mulgated; that is, printed and pub­lished, for the space of six weeks; and afterwards being proposed by them unto the Representative, shall be re­solved by the people of the same, in the affirmative, be the law of the Land.

Thus much may suffice to give im­plicitely a notional account of the whole frame. But a Model of govern­ment is nothing as to use, unlesse it be given practicably; and the giving of a Model practicably, is so much more difficult, that men not versed in the way, say of it (as they would of the anatomy of their own bodies) that it is impracticable. Here lyeth the whole difficulty; such things, as try them never so often, they cannot make hang together, they will yet have to be practicable; and if you would bring them from this kind of shifts, or of tying and untying all kind of knots, unto the natural nerves and ligaments of government, it is im­practicable. But to render that which is practicable, facile; or to do my last endeavour of this kind, of which if I [Page 22] misse this once more, I must hereafter despair: I shall do two things; first, omit the ballot, and then make some alteration in my former method.

They who have interwoven the ballot with the description of a Com­monwealth, have thereby rendred the same by far the more complete in it self; but in the understanding of their readers, as much defective: wherefore presuming the use of the ballot, throughout the orders of this Model, I shall refer it unto practice; in which it will be a matter of as much facility, as it would have been of difficulty in writing. And for the method I have chosen, it is the most natural and fa­cile, being no more then to propose the whole practicably: first, in the Ci­vil; secondly, in the Religious; then in the Military; and last of all, in the Pro­vincial part of the Model.

CHAP. I.

Containing the Civil Part of the Mo­del proposed practicably.

SEeing it hath been sufficiently proved, That Empire follow­eth the nature of propriety, that the kind of Empire or Govern­ment dependeth upon the kind of Di­stribution (except in small Countries) of Land; and that where the Balance in propriety hath not been fixed, the kind or nature of the Government hath been floating: it is good reason that in the proposition of a Common­wealth, we begin with fixation of the Balance in propriety; and this being no otherwise to be done then by some such Laws as have been commonly called Agrarian, it is proposed,

That every one holding above two 1 thousand pounds a year in Land ly­ing within the proper Territory of the Commonwealth, Agrarian Laws. leave the said [Page 24] Land equally divided among his sons; or else so neer equally, that there re­main unto the eldest of them not a­bove two thousand pounds a year in Land so lying. That this Proposi­tion be so understood, as not to con­cern any parent having no more then one son, but the next heir onely that shall have more sons; in such sort, as nothing be hereby taken from any man, or from his posterity, but that fatherly affection be at all points ex­tended as formerly, save onely that it be with more piety, and less partiali­ty. And that the same Proposition, in such families where there are no sons, concern the daughter or daughters in like manner.

2 That no daughter being neither heir nor co-heir, have above fifteen hundred pounds in portion, or for her preferment in marriage. That any daughter being an Orphant, and ha­ving seven hundred pounds or upward in portion, may charge the State with it. That the State being so charged, be bound to manage the portion of such Orphant for the best, either by due payment of the interest of the same; or if it be desired, by way of [Page 25] Annuity for life, at the rate of one hundred pounds a year, for every seven hundred pounds so received. The manner whereof being elsewhere shewn, is not needful to be repea­ted.

That these Propositions bar re­source of a Monarchical Nobility, is their peculiar end: wherefore that this should hold weight of an Obje­ction in a popular Balance already introduced through the failure of a Monarchical Nobility, or through a level made not by the people, but by the Kings or themselves, were prepo­sterous. Yet upon this score (for I see no other) is there such Animosity a­gainst like Laws, that wise men have judged it an Indiscretion in such as are affected unto popular Govern­ment, not to temporize in this point, at least till a Commonwealth were first introduced. To which judgment I am by no means inclining: First, be­cause the whole stream of this kind of Government, is so clear and pellu­cid, as abhorreth to have any thing in the bottom that may not appear at the very top. Secondly, because an A­grarian, not brought in with the in­troduction [Page 26] of a Commonwealth, was never yet known to be brought in af­ter the introduction of a Common­wealth. And thirdly, because the change of Balances in States through the want of fixation, hath been so suddain, that between the reign of Henry the seventh, and that of Queen Elizabeth, being under fifty year, the English Balance of Monarchical, be­came popular; and that of Rome, be­tween the Lives of Scipio and of Ti­berius Gracchus, being also under fifty years, of Popular became Monarchi­cal. Nevertheless, if there remain any cure of Animosity that may be safe, it must be prudent: And such a cure (if we be not so abandoned un­to meer phansie, as thereunto to sa­crifice all prudence) there may be, in the addition of this clause.

Additional Clause unto the Agrari­an. That no Agrarian Law hereby gi­ven to this Commonwealth, or to be hereafter given unto the same, or any Province of the same, be understood to be otherwise binding then to the Ge­neration to come, or to the Children to be born seven years after the enacting of the Law.

Upon the addition of this clause, it [Page 27] may be safely said of these Agrarian Laws, That they concern not any man living; and for posterity, it is well known, that to enact a Law, is no more in their regard, then to com­mend a thing to their choyce, seeing they having the will, can no more be devested of the power to repeal any Law enacted by their Ancestors, then we are of repealing such Laws as have been enacted by ours.

To this it may be objected, That Agrarian Laws being once enacted, must have brought Estates unto the standard of the same, before posterity can come into the capacity to judge of them. But this is the onely means whereby posterity can come unto a true capacity to judge of them: First, because they will have had experience of the Laws which they are to judge of: And secondly, because they will be void of all such imaginary interests as might corrupt their judgment, and do now certainly corrupt ours.

The Balance of the Commonwealth of Israel, The first Pa­rallel. through the Distri [...]urion of Lands at the introduction of the same, became popular; and becoming po­pular, was fixed by the Law for the [Page 28] Jubilee.Deut. 25.28. That which was sold, shall re­main in the hands of them that bought it till the year of Jubilee; and in the Jubilee it shall go out, and he shall return to his possession. The ways in Israel, and in the Commonwealth proposed, where the popular Balance is not made but found, are divers; but the Agrari­an Laws in each, as to the end, which is preservation of the Balance, are of like effect.

To rise thus from true foundations unto proper superstructures, the first step from the Balance thus fixed into the Orders of a Commonwealth, is no otherwise to be taken, then by certain Distributions or Divisions of the Peo­ple, whereof some are to be personal, and some local.

The first personal division of a Peo­ple, is into Freemen and Servants.Freemen and Servants. Freemen are such as have wherewith­al to live of themselves; and Servants, such as have not. This division there­fore is not constitutive, but naturally inherent in the Balance; nor, seeing all Government is in the direction of the Balance, is it possible for the super­structures of any to make more Free­men then are such by the nature of the [Page 29] Balance, or by their being able to live of themselves.

All that could in this matter be done, even by Moses himself,The second Parallel. Levit. 25.29. is con­tained in this proviso. If thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poore, and be sold unto thee, thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bond-servant: but as an hired servant, and a sojour­ner he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of Jubilee. And then shall he depart from thee, both he, and his children with him, and shall return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he re­turn.

The nature of riches considered, this division (I say) into freemen and servants, is not properly constitutive, but as it were natural. To come unto such divisions as are both personal and constitutive, it is proposed;

That all citizens, that is, free­men, 3 or such as are not servants, be distributed into horse and foot. Horse and foot. That such of them as have one hundred pounds a yeare in lands, goods or mo­ny, or above that proportion, be of the horse; and all such as have under that proportion, be of the foot.

4. Elders and Youth. That all Elders or freemen being thirty yeares of age, or upwards, be capable of civil administration; and that the Youth, or such freemen as are betwéen eighteen years of age and thirty, be not capable of civil ad­ministration, but of military only; in such manner as shall follow in the military part of this Model.

Now besides personal divisions, it is, in order unto a Commonwealth, of necessity, that there be some such as are Local. For these therefore it is proposed;

5. Precinct of the Parish. That the whole native or proper territory of the Commonwealth, be cast, with as much exactnesse as can be convenient, into known and fixed precincts or parishes.

6. Parochial Congrega­tions and Deputies. That the Elders resident in each parish, annually assemble in the same; as for example, upon munday next en­suing the last of Dec. That they then and there, elect out of their own num­ber, every fifth man, or one man out of every five, to be for the terme of the year ensuing, a deputy of that parish; and that the first and second so elected, be overséers, or presidents, for the re­gulating of all parochial congregati­ons, [Page 31] whether of the elders or of the youth, during the terme for which they were elected.

That so many parishes lying nea­rest together, 7. Precinct of the Hun­dred. whose Deputies shall amount to one hundred or thereabout, be cast into one precinct called the Hundred. And that in each precinct called the Hundred, there be a town, village, or place appointed to be the Capital of the same.

That the parochial Deputies ele­cted throughout the Hundred, 8. Assembly or master of the Hun­dred. assemble annually, for example, upon munday next ensuing the last of Jan. at the Capital of their Hundred. That they then and there elect out of the horse of their number, one Iustice of the peace, one Iury-man, one Captain, one Ensigne: and out of the foot of their number, one other Iury-man, one high-Constable, &c.

Though our Justices of peace have not been annual, yet that they may so be, is apparent, in that the High Sheriffs, whose office is of greater dif­ficulty, have alwayes been annual: seeing therefore that they may be an­nual, that so they ought in this admi­nistration to be, will appear, where [Page 32] they come to be constitutive of such courts, as should they consist of a stan­ding Magistracy, would be against the nature of a Commonwealth. But the precincts hitherto being thus stated, it is p [...]posed,

9. Precinct of the Tribe. That every twenty Hundreds, ly­ing nearest, and most conveniently together, be cast into one Tribe. That the whole territory being after this manner cast into Tribes, some town, village, or place be appointed unto every Tribe for the Capital of the same. And that these three pre­cincts, that is, the Parish, the Hun­dred, and the Tribe, whether the Deputies thenceforth annually cho­sen in the Parishes or Hundreds, come to increase or diminish, remain firm and inalterable for ever, save onely by Act of Parliament.

These divisions, or the like, both personal and local, are that in a well-ordered Commonwealth, which staire, are in a good house; not that staires in themselves are desireable, but that without them there is no getting into the chambers. The whole matter of cost and paines required unto the in­troduction of a like Model, lyeth [Page 33] onely in the first architecture, or buil­ding of these staires; that is, in stating of these three precincts: which done, they land you naturally and neces­sarily into all the roomes of this fa­brick. For the just number of Tribes into which a territory thus cast may fall, it is not very easie to be guessed; yet because for the carrying on of dis­course, it is necessary to pitch upon some certainty, I shall presume that the number of the Tribes thus stated, amounts unto fifty; and that the number of the Parochial deputies an­nually elected in each Tribe, amount to two thousand: be the deputies more or fewer, by the alterations which may happen in the progresse of time, it disordereth nothing. Now to ascend by these staires into the upper roomes of this building, it is propo­sed,

That the Deputies elected in the several Parishes, 10. Assembly or Muster of the Tribe. together with their Magistrates, and other officers, both civil and Military elected in their several Hundreds, assemble or muster annually; for example, upon munday next ensuing the last of Feb. at the Capital of their Tribe.

How the troopes and companies of the Deputies, with their Military of­ficers, or commanders thus assembled, may without expence of time, be forthwith distributed into one uni­form and orderly body, hath been elsewhere shewn, and is not needfull to be repeated. For their work, which at this meeting will require two dayes, it is proposed,

11. Magistrates of the Tribe. That the whole body thus assem­bled, upon the first day of the assem­bly, elect out of the Horse of their number one High Sheriff, one Lieute­nant of the Tribe, one Custos Rotu­lorum, one Conductor, and two Cen­sors. That the High Sheriff be com­mander in chief, the Lieutenant commander in the second place, and the Conductor in the third, of this band or squadron. That the Custos Rotulorum be muster-master, and kéep the rolls. That the Censors be governors of the Ballot. And that the term of these magistracies be annual.

These being thus elected, it is proposed;

12. The prero­gative Troop. That the Magistrates of the Tribe, that is to say, the High She­riff, Lieutenant, Custos Rotulorum, [Page 35] the Censors and the Conductor, toge­ther with the magistrates and offi­cers of the Hundreds, that is to say, the twenty Iustices of the Peace, the forty Iury-men, the twenty high Constables, be one troop, or one troop and one company apart, called the Prerogative troop or company. That this troop bring in and assist the Iu­stices of Assize, hold the quarter ses­sions in their several capacities, and performe their other functions as for­merly.

By this meanes the Common­wealth at the introduction, may im­brace the law as it stands, that is, unreformed; which is to the greatest advantage of like reformations: for to reform laws before the introdu­ction of the government, which is to shew unto what the laws in re­formation are to be brought or fit­ted, is impossible. But these magi­strates of the Hundreds and Tribes, being such whereby the Parliament is to govern the nation, this is a re­gard in which they ought to be fur­ther capable of such orders and instru­ctions as shall thereunto be requisite; for which cause it is proposed,

13. The Phy­larch. That the Magistrates of the Tribe, that is to say, the high Sheriff, Lieu­tenant, Custos Rotulorum, the Cen­sors and the Conductor, together with the twenty Iustices elected at the Hundreds, be a Court for the Go­vernment of the Tribe called The Phylarch; and that this Court pro­ceed, in all matter of Government, as shall from time to time be directed by Act of Parliament.

