II-2
百度搜索 Common Sense 天涯 或 Common Sense 天涯在线书库 即可找到本书最新章节.
<strong> 2.2 OF MONARCHY AND HEREDITARY SUCCESSION</strong>Mankind being inally equals in the order of creation, the equality could only be destroyed by some subsequent circumstahe distins of rich, and poor, may in a great measure be ated for, and that without having recourse to the harsh, ill-sounding names of oppression and avarice.
Oppression is often the SEQUENCE, but seldom or he MEANS of riches; and though avarice will preserve a man from being ously poor, it generally makes him too timorous to be wealthy.
But there is another and greater distin, for whio truly natural ious reason be assigned, and that is, the distin of men into KINGS and SUBJECTS. Male and female are the distins of nature, good and bad the distins of heaven; but how a raen came into the world so exalted above the rest, and distinguished like some new species, is worth inquiring into, and whether they are the means of happiness or of misery to mankind.
In the early ages of the world, acc to the scripture ology, there were no kings; the sequence of which was, there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throw mankind into fusion. Holland without a king hath enjoyed more peace for this last tury than any of the monarchial govers in Europe. Antiquity favours the same remark; for the quiet and rural lives of the first patriarchs hath a happy something in them, which vanishes away when we e to the history of Jewish royalty.
Gover by king<q></q>s was first introduced into the world by the Heathens, from whom the children of Israel copied the .
It was the most prosperous iion the Devil ever set on foot for the promotion of idolatry. The Heathens paid divine honours to their deceased kings, and the Christian world hath improved on the plan, by doing the same to their living ones. How impious is the title of sacred majesty applied to a worm, who in the midst of his splendor is crumbling into dust! As the exalting one man so greatly above the rest ot be justified on the equal rights of nature, so her it be defended ohority of scripture; for the will of the Almighty, as declared by Gideon and the prophet Samuel, expressly disapproves of gover by kings. All anti-monarchical parts of scripture have been very smoothly glossed over in monarchical govers, but they undoubtedly merit the attention of tries which have their govers yet to form.
RENDER UNTO CAESAR THE THINGS WHICH ARE CAESARS is the scripture doe of courts, yet it is no support of monarchical gover, for the Jews at that time were without a king, and in a state of vassalage to the Romans.
Now three thousand years passed away from the Mosaic at of the creation, till the Jews under a national delusion requested a king.
Till then their form of gover (except iraordinary cases, where the Alm<cite></cite>ighty interposed) was a kind of republic administered by a judge and the elders of the tribes. Kings they had none, and it was held sinful to aowledge any being uhat title but the Lord of Hosts. And when a man seriously reflects on the idolatrous homage which is paid to the persons of kings, he need not wohat the Almighty, ever jealous of his honour, should disapprove of a form of gover whipiously ihe prerogative of heaven.
Monarchy is ranked in scripture as one of the sins of the Jews, for which a curse in reserve is denounced against them.
The history of that transa is worth attending to.
The children of Israel being oppressed by the Midianites, Gideon marched against them with a small army, and victory, through the divierposition, decided in his favour. The Jews, elate with success, and attributing it to the generalship of Gideon, proposed making him a king, saying, RULE THOU OVER US, THOU AND THY SON AND THY SONS SON. Here was temptation in its fullest extent; not a kingdom only, but an hereditary one, but Gideon in the piety of his soul replied, I WILL NOT RULE OVER YOU, HER SHALL MY SON RULE OVER YOU _THE LORD SHALL RULE OVER YOU._ Words need not be more explicit; Gideon doth not dee the honour, but deheir right to give it; her doth he pliment them with ied declarations of his thanks, but in the positive style of a prophet charges them with disaffe to their proper Sn, the King of heaven.
