In the first family of the Kings of France, the younger brothers had also their part in the crown so far, that even bastards were not excluded. Thus Clovis, who was the first Christian King, being dead, his four sons divided the kingdom in as many parts. Childebert had that of Paris; Clodomer that of Orleans; Clotarius that of Soison; and Theodorick their natural brother had that of Metz. At length, these four kingdoms being united in Clotarius, by the death of the rest, his four sons made a like division of it, each of them retaining the title of King of France. This way of division continued likewise in the second family of the Kings of France almost to its end, and all the children of the Kings of France were called Kings. Yet none can say, that those things have been unjustly changed afterwards, and that they ought not to have been altered. Hugh Capet, who brought the sceptre to the third family, was the first that made the law, and gave place to Appenages, as may be seen by an act of 1282, pronounced only in the presence of thirty nobles; yet the female heirs did not think themselves excluded by the act, until the reign of Philip le Bel, who expresly declared against their succession. It were easy to remark several like changes touching the form of laws in ancient times, in the history of France. Now, what Frenchman dare accuse these changes of injustice, or declare them null? Or, who will accuse their kings of want of natural affection in excluding their daughters, even against their will, and without having renounced their right to it? Who dare declare the present laws of no force, because they differ from the ancient ones? Not to speak of those shadows of power in modern Parliaments, which make it clearly appear, that it were ridiculous in France to make the ancient laws the standard of the present ones. Wherefore the Archbishop of Ambrun does but beat the air, when he speaks in a florid, but empty stile, against the aforesaid sanction; prostituting, by that means, the royal sincerity, and the sacredness of oaths, in the opinion of all those who are not blinded with partiality. But the evidence and the reasonableness of that law appears to all the world. Kings should have but one tongue, and one pen, and there is nothing that shines more brightly in a prince than honesty and sincerity. Things that are promised, agreed upon, and sworn to, if ever they ought to be observed, they should be so, without doubt, by those whom we reverence, and esteem, as gods on earth. It is not lawful that what proceeds out of their lips should not take effect. The contracts of kings are not liable to school disputes, they despise the sophisms of the rabble; and they require an observation so much the more sincere, by how much they are agreeable to the matter of renunciations, to the laws of nations, to the decrees of the common law, and to the statutes of ecclesiastical canons. The French, Flemish, and Spanish lawyers, and some of other nations, do teach, That stipulations made of the inheritance of a person in life, particularly with respect to a marriage that is concluded, are approved by universal custom. That the example of almost all the world is for the validity of renunciations; and that too, though no oath should intervene, even notwithstanding the minority of the person, when they are made by a general consent, and for the publick good: that, in the oaths made by heirs, there is implied a solemn consent of their fathers, and an imprecation against them; so that they are as much obliged in conscience to see the thing performed, as those who formerly swore and promised it. That succession is conveighed to children by a certain instinct of nature, and not by any law of nature. That some things are founded on some natural reasons, yet not so as they cannot be changed, altered, or revoked. That one civil law may be abolished by another. That laws are arbitrary to those, in favour of whom they were made, &c.' Should one be at the pains to read all the books that have been writ these thirty years*, he shall find that the French have been fickle and inconstant, and that they have no regard to treaties, laws, or latter wills, when they find it their advantage to break or oppose them. And this certainly should excite all the powers of Europe, who have any regard to their own welfare, in the present juncture of affairs, to take just measures in favour of the house of Austria, against the power and avarice of France. The French put a malicious gloss upon the prudent and wise constitution, which is to be seen in the canon law, touching renunciations confirmed by oath, Cap. Quamvis de Pactis; as if the author of the said constitution, either out of vain glory, or out of a design to strengthen the papal authority, had made that exorbitant decretal, and had endeavoured, by a new law, to confirm that dignity to which the see of Rome has attained, by cunning and deceit. The Pyrenean treaty, which was so prodigal of the Spanish dominions to the French, and the sacredness of repeated oaths, by which France has more than once renounced all claim to the succession of Spain, now complain of being maltreated and trampled under foot, and of being quite altered and deformed by law quirks and school quibbles. The present Pope ought to resent the contempt that is thrown on his predecessor, and on the see of Rome; since the contract of marriage, which is now thought null, had the apostolical benediction to give it the more force, and make it more solemn and sacred. The French violate treaties, deny kings the power of making laws, slight wills and testaments, and, in a word, overturn all those things upon which the peace and security of society and government is founded. They have no regard to the publick good of Europe, and, provided they can but raise the glory and power of France, they do not care if the whole universe besides should perish. Anno 1701. The way to the universal monarchy is now more open to the King of France than ever, and it cannot be thought he will stop in his career which he has begun with so much craft and