By these Courts the Commonwealth will be furnished with true Chanels, whereby at leasure to turn the Law into that which is sufficiently known to have heen her primative course, and into perfect reformation by degrees, and without violence. For as the cor­ruption of our Law deriveth from an Art inabled to improve her private interest, or from the Law upon the Bench and the Jury at the Bar; so the reformation of our Law must come from disabling her as an Art to improve her private interest, or to a Jury upon the Bench, and the Law at the Bar, as in Venice.

The third Parallel. Deut. 16.18. Judges and Officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee throughout thy Tribes, [Page 37] and they shall judge the people with just judgment. These Courts, whose Ses­sion-house was in the Gates of eve­ [...]y City,Book 2. were shewn each of them to [...]ave consisted of twenty three Elders, which were as a Jury upon the Bench, giving sentence by plurality of votes, and under a kinde of appeal unto the seventy Elders or Senate of Israel, as was also shewn in the second Book.

This or the like, by all example, and beyond any controversie, hath been and is the natural way of Judicature in Commonwealths. The Phylarches, with a Court or two of Appeal, eli­gible out of the Senate and the Peo­ple, are at any time with ease, and with small alteration, to be cast upon a Tri­ennial Rotation: which for the rest, proceeding after the manner of the Venetian Quarancies, will be in this case perfect Orders.

To return: The first days Election at the Tribe, being as hath been shewn, it is proposed,

That the Squadron of the Tribe, 14. Knights and Burgesses. upon the second day or their assembly, elect two Knights and three Burges­ses out of the Horse of their number, and four other Burgesses out of the [Page 38] Foot of their number. That each Knight upon Election forthwith make Oath of Allegiance unto the Commonwealth; or refusing such Oath, the next Competitor in Electi­on to the same Magistracy, making the said Oath, be the Magistrate: the like for the Burgesses. That the Knights thus sworn, have Session in the Senate for the term of three years; and that the Burgesses thus sworn, be of the Prerogative Tribe, or repre­sentative of the People for the like term.

Now whereas this Proposition is sufficient for the perpetuation of the Senate and the Assembly of the Peo­ple, being once instituted, but not sufficient for the full and perfect In­stitution of them; it necessitateth the addition in this place, not of a perma­nent order, but of an expedient for the first years Election onely; which may be this:

Expedient for the first years Ele­ction. That for the full and perfect Insti­tution of the Assemblies mentioned, the Squadron of the Tribe in the first year of the Commonwealth, elect two Knights for the term of one year, two other Knights for the term of two years; and [Page 39] lastly, two Knights more for the term of three years: the like for the Bur­gesses of the Horse first, and then for those of the Foot.

By this expedient, the Senate in fifty Tribes is constituted of three hundred Knights or Senators, whereof one hundred through expiration of their terms, come annually to fall; and another hundred at the same time to enter. The like for the Preroga­tive Tribe, or Assembly of the people, which consisting in the whole of one thousand and fifty, suffers the like al­teration in one third part, or in the yearly exchange of one hundred and fifty Burgesses: By which means the Motion or Rotation of these Assem­blies is Annual, Triennial, and Perpe­tual. For the full dispatch of the foregoing Elections, there remaineth but one Proposition more, which is this:

That a Magistrate or Officer e­lected at the Hundred, 15. Proviso. be thereby bar­red frm being elected a Magistrate of the Tribe, or of the first days E­lection: that no former Election whatsoever bar a man of the second days Election at the Tribe, or to be [Page 40] chosen a Knight or Burgess. That a man being chosen a Knight or Bur­gess, who before was chosen a Magi­strate or Officer of the Hudnred or Tribe, delegate his former Office or Magistracy in the Hundred or the Tribe, to any other Deputy, being no Magistrate nor Officer, and being of the same Hunred, and of the same Order, that is, of the Horse or of Foot respectively. That the whole and e­very part of the foregoing Orders for Election in the Parishes, the Hun­dreds and the Tribes, be holding and inviolate upon such penalties in case of failure, as shall hereafter be provi­ded by Act of Parliament against any Parish, Hundred, Tribe, Deputy or Person so attending.

Without some such Provision as is contained in the former part of this Proposition, men would be inconveni­ently bar'd of preferment, or the Tribe obliged to return unto the Ballot; and so to spend more time for trifles, then is required by their business.

The fourth Parallel. 2 Chro. 27.The Representative of Israel col­lected monethly by the two thousand out of each Tribe, if we consider what Method must have been used in like [Page 41] Elections, is such as may infer, first, that there were sub-divisions unto that end in each Tribe, perhaps of the nature of our Hundreds and Parishes. Secondly, that there were qualificati­ons in those Elections as to the Patri­archs or chief Fathers, and as to the People with their Captains of thou­sands and Captains of hundreds: which is enough thus far to embrace and encourage the foregoing Propositi­ons.

The Senate, and the Congregation or Representative of the People, are in every Commonwealth the main Or­ders: the stairs or degrees of ascent unto these, being now mounted, it re­mains that I lead unto the rooms of State, or the Assemblies themselves; which shall be performed, first, by shewing their frame; and next, by shewing their uses or functions. To bring you first into the Senate, it is proposed,

That the Knights of the Annual Election in the Tribes, 16. Frame of The Senate. take their places on Munday next ensuing the last of March, in the Senate. That the like number of Knights, whose Session determineth at the same time [Page 42] recede. That every Knight or Se­nator be paid out of the publick Re­venue quarterly, one hundred twenty five pounds during his term of Ses­sion, and be obliged to fit in purple Robes.

17. Senatorian Magistrates That annually upon reception of the new Knights, the Senate proceed unto Election of new Magistrates and Counsellors. That for Magi­strates they elect one General, one Speaker, and two Censors, each for the term of one year; these promis­cuously: and that they elect one Com­missioner of the great Seal, and one Commissioner of the Treasury, each for the term of three years, and out of the new Knights onely.

This Proposition supposeth the Commissioners of the Seal and those of the Treasury to consist each of three, wheeled by the annual Election of one into each Order, upon a triennial Rotation. For farther explanation of the Senatorian Magistracies, it is pro­posed,

18. The Gene­ral sitting and the Speaker. That the General and Speaker, as Consuls of the Commonwealth, and Presidents of the Senate, be, during the term of their Magistracy, paid [Page 43] quarterly five hudred pounds: that the ensignes of these Magistracies be a sword born before the General, and a Mace before the Speaker: that they be obliged to wear ducal Robes; and that what is said of the General in this Proposition, be understood onely of the General sitting, and not of the General marching.

That the General sitting, 19. The general marching. in case he be commanded to march, receive field-pay; and that a new General be forthwith elected by the Senate to suc­ceed him in the house, with all the Rights Ensignes and Emoluments of the General sitting: and this so of­ten as one or more Generals are marching.

That the three Commissioners of the great Seal, 20. Commissio­ners of the Seal and of Treasury. and the three Com­missioners of the Treasury, using their Ensignes and Habit, and per­forming their other Functions as for­merly, be paid quarterly unto each of them three hundred seventy five pounds.

That the Censors be each of them Chancellour of one Vniversity by vertue of their Election: 21. The Censors. that they govern the Ballot, that they be Pre­sidents [Page 44] of the Council for Religion, that each have a silver wand for the Ensigne of his Magistracy, that each be paid quarterly three hundred se­venty five pounds, and be obliged to wear scarlet Robes.

22. The Signory That the General sitting, the Spea­ker, and the six Commissioners above­said, be the Signory of this Common­wealth.

This for the Senatorian Magistrates: for Senatorian Councils, it is propo­sed,

23. Council of State. That there be a Council of State consisting of fifteen Knights, five out of each Order or Election; and that the same be perpetuated by the annu­al Election of five out of the new Knights, or last elected into the Se­nate.

That there be a Council for Reli­gion consisting of twelve Knights, 24. Council of Religion, of Trade. four out of each Order, and perpetua­ted by the annual Election of four out of the Knights last elected into the Senate. That there be a Council for Trade, consisting of a like number, elected and perpetuated in the same manner.

25. Council of War. That there be a Council of War, [Page 45] not elected by the Senate, but elected by the Council of State out of them­selves. That this Council of War consist of nine Knights, three out of each Order, and be perpetuated by the annual Election of three, out of the last Knights elected into the Council of State.

That in case the Senate add nine Knights more out of their own num­ber unto the Council of War, 26. The Dicta­tor. the said Council be understood by such additi­on to be Dictator of the Common­wealth, for the term of three moneths and no longer, except by farther order of the Senate the said Dictatorian power be prolonged for a like term.

That the Signory have Session and Suffrage, 27. Proposers general. with right also joyntly or severally to propose both in the Se­nate, and in all Senatorian Councils.

That each of the three Orders or Divisions of Knights in each Sena­torian Council, 28. Provosts, or particular Proposers. elect one provost for the term of one week; and that any two Provosts of the same Council so elected, may propose unto their respe­ctive Council, and not otherwise.

That some fair room or rooms well furnished and attended, 29. Academy. be allowed at [Page 46] the States charge for a free and open Academy unto all comers at some convenient hour or hours towards the evening. That this Academy be governed according unto the Rules of good breeding, or civil conversation, by some or all of the Proposers; and that in the same it be lawful for any man by word of mouth or by writing, in jest or in earnest, to propose unto the Proposers.

From the frame or structure of these Councils, I should pass unto their Functions; but that besides annual E­lections, there will be some biennial, and others emergent; in which re­gard it is proposed, first, for biennial Elections,

30. Embassa­dors in or­dinary. That for Embassadorus in ordinary, there be four Residences; as France, Spain, Venice and Constantinople: that every Resident upon Election of a new Embassadour in ordinary, re­move to the next Residence in the Order nominated, till having served in them all, he return home. That upon Munday next ensuing the last of November, there be every second year elected by the Senate some fit person, being under thirty five years [Page 47] of age, and not of the Senate nor of the popular assembly: that the party so elected, repair upon Munday next ensuing the last of March following, as Embassadour in ordinary unto the Court of France, and there reside for the term of two years, to be computed from the first of April next ensuing his Election. That every Embassa­dour in ordinary be allowed three thousand pounds a year during the term of his Residences; and that if a Resident come to dye, there be an ex­traordinary Election into his Resi­dence for his term, and for the remain­der of his removes and progress.

That all emergent Elections be made by Scrutiny, that is, 31. Emergent Elections. by a Coun­cil, or by Commissioners proposing, and by the Senate resolving in the manner following: That all field-Officers be proposed by the Council of War: that all Embassadours extra­ordinary be proposed by the Council of State: that all Iudges and Ser­geants at Law be proposed by the Commissioners of the great Seal: that all Barons and Officers of trust in the Exchequer, be proposed by the Commissioners of the Treasury: and [Page 48] that such as are thus proposed, and ap­proved by the Senate, be hedl lawful­ly elected.

These Elections being thus dispatch­ed, I come unto the Functions of the Senate; and first unto those of the Senatorian Councils: for which it is proposed,

32. Function of the Senato­rian Coun­cils. That the cognizance of all matter of State, to be considered, or Law to be enacted, whether it be Provincial or National, Domestick or Forraign, appertain unto the Council of State. That such Affairs of either kinde, as they shall judge to require more secre­sie, be remitted by this Council, and appertain unto the Council of War, being for that end a select part of the same. That the cognizance and pro­tection both of the National Religion, and of the Liberty of Conscience e­qually established in this Nation, af­ter the manner to be shewn in the Re­ligious Part of this Model, appertain unto the Council for Religion. That all matter of traffick, and regulation of the same appertain unto the Coun­cil for Trade. That in the exercise of these several Functions, which natu­rally are Senatorian or Authoritative [Page 49] only, no Council assume any other power, then such only as shall be esta­ted upon the same by Act of Parlia­ment.

That what shall be proposed unto the Senate by any one or more of the Signory or Proposers general; 33. Function of the Senate. Or what ever was proposed by any two of the Provosts or particular Propo­sers unto their respective Council, and upon debate at that Council shall come to be proposed by the same unto the Senate, be necessarily debatable and debated by the Senate. That in all cases wherein power is derived unto the Senate by Law made or by Act of Parliament, the result of the Senate be ultimate: that in all cases of Law to be made, or not already provided for by Act of Parliament, as War and Peace, levy of Men or Money, or the like, the result of the Senate be not ultimate. That what­soever in resolved by the Senate upon a case wherein their result is not ulti­mate, be proposed by the Senate un­to the Prerogative Tribe or represen­tative of the people; except only in cases of such spéed or secrecy, wherein the Senate shall judge the necessary [Page 50] slowness or openness in this way of proceeding to be of detriment or dan­ger unto the Commonwealth.

34. Function the Dictator. That if upon the motion or propo­sition of a Council or Proposer Ge­neral, the Senate add nine Knights, promiscuously chosent out of their own number, unto the Council of War; the same Council as thereby made Dictator, have power of life and death, as also to enact Laws in all such cases of sped or secrecy, for and during the term of three moneths and no longer, except upon new order from the Se­nate. And that all Laws enacted by the Dictator, be good and valid for the term of one year and no longer; except the same be proposed by the Se­nate, and resolved by the people.

