WE being now in the middest of this season appointed for penitence and prayer, it hath so fallen out, that these two last dayes haue bene spent in a farre other sort of exercise, I meane in Eucharisticke Sacrifice, and gratulation of thankes, presented vnto mee by both the parts of this body of Parliament: and therefore to make vp the number of three, (which is the number of Trinitie, and perfection) I haue thought good to make this the third Day, to be spent in this exercise.

As ye made mee a faire Present indeed in presenting your thankes and louing dueties vnto mee: So haue I now called you here, to recompence you againe with a great and a rare Present, which is a faire and a Christall Mirror; Not such a Mirror wherein you may see your owne faces, or shadowes; but such a Mirror, or Christall, as through the transparantnesse thereof, you may see the heart of your King. The Philosophers wish, That euery mans breast were a Christall, where-through his heart might be seene, is vulgarly knowne, and I touched it in one of my former Speaches vnto you: But though that were impossible in the generall, yet will I now performe this for my part, That as it is a trew Axiome in Diuinitie, That Cor Regis is in manu Domini, So wil I now set Cor Regis in oculis populi.

AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER

THE DEDICATION of the booke.

SONET.

THE ARGVMENT.

SONNET.

PSAL. 2. 10

Bee wise now therefore, O yee Kings; bee instructed yee Iudges of the earth.

THE EPISTLE DEDICATORIE

MY dearest and onely Sonne, in the beginning of this same yeere, I wrote a short Meditation upon the Lords Prayer, and I told the reason, that now being growen in yeares, I was weary of Controuersies and to write of high questions, and therefore had chosen now a plaine and easie subiect to treat of: But of late it hath fallen out, that one day reading priuatly to my selfe the passion of Christ, in the end of S. Matthewes Gospell, I lighted vpon that part, where the Gouernors Souldiers mocked our Sauiour, with putting the ornaments of a King vpon him. Which appeared to me to be so punctually set doune, that my head hammered vpon it diuers times after, and specially the Croune of thornes went neuer out of my mind, remembring the thorny cares, which a King (if he haue a care of his office) must be subiect vnto, as (God knowes) I daily and nightly feele in mine owne person. Whereupon I apprehended that it would bee a good paterne to put inheritors to kingdomes in minde of their calling, by the forme of their inauguration; and so resolued to borrow some houres from my rest, to write a short Meditation upon it.

IT did no sooner please God to lighten his hand, and relent the violence of his deuouring Angel against the poore people of this Citie, but as soone did I resolue to call this Parliament, and that for three chiefe and principall reasons: The first whereof is, (and which of it selfe, although there were no more, is not onely a sufficient, but a most full and necessary ground and reason for conuening of this Assembly) This first reason I say is, That you who are here presently assembled to represent the Body of this whole Kingdome, and of all sorts of people within the same, may with your owne eares heare, and that I out of mine owne mouth may deliuer vnto you the assurance of my due thankefulnes for your so ioyfull and generall applause to the declaring and receiuing of mee in this Seate (which God by my Birthright and lineall descent had in the fulnesse of time prouided for me) and that, immediatly after it pleased God to call your late Soueraigne of famous memory, full of dayes, but fuller of immortall trophes of Honour, out of this transitorie life. Not that I am able to expresse by wordes, or vtter by eloquence the viue Image of mine inward thankfulnes, but onely that out of mine owne mouth you may rest assured to expect that measure of thankefulnes at my hands, which is according to the infinitenes of your deserts, and to my inclination and abilitie for requitall of the same.

MY Lords of the higher House, and you Knights and Burgesses of the Lower house, All men at the beginning of a Feast bring foorth good Wine first, and after, worse. This was the saying of the Gouernour of the Feast at Cana in Galile, where Christ wrought his first miracle by changing water into Wine. But in this case now whereof I am to speake vnto you, I must follow that Gouernours rule, and not Christs example, in giuing you the worst and sowrest Wine last. For all the time of this long Session of the Parliament you haue bene so fed and cloy'd, (specially you of the Lower house) with such banquets, and choise of delicate speeches, and your eares so seasoned with the sweetnesse of long precogitate Orations; as this my Speach now in the breaking vp of this Assembly, cannot but appeare vnto your taste as the worst Wine proposed in the end of the Banquet, since I am onely to deliuer now vnto you matter without curious forme, substance without ceremonie, trewth in all sinceritie. Yet considering the Person that speaketh, the parties to whom I speake, the matter whereof I meane to speake; it fits better to vtter matter, rather then wordes, in regard of the greatnesse of my place who am to speake to you, the grauitie of you the Auditorie, which is the high Court of Parliament; the weight of the matter, which concernes the securitie and establishment of this whole Empire, and litle world.

