IT is with no ſmall Regret, Sober Reader, that I am thus neceſſitated to Vindicate my own and my Friends Innocency, againſt theſe Unfair Aſſaults: I prefer Peace before War; and heartily deſire loving Neighbourhood, rather then daily Conteſt; but this is our Satisfaction, we did not begin with them, but were begun with by them: And ſuch great and general Accuſations call for the like Defences; ſince where Charges go unanſwered, Guilt is moſt uſually reflected, eſpecially where WE are concerned; there being a ſort of Men devoted to miſconſtrue whatever we ſay or do, with whom it is become Criminal to defend our ſelves; and do deſerve to be chid for ſaying, They wrong us: Such continued Unchriſtian Proceedings againſt us will, I hope, give all Impartial People to hold me excuſed for publiſhing this ſecond Vindication, which I intreat them in the Love of God to conſider, that they may the better find out where the SHIFT lieth, whether in us, or this Nameleſs Author and his Abettors.

The Intent of my paper was, to meet with the Vox populi, or common Fame, that as we might be defended, ſo the People diſabuſed, by declaring, that notwithſtanding thoſe Defamatory Reports City and Country had credited againſt us, we had NOT received their Information of the Meeting, much leſs deſignedly avoided it; That it was unfair to concern us in a Meeting without our Conſent; and that we made them a ſolemn Offer of a Publick Meeting, &c.

Now let us ſee how well he hath made good his Title-Page, in which he calls his Paper an Anſwer to mine.

He tells us, that We made an Appeal to the Baptiſts againſt T. Hicks, and that upon this Appeal the Teachers and Elders among them deſired T. H. that he would in a publick Meeting bring forth his Evidences and Witneſſes: That Mr. Kiſſin and Mr. Knowls wrot Letters the 15th of Aug. to W. P. and G. W. informing them of Time and Place.

But what is all this, to prove that we receiv'd any certain Account from them of the Meeting; that we purpoſely avoided the Meeting; and that we were ſo far unconcern'd in it, as that our Conſent to meet was unneceſſary? The Ground of my Paper.

He ſayes that G. W. had notice at the Vizes, having ſeen a Letter of T. Hicks, ſent to one in that Town: But ſuppoſe it to be true; what is that to me, the Perſon moſt of all concern'd in the matter? Or, how doth this reach P. Ford's Letter, writ to inform them of my Abſence, and to deſire the Meeting might be ſuſpended, to prevent vain Boaſting? Was it ſuſpended? No. And hath not vain Boaſting followed? Yes. • A Surreptitious Meeting! A Vain Triumph! Doth not this Proceeding rather give to ſuſpect a Deſign to meet in our Abſence, that made it of no moment to the Meeting, after they heard of it, though before they wrot for, deſired and expected our Preſence.

But ſaith he, W. P. was at home the Night before: Grant it; Muſt I therefore hear or know of any ſuch Meeting, or my Concernment in it? I received no Account, I ſay again, of either the Meeting, or my Relation to it, directly or indirectly, till about Ten the Night after it was over. And for G. W's Knowledge of the Meeting, it is expreſt with Injuſtice both to him and my ſelf; for he had not that Account which belonged to him to have; Therefore not His Account. What was a Rumor to him; or T. Hicks's Letter to another man, receiving no Account himſelf, much leſs any Account of his Concern in the Meeting till the 29th of the laſt Month, which was the Day after the Meeting. Beſides, muſt we take it for granted that G. W. was juſt then at Leiſure to take Poſt for the Meeting; under both it had been well nigh impoſſible for him to reach it; for this Author tells us, that T. H. writ not till the Tueſday before the Fryday (ſo call'd) on which the Meeting was appointed; which was to give him little above a Day to ride about four ſcore Miles: Moreover, He was then pre-engaged for Briſtol; and ſo ignorant of his Concernment in the Meeting, as he after that writ to his Wife to Know if our Friends were concern'd in it. This his SHIFT is too Thread-bare to palliate that unworthy Surpriſe

But, Others had 〈◊〉 , • aith he What then? ſay I. Were not we the Perſons chiefly concern'd? Could any Body elſe have anſwer'd for T. Hicks. beſides himſelf? Who then could fill up our room, e • pecially in matters of Fact? If T. H. was thought fit to be there to explain and vindicate his Dialogues, then ſhould we in Defence of our Anſwers: But, if our Abſence might ſo eaſily be diſpenſed with, why ſhould T. H's Preſence have been ſo requiſite? for T. H and his Books, againſt our Books only, were unreaſonable Odds. The Plea ſhould have layn between Books and Books, the Controverſie being written: And if it was needful that as well he as his Dialogues ſhould be there, then that as well we as our Anſwers; though I cannot ſee with what Liberty we could have defended our ſelves, ſince Such as offered to ſay any thing on our behalf, were interrupted; which gives us Cauſe enough to believe, that this Perſon was beſide the matter, when he tells us, that the Baptiſts were glad to ſee any of us there.

But he ſays, That I Prevaricate, in ſaying, The Baptiſts concern'd us in that Meeting, when we concern'd the Baptiſts in that Meeting: A SHIFT to be ſure, though not his Laſt. I would fain know, if we were not concern'd in that Meeting, becauſe we concern'd the Baptiſts in that Meeting; as I take it, we were reciprocally concerned in that Meeting, and therefore equally intereſted in the Appointment of Time and Place; for was there not the ſame Reaſon that we ſhould be there, viva voce to make good the Charge in our Book, as that T. H. ſhould be there, viva voce to endeavour to clear his Book from our Charge? Never can they defend themſelves from that Injuſtice. It is not the part of a juſt Judge, to hear and determine for one Party in the Abſence of another. Beſides, for what End did they pretend to give us notice, if not that we ſhould be there? It muſt not be forgot, that while in their Letter to me they d • ſire and expect it, in the Letter to J. Oſgood they render it needleſs; nay, it was aſſerted by one eminent among them in that Meeting, as I am credibly informed, That neither G. W. nor W. P. were concerned to be preſent: If ſo, why was our undeſigned Abſence reputed and reported to be the Conſequence of our Fears?