This Dictatorian Council (as may already appear) consisteth fundamen­tally of the Signory, and additionally of nine Knights more emergently chosen, and of the four Tribunes of course, as will appear when I come to speak of that Magistracy. Now if Dictatorian power be indeed formi­dable, yet this in the first place is re­markable, that the Council here offe­red for a Dictator, is of far safer con­stitution, [Page 51] then what among us, hither­to hath been offered for a Common­wealth; as namely, a Parliament, and a Council in the interim. For here is no interim, but all the Councils of the Commonwealth not only remaining, but remaining in the exercise of all their functions, without the abatement of any; speed and secrecy belonging not unto any of their functions, but to that only of the Dictator. And if this Dictatorian Council have more in it of a Commonwealth, then hath hi­therto among us been either practised or offered, by what argument can it be pretended that a Commonwealth is so imperfect through the necessity of such an order, that she must needs borrow of Monarchy, seeing every Monarchy that hath any senate, As­sembly or Council in it, thereby most apparently borroweth more of a Commonwealth, then there is to be found of Monarchy in this Council?

To dismiss this whole Senate with one Parallel:The fifth Parallel. The institution of the se­venty Elders in Israel (as was shewn in the second book) for their number related unto an accident, and a custom thereupon anciently introduced. The [Page 52] accident was, that the sons of Jacob who went into Aegypt were so many; these first governing their families by natural right, came as those families encreased, to be for their number re­tained and continued in tha nature of a Senatorian Council, while the people were yet in Egyptian bondage. So we having had no like custom, have as to the number no like inducement. Again, the Territory of Canaan a­mounted not to a fourth of our Coun­try; and in government we are to fit our selves unto our own proportions. Nor can a Senate consisting of four Senators, be capable of so many distri­butions as a Senate consisting of more. Yet we finde in the restitution of the Sanhedrim by Jehoshaphat, 2 Chr. 19.11. that there was Amariah, chief in all matters of the Lord, that is, in judgment upon the laws which having been pro­posed by God, were more peculiarly his matters; and Zebadiah chief in all the Kings matters, that is, in political debates concerning Government, or War and Peace.Judg. 25.11. v. 5, 11. Lastly, When the children of Ammon made war against Israel, the people of Israel made Jepth­tha not only captain, but head over them. [Page 53] So the Judge of Israel, being no stan­ding Magistrate, but elected upon e­mergences, supplieth the Parallel as to Dictatorian power in a Common­wealth.

Debate is the natural parent of re­sult; whence the Senate throughout Latine Authors is called Fathers, and throughout Greek Authors the com­pellation of a popular assembly is Men; as Men of Athens, Men of Co­rinth, Men of Lacedemon: nor is this custom heathen only, seeing these compellations are used unto the Se­nate and the people of the Jews,Act. 7.2. & 22.1. Luke throughout is perfectly well skilled in the cu­stoms of Common­wealths. not only by Steven, but also by Paul, where they begin their speeches in this man­ner: Men, brethren, and Fathers. To come then from the Fathers unto the People, Popular Assembly or Prero­gative Tribe, it is proposed,

That the Burgesses of the annual election returned by the Tribes, 35. Fabrick of the Preroga­tive Tribe. en­ter into the Prerogative Tribe upon Munday next ensuing the last of March; and that the like number of Burgesses whole term is expired, re­cede at the same time. That the Burgesses thus entered elect unto themselves out of their own number, [Page 54] two of the horse; one to be Captain, and the other to be Cornet of the same: and two of the foot; one to be Captain, the other to be Ensigne of the same, each for the term of three years. That these Officers being thus elect­ed, the whole Tribe or Assembly pro­ceed to the election of four annual Ma­gistrates; two out of the foot, to be Tribunes of the foot; and two out of the horse, to be Tribunes of the horse. That the Tribunes be Commanders of this Tribe in chief, so far as it is a Military body, and Presidents of the same as it is a civil Assembly. And lastly, that this whole Tribe be paid weekly as followeth. Vnto each of the Tribunes of the horse, seven pound. Vnto each of the Tribunes of foot, six pound. Vnto each of the Cap­tains of horse, five pound. Vnto each of the Captains of foot, four pound. Vnto each of the Cornets, three pound. Vn­to each of the Ensignes, two pound seven shillings. Vnto every horse­man two pound, and to every one of the foot one pound ten shillings.

For the salaries of the Senate and the People together, they amount not unto three hundred thousand pounds [Page 55] a year; which is cheaper by neer two parts in three, then the chief Magi­stracy ever did or can otherwise cost: for if you give nothing (omnia dat qui justa negat) men will be their own carvers: But to proceed, it is proposed,

That inferiour Officers, 36. Officers of Officers. as Cap­tains, Cornets, Ensigns, be only for the Military discipline of the Tribe. That the Tribunes have session in the Senate without suffrage; that they have session in the Dictatorian Council so often as it is created by the Senate of course, and with suf­frage. That they be Presidents of the Court in all cases to be judged by the people.

That Peculate or defraudation of the publick, 37. Appeal un­to the peo­ple. all cases tending to the subversion of the Government, be tri­able by this Representative; and that there be an appeal unto the same in all causes, and from all Magistrates, Courts and Councils, whether Nati­onal or Provincial.

This Judicatory may seem large:The sixth Parallel. but thus the Congregation of Israel consisting of four hundred thousand, judged the Tribe of Benjamin. Judg. 20. Halicar. Thus all the Roman Tribes judged Gorila­nus. [Page 56] And thus Duke Loradano was tryed by the great Council of Venice, Janotti. consisting yet of about two thou­sand.

This is as much as I have to say severally of the Senate and the People; but their main Functions being joynt, as they make one Parliament, it is farther propo­sed,

38. The main Function of the Senate. That the right of debate, as also of proposing to the people, be wholly and onely in the Senate, without any power at all of result not derived from the people.

39. The main Function of the Preroga­tive Tribe. That the power of result be wholly and onely in the people, without any right at all of debate.

That the Senate having debated and agreed upon a Law to be propo­sed, 40. Promulga­tion. cause promulgation of the same tobe made for the space of six weeks before proposition; that is, cause the Law to be printed and published so long before it is to be proposed.

41. Manner of Proposition. That promulgation being made, the Signory demand of the Tribunes being present in the Senate, an As­sembly of the people. That the Tri­bunes upon such demand of the Sig­nory [Page 57] or of the Senate, be obliged to assemblie the Prerogative Tribe in Arms by sound of Trumpet, with Drums beating, and Colours flying, in any Town, Field or Market-place being not above six miles distant, up­on the day and at the hour appointed, except the meeting through inconve­nience of the weather, or the like, be prorogned by consent of the Signory and the Tribunes. That the Pre­rogative Tribe being assembled ac­cordingly, the Senate propsoe to them by two or more of the Senatorian Ma­gistrates thereunto appointed, at the first promulgation of the Law. That the Proposers for the Senate open unto the people the occasion, motives and reasons of the Law to be propo­sed; and the same being done, put it by distinct Clauses unto the Ballot of the people. That if any materi­al Clause or Clauses be rejected by the people, they be reviewed by the Senate, altered and proposed, if they think fit, to the third time, but no of­tener.

That what is thus proposed by the Senate, and resolved by the people, 42. Act of Par­liament. be the Law of the Land, and no other, [Page 58] except as in the case reserved unto the Dictatorian Council.

The seventh Parallel.The Congregation of the People being monethly, and the Representan­tive proposed being annual and trien­nial, they are each upon Courses or Rotation: the Congregation of Is­rael consisting of twenty four thou­sand, in which the whole number of the Princes of the Tribes, and of the Princes of the Families, amounting not, I might say, unto one hundred, but will say unto one thousand; it follows, that the lower sort in the Congregation of Israel, held propor­tion unto the better sort, above twen­ty to one. Whereas in the Repre­sentative proposed, the lower sort hold proportion unto the better sort but six to four; and that popular Congre­gation where the lower sort hold but six to four, is by far the most Aristo­cratical that is or ever was in any well-ordered Commonwealth, except Ve­nice: if you will have that Gentry to be all of one sort, or if you allow them to be of a better and of a mea­ner sort, not Venice excepted. The Sanhedrim made no Law without the [Page 59] People; nor may the Senate in the Model: but the Sanhedrim with the Congregation, might make Laws;Ezra 10.8. so may the Senate in the Model, with the Representative of the People. Last­ly, as the Congregation in Israel was held either by the Princes in Person, with their Staves and Standards of the Camp, or by the four and twenty thousand in Military Discipline; so the Representative proposed is in the na­ture of a Regiment.

Bate me Venice, where there is a shadow, and but a shadow of Law made by the Senate (for the Sove­raign power is undenyably in the great Council) and Athens, where a Law made by the Senate was cur­rent, as a probationer for one year be­fore it was proposed unto the people; there neither is nor hath been any such thing in a Commonwealth as Law made by the Senate. That the Senate should have power to make Laws, re­duceth the Government unto a single Council; and Government by a sin­gle Council, if the Council be of the Many, is Anarchy, as in the Assem­blies of the Roman people by Tribes, which always shook, and at length ru­ined [Page 60] that Commonwealth: Or if the Council be of the Few, is Oligarchy, as that of Athens, consisting of the four hundred, who nevertheless pre­tended to propose unto five thousand, though they did not. Of which, saith Thucydides, Thucy. Lib. 8. This was indeed the form pretended in words by the four hundred: But the most of them, through private ambition, fell upon that by which an O­ligarchy, made out of a Democracy, is chiefly overthrown; for at once they claimed every one not to be equal, but to be far the chief. Anarchy, or a single Council consisting of the Many, is e­ver tumultuous, and doth ill even while it means well. But Oligarchy, seldom meaning well, is a faction, wherein each one at strife to make himself, or some other from whom he hopeth for advantage, mars all. There is in a Commonwealth no other cure of these, then that the Anarchy have a Council of some few well chosen and elected by themselves to advise them; which Council so instituted, is the Senate. Or that the Oligarchy have a popular Representative to ba­lance it; which curing both tumult in the rash and heady people, and all [Page 61] those corruptions which cause facti­ousness in the sly and subtile Few, a­mout unto the proper superstructures of a well-ordered Commonwealth; as to return unto the example of the Oligarchy in Athens, where the four hundred, whose reign being very short, had been as seditious, were deposed, and the Soveraignty decreed to a po­pular Council of five thousand, with a Senate of four hundred annually e­lective upon Coursers or Rotation. Of this, saith Thucydides, Lib. 8. Now first (at least in my time) the Athenians seem to have ordered their State aright, it consisting of a moderate temper both of the Few and the Many. And this was the first thing that after so many mis-fortunes made the City again to raise her head. But we in England are not apt to believe, that to decree the Soveraignty unto thousands, were the way to make a City or a Nation reco­ver of wounds, or to raise her head. We have a loathing, we are sick of such thoughts. An Assembly of the People Soveraign! Nay and an As­sembly of the People consisting in the major vote of the lower sort! Why sure it must be a dull, an unskilful [Page 62] thing. But so is the Touchstone in a Goldsmiths Shop, a dull thing, and altogether unskilled in the Trade; yet without this, would even the Master be deceived. And certain it is, that a well-ordered Assembly of the Peo­ple is as true an Index of what in Go­vernment is good or great, as any Touchstone is of Gold.

A council, especially if of loose electi­on, having not only the debate, but the result also, is capable of influence from without, of interest from within: there may be a formed, a prejudicated party will haste or cry you from the debate unto the question, and precipitate you upon the result: whereas if it had no power of result, there could remain un­to the same no more then debate only, without any byas upon, or diversion of such debate from maturity; In which maturity of unbyassed debate, lyeth the final cause of the Senate, and the whole light that can be given unto a people. But when this is done, if your resolving assembly be not such as can imbibe or contract no other inte­rest then that only of the whole peo­ple, all again is lost: for the result of all assemblies goeth principally upon [Page 63] that which they conceive to be their own interest. But how an assembly upon rotation, consisting of one thou­sand, where the vote is six to four in the lower sort, should be capable of any other interest then that only of the whole people by which they are orderly elected, hath never yet been, nor I beleeve ever will be shewn. In like distribution therefore of debate and result, consisteth the highest my­stery of Popular Government, and in­deed the supream law, wherein is con­tained not only the liberty, but the safety of the people.

For the remainder of the civil part of this Model, which is now but small, it is farther proposed,

That every Magistracie, 43. Rule for vacations. Office or Election throughout this whole Com­monwealth, whether annual or tri­ennial, be understood of consequence to enjoyn an interval or vacation e­qual unto the term of the same. That the Magistracy of a Knight and of a Burgesse, be in this relation under­stood as one and the same: and that this order regard onely such electi­ons [Page 64] as are national or domestick, and not such as are Provincial or For­raign.

44. Exception from the Rule. That for an exception from this Rule, where there is but one elder of the horse in one and the same Parish, that elder be eligible in the same without interval; and where there be above four elders of the horse in one and the same Parish, there be not above half, nor under two of them eli­gible at the same Election.

Otherwise the people, beyond all peradventure, would elect so many of the better sort at the very first, that there would not be of the foot or of the meaner sort to supply the due number of the Popular Assembly or Prerogative Tribe; and the better sort being barred subsequent elections by their intervals, there would not be wherewithall to furnish the Senate, the horse of the Prerogative Tribe, and the rest of the Magistracies; each of which obstructions is prevented by this exception. Where by the way, if in all experience, such have been the constant temper of the people, and can indeed be no other in reason, [Page 65] it is apparent what cause there can be of doubt who in a Commonwealth of this nature must have the leading. Yet is no man barred from any prefer­ment; only industry which ought na­turally to be the first step, is first en­joyned by this Policy, but rewarded amply; seeing he who hath made himself worth one hundred pounds a year, hath made himself capable of all preferments and honours in this Go­vernment. Where a man from the lowest may not rise unto the due pitch of his unquestionable merit, the Commonwealth is not equal; yet neither can the people under the limi­tations proposed, make choice (as some object) of no other then high-shoon; nor have they at any time been so inclining to do, where they have not been under such limitations. Be it spoken, not to the disparagement of any man, but on the contrary to their praise whose merit hath made them great, the people of England have not gone so low in the election of an House of Commons, as some Prince hath done in the election of an house of Lords. To weigh election [Page 66] by a Prince with election by a People, set the Nobility of Athens and Rome by the Nobility of the old Monarchy, and an House of Commons freely cho­sen by the Nobility of the new. There remaineth but the Quorum, for which it is proposed,

45. The Quo­rum. That throughout all the Assem­blies and Councils of this Common­wealth, the Quorum consist of one half in the time of health; and of one third part in a time of sicknesse, being so declared by the Senate.

