rity on their fide by any tolerable adminiftration, till provoked by continual oppreffions; no man indeed can then anfwer, where the madness of the people will ftop.

As to the fecond part of the objection; whether the people of England convened by. their own authority, upon king James's precipitate departure, had power to alter the fucceffion?

In answer to this, I think it is manifeft From the practice of the wifeft nations, and who feem to have had the trueft notions of freedom, that, when a prince was laid afide for male-adminiftration, the nobles and people, if they thought it neceffary for the public weal, did refume the administration of the fupreme power, (the power itself having been always in them) and did not only alter the fucceffion, but often the very form of government too; because they believed there was no natural right in one man to govern another, but that all was by inftitution, force, or confent. Thus, the cities of Greece, when they drove out their tyrannical kings, either chofe others from a new family, or abolished the kingly government, and became free states. Thus the Romans, upon the expulsion of Tarquin, found it inconvenient for them to be fubject any longer to the pride, the luft, the cruelty and arbitrary will of fingle perfons, and therefore by general confent intirely altered the whole frame of their government. Nor do I find the proceedings of either, in

this point, to have been condemned by any hiftorian of the fucceeding ages.

But a great deal hath been already said by other writers upon this invidious and beaten fubject; therefore I fhall let it fall; though the point is commonly mistaken, efpecially by the lawyers; who of all others feem leaft to understand the nature of government in general; like under-workmen, who are expert enough at making a fingle wheel in a clock, but are utterly ignorant how to adjust the feveral parts, or regulate the movements.

To return therefore from this digreffion; it is a church of England man's opinion, that the freedom of a nation confifts in an abfolute unlimited legiative power, wherein the whole body of the people are fairly reprefented, and in an executive duly limited; because on this fide likewife there may be dangerous degrees, and a very ill extreme. For when two parties in a ftate are pretty equal in power, pretenfions, merit and virtue, (for these two laft are, with relation to parties and a court, quite different things) it hath been the opinion of the best writers upon government, that a prince ought not in any fort to be under the guidance or influence of either, because he declines by this means from his office of prefiding over the whole, to be the head of a party, which, befides the indignity, renders him answerable for all public mifmanagements, and the confequences of them; and, in whatever ftate this happens, there muft either be a weakness in the prince or ministry, or elfe the former is

too

too much restrained by the nobles, or those who represent the people.

To conclude: A church of England man may with prudence and a good confcience approve the profeffed principles of one party. more than the other, according as he thinks they best promote the good of church and ftate; but he will never be fwayed by paffion or interest to advance an opinion, merely because it is that of the party he most approves ; which one fingle principle he looks upon as the root of all our civil animofities. To enter into a party, as into an order of friers, with fo refigned an obedience to fuperiors, is very unfuitable both with the civil and religious liberties we fo zealously affert. Thus the understandings of a whole fenate are often enflaved by three or four leaders-on each fide, who, instead of intending the public weal, have their hearts wholly fet upon ways and means how to get or to keep employments. But to fpeak more at large, how has this spirit of faction mingled itself with the mass of the people, changed their nature and manners, and the very genius of the nation? broke all the laws of charity, neighbourhood, alliance, and hofpitality, deftroyed all ties of friendfhip, and divided families against themselves? and no wonder it fhould be fo, when in order to find out the character of a perfon, instead of inquiring whether he be a man of virtue, honour, piety, wit, good fenfe, or learning; the modern queftion is only, whether he be a

whig or a tory, under which terms all good and ill qualities are included,

:

pre.

Now, becaufe it is a point of difficulty to chufe an exact middle between two ill extremes, it may be worth inquiring in the fent cafe, which of thefe a wife and good man would rather feem to avoid taking therefore their own good and ill characters with due abatements and allowances for partiality and paffion, I fhould think that, in order to preferve the conftitution intire in church and state, whoever hath a true value for both, would be fure to avoid the extremes of whig for the fake of the former, and the extremes of tory on account of the latter.

I have now faid all that I could think convenient upon fo nice a fubject, and find I have the ambition common with other reafoners, to wish at least that both parties may think me in the right, which would be of fome use to thofe who have any virtue left, but are blindly drawn into the extravagancies of either, upon falle reprefentations, to ferve the ambition or malice of defigning men, without any profpect of their own. But, if that is not to be hoped for, my next wifh fhould be that both might think me in the wrong which I would understand as an ample juftification of myself, and a fure ground to believe, that I have proceeded at least with impartiality, and perhaps with truth.

AN

ARGUMENT

To prove that the ABOLISHING of

CHRISTIANITY

IN

ENGLAND

may, as things now fand, be attended with jome inconveniences, and perhaps not produce thofe many good effects propofed thereby.

Written in the year 1708.

the AM very fenfible, what a weakness and general humour and difpofition of the world. I remember it was with great justice, and a due regard to the freedom, both of the public and the prefs, forbidden upon fevere penalties to write, or difcourfe, or lay wagers against the union, even before it was confirmed by parliament; because that was looked upon as a defign to oppofe the current of the people, which, befides the folly of it, is a manifeft breach of the fundamental law, that makes this majority of opinion the voice of God. In like manner, and for the very fame reafons, H 2

it