TO give you my Opinion freely of the two Libels that you sent me, me­thinks the Design of them lies too open to do much Mischief; for I never saw so bare-fac'd an Araignment of the Government, and all the Parts of it: King, Lords, Commons, Iudges, Ministers of State; they are all of [Page 4] them made Conspirators; against the So­vereign Multitude, forsooth; and when the Libeller has done with the Body of the Commons, he gives you a Defamatory List of betwixt two and three hundred of their Members, provoking and abusing all So­ber Interests; Insomuch, that he has left himself nothing to trust to, but the con­templation of a General Tumult, which is the very Point he drives at in his Appeal to the Rabble.

The Man, I confess, is a great Master of Words; but then his Talent is that which the Lord St. Albans calls Matter of Wonder without Worthiness; being rather the Suppleness and Address of a Tumbler, than the Force and Vigor of a Man of Bu­siness. And you cannot but observe too, that his Excursions, many of them, are unmannerly and Vulgar, and fitter for the Stage of a Merry-Andrew, or a Iack-Pudding, than for a Paper of State.

You would have me guess at the Au­thor; and you might as well bid me tell you the right Father of a Child by a com­mon Strumpet: But I think I may call him Legion, for they are MANY; and [Page 5] there's a Club to his Pen, as well as to his Pocket. This I dare assure you, that the Author of A Letter from a Parliament-man to his Friend in the Country, concerning the Proceedings of the House of Commons, &c. in 75. is very particularly acquainted with the Author of An Accompt of the Growth of Popery, and Arbitrary Government, &c. and the Seasonable Argument, &c. that fol­low'd it, in 77.

The Pretence of the former Pamphlet is exhibited in the Title of it: viz. An Ac­count of the Growth of Popery, and Arbitrary Government in England: And more par­ticularly from November 1675, to Iuly 1677. Upon these Nineteen Months the Composer has bestow'd precisely Nineteen Sheets of Paper, and laid himself out most wonderfully in his Politicks and Conceits, for the better Grace and Relish of the Discourse: But the Malignity of it is so rank, that there's scarce a Page where the Poyson has not eaten quite thorough the Vernish, and discover'd the Spring and Malice of the Design. View it narrowly, and you shall find the Pique to be as well Personal as Seditious, and the Work only [Page 6] of some Mercenary Pen to serve his prin­cipall's Animosity, as well as his Ambition. For a Man may see with half an Eye, how he aggravates, or extenuates; disparages, or commends, reflects upon, or passes over, as well Actions, as Men, according to the various Aspects of Affections or Parties; and without any regard to the Pulse or Truth of Publick Proceedings. By his Vein of improving the Invective Hu­mour, it looks in some places as if he were Transprosing the First Painter; only he has chang d his Battery, which is a Property peculiar to his Party, constant­ly to hate those that are uppermost.

I was once a thinking to write a Just Reply upon the whole Relation, and to lay open the falshood of many Passages in it in matter of Fact; the Partiality of it in others; how perverted, and misap­ply'd it is throughout; and to shew what Gapps, and Maimes the Compiler of it has left in the Story, purposely to divert the Reader from minding the Coherence of Actions, and the reasonable Congruity of Counsels, and Affairs: What un­charitable and illogical Inferences he has [Page 7] drawn from matters as remote as Ten­terden Steeple from being the cause of Goodwin Sands. This was the Method I had propounded to my self; but upon second Thoughts I quitted it, for these Reasons. First, It would have been too tedious; for I must in Honesty have print­ed the Libel as well as the Reply, which in Proportion would have amounted to near forty Sheets of Paper. Secondly, It would have been superfluous; for part of my Business being the Vindication of Truth from Calumny: I find the thing already done to my Hand, in the com­mon Sentence is that pass'd upon it for a lew'd and shameless Imposture. And Thirdly, The Author himself, you see, has upon better consideration reduc'd his Pamphlet of 19 Sheets, into another of Three, as a more compendious Expositi­on of his Meaning: I speak of that Libel which you sent me, under the Name of A Seasonable Argument to perswade all the Grand Iuries in England to petition for a New Parliament; or a List of the Principal Labourers in the great Design of Popery, and Arbitrary Power, &c. So that my Task [Page 8] is only to make good in my Discourse the Parallel that I promis'd you in my Title, and then to pass some Remarks up­on the Scope, and Venome of the Pamphlets themselves.

Now to the end that you may not take the Libels here in question for Originals, let me assure you that these Notable Pie­ces are neither better, nor worse, than the Old Declarations of 40, and 41 only Turn'd, and New trimm'd; The Contrivance, the Positions, and the Drift the very same; and upon the whole Matter, there is so near a resemblance betwixt them, that one Egg is not liker another. If you would have a full History of the Faction, you may read it at large in Bancroft's Dan­gerous Positions, or Heylin's AERIVS REDIVIVVS. But my Purpose is principally to compare the Project of 77. with that of 40 and 41. and by tracing the Foot-steps of that Rebellion, from the Undeniable Fact of things pass'd, to ga­ther some probable conjecture at things to come.

[Page 9]To begin my Parallel with the Alarm of Popery, and Arbitrary Government in 1677, take notice that it was likewise the Pretext and the very Foundation of the Rebellion in 41. A Malignant and Perni­cious Design (says the Remonstrance of De­cember 15. 1641.) of subverting the funda­mental Laws, and Principles of Govern­ment, upon which the Religion, and Iustice of this Kingdom is firmly establish'd. Hus­band's Collections, p. 4. and in the same Page he tells us of Such Counsellers and Courtiers, as for Private Ends have en­gag'd themselves to further the Interest of Some Foreign Princes or States, to the Pre­judice of His Majesty and the State at home. Which Counsellers, and Courtiers of those days, are now translated into French Pensioners and Conspirators in 1677. But if you would see the Reformers in their Colours, read the Declaration, and Protestation of the Lords and Commons in Parliament (as they stile it) to the King­dom, and to the Whole World: where, be­side the Horrid Invocation of Almighty God to Countenance the Juggle, the whole stress of the Quarrel is laid upon [Page 10] the Kings being Popishly Inclin'd; and the War founded upon that Execrable Cheat. The Kings Counsels, and Resolutions (Say they) are so engag'd to the Popish Party, for the Suppression and Extirpation of the true Religion, that all hopes of Peace and Protection are excluded; and that it is fully intended to give Satisfaction to the Papists, by Alteration of Religion &c. And a little further they say that the King en­deavour'd to keep off all Iealousies and Su­spicions, by many fearful Oaths and Impreca­tions of maintaining the Protestant Religion. But what were all their Stories of Popish Plots, Intercepted Letters, Dark, Conspira­cies, but only Artifices to gull the Credu­lous and Silly Vulgar? For the King was so far from being Popishly affected, that never any Prince purg'd himself of an Imputation, by Two more Credible and Dreadfull Solemnities: The First, Pub­lickly upon the Sacrament in Christ-Church Oxon. 1643; and afterward, at his Death upon the Scaffold. Now see the Harmony betwixt Those Remonstrants, and Our Libeller in his Growth of Popery. There has now for Diverse Years, says he, a De­sign [Page 11] been carry'd on to change the Lawful Government of England into an Absolute Tyranny, and to convert the establish'd Pro­testant Religion into down-right Popery. P. 3. He begins in the Method of the Re­monstrants with a General Charge upon Ill Ministers, and he shall Advance with them too, next step, to an Attaque upon the King Himself. And not a Pin matter what is said on either side to the Con­trary.

