The present settlement vindicated, and the late mis-government proved in answer to a seditious letter from a pretended loyal member of the Church of England to a relenting abdicator / by a gentleman of Ireland.

The present settlement vindicated, and the late mis-government proved in answer to a seditious letter from a pretended loyal member of the Church of England to a relenting abdicator / by a gentleman of Ireland.

Table of contents

Advertiſement.

Title page

AN ANSWER To a Late Seditious Letter FROM A Pretended Loyal MEMBER OF THE CHƲRCH of ENGLAND, &c.

ERRATA.

BOOKS Printed for J•ſeph Watts at th• Angel in St. Pauls Church-yard.

AN ANSWER To a Late Seditious Letter FROM A Pretended Loyal MEMBER OF THE CHƲRCH of ENGLAND, &c.

[Page]

[Page]

SIR,

THERE was a Pamphlet put into my Hands lately, by whom I know not, the method of addreſs being unuſual, ſet me upon the immediate peruſal of it; in which I had not gone far, before I obſerved the deſign both of the Donor and Author, who, I am apt to believe, were the ſame; for only one that abounded in his own Notions, and valued them becauſe they were his own, could expect to make a Proſelyte by his Reaſoning: If that was the deſign, theſe few haſty Reflections will ſhew you how much he has been miſtaken in me.

[Page] Before I enter upon Particulars, I muſt acknowledge that our Author's method is very regular; and had he made out the Propoſitions, as laid down by him, his Book would be much more dangerous to the Government than I apprehend it is; for were it made plain that the late King only deſigned the good and happineſs of his Subjects in general, I fear that alone would weaken the hand of our Deliverer, without proving our Condition to be worſe now than in his Reign: But ſince neither of thoſe Propoſitions are true, and ſince ſo little can be ſaid in the ſupport of them, a very critical ſeaſon is required for the advancement of thoſe Notions; though our Author in his Title-page pretends himſelf a Member of the Church of England, and in other places, that his chief concern is for the Church; yet his uſing Arguments to perſwade us to return to that Condition that had ſo lately endangered it, and can only deſtroy it; and his confident miſrepreſenting matter of fact, are ſufficient proofs to what Society he belongs.

His firſt Propoſition is, That King James really propoſed to himſelf thoſe methods of Government which he judged would beſt conduce to the happineſs of all his Subjects in general.

His Arguments to prove this, are only an Encomium on his Perſon and Parts, and a pretended Anſwer to an Objection made by himſelf, which is, in truth, ſeveral, though he calls it but one; and notwithſtanding all he ſays, moſt of them will ſtill remain as blemiſhes on his King's Underſtanding as well as Government.

I am ſorry that the Confidence of the Author forces me to ſay any thing to the leſſening of his Perſon, and nothing leſs than a hold aſſerting, That no qualifications were wanting in King James that we could have wiſhed would have tempted me to it.

Our Author knows very well how to pick out Topicks of Praiſe, but never confiders how applicable they are to his Hero; a proof whereof we have in his firſt inſtance; when I read it I was almoſt tempted to believe I had been reading the Character of his Grandfather, and that our Author had miſtaken one James for the other, otherwiſe he would not have told us of his care in preſerving us in Peace, when moſt part of Europe and Aſia were in continual War: But notwithſtanding all his ſaid Endeavours, there was more Blood ſhed in his Four years Reign, than in the others Twenty-four. And as to the other part of the Aſſertion, I cannot call to mind the continual Wars of our Neighbours, during the late King's Reign; nor inſtance in any other, but that againſt the Turks, which our Author ſeems to [Page] remember by his mention of Aſia; and I leave it to the Chriſtian World to judge, Whether that were not more beneficial, as well as more glorious, than his Peace? How induſtrious he was in advancing the Trade of this Kingdom, I cannot tell: but this I am ſure of, that the Trade this Nation drives with France, was above Six hundred thouſand pound of advantage to that Nation to the prejudice of this, the over-ballance of that Trade amounting yearly to that Sum, if not to a far greater: And, beſides, he was as zealous and more ſucceſsful in deſtroying the Trade of another of his Kingdoms to enlarge hereon, is too melancholy a ſubject for either of us. And though he were a good Husband of his Revenue, yet certainly what was given to the Prieſts and Fryars of both Kingdoms, and their Emiſſaries, might have been better imployed; and I ſhould be glad to know what our Author thinks of the great Expences of Caſtlemain's vain Embaſſy to Rome, which did ſcarce procure him the common reſpect due to his Character. And that he never required a Tax from his People, is ſo ſtrange an Aſſertion, that ſurely our Author never conſidered what he writ, or thought we would not; for he not only required a Tax from his People, but levied great ones of them without their grant; for which, in Page 20. our Author makes an excuſe, which ſhall be conſidered in its place; and if our Author had but looked into the Acts of Parliament of his Reign, he would have found Four of the firſt Five granting him temporary Taxes not expired, and very great ones, ſufficiently large for one Seſſion; and it is ſeldom ſeen that Parliaments give Money without asking: but it was ſo far from that, that he never ſpeaks to them, but to take care of his Revenue, was part of his Speech; and when he paſſed the Bill, ſetling on Himſelf the Revenue his Brother had for Life, he required a further Tax from his People in a ſet Speech for no other purpoſe; and if the Author would but look into his Speech of October the 9th. 1685. at the opening the next Seſſions of that Parliament, he will find he wanted not more Subſidies for want of asking; and that in this particular we are more beholden to his other Councils that made him afraid of Parliaments, than to his kindneſs to his People, if his Magazenes and Stores were plentifully furniſhed: This was but an ordinary effect of his long Peace, great Revenue, and greater Deſigns. But I make a Queſtion, Whether thoſe were ſo well provided, as he was deſirous the World ſhould believe? And, in [Page] truth, they were never more empty; of which the Nation has already found the inconvenience: For if the Naval Stores had but anſwered expectation, his Friends had met with other entertainment in Bantry-bay the Firſt of May laſt. That he kept too good a Correſpondence with one of his Neighbouring Princes, will not be denied; but whether with more than one of them, I queſtion; and whether thereby he did not ſink the Reputation of his Juſtice and Honour both abroad and at home, will appear by the reſpect he had at Rome, where one would have thought he ſhould have been courted at another rate; for a Proteſtant inſtance, the States denial of Dr. Burnet, and not ſuffering the Doctor to with-draw, though he deſired it, is ſufficient; and the Carriage of the French at Hudſons-hay ſhews their kindneſs as well as reſpect. If our Author had conſidered theſe things, ſurely he would not have bragged of the good Correſpondence he held with his Neighbour Princes and States, or of the Reputation he had acquired to himſelf abroad.

When I met the Author praiſing the late King for his Mercy and Compaſſion to his Enemies, I began to ſuſpect my Eyes, and was in hopes that he would have brought us ſo good news from the Weſt, that we ſhould ſpeak no more of the Weſtern Campaign; and that the Numbers that were ſaid to be executed there, were only in Effigie; and that he had the very perſons to produce ſound and in good health; without I could have done this, I ſhould not have mentioned the other, eſpecially if I had been of the Author's opinion, that he was Maſter of ſo many other good qualities. I ſhould think that the uſing this had been enough to make people ſuſpect the reſt of the Character; for if that had been true, there had been no need to add this ſo notoriouſly otherwiſe. I have read the Hiſtory of England, and upon a ſerious reflection thereon, I believe it may be truly ſaid, That ſo many of the Common people were not put to death by the Hand of Juſtice, and driven into Exile for all the Rebellions of theſe 600 years, as were ſerved for that of Monmouth's, which did not laſt ſix weeks, the weaker Sex not ſpared. But for the Duke of Alva's Government of the Netherlands, Foreign Story could not have afforded a precedent: but then I do not find that great Man praiſed for his Lenity; in this we are an Original; neither do I find that he was more exact in his Scrutiny, than we were at Weſtminſter, where we were told that the Rebels were 6000, of which 2000 killed, and only 2000 [Page] brought to Juſtice, the other 2000 our Grand-Jury were directed to find out; and yet, after all this, ſome people will brag of this Man's forgiving Nature, the ſobriety of his Life, and diſcountenancing Debauchery, may be true as to exceſſive Drinking; but the placing his ſpurious Iſſue in the higheſt degree of Honour, is no great diſcouragement to the other ſort of Debauchery. For his Aſſiduity in his Councils and Treaſury, and the reſt of that Paragraph, as it is needleſs to examine them; ſo certainly the truth of them is no proof that the late King intended the happineſs of his Subjects in general.

The next Paragraph aſſerts, ‘That it was the late King's opinion that Liberty of Conſcience would be grateful to a great many of his Subjects, and would invite Forreigners to fix their Habitations amongſt us, to our great advantage; that it was the beſt expedient to bring us to a brotherly Love, and to prevent the Calamities that befel this Kingdom in his Father's time; and that he had this Notion ſtill fixed in him, with a deſign to ſignalize his Reign thereby.’

In oppoſition to which, I will endeavour to ſhew that the late King had no ſuch glorious aim, and that thereby he only intended to ſubvert the eſtabliſhed Religion of theſe Kingdoms: which will plainly appear, if we conſider, firſt, how different ſuch a method is to the fundamental principles of his Religion, as well as the practiſe of all Ages; thoſe that believe there is no Salvation out of the Church, which is only one, and that theirs, if they have any Bowels of Compaſſion or Charity, will endeavour the enlarging the pale of that Church. And then that Hereticks are to be extirpated upon the penalty of having their Territories given away to others, where this duty is neglected, is as eſſential a part of his Religion as General Councils can make it; therefore it were an injury to his Charity and Piety to ſuſpect he would not uſe his power ſo as became a zealous and ſubmiſſive Son of the Church; and what could be a greater brand to the ſincerity of his Religion, than decreeing counter to infallible Councils; it were as eaſie reconciling Toleration to Infallibility, as ſuch actions with being a good Catholick, unleſs they were ſanctified with a good intention, and done for the good of the Church; but to ſay he did not underſtand ſo much of the Arcana of his Religion, cannot be ſuppoſed without ſaying he underſtood nothing of it; and though he [Page] did not, it cannot be doubted but he would have been told of his duty by ſome Monitory Briefs from Rome. St. Peter's Succeſſor uſed to be ſo kind to Princes, as to lay before them the guilt and danger of actions leſs favourable to Hereticks, and to call upon them to avoid both, by executing the Decrees of the Church againſt them, if it be ſaid that the Roman Church, at leaſt the Guides of it, approved what King James did in this matter; and that, to preſerve his Conſcience, the Decrees of the Councils were ſuſpended as to him: I do verily believe it, and think that it follows from thence, that they knew what hook lay under that gilded bait, otherwiſe I know not how the ſame perſons could approve of the French King's Edict of October—85. annulling the perpetual and irrevocable Edict of Nantes, and the barbarous manner of the execution of it; and the late King's Declaration in—87. giving a general Liberty of Conſcience; two Decrees that concur only in one thing; that they are both againſt the Laws of their ſeveral Lands. In my opinion this would look ſo like an affront to that mighty Monarch's Conduct, that unleſs he were likewiſe privy to the plot, his Reſentment would not be ſatisfied with leſs than a ſolemn Renunciation, and taking new meaſures, now he has the late King ſo much at his devotion. And I doubt not, if this proceeding had diſpleaſed him, but in his late Conteſts with the Pope, we ſhould have heard him upbraiding his Holineſs with this kindneſs to Hereticks; but ſince neither of theſe have followed, and that neither the King of France nor the Pope is offended at our Indulgence, we may lawfully conclude there was little kindneſs thereby intended to us.

