§. 14. But that I might omit no care to inform myself in our author's full sense, I con- sulted his Observations on Aristotle, Hobbes, §c. to see whether in disputing with others he made use of any arguments for this his darling tenet OF GOVERNMENT. 15 OF GOVERNMENT. 15 of Adams sovereignty; since in his treatise of the Natural power of Kings, he hath been so sparing of them. In his Observations on Mr. Uobbess Leviathan, 1 think he has put, in short, all those arguments for it together, which in his writings I find him any where to make use of: his words are these: If God created only Adam, and of a piece of him made the ivoman, and if by generation from them two, as parts of them, all mankind be propagated: if also God gave to Adam, not only the dominion over the woman and the children that should issue from them, but also over all the earth to subdue it, and over all the creatures on it, so that as long as Adam lived, no man could claim or enjoy any thing but by donation, assignation or permission from /tim, I wonder, &c. Observations, p. 165. Here we have the sum of all his arguments, for Adam's sovereignty, and against natural freedom, which I find up and down in his other treatises: and they are these following; God's creation of Adam, the dominion he gave him over Eve, and the dominion he had as father over his children: all which I shall particularly consider.
CHAPTER III.
Of Adam's Title to Sovereignty by Creation.
§. 15. Sir Robert, in his preface to his Ob- servations on Aristotle s Politics, tells us, A J (J OF GOVERNMENT.
natural freedom of mankind cannot be supposed without the denial of the creation of Adam: but how Adams being created, which was nothing 1ml his receiving a being immediately from omnipotence and the hand of God, gave Adam a sovereignty over any thing-, I cannot sec, nor consequently understand, how a sup- position of natural freedom is a denial of 'Adam's creation, and would be glad any body else (since our author did not vouchsafe us the fa \ our) would make it out for him: for 1 find no difficulty to suppose thv freedom of mankind, though I have always believed the creation of Adam. He was created, or began to exist by God's immediate power, without the interven- tion ofparents or the pre-existence of any of the same species to beget him, when it pleased God he should; and so did the lion, the king of beasts, before him, by the same creating power of God: and if hare existence by that power, and in that way, will give dominion without any more ado, our author, by this argument, will make the lion have as good a title to it, as he, and certainly the ancienter. No! for Adam had his title by the appointment of God, says our author in another place. Then hare creation gave him not dominion, and one might have supposed mankind free without the denying the creation of Adam, since it was God's appointment made him monarch.
But let us see, hov ' puts his ct ea- OF GOVERNMENT. 17 tion and this appointment together. By the appointment of (rod, says Sir Robert, as soon as Adam was created, lie teas monarch of the world, though he had no subjects; for though there could not be actual government till there were subjects, yet by (he right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his posterity: though not in act, yet at least in habit, Adam was a king from his creation. I wish lie had told us here, what he meant by God's appoint- ment: for whatsoever providence orders, or the law of nature directs, or positive revelation declares, may be said to he by God's appoint- ment: but I suppose it cannot be meant here in the first sense, i. e. by providence; because that would be to say no more, but that as soon as Adam was created he was dej'acto monarch, because by right of nature it was due to Adam, to be governor of his posterity. But he could not de facto be by providence constituted the governor of the world, at a time when there was actually no government, no subjects to be go- verned, which our author here confesses. Monarch of the world is also differently used by our author; for sometimes he means by it a proprietor of all the world exclusive of the rest of mankind, and thus he does in the same page of his preface before cited: Adam.
says he, being commanded to multiply and peo- ple the earth, and to subdue it, and having dominion given him over all creatures, teas thereby the monarch of the whole world; none c 18 OF GOVERNMENT.
of his posterity had any right to possess any thing but by his grant or permission, or by succession from him. 2. Let us understand then by mo- narch proprietor of the world, and by appoint- ment Gods actual donation, and revealed posi- tive grant made to Adam, Gen. i. 28. as we see Sir Robert himself does in this parallel place, and then his argument will stand thus: by the positive grant of God, as soon as Adam was created, he teas proprietor of the world, because by the right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his posterity. In which way of arguing there are two manifest false- hoods. First, It is false, that God made that grant to Adam, as soon as he was created, since, though it stands in the text immediately after his creation, yet it is plain it could not be spoken to Adam, till after Eve was made and brought to him: and how then could he be monarch by appoint ment as soon as created, especially since he calls, if I mistake not, that which God says to Eve, Gen. iii. 16, the ori- ginal grant of government, which not being till after the fall, when Adam was somewhat, at least in time, and very much distant in con- dition, from his creation, I cannot see, how our author can say in this sense, that by God's appointment, as soon as Adam ivas created, he was monarch of the world. Secondly, were it true that God's actual donation appointed Adam monarch of the world as soon as he icas created, yet the reason here given for it, would not prove OF GOVERNMENT. 19 ii; but it would always be a false inference, that God, by a positive donation, appointed Adam monarch of the world, because by right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his posterity: for having given him the right of government by nature, there was no need of a positive donation; at least it will never be a proof of such a donation.