About one hundred and thirty years after this, they fell again into the same error. The hankering which the Jews had for the idolatrous s of the Heathens, is something exceedingly unatable; but so it was, that laying hold of the misduct of Samuels two sons, who were entrusted with some secular s, they came in an abrupt and clamorous mao Samuel, saying, BEHOLD THOU ART OLD, AND THY SONS WALK NOT IN THY WAYS, NOW MAKE US A KING TO JUDGE US, LIKE ALL OTHER NATIONS. And here we ot but observe that their motives were bad, viz. that they might be LIKE unto other nations, i.e. the Heathens, whereas their true glory laid in being as muLIKE them as possible. BUT THE THING DISPLEASED SAMUEL WHEN THEY SAID, GIVE US A KING TO JUDGE US; AND SAMUEL PRAYED UNTO THE LORD, AND THE LORD SAID UNTO SAMUEL, HEARKEN UNTO THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IN ALL THAT THEY SAY UNTO THEE, FOR THEY HAVE NOT REJECTED THEE, BUT THEY HAVE REJECTED ME, _THAT I SHOULD NHEM._ ACC TO ALL THE WORKS WHICH THEY HAVE SIHE DAY THAT I BROUGHT THEM UP OUT OF EGYPT, EVEN UNTO THIS DAY; WHEREWITH THEY HAVE FORSAKEN ME AND SERVED ODS; SO DO THEY ALSO UNTO THEE. NOW THEREFORE HEARKEN UNTO THEIR VOICE, HOWBEIT, PROTEST SOLEMNLY UNTO THEM AND SHEW THEM THE MANNER OF THE KING THAT SHALL REIGHEM, I.E. not of any particular king, but the general manner of the kings of the earth, whom Israel was so eagerly copying after. And notwithstanding the great distance of time and differenanners, the character is still in fashion. AND SAMUEL TOLD ALL THE WORDS OF THE LORD UNTO THE PEOPLE, THAT ASKED OF HIM A KING. AND HE SAID, THIS SHALL BE THE MANNER OF THE KING THAT SHALL REIGN OVER YOU; HE WILL TAKE YOUR SONS AND APPOINT THEM FOR HIMSELF, FOR HIS CHARIOTS, AND TO BE HIS HORSEMAN, AND SOME SHALL RUN BEFORE HIS CHARIOTS (this description agrees with the present mode of impressing men) AND HE WILL APPOINT HIM CAPTAINS OVER THOUSANDS AND CAPTAINS OVER FIFTIES, AND WILL SET THEM TO EAR HIS GROUND AND REAP HIS HARVEST, AND TO MAKE HIS INSTRUMENTS OF WAR, AND INSTRUMENTS OF HIS CHARIOTS; AND HE WILL TAKE YOUR DAUGHTERS TO BE FEARIES, AND TO BE COOKS AND TO BE BAKERS (this describes the expense and luxury as well as the oppression of kings) AND HE WILL TAKE YOUR FIELDS AND YOUR OLIVE YARDS, EVEN THE BEST OF THEM, AND GIVE THEM TO HIS SERVANTS; AND HE WILL TAKE THE TENTH OF YOUR SEED, AND OF YOUR VINEYARDS, AND GIVE THEM TO HIS OFFICERS AND TO HIS SERVANTS (by which we see that bribery, corruption, and favouritism are the standing vices of kings) AND HE WILL TAKE THE TENTH OF YOUR MEN SERVANTS, AND YOUR MAID SERVANTS, AND YOODLIEST YOUNG MEN AND YOUR ASSES, AND PUT THEM TO HIS WORK; AND HE WILL TAKE THE TENTH OF YOUR SHEEP, AND YE SHALL BE HIS SERVANTS, AND YE SHALL CRY OUT IN THAT DAY BECAUSE OF YOUR KING WHICH YE SHALL HAVE CHOSEN, _AND THE LORD WILL NOT HEAR YOU IN THAT DAY._ This ats for the tinuation of monarchy; her do the characters of the few good kings which have lived since, either sanctify the title, or blot out the sinfulness of the in; the high en given of David takes no notice of him OFFICIALLY AS A KING, but only as a MAN after Gods own hea<bdi>..</bdi>rt.
HELESS THE PEOPLE REFUSED TO OBEY THE VOICE OF SAMUEL, AND THEY SAID, NAY, BUT WE WILL HAVE A KING OVER US, THAT WE MAY BE LIKE ALL THE NATIONS, AND THAT OUR KING MAY JUDGE US, AND GO OUT BEFORE US, AND FIGHT OUR BATTLES.