It is true, (says the Growth of Popery p. 155) that by his Majesty and the Churches Care, under God's special Providence, the Conspiracy has receiv'd frequent Disappoint­ments, &c. And do not the Remonstrants on the other side say as much for the Late King? That His Majesty indeed had past more Bills to the Advantage of the Sub­ject, than had been in many Ages, pag. 16. But how comes our Libeller to be so kind to the Church all on a sodain? From whose Pen there never fell any thing yet but poyson upon that Subject. Can any thing be kinder than the Remonstrants were to this Late King (pag. 2.) where they promised to Support His Royal Estate [Page 12] with Honour, and Plenty at Home; with Power, and Reputation Abroad: and by their Loyal Affections, Obedience, and Ser­vice, to lay a sure and lasting Foundation of the Greatness and Prosperity of His Ma­jesty and his Royal Posterity after him. But what do you think rather of the pretend­ed Loyalty of these People afterwards, even in the state of an Actual Rebellion? p. 663. We the Lords and Commons in this present Parliament assembled, do in the pre­sence of Almighty God, for the Satisfaction of our Consciences, and the Discharge of that great Trust which lyes upon us, make this Protestation and Declaration to this Kingdom and Nation, and to the Whole World, that no private Passion, or Respect, no evil Intention to his Majesty's Person, no De­sign to the prejudice of his Iust Honour, and Authority, engag'd us to raise Forces, and take up Arms against the Authors of this War, wherewith the Kingdom is now enslam'd. And does not our Libeller follow the Re­monstrants in their Hypocrisy too? This Book (says he, p. 156.) though of an extra­ordinary Nature, as the Case requir'd, and however it may be calumniated by interressed [Page 13] Persons, was written with no other Intent, than of meer Fidelity, and Service to his Majesty; and God forbid that it should have any other Effect than that the mouth of all Iniquity, and Flatterers may be stopp'd; and that his Majesty having discerned the Dis­ease, may with his healing Touch apply the Remedy: For so far is the Relator himself from any sinister Surmize against his Ma­jesty, or from suggesting it to others, &c. The Pamphlet, I confess, is, as he calls it, A Book of an Extraordinary Nature; but why does he say, As the Case requir'd? Where's the Importance of it? unless he means, that it was the very Nick of Time for him to embroyl the Nation: And for the Interessed Persons, who (he says) may Calumniate it; they are only the King and His Ministers, who are all of them the subject of his Scoptical and Malevolent Sa­tyre. Of his Intent, we shall speak here­after.

This is not the first time that we have heard of Words smoother than Oyl, which yet are very Swords. It is the very Stile that brought the Late King to the Block; and the Saviour of the World was be­tray'd [Page 14] by a Hail Master, and a Kiss. It is the very Crown of the Parallel betwixt 77, and 41. Now to proceed: What was the Old Remonstrance, but a Spiteful and Invidious Misrepresentation of the State of the Kingdom, under the Notion of Declaring Common Grievances? (For His Majesty's Healing Touch too no doubt) and is not That also the very Aim, and Profession of these two Libels? What is the Publication of This same Scandalous List, but the Old Trick over again, of Post­ing those Members for Straffordians, that would not consent to the Death of the Earl of Strafford? And is not their Tam­pering of the Grand Iuries to Petition for a New Parliament, the Old Practice re­viv'd of drawing and solliciting Petitions against Grievances of their own framing; and menaging Affairs of State by Tu­mults? Would not our Remonstratour of 77, rather than his Life, be at the Old Sport again, with a Kennel of Brutes at his Heels, in full Cry, with No Bishops, No Popish Lords, No Evil Counsellours, No Rotten Members, No Porters Lodge; and at last, No King too, which was the very Fact [Page 15] in Consequence upon this Method.

So soon as the Remonstrants (those Sons of Cham) had laid open their Father's na­kedness, with a Malicious Aggravation of all Errours and Misfortunes, (beside Fal­shoods innumerable) to Irritate the Mul­titude against their Superiours; their next Art was to draw that Party to themselves, which they had now detached from the Go­vernment; with an Oh! that we were made Iudges in Israel! Boasting what wonderful things they had then upon the Anvil for the Publick Good; and not forgetting to ar­rogate all those Acts to themselves, which his Majesty had pass'd of his proper Grace and Bounty. Other things (say they, p.15.) of main Importance for the Good of this Kingdom, are in Proposition; as the Establish­ing and Ordering the King's Revenues, that so the Abuse of Officers, and Superfluity of Expenses may be cut off, and the necessary Disbursements for his Majesty's Honour, the Defense and Government of the Kingdom, may be more certainly provided for: the Re­gulating of Courts of Iustice, and Abridg­ing both the Delays and Charges of Law-Suits, &c. See now if our Reformer of 77, [Page 16] does not fish with the very same Bait. The House of Commons (says he, p.63.) took up again such Publick Bills as they had on foot in their former sitting, and others that might either remedy present, or prevent future Mischief: As the Bill for Habeas Corpus; That against sending Men prisoners beyond Seas; That against Raising of Mony without the Consent of Parliament; That against Papists sitting in either House, &c. The Libels in fine of 77, are so exact a Coun­terpart of the others of 41, that two Tal­lies do not strike truer: And undoubtedly such a Correspondence in Method, can­not be without some Conformity also of Design.

There needs no other Argument to prove the Late Rebellion to have been ori­ginally a Conspiracy against the Govern­ment, than the Proportion that appears betwixt the Means, and the End; and the orderly Connexion of Proper Causes and Regular Effects. For it was a Perfect Train of Artifice, Hypocrisie and Impo­sture, from one end of it to the other. The Confederacy was form'd in a Cabal of Scotch and English Presbyterians; as ap­pears [Page 17] not only from their Correspondent Practices in both Nations; but from his late Majesties Charge against the Five Members; and likewise from the Care that was taken upon his Majesties Restaura­tion to date the English Act of Indemnity from the beginning of the Scotch Tumults (Jan. 1. 1637.) which was three Years before the Meeting of the Long Par­liament in November 1640. The two Ministers that stood in the Gap betwixt the Conspiracy, and the Government, (and who were only cut off, as appear'd by the Sequel, to clear the passage to the King himself) were the Earl of Strafford, and Archbishop Laud: So that their First Attaque was upon the Earl, and their next upon the Archbishop, under the Notion of Evil Counsellors; and upon the Common Charge of Popery, and Arbitrary Proceeding, their Impeachments were carry'd on by Tumults, and these Brave Men were rather baited to Death by Beasts, than Sentenc'd with any Colour of Law, or Justice: And as they liv'd, so they dy'd, the Resolute Assertors of the English Monarchy and Re­ligion: The Earl of Strafford in May 41; [Page 18] But the Archbishop was kept languishing in the Tower, till Ian. 44. And their Crime was not in Truth, their being Men of Arbitrary Principles Themselves, but for being the Opposers of those Principles in Others.

As the Remonstrants in 41, for want of Papists, in Practice, and Profession, direct­ed their Spleen against the Kings Ministers, only as Persons Popishly affected, (which in time came to be most Injuriously ap­ply'd to his Majesty, and his whole Party) Just so does our Libeller in 1677. Were these Conspirators (says he) but avow'd Papists, they were the more Honest, the less Dange­rous, and their Religion were Answerable for the Errours they might commit in Order to promote it: But these are Men (says he, in the next pag.) Obliged by all the most Sacred Ties of Malice and Ambition, to advance the ruine of the King and Kingdom; and qualify'd much better than Others, under the Name of Good Protestants, to effect it. As who should say; Popery is to be brought in by some that pass for Good Protestants. (As Rebellion and Tyranny were brought in by the Remonstrants, under the Pro­session [Page 19] of Loyalty and Duty to their Coun­try.) A very Compendious way of mak­ing every Man, that will not be a Traytor, a Papist. For who can say what any Man is, or what he is not, in his Heart?

