The second part of The nonconformists plea for peace being an account of their…

P. 133. But then it must be considered that the absolute power of the Prince, is but an absolute power of Government, not of Possession. It is a power of doing right; but not a power of doing wrong; And at the worst, it is but the power of doing private violences for the security of the public. He is Princeps Regni, but not Dominus; a Prince, not a Lord; and the distinction is very material. For to be Lord signifieth more than the supreme power of Government; It means an Absolute power to dispose of all lives and all possessions; which is beyond the power of the King or Prince: He that is a King, rules over a free people, but a Lord rules over Slaves, Tacitus, according to the popular humour of the Romans, supposed the power of a King to be too great a Violation of Liberty: but Domination was intolerable —The supreme power of Government is at no hand a supreme power or an arbitrary disposer of life and fortunes; but according to Law, or according to extreme necessity which is the greatest Law of all. In the sense of Honour and moderate power the King is a Lord: but not in this sense of law: By a Lord is meant He that hath power to dispose of the goods of the Vassals, but that a King or Prince hath not. This is not the supreme power of Government: A King is not the Lord of his Kingdom; of the Territories of his Subjects.—

P. 133. But then it must be considered that the absolute power of the Prince, is but an absolute power of Government, not of Possession. It is a power of doing right; but not a power of doing wrong; And at the worst, it is but the power of doing private violences for the security of the publick. He is Princeps Regni, but not Dominus; a Prince, not a Lord; and the distinction is very material. For to be Lord signifieth more than the supream power of Government; It means an Absolute power to dispose of all lives and all possessions; which is beyond the power of the King or Prince: He that is a King, rules over a free people, but a Lord rules over Slaves, Tacitus, according to the popular humour of the Romans, supposed the power of a King to be too great a Violation of Liberty: but Domination was intolerable —The supream power of Government is at no hand a supream power or an arbitrary disposer of life and fortunes; but according to Law, or according to extream necessity which is the greatest Law of all. In the sense of Honour and moderate power the King is a Lord: but not in this sense of law: By a Lord is meant He that hath power to dispose of the goods of the Vassals, but that a King or Prince hath not. This is not the supream power of Government: A King is not the Lord of his Kingdom; of the Territories of his Subjects.—