success, unless all the rest of Europe, sensible of the injuries done them by France, do stir up themselves, and, without losing time, examine what they are obliged to do in favour of the house of Austria, lest it should be deprived of its ancient patrimony, and lest Italy, England, Portugal, the United Provinces, and the rest of Germany, be robbed of their beloved liberties, and of their riches and glory. We heartily condole the fate of Spain, that it has been so villainously seduced to act after such a mean and sordid way, as it has done of late. That Spain, which has so long discovered the snares, and resisted the cruel designs of France, should now basely submit to it, yield herself a slave, and quite lose her former greatness and glory; which she must certainly do, if she do not suddenly and vigorously assist the house of Austria. We do not in the least doubt, but that the evident danger, which the dominions and trade of other nations are in, will persuade them to act with all their might, in favour of the just cause of the house of Austria, and make them join together for their own safety and tranquillity. Neither can we doubt, but that his holiness, according to his great prudence, does perceive the little regard the French have for keeping of peace, or observing of covenants and oaths; how much they profane the name of God and the holy gospel; how haughty they are in their threats; how insupportable their government is; how treacherously active they are in foreign courts; and what they are capable to undertake, if the Spaniards, who so long nobly resisted them, continue ingloriously to submit to them, and keep their neck under that intolerable yoke. We deplore the scandal that must follow thereupon; we foresee the approaching danger of our neighbours, and severe calamities, which threaten some remote nations. The Emperor Leopold, who was always peaceable, and a lover of justice, is enemy to none but the Turks, and that too only when they provoke him. He is the avenger of the Christian dignity, and a religious observer of laws, treaties, and oaths. But what should he do now, when he is robbed of his patrimonial right, which, upon many accounts, belongs to the house of Austria, and so insolently invade the fiefs of the empire? The other princes of Europe, who have been injured by France, must certainly see that there is no more effectual way to secure their peace and prosperity, than by bringing France down, and opposing of it with all their force. For my part I stop here, and advise them only upon the account of the dangers with which they are threatened, and upon account of their safety, which is now in a very tottering condition, to remember what has been said of old, ‘To make use of the present time.' Time runs away with rapidity and swiftness, and when men neglect the first opportunity, they scarce ever find such a one again. A DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE CITIES OF LONDON AND PARIS, In Relation to the present Posture of Affairs, rendered into Verse, and made applicable to the Disturbances which now seem to threaten the Peace of Europe. Written by a Person who has no Money to pay Taxes in Case of a War. [From a Folio Edition, containing thirteen Pages, printed in London, 1701.] THE PREFACE. PREFACES have formerly been made use of to clear up some obscurities which have crept into the body of the books they belonged to, and let the reader into the author's design. But as there is no occasion for such a plea, either to vindicate my present intentions, or illustrate what is so obvious to every man's understanding, that has any knowledge from the news-papers of the publick transactions, I shall forbear making comments in prose, upon that which is no otherwise clouded with verse, than the common performances that run about the town so merrily, as pieces of scandal have of late. I ought, indeed, to account for my making cities speak, when their inhabitants have tongues loud and capable enough of expressing their dissatisfactions at some proceedings, which are like to embroil them in a new war, and be very burthensome to their pockets, which they, probably, might wish to have loaden with more agreeable things than taxes, which are the likeliest methods imaginable to make them too light for those whom they belong to. But since Chaucer's birds and beasts have lately been talkative, and spoke their minds with a sort of assurance and freedom, I presume I may take the liberty to give stones the same privilege, which is altogether as poetical. But as some expressions, probably, may give occasion to some people who are subjects for satyre, and make them very ready to run down and decry them, so I must let them know something of my sentiments, and acquaint them, that its two combatants business to try which can cut deepest, and it has been the custom of every Roman gladiator, to take care, Ne parma caderet, that he should not drop his guard, and lay himself open to his enemy's attacks. This, I hope, will excuse the freedom one city takes with another; and since he, who has set them together by the ears, has taken care, like a true-born Englishman, to state the case so, as to make his own countryman's side the strongest, it is hoped, the English reader will give the design his favourable interpretation, especially since the author has as little to get by a war (being no military man) as he has hitherto got by the peace. London. THOU City, whose aspiring turrets rise, Paris. Ah! sister, while we two divided stand, London. Our Kings will surely do as sov'reigns shou❜d, We, that are neighbours, should like neighbours prove, Paris. But ties of blood, and friendship's laws, enjoin And ought, from hence, to be with aid supply'd, Yonder 's a land, from whence your monarch drew His infant breath, and is that land untrue? What e'er he speaks or acts has their applause, While he for arbiter of fate is own'd, And reigns a sov'reign || where he 's not inthron'd. Since there is no distinction in their claim, As I a native's right with zeal pursue, And practise what should be perform'd by you? |