Lord Falkland.—­There is evidently too much truth in what you have said.  But by taking from the king the power of the sword, you in reality took all power.  It was converting the government into a democracy; and if he had submitted to it, he would only have preserved the name of a king.  The sceptre would have been held by those who had the sword; or we must have lived in a state of perpetual anarchy, without any force or balance in the government; a state which could not have lasted long, but would have ended in a republic or in absolute dominion.

Mr. Hampden.—­Your reasoning seems unanswerable.  But what could we do?  Let Dr. Laud and those other court divines, who directed the king’s conscience, and fixed in it such principles as made him unfit to govern a limited monarchy—­though with many good qualities, and some great ones—­let them, I say, answer for all the mischiefs they brought upon him and the nation.

Lord Falkland.—­They were indeed much to blame; but those principles had gained ground before their times, and seemed the principles of our Church, in opposition to the Jesuits, who had certainly gone too far in the other extreme.

Mr. Hampden.—­It is a disgrace to our Church to have taken up such opinions; and I will venture to prophesy that our clergy in future times must renounce them, or they will be turned against them by those who mean their destruction.  Suppose a Popish king on the throne, will the clergy adhere to passive obedience and non-resistance?  If they do, they deliver up their religion to Rome; if they do not, their practice will confute their own doctrines.

Lord Falkland.—­Nature, sir, will in the end be sure to set right whatever opinion contradicts her great laws, let who will be the teacher.  But, indeed, the more I reflect on those miserable times in which we both lived, the more I esteem it a favour of Providence to us that we were cut off so soon.  The most grievous misfortune that can befall a virtuous man is to be in such a state that he can hardly so act as to approve his own conduct.  In such a state we both were.  We could not easily make a step, either forward or backward, without great hazard of guilt, or at least of dishonour.  We were unhappily entangled in connections with men who did not mean so well as ourselves, or did not judge so rightly.  If we endeavoured to stop them, they thought us false to the cause; if we went on with them, we ran directly upon rocks, which we saw, but could not avoid.  Nor could we take shelter in a philosophical retreat from business.  Inaction would in us have been cowardice and desertion.  To complete the public calamities, a religious fury, on both sides, mingled itself with the rage of our civil dissensions, more frantic than that, more implacable, more averse to all healing measures.  The most intemperate counsels were thought the most pious, and a regard to the laws, if they opposed the suggestions