From his Majesty's Yielding in the Bu­siness of the Earl of Strafford, the Faction took their Measures how to deal with him in Other Cases; and never left, till by gra­dual Encroachments, and Approaches, they First stript him of his Friends; Se­condly, of his Royal Authority; Thirdly, of his Revenue; and Lastly, of his Life. Whereas, had but this Pious and Unfortu­nate King follow'd the Advice of his Royal Father to Prince Henry, he might upon cheaper Terms have preserv'd himself, and his Three Kingdoms. Take heed, (says King Iames) to such Puritans; very Pests in the Church, and Common-weal, whom no Deserts can Oblige; neither Oaths, or Promises Bind. Breathing nothing but Sedition, and Calumnies, and making their own Imagina­tions (without any warrant of the Word) the square of their Conscience. I protest be­fore the Great God, (and since I am here as upon my Testament, it is no place for me to [Page 20] ly in) that ye shall never find with any High­lands or Border-Thieves, greater Ingrati­tude, and more Lyes, and vile Perjuries than with these Phanatick Spirits. K. Iames his Works, p.305, and 160.

Upon the Ripping up of Publick Grie­vances, it was but matter of Course to follow their Complaints with Petitions for Redress; and the Good King, on the other hand, to heap Coals of Fire upon their Heads, deny'd them nothing: But the Two First Bills that his Majesty pass'd, were Fatal to him: That for the Attainder of the Earl of Strafford, and the other for the Continuance of the Parliament. They complain'd of the Star-Chamber; High-Commission Court; Ship-Moneys; Forrest-Laws; Stannary-Courts; Tonnage, and Poundage, &c. and had every Point for the Asking: Nay, and as an instance of his good Faith and Meaning, his Ma­jesty took some of their Principalls even into his very Council. But so soon as he had parted with so much, as almost put it into their Power to Take the Rest, they began then to think of Setting up for themselves (see his Majesties Declaration of [Page 21] August 12. 1642.) and nothing but a thorough Reformation they said would ever do the Work. Now see the Gradation. First, The People must be Alarm'd with the Noise of Tyranny, and Popery; and the Evil Counsellors must be Remov'd, that are Said, not Prov'd, to stand that way inclin'd. His Majesty must be humbly Petition'd by Both Houses to Employ such Counsellors, Ambassadours, and other Mi­nisters, in managing his Business at Home, and Abroad, as the Parliament may have Cause to confide in, &c. Nay, It may often fall out, they say, that the Commons may have just Cause to take Exceptions at some Men for being Counsellors, and yet not charge those Men with Crimes; for there be grounds of Dissidence, which lie not in Proof; there are Others which though they may be prov'd, yet are not legally Criminal; to be a Known Favourer of Papists, or to have been very Forward in defending or Countenancing some great Offenders questioned in Parliament, &c. So that at first Dash all the King's Officers are but Tenants at the Will of the Faction. The next Step is, To fill the Places of those whom they cast out, with Mi­nisters, [Page 22] and Officers of their Own Chusing; as well Privy Counsellors, as Iudges. As in the 19 Propositions of Ian. 2. 42. where­in they demand, The Translation of the Power of Chusing Great Officers, and Mi­nisters of State, from the King to the Two Houses. Secondly, All matters of State in the Interval of Parliaments to be debated, and concluded by a Council so chosen, and in Number not above 25, nor under 15; and no Publick Act esteem'd of any validity, as pro­ceeding from the Royal Authority, unless it be done by the Advice and Consent of the Ma­jor Part of that Council; attested under their Hands, and these also sworn to the Sence of Both Houses. Thirdly, The Lords, and Commons must be intrusted with the Militia. Fourthly, His Majesty may ap­point, but the Two Houses, or the Council (in such manner as afore-said) must approve of all Governours of Forts and Castles. Lastly, No Peers hereafter made, must sit, or vote in Parliament, unless admitted there­unto by the Consent of Both Houses.

By this time the Plot is ripe for a Re­bellion; they Levy War, Impose Oaths, Seize the Revenues of the Church and Crown; [Page 23] Kill, Plunder, and Emprison their Fellow-Subjects; Depose and Murther their Sove­reign, under a Form of Publick Iustice; by these Means advancing themselves in­to That Arbitrary Power which they pre­tended to Fear; Over-turning the Govern­ment, under the Colour of a Zeal to Sup­port it: and instead of setting us Right in our Religious and Civil Liberties, they left us neither Church, nor Law, nor King, nor Parliament, nor Properties, nor Freedoms. Behold the Blessed Reformation; and Re­member that the Outcries against Ty­ranny, Popery, and Evil Counsellors, were the Foundation of it. What was their Co­venant, but a Blind to their Designs? A Popular Sacrament of Religious Disobedi­ence; and only a Mark of Discrimination who were against the King, and who for him? Nay, in the very Contemplation of their Purpose, they knew before-hand, That there was no gaining of their Point, but by Rapine, Sacrilege, Perjury, Treason, and Bloud.

After these Notorious Violations of Faith, Honour, Humanity, and Religion; to the Common destruction of Prince, [Page 24] Government, and People, and All upon the same Bottom with our Late Libels; what can this Vnderminer of Parlia­ments, What can our Geneva-Faux find to say for himself? Is not Mercury as good Poyson in 77, as it was in 41? Do we not strike Fire the same way Now, that we did Then? And may not a Spark in the Gun-Room do as much Mischief This Year, as it did Thirty, or Forty Years ago? Are not the People as much Tinder now, as they were Formerly? and as apt to take Ill Impressions? What if the same Method should work the same Confusi­on over again? or in Truth, what is there else to be expected? For the same Cause, acting at Liberty, must eternally produce the same Effect. There's no Chance-medley, or Misadventure in the Case; but the Thing is manifestly done with Prepense Malice, and on set Purpose, to embroyl the State: As upon Examination of the Matter will undeniably appear.

You cannot but take Notice, That the Author of The Growth of Popery, does upon the Main, principally labour these [Page 25] Two things. First, To insinuate that the King is in some Cases Accomptable to his People, (of which hereafter.) And Se­condly, To provoke the People, by sug­gesting that their Souls, and their Liber­ties are at stake, to make use of that Power. From the former Proposition he passes into a Florid and Elaborate Declamation against Popery; and when he has wrought up the Figure to a height, to make it Terrible and Odious, his next Business is to tell the People, that This Gobling is coming in among them, and to possess the Multitude with the Apprehension of a Form'd Conspiracy against our Reli­gion and Government: And this too, un­der the Countenance of an Historical De­duction of Affairs; but with the Faith of a Iesuitical Legend; wherein all the Kings Ministers are in General Terms branded for Conspirators.

