all by private influence; for they, who are aimed with the power of the crown, have many ways of gratifying such as are subservient to their designs, and many ways of oppressing such as oppose them, both within the bounds of the law.

Q. Can a king have a more faithful council than a house of Commons, which speaketh the sense of the people?

A. None; for they will not only give him impartial council, but will powerfully and cheerfully assist him to execute what they advise.

Q. What are the marks of a person, worthy to serve his country in parliament?

A. The marks of a good ruler given in Scripture will serve for a parliament-man; such as rule over you shall be men of truth, hating coretousness; they shall not take a gift; they shall not be afraid of the face of a man, Deut. xvi. Therefore I conclude, that the marks of a good par liament-man are riches with frugality; integrity; courage; being wellaffected to the constitution; knowledge of the state of the country; being prudently frugal of the money, careful of the trade, and zealous for the liberties of the people; having stuck to the interest of his country in perilous times, and being assiduqus in attendance.

Q. Who is most likely to take a bribe?

A. He, who offereth one. Q. Who is likely to be frugal of the people's money?

4. He, who puts none of it in his own pocket.

Q. You seem by this to be averse from chusing such as accept places and gratuities from the crown. What is your reason for this partiality?

A. I am far from thinking that a man may not serve his King and his country faithfully at the same time. Nay, their interests are inseparable. Mr. Such an one, my lord's steward, is a very honest man; and yet if I

had any affairs to settle with my lord, I would chuse my neighbour for a referee rather than my lord's steward.

Q. Why is frugality of the people's money so necessary at this time.

*

A. Because they have run out much, and are still much in debt.. My father and I have paid our share of one hundred millions, and I have heard there are near fifty more to pay. I grudge not this prodigious expence, as far as it has been the necessary price of liberty; but as it would grieve me much to see this blessing ravished from me, which has cost me so dear; so on the other hand I think it expedient to save, now the affair is over, and the government settled.

Q. Who are those, who are so careful of the trade of the nation?

4. Such as are willing to keep it from all vexatious interruptions by inspections, entering into houses, seizures, suits; and the oppression of tax gatherers, as much as possible; such as are willing to take off the burthensome duties, which encrease the expence of the workman, and consequently the price of the manufacture.

Q. But as you have a freehold, would you not be willing to be excused from paying two shillings in the pound, by laying excises upon other parts of our consumption?

4. No doubt but every landed man would be glad to be free from paying two shillings in the pound; but, at the same time, I would not raise, by another tax, two shillings in the pound, nor one shilling in the pound for a perpetuity; for parliaments, who have no more to give, may be disappointed for the redress of their grievances. Besides, I would not be deluded by an impossibility;

* If the writer had lived at the present period he would have found our debt amounting to eight hundred millions, and our taxes increased ten fold !—Ep.

for if my tenant has any new tax laid upon him, I am afraid he will not pay me so much rent; so that the new tax must still affect land. Then it is utterly impossible to raise by excises what shall be equivalent to two shillings in the pound, without the ruin of trade; for the excises, which are settled already, generally speaking, raise double the duty on the people, of what they bring in to the government.

Q. How canst thou prove that? A. By experience of several excises, as of leather, candles, soap, &c. Whatever is brought into the public by those excises is raised double upon the people; therefore if a million of money, or what is equivalent to two shillings in the pound, were levied by excise, it would be two millions upon the excised commodities, which must destroy every subject of trade in Britain. Q. Why dost thou insist that a knowledge of the state of the country is a necessary qualification for a parliament-man?

A. Because this is a qualification, of late, very much unheeded. I have heard that there are many corporations, which never saw their

members.

Q. Is then a writ of parliament only a congé d'Elire for a bishop, where the king nominates!

A. God forbid! The crown is never to meddle in an election.

Q. Why is assiduous attendance so necessary?

A. Because a parliament-man is

entrusted with the lives, liberties and properties of the people, which have often been endangered by the non-attendance of many members; because, if representatives do not attend, I may have a law imposed upon me, to which I had no opportunity of giving my assent.