§. 17. On the other side the matter will not be much mended, if we understand by God's appointment the law of nature, (though it be a pretty harsh expression for it in this place) and by monarch of the ivorld, sovereign ruler of mankind: for then the sentence under consi- deration must run thus: By the law of nature, as soon as Adam was created he was governor of mankind, for by right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his posterity; which amounts to this, he was governor by right of nature, because he was governor by right of nature: but supposing we should grant, that a man is by nature governor of his children, Adam could not hereby be a monarch as soon as created: for this right of nature being found- ed in his being their father, how Adam could have a natural right to be governor, before he was a father, when by being a father only he had that right, is methinks, hard to conceive, unless he will have him to be a father before lie was a father, and to have a title before he had it.
<§. 18. To this foreseen objection, our author 20 OF GOVERNMENT.
answers very logically, he was governor in habit, and not in act: a very pretty way of beins* a Governor without government, a father without children, and a king without subjects. And thus Sir Robert was an author before he writ his book; not in act, it is true, but in habit; for when he had once published it, it was due to him by the right of nature, to be an author, as much as it was to Adam to be governor of his children, when he had begot them: and if to be such a monarch of the world, an absolute monarch in habit, but not in act, will serve the turn, I should not much envy it to any of Sir Robert's friends, that he thought fit graciously to bestow it upon, though even this of acrand habit, if it signified any thing but our author's skill in distinctions, be not to his purpose in this place. For the question is not here about Adams actual ex- ercise of government, but actually having a title to be governor. Government, says our author, was due to Adam by the right of na- ture: what is this right of nature? A right fathers have over their children by begetting them; gcneratione jus acquiritur parentibus in liberos, says our author out of Grotius, Observations, '223. The right then follows the begetting as arising from it; so that, according to this way of reasoning or distin- guishing of our author, Adam, as soon as he was created, had a title only in habit, and not in act, which in plain English is, he had ac- tually no title at all.
OF GOVERNMENT. 21 i: 19. To speak less learnedly, and more intelligibly, one may say of Adam, he was in a possibility of" being- governor, since it was possible lie might beget children, and thereby acquire that right of nature, be it what it will, to govern them, that accrues from thence: but what connection has this with Adams creation, to make him say, that, as soon as he was created, he was monarch of the world1, for it may be as well said of Noah, that as soon as he was born, he was monarch of the world, since he was in possibility (which in our author's sense is enough to make a monarch, a monarch in habit,) to outlive all mankind, but his own posterity. What such necessary connexion there is betwixt Adams creation and his right to government, so that a natural freedom of man- kind cannot be supposed without the denial of the creation of Adam, 1 confess for my part I do not see; nor how those words, by the ap- pointment, cj'c. Observations, 25 J. however explained, can be put together, to make any tolerable sense, at least to establish this posi- tion, with which they end, viz. Adam was a king from his creation; a king, says our author, not in act but in habit, i. c actually no king at all.
§. 20. I fear T have tired my reader's pa- tience, by dwelling longer on this passage, than the weightiness of any argument in it seems to require; but I have unavoidably been engaged in it by our author's way of writing, 22 OF GOVERNMENT.