His Hand being now in, he is resolv'd to go thorough-stitch, and nothing scapes him that falls in his way: He makes the House of Lords (p. 72.) to be Felon of it self; and (p.82.) Non Compos; Arraigning their Proceedings in several Cases with [Page 26] Boldness and Contempt. But he makes a great deal bolder yet with the House of Commons; he divides them into Three Parts. It is too notorious to be conceal'd (says he, p. 73.) that near a Third part of the House, have Beneficial Offices under his Majesty in the Privy Council, the Army, the Navy, the Law, the Houshold, the Re­venue both in England, and Ireland, or in Attendance upon his Majesties Person. Up­on this Exception, he expounds himself, that 'Tis to be fear'd, their Gratitude to their Master, with their own Interest, may tempt them beyond their Obligation to the Publick. What can be more Audacious than this Charge upon King, Lords, and Commons, in the Face of a Sitting Parlia­ment? He says that It is too Notorious to be conceal'd &c. And where's the Crime, or the Shame, I beseech you, for an Offi­cer of the Kings, to be a Member of the House of Commons? As if he that has an Office, and he that has none, had not Both of them the same Master; or that a Man might not as well be a Knave without an Office, as with it. This was the Com­plaint also of 41, against Officers, till the [Page 27] Complainants had gotten those Offices themselves, and then all was quiet. This is only a flyer way of declaring the King's Servants Enemies to the Kingdom, and Erecting an Opposition betwixt the Com­mon, and Inseparable Interests of his Maje­sty, and his Subjects. Beside that, the same Reason would reach to the Excluding of the King's Servants from any other Trust in the Goverment, as well as from That of a Member in the House of Commons; and his Majesties Favour should at that rate Incapacitate any Man for Publick Business. If the Libeller had open'd his mouth a lit­tle wider, he would have told us in Plain English, that there are three, or four of Oliver's Old Servants out of Office, and that the King is strangely over-seen to bestow his Boons upon a Company of Fellows that never had any hand in the bringing of him to the Crown, by the Murther of his Father, as they did. But yet he is content upon some Terms, that they may be admitted, provided that they do not croud into the House in numbers be­yond Modesty, (pag.74.) which may seem to be some amends for the Rascalls he [Page 28] made of them the very Page before. Sup­pose (says he) that the Question concerning this Prorogation, were by the Custom of Par­liaments to be justify'd, (which hath not been done hitherto) yet who that desires to main­tain the Reputation of an Honest Man, would not have laid hold upon so plausible an Occasion, to break Company, when it was grown so scandalous? And then he assigns the matter of Scandal. For it is too noto­rious (says he) to be conceal'd, that near a Third Part of the House have Beneficial Offi­ces under his Majesty, &c. Here's a great deal of Business done in one Period. First, He pronounces this Parliament void, and consequently all their Proceedings to be Nullities. Secondly; He will not al­low any Man to be Honest, that right or wrong would not improve the Opportu­nity of Breaking This Parliament. Thirdly, He makes the House of Commons to be scandalous Company, and scandalous for having Beneficial Offices under his Majesty. The first time that ever I heard the King's Bounty was a Scandal to any Man. But to my Point.

And yet (says he, p. 77.) These Gentle­men [Page 29] being full, and already in Employ­ment, are more good Natur'd, and less dan­gerous to the Publick, than those that are Hungry, and out of Office, who may by pro­bable Computation make another Third Part of this House of Commons. And a while after, They are all of them, he says, to be bought, and sold. And when he goes on; (p. 78.) There is a Third Part still re­maining, but as contrary in themselves, as Light and Darkness. These are either the Worst, or the Best of Men; The first are most prostigate Persons, &c. Concluding (p.79.) That it is less difficult to conceive how Fire was first brought to Light in the World, than how any thing Good could ever be produc'd out of a House of Commons so Constituted. And (p. 149.) he calls them this House, or BARN of Commons; treating the Members ac­cordingly. They list themselves (says he) into some Court Faction, and it is as well known among them to what Lord each of them re­tain, as when formerly they wore Coats and Badges.

And he has not done with them yet neither; for nothing will do his Jobb, but a Final Dissolution; Considering (says he, [Page 30] p. 81.) how doubtful a Foot this long Parlia­ment now stood upon by this long Prorogation, there could not have been a more Legal, or however, no more Wife, and Honest a thing done, than for Both the Lords and Com­mons to have Separated Themselves, &c. I could wish that he had not appeal'd from the Legality of the thing, to the Wisdom, and Honesty of it: But however Legal, or not Legal, the thing is to be done: For he knows very well that so long as this House of Commons continues in Be­ing, Rebellion can never turn up Trump again. But it was otherwise order'd, he says, and so he betakes himself to an Experi­ment of Tampering all the Grand Iuries in England, to Petition for a New Parlia­ment, upon the Credit of his Story con­cerning the Corruptions of this. Wherein by the Foul Reflexions he has past upon many Persons of Known, and Eminent Example, for Piety, Integrity, and Mo­deration, he has utterly disappointed the Malice of his Scandal upon the Rest. It was well enough said, me thought, by a Worthy Member of the House of Com­mons; Do not you see, says he, how they [Page 31] have Libell'd me in that damn'd List of the Parliament-men? One told him that he was mistaken, for his Name was not in't. Why, that's the Business, says he, for 'tis only a Libel upon those that are left out. Nay, rather than fail, he does as good as Ad­vise a downright Insurrection, (in these Words, p. 155.) It is now come to the fourth Act (says he) and the next Scene that opens, may be Rome, or Paris, (by the Plot, it should be rather Geneva, or Edinburgh) yet Men sit by, like Idle Spectators, and still give mony toward their own Tragedy. And why does he blame them for Sitting by? And like Idle SPECTATORS? unless he would have them enter into Tu­mult, and Action. A very fair Encourage­ment to make Men bestir themselves, and without more Ceremony, lay violent Hands upon the Publick. Good God! That ever such a Creature as This should propound to himself by the Dash of a Pen, to move the Foundations of the English Government.

From the Parliament, he descends to the Iudges. Alas! (says he) the Wisdom [Page 32] and Probity of the Law went off, for the most Part, with Good Sir Matthew Hales, and Iustice is made a meer Property. And then he raves upon The Constant Irregularities, and Injustice from Term to Term, of those that administer the Iudicature betwixt his Maje­sty, and his People (p. 154.) This Poysonous Arrow (meaning the Choice of the Jud­ges) strikes to the very Heart of Government, and could come from no Quiver, but that of the Conspirators. What French Counsel, what Standing Forces, what Parliamentary Bribes, what National Oaths, and all the other Machinations of Wicked Men have not yet been able to effect, may be more com­pendiously Acted by Twelve Iudges in Scarlet (p. 66.) And is not this directly 41 again? When no Iudges would serve the Turn, but those that betray'd the People to Sla­very, and His Sacred Majesty to the Scaffold? He has another Fling at the Sheriffs. If any Worthy Person (says he, p.80.) chance to carry the Election, some Mercenary or Cor­rupt Sheriff makes a double Return; and so the Cause is handed to the Committee of Elections, &c. And truly he does not give either the King, or the Monarchy of [Page 33] England, much better Quarter than he allows the rest; as you shall see by and by: So that nothing less than the Thorough Re­formation of 41 will do the Work of 77. And the whole Frame of the Government must be unhing'd, to gratify the Caprice of a Pragmatical Mal-content.

The Passion, and Malice of the Libeller is so evident, that he does half confess it himself, by an Anticipation of the Charge. The Relator, (says he, pag. 155.) foresees that he shall on both hands be blam'd for pur­suing this Method. Some on the One side will expect that the very Persons should have been Nam'd: whereas he only gives Evi­dence to the Fact, and leaves the Malefactors to those that have the Power of Enquiry. If he can but acquit himself on the Other hand for Writing the Libel, as well as on This for not Naming the Persons, he will do well enough. For first; It is not his Business to Prove, but to Defame. Secondly, The Naming of Particulars would have re­strein'd the Calumny: whereas his work is to wound All the Kings Ministers that Faithfully adhere to their Master in the Generality of the Scandal. Thirdly; He [Page 34] judges it safer, and more expedient to a­muse the Multitude with Iealousies that cannot be Disprov'd, than point-blank to fasten upon Particulars an Accusation that cannot be Prov'd. What does he mean by saying that he gives Evidence to the Fact? It is the first Libel certainly that ever was given in Evidence. But where's the Relator himself all this while, upon whose bare word, Parliaments are to be Dissolv'd; Ministers of State Arraign'd; Judges Displac'd; and the whole Govern­ment new Modell'd? What if he should appear, and be found at last to have been one of Oliver's Cabal? Would any Man desire a more Competent Witness for Charles the Second, than the Murtherer of Charles the First? But he has been so us'd to call the King himself Traytor, that he may be allow'd to call his Friends Con­spirators.

