a chearful and willing, than constrain an involuntary and reluctant obedience. All these men allow the Broghill. authority of regal government, and profess their willingness to submit to it; so that all opinions unite in this point, and all parties concur to make a compliance with this request necessary to your highness. Nor is it only for your own sake that this desire is so warmly pressed, but for the security of those whose endeavours have contributed to the establishment of the present government, or shall hereafter act by your authority. All those who receive com missions from the King, by whatever means exalted to the throne, are secured from prosecution and punishment in any change of affairs, by the statute of the eleventh year of Henry the seventh; but the name of Protector can confer no such security, and therefore the cautious and vigilant will always decline your service, or prosecute your affairs with diffidence and timidity; even the honest and scrupu lous will be fearful of engaging where they have nothing but their own opinion to set in balance against the law; and the artful and the avaricious, the discontented and the turbulent, will never cease to contrive a revolution, by which they may avenge the wrongs that they imagine themselves to have received, and riot in the spoils of their enemies.

The present alienation of the crown of these realms from him who pretends to claim them by his birth, may be compared to a divorce, which may, by the mutual consent of both parties, be set aside. It is therefore necessary, to prevent any future reunion, that the crown be consigned to another.

Were the reasons for your assumption of this title less weighty than they appear, the desire of parliament ought

to add to their efficacy. It is not to be conceived Glynne. that we are able to assign all the arguments that might be formed by the united and concurrent wisdom of so numerous and discerning an assembly, an assembly deputed by the whole people to judge and to act for them. The desires of a parliament are never to be considered as sudden starts of imagination, or to be Wolseley. rejected as trivial, or unworthy of consideration; the desire of the parliament, is the voice of the people; nor can it, indeed, be now disregarded, without breaking all the rules of policy, and neglecting the first opportunity of reinstating the nation in tranquillity. Glynne. The parliament, the only authority which the nation reverences, has now first attempted to establish a legal and settled government, by conferring on

your highness the title of King, which you therefore cannot refuse without encouraging the enemies of our Broghill. government, by shewing not only, that the chief magistrate of the nation bears a title unknown to the law, but even such as is disapproved by the parliament; that parliament which he himself called.

But the parliament is far from desiring that their authority alone should enforce their desire, for which they have so many and so strong reasons to allege; nor are their own reasons alone to be considered, but the authority of all former parliaments, who have ever been to the last degree cautious of admitting the least change in any thing that related to the constituent part of our government.

When King James, after his accession to the crown of England, was desirous of changing his title to Lenthal. that of King of Great Britain, the parliament refused to admit any alteration in the regal stile : not that they discovered any apparent ill consequences arising from it, but because they did not know how far it might affect the constitution, nor to what farther alterations it might make way. In the late parliament, when it was proposed that the name of parliament should be changed to that of representative of the people, the proposal was for the same reason disapproved. "Nolumus leges Angliæ mutari" was a fixed principle of the ancient barons, and certainly nothing can shew greater weakness than to change without prospect of advantage. Long prescription is a sufficient argument in favour of a practice against which nothing can be alleged; nor is it sufficient to affirm that the change may be made without inconvenience; for change itself is an evil, and ought to be balanced by some equivalent advantage, and bad consequences may arise though we do not foresee them.

But the consequences of the change now proposed are neither remote nor doubtful; by substituting the name and office of Protector in the place of those of King, we shall immediately alarm the people, we shall awaken the jealousy

of the wise, and the fears of the timorous; there Fines. will be indeed some reasons for apprehension and Lisle. suspicion, which designing men will not fail to exaggerate for their own purposes. The first question that will naturally arise will be, What is this new office of Protector, upon what law is it founded, and what are the limits of his authority? To these inquiries what answer can be returned? Shall it be said that his authority is independent, despotic, and unlimited? Where then is the

liberty for which the wisest and best men of this nation have been so long contending? What is the advantage of all our battles and all our victories? If we say Whitlocke, that the authority of the Protector is bounded Glynne, by the laws, how shall we prove the assertion? Fines, What law shall we be able to cite, by which the Broghill. duties of the Protector to the people, or those of the people to the Protector, are marked out? This then is the great reason upon which the parliament have made their request. The people are to be governed Glynne, according to the law, and the law acknowledges

no supreme magistrate but the King. It is necessary to the good administration of the state, that the duty both of governors and subjects should be known, limited,

and stated, that neither the governors may opWolseley, press the people, nor the people rebel against Whitlocke, the governors; the parliament therefore desires Broghill, that the office and title of King may be restored Glynne. as they are understood in their whole extent, and in all their relations. Every man is well informed when the King acts in conformity to the law, and when he transgresses the limits of his authority; but of the power of the Protector they know nothing, and Fines, therefore will suspect every thing; nor indeed Lisle, can their suspicions be reasonably censured; for Broghill. till they are informed what are the claims of this new magistrate, how can they know their own

rights? If your highness should injure or oppress any man, to what law can he appeal? He may, indeed, discoGlynne, ver that the King could not have attacked his property, but will never be able to prove that the Protector is subject to the same restraint; so that neither your highness is protected by the law when you do right, nor the subject redressed if you should do wrong,