Q. Thou hast prudently and justly resolved to promote, to the utmost of thy power, the public tranquillity. What are the advantages thou proposest from that?

4. All the advantages resulting from political society depend upon the public tranquillity. Besides, by public tranquillity, armies, which are a mark of distrust of the af fections of the people, may be disbanded.

Q. Why do'st thou not love armies, in time of prace?

4. Because armies have overturned the liberties of most countries; and all, who are well-affected to liberty, ever hated them; because they are subject to an implicit obedience to their officers, and to a law of their own; because they are so many lusty men taken from work, and maintained at an extravagant ex} pence upon the labour of the rest; because they are many ways bur thensome to the people in their quarters, even under the best discipline, especially in dear countries; because there are so many preferments in the hands of designing ministers, and lastly, because the king will never be denied an army as great as he pleaseth, when it is necessary.

CHAPTER IV.

Of Adam's Title to Sovereignty by
Donation, Gen. i. 28.

§. 21. Having at lost got through the foregoing passage, where we have been so long detained, not by the force of arguments and opposition, but by the

intricacy of the words, and the doubtfulness of the meaning; let us go on to. his next argument for Adam's sovereignty. Our author tells us in the words of Mr. Selden that Adum by donation from God, Gen i. 28. was made the general lord of all things, not without such a

private dominion to himself, as without his grant did exclude his children. This determination of Mr. Selden, says our author, is consonant to the history of the Bible, and natural reason, Observations, 210. And in his Preface to his Observa tions on Aristotle, he says thus, The first government in the world was monarchical in the father of all flesh, Adum being commanded to people and multiply the earth, and to subdue it, and having dominion given him over all creatures, was thereby the monarch of the whole world: none of his posterity had any right to possess any thing, but by his grant or permission, or by succession from him: The earth, saith the Psalmist, hath he given to the children of men; which shew the title comes from fatherhood.

22. Before I examine this argument, and the text on which it is founded, it is necessary to deșire the reader to observe, that our author, according to his usual method, begins in one sense, and concludes in another; he begins here with Adam's propriety, or private dominion, by donation; and his conclusion is, which shew the title comes from fatherhood.

23. But let us see the argument. The words of the text are these; and God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth and subdue it, and have do minion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth on the earth, Gen. i. 28. from whence our author concludes, that Adam, having here dominion given him over all creatures, was thereby the monarch of the whole world: whereby must be meant, that either this grant of God gave Adam property, or as our author calls it private dominion over the earth, and all inferior or irrational creatures, and so consequently that he was thereby monarch; or 2dly, that it gave him rule and dominion over all earthly creatures whatsoever, and thereby over his children; and so he was monarch; for, as Mr. Selden has properly worded it, Adam was made general lord of all things, one may very clearly understand him, that he means nothing to be granted to Adam here but property, and therefore he says not one word of Adam's monarchy. But our author says, Adum was hereby monarch of the world, which, properly speaking, signifies sovereign ruler of all the men in the world; and so Adam, by this grant, must be constitu

ted such a ruler. If our author means otherwise, he might with much clearness have said, that Adam was hereby proprietor of the whole world. But he begs your pardon in that point: clear distinct speaking not serving every where to his purpose, you must not expect it in him, as in Mr. Selden, or other such writers.

24. In opposition therefore to our author's doctrine, that Adam was monarch of the whole world, founded on this place, I shall shew,

1. That by this grant, Gen. 1. 28. God gave no immediate power to Adam over men, over his children, over those. of his own species; and so he was not made ruler, or monarch, by this charter.

2. That by this grant God gave him not private dominion over the inferior creatures, but right in common with all mankind; so neither was he monarch, upon the account of the property here given him.

