him to condemn it as a most unjust and horrid fact upon their part who did it.' He denounces 'the damnable maxim, Quod libet licet,' and goes on to indicate the limitations of the royal power, and, while plainly admitting his reluctance to treat such a subject at such a moment, bows to the necessity of plain speaking. I desire not to speak much of this subject. Men have been very tender in meddling with the power of Kings. Yet, seeing these days have brought forth debates concerning the power of Kings, it will be necessary to be clear in the matter. Extremities should be shunned. A King should keep within the bounds of the Covenant made with the people, in the exercise of his power. Concerning the last, I shall propound these three to your consideration.'

(a.) A King abusing his power, to the overthrow of Religion, Laws, and Liberties, which are the very fundamentals of this contract and covenant, may be controlled and opposed and if he set himself to overthrow all these by arms, then they who have power, as the Estates of a Land, may and ought to resist by arms; because he doth, by that opposition, break the very bonds and overthrow all the essentials of this contract and covenant. This may serve to justify the proceeding of this kingdom against the late King, who in an hostile way set himself to overthrow Religion, Parliaments, Laws, and Liberties.' (b.) Every breach of the covenant will not justify such action. The case of Asa is instanced.

(c.) The preacher intimates his opinion that it appears to him extremely doubtful, to say the least, whether action. in such a direction can ever be lawfully attempted by private persons, mentioning that the victims of James VI.'s persecutions never even appealed to Parliament in such a sense, as their judgment that the King should be suspended from the exercise of his Royal Power.' (2.) As the King is bound to rule under God in accordance with his contract to his people, so they are bound to

Providence of God was just in bringing him to capital punishment for having consented to the execution of Lord Strafford.

obey him in accordance with their contract with him. Upon this Mr. Dowglas observes, (a.) That that obedience is subordinated to obedience to God. He blames those that say that many ministers in Scotland will not have King Jesus but King Charles to reign,' and goes on to say that there are three sorts of persons who are not to be allowed in relation to the King's interest, but who all talk of Christ's interests.

These are (1) the Sectaries, who have cast off Kingly Government, and whose enmity to Christ's Kingdom experience has shown, (2) the Engagers, who subordinated Christ's interests to the King's, and (3) those who delay duty for fear of preferring the King's interests to Christ's. The intentions of these last the preacher refuses to condemn, but wishes them more charity towards those who differ from them.

(b.) That the Covenant between God, the King, and the People, takes precedence of the compact between the King and the People.

(c.) The respect and love the People should have for their King. There is an imbued affection in the hearts of the people to their King.' Upon this Mr. Dowglas founds an affecting appeal to the people, regarding their Native King installed in his kingdom.'

(d.) As the King is bound to hazard his life and his all for them, so they are bound to hazard their life and their all for him. Mr. Dowglas continues his appeal, and divides his opponents into (A.) those who do nothing, and (B.) those who help the enemy.

(A.) Mr. Dowglas divides those who do nothing into three classes,

a

β

Those who are waiting to see what will happen.

Those who consider matters past hope of remedy. Those who have scruples of conscience. Dealing with this last class, the preacher says that he supposes that their scruples can only be of two sorts, viz., Would they be acting in the King's real interests? or ought they to act along with Malignants? He reiterates the solemn

decision of the General Assembly in answer to the Query of the Estates, to the effect that the Malignants may be acted with if they profess repentance; the heart no man can see. He proceeds to say that people talk of scruples, but that he himself thinks a good deal of Cowardice, Self-Interest, and Treason. However, he submits for their consideration the case of Judges v., where Meroz was cursed for not coming to help the Lord against the mighty; of Numbers xxiii., where Reuben and Gad are told they would sin if they refused to march against the Canaanites; and, lastly, of Saul, in 1 Sam. xxiii., who left the pursuit of David, his most dangerous enemy, when he was upon the point of taking him, in order to repel an invasion. The last case is applied especially to the duty of leaving the Malignants unattacked in order to repel the English. Mr. Dowglas examines the motives of Saul under three heads, and then discusses three separate grounds of objection to acting with the Malignants, who are professedly repentant, or leaving the unrepentant unattached. These three objections he meets in detail, arguing against the last under three separate heads.* At the same time, he does not conceal that the esteem in which the repentant Malignants were held either by himself or by the public was not an high one. And to speak a word by the way, to you, who have been upon a Malignant

