Treasons Masterpiece, Date · Date 4
Lord Broghill
April 16.
YOur Highneſs the laſt time this Committee had the honour to wait on you, ſeemed to be of opinion, that it was not neceſſary that you ſhould aſſume the Title of King to exerciſe legally the office and duty of ſupream Magiſtracy of theſe three Nations; becauſe that the Title of Protector is by the authority of Parliament made the Title of the chief Magiſtrate would do as well and anſwer all ends of Government as fully, as that which now the Parliament does deſire and adviſe your Highneſs to take upon you: but to effect this, either all the powers and limitations of a Protector muſt be more particularly enumerated, or he muſt under the name have all the Authorities with a King, as a King has by the Law. Of the firſt of theſe then (as thoſe learned Gentlemen that have ſpoken before have fully proved) whatſoever is not particularly ſpecified, the Protector is left to act arbitrarily, or a Parliament muſt be called to ſupply every new diſcovered defect, his power being derived only from that authority that now does, or hereafter ſhall conſtitute them, which will prove dangerous and inconvenient both to himſelf, and the people, and to ſet down all authorities and abundances which are requiſite, will be a work of ſo much time and difficulty, if that in the Nation only it ſeems impracticable, in the acting it will be much more found ſo, if the ſecond, then it will evidently appear, if the difficulty is only about a name, and it would be a ſad thing indeed that any diſagreement ſhould be between your Highneſs and the Parliament: eſpecially when the thing differed in, as the ſettling of our foundation, and the thing differed upon, is only a name, I hope that unhappineſs will be ſo well foreſeen as never to run unto.
Your Highneſs was pleaſed to take notice that if the Title of Protector were ſettled by Parliament, hardly any thing could be objected againſt it, but that it is a Title not ſo long known to theſe Nations as that of King, which is a grave and weighty objection, ſince in conſtituting of Governments, the ableſt and moſt deſerving judges are uncapable to ſee theſe diſadvantages and inconveniences which time and experience do render evident, which may be a reaſon, if not the chief one, why our Anceſtours would never alter Kingly Government, though they had often the power to do it, and were provoked thereunto by exorbitance and evil Government of their Princes, chuſing rather to bound that office proportionably to the evils they have deſerved in it, than to eſtabliſh a new Model of their own, in erecting of which they could not have in ſome ages, the experience they had of that, and to caſt off an office that has been ſome hundred of years a pruning and fitting for the good of the people, to eſtabliſh one that has been but newly known, were to think our ſelves wiſer in one day than our forefathers have been ever ſince the firſt erecting of Kingſhip.
It has been an unqueſtionable principle that the Magiſtrate is eſtabliſht for the Laws, and not the lawes for the Magiſtrate: if therefore the Title of Protector ſhould be the Title of the ſupreme Magiſtrate, we ſhould fit the laws to him, not him to the laws; which would be by our practice to contradict our profeſſions, and poſſibly wound the peoples rights, but in this point there has been ſo much ſaid; and that ſo learnedly by thoſe worthy perſons, who have ſpoken before, that to prove the neceſſity of your Highneſs aſſuming the Title of King, and ſhould only add a mentioning of thoſe many reaſons that the Parliament of three Nations think it neceſſary you ſhould do it, which is evident, by their inſerting it amongſt theſe three things, which they eſteem fundamental as to the ſettlement: yea, they have placed at the head of all thoſe fundamentals and laid ſo great ſtreſſes on it, that in their humble Petition and advice, they declare that if it be not accepted of, the whole ſhall be eſteemed null and void, ſo that the higheſt neceſſity impoſed by a Parliament will have the beſt acceptance, your Highneſs was pleaſed to mention, that we had recent experiments what the ſupreme Magiſtracy of the Nation might be well carried into all effects and purpoſes under another Name and Title than that of King, viz. under the name of Keepers of the liberty of England, and under the name of Protector, but I ſhall humbly beſeech your Highneſs to conſider, that becauſe that was not grounded upon the old known Laws, it was of very ſhort duration: and the ſecond for the ſame reaſon, the Parliament is now petitioning and adviſing your Highneſs to alter, ſo what is brought as are arguments to prove, what your Highneſs mentions, poſſibly may rather evince the contrary: beſides, Sir, it is confeſſion on all hands, that theſe two changes ſprung from neceſſity: therefore were not, neither ought to be of longer continuance than that neceſſity which cauſed them, and this is the great and real difference between conſtitutions that are eſtabliſhed meerly becauſe neceſſary, and thoſe that are eſtabliſhed meerly becauſe good: for what is only of neceſſity is but temporary, as no effect laſts longer than it's cauſe: but what is good in it's own nature, is always good and if by intervening accidents it be a while clouded, yet at length it ſhines and overcometh, and all wiſe men do deſire to revert unto it. To prove that the firſt of theſe changes, the Keepers of the liberty of England, was only an act of neceſſity and not of choice, I need but mind your Highneſs of what the Maſters of the Rolls then ſpake of, the Parliament did even now evert, that after the abſolution of Kingſhip, the Parliament were neceſſitated to adviſe with a Civilian of another Nation, what the Hollander had done, what they did, they were at a loſs what to do, the providence of God hath ſo altered the temper of officers between that time and this preſent, that the change appeared beſt, becauſe neceſſary: but the Parliament eſteems the change now deſired neceſſary, becauſe beſt, nor can we poſſibly better expreſs our thankfulneſs for the opportunity which now God hath put into our hands, than to employment, to make the beſt and laſtingeſt ſettlement; all things are beſt which are found beſt upon tryal; but all the changes we have been under of late were upon belief, not experiment, and having had an eſſay of all, the Parliament have ſound that above all Kingſhip is the beſt, ſo that by the beſt judges, and by the beſt way of judging that form of Government now preſented to your Highneſs, hath the preceeding in the peoples opinion, and therefore is hoped you will have it in yours.