25. That this donation, Gen. i. 28. gave Adam no power over men, will appear if we consider the words of it: for since all positive grants convey no more than the express words they are made in will carry, let us see which of them here will comprehend mankind, or Adam's posterity; and those, I unagine, if any, must be these, every living thing that moveth: the words in Hebrew are non п'п i. e. Bestiam Reptantem, of which words the scripture itself is the best interpreter: God having created the fishes and fowls the fifth day, the beginning of the sixth he creates the irrational inhabitants of the dry land, which, v. 24. are described in these words, let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind; cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, after his kind. v. 2. And God made the beasts of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after his kind: here, in the creation of the brute inhabitants of the earth, he first speaks of them all under one general name, of living creatures, and then afterwards divides them into three ranks, 1. Cattle, or such creatures as were or might be tame, and so be the private possession of particular men; 2. ' which, ver. 24 and 25, in our bible, is translated beasts, and by the Septuagint Ongla, wild beasts, and is the same word, that here in our text, ver. 28. where we have this great

the same that is used here, ver. 28. and is translated moving, but in the former verses creeping, and by the Septuagint in all these places, Enerά, or reptiles; from whence it appears, that the words which we translate here in God's donation, ner. 28. living creatures moving, are the same, which in the history of the creation, ver. 24, 25. signify two ranks of terrestrial creatures, viz. wild beasts and reptiles, and are so understood by the Septuagint.

26. When God had made the irrational animals of the world, divided into three kinds, from the places of their habitation, viz. fishes of the sea, fowls of the air, and living creatures of the earth, and these again into cattle, wild beasts, and reptiles, he considers of making man, and the dominion he should have over the terrestrial world, ver. 25. and then he reckons up the inhabitants of these three kingdoms, but in the terrestrial leaves out the second rank, wild beasts but here, ver. 28. where he actually exercises this design, and gives him this dominion, the text mentions the fishes of the sea, and fowls of the air, and the terrestrial creatures in the words that signify the wild beasts and reptiles, though translated living thing that moveth, leaving out cattle. In both which places, though the word that signifies wild beasts be omitted in one, and that which signifies cattle in the other, yet, since God certainly executed in one place, what he declares he designed in the other, we cannot but understand the same in both places, and have here only an account, how the terrestrial irrational animals, which were already created and reckoned up at their creation, in three distincts ranks of cattle, wild beasts, and reptiles, were here, ver. 28. actually put under the dominion of man, as they were designed, ver. 26. noi do these words contain in them the least appearance of any thing that can be wrested to signify God's giving to one man dominion over another, to Adam over his posterity.

27. And this further appears from Gen. ix. 2. where God,renewing this charter to Noah and his sons, he gives

VOL. IX.

them dominion over the fowls of the air and the fishes of the sea, and the terres trial creatures, wild beasts and reptiles, the same words that in the text before us, Gen. i. 28. are translated every moving thing, that moveth on the earth, which by no means can comprehend man, the grant being made to Noah and his sons, all the men then living, and not to one part of men over another: which is yet more evident from the very next words, ver. 3. where God gives every moving thing, the very words used, ch. i. 28. to them for food. By all which it is plain that God's donation to Adam, ch. i 28. and his designation, ver 26. and his grant again to Noah and his sons, refer to and contain in them neither more nor less than the works of the creation the fifth day, and the beginuing of the sixth, as they are set down from the 20th to the 26th ver. inclusively of the 1st chap. and so comprebend all the species of irrational animals of the terraqueous globe, though all the words, whereby they are expres sed in the history of their creation, are no where used in any of the following grants, but some of them omitted in one, and some in another. From whence I think it is past all doubt, that man cannot be comprehended in this grant, nor any dominion over those of his own species be conveyed to Adain. All the terrestrial irrational creatures are enumerated at their creation, ver. 25. under the names beasts of the earth, cattle and creeping things; but man being not then created, was not contained under any of those names; and therefore, whether we understand the Hebrew words right or no, they cannot be supposed to comprehend man, in the very same history, and the very next verses following, especially since that Hebrew word on which, if any in this 'donation to Adam, ch. i. 28. must comprehend man, is so plainly used in contradistinction to him, as Gen. vi. 20. vii. 14, 21, 23. Gen. viii. 17, 19. And if God made all mankind slaves to Adam and his heirs, by giving Adam dominion over every living thing that moveth on the earth, ch. i. 28 as our author would have it, methinks Sir Robert should have carried his monarchical power one step higher, and satisfied the world, that princes might eat their subjects too, since God gave as full power to Noah and his heirs, ch. ix 2. to eat every living thing that moveth, as he did to

