numerous；　and　so　too　slow　for　the　dispatch　requisite　to　execution；　and
  because；　also；　it　is　impossible　to　foresee　and　so　by　laws　to　provide
  for　all　accidents　and　necessities　that　may　concern　the　public；　or　make
  such　laws　as　will　do　no　harm；　if　they　are　executed　with　an
  inflexible　rigour　on　all　occasions　and　upon　all　persons　that　may
  come　in　their　way；　therefore　there　is　a　latitude　left　to　the　executive
  power　to　do　many　things　of　choice　which　the　laws　do　not　prescribe。
  161。　This　power；　whilst　employed　for　the　benefit　of　the　community
  and　suitably　to　the　trust　and　ends　of　the　government；　is　undoubted
  prerogative；　and　never　is　questioned。　For　the　people　are　very　seldom
  or　never　scrupulous　or　nice　in　the　point　or　questioning　of　prerogative
  whilst　it　is　in　any　tolerable　degree　employed　for　the　use　it　was
  meant…　that　is；　the　good　of　the　people；　and　not　manifestly　against　it。
  But　if　there　comes　to　be　a　question　between　the　executive　power　and
  the　people　about　a　thing　claimed　as　a　prerogative；　the　tendency　of　the
  exercise　of　such　prerogative；　to　the　good　or　hurt　of　the　people；
  will　easily　decide　that　question。
  162。　It　is　easy　to　conceive　that　in　the　infancy　of　governments；　when
  commonwealths　differed　little　from　families　in　number　of　people；
  they　differed　from　them　too　but　little　in　number　of　laws；　and　the
  governors　being　as　the　fathers　of　them；　watching　over　them　for　their
  good；　the　government　was　almost　all　prerogative。　A　few　established
  laws　served　the　turn；　and　the　discretion　and　care　of　the　ruler　suppled
  the　rest。　But　when　mistake　or　flattery　prevailed　with　weak　princes；　to
  make　use　of　this　power　for　private　ends　of　their　own　and　not　for　the
  public　good；　the　people　were　fain；　by　express　laws；　to　get　prerogative
  determined　in　those　points　wherein　they　found　disadvantage　from　it；
  and　declared　limitations　of　prerogative　in　those　cases　which　they
  and　their　ancestors　had　left　in　the　utmost　latitude　to　the　wisdom　of
  those　princes　who　made　no　other　but　a　right　use　of　it…　that　is；　for
  the　good　of　their　people。
  163。　And　therefore　they　have　a　very　wrong　notion　of　government　who
  say　that　the　people　have　encroached　upon　the　prerogative　when　they
  have　got　any　part　of　it　to　be　defined　by　positive　laws。　For　in　so
  doing　they　have　not　pulled　from　the　prince　anything　that　of　right
  belonged　to　him；　but　only　declared　that　that　power　which　they
  indefinitely　left　in　his　or　his　ancestors'　hands；　to　be　exercised
  for　their　good；　was　not　a　thing　they　intended　him；　when　he　used　it
  otherwise。　For　the　end　of　government　being　the　good　of　the
  community；　whatsoever　alterations　are　made　in　it　tending　to　that　end
  cannot　be　an　encroachment　upon　anybody；　since　nobody　in　government　can
  have　a　right　tending　to　any　other　end；　and　those　only　are
  encroachments　which　prejudice　or　hinder　the　public　good。　Those　who　say
  otherwise　speak　as　if　the　prince　had　a　distinct　and　separate
  interest　from　the　good　of　the　community；　and　was　not　made　for　it；
  the　root　and　source　from　which　spring　almost　all　those　evils　and
  disorders　which　happen　in　kingly　governments。　And　indeed；　if　that　be
  so；　the　people　under　his　government　are　not　a　society　of　rational
  creatures；　entered　into　a　community　for　their　mutual　good；　such　as
  have　set　rulers　over　themselves；　to　guard　and　promote　that　good；　but
  are　to　be　looked　on　as　a　herd　of　inferior　creatures　under　the　dominion
  of　a　master；　who　keeps　them　and　works　them　for　his　own　pleasure　or
  profit。　If　men　were　so　void　of　reason　and　brutish　as　to　enter　into
  society　upon　such　terms；　prerogative　might　indeed　be；　what　some　men
  would　have　it；　an　arbitrary　power　to　do　things　hurtful　to　the　people。
  164。　But　since　a　rational　creature　cannot　be　supposed；　when　free；　to
  put　himself　into　subjection　to　another　for　his　own　harm　（though
  where　he　finds　a　good　and　a　wise　ruler　he　may　not；　perhaps；　think　it
  either　necessary　or　useful　to　set　precise　bounds　to　his　power　in　all
  things）；　prerogative　can　be　nothing　but　the　people's　permitting
  their　rulers　to　do　several　things　of　their　own　free　choice　where　the
  law　was　silent；　and　sometimes　too　against　the　direct　letter　of　the
  law；　for　the　public　good　and　their　acquiescing　in　it　when　so　done。　For
  as　a　good　prince；　who　is　mindful　of　the　trust　put　into　his　hands　and
  careful　of　the　good　of　his　people；　cannot　have　too　much　prerogative…
  that　is；　power　to　do　good；　so　a　weak　and　ill　prince；　who　would　claim
  that　power　his　predecessors　exercised；　without　the　direction　of　the
  law；　as　a　prerogative　belonging　to　him　by　right　of　his　office；　which
