'make desolation, they call to settle peace.' In every assessment we are robbed; the excise is robbery; the customs robbery; and, with out doubt, whenever it is prudent, it is always lawful to kill the thieves, whom we can bring to no other justice; and not only lawful, and to do ourselves right, but glorious, and to deserve of mankind, to free the world of that common robber, that universal pyrate, under whom, and for whom, the lesser beasts prey. This firebrand I would have any way extinguished; this ulcer I would have any hand to lance; and, cannot doubt, but God will suddenly sanctify some hand to do it, and bring down that bloody and deceitful man, who lives not only to misery, but the infamy of our nation.

I should have reason to be much less confident of the justice of this opinion, if it were new, and only grounded upon collections and interpretations of my own. But herein, if I am deceived, I shall, however, have the excuse to be drawn into that error, by the examples that are left us by the greatest and most virtuous, and the opinions of the wisest and gravest men, that have left their memories to posterity. Out of the great plenty of confirmations, I could bring for this opinion from examples and authorities, I shall select a very few; for manifest truths have not need of those supports; and I have as little mind to tire myself as my reader.

First, therefore a usurper, that by only force possesseth himself of government, and by force only keeps it, is yet in the state of war with every man, says the learned Grotius; and therefore every thing is lawful against an open enemy, whom every private man hath a right to kill. Hostis hostem occidere volui,' says, Scævola to Porsenna, when he was taken, after he had failed in his attempt to kill him; ‘I am an enemy, and an enemy I would have killed;' which every man hath a right to do.

6

"Contra publicos hostes, & majestatis reos, omnis homo miles est, says Tertullian. Against common enemies, and those that are 'traitors to the commonwealth, every man is a soldier.' This opinion the most celebrated nations have approved, both by their laws and practices. The Grecians, as Xenophon tells us, who suffered not murderers to come into their temples, in those very temples they erected statues to those that killed tyrants, thinking it fit to place their deliverers amongst their gods. Cicero was an eyewitness of the honours that were done such men, Græci homines, &c. The Greeks, saith he, attributed the honours of the gods to those that killed tyrants. What have I seen in Athens, and other cities of Greece! What religion paid to such men! What songs! What elogies! By which they are consecrated to immortality, and almost deified! In Athens, by Solon's law, death was not only decreed for the tyrant that oppressed the state, but for all those that took any charge, or did bear any office, while the tyranny remained. And Plato tells us the ordinary course they took with the ordinary tyrants in Greece. If, says he, the tyrant cannot be expelled, by accusing him to the citizens, then by secret practices they dispatch him.

Amongst the Romans the Valerian law was, Si quis injussu populi, &c. Whosoever took magistracy upon him, without the

command of the people, it was lawful for any man to kill him. Plutarch makes this law more severe, Ut injudicatum occidere eum liceret, qui dominatum concupisceret.' 'That it was lawful by that law, before any judgment past, to kill him that but aspired to 'tyranny.' Likewise the consular law, which was made after the suppression of the tyranny of the decemvirate, made it lawful to kill any man that went about to create magistrates, sine provocatione, &c. without reference and appeal to the people. By these laws, and innumerable testimonies of authors, it appears, that the Romans, with the rest of their philosophy, had learned from the Grecians, what was the natural remedy against a tyrant: nor did they honour these less that durst apply it. Who, as Polybius says (speaking of conspiracies against tyrants) were not deterrimi civium, sed generosissimi quique, & maximi animi; not the worst and meanest of the citizens, but the most generous, and those of the greatest virtue: so were most of those that conspired against Julius Cæsar; he him. self thought Brutus worthy to succeed him in the empire of the world. And Cicero, who had the title of Pater Patriæ, if he were not conscious of the design, yet he at last affected the honour of being thought so: Quæ enim res unquam, &c. 'What act,' says he, 'O Jupiter! more glorious; more worthy of eternal memory, hath been done not only in this city, but in the whole world! In this ❝ design, as the Trojan horse, I willingly suffer myself to be included with the princes.' In the same place, he tells what all virtuous Romans thought of the fact as well as he: Omnes boni, quantum in ipsis fuit, Cæsarem occiderunt: aliis consilium: aliis animus : aliis occasio defuit, voluntas nemini: 'all good men,' saith he, as much as lay in them, killed Cæsar: some wanted capacity, some courage, others opportunity, but none the will to do it.' But yet we have not declared the extent of their severity against a tyrant: they exposed him to fraud, as well as force, and left him no security in oaths and compacts; that neither law, nor religion, might defend him that violated both. Cum tyranno Romanis nulla fides, nulla jurisjurandi religio, saith Brutus in Appian; with a tyrant the Romans think no 'faith to be kept, observe no religion of an oath;' Seneca gives the reason, Quia quicquid erat, quo mihi cohæreret, &c. For, whatever there was of mutual obligation betwixt us, his destroying the laws of human society hath dissolved; so these that thought that there was in hostem nefas, that a villainy might be committed against an enemy: these that professed, non minus juste quam fortiter arma gerere, to manage their arms with justice as well as courage: these that thought faith was to be kept even with the perfidious; yet they thought a tyrant could receive no injustice, but to be let live; and that the most lawful way to destroy him was the readiest, no matter whether by force or fraud; for, against beasts of prey, men use the toil and the net, as well as the spear and the lance. But so great was their detestation of a tyrant, that it made some take their opinions from their passions, and vent things which they could but ill justify to their morality; they thought a tyrant had so absolutely forfeited all title to humanity, and all kind of protection they could

