the fame law of nature gives the fame paternal power to the heir over his brethren, who did not beget them: whence it follows, that either the father has not his paternal power by begetting, or elfe that the heir has it not at all; for it is hard to understand how the law of nature, which is the law of reafon, can give the paternal power to the father over his children, for the only reafon of begetting; and to the firft-born over his brethren without this only reason, i. e. for no reason at all: and if the eldest, by the law of nature, can inherit this paternal power, without the only reason that gives a title to it, fo may the youngest as well as he, and a stranger as well as either; for where there is no reason for any one, as there is not, but for him that begets, all have an equal title. I am fure our author offers no reafon; and when any body does, we fhall fee whether it will hold or no. §. 102. In the mean time it is as good fenfe to fay, that by the law of nature a man has right to inherit the property of another, because he is of kin to him, and is known to be of his blood; and therefore, by the fame law of nature, an utter ftranger to his blood has right to inherit his eftate; as to say that, by the law of nature, he that begets them has paternal power over his children, and therefore, by the law of nature, the heir that begets them not, has this paternal power over them; or fuppofing the law of the land gave I 3 gave abfolute power over their children, to fuch only who nurfed them, and fed their children themselves, could any body pretend, that this law gave any one, who did no fuch thing, abfolute power over those, who were not his children ? §. 103. When therefore it can be shewed, that conjugal power can belong to him that is not an hufband, it will also I believe be proved, that our author's paternal power, acquired by begetting, may be inherited by a fon; and that a brother, as heir to his father's power, may have paternal power over his brethren, and by the fame rule conjugal power too but till then, I think we may reft fatisfied, that the paternal power of Adam, this fovereign authority of fatherhood, were there any fuch, could not defcend to, nor be inherited by, his next heir. Fatherly power, L eafily grant our author, if it will do him any good, can never be loft, because it will be as long in the world as there are fathers: but none of them will have Adam's paternal power, or derive their's from him; but every one will have his own, by the fame title Adam had his, viz. by begetting, but not by inheritance, or fucceffion, no more than husbands have their conjugal power by inheritance from Adam. And thus we fee, as Adam had no fuch property, no fuch paternal power, as gave him fovereign jurifdiction over mankind; fo likewife his fovereignty built upon either of thefe titles, if he had any fuch, could not have have defcended to his heir, but muft have ended with him. Adam therefore, as has been proved, being neither monarch, nor his imaginary monarchy hereditable, the power which is now in the world, is not that which was Adam's, fince all that Adam could have upon our author's grounds, either of property or fatherhood, neceffarily died with him, and could not be conveyed to pofterity by inheritance. In the next place we will confider, whether Adam had any fuch heir, to inherit his power, as our author talks of. CHA P. X. Of the Heir to Adam's Monarchical Power. §. 104. UR author tells us, Obfervations, 253. That it is a truth undeniable, that there cannot be any multitude of men whatfoever, either great or small, tho' gathered together from the feveral corners and remoteft regions of the world, but that in the fame multitude, confidered by its felf, there is one man amongst them, that in nature hath a right to be king of all the reft, as being the next heir to Adam, and all the other fubjects to him: every man by nature is a king or a fubject. And again, p. 20. If Adam himself were still living, and now ready to die, it is certain that there is one man, and but one in the world, whe is next beir. Let this multitude of men be, if I 4 our our author pleafes, all the princes upon the earth, there will then be, by our author's rule, one amongst them, that in nature hath a right to be king of all the reft, as being the right heir to Adam; an excellent way to establish the thrones of princes, and fettle the obedience of their fubjects, by fetting up an hundred, or perhaps a thousand titles (if there be fo many princes in the world) against any king now reigning, each as good, upon our author's grounds, as his who wears the crown. If this right of beir carry any weight with it, if it be the ordinance of God, as our author feems to tells us, Obfervations, 244. must not all be subject to it, from the highest to the lowest? Can those who wear the name of princes, without having the right of being beirs to Adam, demand obedience from their fubjects by this title, and not be bound to pay it by the fame law? Either governments in the world are not to be claimed, and held by this title of Adam's heir; and then the ftarting of it is to no purpose, the being or not being Adam's heir fignifies nothing as to the title of dominion: or if it really be, as our author fays, the true title to government and fovereignty, the first thing to be done, is to find out this true heir of Adam, feat him in his throne, and then all the kings and princes of the world ought to come and refign up their crowns and Scepters to him, as things that belong no more to them, than to any of their fubjects. §. 105. §. 105. For either this right in nature, of Adam's heir, to be king over all the race of men, (for all together they make one multitude) is a right not neceffary to the making of a lawful king, and fo there may be lawful kings without it, and then kings titles and power depend not on it; or elfe all the kings in the world but one are not lawful kings, and fo have no right to obedience: either this title of heir to Adam is that whereby kings hold their crowns, and have a right to fubjection from their fubjects, and then one only can have it, and the rest being fubjects can require no obedience from other men, who are but their fellow subjects; or elfe it is not the title whereby kings rule, and have a right to obedience from their fubjects, and then kings are kings without it, and this dream of the natural fovereignty of Adam's heir is of no ufe to obedience and government: for if kings have a right to dominion, and the obedience of their fubjects, who are not, nor can poffibly be, heirs to Adam, what use is there of fuch a title, when we are obliged to obey without it? If kings, who are not heirs to Adam, have no right to fovereignty, we are all free, till out author, or any body for him, will fhew us Adam's right heir. If there be but one heir of Adam, there can be but one lawful king in the world, and no body in conscience can be obliged to obedience till it be refolved who |