It may poſſibly be fit for your Highneſs obſervation that the beſt breach which happened amongſt thoſe worthy perſons which inſtrumentally carried on our Common cauſe, ariſe from the taking away the Title and Office of King, ſo often declared for and engaged to be maintained by the Parliament, till then we went hand in hand and took ſweet council together, and if the aboliſhing thereof cauſed ſo ſad a breach probably the reſtoration of it may make it up again.
Your Highneſs was pleaſed to ſay, you aſſumed the Office you now bear with no better hope than to prevent miſchief; queſtionleſs we may expect better fruits from the ſupreme Magiſtracy: and if your Highneſs, who is every way ſo worthy of that office, had no better hopes under the Title Protector, we may juſtly ſubſcribe it not unto your ſelf, but unto the conſtitution of Government you acted under, and therefore your Highneſs do aſſume the Supreme Magiſtracy according to the Laws: we ſhall both hope and believe that you will not only prevent ill, but do much good, the beſt Governour being graſted upon the beſt Government. Your Highneſs expreſſed ſome doubts that the providence of God hath blaſted the Kings office in the duſt, and that by an act of Parliament was laid aſide: but I humbly hope your Highneſs will pardon me, if I cannot have the like apprehenſion, I cannot believe if that office were blaſted by the hand of God, that the Parliament would adviſe and Petition you to take it up. Beſides, Sir, the very act which firſt caſt out the Kingly Office, did alſo caſt out the Supreme Magiſtracy in any ſingle perſon: yea, by way of election or otherwiſe; therefore I begg your pardon if I cannot think that act of Parliament can be interpreted as a providential blaſting of that office, which your Highneſs thought neceſſary to accept of, and by virtue of which we have for ſome years paſt enjoyed quiet and protection. So that if Kingſhip be blaſted, then Supreme Magiſtracy in a ſingle perſon is as much, being both equally declared againſt at the ſame time, and in the ſame Act of Parliament; and that ſince your Highneſs by your actings… have evinced you did not believe the Supreme Magistracy in a ſingle perſon was blaſted by providence, you will permit us to believe that Kingſhip is no more blaſted than that the ſame authority and the ſame act having blemiſhed (as far as it could) both alike; but your Highneſs is pleaſed to ſay Kingſhip is caſt out de facto. If the weight of the argument do reſt thereon, your Highneſs by accepting the Petition and Advice of the Parliament will make your argument as ſtrong for Kingſhip as ever it was againſt it, and 'tis hoped your Highneſs will not doubt that what one Supreme authority did ſuppreſs, another may erect: that ſeemed neceſſary then in the judgment of them only, then they knew not what to do when they had erected Kings, and we ſhall be in the like perplexity if now you accept not of this: What the long Parliament did after ſo long a War, muſt be conſidered rather as reſult of providence, than the caſting out the other. The Eſtate of Parliament muſt be conſidered under that notion alſo, and yet I think there is few that eſteem it not as fit to refer it again under due qualifications, as then 'twas eſteemed fit not to allow of it under any; if alſo your Highneſs arguments were carried on as farr as it might be, I apprehend it might alſo bring it in queſtion, that the Parliaments were blaſted by providence, for whoever allows not the diſſolving of the long Parliament to be under that notion, will hardly find a good reaſon for its diſſolution; but it may be anſwered, that it may not caſt down in reference to ſome that acted in it, who were ſuſpected to have a deſign of perpetuating themſelves in that authority, which would have turned what ſhould have been our Phyſick into our food. To which I humbly anſwer, had that been ſo, the people might have had new Writs ſent unto them for the election of their repreſentatives, who might have carryed on the publick affairs of the Nation by a new Parliament; but it ſeems thoſe times would not bear it, and therefore a convention of ſelect Perſons were called, unchoſen by the people, to whom all power was devolv'd, and who had even a right to have perpetuated themſelves by calling into themſelves from time to time whom they thought fit: ſo that Parliaments were not for that turn only laid aſide, but even by that conſtitution which did it, were perpetually excluded: by which it is evident that if Kings were de facto blaſted, Parliaments were the like; yea much more, for in the act for aboliſhing Kingſhip, it was treaſon in thoſe only who offered to reſtore it, but by conſent in Parliament; but in that aſſembly there was no ſuch proviſion for Parliaments ever, as hath been ſaid. By their conſtitution Parliaments were excluded; and to evidence how much ſtreſs there lies barely upon a legal name, that aſſembly to give greater authority to their actings, ſtiled themſelves a Parliament, as