How the City-Government with­out diminution of their priviledges, and with improvement of their Policy, may be made to fall in with these or­ders, hath elsewhere been shewn in part, and may be considered farther at leasure. Otherwise the whole Com­monwealth, so far as it is meerly ci­vil, is in this part accomplished. Now as of necessity there must be a natural man, or a man indued with a natural body, before there can be a spiritual man, or a man in capacity of divine contemplation: So a Govern­ment must have a civil part, before it can have a religious part. And if a [Page 67] man but of natural parts can never be so stupid as not to have some re­flection upon Religion, much less a Commonwealth; which necessitateth the Religious part of this Model.

CHAP. II.

Containing the Religious Part of this Model proposed practicably.

THere is nothing more certain or demonstrable unto com­mon Sense, then that the far greater part of mankind, in matter of Religion, give themselves up unto the publick leading. Now a national Re­ligion rightly established, or not co­ercive, is not any publick driving, but onely the publick leading. If the publick in this case may not lead such as desire to be led by the publick, and yet a party may lead such as desire to be led by a party; where would be the liberty of Conscience as to the State? which certainly in a well-ordered Com­monwealth, [Page 68] being the publick Reason, must be the publick Conscience. Nay, where would be the liberty of Con­science as to any party, which should so proceed as to shew, that without ta­king the liberty of Conscience from others, they think not that they can have it themselves? If the publick refusing the liberty of Conscience un­to a party, would but be the cause of tumult, how much more a party refu­sing it unto the publick? And how, in case of like tumult, should a party de­fend their liberty of Conscience, or indeed their throats from the whole or a far greater party, whithout keeping down or tyrannizing over the whole or a far greater party by force of arms? These things being rightly considered, it is no wonder that men, living like men, have not been yet found with­out a Government, or that Go­vernment hath not been yet found without a national Religion; that is, some orderly and known way of pub­lick leading in divine things, or in the worship of God.

A national Religion being thus proved necessary, it remaineth that [Page 69] I prove what is necessary unto a nati­onal Religion, that is, as to the State, or in relation unto the Duty of the Magistrate.

Certain it is, that Religion hath not seen Corruption but by one of three causes; some interest therewithal in­corporated, some ignorance of the truth of it, or by some complication of both. Nor was ever Religion left wholly unto a Clergie that escaped these causes, or their most pernitious effects; as in Rome, which hath brought Ignorance to be the Mother of Devo­tion, and indeed Interest to be the Fa­ther of Religion. Now the Clergie not fayling in this case to be dange­rous, what recourse but to the Magi­strate for safety? especially seeing these causes, that is, Interest and Ignorance, the one deriving from evil Laws, the other from the want of good educa­tion, are not in the right or power of a Clergie, but of a Magistracy. Or if so it be that Magistrates of bounden duty ought to be nursing fathers and nursing mothers unto the Church,Isa. 49.23. how shall a State in the sight of God be excusable, that taketh no heed or care lest Religi­on suffer by causes, the prevention or [Page 70] remedy whereof is in them onely? To these therefore it is proposed,

46. Universities. That the Vniversities being pru­dently reformed, be preserved in their rights and endowments, for and to­wards the education and provision of an able Ministery.

We are commanded by Christ to search the Scriptures. Joh. 5.39. The Scriptures are not now to be searched but by skill in Tongues. The immediate gift of Tongues is ceased; How then should skill in Tongues be acquired but me­diately, or by the meanes of Educati­on? How should a State expect such Education, (especially for a matter of ten thousand men) that provideth not for it? And what provision can a State make for such Education, but by such Schools so endowed and regula­ted, as with us are the Universities? These therefore are a necessary step towards the prevention of such Igno­rance or Interest, as through the infir­mities or byas of Translators, Inter­preters and Preachers, both have and may frequently come to be incorpo­rated with Religion; as also unto the improvement or acquisition of such light as is by the command of Christ [Page 71] to be attained or exercised in searching the Scriptures.

The excellent lerrning of the Le­vites in all kindes,The eighth Parallel. not ordinarily infu­sed, but acquired, there having been among them as well the teacher as the scholar, 1 Chr. 25.8. Mal. 2 12. leaveth little doubt but their forty eight Cities were as so many U­niversities. These with their Suburbs or Endowments contained in the whole (each of their Circuits in Land reckoned at four thousand cubits deep) about an hundred thousand A­cres; that is, if their measure were according to the common cubit; if ac­cording to the holy cubit (as with Levites was most likely) twice so much; which at the lowest account I con­ceive to be far above the Revenues of both our Universities.

These being ordered as hath been said, it is proposed,

That the legal and ancient provisi­on for the national Ministry be so augmented, 47. Augmenta­tion of Li­vings. that the meanest sort of Livings or Benefices, without de­falcation from the greater, be each im­proved to the revenue of one hundred pounds a year at the least.

The ninth Parallel.This, in regard the way is by tythes, cometh up so close unto the Orders of Israel, as in our days may shew that a Commonwealth may come too near that pattern to be liked. We find not indeed that the Apostles either took or demanded Tythes; in which case the Priests who were legally possessed of them, might have had suspition that they, under colour of Religion, had aimed at the violation of propriety. But putting the case that generally the Priests had been converted unto the Christian Faith, whether would the Apostles for that reason have en­joyned them to relinquish their Tythes? Or what is there in the Christian Religion to favour any such surmise? To me there seemeth to be abundantly enough to the contrary. For if the Apostles stuck not to com­ply with the Jews in a Ceremony which was of meer humane inventi­on, and to introduce this, as they did Ordination by imposition of hands into the Christian Church; that they would, upon like inducement, have refused a standing Law, undoubtedly Mosaical, is in my opinion most im­probable. So that, I conceive, the [Page 73] Law for Tythes in being, may or may not be continued, at the pleasure of the Law-givers, for any thing in this case to the contrary. Confident I am, that the introducing of this Model in the whole, which is thought so impra­cticable, were not unto willing minds so difficult a work as the abolition of Tythes.

But Benefices, whether by way of Tythes or otherwise, being thus ordered, it is proposed,

That a Benefice becoming void in any Parish, 48. Ordination. the Elders of the same may assemble and give notice unto the Vice-Chancellour of either Vniver­sity by Certificate, specifying the true value of that Benefice: that the Vice-Chancellour upon receit of such Certificate, be obliged to call a Con­gregation of his Vniversity: that the Congregation of the Vniversity to this end assembled, having regard unto the value of the Benefice, make choice of a person fitted for the Mini­sterial Function, and return him unto the Parish so requiring: that the Probationer thus returned unto a Parish by either of the Vniversities, exercise the Office, and receive the [Page 74] Benefits as Minister of the Parish for the term of one year: that the term of one year expired, the Elders of the Parish assemble and put the election of the Probationer unto the Ballot: that if the Probationer have three parts in four of the Balls or Votes in the affirmative, he be there­by ordained and elected Minister of that Parish; not afterwards to be de­graded or removed, but by the Censors of the Tribe, the Phylarch of the same, or the Council of Religion in such cases as shall be unto them re­served by Act of Parliament. That in case the Probationer come to fail of three parts in four at the Ballot, he depart from that Parish; and if he return unto the Vniversity, it be with­out diminution of the former Offices or Preferments which he there en­joyed, or any prejudice unto his future preferment: and that it be lawful in this case for any Parish to send so often unto either Vniversity, and be the duty of either Vice-Chancellour upon such Certificates to make re­turn of different Probationers, till such time as the Elders of that Pa­rish have fitted themselves with a [Page 75] Minister of their own choyce and li­king.

In case it were thought fit, that a Pro­bationer thus elected, should, before he depart, receive imposition of hands by the Doctors of the Universitie; I cannot see what the most scrupulous in the matter of Ordination could find wanting. But be this so, or other­wise. The Universities by proposing unto the Congregation in every Pa­rish, do the Senatorian Office; and the people thus fitting themselves by their Suffrage or Ballot, reserve that Office which is truly popular, that is, the result unto themselves.

Moses, Th [...] tenth Pa [...]allel. (for so far Divines reach at Ordination) in the institution of the Senate of Israel, wherein he can ne­ver be proved to have used imposition of hands,Deut. 1. Numb. 11. Act. 1. doing the Sanatorian Of­fice, caused the people to take wise men, and understanding, and known among their Tribes, whereof the lot fell upon all but Eldad and Medad. And the Apostles doing the Sena­torian Office, in like manner, without imposition of hands, caused the whole Congregation to take two,Act. 1.26. whereof the lot of Apostle­ship [Page 76] fell upon Matthias. So that this way of Ordination being that which was instituted by Moses, and the prime of those which were taken up by the Apostles,See Book 2. chap. 8. is both Mosaical and Apo­stolical. Nor hath a well-ordered Commonwealth any choyce of those other ways of Ordination, used by the Apostles in complaisance unto worse Government, but is naturally necessi­tated unto this, that is, unto the very best.

Ordination being thus provided for, it is proposed,

49. National Religion, and provi­sion against scandalous Ministers. That the National Religion be ex­ercised according to a Directory in that case to be made, and published by Act of Parliament. That the Nation­al Ministry be permitted to have no other publick preferment or office in this Commonwealth. That a Na­tional Minister being convict of ig­norance or scandal, be movable out of his Benefice by the Censors of the Tribe, under an appeal unto the Phylarch, or to the Council for Reli­gion.

50. Liberty of Conscience That no Religion being contrary unto or destructive of Christianity, nor the Publick exercise of any Reli­gion, [Page 77] being grounded upon or incor­porated into a Forraign interest, be protected by or tolerated in this State. That all other Religions, with the Publick exercise of the same, be both tolerated and protected by the Coun­cil of Religion; and that all Profes­sours of any such Religion, be equally capable of all Elections, Magistra­cies, Preferments, and Offices in this Commonwealth, according unto the Orders of the same.

Upon the whole of these Proposi­tions touching Church-Discipline. Thus neither would the party that is for gifted men, through ignorance (which else in all probability they must) lose Religion; nor the Clergy corrupt it through interest. But decency and order with the liberty of conscience, would still flourish to­gether, while the Minister hath a pre­ferment he sought, the Parish a Mini­ster they chose, the Nation a Religion according to the Publick Conscience, and every man his Christian liberty. He therefore that endeavours to con­fute this chapter, must either shew how these things may be omitted, or more effectually provided for, or [Page 78] tythe Mint and Cumine, and neg­lect the weightier things of Law-giving.

A Commonwealth having in the e­stablishment of Religion, made resig­nation of her self unto God, ought in the next place to have regard unto the natural means of her defence; which introduceth the Military part of this Model.

CHAP. III.

Containing the Military part of this Model proposed practicably.

THe Military part, on which at present I shall discourse lit­tle, consisteth in the Disci­pline of the Youth, that is, of such as are between eighteen and thirty years of age: and for the Discipline of the Youth it is proposed,

That annually upon Wednesday next ensuing the last of December,51. Discipline of the Youth. the Youth of each Parish (under the inspection of the two Overseers of the same) assemble and elect the fifth man of their number, or one in five of them, to be for the term of that year, Deputies of the Youth of that Parish.

That annually on Wednesday next ensuing the last of January,52. Their Troops and Sports. the said Deputies of the respective Parishes meet at the Capital of the Hundred [Page 80] (where there are Games, and Prizes alotted for them, as hath been shewed elsewhere:) that there they elect to themselves out of their own number, one Captain, and one Ensigne. And that of these Games, and this Electi­on, the Magistrates and Officers of the Hundred be Presidents, and Iudges for the impartial distribution of the Prizes.

53. Their Squa­drons and exercises. That annually upon Wednesday next ensuing the last of February, the Youth through the whole Tribe thus elected, be received at the Capital of the same, by the Leiutenant as Com­mander in Chief, by the Conductor, and by the Censours; that under in­spection of these Magistrates, the said Youth be entertained with more splendid games, disciplined in a more Military manner, and divided by lot into sundry parts, or Essays, accor­ding to Rules elsewhere given.

54. The second Essay, or the standing Army. That the whole Youth of the Tribe thus assembled, be the first Essay. That out of the first essay, there be cast by lot two hundred horse, and six hundred foot: that they whom their friends will, or themselves can mount, be accounted horse, the rest [Page 81] foot. That these forces amounting in the fifty Tribes to ten thousand horse, and thirty thousand foot, be alwaies ready to march at a weeks warning: and that this be the second Essay, or the standing Army of the Common­wealth.

That for the holding of each Pro­vince, 55. Provincial guards. the Commonwealth in the first year assigne an Army of the Youth, consisting of seven thousand five hundred foot, and one thousand five hundred horse. That for the per­petuation of these Provincial Ar­mies or Guards, there be annually, at the time and places mentioned, cast out of the first essay of the Youth in each Tribe ten horse, and fifty foot, that is, in all the Tribes five hun­dred horse, and two thousand five hun­dred foot for Scotland, the like for Ireland, and the like of both orders for the Sea-Guards, being each ob­liged to serve for the term of three years upon the States pay.

