before he is acquainted with the men and manners of the place, does just as if he should come into the presence all dirty, with his boots on, his riding-coat, and his hat all daubed. They may serve him well enough in the way, but when he comes to court, he must conform to the place.

ΙΟ

CXLIV.

VOWS.

Question. Suppose a man find by his own inclination he has no mind to marry, may he not then vow chastity? Answer. If he does, what a fine thing has he done? 'Tis as if a man did not love cheese; and then he would vow to God Almighty never to eat cheese. He that vows can mean no more in sense than this; to do his utmost endeavour to keep his vow.

CXLV.

USURY.

1. THE Jews were forbidden to take use one of another, but they were not forbidden to take it of other nations. That being so, I see no reason why I may not as well take use for my money as rent for my house. 'Tis a vain thing 20 to say, money begets not money; for that no doubt it does 1.

2. Would it not look oddly to a stranger, that should

1 No doubt it does, H. 2] no doubt is does, H.

come into this land, and hear in our pulpits usury preached against; and yet the law allow it? Many men use it, perhaps some churchmen themselves. No bishop nor ecclesiastical judge, that pretends power to punish other faults, dares punish, or at least does punish, any man for doing it.

CXLVI.

PIOUS USES.

THE ground of the ordinary's taking part of a man's estate, who died without a will, to pious uses, was this; to give it somebody to pray that his soul might be delivered 10 out of purgatory. Now the pious uses come into his own pocket. 'Twas well expressed by John o' Powls in the play, who acted the priest; one that was to be hanged, being brought to the ladder, would fain have given something to the poor; he feels for his purse, (which John o' Powls had picked out of his pocket a little before) missing it, cries out, he had lost his purse now he intended to have given something to the poor: John o' Powls bid him be pacified, for the poor had it already.

1. 12. 'Twas well expressed &c.] The same incident occurs in the following, which is probably the passage which Selden had in mind :

'Malheureux (pinioned and led out to execution):

My endless peace is made; and to the poor

My purse, my purse!'

Cocledemoy (who has just picked Malheureux' pocket) :

Ay, sir; and it shall please you, the poor has your purse already.' -Marston, Dutch Courtezan, Act v. sc. 3 (vol ii. p. 98 in Bullen's ed. of Marston's works).

I am indebted to Mr. P. A. Daniel for this reference.

CXLVII.

WAR.

1. Do not undervalue an enemy by whom you have been worsted. When our countrymen came home from fighting against the Saracens, and were beaten by them, they pictured them with huge, big, terrible faces, (as you still see the sign of the Saracen's head is) when in truth they were like other men. But this they did to save their own credits.

2. Martial law in general, means nothing but the martial 10 law of this or that place; with us 'tis to be used in fervore belli, in the face of the enemy, not in time of peace; then they can take away neither limb nor life. The commanders need not complain for want of it, because our ancestors have done gallant things without it.

1. II. In the face of the enemy, not in time of peace] The billeting of great companies of soldiers and mariners, and the appointment of special commissioners to deal summarily, 'as is agreeable to martial law,' with them or with other dissolute persons joining with them to commit murder, robbery, felony, mutiny, or other outrage or misdemeanour, are among the grievances set down in the 'Petition of Right' of 1628. The result of them is said to have been the illegal execution of some persons by the commissioners, and the escape of 'sundry grievous offenders,' against whom the judges refused to proceed 'upon pretence that the said offenders were punishable only by martial law,' &c. Somers, Historical Tracts, vol. iv. pp. 118, 119.

There are several speeches of Selden's on this matter, in which he argues and brings proof that in time of peace there can be no martial law; that wherever the sheriff in the county can execute the king's writs, there it is time of peace, though in other parts there be war; that in time of peace, so defined, soldiers are under the common law; and that martial law, where it legitimately exists, is not the abrogation of law but proceeds by settled rules. Works, iii. 1986 ff.

The subject was fully discussed in Parliament by several other speakers, and the proclamation of martial law in time of peace was condemned as unconstitutional and illegal. Rushworth, Collections, vol. iii. Appendix, p. 76.

3. Question. Whether may subjects take up arms against their prince?

Answer. Conceive it thus; here lies a shilling betwixt you and me; tenpence of the shilling is yours, twopence is mine by agreement: I am as much king of my twopence, as you of your tenpence: if you therefore go about to take away my twopence, I will defend it; for there you and I are equal, both princes.

4. Or thus; two supreme princes meet; one says to the other, Give me your land; if you will not, I will take it 10 from you: the other, because he thinks himself too weak to resist him, tells him, Of nine parts I will give you three, so I may quietly enjoy the rest, and I will become your tributary. Afterwards the prince comes to exact six parts, and leaves but three; the contract then is broken, and they are in parity again.

5. To know what obedience is due to the prince, you must look into the contract betwixt him and his people; as if you would know what rent is due from the tenant to the landlord, you must look into the lease. Where the contract 20 is broken, and there is no third person to judge, then the decision is by arms. And this is the case between the prince and the subject.

1. 1. Whether may subjects &c.] The right of subjects to take up arms against their Prince was a natural subject of discussion in Selden's day. The clergy pronounced against it. The new Canons of 1640, put out by the two Synods and accepted and endorsed by the King, speak very decidedly about it. 'For subjects to bear arms against their Kings, offensive or defensive, upon any pretence whatsoever, is at least to resist the powers which are ordained of God; and though they do not invade, but only resist, St. Paul tells them plainly, they shall receive to themselves damnation.' Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical, sec. 1. Wilkins, Concilia, iv. 545.

It was one of the charges against Archbishop Laud that he had ordered the clergy to preach in the above sense four times in the year. This order appears in the preface to the first Canon, and the doctrine thus approved is defended at length in Laud's own history of his troubles and trial. Conf. Laud's Works, vol. iii. pp. 366-370.

ΙΟ

6. Question. What law is there to take up arms against the prince, in case he break his covenant?

Answer. Though there be no written law for it, yet there is custom, which is the best law of the kingdom; for in England they have always done it. There is nothing expressed between the king of England and the king of France, that if either invades the other's territory, the other shall take up arms against him; and yet they do it upon such an occasion.

7. 'Tis all one to be plundered by a troop of horse, or to have a man's goods taken from him by an order from the Council-table. To him that dies, 'tis all one whether it be by a penny halter, or a silk garter; yet I confess the silk garter pleases more; and, like trouts, we love to be tickled to death.

8. The soldiers say they fight for honour; when the truth is they have their honour in their pocket. And they mean the same thing that pretend to fight for religion. Just as a parson goes to law with his parishioners, he 20 says, for the good of his successor, that the church may not lose its right; when the meaning is to get the tithe into his own pocket.

9. We govern this war as an unskilful man does a casting-net; if he has not the right trick to cast the net off of his shoulder, the leads will pull him into the river. I am afraid we shall pull ourselves into destruction.

10. We look after the particulars of a battle, because we live in the very time of the war. Whereas of battles past, we hear nothing but the number slain. Just so for the 30 death of a man; when he is sick, we talk how he slept this

night, and that night; what he eat, and what he drank : but when he is dead, we only say, he died of a fever, or name his disease; and there's an end.

II. Boccaline has this passage of soldiers; they came to

1. 34. Boccaline has this passage &c.] This is not quite correct.