judging it convenient and behoveful; there being no impossibility in
nature considered by itself, but that man might have lived without any
public regiment, Hooker's Eccl. Pol. lib. i. sect. 10.)
Sec. 75. Thus it was easy, and almost natural for children, by a
tacit, and scarce avoidable consent, to make way for the father's
authority and government. They had been accustomed in their childhood to
follow his direction, and to refer their little differences to him, and
when they were men, who fitter to rule them? Their little properties, and
less covetousness, seldom afforded greater controversies; and when any
should arise, where could they have a fitter umpire than he, by whose
care they had every one been sustained and brought up, and who had a
tenderness for them all? It is no wonder that they made no distinction
betwixt minority and full age; nor looked after one and twenty, or any
other age that might make them the free disposers of themselves and
fortunes, when they could have no desire to be out of their pupilage: the
government they had been under, during it, continued still to be more
their protection than restraint; and they could no where find a greater
security to their peace, liberties, and fortunes, than in the rule of a
father.
Sec. 76. Thus the natural fathers of families, by an insensible
change, became the politic monarchs of them too: and as they chanced to
live long, and leave able and worthy heirs, for several successions, or
otherwise; so they laid the foundations of hereditary, or elective
kingdoms, under several constitutions and mannors, according as chance,
contrivance, or occasions happened to mould them. But if princes have
their titles in their fathers right, and it be a sufficient proof of the
natural right of fathers to political authority, because they commonly
were those in whose hands we find, de facto, the exercise of government:
I say, if this argument be good, it will as strongly prove, that all
princes, nay princes only, ought to be priests, since it is as certain,