The standing Army of the Com­monwealth consisting thus of forty thousand (not Souldiers of fortune not in body nor in pay) but Citizens at their vocations or trades, and yet [Page 82] upon command in continual readi­nesse: and the Provincial armies each consisting of nine thousand in pay in body, and possessed of the avenues and places of strength in the Province, it is not imaginable how a Province should be so soon able to stir, as the Commonwealth must be to pour forty thousand men upon it, besides the Sea-guards. Nor cometh this Militia thus constituted, except upon marches, unto any charge at all; the standing Army having no pay, and the Provinces, whereof the Sea thus guarded will be none of the poorest, maintaining their own guards. Such is the military way of a Commonwealth, and the constituti­on of her Armies, whether levied by suffrage, as in Rome; or lot, as in Israel.

The ele­venth Pa­rallel. Judg. 20.9. We will go up by lot against Gibeah.

Standing Forces being thus esta­blished: for such as are upon emer­gent occasions to go forth, or march, it is proposed,

56. The third Essay, or Ar­my march­ing. That the Senate and the People, or the Dictator having decreed or de­clared War, and the Field Officers being appointed by the Council of [Page 83] War; the General by Warrant issued unto the Leiutenants of the Tribes, demand the second Essay, or such part of it as is decreed; whether by way of levy or recrute. That by the same warrant he appoint his time and Rendevous: that the seve­ral Conductours of the Tribes deli­ver him the forces demanded, at the time and place appointed. That a Ge­neral thus marching out with the standing Army, a new Army be e­lected out of the first Essay as for­merly, and a new General be elected by the Senate; that so alwaies there be a General sitting, and a standing Ar­my, what Generals or Armies soe­ver be marching. And that in case of invasion the bands of the Elders be obliged unto like duly with those of the Youth.

That an only Son be discharged of these duties without prejudice. 57. Poena [...]; or the Guardian of Educati­on and Li­berty. That of two Brothers there be but one ad­mitted to forraign service at one time. That of more Brothers, not above half. That whoever otherwise refuseth his lot, except upon cause shewn he be dispensed withall by the Phylarch, or upon penitence be by [Page 84] them pardoned and restored, by such refusal be uncapable of electing, or being elected in this Commonwealth; as also that he pay unto the State a fifth of his revenue for protection, be­sides taxes. That Divines, Physi­cians, and Lawyers, as also trades not at leasure for the Essaies, be so far forth exempted from this Rule, that they be still capable of all prefer­ments in their respective professions, with indemnity, and without milita­ry education or service.

A Commonwealth whose Militia consisteth of Mercenaries, to be safe, must be situated as Venice, but can in no wise be great. The industry of Holland is the main revenue of that State; whence not being able to spare hands unto her Armes, she is cast upon strangers and mercenary forces, through which we in our time have seen Amsterdam necessitated to let in the Sea upon her, and to become (as it were) Venice. Unto a Popular Government that could not do the like, Mercenary Armes have never failed to be fatal; whence the last Pro­position is that which in every well-ordered Commonwealth hath been [Page 85] looked unto as the main guard of liberty.

In this Israel was formidable be­yond all other Commonwealths with a kind of fulmination.The twelfth Parallel. Saul when he heard the cruelty of Nahash the Am­monite, at the leaguer of Jabesh-Gi­lead, 1 Sam. 11.7. took a yoke of oxen and hewed them in pieces, and sent them through­out the coasts of Israel, by the hands of messengers, saying, Whosoever cometh not out after Saul, and after Samuel, so shall it be done unto his oxen. Which amounted not only unto a confiscation of goods (the riches of the Israelites lying most in their Cattle) but unto a kind of Anathema, as more plainly appeareth, where it is said, Curse ye Meroz, Judg. 5.23. curse ye bitterly the inhabi­tants thereof, because they came not forth to help the Lord against the migh­ty. Nay this ( [...]) desertion of the military orders and services in Israel, was sometimes punished with total extermination, as after the vi­ctory against Benjamin, Judg. 21. where the con­gregation or Political Assembly of that people, making inquisition what one of the Tribes of Israel came not up to the Lord in Mizpeh (the place [Page 86] where before the taking of Jerusa­lem, they held, as I may say, their Parliaments) and finding that there came none to the camp from Jabesh-Gilead, sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead with the edge of the sword, with the wo­men and the children: which was done accordingly.

But by this time men will shrink at this as a dreadful order, and begin to compute that a Commonwealth, let her Prerogatives for the rest be what they will, must at this rate be but a dear purchase: whereas indeed, if this way cost something, there is no other that doth not hazard all; foras­much as discarding this order, play your game as you can, you are some­time or other a prey to your enemies, or to your mercenaries. This cer­tainly is that root in (the Penetralia) the bowels of a Commmwealth, whence never any Court-Arts, or Polish, could attain unto the gallan­try or splendour of the education in Popular Governments. For let any man, remembring what it was to be a Gideon, a Miltiades, a Timoleon, a [Page 87] Scipio, or a Magistrate in a Common­wealth, consider if there should be no way with us to Magistracy, but by having served three years at Sea, and three years at Land, how the whole face and genius of education, both in the better and in the lower sort, would of necessity be changed in this Nati­on, and what kind of Magistrates such experience in those services must create unto the Common­wealth. Consider, whether the threat­ned punishments of this order, albeit through unacquaintance they may at the first sight have some brow, would not, as they have done in other Commonwealths of like structure, e­ven with low spirits, expire in scorne and contempt, or through the meer contemplation of the reward of Ho­nour, nay of the honour it self, in which point where right hath not been done, men, under Governments of this nature, have been much more apt unto heats; as where the men of E­phraim fought against Jeptha, for an affront in this kind which they con­ceived him to have put upon them. Wherefore passedst thou over to fight a­gainst the children of Ammon, Judg. 12. and didst [Page 88] not call us to go with thee? We will burne thine house upon thee with fire. Nor is this way so expensive of the purse or of bloud. Not of the pub­lick purse, because it detesteth mer­cenaries; nor of the private purse, because the waies of education thus directed, are all assisted with the States pay; so that a man in this road might educate three children cheaper, and to the most solid ends, then he could any one unto trifles in those which among us hitherto have been usual. And as to bloud, there is no­thing more certain, then that idle­ness, and her inseparable companion luxury, are exceedingly more wastful as of the purse, so of health, nay and of life it self, then is war; which neverthelesse this order is such as doth rather prevent then necessitate, in regard that to be potent in Armes is the way of peace. But whereas in a Martial Commonwealth there may be men having exceeded the thirtieth year of their age, who like those of Ephraim would yet take it ill to be excluded the lists of honour, and it must also be unto the detriment of the Commonwealth that they should; [Page 89] for these, whom we may call Volun­teers, it is proposed,

That upon Warrants issued forth by the General for recrutes or levies, 58. Volunteers. there be an Assembly of the Phylarch in each Tribe; that such Volunteers, or men being above thirty years of age, as are desirous of farther im­ployment in arms, appear before the Phylarch so assembled. That any number of these, not exceeding one moity of the recrutes or levies of that Tribe, may be taken on by the Phy­larch, so many of the youth being at the discretion of this Council dis­banded, as are taken on of the volun­teers. That the levies thus made, be conducted by the Conductour of the re­spective Tribe unto the Rendez­vous appointed. And that the ser­vice of these be without other term or vacation, then at the discretion of the Senate and the people, or such in­structions unto the General, as shall by them in that case be provided.

Thus much for the Military or de­fensive part of this Model. For Of­fences in general it is written,Mat. 18.7. Wo unto the world because of offences: for it must needs be that offences come, but [Page 90] wo to that man by whom the offence cometh. Among offences are offen­sive wars: now it being out of questi­on, that for the righteous execution of this wo upon him or them by whom the offence cometh, a war may be just and necessary, as also that vi­ctory in a just and necessary war, may intitle one Prince or one People un­to the Dominion or Empire of ano­ther Prince or People; it is also out of question, that a Common­wealth, unless in this case she be provided both to acquire, and to hold what she acquireth, is not perfect: which consideration bringeth me un­to the Provincial part of this Model.

CHAP. IV.

Containing the Provincial Part of this Model proposed practicably.

THe word Province, is with Ro­man Authors of diverse sense: By these it is taken sometimes for Magistracy; as that of the Consul, which was called His Province: some­time for any Region or Country, in which a Roman Captain or General was commanded to make War; but especially for such a Country as was acquired and held by armes, or by Provincial Right. The word is of like diverse use in Scriptures; as where it is said,Esth. 1.1. That Ahasuerus reign­ed over an hundred and seven provin­ces; by which are understood as well the divisions of the native, as those of the acquired Territories. But where Tanais the Governour writeth unto the King of Assyria concerning the Pro­vince of Judea, Ezra 5.8. it is understood a Coun­try [Page 92] acquired and held by arms; which cometh to the usual signification of the word with the Romans, it being in this sense that the Governour Fe­lix asked Paul of what province he was, and came to understand that he was of Cilicia, Act. 23.34. then a Province of the Ro­man Empire: and this signification is that in which I take the word through­out this Chapter.

The mighty load of Empire which happened unto the Commonwealth of Rome through the Acquisition of ma­ny and vast Provinces, is that where­unto the Songs of Poets, and the Saw of more serious Writers attribute the weight which they say over-swayed her. But this Judgment, though in it self right, is not in the manner they take it, to be swallowed without chew­ing. For how probable it is that the succeeding Monarchy was able to sup­port a weight in this kind, which the Commonwealth could not bear, may at this distance be discerned, in that the Provinces were infinitely more tur­bulent in the reign of the Emperours, then in that of the Commonwealth, as having a far stronger interest through ambition of attaining unto [Page 93] the whole, to tear the Empire in pie­ces: which they did, while divers Pro­vinces made divers Emperours, which before could not hope to make divers Commonwealths, nor to acquire safety by retreat unto a petty Government. But in this, the acquisition of Provin­ces devoured the Commonwealth of Rome, that she, not being sufficient­ly fortified by Agrarian Laws, the Nobility,Plutarch in Grach. through the spoil of Pro­vinces, came to eat the people out of their popular Balance or Lands in Ita­ly by purchases; and the Lands that had been in the hands of the Many, coming thus [...]nto the hands of the Few, of natural and necessary conse­sequence there followeth Monar­chy.

Now that England, a Monarchy, hath been seized of Provinces, (one of them, while France was such, being as great as any one of the Roman) is a known thing; and that the Militia proposed by the present Model, con­taineth all the causes of greatness that were in that of Rome, is to such as are not altogether strangers unto the former, no less then obvious. Now of like causes not to presume like effects, [Page 94] were unreasonable. The safety there­fore of the foregoing Agrarian, as hi­therto proposed, or that Lands be di­vided in their descent, must in this case be none at all, unless there be some stop also given in their Accumulation by way of purchase; lest otherwise the spoil of some mighty Province be still sufficient to eat out the people by purchase.

To submit therefore in this place (for ought I perceive) unto inevi­table necessity, it is proposed,

59. Additional propositions unto the A­grarian. That (great Commonwealths ha­ving been overthrown by the spoil of provinces) an estate of two thousand pounds a year in land, be incapable of any Accumulation by way of pur­chase.

Donations and Inheritances will be fewer then to be dangerous; and as some fall, others will be dividing in their descent. But to resume the dis­course upon the Agrarian Laws, which because they were not till in this Proposition compleat, remains imperfect. That unto Agrarian Laws some standard is of necessity, appear­eth plainly enough. This standard in a well-founded Monarchy, must bar [Page 95] recess; and in a well-founded Com­monwealth must bar increase. For cer­tain it is, that otherwise each of these policies doth naturally breed that Vi­per which eateth out the bowels of the Mother: as Monarchy, by Pomp and Luxury, reduceth her Nobility through debt into poverty, and at length unto such a level with the people, upon which no Throne ever stood or can stand: such was the case of this Na­tion under her latter Princes. And a Commonwealth by her natural ways of frugality, of fattening and coc­kering up of the people, is apt to bring estates unto such excess in some hands, as eating out the rest, boweth the neck of a free State or City unto the yoak, and exposeth her unto the goad of a Lord and Master; which was the case of Rome under her perpetual Dictators. But why yet must this standard of Land in the present case, be neither more nor less then just two thousand pounds a year? Truly, where some standard was of necessity to be named, I might as well ask why not this as well as any other? yet am I not without such reasons why I have pitched upon this, rather then any o­ther, [Page 26] as I may submit unto the judg­ment of the Reader in the following Computation or Comparison of the divers effects or consequences of so many different standards, as by the Rules of proportion may give suffici­ent account of the rest.

Let the dry rent of England (that is, at the rate a man may have for his Land without sweating) be computed at ten Millions: This presumed, if you set the standard at ten thousand pounds a year, the whole Territory can come into no fewer then one thousand hands. If you set it at five thousand pounds a year, it can come into no fewer then two thousand hands; and if you set it at two thou­sand pounds a year, it can come into no fewer then five thousand hands. It will be said, In which way you please, it will never come into so few hands as are capable of having it: which is cer­tain: yet because the effects in their approaches would be such as may be measured by their extreams, I shall pitch upon these as the readiest way to guide my Computation. The Balance in a thousand hands might affect the Government with an hankering after [Page 97] Monarchy; in two thousand hands it might usurp it, so as did the Roman Nobility, and thereby cause fewd be­tween the Senate and the People. These not onely in the extreams, but with much of like nature in the ap­proaches.