  he　may　exercise　at　his　pleasure　to　make　or　promote　an　interest
  distinct　from　that　of　the　public；　gives　the　people　an　occasion　to
  claim　their　right　and　limit　that　power；　which；　whilst　it　was　exercised
  for　their　good；　they　were　content　should　be　tacitly　allowed。
  165。　And　therefore　he　that　will　look　into　the　history　of　England
  will　find　that　prerogative　was　always　largest　in　the　hands　of　our
  wisest　and　best　princes；　because　the　people　observing　the　whole
  tendency　of　their　actions　to　be　the　public　good；　or　if　any　human
  frailty　or　mistake　（for　princes　are　but　men；　made　as　others）
  appeared　in　some　small　declinations　from　that　end；　yet　it　was
  visible　the　main　of　their　conduct　tended　to　nothing　but　the　care　of
  the　public。　The　people；　therefore；　finding　reason　to　be　satisfied　with
  these　princes；　whenever　they　acted　without；　or　contrary　to　the
  letter　of　the　law；　acquiesced　in　what　they　did；　and　without　the
  least　complaint；　let　them　enlarge　their　prerogative　as　they　pleased；
  judging　rightly　that　they　did　nothing　herein　to　the　prejudice　of　their
  laws；　since　they　acted　conformably　to　the　foundation　and　end　of　all
  laws…　the　public　good。
  166。　Such　God…like　princes；　indeed；　had　some　title　to　arbitrary
  power　by　that　argument　that　would　prove　absolute　monarchy　the　best
  government；　as　that　which　God　Himself　governs　the　universe　by；　because
  such　kings　partake　of　His　wisdom　and　goodness。　Upon　this　is　founded
  that　saying；　〃That　the　reigns　of　good　princes　have　been　always　most
  dangerous　to　the　liberties　of　their　people。〃　For　when　their
  successors；　managing　the　government　with　different　thoughts；　would
  draw　the　actions　of　those　good　rulers　into　precedent　and　make　them　the
  standard　of　their　prerogative…　as　if　what　had　been　done　only　for　the
  good　of　the　people　was　a　right　in　them　to　do　for　the　harm　of　the
  people；　if　they　so　pleased…　it　has　often　occasioned　contest；　and
  sometimes　public　disorders；　before　the　people　could　recover　their
  original　right　and　get　that　to　be　declared　not　to　be　prerogative　which
  truly　was　never　so；　since　it　is　impossible　anybody　in　the　society
  should　ever　have　a　right　to　do　the　people　harm；　though　it　be　very
  possible　and　reasonable　that　the　people　should　not　go　about　to　set　any
  bounds　to　the　prerogative　of　those　kings　or　rulers　who　themselves
  transgressed　not　the　bounds　of　the　public　good。　For　〃prerogative　is
  nothing　but　the　power　of　doing　public　good　without　a　rule。〃
  167。　The　power　of　calling　parliaments　in　England；　as　to　precise
  time；　place；　and　duration；　is　certainly　a　prerogative　of　the　king；　but
  still　with　this　trust；　that　it　shall　be　made　use　of　for　the　good　of
  the　nation　as　the　exigencies　of　the　times　and　variety　of　occasion
  shall　require。　For　it　being　impossible　to　foresee　which　should
  always　be　the　fittest　place　for　them　to　assemble　in；　and　what　the　best
  season；　the　choice　of　these　was　left　with　the　executive　power；　as
  might　be　best　subservient　to　the　public　good　and　best　suit　the　ends　of
  parliament。
  168。　The　old　question　will　be　asked　in　this　matter　of　prerogative；
  〃But　who　shall　be　judge　when　this　power　is　made　a　right　use　of？〃　I
  answer：　Between　an　executive　power　in　being；　with　such　a
  prerogative；　and　a　legislative　that　depends　upon　his　will　for　their
  convening；　there　can　be　no　judge　on　earth。　As　there　can　be　none
  between　the　legislative　and　the　people；　should　either　the　executive　or
  the　legislative；　when　they　have　got　the　power　in　their　hands；
  design；　or　go　about　to　enslave　or　destroy　them；　the　people　have　no
  other　remedy　in　this；　as　in　all　other　cases　where　they　have　no　judge
  on　earth；　but　to　appeal　to　Heaven；　for　the　rulers　in　such　attempts；
  exercising　a　power　the　people　never　put　into　their　hands；　who　can
  never　be　supposed　to　consent　that　anybody　should　rule　over　them　for
  their　harm；　do　that　which　they　have　not　a　right　to　do。　And　where　the
  body　of　the　people；　or　any　single　man；　are　deprived　of　their　right；　or
  are　under　the　exercise　of　a　power　without　right；　having　no　appeal　on
  earth　they　have　a　liberty　to　appeal　to　Heaven　whenever　they　judge
  the　cause　of　sufficient　moment。　And　therefore；　though　the　people
  cannot　be　judge；　so　as　to　have；　by　the　constitution　of　that　society；
  any　superior　power　to　determine　and　give　effective　sentence　in　the
  case；　yet　they　have　reserved　that　ultimate　determination　to　themselves
  which　belongs　to　all　mankind；　where　there　lies　no　appeal　on　earth；
  by　a　law　antecedent　and　paramount　to　all　positive　laws　of　men；　whether
  they　have　just　cause　to　make　their　appeal　to　Heaven。　And　this
  judgeme