a denial of Adam's creation, and would be glad any body elfe (fince our author did not vouchfafe us the favour) would make it out for him: for I find no difficulty to suppose the freedom of mankind, though I have always believed the creation of Adam. He was created, or began to exift, by God's immediate power, without the intervention of parents or the pre-existence of any of the fame fpecies to beget him, when it pleased God he should; and fo did the lion, the king of beafts, before him, by the fame creating power of God: and if bare existence by that power, and in that way, will give dominion, without any more ado, our author, by this argument, will make the lion have as good a title to it, as he, and certainly the antienter. No! for Adam had his title by the appointment of God, fays our author in another place. Then bare creation gave him not dominion, and one might have fuppofed mankind free without the denying the creation of Adam, fince it was God's appointment made him monarch.

§. 16. But let us fee, how he puts his creation and this appointment together. By the appointment of God, fays Sir Robert, as foon as Adam was created, he was monarch of the world, though he had no fubjects; for though there could not be actual government till there were fubjects, yet by the right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his pofterity:

C

though

though not in act, yet at least in habit, Adam was a king from bis creation. I with he had told us here, what he meant by God's appointment: for whatsoever providence orders, or the law of nature directs, or pofitive revelation declares, may be faid to be by God's appointment: but I fuppofe it cannot be meant here in the firft fenfe, i. e. by providence ; because that would be to fay no more, but that as foon as Adam was created he was de facto monarch, because by right of nature it was due to Adam, to be governor of his pofterity. But he could not de facto be by providence conftituted the governor of the world, at a time when there was actually no government, no fubjects to be governed, which our author here confeffes. Monarch of the world is alfo differently used by our author; for fometimes he means by it a proprietor of all the world exclufive of the reft of mankind, and thus he does in the fame page of his preface before cited: Adam, fays he, being commanded to multiply and people the earth, and to fubdue it, and having dominion given him over all creatures, was thereby the monarch of the whole world; none of his pofterity kad any right to poffefs any thing but by his grant or permiffion, or by fucceffion from him. 2. Let us understand then by monarch proprietor of the world, and by appointment God's actual donation, and revealed pofitive grant made to Adam, i. Gen. 28. as we fee Sir Robert

Robert himself does in this parallel place, and then his argument will ftand thus, by the pofitive grant of God: as foon as Adam was created, he was proprietor of the world, because by the right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his pofterity. In which way of arguing there are two manifeft falfehoods. First, It is falfe, that God made that grant to Adam, as foon as he was created, fince, tho' it ftands in the text immediately after his creation, yet it is plain it could not be spoken to Adam, till after Eve was made and brought to him and how then could he be monarch by appointment as foon as created, especially fince he calls, if I mistake not, that which God fays to Eve, iii. Gen. 16, the original grant of government, which not being till after the fall, when Adam was fomewhat, at least in time, and very much distant in condition, from his creation, I cannot fee, how our author can fay in this sense, that by God's appointment, as foon as Adam was created, he was monarch of the world. Secondly, were it true that God's actual donation appointed Adam monarch of the world as foon as he was created, yet the reafon here given for it would not prove it; but it would always be a falfe inference, that God, by a pofitive donation, appointed Adam monarch of the world, because by right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his pofterity: for having given him the right of government by nature, there was no need of a pofitive

C 2

donation;

donation; at least it will never be a proof of fuch a donation.

§. 17. On the other fide the matter will not be much mended, if we understand by God's appointment the law of nature, (though it be a pretty harsh expreffion for it in this place) and by monarch of the world, fovereign ruler of mankind: for then the fentence under confideration muft run thus: By the law of nature, as foon as Adam was created he was governor of mankind, for by right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his pofterity; which amounts to this, he was governor by right of nature, because he was governor by right of nature but fuppofing we fhould grant, that a man is by nature governor of his children, Adam could not hereby be monarch as foon as created: for this right of nature being founded in his being their father, how Adam could have a natural right to be governor, before he was a father, when by being a father only he had that right, is, methinks, hard to conceive, unless he will have him to be a father before he was a father, and to have a title before he had it.

§. 18. To this foreseen objection, our author answers very logically, he was governor in habit, and not in act: a very pretty way of being a governor without government, a father without children, and a king without fubjects. And thys Sir Robert was an author before he writ his book; not in act it is true, but in habit; for when he had once published

it,

it, it was due to him by the right of nature, to be an author, as much as it was to Adam to be governor of his children, when he had begot them and if to be fuch a monarch of the world, an abfolute monarch in habit, but not in act, will ferve the turn, I fhould not much envy it to any of Sir Robert's friends, that he thought fit graciously to bestow it upon, though even this of act and babit, if it fignified any thing but our author's skill in distinctions, be not to his purpofe in this place. For the question is not here about Adam's actual exercife of government, but actually having a title to be governor. Government, fays our author, was due to Adam by the right of nature: what is this right of nature? A right fathers have over their children by begetting them; generatione jus acquiritur parentibus in liberos, fays our author out of Grotius, Obfervations, 223. The right then follows the begetting as arifing from it; fo that, according to this way of reasoning or diftinguishing of our author, Adam, as foon as he was created, had a title only in habit, and not in act, which in plain English is, he had actually no title at all.

§. 19. To fpeak lefs learnedly, and more intelligibly, one may fay of Adam, he was in a poffibility of being governor, fince it was poffible he might beget children, and thereby acquire that right of nature, be it what it will, to govern them, that accrues from C3

thence :