But the Man thinks he hath a ſtronger Argument then all this, in my Book (intituled, the Spirit of Truth Vindicated, pag. 78. That to which an Appeal is made muſt be capable of giving an Infallible Judgment, and ſo a true Judge, or elſe the Appeal is Fooliſh. He is ſo wiſe as to leave the Application to his Reader, for which Way he could make it bear to his Purpoſe, I know not: But let it ſuffice, Firſt, That I made not the Appeal by him recited, as the Poſtſcript of my Book proveth: Next, Nor can any ſober Man think, we intended by our Appeal to the Baptiſts our abiding by their Judgment, be it right or wrong; They very Words of it ſhow the Appeal to the Baptiſts, was not to try whether T. H. was guilty; but for Judgment againſt him, having proved him guilty; for that were to admit of their Judgment, to conclude us againſt our ſelves; they themſelves will not think us ſo kind to them: Take the Appeal as this Perſon recites it; Now if you the Teachers and Elders among the Baptized People do not publickly clear your ſelves of T. Hicks, and theſe his unjuſt Proceedings againſt us; we may take it for granted, that you own his VVork, and may juſtly deal with him as the Baptiſts great Champion, peculiar Agent or Repreſentative, &c. Now I would fain know which Way this binds us from all further Meeting, upon the ſame Score? Nothing can be well clearer, then that this Appeal aim'd no further, then to know whether the Baptiſts did and would own or reject T. H's Proceedings, that we might the better underſtand whom to addreſs our ſelves to next time. There is great Difference in the Nature of Appeals: And the Reaſon of my Writing, as he citeth me, was, to prove the Light capable of giving an infallible Judgment, from my Adverſary's acknowledging it to be the Gift of God, and appealing to it, as a right Diſcerner, for Judgment about what is right, and what is wrong, which this Perſon, T. H. like, left out: Howbeit, thus far what he cites, reacheth our preſent Caſe; for doubtleſs, they had Power to give Judgment againſt T. H. if they had been but as willing to uſe it, having ſuch clear Evidences in our Books before them. Nevertheleſs, this doth not prove, That we knew of the Meeting, that we were unconcerned in it, or that we deſignedly ſhunned it: The Foundation of our Paper, no wayes ſhaken by this Libeller's Sheet. The Meeting was pretended for a Church-Examination; but almoſt every where, in and about London, noiſed by the Baptiſts themſelves to have been for a Diſputation, and our Abſence accordingly interpreted: A manifeſt Injury to our Books, Perſons and Profeſſion.

For my Offer to J. Gladman, he meanly ſhifts it, and ſeeks to creep out at the Word FORMAL; ſo that we are to read it thus, VVilliam Penn did offer, but not formally Challenge, to meet T. Hicks with the Bible in one Hand, & with his Dialogue in the other. Let it be ſo; I hope it is enough to ſatisfie the World, that an Offer was made and rejected: Nor is my printed One more Formal; for it was on Purpoſe made to remove all Obſtruction to a Meeting, upon Terms formally propoſed; for which I ſhall produce a Witneſs in convenient Time and Place. In the mean while it is to be conſidered, that the Perſon miſtakes, when he makes T. H. to have offered W. P. any ſuch Meeting, whatever he might do to G. VV. as the very Page he refers to in T. H's third Dialogue proves: Further, that he never offered me any Meeting, but in private, and that too not till after he had twice publickly wronged me, which was refuſed, not to decline a Meeting, but as reputing it too mean a Satisfaction.

For his reflective Commendation of my Prudence, becauſe I did not, after their Example, appoint a Meeting without their Notice; it ſpeaks ſo much the Juſtice of my Proceeding, that it reflects Folly upon his Mention of it, and not a little Falſeneſs too, ſince a Meeting to be agreed upon by two Parties, cannot be ſaid to be lodged in any one of their Breaſts, without telling a manifeſt Untruth.

His Black Menace of us and our Religion, with ſome Hydr • an Piece, ſuddenly to be publiſht, we are very little ſolicitous about; our Conſciences are approved to God in this Matter; and we hope (through his Aſſiſtance (however miſrepreſented to the World) before we have done, to approve our Cauſe Juſt in the Minds of impartial People.

To conclude; ſince he tells us, That the Baptiſts have received Satisfaction in T. H's Proceedings againſt us (and great Cauſe we have to believe, that ſome of them were not ignorant of his Libel) I do hereby ſoberly renew my ſolemn Offer to them, and expect from them a Publick Meeting, wherein we may have Leave, as viva voce, to repeat and defend our Charges, as T. H. manifeſtly had to read and vindicate his Dialogues. And be it known to all thoſe Baptiſts, that though the Controverſie fall in T. Hicks, by our Appeal to them; yet that it riſeth in them by their Juſtification of him: Therefore, as we can never acquieſce in their Proceedings, which he calls a Satisfaction, that have proved thus plainly injurious; ſo from them do we yet expect that Satisfaction, which we are bold to ask, and in Honeſ • y they are bound to give us, in the Face of a ſo • er Auditory, at ſuch Time and Place, as they and we, on Conference, ſhall mutually appoint.