But fuppofe it further urged, that in Cafes of Ufurpation, the People were under a Precontract to their former Prince, and therefore not at Liberty to enter into new Engagements with the Ufurper. Now this is carrying the Argument deduced from the Cafe of Matrimony farther than the Parallel will go; and therefore is nothing to the Purpose. For the People cannot be under a Contract to the reigning Powers, any longer than they are the reigning Powers. The End of Government, as hath been afore observed, is the Good of the People: But the reigning Powers are only the Means to attain this End; and confequently the Contract can be in Force no longer than while that End is anfwered. The Magiftrate may be looked upon either as a a Political Father, by Appointment, for the good Government of the Subject; or as a Proprietor, who has a Right to the Crown in Subordination to the Rights of the People. Now in either Respect, his Office, and his Right ceafes of courfe, as far as concerns the People, when they cannot reap thofe Advantages from them, which they ought to have done. He received thefe Things by Way of Compenfation for the Good communicated to the People by Means of his Adminiftration. But if he can no longer fulfil - his Engagements, he has no longer a Right to thofe Prerogatives and Emoluments which were defigned to be the Rewards of fulfilling them. It is to no Purpose to fay, that

this

this is not his Fault; and therefore he ought not to be deprived of them: That may be true, if urged against the Ufurper: But it is nothing to the People: They do him no Injustice. His Paternity and his Property were Rights fubordinate to theirs; and therefore if both are incompatible, which must give Place? The great Maxim of the Law is, Rex eft major fingulis, minor univerfis. And undoubtedly the Means are inferior, to the Ends for which they were ordained. Now the People have a perpetual and unalienable Relation to the Ends of Government, i. e. They have always a Right to be governed well, be the Governors who they will. But their Relation to the Means, to the particular Governors, fubfift no longer, than while they are Means: i. e. during the Time they can properly protect and defend their Subjects. Wherefore if it should happen, that a stronger Power should fubdue them, or drive them out, notwithstanding all the Efforts of the Subject to the contrary, they then cease to be the

hIt is both the Doctrine of Scripture and of Reason (as it is alfo a Part of the Conftitution of our own Kingdom; fee the Stat..11 of Henry VII. c. 1) to defend the King for the Time being with all our Might, against all Invaders. So that a rightful Prince has nothing to fear, and every thing to hope from this Principle, as long as he rules well. The Subject will not turn againft him in Favour of any other, whilft he governs agreable to the Charter received from God, of being his Minifter for good.

Means

Means of Protection and Defence to the People. And confequently the Connection or Relationship is diffolved of Courfe: So that the People commit no Act of Injustice towards their late Governors, by feeking out a new Protection, when their's fail: And the whole Blame, whatever it is, muft rest upon the Ufurper.

Thus have I endeavoured to vindicate St. Paul's Argument in every Light that it appeared to me. The Powers that be, when they are the Minifters of Good to the People, are ordained of God. This is the best Politicks, as well as true Divinity. For after all, let me ask, upon what other Footing do the Titles of all the Governments around us this Day fubfift? If it is faid, that long Prefcription has given them a Right: I afk, what has given a Right to Prefcription? The Anfwer muft be, for there is no other, It was the PUBLICK GOOD, the ultimate End of Government. That indeed is very just: But then I must observe, it is the Thing itself I am here contending for.

Some there are among us, who call in Question the Justice of the Measures purfued at the Revolution. I will not here enter upon a Vindication of their Expediency, and even Neceffity (tho' both appear very clear to me, And if we date the Origin of our Prefent Government from that time, I think it is evident, that it has a better and a fairer Title,

Title, if we go back to the Origin of Titles, than most others in the known World.) But I will allow for Argument's fake, that the Measures taken at the Revolution, were not to be juftified: Let us now fee, what is to be gained by this Conceffion. Were those at the Norman Conqueft, or Saxon Invafion, to be juftified? Suppofe all the three Events were cotemporary, the Norman Conqueft, the Saxon Invafion, and the Revolution; and that we must deduce the Origin of our Government, and the Title of the reigning Powers from one, or other of them: I would afk the moft bigotted Perfon against the Revolution, which is the leaft exceptionable of the three?

Some have also been weak enough to conclude, that the Saxon, or Norman Ufurpations have acquired a juft Title, independent of the Publick Good and the Confent of the People, by means of the Deaths or Ceffions of the righful Claimants. But fuppofe, that all the rightful Claimants are dead, or deftroyed by the Ufurper: doth it therefore follow, that he hath a Good Title? or that the Subject is barred from choofing another to fill the vacant Throne? What Right can the Ufurper acquire by the Death or Destruction of a Perfon, whom he had no Right to fucceed? But the Suppofition here made, is not true in fact: For there are feveral Families now fubfifting, who pretend to trace their Pedigrees from the antient British Princes; E and

and could make out a much more plaufible Title, upon the Footing of an indefeasible hereditary Right, than any of our Kings preceding the Revolution. As to the Ceffions, which they have made by taking the Oaths to the reigning Powers, the Perfons, with whom I am now contending, have taught them to look upon fuch things as void and null: And the Behaviour of the House of York towards the Lancaftrian Kings may furnish them with a Precedent. Thus it evidently appears, That if Perfons will object to the Government founded on the Revolution, as if it wanted a rightful Title, they must object to the Government preceding it, for the fame reason. But if they will fay, that the Powers then in being were the Ordinance of God, because they were the Minifters of God for Good; and will reft the Title of the Prince, and the Obedience of the Subject upon that Bafis; they will do well: And we will join Iffue with them; for this is the very thing we contend for in relation to the prefent Powers. This likewife is St. Paul's exprefs Direction; Let every Soul be fubject to the higher Powers;the Powers that be;-the Minifters of God to thee for Good.

And now, as we have examined at large into the true Meaning of this famous Paffage of the xiiith to the Romans, and endeavoured to obviate every Objection, that could be

made