give him or his, that they left his wife without any other guard for her chastity but age and deformity; and thought it not adultery what was committed with her. Many more testimonies might I bring; for it is harder to make choice than to find plenty. But I shall conclude with authorities that are much more authentick, and examples we may much more safely imitate.

The law of God itself decreed certain death to that man that would do presumptuously, and submit to no decision of justice. Who can read this, and think a tyrant ought to live? But certainly, neither that, nor any other law were to any effect, if there were no way to put it in execution. But, in a tyrant's case, process and citation have no place; and, if we will only have formal remedies against him, we are sure to have none. There's small hopes of justice where the malefactor hath a power to condemn the judge.

All remedy therefore against a tyrant is Ehud's dagger, without which all our laws were fruitless, and we helpless. This is that high court of justice where Moses brought the Egyptian, whither Ehud brought Eglon; Samson, the Philistines; Samuel, Agag; and Jehoiada, the she-tyrant Athaliah.

Let us a little consider, in particular, these several examples, and see whether they may be proportioned to our purpose.

First, as to the case of Moses and the Egyptian. Certainly, every Englishman hath as much call as Moses, and more cause than he, to slay this Egyptian, that is always laying on burthens, and always smiting both our brethren and ourselves: for, as to his call, he had no other that we read of, but the necessity his brother stood in of his help. He looked on his brethren's burdens, and seeing an Ægyptian smiting an Hebrew, and knowing he was out of the reach of all other kind of justice, he slew him. Certainly, this was and is as lawful for any man to do, as it was for Moses, who was then but a private man, and had no authority for what he did, but what the law of nature gives every man, to oppose force to force, and to make justice where he finds none. As to the cause of that action, we have much more to say than Moses had; he saw one Hebrew smitten, we many Englishmen murdered; he saw his brethren's bur dens and their blows, we our brethren's burdens, imprisonments, and deaths. Now, sure, if it were lawful for Moses to kill that Ægyptian that oppressed one man, seeing there was no way to procure an ordinary course of justice against him; it cannot be but absurd to think it unlawful to kill him that oppresses a whole nation, and one that justice as little reaches as it defends.

The example of Ehud shews us the natural and almost the only remedy against a tyrant, and the way to free an oppressed people from the slavery of an insulting Moabite. 'Tis done by prayers and tears, with the help of a dagger, by crying to the Lord, and the lefthand of an Ehud. Devotion and action go well together; for, be lieve it, a tyrant is not of that kind of devil that is to be cast out by only fasting and prayer; and here the scripture shews us, what the Lord thought a fit message to send a tyrant from himself; a dagger of a cubit in his belly; and every worthy man that desires to be

an Ehud, a deliverer of his country, will strive to be the mes

senger.

We may here likewise observe in this and many places of Judges, that, when the Israelites fell to idolatry, which, of all sins, cer. tainly is one of the greatest, God Almighty, to proportion the punish. ment and the offence, still delivered them into the hands of tyrants, which sure is one of the greatest of all plagues.

