_True._ No, not unlesse you can produce an expresse _stipulation_ to _That very purpose_. But let me shew you, First, the Errour of taking That to be a _Trust_ from the _People_, which, in truth, is an _Ordinance_ of _Providence_, For _All Power is from God_; And Secondly, the _Absurdity_ of the very _Supposition_, even in the Case of a Trust conferr'd by the People. If the _King breaks_ his _Trust_, the _People Resume_ it: but _who_ are These _People_? If a _Representative_, they are but _Trustees Themselves_, and may incur a _Forfeiture_ too, by the same Argument. Where are we next then? For if it devolves to the _Loose Multitude_ of _Individuals_, (which you will have to be the Fountain of _Power_) you are Then in an _Anarchy_, without any Government at all; and There you must either Continue in a _Dissociated State_, or else agree upon _Uniting_ into some Form of _Regiment_, or other: and whether it be _Monarchy_, _Aristocracy_, or _Democracy_, it comes all to a Point. If you make the _Government Accountable_ upon every Humour of the _People_, it lapses again into a _Confusion_. To say nothing of the ridiculous phansy of a _Sovereignty_ in the _People_ upon This Account; that they can never be so brought together either to _Establish_ or to _Dissolve_ a _Government_, as to authorize it to be the _Peoples Act_. For there must be, _First_, an _Agreement_ to _Meet_ and _Consult_. _Secondly_, an _Agreement_ upon the _Result_ of That _Debate_; and any _One Dissenter_ spoils all, where every _Individuall_ has an _Equall Right_: So that unlesse the People be all of the same minde, This Supposition will be found wholly Impractible and Idle. _Citt._ But is there no Fence then against _Tyranny_? _True._ Only _Patience_, unless you run into _Anarchy_, and then into that which you call _Tyranny_ again; and so tread Eternally that Circle of _Rigour_ and _Confusion_. _In fine_, the Question is this, whether people had better run _Certainly_ into _Confusion_ to avoid a _Possible Tyranny_, or venture a _Possible Tyranny_, to avoid a _Certain Confusion_. _Citt._ But where we finde _Positive Law_ and _Provisions_ to _fail_ us, may we not in those Cases, betake our selves to the _Laws_ of _Nature_ and _Self-Preservation_? Self-preservation is no Plea for the People. _True._ No, ye may not; for many Reasons. First, it makes you _Judges_; not only _when_ those Laws take Place, but also _what_ they _are_. Secondly, the _Government_ is _Dissolved_, if Subjects may go off or on at pleasure. Thirdly, _Self-Preservation_ is the Plea only of _Individuals_; and there can be no Colour for the exposing of the _Publick_ in favour of _Particulars_. What would ye think of a _Common Seaman_ that in a _Storm_ should throw the _Steers-man Overboard_, and set himself at the _Helm_? Or of a _Souldier_ that shou'd refuse a _Dangerous Post_ for fear of being knock'd on the Head, when the _whole Army_, depends upon the Maintaining of _That Pass_.