Secondly, If this Notion had been ſtill fixed in the late King; and had he always been of opinion, that none ought to be oppreſſed and perſecuted for matters of Religion, he would ſtill have acted conſonant to this principle; which that he did not do, is plain from his concurring with and promoting the enacting of the ſevereſt Laws againſt Diſſenters in his Brother's time, and alſo from his firſt Act of Government, the rigorous impoſing the Teſt of Scotland, when he repreſented his Brother there; and, laſtly, from the ſevere proſecution of the Diſſenters in the beginning of his own Reign in all his Kingdoms, and as to Scotland the 8th of May—85. he paſſed an Act of Parliament there, making it Death to preach, or be preſent at an Houſe or Field-Conventicle; which ſeverity [Page] would certainly have laſted to the end, could he have brought the Church of England to have complied with his unreaſonable Deſires, in relation to the Teſt. And if we look into his Letter which carried the firſt Indulgence to Scotland, and into the Proclamation itſelf, we ſhall find ſeveral Reſtrictions that do not ſeem to flow from that principle: He thereby recommends the rooting out of the Field-Conventiclers with all the Severities of the Law, and the moſt vigorous proſecution of his Forces: And then, except the Papiſt, only the Quakers, and the moderate Presbyterians were tolerated; which either were ſo few, or by a Court-interpretation might have been declared ſo, that had the matter gone ſmoothly with the Papiſts, it might eaſily have been rendred uſeleſs to all but themſelves; and ſurely no other Reaſon could be given for reſtraining them from uſing their Barns or Out-Houſes, or building Meeting-Houſes; a Quaker's Conſcience knew no difference between a Barn, Church, or Meeting-Houſe, where-ever the Spirit moved, he muſt hold forth, notwithſtanding the Reſtrictions of the Proclamation.

Thirdly, If the eaſing ſcrupulous Conſciences had been the late King's only Aim, he would have been contented with the Repeal of the Penal Laws, and not have inſiſted ſo ſtifly for the Repeal of the Teſt-Acts alſo, nothing therein being any reſtraint on any Diſſenter's worſhip; unleſs they believed God would not hear their Prayers, unleſs they were in Scarlet, or in an Alderman's Gown. And he was ſo fond of his Deſign of Repealing the Teſt-Acts, that thô he found how averſe the generality of the Nation were thereunto; thô he found by Penſionary Fagel's Letter, what was the Prince and Princeſs of Orange's Opinions in the matter, how they did concur with him in the Repeal of the Penal Laws, but not of the Teſt-Acts; becauſe thoſe Acts had no other tendency but the Security of the Eſtabliſhed Religion, and keeping the Papiſts from the means of ove [...]turning it, with other plain and ſolid Reaſons; yet he ſtill perſiſted in his Deſign, and was no ways ſatisfied with the Diſtinction made of the Teſt from the Penal Laws; as appears by Mr. Stewart's Letter of October the Nineteenth, 1687.

From hence I think it appears more clearly than from the mouth of many Witneſſes, that the late King's main Deſign was to get the Papiſts into Both Houſes of Parliament, where new Creations could have made a majority in the Houſe of Peers, and a Houſe of Commons might as eaſily have been made Popiſh by force or fraud, [Page] in the Elections or Returns; to facilitate which, we wanted neither Sheriffs nor Regulators; and then how eaſie had it been for them to enact Laws to deſtroy our Religion, we having before-hand Repealed all thoſe made for its preſervation. And to thoſe that require a Witneſs, we have Coleman telling us, That a general Liberty of Conſcience is the beſt way to introduce Popery, and the greateſt blow to the Proteſtant Religion here, that ever it received ſince its birth; that King Charles's Renuntiation of his Declaration for Liberty of Conſcience, was an injury to the Papiſts and their Deſigns: And why ſhould we not rather believe him than the Author; eſpecially ſince we know that it is an old Maxime of the Society. And further, it is not to be imagined that Coleman and his Confederates, would have been ſo zealous in their time, in promoting Liberty of Conſcience, and with the aſſiſtance of France, barely for the Eaſe of the Nation. The whole Kingdom was lately ſo ſenſible of this, and ſo plainly ſaw whether this Project tended, that the Diſſenters, thô they had not forgotten the ſmart of the Penal Laws, at leaſt the Men of Reaſon amongſt them, deſired their continuance, rather than by Repealing them, as demanded, to run the hazard of looſing the Proteſtant Religion: after which, ſurely, we need produce no further proof to this point.

Our Author next tells us, how much the late King hated Hypocriſie, and that he looked upon it as the moſt deteſtable Vice: In anſwer to which, I ſhall only ſay, that if he was a Papiſt ſo early as moſt people believe, he diſſembled many Years with God and Man, if attending at the Prayers of our Church, and receiving the Sacrament there, be ſo in a Papiſt. I know not how to evade this, but by ſaying he abſtained from both as ſoon as he was a Papiſt: But if this take off one Objection, it lays him open to another as ill, viz. In ſo ſilently parting with his Religion, as not to call to one of our many Clergy-men, that were at hand, for help: This ſhews he had but little value for the Old, and if ſo, I ſhould ſuſpect he had not all the Zeal for the New that he pretended; but this, as it is in the dark, ſo there let it remain, until the Secrets of all Hearts are opened.

But there is another thing looks very like Hypocriſie, and a diſſembling his Religion, when the whole Nation ſeemed ſatisfied what it was, and that is, proſecuting people by Actions of Scandalum Magnatum, and Indictments for calling him a Papiſt; many [Page] Inſtances whereof might be given in both Kingdoms, this was certainly as much below the Honour of a Gentleman, as the Sincerity of a Chriſtian.

But not to enlarge hereon, our Author in pag. 4 tells us, That the late King choſe the eaſieſt Methods, and uſed all the caution and moderation imaginable to effect his Deſign; which he calls only, The making of all Parties live eaſie under his Government: And tells us the Opinion of ſome Lawyers, and the Judgment he had to ſupport his Diſpenſing Power, opened the Door for the admiſſion of both kind of Diſſenters to Places of Truſt, Military and Civil; but that he made but little uſe of it, till neceſſity compelled him to it.

In anſwer to which I muſt ſay, That the Methods the late King took to procure the Repeal of the Penal Laws and Teſt, were not only mean, if going round a great part of the Nation to ſollicite Votes, or cloſſeting to that end were ſo, but alſo violent; if diſplacing all Men from their Offices and Imployments, that would not promiſe to conſent to the Repeal; nay, they muſt go further to ſecure their Places, and promiſe to be aiding and aſſiſting thereunto; were not the changes of Corporations as violent as ſcandalous. Laſtly, The univerſal inquiry how Men deſigned to Vote, if Elected Parliament-men, and what ſort of Members they deſigned to chuſe, was not only unuſual, and without precedent, but took away and deſtroyed the very Eſſence of an Engliſh Parliament, freedom both of Choice and Debate.

But now as to the inſtance by which our Author proves the late King's moderation in the matter; which is, That having conſulted the Judges, and others Learned in the Law, and finding them not only ready to countenance the Ʋndertaking, but aſſuring him he had a Power of Diſpenſing with the Penalties of thoſe Statutes, he might therefore lawfully exerciſe that Power; ſo confidently declared in him. To this I ſay, that thô it ſhould be granted, that ſuch a Diſpenſing Power had been veſted in him, yet it cannot be denyed, but that it was accompanied with a Truſt, not to make uſe thereof but for the Good of his People; and it can never be made out, that what he did was ſo, ſo long as the preſervation of the Proteſtant Religion is the great Intereſt of the Nation.

This Anſwer ſuppoſes the King acting according to Law, but if we take the Caſe as it really was, we ſhall find that the Long Robe did not make the King of their pretended Opinion, but that [Page] he made them of his; which is plain by the many Removes he made on the Benches before he could get a Sett for his purpoſe; and then the famous Judgment ſo much inſiſted on, was ſuch a piece of pageantry, as was never acted in Weſtminſter-Hall: The Judges may deny, as they do, that they knew who was Plantiff, or that he wore the Defendant's Livery; or that the Defendant, or Graham paid the Fees of both ſides; but herein their luck was very bad, to be ignorant of what few of the Nation were. But ſuppoſing this, the diſpatch they made was very extraordinary, for it was obvious to all Men of Sence, as well as Law, that the Caſe was of ſome conſequence, and deſerved more than a ſhort Vacations Conſideration, and more Arguments than one; and if what a late Author tells us be true, (and one that had any regard to his Credit, could ſcarce publiſh a Lye in ſo notorious a matter, and ſo eaſie to be diſproved) the Court denied to hear Mr. Wallop argue the Caſe; for which Sir Edward Herbert makes no excuſe in his Book; neither could he, if it be true: But what further clears the matter beyond all diſpute, is, that in delivering the Judgment, they carried the matter further then the neceſſity of the Caſe before them required; which amongſt Lawyers always leſſens the Authority of ſuch Reſolutions: but I forbear entring on the Legal part of this Controverſie, becauſe it has already been done, and is not within the Task I have undertaken.

The reſt of this Page is taken up in magnifying the late King's kindneſs to the Church of England, in aſſuring them all their Rights, and the ſole Injoyment of their Dignities, Offices, and Benefices thereto belonging; and that no Perſons were preſented to any Eccleſiaſtical Dignities, belonging to the Hierarchy, but Members of the Church.

Something has been already ſaid to the kindneſs deſigned for the Church in general, and more ſhall be ſaid when we conſider the Author's Objections; in the mean time it is ſufficient to ſay, we have heard of the Reproaches thrown by him on the Church, where in one of his kind fits to Alſop, he threatned, Ours ſhould be the laſt Church to which he would turn: And that we know not whether Sam. Oxon, or his Brother of Cheſter ſhould be accounted of our Church; but if they were, we know no difference between impoſing ſuch Men, and profeſſed Papiſts on us. That we look upon the Preferments in our Univerſities, to be of great concern to our Church; yet there we find Obadiah Walker a great [Page] Ruler, and a whole ſwarm at Magdalen-Colledge; If theirs were not Eccleſiaſtical Preferments, what had our late Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſioners to do with them, though they deprived the Fellows as Viſitors, yet ſure their incapacitating Decree was by vertue of their Eccleſiaſtical Supremacy?

