Derby, county 4, town 1. mouth, Clifton and Harderness 1, Totness 1, Tiverton i, Honiton 1. Dorset, county 6, Dorchester 1, Weymouth and Melcomb. Regis 1, Lyme-Regis 1, Pool 1. Durham, county 2, city 1. Eflex, county 13, Malden 1, Colchester 2. Gloucester, county 5, city 2, Tewksbury 1, Ciren cefter 1. Hereford, county 4, city 1, Lempster 1. Hertford, county 5, town i, St. Albans 1, Huntingdon, county 3, town i. Kent, county 11, Canterbury 2, Rochester 1, Maid stone 1, Dover 1, Sandwich i, Queenborough 1. Lancaster, county 4, town 1, Preston 1, Liverpool 1, Manchester 1. Leicester, county 4, town 2. Lincoln, county 10. city 2, Boston 1, Grantham 1; Stamford 1, Great Grimsby 1. Middlesex, county 4, London 6, Westminster 2, Monmouth, county 3: Norfolk, county 10, Norwich 2, Lynn 2, Yarmouth 2. Northampton, county 6, town I, Peterborough 1. Nottingham, county 4, town 2. Northumberland, county 3, Newcastle 1, Berwick 1. Oxon, county 5, city 1, university 1, Woodstock 1. Rutland, county 2. Salop, county 4, Shrewsbury 2, Bridgenorth 1, LudStafford, county 3, town 1, Litchfield i, Newcastle 1. Somerset, county 11, Bristol 2, Taunton 2, Bath I, Wells 1, Bridgewater 1. Southampton, county 8, town 1, Winchester 1, Portf mouth 1, Wight Isle-2, Andover 1. Suffolk, county 10, Ipswich 2, Bury St. Edmonds 2, Dunwich 1, Sudbury I. Surry, county 6, Southwark 2, Guildford 1, Rygate 1, Sussex, county 9, Chichester 1, Lewes 1, East-GrimItead 1, Arundel 1, Rye 1. Weltmore. low I. Westmoreland, county 2. Devizes I. city 2, Hull 1, Beverley I, Scarborough 1, Rich mond 1, Leeds i, Hallifax 1. *** No. II. A Debate between the committee of the house of com. mons in 1657, and O. Cromwell, upon the humble petition and advice of the parliament, by which he was desired to assume the title of KING. N April the uth, [according to Whitelock, on the 4th] the protector was attended by the committee, appointed by the parliament, to receive and answer his doubts and fcruples relating to their request and advice, that he would assume the title of king; but the protector being unwilling to disclose his own sentiments, till he was informed of the reasons by which the parliament had been determined, the following arguments were offered by the committee, which consisted of 100 members ; those who were de- Oliver St. John, lord chief justice. treasury: N. B. We have taken their arguments in one feries or discourse, as they are given by a modern compiler ; the whole debate, as it was printed in 1660, being so tedious and intricate, that it would rather tire than entertain the reader, unless he were more than ordinarily curious to know what was said on so unprecedented a subject. May it please your highness, I deputed by the parliament to confer with your highness, upon the settlement of the publick tranquility, and the establishment of such a form of government as may best promote the great ends for which government was instituted, for which we have been fo long labouring, and for which we have hazarded our fortunes and our lives. We doubt not of finding your highness ready to concur in any lawful measures, that can contribute to the happiness of the publick, to the pacification of those differences that have fo divided them, and to the perpetuity of that freedom which has been so dearly purchased, and so fuccessfully defended. And we cannot forbear to inform you that, in our opinion, in the opinion of the parliament, and of of the people who are represented by it, these purposes cannot be effe&tually profecuted by your highness without assuming not the office only, but the title likewise of king. Your highness may demand why, having already made you protector, invested you with the office of chief magiftrate, and intrufted you with the care of our liberties, our commerce, and our honour, we are now grown weary of our institution, and desire to reftore a title, which a long series of wicked administration has made it proper to abrogate ? to this we can easily answer, that our requeft is the requeft of the people, the people whose interest is chiefly to be considered, and to whom it is your higheft honour to be a faithful fervant. That they have a right to judge for themselves, to promote their own happiness by their own measures, and to distinguish their fervants by what name or titles they shall judge most proper, cannot be denied. Monarchy has always been thought by this nation, the most eligible form of government, and the title of KING has been always considered by them as essential to it. The office has never been complained of, nor the title changed, even by those parliaments that have made the ftrictest en. quiries into the defects of our conftitutions, and have had power to reform whatever they disliked. The office in general was always regarded as useful and necessary, and the citle was reverenced, when the conduct of him that held it was condemned. It is never prudent to make needless alterations, because we are already acquainted with all the consequences of known establishments and antient forms; buto new methods of administration may produce evils which the most prudent cannot forefee, nor the most diligent rectify. But least of all are such changes to be made as draw after them the necessity of endless alterations, and extend their effects through the whole frame of government. That the change of the title KING to that of PROTECTOR, or any other, would affect the remoteft links of subordination, and alter the whole conftitution, is evident, at the most superficial and transient view of the laws and customs of the nation. Every officer of justice acts in the king's name, and by the king's authority, an authority that gives life and efficacy to law, and makes every fentence valid and bind. ing. In all criminal cases the law knows not any prosecutor but the king, nor can inflict any punishment but in his name. If it be urged, that the judges have already taken their commiffions in the name of the lord protector, and supposed his authority and that of the king to be the same, let it be remembred that the judges themfelves were far from concurring in their opinions; they whose province is to justify the proceedings of the go. vernment to the people, were not satisfied themselves, and even those that complied with least reluctance pleaded rather the refiftless force of necessity, than the authority of law or the evidence of realon; and les us not reduce our judges to say, when either the captious or conscientious enquirer shall demand the reafons of their conduct, that they act not as they ought but as they must. In defiring you to assume this title, the parliament has regard not only to conscience but prudence, not only to the people's happiness but to your safety. The office of protector is new and unheard of till now, and by consequence unknown to the law, nor under stood with regard to its relation to other parts of the conftitution; To that neither the duties of the protector are known by the people, nor those of the people by the protector : fuch ignorance and uncertainty can produce nothing but disputes, murmurs, and confusions. The knowledge of our duty is necessarily previous to the practice of it, and how can any man know his duty to a magistrate to whose authority he is a stranger ? The limits of obedience to a protector are settled by no law, nor is there any statute in being that condemns any attempt to shake off his authority: For this reason it is not without long hesitation and |