But letting these passe, as also the numbers or compasse necessary unto the rotation of such a Common­wealth, none of which inconveni­ences are incident unto the standard of two thousand pounds a year, as that whereby lands can come into no fewer then five thousand proprietors; we will suppose these standards to be each of them, as to the safety of the Government, indifferently practica­ble.

Yet so it is upon the record of expe­rience, and wise Authours, that the true cause whence England hath been an overmatch in arms for France, lay in the communication or distribution of propriety unto the lower sort; and for the same cause let it be considered, if the Commonwealth upon the stan­dard of two thousand pounds a year (caeteris paribus) must not necessarily be an overmatch in the potency of [Page 98] her Militia for the other two. Such are the advantages, such is the glory of like moderation unto the publick. Money (saith my Lord Verulam) is like muck, not good except it be spread. Much rather in Popular Government is this holding as to land, this having upon the State a far stronger influ­ence, at least in larger Territories, then money; for in such, money while scarce cannot over-balance land; and were silver and gold as plen­tiful as brasse or iron, they would be no more, nor would land be lesse worth. And for private men, were it not that it is easier to fill the belly of a glutton then his eye, not only vertue, but the beatitude of riches, would be apparently consistent in a mean. But what need the Divine or the Philoso­pher, upon a Doctrine which is not to diminish any mans estate, not to bring any man from the customs whereunto he hath been inured, nor from any emergent expectation he may have, but regards only the generation to come, or the children to be borne se­ven years after the passing such a law? whence it must needs follow, that put­ting the case this Agrarian be intro­duced, [Page 99] it is unto our age as if there were none; and if there be no Agra­rian, it is unto our age as if there were one. The difference is no more, then that in the one way the Common­wealth is at all points secured, and in the other she is left unto her fortune even in the main. Of such soveraign effect are like laws, that I would go yet farther, and propose,

That in Scotland the standard be set at five hundred pounds a year, 60. Agrarian for Scot­land and Ireland. in Ire­land at two thousand pounds a year, in land; the rest for each as for England.

Narrownesse of an Agrarian for Scotland, being a Martial Countrey, would make the larger provisi n of a good Auxiliary Militia; and large­nesse of an Agrarian for Ireland, being lesse Martial, would cast a sop into the jaws of their avarice, who should think it too much confined at home. And lest the Provincials in this case should think themselves worse dealt withall then the Citizens themselves, the sum of the Agrarian Laws being cast up together, any man in the three Nations may hold four thousand five hundred pounds a year in land, and any small parcel of land, [Page 100] or meer residence in England, maketh a Provincial a Citizen. Should the Commonwealth increase in Provin­ces, the estates at this rate both of her Citizens and Provincials, would be more and greater then ever were those of the ancient Nobility of these Nations, and without any the least hazard unto liberty. For he who considering the whole story, or that only of the Gracchi in Plutarch, shall judge aright, must confesse, that had Rome preserved a good Agrarian but in Italy, the riches of her Provinces could not have torn up the roots of her liberty, but to the contrary must have water'd them. It may be said, What need then of putting an Agra­rian upon the Provinces? I answer: For two Reasons: first, indulgence to the Provincials, and then advantage to the Commonwealth. For the first, it is with small foresight apparent e­nough, that the avarice of the Citizen being bounded at home, and having no limits in the Provinces, would in a few years eat up the Provincials, and bring their whole Countries (as the Roman Patricians did Italy) to sound in their fetters, or to be tilled [Page 101] by their slaves or underlings. And so for the second, would by such means lose the Commonwealth an Auxiliary Militia, to be otherwise in Scotland only more worth then the Indies. These things therefore thus ordered, it is proposed,

That upon expiration of Magi­stracy in the Senate, 61. Provincial Councils. or at the annual recesse of one third part of the same, there be elected by the Senate out of the part receding, into each Provin­cial Council, four Knights for the term of three years, thereby to render each Provincial Council (presuming it in the beginning to have been con­stituted of twelve Knights, divided af­ter the manner of the Senate by three several lists or elections) of annual, triennial, and perpetual revolution or rotation. 62. Provincial Governours or Gene­rals.

That out of the same third part of the Senate annually receding, there be unto each Province one Knight elected for the term of one year. That the Knight so elected, be the Provinci­al General or Governour. That a Provincial Governour or General receive annually in April at his Ren­dezvous appointed, the Youth or Re­crutes [Page 102] elected in the precedent Moneth, to that end, by the Tribes, and by their Conductours delivered accordingly. That he repair with the said Youth or Recrutes unto his Province, and there dismisse that part of the Provincial Guard or Army whose triennial term is expired. That each Provincial Governour have the conduct of Affairs of War and of State in his respective Pro­vince, with advice of the Provincial Council; and that he be President of the same.

63. Provincial Provosts. That each Provincial Council e­lect three weekly Proposers, or Pro­vosts, after the manner, and to the ends already shewn in the constitu­tion of Senatorian Councils; and that the Provost of the seniour list, during his term, be President of the Council in absence of the General. 64. Subordina­tion and function of Provincial Councils.

That each Provincial Council procéed according unto instructions received from the Council of State, and keep intelligence with the same by any two of their Provosts, for the Government of the Province, as to matter of War or of State. That upon levies of native or proper arms [Page 103] by the Senate, and the people, a Pro­vincial Council (having unto that end received orders) make levies of Provincial Auxiliaries accordingly. That Auxiliary arms upon no occa­sion whatsoever exceed the proper or native arms in number. That for the rest, the Provincial Council maintain the Provincials, defraying their peculiar guards and council, by such known proportion of tri­buts, as on them shall be set by the Senate and the People, in their pro­per Rights, Laws, Liberties, and Immunities, so far forth as upon the merits of the cause whereupon they were subdued, it seemed good unto the Senate and the People to con­firm them. And that it be lawful for the Provincials, to appeal from their Provincial Magistrates, Councils, or Generals, to the People of England.

In modeling a Commonwealth, the concernment of Provincial Govern­ment comes in the last place; for which cause I conceive any long Discourse upon these Orders to be at present un­necessary: But certain things there are upon the by, which I am unwilling to let slip without pointing at.

Whethermen or money be the nerve of War.Some will have men, some will have money to be the Nerve of War; each of which Positions, in the proper case, may be a Maxime: for if France, where the main body of the people is imbased; or Venice, which standeth upon a Mercenary Militia, want mo­ney, they can make no War. But it hath heretofore been otherwise with Commonwealths. Roman Hi­storians (as is observed by Machia­vel) in their Military preparations or expeditions, make no mention of mo­ney, unless what was gained by the War, and brought home into the Treasury; as the spoil of Macedon by Aemilius Paulus, being such, as the people for some years after were discharged of their Tribute. Not that their Wars were made altogether without money; for if so, why should the people at any time before have paid Tribute? Or why, upon this oc­casion, were they excused? but that the money in which their Wars stood them, was not considerable in compa­rison of that which is requisite where money may be counted the Nerve of War; that is, where men are not to be had without it. But Rome, by ver­tue [Page 105] of her Orders, could have raised vaster numbers of her Citizens and Associates, then perhaps she ever did, though during the Consulate of Papus and Regulus, she levyed in Italy one­ly, seventy thousand Horse, and seven hundred thousand Foot. Should we conceive the Nerve of this Motion to have been money, we must reckon the Indies to have been exhaulted be­fore they were found; or so much Brass to have been in Italy, as would have made stones to be as good mo­ney. A well-ordered Common­wealth doth these things not by mo­ney, but by such Orders as make of her Citizens the Nerve of her Wars. The Youth of the Commonwealth propo­sed, are esteemed in all at five hundred thousand. Of these there is an annu­al Band, consisting of one hundred thousand. Of this one hundred thou­sand, there is a standing Army consi­sting of thirty thousand Foot and ten thousand Horse, besides such as being above thirty years of age, shall offer themselves as Volunteers; of which the number is no wise likely to be few. To the standing Army, the Pro­vinces, or that onely of Scotland, be­ing [Page 106] both Populous and Martial, can afford at any time an equal number of Auxiliaries.

These Orders, thus summed up together, render this Commonwealth ordinarily able to wage War with fourscore thousand men; a Force, which it is known, not any Prince in Chri­stendom is able to match in Vertue, Number or Discipline. For these, the Commonwealth in her Sea-guard hath always at hand sufficient waftage, or at least such a sufficient Convoy as may make any Vessels at hand a suffi­cient wastage; all this, I say, by vertue of Orders: not but that the March, the Eguipage, the Waftage of so great an Army must cost money, but that it will come to no account in compari­son of a lingring War made by a mat­ter of thirty thousand Mercenaries, the very consumption of a State; whereas fourscore thousand men so disciplined and so furnished, as hath been shewn, being once transported, must suddainly come to be no charge, or make the War defray it self.

But to reckon upon such a Mili­tia, were to suppose a large Coun­try capable of being a Common­wealth; [Page 107] whereas we hold them learn­ed, who say, That no Commonwealth hath consisted of more then some one City or Town.Whether a Common­wealth have consisted of more then one City or Town. But in what Language or in what Geography are the twelve Tribes of Israel; the ( [...]) Peo­pledoms or Prytanies of Athens, which Theseus gathered into one bo­dy; the Tribes and Lineages in Lace­demon instituted by Lycurgus; the five and thirty Roman Tribes planted between the Rivers Vulturnus and Ar­no, or between the Cities now called Capua and Florence; the thirteen Cantons of the Switzers; the seven united Provinces of the Low-Coun­tries, understood to have been or to be but one City or Town? Whether were not the people of Israel under their Commonwealth six hundred thousand? What reason can be given why the Government that could take in six hundred thousand, might not as well take in twice that number? How much short came the Country, plan­ted by the Roman Tribes, of one hun­dred and fifty miles square? Or how much over is England? And what rea­son can be given why a Government taking in one hundred and fifty miles [Page 108] square, might not as well take in twice that compass? Whether was our House of Commons under Monarchy not collected from the utmost bounds of the English Territory? And whe­ther had the Laws by them enacted not their free course unto the utmost limits of the same? And why should that be impossible or impracticable un­to a Representative of the people in a Commonwealth, which was so facile and practicable to a Representative of the people under Monarchy?

It is a wonder how the Common­wealth of Rome, which held as it were the whole World by Provinces, should be imagined by any man to have con­sisted but of one Town or City.

But to return: It is alledged by o­thers, and as to Provincial Govern­ment, very truly, that a Common­wealth may be a Tyranny: Nor do I think that Athens, in this point, came short of any Prince: Rome, on the other side, was (according to the merits of the cause) as frequent in giving liber­ty, as in taking it away. The Provinces of Venice and of Switz, would not change their condition with the Sub­jects of the best Prince. However, [Page 109] the possibility in a Commonwealth of tyrannizing over Provinces, is not to be cured; for be the Commonwealth or the Prince, a State or a Man after Gods own heart, there is no way of holding a Province but by arms.

When the Syrians of Damascus came to succour Hadadezer king of Zobah, The thir­teenth Pa­rallel. 2 Sam. 8.5.6. David slew of the Syrians two and twen­ty thousand men: then David put gari­sons in Syria of Damascus, and the Sy­rians became servants to David, and brought gifts: and the Lord preserved David whither soever he went.

With this Parallel I draw the cur­tain, and close (be it Comedy to such as are for Tragedy) this Model; ap­pealing to the present, or the next Age, whether throughout I have not had God Himself for my Vouchee. In the mean time,See the Co­rollary of Oceana. there is nothing hereby proposed which may not stand with a supreme Magistrate.

The Conclusion:

Shewing how the Model proposed may be proved or examined; and giving a brief Answer unto Mr. Wren's last Book; intituled, Monarchy asserted against Mr. Harrigtons Oceana.

Sect. 1. That a Common­wealth not rightly or­dered, is yet less sediti­ous then the best of Mo­narchies.

FOr a Nation to be still upon the cast of a Dye, to be ever in trepidation as to the main chance of Government, is a dreadful state of things. Such indeed with us hath been the Constitution of late Go­vernments, of which therefore not any can be called a Commonwealth. Yet hath the like state of things, in favour of Monarchs, and through the industry of the Clergy, been for many ages, that whereof Common­wealths unheard, are still accused and condemned. For proof in this case, the Tribunitian storms of the Roman peo­ple are thought abundantly sufficient. [Page 112] But these having been without blood, if with our affairs they hold any Pa­rallel, are not to be compared with the Barons Wars, those of York and Lancaster, or the like; but with the contests or strivings of our Parlia­ments with their Kings, while such strife came not unto arms. Or if the Roman fields from the time of the Gracchi grew bloody, we have known a matter of a dozen years, in which ours might have compared with them. The se­ditions under the Commonwealth of Rome, unto those under the Empire, hold such proportion, as the seditions under the Commonwealth of Israel unto those under their kings.See Book 2. chap. 4. I am con­tented at this time, for discourse sake, that the seditions of Venice should pass as they are computed by Mr. Wren: let those also which have happened in the Commonwealths of Switz, and of the united Provinces, by the skill of some man who may be thought more impar­tial then my self, be rightly enumera­ted and added. This being done, let the seditions that have happened in the Monarchies of England, France and Spain, be as impartially summed up; and I may venter to promise you, [Page 113] That you shall not finde the sum of the seditions which have happened in those three Commonwealths, to ba­lance the foot of the account with those seditions which have happened in any one of those Monarchies; nor are we without sufficient inducement to believe, that the whole account in this particular, of those Common­wealths which have been in the world, can come any whit neerer unto that of the Monarchies. But this being so, be it also that a Commonwealth is a seditious Government, yet must it be the least seditious Government. [...]. Lib. 4. The Republick of Corinth never suffered but that one sedition which is descri­bed by Xenophon; and this too from an external cause.