Next we find our Author, giving ſome inſtances of the late King's with-drawing his Protection from the Church of England, which he modeſtly calls one Objection, inſtead of many: For the clearing whereof, he tells us, That as ſoon as the King publiſhed his Declaration for Indulgence, there preſently began a great ferment in the Nation; and that the Roman Catholicks finding the Church of England imbittered againſt them, he means unwilling to ſubmit to the Romiſh Yoke, which our Forefathers were not able to bear; they fell a Careſſing the Diſſenters, vainly ſuppoſing them the moſt powerful Intereſt of the Nation.

All that I ſhall obſerve from hence is, That this procedure exactly follows their old meaſures in keeping up the Diviſions amongſt Proteſtants; they had not forgotten the Old ſaying, Divide & impera. But I have not ſeen the end of keeping up theſe differences, ſo plainly owned by any of the Party, as by our Author; who ſays plainly, That when the Church of England would not ſerve their turn, they joyned with the Diſſenters, in confidence, that in conjunction with them they had the moſt powerful intereſt of the Nation, which I always looked upon as the true reaſon of the Indulgence; when I reflected on the time when we were bleſſed with it, it was then that the generality of the Diſſenters were better ſatisfied with the Church than ever they had been; they were then fully ſatisfied the Church had no inclination or warping towards Popery; ſo that it was really timed ſo as to blaſt the fair hopes we had of a perfect Union amongſt our ſelves. From hence let us learn how to regard ſuch as promote the old, or any new difference amongſt us; for let the Pretenſions be never ſo plauſible, the Deſign is to weaken us by dividing us; which hopes are not quite dead in the Author, as we may imagine by his attributing all that was done againſt any Member of the Church oſ England, to their ſtruggle with the Diſſenter: I am confident the Biſhop of London and the Fellows of Magdalen know where to place it better, viz. to their ſtruggle with the Papiſts; which is plain, if we conſider the time when theſe things happened; the [Page] Biſhop of London's Perſecution began the 14th of July—86, that being the Date of the King's Letter to him, and his firſt Appearance was on the 4th of Auguſt following, and the King's Declaration for Liberty of Conſcience was not until the 4th of April after; ſo that it is impoſſible to aſcribe what was done to this Member of the Church to any ſtruggle with the Diſſenter, occaſioned by the Declaration of Liberty; and how the buſineſs of Magdalen ſhould be attributed to that, I cannot ſee; when the Letter in behalf of Farmer bore date the day after the Indulgence, it was of a mighty force, if it could ſet the Nation ſo ſoon in a ferment, as the Author ſays it did; and Alban Francis's Letter bore date the 7th of March, before the Indulgence, on which Dr. Peachell was deprived; ſo that our Author muſt either mean that theſe were no Members of the Church of England; or what is as ridiculous, that there was nothing done againſt them; or his Propoſition is falſe, that the Diſſenters ſtruggle for Maſtery, occaſioned what was ſo done; It were but a ſmall improvement of this Obſervation, to ſhew that our Author broaches this Doctrine with the ſame deſign now, when prudent and pious Endeavours are uſing to remove all ſtumbling-blocks out of the Diſſenter's way, in coming to our Churches; which I hope will meet with the wiſhed-for ſucceſs, notwithſtanding all the endeavours of Rome and Hell to the contrary.

Next our Author goes to demonſtrate, That the overthrow of the Church of England, or eſpecially of Proteſtaniſm, was never deſigned; and this he thinks he does by the King's ſo often declaring the contrary, and by the ſence he and his Juncto had, that their Converts were but few, and by the late King's granting a ſafe retreat and liberal contribution to the French Proteſtants, and by the paucity of the Papiſts in his Army.

To which I ſay, that from all theſe it does not follow that the deſtruction of the Church was not deſigned; for unleſs the King's Word were like the Laws of the Medes and Perſians, unalterable, it will be but a looſe Conſequence, the King promiſed not to do it, therefore he will not: it conculdes much ſtronger; the Principles of his Religion obliege him to it, therefore he will endeavour it. When this Argument was uſed, ſoon after the Gracious aſſurance given us at the firſt Council, or firſt Seſſion of Parliament, where the ſame was again repeated; it had ſo much colour of an [Page] Argument, that it deceived many, eſpecially when there was ſubjoyned to it, That theſe promiſes and aſſurances came from a Prince that valued his word ſo much as never to have broken it. Bu [...] now that we have ſeen him break through Laws that he had ſworn, as well as promiſed to maintain, the very pretence to an Argument is vaniſhed; for as there is more Injuſtice, ſo there is more of Diſhonour in the one than the other.

When we examine his other inſtances, they will prove as inconcluſive; for he could not deny a retreat to the fugitive Hugonots, without allaruming his own Subjects, and diſcovering his Deſigns too plainly to the moſt ſhort-ſighted; and they were not then ripe for ſuch a diſcovery. After ſuch an action, who would have believed him that it was his Opinion, That Conſcience ought not to be forced? If he had endeavoured either by fair or foul means to have preſerved the Edict of Nantes, to have ſupported that moſt diſtreſſed part of Mankind from their King's Barbarities, as Queen Elizabeth did, and his Father attempted, it would have been a better proof of his love for Liberty of Conſcience, than either his Declarations or a ſmall Charity afforded to a few fugitives; which I muſt call but ſmall, when I conſider what the Elector of Brandenburgh did for thoſe poor people; that great Man not only offorded them a ſafe retreat when they came into his Dominions, but by a ſolemn Declaration invited them to take ſhelter there; and to aſſiſt them in their Journey, appointed his ſeveral Agents in Holland, Hamburgh, Francfort and Cologne to furniſh all ſuch of them as ſhould deſire it, with what Veſſels and Proviſions they ſhould ſtand in need of, for the Tranſportation of themſelves, their Goods and Families, to whatſoever Town in his Dominions they ſhould pitch upon for the place of their abode: But his kindneſs did not reſt here, for he provided Houſes and Lands for them and their Heirs; and where it was neceſſary, he provided them all Materials for Repairs and Building; where Houſes were built on new Foundations, they had Ten years Exemption from all Taxes and Duties, and Six years where they were only repaired: And for a further encouragement, he made them Free of all his Towns and Corporations, without paying any thing for the ſame; and leſt they might be oppreſſed, he ſet over them a Juriſdiction, compoſed of perſons choſen by themſelves; and if any difference happened between them and a German, this perſon [Page] was to joyn with the Magiſtrate in deciding the ſame, and maintained one of their own Miniſters for them in every Town, with ſeveral other great favours. If King James had taken this courſe, our Author might have inſiſted on it, at leaſt as an heroick Act; but ſince he did not ſet out a Fleet, or ſo much as one ſingle Ship to aſſiſt thoſe poor people in their flight, and when with difficulty they had gotten here, he left them to their ſhifts and the charity of the Nation. I do not ſee what he could have done leſs, eſpecially if we conſider one diſcouragement that went along with it: It is true, he ſuffered them to breathe of his Air, but would not ſuffer them to ſigh or complain of the uſage they had met with in France; but at the inſtance of the French Ambaſſador, ordered the Account they had written thereof to be Burnt by the hand of the Hangman, which was accordingly done the fifth of May—86, and the Royal Exchange was made the place of Execution, that the account thereof might fly the eaſier over France by our Merchant's Letters to their Correſpondents there; which as it proved a diſcouragement to thoſe in France not to take ſanctuary here, ſo it ſo much frightned thoſe that were then here, that many of them thereupon removed to the Weſt-Indies and other places, where the French King's Miniſters had not ſo much power, being juſtly jealous that that power might ſoon be improved to a forcing them back. But ſince our Author lays ſo much ſtreſs on this Act, if ye examine the matter a little further, we ſhall find theſe poor people owe the compleating of their miſery to the late King: For though the Tyrant began to oppreſs his Proteſtant Subjects ſome years ago, which from time to time encreaſed, as his Intereſt did at our Court; yet he never ventured on the total ſuppreſſion of the Reformed Religion, nor revoked the Edict of Nantes until October—85. that the late King was on the Throne, for as much his friend as King Charles was; yet he did not know how far a Parliament might have influenced him to reſent that matter, therefore he forbore it until all was ſure on this ſide the Water.

Next, as to the Number of Papiſts in the Army: they will appear very many, if we conſider two things: Firſt, that there were fewer of them to be had in England, than of other Men, fit to be Souldiers; and yet their proportion was greater with reſpect to the Army, than to the Kingdom, otherwiſe there had not been above two or three in a Regiment; all that exceeded that number [Page] ſeems to be the effect of induſtry and pains, rather than chance.

Next we muſt remember the little time the late King had for this mighty buſineſs; he had little more than three years for the Raiſing his Army, which at firſt, to avoid offence, was to be Proteſtant, but a few Officers, whoſe Loyalty he had experienced; and having had the benefit of their Services, in the late time of need and danger, he could not expoſe them to diſgrace, nor himſelf to the want of them againſt the next Rebellion: this is his language in—85; yet in the next three years he brought many into the Army that had helped him but little againſt Moumouth.

Here we muſt not forget the ſeveral ways that were taken to remedy this, and to increaſe their number: One was by ſending the Army by parcels into Ireland, where, in a little time, they could be made intirely Catholick; and this was the caſe of Hamilton's Regiment of Dragoons, which came intirely Proteſtant into Ireland, except a very few Officers; and about two years and an half afterwards returned to England intirely Papiſt; though this was practiſed on no other part of the Army, yet we do not forget what Preparations were made in Ireland for changing that part of the Army we had there, upon pretence that the King might ſee them, though we know that the other deſign was in the bottom.

Another courſe was, the adding a few Iriſh to every Regiment: this was attempted on Col. Beaumont at Portſmouth; and would have been further uſed, if the danger from Holland had not come ſuddenly upon them.

Laſtly, It is to be noted that the Army in Ireland had in that time from Proteſtant been intirely made Papiſt, to the undoing of many young Gentlemen, who had laid out their Fortunes in the purchaſe of Imployments therein, which was but an ill return for their Zeal in the Moumouth Rebellion, in which time a thouſand of them came into this Kingdom on a very few hours warning: And they that have ſeen Teague-O-Regan, and the Tools for which theſe were Disbanded, muſt conclude that the King deſigned ſomething elſe than having a brisk and loyal Army. From what I have ſaid, I think I may modeſtly conclude, that there is but little force in any of the matters hitherto inſiſted on by our Author.