On the other hand (says he, pag. 155.) some will represent this Discourse (as they do all Books that tend to detect their Con­spiracy against his Majesty, and Kingdom) as if It too were written against the Govern­ment. For now of late, as soon as any Man [Page 35] is gotten into Publick Employment by ill Acts; and by worse continues it; he, if it please the Fates, is thenceforward the Go­vernment, and by being Criminal, pretends to be Sacred. This is only crying Whore first, to call those People Conspirators, who are likely to censure him for a Libeller: which with his Learned Leave, is but a Course Figure neither; and runs much better in the Common Billinsgate of You are a Knave yourself to say that I'm one. Which in few words is all that's in't. For he does not offer so much as one Syllable in his Justification, but with another Lash or two at the King's Ministers, winds up his Period. Now of late, says he, (he means I suppose, since Oliver went out of Play) as soon as any Man is gotten into Publick Employment by ill Acts, &c. He should do well to consider who Governs, before he says That Villany is the ready way to Pre­ferment; He, if it please the Fates, is thenceforward the Government, and by being Criminal, pretends to be Sacred. I answer, That in the Case of a Publick, and Legal Accusation, the Minister is not the Go­vernment; for the Charge terminates in, [Page 36] and operates no further than his Person; but in the Affront of a Nameless, and In­definite Libel, the King himself is wound­ed in a General Reflection upon his Mini­sters; for it is his Choice, and Commissi­on, not the Officers Misdemeanour, that is there in Question: Nor does he pretend to be Sacred because he is Criminal; but the Libeller (who still writes after the Re­monstrance) makes every thing Criminal that is Sacred, and gives the Constructi­on of Rebellion to Loyalty, and of Loyalty to Rebellion.

But if there be not Mischief in the very Project of this Libel, there's nothing at all in't; for I cannot frame to my self the least Colour, or Possibility of any other End. He says, It was his Design indeed to give Information, but not to turn Infor­mer. That is to say, He would set the People together by the Ears, and no body should know who did it. Now see the End he propounds. That those (says the Relator) to whom he has only a Publick En­mity, no Private Animosity, might have the Priviledge of States-men to Repent at the last hour, and by one single Action to expiate [Page 37] all their former misdemeanours. Which is e'en as Civil a way as a body would wish, of Recommending a Publick Minister to his last Prayer. It remains now to speak a word to the Timing of his Enterprize, which, in a wicked Sence, is in Truth the Glory of it.

I shall not need to speculate upon the Power, and Designs of France, the deplo­rable State of Flanders, or the Consequen­ces that must inevitably reflect upon Eng­land in the Loss of the Spanish Neither­lands: the matter being agreed upon at all hands, that an Union of Affections, Counsels, and Interests, was never more necessary to this Nation than at this In­stant it is; and that Delay is Death to us, This being given for granted, it is like­wise as certain, that nothing under Hea­ven, but the Credit of this Sitting Par­liament, and the Blessing of a Fair Under­standing betwixt his Majesty, and his Two Houses can preserve this Kingdom (Mo­rally speaking) from Irreparable Ruine. And yet this is the Critical Juncture that the Libeller has made choice of, for the blasting both of the Government, and the [Page 38] Administration of it; for the violent Dis­solution even of this most necessary Par­liament; for the sowing of Jealousies, and alienating the Peoples Hearts from their Duty to their Sovereign. Let the World now judge betwixt the Libeller, and the pretended Conspiratours; who are more probably the Pensioners of France; those that are only Calumniated in the Dark, and without any Proof, or the least Colour of it, or the Calumniatours themselves, (I mean, the Libeller and his Adherents) who are doing all that is possible toward the Facilitating of the Work of France, and the Putting of England out of Condition to defend it self. What is it, I beseech you, that can now support us in this Exigent, but the Wisdom, and Reputation of a Parliament? which they are at this very Instant, labouring to desame and dissolve: Distracting and Dividing the Nation, at a Time when our best Union is little enough to preserve us; and obstructing those Parliamentary supplyes, without which we must unavoidably perish: For it is to this Session, that the Libeller di­rects the Mock of Still giving Mony toward [Page 39] their own Tragedy. But sure we are not so mad yet, as to take the Subverters of our Church and State, for the Advocates of our Religion and Freedom. I would know in the next place, What any Man can say to excuse his Growth of Popery, from being a Daring, and a Spightful Libel a­gainst the King, and his Government. And I shall begin with the Liberties he takes with his Majesty, sometime in direct Terms, and otherwhile under the Blind, of the Conspiratours.

Speaking of the Shutting up of the Ex­chequer (pag. 31.) The Crown (says he) made Prize of the Subject, and broke all Faith, and Contract at Home, in order to the breaking of them Abroad with more Advan­tage. The Copy has in This Point out­done the Original; for the Remonstrants were in Arms, before they presum'd to word it at this Audacious height. Take it in the Insolent Representation of the Fact; the Malicious Construction and Presumption of the Intent; and to Both these, add the Sordid Manner of Reflect­ing upon an Extraordinary thing done [Page 40] upon an Extraordinary Occasion, and wherein the Subject has since receiv'd so Ample, and Generous Satisfaction; the Clamour is so foul, as if an AEgyptian Plague were broken in upon us, and the Frogs of Geneva crept into the King's Cham­bers. And 'tis much at the same Rate that he treats the King about his Declaration of Indulgence, (pag. 33.) Hereby (says he,) all the Penal Laws against Papists, for which former Parliaments had given so many Sup­plyes, and against Non-conformists, for which this Parliament had pay'd more large­ly, were at one Instant suspended, in or­der to defraud the Nation of all that Reli­gion, which they had so dearly purchased, &c. Observe here how ungratefully he charges the Design of this Declaration to be The defrauding the Nation of their Religion; which, on the contrary, was a Manifest Concession, only to gratifie the restless Importunities of his own Gang. And see what Sport he makes, but five or six Lines further, with the very Reason of that Law which he takes here so hainously to be suspended. It appears (says he) at the first Sight, that Men ought to enjoy the same [Page 41] Propriety, and Protection in their Consci­ences, which they have in their Lives, Li­berties, and Estates: But that to take away there in Penalty for the other, is meerly a more Legal, and Gentile way of Padding up­on the Road of Heaven; and that it is only for want of Mony, and for want of Religi­on, that Men take these desperate Courses. Now, by his Favour, there is a great Di­sparity betwixt a Pretence to Propriety, and Protection in Consciences, and a Pretence to them, in Lives, Liberties, and Estates; for the Latter are lyable to Violence, and may be taken away, but the Other cannot. And now he talks of Padding upon this Road; the Remonstrants (as I remember) were very good at it, that drove away from their Churches, 85 Ministers, of 97, within the Walls of London. We'll agree in the Matter with him, That want of Mony, and want of Religion will put Men upon Despe­sperate Courses; for my Charity perswades me, he would never have written these Li­bels else. He is a little positive, me thinks, in Averring that a Great Lord lost his Place for defending the Protestant Religi­on, (pag. 44.) But he has forgotten the [Page 42] Statute of his own Citing (pag. 15.) that makes it Incapacity, for saying That the King is a Papist, or an Introducer of Popery, and that it was the King himself that re­mov'd his Lordship. And what do you think of his Irony, (pag.43.) where he says, that The Parliament, by the Conspiratours good Leave, was admitted to sit again at the day appointed. He tells us of another Affair too, pag. 51; which being transmit­ted to his Majesty, was easily chang'd into a Court Intrigue; And (pag. 63.) That the Conspiratours might so represent things to his Majesty, as to incense him against the Parliament, and distrusting all Parliamen­tary. Advice, to take Counsel from Them­selves, from France, and from Necessity.

