Killing No Murder
Killing No Murder is a 1657 pamphlet of disputed authorship that advocates for the assassination of Oliver Cromwell. Published durning The Protectorate period of the English Interregnum, it was in high demand at the time of its distribution, and Cromwell was said to have been so disturbed after its publication that he never spent more than two nights in the same place and always took extreme precaution in planning his travel.
The pamphlet offers a definition of the political roles of tyrants, and highlights the military background of historical tyrants as many of them were former generals or military officers. It also highlights that tyrants use religion to their advantage, claiming divine inspiration for their policies, while also claiming that their love of God and religion justifies whatever policy they support. The author claims that since tyrants place themselves above the law and acknowledge no legal limit to their own authority, they have no actual right to the protections provided by the law. When the courts of law fail to act against the tyrants, the matter has to be resolved by vigilantism.
The author of the pamphlet used the pseudonym William Allen, and his identity is uncertain. The disputes over the identity of the writer have mainly focused on three candidates: the politician Silius Titus, the failed assassin and supposedly insane prisoner Edward Sexby, and the Republican soldier William Allen.
Contents
The pamphlet asks three questions, which highlight the purpose of the document :- What is a Tyrant?
- Is it honourable to kill a tyrant?
- Will the outcome of killing a tyrant be beneficial to the state?
- Prior military leadership service—tyrants are often former captains or generals, which allows them to assume a degree of honour, loyalty, and reputability regarding matters of state
- Fraud over force—most tyrants are likely to manipulate their way into supreme power rather than force it militarily
- Defamation and/or disbanding of formerly respectable persons, intellectuals, or institutions, and the discouragement of refined thinking or public involvement in state affairs
- Absence or minimalisation of collective input, bargaining, or debate
- Amplification of military activity for the purposes of public distraction, raising new levies, or opening future business pathways
- Tit-for-tat symbiosis in domestic relations: e.g. finding religious ideas permissible insofar as they are useful and flattering of the tyrant; finding aristocrats or the nobility laudable & honourable insofar as they are compliant with the will of the tyrant or in service of the tyrant, etc.
- Pretenses toward inspiration from God
- Pretenses toward a love of God and religion
- Grow or maintain public impoverishment or instability as a way of removing the efficacy of the people's will
Other key points:
-As one who submits to no law, a tyrant is not an entity *of* the state so much as an entity outside of it, or above it. As such, a tyrant should not have the protections due through law, or any defence from law since the tyrant acknowledges no laws dictating his own actions. "He that flies justice in the courts, must expect justice in the streets."