WHat a monstrous, rare, nay neuer heard-of Treacherous attempt, was plotted within these few yeeres here in England, for the destruction of Mee, my Bed-fellow, and our posteritie, the whole house of Parliament, and a great number of good Subiects of all sorts and degrees; is so famous already through the whole world by the infamie thereof, as it is needlesse to bee repeated or published any more; the horrour of the sinne it selfe doeth so lowdly proclaime it. For if those crying sinnes, (whereof mention is made in the Scripture) haue that epithet giuen them for their publique infamie, and for procuring as it were with a lowd cry from heauen a iust vengeance and recompense, and yet those sinnes are both old and too common, neither the world, nor any one Countrey being euer at any time cleane voyd of them: If those sinnes (I say) are said in the Scripture to cry so lowd; What then must this sinne doe, plotted without cause, infinite in crueltie, and singular from all examples? What proceeded hereupon is likewise notorious to the whole world; our Iustice onely taking hold vpon the offenders, and that in as honourable and publique a forme of Triall, as euer was vsed in this Kingdome.

My Lords Spirituall and Temporall, and you the Knights and Burgesses of this Parliament, It was farre from my thoughts till very lately before my comming to this place, that this Subiect should haue bene ministred vnto mee, whereupon I am now to speake. But now it so falleth out, That whereas in the preceding Session of this Parliament, the principall occasion of my Speach was, to thanke and congratulate all you of this House, and in you, all the whole Common-wealth (as being the representatiue body of the State) for your so willing, and louing receiuing and embracing of mee in that place, which God and Nature by descent of blood, had in his owne time prouided for me: So now my Subiect is, to speake of a farre greater Thankesgiuing then before I gaue to you, being to a farre greater person, which is to God, for the great and miraculous Deliuery he hath at this time granted to me, and to you all, and consequently to the whole body of this Estate.

I must therefore begin with this old and most approued Sentence of Diuinitie, Misericordia Dei supra omnia opera eius. For Almightie God did not furnish so great matter to his glory by the Creation of this great World, as he did by the Redemption of the same.

Eadem Mutata Resurgo

[I rise again, transformed, but the same]

The Long Parliament declared by a solemn oath that it could not be dissolved (p. 181). To assure its power, it never ceased stirring up the people, sometimes inflaming their minds by cunning speeches (p. 176), sometimes causing petitions in support of the Revolution to be sent in from all parts of the realm (p. 133). Abuse in the press was carried to extremes; numerous clubs everywhere produced noisy tumults; fanaticism had its own language, it was a new jargon invented by the fury and hypocrisy of the times (p. 131). Every day produced some new harangue on past grievances (p. 129). All the old institutions were overthrown one after the other (pp. 125, 188). The self-denial ordinance and the new model bill completely disorganized the army and gave it a new form and new composition which forced many old officers to resign their commissions (p. 13). Every kind of crime was attributed to the royalists (p. 148), and the art of deceiving and frightening the people was carried to the point of making them believe that the royalists had mined the Thames (p. 177). No king, no nobility, universal equality, became the watchwords (p. 87). But in the midst of this popular effervescence, there now appeared a separate party, the Independents, an enthusiastic sect which ended by enslaving the Long Parliament (p. 186).