Samuel tio reason with them, but to no purpose; he set before them their ingratitude, but all would not avail; and seeing them fully bent on their folly, he cried out, I WILL CALL UNTO THE LORD, AND HE SHALL SEND THUNDER AND RAIN (which then unishment, being iime of wheat harvest) THAT YE MAY PERCEIVE AHAT YOUR WIESS IS GREAT WHICH YE HAVE DONE IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD, AND THE LORD SENT THUNDER AND RAIN THAT DAY, AND ALL THE PEOPLE GREATLY FEARED THE LORD AND SAMUEL. AND ALL THE PEOPLE SAID UNTO SAMUEL, PRAY FOR THY SERVANTS UNTO THE LORD THY GOD THAT WE DIE NOT, FOR _WE HAVE ADDED UNTO OUR SINS THIS EVIL, TO ASK A KING._ These portions of scripture are dired positive.
They admit of no equivocal stru. That the Almighty hath here entered his protest against monarchical gover, is true, or the scripture is false. And a man hath good reason to believe that there is as much of kingcraft, as priestcraft, in withholding the scripture from the publi Popish tries.
For monarchy in every instance is the Popery of gover.
To the evil of monarchy we have added that of hereditary succession; and as the first is a degradation and lessening of ourselves, so the sed, claimed as a matter ht, is an insult and an imposition on posterity. For all men being inally equals, no ONE by BIRTH could have a right to set up his own family iual prefereo all others for ever, and though himself might deserve SOME det degree of honours of his poraries, yet his desdants might be far too unworthy to i them. One of the stro NATURAL proofs of the folly of hereditary right in kings, is, that nature disapproves it, otherwise she would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by giving mankind an ASS FOR A LION.
Sedly, as no man at first could possess any other publiours than were bestowed upon him, so the givers of those honours could have no power to give away the right of posterity. And though they might say, "We chooses you for OUR head," they could not, without ma injustice to their children, say, "that your children and your childrens children shall reign over OURS for ever." Because su unwise, unjust, unnatural pact might (perhaps) in the succession put them uhe gover of a rogue or a fool.
Most wise men, in their private ses, have ever treated hereditary right with pt; yet it is one of those evils, which when oablished is not easily removed; many submit from fear, others from superstition, and the more powerful part shares with the king the plunder of the rest.
This is supposing the present race of kings in the world to have had an honourable in; whereas it is more than probable, that could we take off the dark c of antiquities, and trace them to their first rise, that we should find the first of them nothier than the principal ruffian of some restless gang, whose savage manners or preeminen subtlety obtaihe title of chief among plunderers; and who by increasing in power, aending his depredations, overawed the quiet and defeo purchase their safety by frequent tributions. Yet his electors could have no idea of giving hereditary right to his desdants, because such a perpetual exclusion of themselves was inpatible with the free and urained principles they professed to live by. Wherefore, hereditary succession in the early ages of monarchy could not take place as a matter of claim, but as something casual or plemental; but as few or no records were extant in those days, and traditional history stuffed with fables, it was very easy, after the lapse of a few geions, to trump up some superstitious tale, vely timed, Mahomet like, to cram hereditary right dowhroats of the vulgar. Perhaps the disorders which threatened, or seemed to threaten, on the decease of a leader and the choice of a new one (for eles among ruffians could not be very orderly) induced many at first to favour hereditary pretensions; by which means it happened, as it hath happened sihat what at first was submitted to as a venience, was afterwards claimed as a right.
England, sihe quest, hath known some few good monarchs, but groaned beh a much larger number of bad ones; yet no man in his senses say that their claim under William the queror is a very honourable one. A French bastard landing with an armed banditti, aablishing himself king of England against the sent of the natives, is in plain terms a very paltry rascally inal. It certainly hath no divinity in it. However, it is needless to spend much time in exposing the folly of hereditary right; if there are any so weak as to believe it, let them promiscuously worship the ass and lion, and wele.
I shall her copy their humility, nor disturb their devotion.
Yet I should be glad to ask how they suppose kings came at first? The question admits but of three answers, viz. either by lot, by ele, or by usurpation. If the first king was taken by lot, it establishes a pret for the , which excludes hereditary succession. Saul was by lot, yet the succession was not hereditary, her does it appear from that transa there was any iion it ever should be. If the first king of any try was by ele, that likewise establishes a pret for the ; for to say, that the RIGHT of all future geions is taken away, by the act of the first electors, in their <q></q>choiot only of a king, but of a family of kings for ever, hath no parallel in or out of scripture but the doe inal sin, which supposes the free will of all men lost in Adam; and from suparison, and it will admit of no other, hereditary succession derive no glory. For as in Adam all sinned, and as in the first electors all men obeyed; as in the one all mankind we re subjected to Satan, and iher to Snty; as our innoce was lost in the first, and our authority in the last; and as both disable us from reassuming some former state and privilege, it unanswerably follows that inal sin and hereditary succession are parallels.