[Page] Now he comes to Anſwer the Objection made by himſelf; which is, That his King began early to withdraw his Protection from the Church of England, in ſuſpending the Biſhop of London, by preſenting two Roman Catholicks to the Headſhips of Colledges, and by Mandates putting ſome of them into Fellowſhips, and afterwards diſplacing Twenty five of Magdalen-Colledge, and filling it with Roman Catholicks; laſtly, by Impriſoning ſeven Eminent Biſhops.

This our Author makes but one Objection, and his Anſwer to the firſt part of it relating to the Biſhop of London's Sufferings from the Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſion, is but ſhort, and ſuppoſes the Spirit of Propheſie amongſt ſome of the Party, and is only, That it appears, ex poſt facto, that the King was too merciful to him, becauſe he appeared early for the Prince of Orange in Counſelling and Accompanying the Princeſs Ann's flight to the Lords in the North, and for ſetting the Crown on the new King's Head, after contributing ſo much to the tearing it from the Father's. Though it were true that he contributed much thereunto, I dare boldly ſay, that his Judges the Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſioners contributed much more: But then why the Author ſhould affix the Epithet of Merciful to thoſe proceedings, I ſee not; if they had been ſuch as would have prevented the pretended Crimes, they might have been called Prudent; but as they were, they had no pretence to either, or to Juſtice, the more indiſpenſible requiſite; our Author knew how little could be ſaid on this Topick, and therefore wholly waved it. Aftertimes will admire the prudent Conduct of that great Prelate, who did not by inadvertency lay himſelf more open to that malice that could make his duty a crime; and that his Enemies could not find ſome better pretence to quarrel with him, than his not Suſpending Dr. Sharp, without citing, or hearing him in his own defence, and for a matter he was no ways guilty of, as every body muſt believe, ſince they did not think fit to proſecute him for his crime. Did the Biſhop of London's contempt leſſen or take off his? if not, why was not he puniſhed? the reaſon certainly was, becauſe they could not make out their Charge againſt him. And I muſt tell our Author, that the Nation was not more diſſatisfied with the injury done them in the Perſon of this Biſhop, than with the Arbitrary manner of doing it; to find ſuch an Authority uſurped and executed, not only againſt Law, but the very Forms thereof, was a terrible blow not only to the Spiritual concern, but [Page] to the Civil Right of the Nation; for the ſame reaſon that juſtified this Court, might have ſet up another Court of Star-Chamber, and therein Men might as legally have been puniſhed for diſobeying the King's Temporal Commands; ſuch as refuſing to lend Money, or to concur in the Repeal of the Teſt; then the ſuddenneſs of the blow was a new aggravation; no more was to be done but to ask a queſtion, and then read a Sentence of Condemnation, though in the Biſhop's Caſe they were pleaſed to hear his Civilians, (though not the Common Lawyers againſt the Juriſdiction of the Court;) yet what they ſaid ſeemed ſo little to the purpoſe, that it did not ſo much as require an Anſwer. As prepared as the Judges were in Sir Edward Hale's Caſe, yet they kept to the formality of hearing of Counſel of both ſides; but this being a new Court, it was fit that it ſhould have as new a Method of proceeding, and as much unknown in this Kingdom as it ſelf.

His Anſwer to the buſineſs of St. Mary Magdalen-Colledge is one of the moſt unconcluding Paragraphs of this Book; He blames Mr. Walker's Zeal, Lord Sunderland's want of Phlegm, and the Roman Catholicks want of Wit; in which particulars there ſhall be no difference between us; the reſt he ſays is, That the rigor uſed againſt theſe Gentlemen was occaſioned by their ſtiff oppoſition to the King; who ſaid with ſeriouſneſs to one of his acquaintance, That if the Fellows had not proceeded to Election, but ſuſpended that until the Qualification of Mr. Farmer had been enquired into, he would either have left them to their choice, or recommended ſome other as ſoon as he had been ſatisfied of the unfitneſs of Mr. Farmer; and that if the Fellows had admitted the Biſhop, asked the King's pardon and acknowledged themſelves wanting in their duty, there had not been above two of them removed, which is only a ſoft word for Expelled; and that it is apparent that it was from after Counſels, upon the emergency that R [...]an Catholicks were ſubſtituted in their places.

In anſwer to which, I ſay there is but little coherence in the diſcourſe he makes for the King; he repreſents him angry; that the Fellows went to an Election until Mr. Farmer's qualifications were enquired into; their delaying in order to know his pleaſure to the utmoſt time limited by their Statutes, to which they were ſworn was no excuſe: the reaſon whereof, tho' another be pretended, was, That if they had neglected their Oath in that particular, [Page] they could never afterwards have inſiſted on the Obligation there of in oppoſition to his Will; if they had, he that upbraided them for not reading Maſs, would never have miſſed ſo late an inſtance. But then, what was the need of enquiring into Farmer's qualifications? without any, the King knew he wanted the chief one requiſite, the eſtabliſhed Religion, yet that did not hinder his recommending of him; but then if they had ſtayed, where was the mighty ſavour in eaſing them of Farmer, and impoſing the Biſhop on them, both were equally contrary to their Statutes and Oaths? Our Author muſt excuſe me if I cannot take his word for what he ſays: In the laſt place; what, had Mr. Walker's Zeal no aim, but the good of the Proteſtant Religion? and was not Farmer well qualified for the promoting thereof? was it King James's love to Proteſtants made him diſguſt the whole Proteſtant part of the Nation? there are ſome things carry their own evidence with them, and few with greater clearneſs than this: For if the King had not deſigned this Colledge to the Roman Catholicks, from the beginning of the Controverſie, he might have given it to his new friends; and this had been a greater proof of his real kindneſs for them than his famed Indulgence. The laſt thing that I ſhall obſerve in this matter is, That our Author ought not only to have cleared the King and his Commiſſioner's Juriſdiction in the caſe, but alſo have juſtified their manner of proceeding; and ſhould have ſhewed us how Dr. Hough could juſtly be deprived, without calling him to anſwer for himſelf; ſurely thoſe Commiſſioners had this in their head when they rejected the Biſhop of London's Plea, that he could not ſuſpend Dr. Sharp without calling him to anſwer; it was ill done of him that he would not ſet them a precedent how they might deal with ſuch as they feared might be too hard for them; and upon what Law or Reaſon they founded that cruel Sentence, rendring them uncapabl [...] of any Eccleſiaſtical Benefice, Promotion, or Holy Orders, I do not ſee: The Reformed Church could afford them no precedent for this; and I queſtion whether the Roman Cruelty ever came up to it. But of all this there is not a word of excuſe, the reaſon may be eaſily gueſſed.

Our Author comes next to the buſineſs of the Seven Biſhops; and what he ſays on this Head, is as lame as what he ſaid on the former: Firſt he pretends that the ſole deſign of having the Declaration [Page] read in the Churches was, That all might be aſſured of the grounds of it. But ſurely reading it in a Coffee-houſe, a Market-houſe, or in any other place, had done that as well, as was truly obſerved by the Author of the Clergy-man's Letter; the ſubſtance whereof might properly be inſerted here, but I rather chuſe to refer my Reader thereto.

He next quarrels at ſome indecent circumſtances of their Actions: the firſt he mentions is, That the King was not acquainted with their deſign, to be excuſed, until the Friday night before it was to be publiſhed in the Churches of London. This is otherwiſe, if we will believe the King, who at the delivery of the Petition to him, told them he had heard of their deſign before, but could not believe it: How could the Biſhops help that? they then undeceived him: This, he ſays, was excuſed by waiting for a Welſh Biſhop: But, by his favour, I have another excuſe; which is, That the King appointed the Reading of the Declaration ſo ſoon after the Order for that purpoſe, that the Clergy had too little time allowed them to conſider of ſo great a matter; the Order of Council for Reading the Declaration bore date the 4th of May, and was publiſhed in the Gazette the 7th, and directed the Declaration to be Read in London on the 20th; ſo that the Biſhops were but Ten days conſulting; If they had taken leſs time, the Act would have been cenſured as raſh, and that they had not well conſidered of it: but if the King had not long enough time to deliberate on the matter, or to have ſignified his pleaſure therein to the City before Sunday; yet ſurely he might have been content with the ſinful compliance of thoſe that did Read it the firſt Sunday, and had time enough to ſignifie his pleaſure before the ſecond Sunday it was appointed to be Read in the City; or before the third of June, that it was appointed to be Read in the Countrey; and he might afterwards have taken what time he pleaſed to have conſidered how to deal with thoſe that did not Read it.

He next ſays, That they put the proof on the King, that they delivered their Petition, knowing that none were then preſent but themſelves; and inſiſted thereon, until by the Candor of the Archbiſhop it was owned. Thoſe that will look into their Tryal, will ſee what reaſon they had for ſo doing; and will be able to judge, whether it was generous in the King to make evidence of what paſſed at the Board; which paſſage we ſhall find miſ-repreſented by the Author, [Page] if we look into Page 91. of the Biſhops Tryal, where Mr. Muſgrave on his Oath gives an account of what paſſed there: He ſays, That when the Paper was read, they were asked if they owned it? or if it was their Hands? That the Archbiſhop, in the Name of the reſt, declined, anſwering, Upon the account they were there as Criminals, and not obliged to ſay any thing to their own prejudice, or that might hurt them thereafter: But if his Majeſty would command them; and if he would promiſe no advantage ſhould be made of what they confeſſed, then they would anſwer the queſtion: His Majeſty ſaid, He would do nothing but according to Law; that then they were ordered to with-draw: and being called in again, they were asked the ſame queſtion; and then the Archbiſhop anſwered, We will rely upon your Majeſty; and then they did own their Hands. Now if ſilence be giving conſent, the King conſented, or made them believe he conſented to their juſt requeſt; ſo that this Debate was only as to their Hands being to the Petition, nothing ſaid of the Delivery: All the Witneſſes the King's Counſel produced could not ſay that ever any queſtion was asked them about the Delivery, or that they either confeſſed or denied that; and at laſt they were forced to own that there was no poſitive proof thereof either by confeſſion or otherwiſe, and went about to ſupply this with circumſtances: If the Chancellor had thought how material this queſtion would have been upon the Tryal, he would not have omitted the asking of it, and would have gotten an anſwer under the ſame truſt with the former. This being the ſtate of that matter, I appeal to all Men that underſtand the difference between denying and not owning their Hands, Whether there was any Ill in this part of that Tranſaction?