In theorizing about the counter-revolution, men have too often assumed that this counter-revolution should and could be solely the result of popular deliberation. ‘The people fear,’ they say, ‘the people want, the people will never consent, it does not suit the people, etc.’ What a pity! The people count for nothing in revolutions, or at most count only as a passive instrument. Four or five persons, perhaps, will give France a king. Letters from Paris will announce to the provinces that France has a King, and the provinces will cry ‘Long live the king.’ Even in Paris, all but a twentieth of the inhabitants, perhaps, will learn some morning that they have a king. ‘Is it possible?’ they will exclaim. ‘Isn't this a strange turn of events? Does anyone know by what gate he will be entering? Perhaps it would be wise to rent windows in advance, for there will be crushing crowds.’ If the monarchy is restored, the people will no more decree its restoration than they decreed its destruction or the establishment of the revolutionary government.

I beg that my reflections be considered carefully, and I recommend them particularly to those who believe counter-revolution to be impossible because there are too many Frenchmen attached to the Republic and because a change would cause suffering for too many.

Scilicet is superis labor est! Whether or not the Republic has the support of the majority is certainly open to dispute, but whether it does or not makes no difference at all. Enthusiasm and fanaticism are not lasting phenomena. Human nature soon tires of this kind of ecstasy.

The latest edition of this work was nearing completion when certain completely trustworthy Frenchmen assured me that the book Développement des principes fondamentaux, etc., which I cite in Chapter 8, contains maxims that the king does not approve.

‘The authors of the book in question’, they tell me, ‘are magistrates who reduce the right of the Estates-General to that of presenting grievances and attribute to the parlements the executive power of verifying all laws, even those which are the result of a request from the Estates, which is to say they elevate the magistracy above the nation.’

I avow that I had not perceived this monstrous error in their book (and which I do not share); this error even appeared to me to be excluded by certain of its texts, quoted on pages 64 and 65 of my work, and it can be seen by my note on page 68 that the book in question can give rise to objections of quite another sort.

If, as I am assured, the authors have deviated from true principles in reference to the legitimate rights of the French nation, I am not surprised that their work, otherwise full of excellent things, has alarmed the king, for even those persons who have never had the honour of meeting him know by a great many unimpeachable witnesses that these sacred rights have no more loyal protector than himself and that nothing would offend him more than the preaching of contrary systems.

General Considerations

It is common fallacy nowadays to insist on the danger of counter-revolution in order to show that we should not return to the monarchy. A great number of works designed to persuade the French to hold fast to the Republic are only developments of this idea. The authors of these works stress the evils inseparable from revolutions; then, observing that the monarchy cannot be restored in France without a new revolution, they conclude from this that the Republic must be maintained. This stupendous fallacy, whether it arises from fear or from the desire to deceive, deserves to be carefully discussed.

Almost all errors spring from the misuse of words. It has become customary to give the name counter-revolution to any movement aimed at stopping the Revolution. Because such a movement must work against the Revolution, some would conclude that it would be simply a reverse revolution. But would it be argued, for example, that the return from sickness to health must be as painful as the passage from health to sickness? Or that because the monarchy was overthrown by monstrous men that it must be restored by the same type? Ah, if those who peddle this fallacy would only be honest with themselves! They know full well that the friends of religion and monarchy are incapable of the excesses with which their enemies have besmirched themselves. They know full well, even taking things at their worst, taking full account of human weaknesses, that the oppressed party is a thousand times more virtuous than their oppressors.

It would be better to ask whether the Republic can exist. The assumption is made, but too hastily, and the preliminary question seems quite justified, for nature and history together prove that a large indivisible republic is an impossibility. A small number of republicans closed up within the walls of a city can undoubtedly have millions of subjects; this was the case with Rome. But a large and free nation cannot exist under a republican government. The thing is so clear in itself that theory could dispense with experience; but here experience, which decides every question in politics as in physics, is perfectly in accord with theory.

What could have been said to the French to get them to believe in a republic of twenty-four million people? Two things only: (1) nothing prevents us from doing something that has never been seen before; (2) the discovery of the representative system makes possible for us what was impossible for our predecessors. Let us examine the strength of these two arguments.

If we are told that a die thrown a billion times had never turned up anything but five numbers – 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 – could we believe that there was a 6 on one of the faces? NO, undoubtedly; and it would be as obvious to us as if we had seen it that one of the faces is blank or that one of the numbers is repeated.