The end for which monarchy has been for some time sus

Broghill. pended, is the happiness of the people, and this end can only now be attained by reviving it. The question may indeed be brought to a short issue, for either the office of Protector is the same with that of Fines. King, or something different from it; if it be the same, let us not be so weak as to impose upon ourselves, or so dishonest as to endeavour to deceive others, by rejecting the name while we retain the thing; let not an aversion to an idle sound, to a name reverenced by the people, and approved by the parliament, incite

Fines,

Lisle, you to reject the petition of the whole nation, to Glynne. raise difficulties in the distribution of justice, and awaken themselves in the minds of all those who attend more to names than things, who will always be the greatest number, and whose satisfaction ought therefore to be endeavoured by all lawful compliances.

It is a certain truth that old institutions are, merely because they are old, preferable to new plans, in Broghill, their nature equally good, because a very small Fines, part of mankind judges from any other principle Wolseley. than custom, and it will be long before new titles attract their regard, esteem, and veneration.

But if the office of Protector be not only in its denomination, but in nature also, absolutely new, we are then yet in a state of uncertainty, confusion and misery; we have the bounds of his authority to settle, the rights of parliament to state, all our laws to new model, and our Fines. whole system of government to constitute afresh. An endless and insuperable task, from which we intreat your highness to exempt us, by assuming, according to the advice of parliament, the office and title of King.

The Protector having desired some time to consider the arguments that had been offered, returned on April the 13th (the 7th as may be collected from Whitlocke) his Answer to this effect.

MY LORDS,

THOUGH I am far from imagining myself qualified to controvert a question of so great importance, with the learned members of this committee, especially as the arguments have been founded chiefly upon the laws and ancient constitution of this nation, with which I have had no opportunity to be well acquainted; yet, since it may be reasonably required of me either to yield to your reasons, or to assign the difficulties and objections that hinder me from yielding, I shall attempt to consider and discuss them diligently and distinctly.

It has been urged, with great appearance of strength, that the title of King is the only title by which the laws acknowledge the chief magistrate of this nation; that the title cannot be changed without supposing a change in the office, and that a change in the office would be a dangerous innovation, productive of debate, jealousy, and suspicion; that the limits of this new-erected authority would be unknown to the people, as being unsettled by the law; that

the people are best pleased with institutions which they have long known, and that therefore it would neither contribute to the public happiness, nor to our own security, to obtrude upon the nation titles and offices either new in reality or in appearance.

pre

The apprehension that the parliaments have always expressed of changes and innovations, has been made appear by two remarkable instances, and to shew the necessity of restoring the title of King, it has been alleged, that not only the dangers and discontents that novelty produces will be escaped by it, but that both the chief magistrate, and those that act by his authority, will be more effectually protected by the laws of the nation.

These are the chief arguments that have dwelt upon my memory. Arguments doubtless of force, and such as do not admit of an easy confutation, but which, however, in my opinion, prove rather the expediency than necessity of reviving monarchy under its ancient title, and as such I shall consider them, for where absolute inevitable necessity is contended for, the controversy will be very short; absolute necessity will soon appear by the impossibility of shewing any method of avoiding it, and where any expedient may be proposed that may probably produce the same effects, necessity vanishes at once. Very few actions are really necessary, most of them are only expedient, or comparatively preferable to other measures that may be taken. Where there is room for comparisons there is room for diversity of opinions.

That the title of King is not necessary, how long soever it may have been in use, or what regard soever may have been paid it, is plain from the very nature of language. Words have not their import from the natural power of particular combinations of characters, or from the real efficacy of certain sounds; but from the consent of those that use them, and arbitrarily annex certain ideas to them which might have been signified with equal propriety by any other. Whoever originally distinguished the chief magistrate by the appellation of King, might have assigned him any other denomination, and the power of the people can never be lost or impaired. If that might once have been done, it may be done now; for surely words are of no other value than their significations, and the name of King can have no other use than any other word of the same import.

That the law may be as regularly executed, and as chearfully obeyed, though the name of King be entirely rejected, is, in my opinion, plain, from the experience both of