fufpend or pervert the Laws and therefore with fubmiffion to better Judgments, I am not convinced, that the King, whilft he is uncrowned, has that Right in our Allegiance as he has after that the Crown is fet upon his Head, in the fame way that it ought to be done, for before the Crown is fet upon his Head by the Archbishop, or other perfon appointed to do it, the Nobility and People are asked, if they will do their Homage and Service to him, which by the way implies, that the People are at liberty in the thing, and that if he be Crowned, it is by their Leave and Election; then if the People confent, the King takes the Coronation Oath, which is, to preferve the Church, our Laws, Liberties, and Properties, and to adminifter fuftice indifferently; and thus, when he has Sworn to us, the Crown is immediately put upon his Head, and then the Nobility and People do their Homage to him: and according to this has been the Practice ever fince there were Kings in England. And I believe there is scarcely an Inftance where the People ever wore to the King before be bad taken bis Oath to them: If there be any fuch Prefident, it is to be look'd upon as irregular, and not to be a Direction to us; for it is not impoffible but fuch a thing may happen, but however, is it reasonable that one or two Inftances fhall be fufficient to invalid a Practice of feveral hundred years to the contrary? And is it not a piece of nonfence, that we should adventure our Religion, and Properties, and all we have, in the Hand of him, that for ought we know has an Obligation on him to ruine or give us up to a Foreigner, and not in the first place to take Securi ty from him, that he will defend and do usright, Bbbb

bc

before we repose so great a Trust in him, for otherwife fuch Confufion and fuch Contradictions would follow, that the Wit of Man cannot invent how to falve them.

But I acknowledge there are fome Inftances where the People have sworn to the Succeffion in the life-time of the Father; and thence fome do inferr, that the King is entitled to our Allegiance before the Crown is fet on his Head: but this, under correction will not hold, for it does not appear, but that the intended Succeffor fwore to them allo at the same time; and it is very probable he did: yet if he did not, it cannot thence be concluded, that the King has Right to our Allegiance before he is Crowned; for whenever it happen'd that the Succeffor was fworn to in the life-time of his Father, if afterwards he came to the Crown, he took the Coronation Oath before the People fwore Allegiance to him: And therefore it is very plain, that an Oath taken to the Succeffor in the life-time of his Father, is nothing more but a declaring the good liking they have of the Succeffor, and that if in cafe he will promife to defend them and their Properties, when his Father or Predeceffor dies, they will elect him for their King; as poffibly it might now fall out, if in cafe the Duke of Monmouth were legitimate: Don't you. think that the People would be very inclinable to fwear to his Succeffion next after the King? And I believe you will never find it done, but when the King had the Hearts of the People, or out of the hopes they had in the Succeffor, for English Men, if the King pleases them, he may have all they have, even to their Skins; as a wife man faid, If an English King will be kind to the People,

be

be can never want their Heads, Hands, and Purfes: and therefore it is, that in the most peaceable and tranquil times that ever the Land faw, when King and People had a mutual Confidence of each other, we find things done by the King that are more irregular in thofe times of agreement, than was done in times of greater confufion; and the reason is, because the King firove to please the People, and they were willing to gratifie him by conniving at his Faults.

But befides all this, the Law of Nature is to -be confidered, and this Law cannot be extinguihed by any other Laws whatsoever: And this I never heard any man deny. The Law of Nature -commands Self-preservation; and then I would ask, whether I am to obey bine that will deftroy me. Ifwe fhall have a Prince that plainly declares either by his Words or Actions, that he will change our Government and Religion, or that he will give us up to a Foreigner, or else that he will govern by a ftanding Army, and take away our Properties, muft I obey him? muft I not endeavour to rescue my Self and Country from Ruine? for in the Saxons time, Treafon did not relate to any thing but the Government, and the general Concern of the Nation, and not to the fingle Perfon of the King: and now, though it be Treafon to kill the King, yet it is only in order to the Publick Good; and therefore with the Saxons all Indictments against Legience concluded Felonia & Proditoriæ,but against the Perfon of the King only Felonia: But in our days we find things are crept in that is difficult to tell how or when they came in. And you fhall find in all our ancient Laws, that whatever Bb bb 2

w as

was decreed or enacted was for the Common Good, and the King was not concerned otherwise, than fo far as related to the Common-wealth; though I know, in our days, another Opinion is afferted, which I am fure cannot be maintained, That all things must give place to the King's particular Intereft. For my own part, I will obey the King, but I think my Obedience is obliged no further than what he commands is for the Common Good. Our Government ever fince the Conquest has proceeded upon the Saxon Principles, and they were grounded upon Self-prefervation, which I do not find to be repeated by any Act of Parliament; for all our Lawyers do agree, That it is Treafon to fubvert the Government and if fo, without doubt our Allegiance, the Laws of God and of Nature command us to defend them.

I will detain you no longer, but only to confider this one thing: Whenever we have a Popish King, we muft expect an alteration at leaft in our Religion; for though he take all the Oaths and Declarations that can be devifed, yet it ever ftands in the way to oppofe the Intereft of Rome, they must all give place, and it is meritorious to break thofe Engagements for that purpose, or, at worst hand, be certainly pardoned, if he prefume to do it without a Difpenfation; and it is no more in his power to preferve our Religion, than it is for him to work an Impoffibility. therefore, whether it is better to oppofe a Popish Succeffor, feeing we have the practice of our Forefathers to justifie us in it, and betides, he cannot if he would defend us; or clfe to fuffer him to reft in the Throne, to destroy all we have, and bring

And

bring in a Religion that will damn Millions of Souls from Generation to Generation: And if we may not defend our Religion, then we must abfolutely depend upon Providence in every thing, and not put out our Hand to help our felves up when we are fallen into a Ditch. This is the Cafe, and here is an end of all Human Policy, but without doubt it is our Duty to do our Endeavours, and leave the Succefs to God Almigh ty, and his Will be done.