Sect. 2. That Mr. VVrens op­position of popular pru­dence, a­mounteth unto confir­mation of it.

But I am the more confirmed by the Assaults of Mr. Wren, to have no less then demonstrated in the proposed Model, that a Commonwealth rightly ordered, is altogether incapable of sedition, and so consequently of disso­lution, that is, from any internal cause. To render his intire Confutation, and the truth of this assertion the more conspicuous, I shall first insert those Rules or Maximes whereby a Model [Page 114] of a Commonwealth may be exactly proved or examined, and then shew how they totally enervate and over­turn those Arguments adoperated by Mr. Wren towards the examination and confutation of the Model proposed.

How a Mo­del of popu­lar Govern­ment may be tryed or ex­amined.The Maximes or Rules whereby a well-ordered Model of popular Go­vernment may be most exactly proved or examined, are especially two:

1. It must be wholly void of any con­tradiction or inequality.

2. It must be such in which no num­ber of men having the interest, can have the power or strength: and no number of men having the power or strength, can have the interest to invade or disturb the Government.

It is not in Nature that there should be an effect, where there is not the cause of that effect; and in a frame of Government that is exactly accor­ding unto the foregoing Maximes, there can be no cause of sedition or dissolution. A Model of Govern­ment therefore that will hold exami­nation by these Maximes, must (with­out [Page 115] oftentation, or with Mr. Wrens pa­tience) be perfect.

Now let us observe how he bestir­reth himself to examine and confute this Model. As to contradiction, he doth not so much as pretend that there is any guile in it; yet will not allow it to have any truth: For, saith he,VV. p. 78. as in a fiction the several members may be so contrived, as not to give one another the lye, but be all contained within the limits of verisimilitude, and yet the whole remain without the least syllable of truth; so in a Model of Govern­ment. To which I answer, That there being a truth of Nature, and a truth of Fact, this way of Mr. Wrens dispu­ting is meer equivocation. For the Model is not proposed to shew the truth of Fact, or that there hath been any such exactly in practice; but to shew the truth of Nature, or that such a Model is practicable: wherefore he needeth not to have alledged that it hath not the truth of Fact, which we all know; but was to shew where it faileth of such truth in Nature as can any way render it impracticable. But instead of this, he is gone to the Moon; and will read us a Lecture in Politicks, [Page 116] by the Planets, or various Hypotheses of Celestial motions, which may be ex­cogitated including no absurdity in themselves, Ibid. and yet perhaps not any one of them prove to be the true method of nature. But may a man therefore ar­gue in this manner: It is very hard to know certainly which are the high-waies of the Planets, therefore there can be no certain knowledge which are the high-waies to London? Let us e'en say, Because the rotation of the World may as well go upon the hea­vens as upon the earth, therefore a man may as well go upon his head as upon his heels, and a Commonwealth as well stand upon a Milk-womans pattins as upon the strongest interest, or the interest of the strongest.

W. p. 179.So much for contradiction. Now for inequality, saith Mr. Wren, Though it should be allowed Mr. Harrington, that his Commonwealth hath none in it, yet would it fail of attaining the perfe­ction of Government, seeing there is an inequality in the nature of man, which is not rectified by the Model of his Com­monwealth. As if the equality of a Government pretended to be such, as should make a crooked man [Page 117] straight, a wicked man good, or a pas­sionate man a Philosopher; and were not perfect in being sufficient to pre­vent any influence, that wickedness, or passion in a man, or in men, may have upon the Government. But for far­ther discovery of these inequalities in the nature of man, that are not recti­fied by the Model, Mr. Wren sendeth us unto his eight and ninth Chapters, where he produceth them in such order, as I shall observe in repeat­ing him.Pag. 84. Whensoever (saith he) un­der Popular Government the number of those whose offences have rendered them lyable unto the severity of Laws, is considerable enough to qualifie them for attempt, Popular Government has no more security then any other, of being free from sedition. It is very true: but Mr. Wren was obliged to have shewn how in an equal Common­wealth, or under the Model proposed, it were possible that the number of such men should come to be consider­able enough to qualifie them for such attempt. But in this kinde he is no otherwise provided then to tell us, That of this Original and extraction, as to the main, was Catilines attempt upon [Page 118] the Roman Commonwealth. So under­taking against Oceana, or the most e­qual Commonwealth, he is come to arguing against Rome, or the most un­equal Commonwealth; and at such a time too, when being no longer capa­ble of liberty, but ready for bonds, there were other parties besides Cati­lines, and others besides such as were obnoxious unto the Laws, that lay in wait for her; as Pompey and his party, or at least Caesar and his, who at length carried it: so that this feat was not so much performed by men other­wise lyable unto severity of Laws, as by men puffed up by ambition. But let these have been of which sort he will, it remains with him to shew, how there should be of either kinde e­nough in Oceana for a like attempt. It is known that long before this hap­pened in Rome, the whole of that Commonwealth was in the hands of three men, Caesar, Pompey, and Cra­seus: wherefore he should have first shewn, which way the whole of the Commonwealth of Oceana might come into the hands of three, or of a few men. But leaving this untouch­ed, he runs making a dust, and a doubt [Page 119] where the soveraign power of Oceana can be; which even in Rome, as une­qual as it was, is acknowledged to have been in the Assemblies of the People; and in Athens, Lib. 5. Thucydides expressly saith, That the soveraignty was in the five thousand: whoever doubted but where the ultimate re­sult is, there also must be the sove­raignty? and the ultimate result of Oceana is in the Prerogative Tribe, or Representative of the People. Then saith he,Pag. 84. This Representative thinking it their interest, may dissolve the Government, and perpetuate them­selves, and may come to think it their interest. For the desire of power being natural to man, a far greater share of power remaineth with every particular man, when the soveraign power is divi­ded among so many, then when the same power is divided among two hundred thousand. But I shewed that this Representative hath the whole sove­raign power in themselves, not divided with any other, or with the five hun­dred thousand; which I suppose he means by the two hundred thousand he mentions. Now this Representa­tive cannot be understood to have the [Page 120] soveraign power by over-balance of strength, because they are but one thousand, to five hundred thousand: so it is plain that they have it by con­sent, or by orders only; wherefore these orders they have not the power, or strength, nor the interest to break, because breaking their orders, by which onely and not by strength the power is in themselves, they come to divide the power that was in them­selves, with the five hundred thousand, as they who in defect of the orders have the far greater strength, and no legal bar. Yet saith he, That a Repre­sentative is not uncapable of making such an attempt as this, W. p. 85. will (it is not im­probable) easily find belief with those who are acquainted with the actions of these last eighteen years. Which is as much as to say, That because a Representa­tive, by and with the people, may have both the interest, and the power or strength to free themselves of a bro­ken Monarchy; therefore a Repre­sentative may without and against the people, have both the interest, and the power or strength to break the orders of the most equal Commonwealth. But if the Representative of Oceana [Page 121] have not the power or strength to break their orders, and perpetuate themselves, much less the Senate. True it is, if we look upon some other Commonwealths, a Senate might have the interest to do it; but not where the Senate hath been upon rotation. To adde then unto Mr. Wrens faculty of opposition greater strength then is in it; if the Senate of Oceana would do any thing of this kind, their rea­diest way were by creating of the Di­ctator. The Dictator being created, hath soveraign power in carrying on the orders of the Commonwealth; but those do not perpetuate their power, this therefore cannot be done but by force or arms. The arms of the Commonwealth are both nume­rous, and in posture or readiness; but they consist of her Citizens: and for the Dictator to bring the Citizen to break the Commonwealth, were for a General to command his Army to cut their own throats. It is true, the Ro­man Decemvirs put in for prolongati­on; but, though in the most unequal Commonwealth, could not make it stand one year. And for mercenaries there are none in Oceana: is this news? [Page 122] there were none in Israel, there were none in Athens, there were none in Lacedemon, there were none in Rome, while those Commonwealths flouri­shed. But were there mercenaries, as he might perhaps reckon servants, they are unarmed, undisciplined; they cannot rise, through the vast bodies of Citizens in arms both Elders and Youth; or if they would rise, were no­thing in their hands. The Roman slaves, and the Lacedemonian Helots being far of another, and more dan­gerous nature, never rose against their Lords, but to their own destru­ction. All this while I say nothing of the security which is in the frame of this Dictator, beyond any example or interest of prolongation to be found either in the Roman Dictator or the Venetian Council of ten, each whereof having had like power, did never discover any such inclination. It is true, that in the time of Sylla, the Roman Dictator began to be perpetu­al; but this is not to be attributed so much unto the imperfection of the order, as to the change of the ba­lance. But if the Dictator of Oceana cannot have the interest, or having [Page 123] the interest cannot have the power or strength to perpetuate that Magistra­cy, much less can the Senate.

The summe of what hath been said, may be thus cast up, as to the whole constitution. If things or per­sons that have neither the right nor the might, may prevail against things and persons who have both the right and the might; then may one order of this Commonwealth break the whole systeme: but the might through the foundation or popular balance of propriety being in the whole people, and the whole superstructures of this Commonwealth being nothing else but an equal distribution of common right unto the whole people, who are possessed of the might; they who have the might, have not the interest to break, but to preserve the orders, which therefore no other can have the power or strength to break, or some other breaking, must but lose that which they pretend to gain; the right which in this case must still fall unto the might, devolving upon the people. That Mr. Wren will needs fancie the Tribes or Cities in Oceana, W. p. 87. as those in the united Provinces, or [Page 124] the Cantons of Switz to be distinct so­veraignties, concerns not me, seeing the form of Oceana is far otherwise; nor indeed him, seeing neither do the Cities in Holland, nor the Cantons in Switz go about to dissolve their Com­monwealths or Leagues. The Cham­pion having thus failed at the head, is contented to play low. Though there be care taken (saith he) that at the As­sembly of the Hundred and the Tribe, W. p. 181. such and such Magistrates should be elected out of the Horse, there is no ne­cessary provision there should be any Horse there, out of which to elect. And where can they be then, if not in some Parish? He might better have said, that at the Parish there was no care taken, that the people should not e­lect too many of the Horse, which be­ing indeed the defect of the former, is in this Edition rectified.See the pro­position 44. His last exception is against the place where I say, that They who take upon them the profession of Theology, W. p. 183. Physick or Law, are not at leasure for the Essaies, whereby the Youth commence for all Magistracies and Honours in the Com­monwealth. To which reason he of­fers not so much as any answer: nor [Page 125] pretends any other argument against it, then that this excludes Di­vines, Lawyers and Physicians, from those Honours unto which their Pa­rish Clerkes, their Scriveners, and their Apothecaries, nay Farriers and Cobblers may attain. And what can I help that, if it ought neverthelesse so to be, for a reason which he cannot answer? Nay, if so it be in common practice where the reason is nothing neer so strong, seeing a Parish Clerk, a Scrivener, an Apothecary; nay a Cobbler or a Farrier, is not uncapable of being of the Common-Council, nor yet of being an Alderman or Lord Maior of London; which neverthelesse that a Divine, a Lawyer, or a Physician should be, were absurd to think. Di­vines have a plough from which they ought not to look back: they have above a tenth of the Territory, with which they ought to be contented; and more then all, civil interest con­tracted by a Clergy, corrupts Religion. For Lawyers, their practice and Ma­gistracies are not onely the most gain­ful, but for life; and in a Common­wealth, neither is accumulation of Magistracie just or equal, nor the con­founding [Page 126] of executive and legislative Magistracie safe. Will Mr. Wren be­lieve one of our own Lawyers, and one of the learnedst of them upon this point?Verulame de aug. Scien. lib. 8. cap. 3. It is my Lord Verulam: They (saith he) who have written (de legibus) of Law-making, have handled this Ar­gument as Philosophers, or as Lawyers. Philosophers speak higher then will fall into the capacity of practice (to which may be referred Plato's Common­wealth, Sir Thomas More's Utopia, with his own Atlantis) and Lawyers be­ing obnoxious, and addicted each unto the Laws of their particular Country, have no freedom nor sincerity of judgment, but plead as it were in bonds. Certain­ly the cognizance of these things is most properly appertaining unto political per­sons, who best know what standeth with humane society, what with the safety of the people, what with natural equity, with ancient prudence, and with the different constitution of Commomwealths. These therefore, by the principles and precepts of natural equity and good policie, may and ought to determine of Laws. For Physitians, who (as such) have in the management of State-affairs no pre­judice; if you open them the door, [Page 127] they will not at all, or very rarely, come in; whereby it appeareth, first, that such a bar may in some cases be no vi­olation of liberty. And secondly, that such who for better causes might be as well satisfied, and for more unanswe­rable Reasons ought to forbear, yet are impatient, give a full testimony that their meaning is not good.

Thus is the Commonwealth by Mr. Wren opposed, by him asserted. There remaineth no more unto the full con­futation of his Book, then to shew how the Monarchy by him asserted is by him destroyed. This is to be done by examination of his ninth Chapter, which is the next of those unto which he referred us.

Sect. 3. That Mr. VVrens as­sertion of Monarchy amounteth unto sub­version of it.