In the story of Samson, it is manifest, that the denying him his wife, and after the burning her and her father, which, though they were great, yet were but private injuries, he took for sufficient grounds to make war upon the Philistines, being himself but a private man, and not only not assisted but opposed by his servile countrymen. He knew what the law of nature allowed him, where other laws have no place, and thought it a sufficient justification for smiting the Philistines hip and thigh, to answer for himself; that, as they did unto him, so had he done unto them.

Now that which was lawful for Samson to do against many op pressors, why is it unlawful for us to do against one? Are our in. juries less? Our friends and relations are daily murdered before our faces: Have we other ways for reparation? Let them be named, and I am silenced: But, if we have none, the fire-brands, or the jawbone, the first weapons our just fury can lay hold on, may certainly be lawfully employed against that uncircumcised Philistine that oppresses us. We have too the opposition and discouragements that Samson had, and therefore have the more need of his courage and resolution: As he had the men of Judah, so we have the men of Levi, crying to us out of the pulpit, as from the top of the rock Etam, 'Know you not that the Philistine is a ruler over you?' The truth is, they would fain make him so, and bind us, with Samson, in new cords; but we hope they will become as flax, and that they will either loose from our hands, or we shall have the courage to cut them.

Upon the same grounds of retaliation did Samuel do justice with his own hand upon the tyrant Agag: As thy sword, says the prophet, hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless amongst women.' Nor there is any law more natural and more just.

How many mothers has our Agag, for his own ambition, made childless? How many children fatherless? How many have this reason to hew this Amalekite in pieces before the Lord? And let his own relations, and all theirs that are confederates with him, beware, lest men come at last to revenge their own relations in them, They make many a woman husbandless, and many a father childless: Their wives may come at last to know what it is to want a husband, and themselves to lose their children. Let them remember what their great apostle Machiavel tells them, that, in contestations for the preserving their liberty, people many times use moderation; but, when they come to vindicate it, their rigour exceeds all mean; like beasts that have been kept up, and are afterwards let loose, they always are more fierce and cruel,

To conclude with the example Jehoiada hath left us. Six years he hid the right heir of the crown, in the house of the Lord; and, without all doubt, amongst the rest of God's mercies there, he was all that time contriving the destruction of the tyrant, that had aspired to the crown by the destruction of those that had the right to it. Jehoiada had no pretence to authorise this action, but the equity and justice of the act itself. He pretended no immediate command from God for what he did, nor any authority from the Sanhedrim, and therefore any man might have done what Jehoiada did as lawfully, that could have done it as effectually as he. Now what citation was given to Athaliah, what appearance was she called to before any court of justice? Her fact was her trial. She was, without any expostulation, taken forth of the ranges, and only let live till she got out of the temple, that that holy place might not be de. filed by the blood of a tyrant, which was fitter to be shed on a dunghill; and so they slew her at the horse-gate. And by the king's house, the very Whitehall where she had caused the blood royal to be spilt, and which herself had so long unjustly possessed, there, by providence, did she receive her punishment, where she had acted so great a part of her crimes. How the people approved of this glorious action of destroying a tyrant, this chapter tells us at the last verse *: And all the people of the land rejoiced, and the city was quiet, after they had slain Athaliah with the sword.' And that it may appear they no less honoured the authors of such actions, than other nations did; as in his life-time they obeyed Jehoiada as a king, so, after his death, for the good he had done in Israel, saith the Scripture, they likewise buried him amongst the kings.

I must not conclude this story, without observing that Jehoiada commanded, that whosoever followed Athaliah should be put to death; letting us see what they deserve that are confederates with tyrants, and will side with them, and but appear to defend them, or allow them his highness's council, his junto, and the aga's of his janisaries, may, if they please, take notice of this, and repent, lest they likewise perish. And likewise his highness's chaplains, and triers, who are to admit none into the ministry that will preach liberty with the gospel, may, if they think fit, observe, that with the tyrant fell Mattan the priest of Baal. And indeed, none but Baal's priests will preach for tyrants. And certainly, those priests that sacrifice to our Baal, our idol of a magistrate, deserve as well to be hanged bfeore their pulpits, as ever Mattan did to fall before his altars.

I should think now I had said much more than enough to the second question, and should come to the third and last I proposed in my method; but I meet with two objections lying in my way: The first is, that these examples out of Scripture are of men that were inspired of God, and that therefore they had that call and authority for their actions, which we cannot pretend to; so that it would be

2 Chron. xxiii. 21.