all the Happiness We enjoy from it's Consequences? -But, let Us examine thofe revived Marlayan Doctrines, by the true Principles of the British Policy, not by the Dictates of fervile Temporifers, and fee how they will then stand the Teft.

NEITHER this mighty Juftice, nor any of his puifnè Brethren, ever attempted to contradict, in Words, however they might, in Practice, have ran counter to, the Principles of the British Policy, fet forth in the following Papers, though it is most evident, that this Gentleman is as much a Stranger, or an Enemy, to these Principles, as he is to these Papers, or to the Author: For, though in thefe, a Body Politic be exactly and truly defined, the Relation, every Member of the Community bears to an other, set forth, and the general Conftitution layed down, from the best Authority; yet, does this wife and learned Judge, fhew or affect an Ignorance of both, inconfiftent with the Duty of his Office, and unbecoming this, his gracious Charge. In p. 7, bis Lordship pathetically wishes, fome of the political Preachers, the Mountebank Politicians, againft which he preaches, or at whom he fcolds, in a Language, better fuited to Billinfgate, than to a Bench of fuftice, bad at left read fop's Fables, and there remembered the War between the Members and the Belly. If this difcerning Judge had read and understood thefe Papers, he must have seen the Moral of this Fable strongly inculcated from Reason and Law, to which he chooses to turn Tail, throughout all the Oeconomy of his Station, as well as in this learned Charge. But in the Conclufion of this Paragraph, bis Lordfbip affigns bis Caufe for his Wifb, which is, in order to cure thofe Politicians of their Affectation of the Religion of the Independents, a Sect, which he fays, once overturned the whole Eftablishment, civil and ecclefiaftic, and in the End ruined them felves: I should hardly be able to refrene from Laughter, at this mighty Mock-Politician, were I not attended with a most melancholy Affociation of Ideas, upon reflecting, that the Lives and Liberties of mine unhappy Countrymen,

Countrymen, are exposed to the Infolence, Ignorance or Caprice of this worthy Judge. How unfit, a Man, fo ignorant of Hiftory, as well as Law, fo inconverfant with these Papers, which he pretends to explane and judge, or, fo regardless of the unquestionable Truths they contain, must be to judge of them, or the Author, let any Man of common Senfe determine. Let Us now fee what Regard he pays the Conftitution.

WHAT can be more furprising, than to fee a Gentleman, raised to the first Bench of Juftice in a British Government, run retrograde to the Principles of the Common Law, on which our Frame of Government is founded, and lay hold on those of Civil Law, which never got Footing in thefe Kingdoms? The fhameful Preference, which this learned and right honorable Gentleman gives the Principles of the Civil, or Imperial Law, to thofe of the Common, or Popular Law, is pretty evident from the recited Paffages of his Charge. That he is wilfully, or affectedly, if not really, ignorant of the later, and acts quite up to the former, when he treats of Government, will further appear from the following Confiderations.

IN Monarchies, univerfally Principum Placita, the Civil or Imperial Law prevails, which, indeed, gives the Princes, the Powers and Sanctions, for which our Civil Juftice here contends: For there, their Kings are abfolute Sovereigns, and clame an indefeafable bereditary Right to the Crown. Every Monarch is, not onely, exempt from Law, but above all Laws; being, not onely, an absolute and irrefiftable Legiflator in him felf, but the fole Explaner, as well as Proprietor and Executioner of the Laws. In fhort, a Monarch is a King, poffeffed of abfolute, unlimited, arbitrary Power, whofe Will is the Law.

Now, compare this Definition of Monarchy, the Truth of which, his Lordfbip will not prefume to deny, with that of the Regal Office in Great-Britain, and fee whether they bear any, and what Analogy to each other.

c.

OUR

1

OUR GOVERNMENT is declared and confeffed, by the greatest of our Lawyers, Legiflators and Kings, to be a Common-Wealth, not a Monarchy. We are not to judge of the Power or Prerogative of our Crown, by any Thing, clamed or poffeffed in abfolute Monarchies, under the Civil Law, a System of Government, which never yet subsisted in Great-Britain, or Ireland. Our Government may, with equal Propriety, be called, a Democracy, or an Ariftocracy, as a Monarchy: It is truly, a mixed Government, compofed of each of these Forms; and has more of the true Republic, in it's Compofition, than any of those, that now bear the Name of Republic. Yet, the Head of this, our Common-Wealth, the KING, is endowed with all the Honor and Dignity, and all the Power, Authority, and Privilege, neceffary to fupport that Honor and Dignity, and confiftent with the ENDS of the Inftitution, the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, which stand upon as firm a Bafis, as the Prerogative of the Crown. Our King neither poffeffes nor clames a Power or Prerogative, that he does not derive from the Laws; of which, he is therefore the Creature, not the Creator or Proprietor, as fome former flattering Judges, as well as our Irish Chief Justice, would infi

nuate.