* It will therefore be observed that Mr. Dowglas' system of sub-division here reaches its climax, at a point where we are unable to follow him by numerals or letters. There are here (1) the fifth of the five main divisions of the sermon; (2) the second of the three subdivisions of that head; (3) the fourth of the four sub-divisions of that sub-division; (4) the first of the two sub-divisions of that sub-division; (5) the third of the three subdivisions of that sub-division; (6) the second of the two sub-divisions of that sub-division, and (7) his own three sub-divisions of his reply to that second point. This reply on the subject of the Malignants takes more than half a large page of very small print, and is of real historical interest, but even to inake an abstract of it in the above analysis of the sermon seems to be going farther than necessary for the information of the ordinary reader.

course.

Little good is expected from you. I pray you, be honest, and disappoint them. I wish you true repentance, which will both disappoint them and be profitable to yourselves.'

B. Those who help the enemy. If,' says Mr. Dowglas,

'they be cursed who will not come out to help the Lord against the mighty, what a curse shall be upon them who help the mighty against the Lord?' He specifies three ways in which they do it.

(a.) ‘By keeping correspondence with them, and giving them intelligence. There is nothing done in Kirk or State, but they have intelligence of it. A baser way hath never been used in any nation. Your counsels and purposes are made known to them. If there be any such here (as I fear they be*) let them take this to them, they are of those who help the mighty against the Lord, and the curse shall stick to them.'

(3.) ‘By strengthening the enemies' hands with questions, debates, and determinations.'

(7.) By joining the enemy.

(3.) Directions to the King, for the right performing of his duty. (a.) To seek God in frequent and earnest prayer. 'A praying King is a prevailing King.' 'Prayers are not in much request at Court; but a Covenanted King must bring them in request. I know a King is burthened with multiplicity of affairs, and will meet with many diversions. But, sir, you must not be diverted. Take hours, and set them apart for that exercise. Men, being once acquainted with your way, will not dare to divert you. Prayer to God will make your affairs easy all the day. I read of a King, of whom his courtiers said, He spoke oftener with God than with men. If you be frequent in prayer, you may expect the Blessing of the Most High upon yourself and upon your Government.'

(b.) To be careful of the Kingdom. 'Senates and States have had mottoes written over the doors of the meeting

* Can this have been aimed at Argyll?

places. Over the Senate's House of Rome was written, Ne quid Respublica detrimenti capiat. I shall wish this may be written over your Assembly Houses. But there is another which I would have written with it, Ne quid Ecclesia detrimenti capiat. Be careful of both; let not Kirk nor State suffer hurt; let them go together. The best way for standing of a kingdom is a well-constitute Kirk. They deceive Kings who make them believe that the Government of the Kirk, I mean Presbyterial Government, cannot suit with Monarchy. They suit well, it being the Ordinance of Christ, rendering to God what is God's, and to Cæsar what is Cæsar's.' Exhorting the King to be a nursing-father to the Church (Is. xli. 3.), Mr. Dowglas warns him to beware of two classes, viz., Sectaries and Erastians, but especially of Erastians, who are more dangerous snares to Kings than are Sectaries. For they would make Kings believe that there is no Government but the Civil, and derived from thence, which is a great wrong to the Son of God, Who hath the Government of the Kirk distinct from the Civil, yet no ways prejudicial to it, being spiritual and of another nature. Christ did put the Magistrate out of suspicion that His Kingdom was prejudicial to Civil Government, affirming, My Kingdom is not of this world. This Government Christ hath not committed to Kings, but to the office-bearers of His House, who, in regard of civil subjection, are under the civil power as well as others, but in their spiritual administration they are under Christ, Who hath not given to any King upon earth the dispensation of spiritual things to His people.' He reminds the King that he has bound himself to maintain the Presbyterian form of Church Government, and warns him against Erastianism, which he says he knows already abounds at Court.

(c.) The King should make much of faithful servants of Christ, who speak the truth, whether (1) ministers or (2) laymen.

(d.) The King should be very careful whom he puts in places This is illustrated by an anecdote of the Em

of trust.