the only name the Parliament took notice of, as the Supreme authority of the Nation which, poſſibly may invite your Highneſs to believe that godly men and wiſe men think it eſſential to have Titles conſonant to our Laws: and therefore that your Highneſs in the exerciſe of the Supreme Magiſtracy will be the rather invited to aſſume the Title King, that being conſonant, and that only being conſonant to the Law: I think all ſober men agree of that Government, but for the particular form thereof, it is left to the wiſdome of thoſe which the people chuſe to repreſent them, to ſet upon ſuch a form as may be moſt fitted to their Genius, and likelieſt to prove their good and quiet. If any can prove that Kingſhip by the word of God is unlawful, or that people have not power to give the Supreme Magiſtrate what name they think beſt, I ſhould be then ſilent; but ſince that power is unqueſtionable in the Repreſentative of the people, and that they have deſired your Highneſs to govern them by the Title of King, and ſince alſo nothing can be objected againſt it, and both reaſon and cu…ome pleads for it, we earneſtly hope you will not think fit to deny the people that which is but their Right, and I believe it was not yet denied by any Supreme Magiſtrate to any people: to which may be added, that if the Kingſhip has been caſt out by many providences, your Highneſs accepting it will ſhew, that it is reſtored at leaſt by as many more as have happened in reference thereunto, for its abſolution to its reſtitution.
Your Highneſs did further object, that ſome good men would be offended at your acceptance of that Title. I confeſs it is very conſiderable and I think every judicial perſon of the Houſe would be very cautious to give men under that character a juſt offence, but your Highneſs will be pleaſed to permit me to mind you of the character you gave of good men in your laſt ſpeech; they are ſuch you ſaid as give obedience to Goſpel-Ordinances, which requires Obedience to authorities, not for fear, but for conſcience ſake, That you reckon nothing of Godlineſs without the Circle, and that any principle which oppoſeth thus was diabolical, and ſprung from the depth of Satans wickedneſs. You were pleaſed further to ſay, that though ſome good men ſcrupled at that name the Parliament thought fit to aſſume, yet their doing ſo was no part of their goodneſs: by all which it will be evident that your acceptance thereof cannot offend good men, but by their eſteeming their Obedience to a Goſpel-Ordinance, an offence which I hope no good men will or can do. I ſhall alſo humbly beſeech your Highneſs to conſider, that if on the one ſide the …cceptance of the Title may offend ſome good men, ſo on the other ſide the declining of it will give offence to the Parliament, where all good men are legally and at once only repreſented. The caſe of David when his child was ſick may poſſibly parallel the caſe of ſuch good men as are herein unſatisfied; while as the child was ſick he was very earneſt with the Lord for the reſtoring of it to health, but God was not pleaſed ſo to do, and the child died, his ſervants being of another principle than himſelf, thus reaſoned, if his trouble and grief were ſo great, while yet the child was not dead, what will it be now it is dead; but David reaſoned thus, while there was hope, I wreſtled with God, but ſince his will is declared I chearfully ſubmit to it. I hope, as ſcrupulous good mens caſes in the particular of Kingſhip, is a parable in the Hiſtory, ſo it will likewiſe prove in the event. Your Highneſs was further pleaſed to mention ſome conſiderations in reference to ſafety, to which I humbly anſwer, the things that are offered to you are juſt in themſelves in reference to Civils and Spirituals, and ſo acknowledged by you: that authority that tenders them is the Supreme legal authority of three great Nations. You have a faithful and a good army, and we have you at the head of them, what ſhall we then fear; To which I ſhall only add, that ſafety hath been often in danger by the Kings and Parliaments diſagreeing, but this is the firſt time, (if it be in danger) that ever it was by their agreement; to which I may further add, that whatever evil may ariſe from your agreement with your Parliament; it will befall us on the way of our duty, which is an inward comfort to ballance any outward evil; But if any evil happens, by your not cloſing with your Parliament, we ſhall undergo the outward harm, and be denied the inward ſupport. Your Highneſs was pleaſed to ſay, your had rather have any name that is not given by them. Permit me therefore now to ſay, that to all other arguments we have one irrefutable, and that is your own ingagement, for the Parliament doth deſire and adviſe you to accept the name of King, hitherto we have pleaded but upon the accout of your engagement and it is humbly hoped your Highneſs, who hath ſo' exactly obſerved your word to your worſt enemies, will not break it unto your beſt friends, the Parliament.