I can make no other Definition of a true Fundamental than this: viz. That whatever a Man hath a desire to do or to hinder, if he hath uncontested and irresistable Power to effect it, that he will certainly do it.
If he thinketh he hath that Power, though he hath it not, he will certainly go about it.
Some would define a Fundamental to be the settling the Laws of Nature and common Equity in such a sort as that they may be well administered: even in this case there can be nothing fixed, but it must vary for the Good of the whole.
A Constitution cannot make itself; some body made it, not at once but at several times. It is alterable; and by that draweth nearer Perfection; and without suiting itself to differing Times and Circumstances, it could not live. Its Life is prolonged by changing seasonably the several Parts of it at several times.
The Reverence that is given to a Fundamental, in a general unintelligible Notion, would be much better applyed to that Supremacy or Power which is set up in every Nation in differing Shapes, that altereth the Constitution as often as the Good of the People requireth it.
Neither King nor People would now like just the original Constitution, without any varyings.
If Kings are only answerable to God, that doth not secure them even in this World; since if God upon the Appeal thinketh fit not to stay, he maketh the People his Instruments.
I am persuaded that where ever any single Man had Power to do himself right upon a deceitful Trustee, he would do it. That Thought well digested would go a great way towards the discouraging Invasions upon Rights, &c.
I lay down then as a Fundamental, 1st, that in every Constitution there is some Power which neither will nor ought to be bounded.
2. That the King’s Prerogative should be as plain a thing as the People’s Obedience.