In this Disloyal and Irreverent Licence; he drops you a word or two now and then, before he is aware, against the King himself; and other whiles, Discharges his Malice to the Government, upon the Heads of Publick Ministers. The Subject Matter of his Complaint is a Tendency of Coun­sels, and Actions towards Tyranny, and Popery. But the King (says he, pag. 4.) can do no wrong; and so goes on, nor can [Page 43] he receive wrong. What is this, but a Ju­stification of all the Violences that were acted upon the late King; even to the very Murther of him; under that Mortal, and Treasonous Distinction betwixt his AV­THORITY, and his PERSON? And an Allowance, that the same Course may be taken with his Royal Successours? The King can receive no wrong; (he says) What does he mean by this? Is not his Maje­sties Breath in his Nostrils? Is he not Flesh and Bloud? Is not his Body lyable to Wounds, Distempers, Emprisonment, and Death? He'll tell you, Yes; but This is not the KING, but the MAN, the PERSON: But the KING, all this while, that is to say, the Authority, is Sa­cred, and Invulnerable.

Now for Peace, and Brevity sake, let us suppose that this Charge of a Popish, and Arbitrary Design, does neither Intend nor Reflect any Imputation upon his Maje­sty; (his Religion, and his Tenderness of Nature being Unquestionable) It is yet a worse Libel Another way. Worse (I say) both as to the Drift, and to the Scandal of it, by how much Contempt is more dan­gerous [Page 44] to a Prince, than Hatred: For he employes his Utmost Skill to represent his Majesty only Passive in all his Administra­tions, and so to lessen the Indubitable Fame of his Royal Prudence, and Courage a­mong his People.

You see, Sir, the Freedom he takes with the King, and his Ministers; the next Point will be to enquire how he stands affected to the Government it self. The Subjects (says he, pag.3.) retain their Proportion in the Legislature. In which saying, he makes them Partners of the Sovereignty, and turns the Monarchy of England into a Tripartite and Coordinate Government; which is as well Destructive of Parliaments, on the One hand, as of Royalty, on the O­ther. Upon the Admittance of this Co­ordination, any Two of the Three may de­stroy the Third: the Two Houses may de­stroy the King, and the King, with Either of the Houses, may destroy the Other. Which, if it be so, what Prince that is Imperial in the Intervalls, would ever hazard the Dethroning of himself by a Session? The Making of Law is a Pecu­liar, and Incommunicable Priviledge of the [Page 45] Supreme Power, and the Office of the Two Houses in this Case is only Consultive, or Preparatory; but the Character of Power rests in the Final Sanction, which is in the King: And Effectually, the Passing of a Bill, is but the granting of a Request: The Two Houses make the Bill, 'tis true, but the King makes the Law; and 'tis the Stamp, not the Matter, that makes it Current: Nor does the Subject any otherwise make Laws, than the Petitioner makes Orders of Council.

It is a Suspicious, and Ill-looking Pas­sage that he has, Pag. 14. As to Matter of Government, says he; If to murther the King, be (as certainly it is) a Fact so horrid, (he does not say how horrid) how much more Hainous is it to Assassinate the King­dom? Here is First involv'd in this Clause, the Deposing Position of 41, that the King is Singulis major, Vniversis minor: For it is clear that the Comparison was only made to draw on the Preference, and to possess the People that they have a greater Prize at Stake in the hazard of their Religion, than in the Tye of their Civil Obedience. (the very Translation still of 41.) And for [Page 46] their further Encouragement, he tells them (pag. 4.) that We have the same Right (modestly understood) in our Propriety, that the Prince hath in his Regality: which car­ries with it an Innuendo, that the King may as well Forfeit his Crown, as the Subject his Free-hold. It cannot be imagin'd that all these Leading and Desperate Hints should fall from a Man of Brains and Sense by Chance; and you see the whole Tract takes the same Biass.

No King of England (says he, pag. 58.) had ever so great a Treasure of his Peoples Affections, except what those Ill men have (as they have done all the rest) consum'd; whom, but out of an Excess of Love to his Person, the Kingdom would never (for it never did formerly) so long have suffer'd. Here's still the Crocodile of 41; nothing but Love and Reverence to his late Majesty too, till his Head was off. But let us Reason the Matter in a word. These Ill men have no Names, it seems; so that any Man that's near the King, is by this Libeller set up for a Mark to the Outrage of the People. And then he says, The Kingdom would ne­ver have suffer'd them. Who are they, I [Page 47] pray, that he calls the Kingdom, but the Rabble still of 41; the Execrable Instruments of That Rebellion, and the Hopes of An­other? But if the Kingdom would not suf­fer it, what would he have them do to help themselves? The Law is open, in Case of any Legal Impeachment, and 'tis too Early Days yet for a Tumult.

In his Descant upon the, Test he is wonderfully free of his Figures. Never (says he, pag. 59.) was so much sence con­tain'd in so few words; no Conveyancer could ever in more Compendious, or Binding Terms have drawn a Dissettlement of the whole Birth-right of England. This Test has made a great Noise, and it will be worth the while to examine what is said against it. The Form of it is as follows.

I. A. B. do declare that it is not lawful up­on any Pretence whatsoever to take up Arms against the King; and that I do abhor that Trayterous Position of taking Arms by his Authority, against his Person, or against those that are Commission'd by him in Pur­suance of such Commission. And I do swear that I will not at any time Endeavour the [Page 48] Alteration of the Government, either in Church or State. So help me God.

He says, pag. 57, That it was thrown out of the House in the Plague-year at Ox­ford, for fear of a general Infection of the Vitals of this Kingdom; whereas in truth, it was brought into the House as an Anti­dote against that Poyson which had seiz'd the Vitals of this Kingdom already; and amounts to no more than the Vnswearing of That on the Behalf of theGovernment, which had been formerly sworn for the Destruction of it. The Author of A Letter from a Person of Quality, &c. calls it, p. 1. A STATE-MASTER-PIECE, and design'd to these Ends. First, To make a Distinct Party, from the rest of the Nation, of the High Episcopal Man, and the Old Ca­valier. Now I took it rather to be a De­sign of Vniting All Parties, under one Common Bond of Duty, and Obedience to the Government: And where That could not be obtain'd, to distinguish who were for the Government, and who a­gainst it; for the Late King was murther'd upon this very Distinction betwixt his [Page 49] Authority and his Person, Nor is there any Government upon the Face of the Earth, without some Obligation upon the Sub­ject, Equivalent to This Test.

Next, says he, they design to have the Government of the Church sworn to as Un­alterable, and so Tacitely own'd to be of Di­vine Right. This, is under favour, is a Fallacy. The Test does not concern it self whether the Government be Changeable, or not, but only provides that the State may be serv'd with Magistrates and Officers, that stand well. Affected to the Establish­ment. Those that do so, will never scruple the Oath; and for those that do not, it is the very Intent of it to discriminate, and to exclude them: And to encounter the Covenant,by Virtue of which they dis­solv'd the Late Government, with an Oath never to endeavour any further Alterati­on in This. And certainly, a Man may better swear the Maintaining of a Govern­ment According to the Law, than the Al­teration of it Against Law.

