a denial of Adam's creation, and would be glad any body elſe (ſince our author did not vouchſafe us the favour) would make it out for him: for I find no difficulty to ſuppoſe the freedom of mankind, though I have always believed the creation of Adam. He was created, or began to exiſt, by God's immediate power, without the intervention of parents or the pre-exiſtence of any of the ſame ſpecies to beget him, when it pleaſed God he ſhould; and ſo did the lion, the king of beaſts, before him, by the ſame creating power of God: and if bare exiſtence by that power, and in that way, will give dominion, without any more ado, our author, by this argument, will make the lion have as good a title to it, as he, and certainly the antienter. No! for Adam had his title by the appointment of God, ſays our author in another place. Then bare creation gave him not dominion, and one might have ſuppoſed mankind free without the denying the creation of Adam, ſince it was God's appointment made him monarch.
§. 16. But let us ſee, how he puts his creation and this appointment together. By the appointment of God, ſays Sir Robert, as ſoon as Adam was created, he was monarch of the world, though he had no ſubjects; for though there could not be actual government till there were ſubjects, yet by the right of nature it was due to Adam to be governor of his poſterity:
