votes for one in the same family, and therefore this must be the
interest of the family, or the family knows not its own interest.
If a man shall dispute otherwise, he must draw his arguments from
custom and from greatness, which was the interest of the
monarchy, not of the family; and we are now a commonwealth. If
the monarchy could not bear with such divisions because they
tendered to a commonwealth, neither can a commonwealth connive at
such accumulations because they tend to a monarchy. If the
monarchy might make bold with so many for the good of one, we may
make bold with one for the good of so many, nay, for the good of
all.

"My lords, it comes into my mind, that which upon occasion of
the variety of parties enumerated in our late civil wars, was
said by a friend of mine coming home from his travels, about the
latter end of these troubles; that he admired how it came to
pass, that younger brothers, especially being so many more in
number than their elder did not unite as one man against a
tyranny, the like whereof has not been exercised in any other
nation. And truly, when I consider that our countrymen are none
of the worst-natured, I must confess I marvel much how it comes
to pass that we should use our children as we do our puppies --
take one, lay it in the lap, feed it with every good bit, and
drown five; nay, yet worse, forasmuch as the puppies are once
drowned, whereas the children are left perpetually drowning.
Really, my lords, it is a flinty custom! and all this for his
cruel ambition, that would raise himself a pillar a golden pillar
for his monument, though he has children, his own reviving flesh,
and a kind of immortality. And this is that interest of a family,
for which we are to think ill of a government that will not