Our Author next ſays, That the Law of the Land, the benefit of Peerage, and the Biſhop's inſiſting thereon, was a ſurprize to the King and Council, and put them upon ſome difficulty; and that there was no expedient to be found, but either to acquit or commit them. This ſeems ſtrange, and is not only a reflection on the Lawyers of the Board, but on thoſe learned Gentlemen that were attending; for ſurely none of the four were ſo ignorant; they could have told the King, you may and ought to diſmiſs them for this time, with a Reprimand; and acquaint them, that as ſoon as the Term comes, which was not far off, an Information ſhould be exhibited againſt [Page] them for their Seditious Libel; and that if they did not appear to anſwer the ſame, Proceſs would iſſue againſt them; thoſe that had been Chief Juſtices of that Court, and the King's Council knew this very well; but that did not anſwer their ends, they were in haſt, and by this method the Term might have been ſpent without any Tryal: And what is more, they would not have known how to have avoided the Archbiſhop's Preſence to the affair they were to have in hand ſoon: this looks ſo like their Politicks, that it finds greater belief than any poſitive proof we have for it deſerves.

The next Aſſertion is, That the Biſhop's Tryal was managed favourably, and that over-ſights were committed in the want of proof, and ſuffering the diſpencing Power to be ſo fully argued: Theſe were certainly over ſights, but they were ſuch as were not to be remedied by any diligence, and ſhould have been conſidered before the Proſecution was reſolved on; for it was obvious to the meaneſt capacity, that the Biſhops would make that defence; but their rage blinded them in more particulars than our Author mentions, elſe they had never forgotten that the Archbiſhop was not at White hall, or that he had not done any Act in the County where they laid their Venue. I formerly mentioned their want of proof of the publiſhing; and I might here add thoſe other ingredients of a Libel, Falſity and Malice; had they not been tranſported with Rage, or ſomething more extravagant, could they hope that twelve Engliſh-men would believe it unlawful to Petition the King; had not their former ſucceſs with Juries been great, they would never have attempted ſo extravagant a thing.

With what patience the late King endured the rejoycing at the Biſhop's acquittal, I know not; but it would ſeem by the Proceedings of his Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſioners, and their Order of the 12th of July to all the Chancellors of the Kingdom to return them the Names of all ſuch of our Clergy as did not Read the King's Declaration on the 16th day of Auguſt following, that he was not reſolved to let the matter end ſo; and though the Jury had acquit them, he had a Sett of Commiſſioners that knew better the ſin of diſobeying his Majeſty's Commands; and if deſtruction had not come ſuddenly upon them, it is not to be imagined what Examples we ſhould have had of his fury; if we compute according to the Durham pattern, we ſhould have had at leaſt [Page] Five thouſand ſuſpended Miniſters in the Kingdom, which does many times exceed the Numbers that were deprived either on King Edward or Queen Elizabeth's Reformation.

And then as to the King's Juſtice in the matter, of which our Author ſays none have reaſon to complain; it was making a Petition a Libel, and the delivery of it to himſelf in his Bed-chamber or Cloſet a Publiſhing of it; and ſurely there was as little Juſtice or Clemency in the laſt part of the Tragedy, to diſplace the Judges for diſcharging their Conſciences, and declaring the Law to be as really it was, was ſo arbitrary, that the Great Lewis could have done no more if his Commands had been contradicted; and to do that ſo ſuddenly after the Tryal, and to ſuperſede them before they had finiſhed the Circults to which they had been appointed, did ſo much proclaim his rage, that few people will be perſwaded that he would patiently have endured the Huzza's our Author ſpeaks of, if he had known how to help it.

He ſuppoſes we will lay no great ſtreſs upon the King's placing ſome Roman Catholicks in Colledges, it being known that the Kings of England have in all Ages diſpenced with Qualifications required by the Ʋniverſity-Statutes, eſpecially ſince the Judgment for the Diſpencing Power.

How this Judgment comes to be urged here, I do not ſee; unleſs it be, becauſe the word Diſpence is uſed in both; for that Judgment, as extravagant as it was, had no influence on our Univerſities; for that great reaſon, That nothing ought to hinder the King of the Uſe and Service of his Subjects, has no force here, unleſs we allow that the corrupting the Youth of the Nation was the ſervice the King had for thoſe Popiſh Emiſſaries; and then that other reaſon, That the Laws of England are the King's Laws, does not come up to the preſent caſe, becauſe the Magdalen-Statutes are alſo the Founder's Laws, and therefore not to be changed without his or his Succeſſor's conſent; but ſuppoſing the King had ſuch a Power by the Law, was that the way he ſwore to ſupport the Church of England? was not that truſting our Sheep and Lambs to the Wolf to keep? In this particular, as in all others of Honour or Profit, the Papiſt had the better much of the Diſſenter, in whoſe favour we do not find one Mandate to the Univerſity.

Theſe are the particulars our Author ſays gave the greateſt cauſe of clamour; and the reaſon was, becauſe they ſhaked the Foundations [Page] of our ſecurity, and veſted the whole Legiſlature in the King; in the ſupport of which Uſurpation, he was reſolved to ruin all that thwarted him, on the meaneſt pretence; this made his Rule odious and terrible to the Subject: How could we account any thing, either of Religion or Property, our own, when the doors were opened, and we were only beholden to the Jeſuit's modeſty for not entring and ſtripping us of as much of either of them as they thought fit.

Before I have done with this Head, I muſt deſire you to take notice of our Author' [...] modeſty in reckoning the late King's injuries to the Church of [...]ngland; if he had pleaſed he might have inſtanced more; as the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge's Caſe, who for refuſing to admit Alban Francis a Benedictine Monk, on the King's Mandate, to the degree of Maſter of Arts, without taking the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, appointed to be taken by ſeveral Acts of Parliament, was deprived of that Office, and alſo ſuſpended ab officio & beneficio of his Maſterſhip of Magdaten-Colledge, during his Majeſty's pleaſure: This ſentence was pronounced the 7 th of May—87, and never relaxed until the General Jubilee on the Biſhop's Addreſs October—88. His four new Biſhops, and keeping Biſhopricks vacant, all that fell in his time in Ireland, and making worſe uſe of ſome in England; entertaining a Nuntio publickly at Court; ſetting a Jeſuit at Council-Table, were no great Complements to the Church of England, nor their publick Schools and Maſs-houſes; the regulation of Corporations ſhewed them but little reſpect, with many other things of this ſort that might be mentioned. I am ſorry the Author's indiſcretion ſhould have forced me to give ſo many inſtances of that Man's failings; he fancied had all that could be wiſhed, and do now leave it to you and all indifferent perſons to judge, whether the Author has made out his firſt Propoſition of King James's good intentions.

The ſecond Propoſition laid down by our Author is, That the late King's deſigns were totally fruſtrated, but whether by ignorance or treachery, or both, is not worth while to examine. In his diſcourſe on this Head he mentions ſeveral over fights in the then Miniſters of State; but inſtead of four, he ſhould have given us many more; wherewith I will not trouble my ſelf at preſent, my deſign being to Anſwer his Book, not to Mend it.

[Page] I will therefore haſten to the third Propoſition, which is, That our condition, in reſpect of our Laws, Liberties, and Properties, is now worſe than it was, or was like to have been under King James. In the handling whereof, our Author pretends to conſider the ſeveral Grievances we laboured under in King James his time, as they are ſummed up in the Declaration of the 12th of February laſt, which filled up our vacant Throne, and that he will draw the Parallel between the late and preſent Times impartially. This, I muſt confeſs, is a very proper method for his deſign, which is all the good I can ſay of the undertaking; I will follow him through the ſeveral Articles as laid down, and hope plainly to demonſtrate the malice and falſe gloſſes of all he ſays; and if that be well done▪ I think little more need be ſaid in Confutation of the reſt of the Book.

The firſt Article is, That King James did endeavour to ſubvert and extirpate the Proteſtant Religion, the Laws and Liberties of this Kingdom; the other Articles are only the means which he uſed to this end: In anſwer to which, he ſays, The late King aimed at nothing but Liberty to all ſorts of Diſſenters, and that Roman Catholicks might have their ſhare of eaſe. 2. That few Converts were made in his time. 3. And that having armed his Roman Catholicks in his laſt extremity, they did not amount to the fortieth part of his Army, nor to the 300 fighting Men in his Kingdom, therefore they could afford him ſmall aſſiſtance. 4. That the Church flouriſhed in his time, many Diſſenters being then brought into its Communion. 5. That now the Church of England and Epiſcopacy is in danger, if Proteſtancy be not, as appears by the late Act of Toleration, wherein Turciſm is not excepted, though Popery be. 6. That Epiſcopacy is aboliſhed in Scotland, and they have a Party in the Convention here endeavouring the ſame thing. 7. That we have loſt the Doctrine of our Church-Loyalty and Non-reſiſtance. 8. That we have ſeen a total Abolition of the Laws; for we have changed the Hereditary Monarchy into an Elective one, and deſtroyed all Government by declaring an Original Power in the People. This, with ſome ſcandalous and unjuſt Reflections on his preſent Majeſty, to which I will not give ſo much countenance as an Anſwer, is the ſubſtance of what he ſays on the firſt Article, which for Method's ſake I have ſub-divided into eight Particulars, to each of which I will propoſe ſome Conſiderations, except to the firſt; of which I have ſaid ſo much already, that it is needleſs to ſay more. [Page] But that if the late King had been, as our Author ſays, Maſter of the Wiſdom, we could have wiſhed him, he would never have done ſo many mean, harſh, and ſuperſtitious things for no purpoſe whatſoever, unleſs it were to hinder what our Author ſays he only deſigned. From hence I think we may ſtrongly conclude, that he deſigned more than Eaſe for Roman Diſſenters.

To the ſecond, no body would have ſaid that few Converts were made in his time, that did not wiſh them more: Was there any Order of Men amongſt us free? Some of the Nobility in all the three Kingdoms; ſome of our Clergy, Lawyers, Souldiers, and of all other ranks had actually declared; and it is too much to be feared, that many waited only for the Repeal of the Penal Laws, though they cared not for their Souls, nor ſtood in awe of Damnation; yet they dreaded the Statute againſt being reconciled: But then if their Numbers were but ſmall, the fault was not the King's, for he made the full uſe of the Arguments in his Power, diſcountenancing the ſtedfaſt, and rewarding thoſe that came over to him; the Great Seals of two of the Three Kingdoms were in ſuch hands, and ſurely England will not brag much of their Proteſtant Chancellor; to go to Maſs was the certain way to Preferment, as might be inſtanced in many particulars; and we cannot forget what took the Treaſurer's Staff from the Earl of Rocheſter.