Thirdly, says the Author of the Letter, In Requital to the Crown, they declare the Go­vernment Absolute, and Arbitrary, and [Page 50] allow Monarchy, as well as Episcopacy, to be Jure Divino, and not to be bounded, or limited by Humane Laws.

How This Test does either Declare, or Pretend the Government to be Absolute, and Arbitrary, I cannot imagine: But on the Contrary, every Man is ty'd by it from Endeavouring to make it so, if it be not so already, in Swearing that he will not at any time endeavour the Alteration of it. And then in his Explication of the meaning of Church, and State in the Test, by Monarchy, and Episcopacy in his Reflection upon it, he has done us a greater Kindness than he was aware of; for he has wholly Dis­appointed the Spight, and the Intent of his next Clause. And (as he goes on) to secure all this, they resolve to take away the Power, and Opportunity of Parliaments, to alter any thing in Church or State, only leave them as an Instrument to raise Mony, and to pass such Laws, as the Court, and Church shall have a mind to: The Attempt of any other, how Necessary soever, must be no less a Crime than Perjury.

See now whether or no this be fair deal­ing. It is, by his own Confession, the [Page 51] Form of Monarchy, and the Order of Epi­scopacy, the Government it self, and not the Administration of it, that is here in Que­stion. He would have it believ'd, That by this Test, Parliaments are barr'd upon Pain of Perjury from Attempting any Al­teration IN Church or State: whereas they are left at Liberty to debate what Al­terations they please in the Parts of the Government provided they do not strike at the Root of the Government it self. And the Deliberation and Result of the whole Matter, is no more than This. Many of the People (and All the Princi­ples) are yet Living, that destroy'd the King, and the Bishops in the last Rebel­lion; Let us have a Care of the same Hands again, and trust none of them in the Government but under an Oath, not to endeavour the Alteration of it. That is to say, of the Monarchy into a Repub­lique, or of Episcopacy into Presbytery; as they did before. And this was the Clear Scope of the Test.

The Author of the Growth of Popery, discoursing upon this Subject; There is nothing (says he, p. 57.) more Portentous, [Page 52] and of worse Omen, than when such an Oath hangs over a Nation like a New Comet, fore­boding the Alteration of Religion or Go­vernment.

A word first to the Oath, which, for want of an Epithete to express the hai­nousness of it, the Libeller so Emphati­cally calls SVCH an Oath. It is an Oath founded upon the same Considera­tion with the Oath of Allegiance, and di­rected to the same End; and every jot as Necessary under This King, as That was under his Grand-Father. The Ie­suited Papist's had invited the Spaniard to Invade England: The Iesuited Protestants in the late Rebellion, did, in like man­ner apply themselves to the French. The Former laid on Plot for the Blowing up of the Parliament: The Other executed the Plot of Destroying Parliaments, Chang­ing the Government, and murthering the King. The People were misled in the One Case, upon the Iesuitical Principle, that a Prince being Excommunicate by the Pope, the Subject is discharg'd of his Duty to him, and they were seduc'd in the Other, by a Persuasion that the Sacred Character [Page 53] of a King rests in the Authority, and is se­parable from the Person; which Authority they lodg'd in the Two Houses, and so did their Business. This Practice of the Ie­suites occasion'd the Oath of Allegiance in the Statute 3^o Iacobi, entitled An Act for the Discovering, and Repressing of Popish Re­cusants. In which Oath, you have this Clause. And I do further swear that I do from my Heart detest and abjure, as Impious and Heretical, this damnable Doctrine, and Position, That Princes which be Excommu­nicated, or Deprived by the Pope, may be Deposed, or Murther'd by their Subjects, or any other whatsoever. Here was an Act for the Discovering and Repressing of Popish Re­cusants, with an Oath, under a Penalty, and a Declaration against, and an Abhorrence of that Impious Position, whereupon the Treasons of those Times were founded: And why not a Provision as well against those People that with premeditated Ma­lice, as well as Ambition, over-turn'd the Late Government; and against That Prin­ciple, of Dividing his Majesties Authority from his Person, which was the Counte­nance and Support of the late Rebellion? [Page 54] Take it in short, and the Test is but a Sup­plement to the Oath of Allegiance. The Scottish Faction Impos'd upon the People that they might be true to the King, though they Levy'd Arms against his Person: and the end of this Oath is only to expound That Position to be Treasonous, and to Secure the Government for the Fu­ture against Men of such Principles: Ac­cording to Equity and Conscience, and to the Common Practice, and according to the Prudence of all well Order'd States.

Is this the Oath now that he calls SVCH an Oath? The Oath, than which there is nothing more Portentous, and of worse Omen to a Nation? He has forgotten the Fore-boding, and Portentous Omens of Forty One, and the Dire Events of those Presages. What do you think of a deliberate Design, to spoil the Crown, the Church, and the Subject: And all this in the Name of God, for the Honour of the King, and the Good of the People? And then the En­titling of Providence to all the Advanta­ges that the Faction got by the Ruine of Three Kingdoms? Here's the unrepented [Page 55] Guilt of Sacriledge, Treason, and Bloud, to the Highest Degree, and so Transcend­ent an Ingratitude, that some of the very Men that were Pardon'd for One Rebel­lion, are now the Advocates for Ano­ther. If these Practices should be suffer'd, there would be no need to consult the Stars for a Prognostick of Change of Go­vernment.

The Oaths (says he, pag. 58.) in our Late King's time taught the Phanaticks, be­cause they could not swear, yet to Covenant. His Memory fails him, I perceive, for the Covenant was a Foot in Scotland be­fore any Oaths complain'd of here; by the Token that the Assembly at Glasgow, in 1638, came to this Resolution upon the Point. It is lawful for Subjects to Co­venant and Combine, without the King, and enter into a Bond of mutual Defence against him. Take notice next that the Oath com­plain'd of, was the Oath ex Officio, which Oath was Abolish'd, before any Covenant­ing in England: And he is so much out again, in saying that the Phanaticks Co­venanted, &c. because they could not swear, that in Truth they Covenanted because they [Page 56] car'd not what they swore. Witness their Covenants, Negative Oaths, and Oath of Abjuration, in Opposition to their Oaths of Allegiance, and Canonical Obedience: There was no Compounding, no Living in their Quarters, without Swearing. There was an Oath, given at a Communion at Fife, obliging People not to take the King's Covenant; And it was one Condi­tion upon the Treaty at the Isle of Wight, that his Majesty himself should give Assu­rance by Solemn Oath under his Hand, and Seal, for settling Religion according to the Covenant: So that they made no Consci­ence (you see) either of Swearing, or For­swearing; either of taking Oaths Them­selves, or of Forcing them upon Others for the Advancement of their Design.

He takes Exception (pag. 59.) to the Two Declaratory Points of the Test. First, That it is not lawful upon any Pretence whatsoever, to take up Arms against the King. And he reasons the Matter in these Words: It were difficult to instance a Law, either in This, or Other Country, but that a Private Man, if any King in Christendom Assault him, may, having Retreated to the [Page 57] Wall, stand upon his Guard. That is to say, A Private Man may kill his Prince in his own Defence. For he puts This Case in Opposition to the Declaration; Only translating the Taking up of Arms against the King, into a Man's Standing upon his Guard. All that's Honest in't is This, That he refuses to declare That to be Vn­lawful, which he holds to be Lawful.

His Second Scruple is The Abhorrence of that Traiterous Position of taking Arms by his Authority, against his Person; or against those that are Commissioned by him, in pursuance of such Commission. Here (says he) is neither Tenour, or Rule of any such Commission specify'd, nor the Qualification of those which shall be Armed with such Com­missions, expressed, or Limited.