Dishonourable rank! Inglorious e! Yet the most subtle sophist ot produce a juster simile.
As to usurpation, no man will be so hardy as to defend it; and that William the queror was an usurper is a faot to be tradicted.
The plain truth is, that the antiquity of English monarchy will not bear looking into.
But it is not so much the absurdity as the evil of hereditary succession which s mankind. Did it ensure a race of good and wise men it would have the seal of divihority, but as it opens a door to the FOOLISH, the WICKED, and the IMPROPER, it hath in it the nature of oppression. Men who look upon themselves born tn, and others to obey, soon grow i; selected from the rest of mankind their minds are early poisoned by importance; and the world they a differs so materially from the world at large, that they have but little opportunity of knowing its true is, and when they succeed to the gover are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.
Another evil which attends hereditary succession is, that the throne is subject to be possessed by a minor at any age; all which time the regency, ag uhe cover a king, have every opportunity and i to betray their trust. The same national misfortune happens, when a king, worn out with age and infirmity , ehe last stage of human weakness. In both these cases the public bees a prey to every mist, who tamper successfully with the follies either of age or infancy.
The most plausible plea, which hath ever been offered in favour of hereditary succession, is, that it preserves a nation from civil wars; ahis true, it would be weighty; whereas, it is the most barefaced falsity ever imposed upon mankind. The whole history of England disowns the fact. Thirty kings and two minors have reigned in that distracted kingdom sihe quest, in which time there have been (including the Revolution) ha civil wars and een rebellions. Wherefore instead of making for peace, it makes against it, aroys the very foundation it seems to stand on.
The test for monarchy and successioween the houses of York and Lancaster, laid England in a se of blood for many years.
Twelve pitched battles, besides skirmishes and sieges, were fought between Henry and Edward. Twice was Henry prisoo Edward, who in his turn risoo Henry. And so uain is the fate of war and the temper of a nation, when nothing but personal matters are the ground of a quarrel, that Henry was taken in triumph from a prison to a palace, and Edward obliged to fly from a palace to a fn land; yet, as sudden transitions of temper are seldom lasting, Henry in his turn was driven from the throne, and Edward recalled to succeed him.
The parliament always following the stro side.
This test began in the reign of Henry the Sixth, and was irely extinguished till Henry the Seventh, in whom the families were united.
Including a period of 67 years, viz. from 1422 to 1489.
In short, monarchy and succession have laid (not this or that kingdom only) but the world in blood and ashes. Tis a form of gover which the word of God bears testimony against, and blood will attend it.
If we inquire into the business of a king, we shall find that in some tries they have none; and after sauntering away their lives without pleasure to themselves or advao the nation, withdraw from the se, and leave their successors to tread the same idle ground. In absolute monarchies the whole weight of business, civil and military, lies on the king; the children of Israel in their request for a king, urged this plea "that he may judge us, and go out before us and fight our battles." But in tries where he is her a judge neneral, as in England, a man would be puzzled to know what IS his business.
The nearer any gover approaches to a republic the less busihere is for a king. It is somewhat difficult to find a proper name for the gover of England. Sir William Meredith calls it a republic; but in its present state it is unworthy of the name, because the corrupt influence of the , by having all the places in its disposal, hath so effectually swallowed up the power, aen out the virtue of the house of ons (the republi part in the stitution) that the gover of England is nearly as monarchical as that of France or Spain. Men fall out with names without uanding them.
For it is the republi and not the monarchical part of the stitution of England whiglishmen glory in, viz. the liberty of choosing an house of ons from out of their own body - and it is easy to see that when republi virtue fails, slavery ensues. Why is the stitution of England sickly, but because monarchy hath poisohe republic, the hath engrossed the ons? In England a king hath little more to do than to make war and give alaces; whi plain terms, is to impoverish the nation a together by the ears. A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight huhousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more worth is one ho man to society and in the sight of God, than all the ed ruffians that ever lived.
百度搜索 Common Sense 天涯 或 Common Sense 天涯在线书库 即可找到本书最新章节.