To the third, That the Papiſts of Fngland are not the 300th fighting Man, I will not diſpute; but that they were not the 40th Man of the late Army, is certainly falſe; if he had told us in plain Engliſh, that there was but one or two of them in a Company, all perſons that had been converſant in the places where they were Quarter'd, would have known the contrary; therefore he choſe other words, and yet ſays the ſame thing; which is plain, when we conſider that our Companies conſiſted of about 50 Men; but for eaſineſs of computation, we will allow them to be 60, which by our Author's proportion is only three Papiſts to two Companies. I might here mind our Author, that the Iriſh Army was Papiſt, which, multiplied by 40, had made an Army big enough for the Great Mogull: But I will yield that our Author did not include the Iriſh Army, when he made the 40th Man the proportion of Papiſt; and yet they ought not to be forgotten, when we are ſpeaking of King James's Popiſh Forces: But his Expreſſion being, That the Papiſts armed in his laſt extremity, were not the 40th [Page] part of his Army. The Party that came from Ireland in October—88, muſt be included, or he was not then or afterwards in extremity. Now ſuppoſing no Papiſts in his Army before, and that Party being at leaſt 3000 by the Author's Rule of proportion, his Army ought to have conſiſted of 120000 Men; but his Army was not ſo great, and the Papiſts of it more, ſo that another eſtimate of them muſt be taken; if we throw away the cypher, and read a 4th, inſtead of a 40th part, I believe we ſhall be nearer the matter. But ſince that and a much greater force was not ſufficient to enſlave this Nation, we muſt conclude he had other Tools, Forreign or Domeſtick, to carry on the Cauſe.

To the fourth, That the Church flouriſhed in the late King's time; if our Author means that we had many good and learned Men then in it, I muſt grant it; but then it muſt be granted to me, that he thought them too many, and endeavoured to make them ſewer both by tearing ſo great a Limb as Magdalen from the Univerſity, and ſhutting Twenty-ſeven of them out of the Church by the cruel Decree of the 18th of October—87. And how little he regarded thoſe good Men that helped our Church to flouriſh, may be ſeen by the Worthies he preferred to the Sees of Oxford and Cheſter, and his preferring Farmer to Dr. Hough; that he did this out of kindneſs to the Church, our Author dare not ſay; but he may tell me, and that truly, that in the See of Briſtol it was otherwiſe, and that therefore the King did not always deſign a ſcandal or injury to the Church by thoſe he preferred in it; I have too great a veneration for the Chriſtian Courage and Sufferings of that Biſhop, not to make him an Exception out of that Rule: But then we muſt remember, he was preferred before his Fears of oppoſition from the Nation were quit off him; and if we conſider how many of the Lay-Proteſtants, preferred by him in the beginning of his Reign, were afterwards diſplaced, and his aftercarriage to that Biſhop, we may conclude that his High Commiſſion would ſoon have rectified that miſtake, by a Deprivation, if his fault was any thing greater than not Suſpending Dr. Sharp, or as great as the Biſhop of Dunkell's giving his Vote in Parliament againſt the Repeal of the Teſt, had it not received an unexpected diſſolution: But notwithſtanding all his Suſpenſions, Deprivations, Impriſonments, and other favours to our Clergy, our Author tells us, that many of the Diſſenters were brought into the Communion of the Church by the unanſwerable Writings of that time againſt [Page] Popery; that theſe ſhould influence them more than thoſe learned ones, ſet out a little before for their Conviction, ſhews that the terrour of Popery wanted not its force in perſwading them to that prudent Conduct. But how to draw an Argument from hence in praiſe of the late King, or his Times, I ſee not; unleſs thoſe ſtraying Sheep were brought back to the Fold by the diligence of his Shepherds: Was any of thoſe Pieces written by Sa. Oxon? or did the famous Rippon's Sermon contribute thereunto? Not ſo much, I dare ſay, as it did to the Preacher's Biſhoprick. I muſt confeſs the Reaſons for Abrogating the Teſt, Mr. Sclater's and Obediah's Pieces contributed thereunto, but it was by ſetting ingenious Men to write Anſwers to them. Before I cloſe this Section, I muſt again put you in mind of what I ſormerly hinted to you; That the Indulgence coming at the nick of time, when things were healing very faſt; and when the great Scare-crow, the approaches of our Church to Popery, was experimentally confuted, it looks as if ſome-body deſigned to widen our Breaches, and to diſappoint the Church of that ſatisfaction, which was not more earneſtly deſired by us, than dreaded by them.

As to the fifth, in which our Author tells us, That the Church of England is in danger, and pretends to prove it by the late Act of Toleration: I ſay, firſt, that the late King's being larger, muſt have endangered it more; if the Act let in Turciſm, as our Author falſly ſuggeſts, it keeps out Idolatry, and at once frees us from God's Judgments due to that crying Sin, and in a great meaſure from Popiſh Contrivances; for now the Jeſuits muſt work in the dark, as they did formerly; which as it much retards their deſigns, ſo it occaſions many miſtakes to the frequent fruſtrating thereof; the Act requires the profeſſing of Faith in Father, Son, and Holy Ghoſt, and thereby excludes Mahometiſm, which the Proclamation does not.

Next, I ſay, it is pretty ſtrange to find one that has ſaid ſo much for Liberty of Conſcience, and a Proclamation granting it, making the Act for Toleration dangerous: Is it not lawful for their preſent Majeſties to Signalize their Reign on the ſame Principle our Author pretends King James deſigned? Or is the preſent Liberty the worſe, or more dangerous to Church or State, becauſ [...] it comes as it ought to do, in a regular and legal way, from the Legiſlative Power? Is it the worſe, becauſe it does not alter the [Page] Conſtitution of our Government? Had it been the leſs hurtful, if, like the late King's, it had placed the Royal Will and Pleaſure above our Laws? Does the King, in the preſent Toleration, claim an Abſolute Power, which we are bound to obey without reſerve? And does he thereby impoſe an Oath on us, not only to ſubmit to that Power, but to aſſiſt and defend him in the Exerciſe thereof? Since in theſe ſeveral particulars it has the advantage of the late King's, I doubt not but it will be more ſatisfactory to all people, and that the Church will receive Eaſe as well as Enlargement by it.

6. But Epiſcopacy is Aboliſhed in Scotland, and from thence ſprung the Covenant that deſtroyed it here formerly; our Author might as well have told us it was ſo at Geneva. What has the Declaration of their Eſtates to do with the Government of our Church? they do not ſo much as pretend to it, only declaring it a Grievance to that Kingdom: If the Author had but known how unlike the Scotch Biſhops were to ours; how unable they were of late to do any thing but miſchief; how little difference there is between no Epiſcopacy and Biſhops, during pleaſure, he would the leſs lament the loſs; but, in truth, the Abuſes might have been redreſſed by other and eaſier methods; good Laws might have reſtored Epiſcopacy to its antient Purity; for otherwiſe, and by that Argument, we ought to Aboliſh Judges here, becauſe they have abuſed their Power, being like the Scotch Biſhops by their tenure Slaves to the Court; though this is unreaſonable, and better methods have been taken; but if we had choſen the other courſe, certainly the loſs would never have been leſs lamented than now, when we are bleeding of the Wounds they have given us. The Scotch, I think, ſhould have remembred that the Protomartyr of the laſt Reign was one of thoſe Tenants at Will, and that Dr. Bruce was thruſt out of the Biſhoprick of Dunkell for oppoſing the Repeal of the Teſt: Theſe Nations ought to remember that it was he ſet us the glorious Example of deſpiſing the Honours and Profits of this World, when they came in competition with the Preſervation of the Proteſtant Religion: But it is not fitting to be too poſitive in this matter, relating to the Church of Scotland, ſince it is uncertain what expedients his Majeſty's Wiſdom may find out for the ſatisfaction of that divided Nation. But he tells us, there is a Party in our Parliament endeavouring the ſame [Page] thing; but who told him ſo, he does not ſay; if we judge of them by their Actions, neither the Coronation-Oath, nor the Addreſs of the 16th of April laſt ſhews any thing of this; and in the King's Anſwer thereunto, and in the Speech that occaſioned that Addreſs, we have his Majeſty's repeated Aſſurances of his kindneſs and care of the Church; though thoſe were cheap in the laſt Reign, let us not ſuſpect this only for that reaſon, but reſt ſatisfied until, at leaſt, one promiſe to us be broken.

In the ſeventh, our Author tells us, That though our Religion be ſafer now, than it was lately, yet we have loſt the Doctrine of our Church-Loyalty and Non-reſiſtance; and for proof of it, gives us his Word, ſo that a bare denial were a ſufficient anſwer. But to ſet the matter in a better light, I muſt deſire you to conſider that there is a great difference between Aiding our Prince to deſtroy or enſlave his People, and the Doctrine of Non-reſiſtance; though I ſhould yield that it was not lawful in lawful in October laſt forceably to reſiſt the late King, yet certainly it was both lawful and prudent not to aſſiſt him: this is ſufficiently juſtified by the practiſe of the Primitive Chriſtians, who did nothing in defence of their perſecuting Emperors whilſt living, nor in revenge of their injuries after their death; and does ſufficiently excuſe the Church in their late Conduct, without the Shipwrack of any of its Doctrines. Which being ſo full an Anſwer to our Author's Objection; and ſeeing they were but few that took up Arms againſt the late King, in reſpect to the Nation, I will not at preſent inſiſt on the Defence they make for themſelves in acting only for their Laws, Rights, and Religion; to which either they had no Right; but if they had, they had a Right to preſerve them, eſpecially againſt him that had not only deſtroyed them, but his own Right alſo, if the Laws and Conſtitutions of the Kingdom create them, as plainly they do. But of this more anon.

In the laſt diviſion of this Paragraph, our Author objects the total Abolition of our Laws, becauſe we have changed our Hereditary Monarchy into an Elective. As if the People of England had no Laws worth regarding, but thoſe that limit the Succeſſion of the Crown; if we have made ſome changes in that to ſecure the reſt, ſurely it is no ill bargain, and is no more than the Wiſdom of the Nation aimed at formerly more than once: If this had been the firſt time a change had been made in the Succeſſion, I ſhould not wonder [Page] that ſome turbulent Men ſhould make a noiſe at it for want of a better pretence; but ſince Alterations in the Succeſſion have been frequent in this Kingdom, why ſhould people be more concerned at it now than formerly? I need not mention the many Breaches of the Royal Line in the Saxon Times, or in the time of our firſt Norman Kings; but certainly the Intails of the Crown, made in Henry the Eighth's time, and the Statutes authorizing them, made a greater Alteration in the Succeſſion than is made at preſent, yet no body dream't that thereby our Monarchy was become Elective. Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth ſucceſſively enjoyed this Crown; but what ſort of Hereditary Right it was that could ſerve them both, I do not ſee; and after both their Reigns our Monarchy continued as Hereditary as it was before, though there was a late Statute of Queen Elizabeth, declaring it in the Power of the Parliament to alter it, and making it Penal to deny it. The interruption that is now given to the Lineal Succeſſion is ſo remote a poſſibility, that the perſons moſt immediately concerned readily conſented to it: The Matrimonial Crown, ſuch as King Philip had in Queen Mary's time, is due to the King on his Wifes aſcending the Throne; ſo that unleſs he out-live the Queen, who is about twelve Years younger, this terrible Alteration of the Succeſſion ends in nothing, unleſs it be the Excluſion of the pretended Prince of Wales; which diſſatisfies ſo few people, that his pretence is ſcarce worth the expoting; and were there no Objection againſt his being Born of the Queen, but barely this, That ſhe did not, during the nine Months time ſhe ſhould have been with Child, ſatisfie the ſcruples and jealouſies of all the Women ever came about her; it leaves the reality of his Birth ſo doubtful, that the known and received Heirs ought not to be ſet aſide for him; the Queen and her Counſel were not ignorant what opinion the Nation had of her big Belly, neither were they ſo impolitick as not to know of what concern it would be to that Iſſue, to be of an unqueſtioned Birth; and we cannot ſuppoſe the Queen ſo much wanting in her Maternal duty and affection, though nothing had been due to her own Honour, as not to take ſome pains for the clearing of both; therefore we muſt conclude, ſince ſhe did not give the World that ſatisfaction which any Woman with Child▪ might eaſily have d [...]ne, that ſhe was not really ſo.