The Author of this Frivolous Shift, knows very well, that the Rules, and Mea­sures of Commissions vary according to the Circumstances of Time, Place, Fact, Person; that the Qualification of the Commissioner does not at all operate upon the Autho­rity of the Commission: and that if the Bill were drawn out to the length of the Book of Martyrs, there would not yet be room [Page 58] enough to obviate all Cavills, and Obje­ctions. But in the next Page, he speaks his Mind a little plainer.

As to the Commission, (says he) if it be to take away a Man's Estate, or his Life, by Force, yet it is the King's Commission: Or if the Person Commissionate be under ne­ver so many Disabilities by Acts of Parlia­ment; yet his taking this Oath, removes all those Incapacities, or his Commission makes it not disputable.

This Seditious Hint, (for I cannot call it an Argument) lyes open so many ways, that I am only at a Loss where to begin with it. First, Let the Commission, and Commissioner be what they will, no Man is to be a Iudge in his own Cause; but the Law must be the Iudge both of the Lega­lity of the One, and the Capacity of the Other. Secondly, If upon this Ground an Injur'd Person may take Arms, in One Case; so may a Criminal, upon the bare Pretence of it in any Other: For 'tis but say­ing that the Commission is Vnwarrantable, or that the Officer is a Rascal, and there's his Justification. Thirdly, Suppose a Double Abuse in Manner, as is here suggest­ed; [Page 59] That Abuse does not yet void the Au­thority, to which the Law on the One side requires Obedience, or at least Submission; and there is no Law, on the Other side, that allows Resistance. Fourthly, The End and Prospect of all Laws is Publick Convenience, and there was never any Law invented, so Profitable to a Commu­nity, but it was in some Respect or other, to the Detriment of some Particulars: So that the very Admittance of his Supposi­tions, does not at all affect the Reason of the Test, if the Benefit be General on the One hand, and the Mischief only Particu­lar on the Other. How many Men are sworn out of their Lives, and Fortunes by False Witnesses? Shall we therefore quarrel the Method of Proceeding Secundum Alle­gata, & Probata? A Man is Arrested up­on a Fobb'd Action, for a sum of Mony, knowing First, that he ows not a Penny; Secondly, that the Consequence of it will be his Ruine; Thirdly, that the Action is meerly Malicious; And Fourthly, (to make it strong enough) that the Officer that serves the Writ is Consederate with his Adversary, and that they have Both [Page 60] complotted his Destruction: All this will not yet Authorize a Resistance; but if an Officer that has the King's Writ, or any other Lawful Warrant, though Erroneous, shall be slain in the Execution of it, This is MVRTHER. A word now as to the Occasion of it.

The People of 41, when they had for­ced his Majesty from his Palace, by Af­fronts and Arm'd Tumults, Publish'd this Doctrine to the Nation, That though his Person was gone, his Authority resided in the Two Houses: under which Colour they imposed Ordinances upon the People, for Laws, and by Degrees proceeded to an Exercise of all the Acts of Sovereignty; making War against the Person of the King, and those that were Commission'd by him, under the Pretence afore-said: as Rebellious, Traytors, and Conspirators. Now to prevent the same Mischief again, from the same Principles, it was thought fit to propose this Declaration of Abhor­rence. The Objections against it are, That the King may grant a Commission to take away a Man's Life, or Estate, and Employ any Man at a venture to execute it: which [Page 61] is First, The Supposal of an Vnjust, and Tyrannical Commission: Secondly, A Case so Rare, that it would be a hard matter to produce a President for it, without a Reference to a Tryal at Law: And Third­ly, What would be the Fruit of such a Resistance, but the Turning of an Oppressi­on on the One side, into a Rebellion on the other, and the Forfeiting of that Life, and Estate To the Law, which was otherwise invaded Contrary to the Law? For 'tis a Thousand to one that the Power that Issu'd the Commission will find Assi­stants to Execute it. So that the Resist­ance pleaded for in this Case, is First, of a very remote Supposition. Secondly, of dangerous Consequence to the Resistent: And, Thirdly, of no Avail to him at all.

If we may not Resist (says the Faction) under these Circumstances our Lives, Li­berties, and Estates are at the King's Mer­cy; for that which maybe. One Man's Case, may be Any Man's And so be­cause of This Possibility of Wrong to Particulars, we judge it Reasonable, that every Particular Man should be Allow'd to Defend himself. See now the Incon­venience, [Page 62] which, upon the Allowance of this Liberty in Favour of Particulars, will redound to the Publick.

An Honest Man is charg'd with Treason in the King's Name, and by his Majesties Order to be taken into Custody, and by an Officer too, under what Disabilities you please. Here's the whole Case. An Innocent Person; Life, Liberty, and Estate at stake, and an Vnqualify'd Commissioner. If One Man may Resist, because he is Inno­cent, Another upon the same Pretence may Resist too, although he be Guilty. For no Man under a Charge, is either Guilty, or Innocent in the Eye of the Law, till he be Legally, either Convicted, or Acquitted. So that the Innocent, and the Guilty, are to be try'd indifferently by the same Law, and so are the Pretended Errours either in the Commission, or Commissioner. Take mat­ters once out of the Channel of Tryal by our Peers, There's an end of Magna Charta; and the Government it self is become Passive, and Precatious. Will you have the true Reason now, why this Abhorrence goes so much against the hair with some People? The Position is to be Cherish'd, and kept in [...] till the time comes for us.

[Page 63]No Man can be so blind, as not to dis­cern by the correspondent Motions of the Consistorians in Scotland, and the Scottish English, that they Act already by Concert; and it is as plain by this Bold and Adventu­rous way of Libels all on the soddain, that they depend upon France for a Second: Which is no more than was done in the Late Rebellion, by the same Faction, as appear'd by a Letter of the Lord Lowdens to the French King, for his Protection and Assistance, for which he was committed to the Tower; and it was also confirm'd by the Fourth Article against the Five Mem­bers, Accusing them to have Trayterously invited and encourag'd a Forreign Power to invade his Majesties Kingdom of England. Husband's Collections, p. 35. These are the French Pensioners, and the Betrayers of our Religion and Freedom, under Oaths, and Covenants to Preserve them. Were not our Divines Pillag'd, Sequestred, Impri­son'd, either for praying for his Majesty, or for Refusing to Abjure him? How many Reverend Divines were poyson'd in Peter-House? I could give you the History of their Spiriting away several Persons of [Page 64] Honour for Slaves; their Sale of three, or four Score Gentlemen to the Barbadoes. Their Sequestrations, Decimations, Exclusion from all Offices, Plunders, Banishments, Consine­ments, Prohibition of Correspondence with the King, upon Pain of Death: The Jug­gles of the Irish Adventures; Money, and Plate upon the Propositions; Confiscated Estates; Twentieth Parts, Weekly Assess­ments, and a Hundred other Pecuniary, and Arbitrary Stratagems, till they finish'd the Ruine of the Nation, in the Dissoluti­on of the Government, and in the Bloud of their Sovereign. It is not less certain that This is in Sum the Design of their Se­cond Reformation, than that it was the Ef­fect of their Former: and they are Fools that take Men of these Practices to be of any Religion. To understand these People aright, a Man must read them, like the O­riginal Tongues, Backward. They are ne­ver so deadly, and dangerous Enemies to the Government, as when they prosess the dearest Affection to it; and I do not know but that the Author of the Growth of Po­pery may be the greatest Friend in the World to the Church of Rome, when he [Page 65] Professes himself the Bitterest Adversary. I pray, bestow a Second Thought upon his Declamation against Popery (with which I shall Conclude) and tell me next time I see you, whether he has not taken more Pains to Shew his Skill, than Care to De­liver his Opinion.