The opposition made by Mr. Wren unto a Commonwealth, and his pre­tended asserting of Monarchy, run al­together upon Mr. Hobbeses princi­ples, and in his very words; but through the want of understanding, much ener­vated: so that Mr. Wrens whole feat of Arms cometh but to have given me a weaker Adversary for a stronger. In Soveraignty (saith he) the diffused strength of the multitude is united in one person; VV. p. 97. which in a Monarchy is a [...] [Page 130] joyned? If these be small Armies, the like may befal them, which befel those of the Kings in the Wars of the Ba­rons. And if they be great Armies, the Prince hath not wherewithall to support or content them; nay if he had, Mr. Wren telleth us plainly, That Princes who keep great Armies, W. p. 106. as Guards to their persons or Empires, teach us that this is to walk upon preci­pices; there being no possibility of pre­venting such an Army (especially if they lie still without imployment) from acquiring an interest distinct from that of the Prince. Wherefore to follow Mr. Wren. & no other leader in his own words against himself. This Militia being great, cannot be so instituted, as to have no interest besides the pay it receiveth from the Monarch, nor so as to have no hopes of being safe in their own strength, if they should with­draw themselves from the service and obedience due unto him: and being not great, against the whole order or orders of the Nobility and the People, they cannot be sufficient. What then remaineth but to say, that Mr. Wren having declared, The perfection of Mo­narchical Government to consist in a W. p. 107. [Page 131] mixture of a Monarchy by a Nobility, and a Monarch by arms, hath as to his Model intirely subverted Monar­chy? In this way of disputing, I have rather followed my leader then rea­son; the true answer being that which was given in the Preface, namely, that an Army to be effectual in England, must be such where the Officers have po­pular estates, or where they have such estates as had the ancient Nobility: in the latter case, they make a King; in the former, a Commonwealth. But Mr. Wren will have his own way; and therefore, to conclude, let me but de­sire him to lay his hand upon his heart, and then tell me, whether the condition of the Nobility (to whose favour in my exclusion he pretends a Meritorious title) sharing eminently and according to their rank with the people or the high-shoon (as he pleaseth to call them) in the Commowealth by me proposed; or the condition of the Nobility under the insolence and burden of a Mercenary Army, sharing equally with the high-shoon in oppres­sion and slavery, or reviving the old Barons Wars for new liberty, in the Monarchy by him proposed; be the [Page 130] [...] [Page 131] [...] [Page 132] more desirable. And to speak a world for my adversary, we will submit it wholly unto the present Nobility, whether Mr. Wren or I be so extrava­gant in these things, that they have, or can have any other then the like choice. Yet enters not Mr. Wren into despair of living to enjoy his share (which ought to be a good one) of the felicities which will belong unto the Sub­jects of such a Government. Ibid. He looks upon persons, but things are invin­cible.

The rest of his Book (to which, The Prerogative of Popular Govern­ment, is still a compleat answer) con­sisteth altogether of grosse evasion or invective, or of drawing out of story against Popular Prudence such ima­ginary swords as do but stand bent. To rectifie or streighten these, I may hereafter present him (if any man shall think it worth the while) with a fuller answer.

An Appendix

Concerning an House of Peers.

NOt a man knowing in what is of necessity unto the foundation or being of Popular Government, can hope or expect the introduction of any such form, where Monarchy is not impracticable. They, where Mo­narchy is impracticable, who come first to discover it, and be convinced of it, if reason be not altogether de­posed, are inevitable leaders. Hence it is that our Commonwealths-men are already renowned throughout this Nation, for their invincible rea­son, even by confession of their op­ponents, or such as proceed never­theless in other waies. But where seed is so well sowen and rooted, in­tervening possession and interests, are like such weather as holding back the Spring, but improves the Harvest; it may indeed be a chill season unto [Page 134] Commonwealths-men, but upon the Commonwealth must bestow fer­mentation. Had our incomparable assertors of publick liberty, shot up before an universal eviction of the necessity which enforceth their cause, it must have been through such relu­ctancy, as would have made them glad to do things by the halves, which is the only rock to a rising Common­wealth, of scandal or danger; the whole being such against which there is nothing to be alledged, and the halfe such as is easily confuted. These things considered, what appearance is there, but it must redound unto the greater advantage of our Common­wealths-men, that we are under a Vogue which abhorreth the very name of a Commonwealth? Seeing by this means one of two things must of necessity come, and come shortly unto publick view or discovery; either that Monarchy is practicable, or that it is not practicable; that is, in our state of affairs, or in this present distri­bution of the balance. If Monarchy be found practicable, Common­wealths-men are satisfied in their Consciences, and so ready in fair [Page 135] waies to return, and submit not only for wrath, but for conscience sake. But (let Divines cry Atheism, and Lawyers Treason) if it be discovered once unto common understanding that Monarchy is impracticable, then in cometh the Commonwealth, not by halves, but with all her Tackling, full fail, in her Streamers, and with Top and Top-Gallant.

The waies whereby it is at hand to be discovered whether Monarchy be practicable or impracticable, are e­specially two; the one quicker, the o­ther slower: the quicker way will be by work-men, the slower by the work.

If the work-men (being willing) be yet overcome by the meer obstina­cy of their matter, it amounteth unto a plain confession, that Monarchy is impracticable. And if they give a­way the Liberties of the People, they are overcome by the obstinacy of the matter; for that is not their work; nor any other work then such as must be void, not so much in regard of it self, though that may be true enough, as through the want of any other se­curity then what the Prince had be­fore, [Page 136] that is, an Army; and such an Army the nature whereof, for securi­ty is none at all, but the contrary, as hath been shewn already:Book 3. p. 16, 17, 18. nor to be altered with better success then theirs, who became Princes in Grecian and Sicilian States.

But if the work-men give not a­way the Liberties of the People, then must they so bound their Prince, that he can in no wise invade those Liber­ties; and this by any other means then the full & perfect introduction of a well-ordered Commonwealth, they will find to be utterly impossible: so either way they are overcome by the meer obstinacy of their matter.

If through secret dictate, (as when the Senate of Rome was Conviva Caesaris) or haste to make riddance, this be not perceived by the work-men, it will be but the more per­ceivable by the work when it cometh to wearing or in pra­ctice; and the flaws or grievances being found insupportable, the next Parliament, through the meer want of other remedy, must introduce a Commonwealth.

Good, and egregiously Prophetical! [Page 137] But what say you for all this, if we have an House of Peers, and that even for the Lords sake, there being no other way to secure the Liberty of Consci­ence? Why I say, if we have an House of Peers, it must be an House of old Peers, or an House of new Peers, or an House of the one and the other. Moreover I say, Let it be which you will, such an House may at some time, for some reason, be personally affected unto Liberty of Conscience; but is a constitution naturally averse, nay con­trary unto the Liberty of Conscience, and therefore can be no security unto the same, whether the Lords be Spiri­tual or Temporal, or partiparpale.

Lords Spiritual are inspired with a third estate, or share of a Realm, which giveth no toleration unto any Religion, but that only asserting this point, which is Monarchy. Setting this Oracle and some like reason of State aside, we may think that every Soveraignty (as such) hath Liberty of Conscience: this a King having, cannot give; and a People having, will not lose. For liberty of consci­ence is in truth a kinde of State, wherein a man is his own Prince: but [Page 138] an House of Peers sets up another Prince; it cannot stand without a King. If the Balance be in the Lords, as before Henry the seventh, yet must they have a King to unite them, and by whom to administer their Govern­ment; and if the balance be not in the Lords, they stand or fall with the King, as the House of Peers in the long Parliament; and the King fal­ling, their Government devolves unto the People. Again, an House of Peers having the over-balance, signi­fies somthing; in which case it hath not been known to be for Liberty of Conscience: and not having the over-balance, signifies nothing; in which case it cannot secure the Liberty of Conscience: thus an House of Peers, whether somthing, or nothing, is no way for the Liberty of Conscience, but every way for a King. And a King is a defender of the Faith. The faith whereof a King is defender, must be that which is, or he shall call his own faith; and this faith it concerneth his Crown and Dignity, that he de­fend against all other faiths. True it is, that a King for a step unto a Throne, may use what is at hand; o­therwise [Page 139] where there is Liberty of Conscience, to assert Civil Liberty by Scripture can be no Atheism; which lameth a Prince of one arm. But where liberty of conscience is not, or not perfect, Divines, who (for the greater part) are no fair Hunts-men, but love alife to be poa­ching, or clubbing with the secular arm; though if we (who desire no such advantages) might prosecute them for abusing Scripture, as they have done this thousand years, to all ends, intents and purposes of Monar­chy, they would think it an hard case; yet not only brand assertors of civil liberty with Atheism, but are some of them studious in contrivances, and quaint in plots to give check or re­move to this or that eminent Patriot, by like pretences or charges; which succeeding accordingly, by the power of a Parliament, they may have a Parliament in their power. Where there is no liberty of conscience, there can be no civil liberty; and where there is no civil liberty, there can be no security unto liberty of conscience: but an House of Peers is not only a necessary, but a declared [Page 140] check upon civil liberty; therefore it can be no security unto liberty of con­science. And so much for this particu­lar.

Now to make upon the other parts proposed, and in a meer civil sense, some farther conjecture.

When an House of Peers setteth up an House of Commons, as in the Barons Wars, they will Govern the Commons well enough for their pur­pose, and not seldom the King too.

But we are to speak of a thing without any example, an House of Peers set up by an House of Com­mons; nor, in the want of example, are we thought worthy to be furni­shed with reason: so the guidance of our Discourse upon this point, is com­mited unto Mother Wit, a notable Gossip, but not so good a Politician.

Nevertheless if this House consist of old Peerage only, we have directi­on enough to know how that will be; for either the single person, or the commons will be predominant in the Government: if the Commons be so, then it will be with the Peers, as it was before their last seclusion; that is, while they do as the Commons would [Page 141] have them, they may sit; otherwise they are sent home: and if the single person be predominant, it can be no otherwise then by an Army; in which case the old Peers being not in arms, nor having any help that way, are as much under the Yoke as the Com­mons: by which it may be apparent, that it is the great interest of the pre­sent Peerage, that there be a well-ordered Commonwealth; otherwise the Commons being in bondage, the Lords whom that least becometh are but equal with them; and being free, the Lords are not the head, but at the foot of them; whereas in an equal Commonwealth, that the Nobility be not at the head, or have not the lea­ding, is quite contrary unto all reason and experience.

If the House consist of new Peers only, it must consist of the chief Of­ficers in the Army: which immedi­ately divides the Government into two distinct Governments; the one in the House of Commons, whose foundation is the body of the People; the other in the House of Peers, whose foundation is the Army; which Army if it remain firme unto the [Page 142] Peers, they not only command the Commons, but make and unmake Kings as they please, or as ambitious parties and persons among themselves are diligent or fortunate. But if the Army (as is most and more then most likely) come off to the Commons, the Peers are nothing, and the Commons introduce a Commonwealth.

If the House consist of new Peers and old, the old Peers while they like it, are cyphers to new figures; and when they like it not, may go home a­gain: Nor whether they stay or go, is this case so different from the former, as to be any greater obstruction unto a Commonwealth.

To hate the very name of a Com­monwealth, or not to see that England can be no other, is as if men were not in earnest. It is asked of the Com­mons what the Protector shall be, and he can be nothing but what they will. It is asked of the Commons what the other House shall be, and it can be nothing but what the Commons will. The Commons are asked whose the Army, whose the Militia, whose the Negative Vote is; nor can these be otherwise determined of then as they [Page 143] please. The Commons are asked whe­ther they will make such a War, whe­ther they will pay such a Debt, whe­ther they will advance such a Sum; all which are intirely at their discretion: therefore actually and positively Eng­land is a Commonwealth. Nay, and that there remain not the least doubt, whether it be safe for any man to say thus much, the present Government hath either no legal denomination at all, or is legally denominated the Commonwealth: the question of the future state of it, cometh not one whit upon the matter, which is alrea­dy granted, but upon the form only. A Commonwealth for the matter makes her self; and where they will not bestow upon her the form neces­sary, faileth not to ruine, or at least to disgrace the work-men. Or, to speak more properly and piously, a Com­monwealth is not made by men, but by God; and they who resist his holy will, are weapons that cannot pro­sper.

FINIS.

The Errors of the Press Corrected.

Book I.

  • PAge 18. line 23. for facility read felicity.
  • Page 32. line 1. the stop which is at the word or­ders, should be as the word executing.

Book II.

  • PAge 16. line 23. for belongeth read belonged.
  • Page 23. line 10. read by lot, and intailing the lands so distributed upon the proprietors.
  • Page 25. line 19. for caused read causing.
  • Page 42. line 27. for sixty one read sixty.
  • Page 83. line 11. I desire a courtesie unto my self, which is, that in these words, This indeed is so clear in their Talmud, I may be understood no otherwise, then that this is so generally affirmed by their Talmudists.

Book III.

  • PAge 15. line 15. for which hath amounted read they have amounted.
  • Page 4. line 19. for atttending read offending.
  • Page 50. line 23. read consisteth fundamentally of the Signiory with nine Knights elected by the Council of State, additionally of nine Knights more emer­gently chosen by the Senate.
  • Page. 52. line 15. for consisting of four Senators read con­sisting of few Senators.
  • Page 58. line 3. for of the people read of Israel.
  • In the same, line 11. for amounting read amounted.
  • Page 121. line 29. for stand one year read stand one year, because of the Citizen in arms.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal licence. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.