28. David, who might be supposed to understand the donation of God in this text, and the right of kings too, as well as our author in his comment on this place, as the learned and judicious Ainsworth calls it, in the 8th Psalm, finds here no such charter of monarchical power: his words are, Thou hast made him, i. e. man, the son of man, a little lower than the angels; thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands, thou hast put all things under his feet, all sheep and oxen, and the beasts of the field, and the fowls of the air, and fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the sea. In which words, if any one can find out, that there is meant any monarchical power of one man over another, but only the dominion of the whole species of mankind over the inferior species of creatures, he may, for aught I know, deserve to be one of Sir Robert's monarchs in habit, for the rareness of the discovery. And by this time, I hope it is evident, that he that gave dominion over every living thing that moveth on the earth, gave Adain no monarchical power over those of his own species, which will yet appear more fully in the next thing I am to shew.

29. 2. Whatever God gave by the words of this grant, Gen. i. 28. it was not to Adam in particular, exclusive of all other men whatever dominion he had thereby, it was not a private dominion, but a dominion in common with the rest of mankind. That this donation was not made particular to Adani, appears evidently from the words of the text, it being made to more than one; for it was spoken in the plural number, God blessed them, and said unto them, Have dominion. God says unto Adam and Eve, Have dominion; thereby, says our author, Adam was monarch of the world: but the grant being to them, i. e. spoke to Eve also, as many interpreters think with reason, that these words were not spoken till Adam had his wife, must not she thereby be lady, as well as he lord of the world? If it be said, that Eve was subjected to Adam, it seems she was not so subjected to him, as to hinder her dominion over the creatures, or property in them: for shall we say, that God ever made a joint grant to two, aud one only was to have the benefit of it?

30. But perhaps it will be said, Eve was not made till afterward: grant it so, what advantage will our author get by it? The text will be only the more directly against him, and shew that God, in this donation gave the world to mankind in common, and not to Adam in particular. The word them in the text must include the species of man, for it is certain them can by no means signify Adam alone. In the 26th verse, where God declares his intention to give this dominion, it is plain he meant, that he would make a pecies of creatures, that should have dominion over the other species of this terrestrial globe: the words are, And God said, let us make, man in our image, after our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish, &c. They then were to have dominion. Who? Even those who were to have the image of God, the individuals of that species of mun, that he was going to make; for that them should signify Adam singly, exclusive of the rest that should be in the world with him, is against both scripture and all reason; and it cannot possibly be made sense, if man in the former part of the verse do not signify the same with them in the latter; only man there, as is usual, is taken for the species, and them the individuals of that species and we have a reason in the very text. God makes him in his own image, after his own likeness; makes him an intellectual creature, and so capable of dominion: for whereinsoever else the image of God consisted, the intellectual nature was certainly a part of it, and belonged to the whole species, and enabled them to have dominion over the inferior cratures; and therefore David says in the 8th Psalm above cited, Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, thou hast made him to have dominion. It is not of Adam king David speaks here, for verse 4, it is plain it is of man and the son of man, of the species of mankind.

31. And that this grant spoken to Adam was made to him, and the whole species of man, is clear from our author's own proof out of the Psalmist. The earth, saith the Psalmist, hath he given to the children of men which shews the title comes from fatherhood. These are Sir Robert's words in the preface before cited, and a strange inference it is he makes; God hath given the earth to the children of men, ergo the title comes from fatherhood, It is pity the propriety of