[Page] But to return to our Author: I ſay it looks a little ſuſpiciouſly to find him ſo much more fond of one part of the Conſtitution than of the reſt; whilſt he is excuſing ſo many Violations of the Law, why ſhould he be ſevere againſt what he calls but one, when we find him juſtifying the late Diſpenſing Power, and yet complain of altering our Conſtitution? We muſt conclude that he either did not underſtand, or not value it; and that his concern is for ſomething elſe than what he pretends; which will be very plain, if we take but a ſhort view of the Engliſh Conſtitution: And this will alſo be of further uſe in deciding the Controverſie between us. The firſt Fundamental part of our Conſtitution that I ſhall mention is, That the Government be adminiſtred according to Law: this is a Truſt inſeperably annexed to the Royalty, of which the Coronation-Oath is a ſufficient proof.

It is another Fundamental part of our Conſtitution, That thoſe Laws by which we are to be governed be made by the King, Lords and Commons; the Clauſe of the Coronation-Oath, Quas vulgus elegerit, proves this, taken in either of the Tenſes, of, have, or ſhall chuſe, beſides a practiſe Time out of mind; which is the beſt proof of the Original contract.

The laſt part thereof that I ſhall mention is, That the Repreſentatives of the Commons be legally and freely choſen, otherwiſe they are not the Kingdom's choice; nor do they repreſent their Electors, nor carry their Aſſent with them to what ſhall be enacted.

Now if we take as ſhort a view of the State that theſe eſſential parts of our Conſtitution were in, during the late Reign, we ſhall find them all in ſuch diſorder, that it cannot be ſaid that we then had any more than the ſhadow of our old Conſtitution; and ſince the King's Right to the Regal Eſtate is ſolely founded on theſe Conſtitutions; if he do ſubvert them, he thereby determines and deſtroys his own Right, which is founded on them; and does more effectually dethrone himſelf, than the Declaration of the 13th of February did.

Now that the late King did over-throw the whole Conſtitution, will appear, if we examine his Behaviour to the ſeveral parts thereof. And as to the firſt, we will find, That he was ſo far from Governing according to Law, that ſo ſoon as he thought himſelf out of the danger of the Monmouth Rebellion, by his Victory over [Page] him in the Weſt, and Triumph on Tower-hill; and that his ſevere Proſecution of the remainder of that Party had ſecured him againſt all other oppoſition, his whole Government was a perfect oppoſition to the Law; after that moſt of the great Employments of the Nation were diſpoſed of by him to perſons by Law uncapable of them: At Court we had a Secretary and Privy-Seal, Lords of the Treaſury and Privy-Counſellors, with their Preſident of that ſort; in the Adminiſtration of Juſtice, we had Judges, Sheriffs, Juſtices of the Peace, with a long, &c. of unqualified perſons; in the Cities our Mayors and other Magiſtrates were ſo; the Army which was wholly againſt Law, was made more illegal by its unqualified Officers, and the other perſons whereof it conſiſted; the Tower in ill hands, and the very Church not free of ſuch Vermin; the chief Government of Ireland given to one that deſigned to diſmember it from this Crown: Were not our Perſons impriſoned againſt Law? witneſs the Seven Biſhops. Were we not diſſeiſed of our Eſtates againſt Law, and without Tryal? witneſs Dr. Hough. Were not Taxes levied on us without and againſt Law? witneſs the Cuſtom-houſe Books. Were not ſome of us Hanged up as Criminals, without any colour of Law? at leaſt, leſs than was for the Diſpenſing Power or Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſion; ſo little, as could not ſatisfie him that was well ſatisfied in both the other. Theſe are Inſtances of the breach of the Law, in the caſe of our Liberties, Lives and Properties; and that our Souls might be endangered, were not Schools and Churches opened to the Romiſh Clergy? Had any of their Converts the reward due to them by Law, and to keep us under theſe Oppreſſions without redreſs? Were not our Parliaments put off and Prorogued from time to time, and not ſuffered to ſit at the end of three years, as the Law requires?

This was the condition of the Executive Power: And as for the Legiſlative, it was far worſe, and wholly over-thrown by the claim of an Abſolute power, to which we were to ſubmit without reſerve, the Diſpenſing with the Eccleſiaſtical Laws implied a Power of Diſpenſing with all the reſt; and the Diſpenſing with any one, was an Uſurpation on the Legiſlative: For to what end ſhould the Parliament make Laws, if they were to be of force only, during the King's pleaſure? If that were ſo, all their coſts and pains could not enſure them one Law for ſo long time as would be requiſite for their Journey home; and as the Suſpenſion of one [Page] Law is certainly the making of another: As for inſtance; the Law impoſes Twelve-pence for not coming to Church on Sunday; the Proclamation ſuſpending that Act, enacts that I may ſtay at home, or go to a worſe place, without paying any thing; ſo it ſeems to me, that the laſt is the higher Power; for to controle an Act, requires more Authority, than contributed to the firſt making of it, as the daily experience of our Courts ſhews us; the King's-Bench controles the reſt, but no inferiour Court puts any check to the proceedings thereof. Laſtly, The Kings of England never claimed nor exerciſed ſuch a Power before 62 and 72, and then the Endeavours were but faint; the Crown wiſhed for ſuch a Power, and afterwards on the Remonſtrance of the Commons promiſed it ſhould never be drawn into Conſequence, or Example. The impoſing Taxes and Oaths on the Subject, was always looked upon as another branch of the Legiſlative Power, but both were exerciſed by the late King.

As to the laſt part mentioned, we have ſeen the late King corrupting the Elections by the meaneſt Arts, a perpetual regulation of the Corporations, until they could find a Sett of Men that would engage to chuſe ſuch perſons as ſhould be recommende [...] by the Court, and daily diſplacing all perſons that would not engage their Votes: But this was not all the injury done us in relation to the Houſe of Commons; we had Sheriffs and Mayors not qualified for their Offices, ſo not capable of guiding the Elections. Formerly under weak Princes, and in ill times, there has been attempts made againſt the Conſtitution of the Kingdom, but never ſo Univerſal an one, or with ſuch ſucceſs as now; neither was it ever attempted before this Reign to pack a whole Houſe of Commons. New Creations has done ſomething of that ſort on the Peers; and there has been Irregularities in particular Elections, but it was never attempted before to rob us of the whole Houſe of Commons; at preſent the Crown neither claims nor aims at any of theſe things; now the Law runs in its old channel; and that it may ſtill do ſo, the King has given us Judges of the ableſt of their profeſſion; and the Chancery from a State-Court [...] is now become a Court of Conſcience; the Crown pretends to no abſolute Authority either in ſuſpending or altering our Laws; the King concurs with his People in all Laws they have pr [...]pared for [Page] his Royal Aſſent, and wiſhes to be no greater than the Laws of England make him; with reſpect to the Houſe of Commons, he has ſeized on no Charters, nor uſed any Regulations; but the preſent Members of that Houſe are the moſt unanimouſly choſen that ever any were. And now let the World judge, whether our Religion, Laws and Liberties, are not in a better condition, than in the late Reign.

Our Author tells us, that the ſecond Article ſhews the ways and means King James uſed to effect what he was charged with in the firſt, which is an aſſuming and exerciſing a Power of diſpenſing with, and ſuſpending Laws, and the execution of them without Act of Parliament. Our Author is ſo modeſt as not to deny this, or the fatal conſequences thereof to the Kingdom, but excuſes it as done by colour of the Prerogative; whereas the Prerogative is nothing but the Law of the Land, and a part of it with which the King is intruſted for the good of his People: He then tells us, That the preſent Parliament have made ſome Acts that Abrogate old, and others that are new Laws: But unleſs he ſhews us that the King aſſumes [...] Power to himſelf, the Times are not parallel; and that is what he promiſed to make appear.

Our Author in this, and in other Sections, is witty, or thinks himſelf ſo, upon our preſent Parliament, calling them Self-created; and that they have aſſumed God's Prerogative of creating themſelves out of nothing, (as if God had done ſo.) For the taking off that Aſſertion, and clearing of that matter, I muſt deſire you to remember that the Eſſential parts of an Engliſh Parliament are the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons choſen by the ſeveral Shires and Towns of the Nation as their Repreſentatives. Now the Convention that met at Weſtminſter the 22d of January laſt, was compoſed of theſe; not a County, City, or Borough of England but appeared there by their Repreſentatives, and the whole Peers did or might have appeared by themſelves or Proxies; ſo that here was a Parliament in ſubſtance; and the Author will not pretend that any thing was wanting but the King's Writ to call them together. To which I ſay firſt, That anciently, when Parliaments met at the King's Court on fixed times, as the Feaſt of the Nativity, and other Feaſts every year, we have no account of any Summons: becauſe the Time and Place of meeting being known, [Page] that was needleſs. But theſe Times are ſo dark, that I will not inſiſt much on this, nor on the Election of our Kings in the Saxon Times, which was done by an Aſſembly convened certainly without the King's Writ, or any Authority from one.

