among the ancient civilized nations: but if this be not enough, the law of God, that wholly omits fe males, is sufficient to shew, that nature, which is his handmaid, cannot advance them. When God describes who should be the king of his people* (if they would have one) and how he should govern, no mention is made of daughters. The Israelites offered the kingdom to Gideon, and to his sons: God promised, and gave it to Saul, David, Jeroboham, Jehu, and their sons. When all of them, save David, by their crimes, fell from the kingdom, the males only were extirpated, and the females, who had no part in the promises, did not fall under the penalties, or the vengeance that was executed upon those families: and we do not, in the word of God, or in the history of the Jews, hear of any feminine reign, except that which was usurped by Athaliah; nor that any consideration was had of their descendants in relation to the kingdom: which is enough to shew that it is not according to the law of God, nor to the law of nature, which cannot differ from it. So that females, or such as derive their right by inheritance from females, must have it from some other law, or they can have none at all.

But though this question were authentically decided and concluded, that females might or might not succeed, we should not be at the end of our contests; for if they were excluded, it would not from thence follow, as in France, that their descendants

* Deut. xvii.

should be so also; for the privilege which is denied to them, because they cannot, without receding from the modesty and gentleness of the sex, take upon them to execute all the duties required, may be transferred to their children, as Henry the 2nd, and Henry the 7th, were admitted, though their mothers were rejected.

If it be said that every nation ought in this to follow their own constitutions, we are at an end of our controversies; for they ought not to be followed, unless they are rightly made; they cannot be rightly made, if they are contrary to the universal law of God and nature. If there be a general rule, it is impossible but some of them, being directly contrary to each other, must be contrary to it. If therefore all of them are to be followed, there can be no general law given to all; but every people is by God and nature left to the liberty of regulating these matters relating to themselves according to their own prudence or convenience: and this seems to be so certainly true, that whosoever does, as our author, propose doctrines to the contrary, must either be thought rashly to utter that which he does not understand, or maliciously to cast balls of division among all nations, whereby every man's sword would be drawn against every man, to the total subversion of all order and government.

SECTION XVIII.

KINGS CANNOT CONFER THE RIGHT OF FATHER UPON PRINCES, NOR PRINCES UPON KINGS.

LEST what has been said before by our author should not be sufficient to accomplish his design of bringing confusion upon mankind, and some may yet lie still for want of knowing at whose command he shall cut his brother's throat, if he has not power or courage to set up a title for himself, he has a new project that would certainly do his work, if it were received. Not content with the absurdities and untruths already uttered in giving the incommunicable right of fathers, not only to those who, as is manifestly testified by sacred and profane histories, did usurp a power over their fathers, or such as owed no manner of obedience to them; and justifying those usurpations, which are most odious to God, and all good men, he now fancies a kingdom so gotten may escheat for want of an heir; whereas there is no need of seeking any, if usurpation can confer a right; and that he who gets the power into his hands, ought to be reputed the right heir of the first progenitor; for such a one will be seldom wanting, if violence and fraud be justified by the command of God, and nations stand obliged to render obedience, till a stronger or more successful villain throws him from the throne he had invaded. But if it should come to pass that no man would step into the vacant place, he has a

new way of depriving the people of their right to provide for the government of themselves.

cause," says he, "the dependency of ancient families is oft obscure, and worn out of knowledge; therefore the wisdom of all, or most princes, hath thought fit many times to adopt those for heads of families, and princes of provinces, whose merits, abilities, or fortunes, have ennobled them, and made them fit and capable of such royal favours: all such prime heads and fathers have power to consent to the uniting and conferring of their fatherly right and sovereignty on whom they please," &c.

I may justly ask, how any one or more families come to be esteemed more ancient than others, if all are descended from one common father, as the scriptures testify; or to what purpose it were to inquire what families were the most ancient, if there were any such, when the youngest and most mean by usurpation gets an absolute right of dominion over the eldest, though his own progenitors, as Nimrod did; but I may certainly conclude, that whatever the right be that belongs to those ancient families, it is inherent in them, and cannot be conferred on any other by any human power; for it proceeds from nature only. The duty I owe to my father does not arise from an usurped or delegated power, but from my birth derived from him; and it is as impossible for any man to usurp or receive by the grant of another the right of a father over me, as for him to become, or pretend to be made my father by another

who did not beget me. But if he say true, this right of father does not arise from nature; nor the obedience that I owe to him that begot me, from the benefits which I have received, but is merely an artificial thing, depending upon the will of another: and that we may be sure there can be no error in this, our author attributes it to the wisdom of princes. But before this comes to be authentic, we must at the least be sure that all princes have this great and profound wisdom, which our author acknowledges to be in them, and which is certainly necessary for the doing of such great things, if they were referred to them. They seem to us to be born like other men, and to be generally no wiser than other men. We are not obliged to believe that Nebuchadnezzar was wise till God had given him the heart of a man, or that his grandson Belshazzar, who being laid in the balance was found too light, had any such profound wisdom. Ahasuerus shewed it not, in appointing all the people of God to be slain, upon a lie told him by a rascal; and the matter was not very much mended, when, being informed of the truth, he gave them leave to kill as many of their enemies as they pleased. The hardness of Pharaoh's heart, and the overthrow thereby brought upon himself and people, does not argue so profound a judgment as our author presumes every prince must have: and it is not probable that Samuel would have told Saul," he had done foolishly," if kings had always been so exceeding wise: nay, if wisdom had been annexed to the character, Solomon might have