•who, huddling several suppositions together, and that in doubtful and general terms, makes such a medley and confusion, that it is impos- sible to shew his mistakes, without examining the several senses wherein his words may be taken, and without seeing how, in any of these various meanings, they will consist together, and have any truth in them: for in this present passage before us, how can any one argue against this position of his, that Adam teas a king from his creation, unless one examine, whether the words, from his creation, be to be taken, as they may, for the time of the commencement of his government, as the fore- going words import, as soon as he was created he ivas monarch; or, for the cause of it, as he says, p. 11. creation made man prince of his posterity? how farther can one judge of the truth of his being thus king, till one has exa- mined whether king be to be taken, as the words in the beginning of this passage would persuade, on supposition of his private do- minion, which was, by Gods positive grant, monarch of the world by appointment; or king on supposition of his fatherly power over his offspring, which was by nature, due by the right of nature; whether, I say, king be to be taken in both, or one only of these two senses, or in neither of them, but only this, that creation made him prince, in a way different from both the other? For though this assertion, that Adam was king from his creation, be due in no OF GOVERNMENT. 23 sense, yet it stands here as an evident conclu- sion drawn from the preceding- words, though in truth it he but a bare assertion joined to other assertions of the same kind, which confi- dently put together in words of undetermined and dubious meaning-, look like a sort of arguing, when there is indeed neither proof nor connection: a way very familiar with our author: of which having given the reader a taste here, I shall, as much as the argument will permit me, avoid touching on hereafter; and should not have done it here, were it not to let the world see, how incoherences in matter, and suppositions without proofs put handsomely together in good words and a plausible stile, are apt to pass for strong- reason and good sense, till they come to be looked into with attention.
CHAPTER IV.
Of Adam's Title to Sovereignty by Donation, §. 21. Having at last got through the fore- going passage, where we have been so long- detained, not bv 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 sove- reignty. Our author tells us in the words of Mr. Selaen, that ^idam hy donation from God, 24 OF GOVERNMENT.
24 OF GOVERNMENT.
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 Pref. to his Observations on Aristotle, he says thus, The first government in the ivorld was monarchial in the father of all flesh, Adam 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 desire the reader to observe, that our au- thor, 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, toid replenish the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the Jish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living Ol GOVERNMENT. 25 thing' that moveth on the earth, Gen. i. *28. from whence our author concludes, that Adam, having here dominion given him over all crea- tures, ivas therehy the monarch of the whole world: whereby must he 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 mo- narch: or 2dly, that it gave him rule and dominion over all earthly creatures whatso- ever, and thereby over his children; and so he was monarch: for, as Mr. Selden has pro- perly 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 Adams monarchy. J3ut our author says, Adam was hereby monarch of the world, which, properly speaking, signifies so- vereign ruler of all the men in the world; and so Adam, by this grant, must be constituted 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, 26 OF GOVERNMENT.
1. That by this grant, Gen. i. 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 imagine, if any, must be these, evert/ living thing thai moveth: the words in Hebrew are rwftin nvr i.e. JSes- tiam Repfanlem, of which words the scripture itself is the best interpreter: God having created the fishes and fouls 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 hind; cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, after his kind. v. 2. And God made the beasts of the earth after his hind, and cattle after their hind, and every tiling that creepeth on the earth after his hind: here, in the creation of the brute inhabi- tants of the earth, he first speaks of them all OF GOVERNMENT. 27 OF GOVERNMENT. 27 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 posses- sion of particular men; 2. nvr which, vcr. 24 and 25. in our Bible, is translated beasts, and by the Sepluagint 6>]pia, ivild beasts, and is the same word, that here in our text, ver. 28. where we have this great charter to Adam, is translated living thins- and is also the same word used, Gen. ix. 2. where this grant is renewed to Noah, and there likewise transla- ted beast. 5. The third rank were the creeping animals, which ver. 24 and 25. are comprised under the word JittfDTr, the same that is used here, ver. 28. and is translated moving, but in the former verses creeping, and by the Seplua- gint in all these places, ip-ire-fr, or reptiles; from whence it appears, that the words which we translate here in God's donation, ver 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. Jishcs 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 lie should ha\e over 28 OF GOVERNMENT.
28 OF GOVERNMENT.
the terrestrial world, ver. 26. and then he reckons up the inhabitants of these three king- doms, but in the terrestrial leaves out the second rank nrr or 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 movelh, 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 ter- restrial irrational animals, which were already created and reckoned up at their creation, in three distinct ranks of cattle, wild beasts, and reptiles, were here, ver. 28. actually put under the dominion of man, as they were designed ver. 26. nor do these words contain in them the least appearance of any thing that can be wrested to signify Gods 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 ISoah and his sous, he gives them dominion over the fouls of the air, and the fishes of the sea, and the terrestrial creatures, expressed by rvn and t^DTT OF GOVERNMENT. 29