THE KING of this FREE KINGDOM, is invefted with a general executive Power. But, it is confeffedly, de-. rivative and fiduciary, in no Sort, folely, legislative, much lefs, arbitrary or unlimited. How then are We to look upon this fupreme Magiftrate, in the Chief Juftice's Light, as the fovereign Owner or Proprietor of the Laws, when the Laws are as much the Property, the indefeafable BIRTH-RIGHT of the meanest Subject, as they are of the most potent Prince, and when the Prince is as much bound by the directive, as the Subject, by the coerfive Power of the Laws?

Ir is not very difficult to point out, among the Kings of Britain, one, who acceded to the Throne, by as good a Titule, as any of his Predeceffors or Succeffors could boaft. His Power was, as well, as

abfolutely

abfolutely established, and his Perfon deemed as facred, as his fondeft Minions, or Sycophants, or the most fervile of his Judges, could fuggeft; and his Reign commenced with as great an Eclat, and as fair a Prospect of general Happiness, as could well have been wifhed. How happy had it been for this unfortunate Prince, that he had had no false or wicked Counsellors about him, no flavish and corrupt Judges to poifon his Ear with monarchical Notions, none infiduous and iniquitous Minifters, as ready to prompt, as to execute arbitrary Measures of Administration, agreeable, indeed, to our Irish Chief Justice's Principles, but diametrically the Reverse of thofe of our Conftitution? This King wanted not an Herbert, an Allibone, a Jeffries, or even a Marlay, to advise him; that as King of Britain, be was an abfolute Monarch; that the Laws of Britain, were the King's Laws; that the King was above the Laws, having Power to dispense with all Laws, those touching Government and the Prerogative Royal, more efpecially, and that his Perfon was abfolutely facred and inviolable, as bis Right to the Crown, was a divine Right, hereditary and indefeafable. -But, how long did thefe Parafites maintain these Civil-Law Pofitions? -Juft long enough to undo their unhappy, duped Prince: For, they had no fooner wound him up to this Pitch, and he had fet out upon these Principles, which, if not layed down, were yet authorised, or approved, by his learned and faithful Judges, than he, too late found, he was not so abjolute a Monarch, nor fo abfolutely facred in his Perfon, as they had made him believe. He then faw, that he was but a King by Compact, with a FREE PEOPLE, whom he was bound to govern by their Laws, not by bis Will; that he was bound to obferve and execute the Laws, and to protect the Lives, Liberties and Properties of the Subject, as the Laws directed; that when he had ran counter to, or neglected, this Part of his Duty to his Subjects, the very End of the Inftitution of his Office, he broke and diffolved the most facred Compact between him and his People, and, by fo doing, abfolved

the

the People from their Allegiance, and, of Courfe, that he had, to all Intents and Purposes, degraded him felf, Atripped and divested him felf of the Majesty of the People, which they gave up to adorn their Head, and fo forfeited the Power, Crown and Dignity, which he derived from, and held in Trust for, the Community, which Community, as an Example to all future Kings, cut off this their late mighty Monarch, and his no lefs Sacred Confort and Family, and gave them Time and Leisure to repent of having fet up monarchical Meafures of Government, in free Countries, or to improve their political Principles, by leting them fee the fweet Effects of defpotic Power, in a beggarly Exile, in inflaved Countries.Was this, at any Time, lawful and right, agreeable to the Conftitution of Britain?

-And, muft it not hold always equally fo, in the like Emergency? Yet, was not this, as much a facred Monarch, and, was not his Perfon, as inviolable, as that of any of our Kings?- -I fuppofe, our capital Juftice, notwithstanding his exorbitant Luft for arbitrary Power, will hardly prefume to answer these Questions in the Negative, with, or without, that fmooth Smile, that ufually disguises his real Counte

nance.

WHO then, can take Allegiance in the contracted and abused Sense of our high Justice? Allegiance is, and can be, no more, than a due Obfervance of the Law, to which, King and People are equally, mutually bound. The King is to obferve, fulfil, maintain, and execute the Law, on his Part, with Juftice and Mercy; and to this, he fwears, at his Coronation, as a Renewal of the ORIGINAL COMPACT between the King and People. And the People, on their Part, are bound to honor and obey the King, under the Law, not otherwise.

Now, can any Man, below the Rank of a Chief Juftice of the King's-Bench, in Ireland, put any other Conftruction on Allegiance, than this, without coming under the Imputation of being a Stranger, or an Enemy, to the Principles of our Government, by