up by certain consequences into the national interest, and this,
if they be planted popularly, comes to a commonwealth; if by way
of nobility, to a mixed monarchy, which of all other will be
found to be the only kind of monarchy whereof this nation, or any
other that is of no greater extent, has been or can be capable;
for if the Israelites, though their democratical balance, being
fixed by their agrarian, stood firm, be yet found to have elected
kings, it was because, their territory lying open, they were
perpetually invaded, and being perpetually invaded, turned
themselves to anything which, through the want of experience,
they thought might be a remedy; whence their mistake in election
of their kings, under whom they gained nothing, but, on the
contrary, lost all they had acquired by their commonwealth, both
estates and liberties, is not only apparent, but without
parallel. And if there have been, as was shown, a kingdom of the
Goths in Spain, and of the Vandals in Asia, consisting of a
single person and a Parliament (taking a parliament to be a
council of the people only, without a nobility), it is expressly
said of those councils that they deposed their kings as often as
they pleased; nor can there be any other consequence of such a
government, seeing where there is a council of the people they do
never receive laws, but give them; and a council giving laws to a
single person, he has no means in the world whereby to be any
more than a subordinate magistrate but force: in which case he is
not a single person and a parliament, but a single person and an
army, which army again must be planted as has been shown, or can
be of no long continuance.

It is true, that the provincial balance bring in nature quite
contrary to the national, you are no way to plant a provincial