believe it will be hard for him to find any other age, or country of the world, but this, which has asserted monarchy to be jure divino . And he confesses, Patr. p. 4, “That Heyward, Blackwood, Barclay, and others, that have bravely vindicated the right of kings in most points, never thought of this: but with one consent admitted the natural liberty and equality of mankind.”
By whom this doctrine came at first to be broached, and brought in fashion amongst us, and what sad effects it gave rise to, I leave to historians to relate, or to the memory of those who were contemporaries with Sibthorp and Manwaring, to recollect. My business at present is only to consider what Sir Robert Filmer, who is allowed to have carried this argument farthest, and is supposed to have brought it to perfection, has said in it: for from him everyone, who would be as fashionable as French was at court, has learned, and runs away with this short system of politics, viz. “Men are not born free, and therefore could never have the liberty to choose either governors, or forms of government.” Princes have their power absolute, and by divine right; for slaves could never have a right to compact or consent. Adam was an absolute monarch, and so are all princes ever since.