I confeſs that in the ordinary Adminiſtration of Affairs, the King's Writ is requiſite to bring the Nation to a great Council: But this is not required ſo much for any Authority derived from thence, as to keep up an agreement and harmony in the Government; if this were otherwiſe, all Members could ſit in the Houſe of Commons that have ſuch a Writ authorizing their Election; which not ſo, eſpecially in long-liv'd Parliaments, ſuch as King Charles the Second's was, there a Majority of the Houſe might have been of ſuch as were Elected by vertue of a Warrant from the Speaker: In 73 about Thirty Members, Elected by vertue of the King's Writs, were not ſuffered to ſit, but were diſmiſſed the Houſe, and the Speaker Iſſued Warrants for new Elections; ſo that in theſe caſes the Authority ſeems to proceed more from the Speaker's Warrant than the King's Writ: But I ſay, that from this uſual practiſe it does not follow, that the Eſtates may not Aſſemble otherwiſe in extraordinary Caſes: As in this Hereditary Monarchy; Suppoſe the Royal Family were extinct, muſt the Nation remain ſtill in confuſion? never come into any form of Government, becauſe we cannot have the King's Writ to Summon a Parliament, that is unreaſonable; therefore the Repreſentatives of the Nation muſt meet and ſettle the Government without any Writ of Summons: this is no impoſſible ſuppoſition, though it never happened in this Kingdom, becauſe it has happened in other places, and upon ſuch occaſions the Government has been re-ſettled by the States.

Next, Suppoſing that on the Death of the reigning King, his Son or Succeſſor, is far diſtant: this is no fictitious ſuppoſition, becauſe it really happened: In what condition muſt we be until the return of our King, or directions from him? The Authority of our Judges, Sheriffs, &c. determined with the King's Life, ſo they cannot act; therefore in this neceſſity, to avoid Anarchy and Confuſion, the States of the Kingdom muſt meet, and ſettle the Government by appointing Officers, and doing what elſe is requiſite for the ſafety of the Kingdom: And this they did upon [Page] the Death of Henry the Third, without any Writ or Authority from his abſent Son.

After the Death of William Rufus the Crown of this Kingdom was given to King Henry by an Aſſembly of the people, not choſen by Writ: this ſhews alſo the regard they had in thoſe days to the Lineal ſucceſſion. Theſe inſtances ſhew that the King's VVrit of Summons is not ſo eſſentially neceſſary to the Being of Parliaments, but that the people of England may and have aſſembled in ſome caſes without them, of which we have a very late inſtance in the Parliament; to which the Royal Family is much obliged, and to which the Nation was more obliged than to any but the one now ſitting, I mean the Parliament that brought back the Royal Family: This Parliament met without the King's VVrit, and was called in the Name of the Keepers of the Liberties of England, and yet fate, made Laws, and acted as a Parliament with King Charles the ſecond for ſeveral Months together; and yet no Man can ſay there was ſo great reaſon for their continuing together, as for the preſent Parliaments; we had not then ſo many Enemies abroad, and at home the Kingdom was in full quiet; the French and Iriſh were not then our avowed Enemies, nor ready to devour us; a forty days delay then had not put us in the power of either of them, as probably it had now done; and if the King had now taken that courſe, the conſequence had only been the trouble of Electing the ſame perſons a-new, and poſtponing the neceſſary preparations for our ſecurity for two Months at leaſt. And if we further compare the Caſe in queſtion with theſe I have mentioned, we will find that it has much the advantage in other circumſtances, for that Parliament laboured under more difficulties than the want of VVrits of Summons; a doubt, that the Long Parliament was then in being by vertue of King Charles the Firſt's unfortunate Act, that it ſhould not be diſſolved without their own conſent; and in 59, King Charles was at Breda, or not much further off, and he would gladly have Iſſued VVrits, if they had been deſired of him; but his Brother cancelled and tore thoſe he had once Iſſued; that Parliament met without any requeſt from the Body of the people: this at the Expreſs requeſt of the City of London, and almoſt the whole Nation; and if that Parliament was called by thoſe that Exerciſed [Page] the chief Authority in the Nation; ſo was this by him, that at our own deſire had taken the Adminiſtration of Affairs upon him; though the Royal Line was not extinct, yet in October laſt the Kingdom was left as much in confuſion, and without government, as if that misfortune had befallen us; a Parliament by VVrits we could not have, and without a Parliament it was impoſſible to ſettle the Kingdom; ſo that we had no choice, but either to continue without any Government as we were, or to meet in Parliament as we did; which being formerly done in other Countries, as well as our own: And ſince the King is pleaſed to conſult with them, we muſt acquieſce in their Judgments, and obey them as the Legiſlative power of this Kingdom, notwithſtanding our Author's Jeſts here, and his Aſſertions in the fourth Article, That this is done without precedent or colour of Law.

The third Article Article is, His committing and proſecuting the Biſhops for humbly Petitioning to be excuſed from conſenting to the ſaid aſſumed Power of Suſpending the Laws and their execution.

For anſwer to which, our Author refers us to what he ſaid on this ſubject before; and therefore ſo do I. He tells us further on this Head, That the preſent Government remembring the Proverb, Felix quem faciunt, is reſolved to avoid the Rocks the laſt ſplit upon; which I look upon to be no ill news: For now, if we will take the Author's word, there will be no further attempts againſt our Church or Religion, our Laws or Properties; but, God-bethanked, we have better aſſurance than the Author's or his King's word. And though this were a ſufficient reaſon for the mild courſe taken by the new Act injoyning the Oaths, yet certainly the Nation does attribute that courſe very much to the mild Nature of the King; who would not too haſtily exact a Complyance, nor too ſeverely puniſh the want of it; though certainly the accepting of him for King, and ſwearing Allegiance to him, is a matter of far greater moment than any oppoſition King James met with from the Church, and ſo might deſerve a ſeverer puniſhment than for not obeying an illegal Mandate.

Our Author miſſes no opportunity of telling what is doing in Scotland, but he is not ſo forward to tell us News from Ireland: He tells us the Scotch Clergy are obliged to pray for the King [Page] and Queen under pain of Deprivation; and pray why ſhould they not? But does not tell us that the Biſhop of Dunkell was deprived by the late King for Voting or Arguing in Parliament according to his Conſcience; neither does he give us any account of the pretended Act of Parliament in Ireland, taking away many of the Rights of the Clergy without any pretended fault; nor of their Act repealing the Acts of Settlement, which almoſt renders uſeleſs another of their Acts attainting our Nobility, Gentry, and Clergy only for being in England: Here is Fangs and Claws with a witneſs; and of ſo weak a Government, that one would think theſe Acts were deſigned for nothing elſe than to ſhew the Temper of the Man, and thoſe that influence him.

The fourth Article is againſt the Court of the Commiſſioners for Eccleſiaſtical Cauſes: To which he ſays, That the Statute repealing the firſt of Elizabeth hath a Salvo for the King's Supremacy, ſo that there was an appearance of Law to juſtifie that Commiſſion, and that our Parliament meddle with Eccleſiaſtical matters alſo.

Our Author is pretty modeſt in this Anſwer, pretending but to an Appearance of Law, to juſtifie the late Commiſſion-Court. So that now I am not only to argue againſt the Court, but alſo to ſhew how little that very Appearance really was; which I think will be beſt done, by conſidering the Statutes of 170 Car. primi C. 110. and the 13. Car. ſecundi, Cap. 12. In the firſt we will find that the Clauſe of the Statute of the Queen, which Erected the firſt Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſion-Court, is repealed: In this I do not find any Salvo for the King's Supremacy; but there is a Clauſe of another nature, to wit, That no new Court ſhall be Erected with the like Power, Juriſdiction, or Authority, as the former had, or pretended to have; and that all ſuch Commiſſions made, or to be made by his Majeſty, his Heirs or Succeſſors, and all Sentences and Decrees, by colour thereof, ſhall be utterly void and of none effect. By the 13th of King Charles the ſecond part of this Statute is repealed; but what relates to the High Commiſſion, or the new Erecting of ſuch another Court, is not: this Statute has the Salvo I ſuppoſe our Author means. So that now the matter is ſhortly thus: The firſt Statute ſuppreſſes the High Commiſſion-Court in being, and prohibits the Erecting of any ſuch other for the future; and Enacts ſome other things [Page] forreign to this matter, which by Charles the ſecond's Statute are repealed: But as to the High Commiſſion-Court, it confirms the former with the Author's Salvo, that this Act ſhall not extend to abridge the King's Supremacy in Eccleſiaſtical Affairs. Now though this Statute had by this Clauſe been Felo de ſe, yet ſtill by the firſt Statute the Erecting any ſuch new Court is prohibited; for the Salvo only is, That nothing in that Act ſhall abridge the King's Supremacy; but does not ſay, that nothing in the former ſhall. To obviate this, our Author put his Salvo in the firſt, rather than in the other: But I ſay further, That though the Salvo had been where our Author would have it; or that the Clauſe had been, That nothing in either of the Acts ſhould abridge the Supremacy: or to make the matter a little plainer; Suppoſe it had been literally worded, provided that the King by his Supremacy may Erect ſuch a Court when he thinks fit; the matter had been but little mended for the Enacting part, that no ſuch Court ſhould be Erected, had been good, and the Proviſo void; for it is a known Rule in Law, That the Proviſo or Exception muſt not wholly deſtroy the preceding Grant, though it may leſſen or qualifie it: As for inſtance; If one grant to me all his Trees, and afterwards adds a Proviſo, except all his Trees, the Grant is good, and the Proviſo void, becauſe it would tender the Grant wholly uſeleſs; but he may except all his Trees in ſuch a place, or twenty, or any number by name, becauſe there is a ſubject both for the Grant and Exception: So a Proviſo in the Act might have preſerved the Supremacy in Wales, or any particular place; but being general, it is void, or rather has no operation on the matter poſitively Enacted, though it may preſerve the Supremacy in other matters.

This Article complains as much of the Executing as the Iſſuing this illegal Commiſſion: To which, ſince our Author ſays nothing; I will only add, That though the Law had been plain for the Prerogative in this caſe, as to the Erecting of the Court; yet ſince King Charles, who was looked upon as a Proteſtant, did not think fit to put this Power in execution, during the Twenty-four years he lived after the Statute: which implies, That either there was no need of ſuch a Court, or that he thought he had no Power of Erecting it; it was a bold ſtep in the late King to venture on [Page] it, but perfect madneſs as he managed the matter. When the Statute was in force, the Proceedings were for the Correction and Reformation of ſuch Offences, as by the Eccleſiaſtical Juriſdiction could lawfully be corrected and reformed, during the continuance of that Court, which was near an hundred years: The Proceedings there were only againſt perſons that diſobeyed the King's Laws; never one was puniſhed by them for not obeying a Letter, but the Biſhop of London; the disobeying the King's Arbitrary and Illegal Mandates was never looked upon as a crime before the late times. And for a further inſtance and proof of their illegal Proceedings, the Commiſſioners that acted in purſuance of the Statute could not proceed againſt perſons for ſmall Crimes, or ſuch as could be remedied by the ordinary: For which reaſon, we find in our Books, that a Prohibition went out of the Temporal Courts to ſtop their Proceedings againſt one for Adultery, as Judge Hutton tells us in Iſabel Peel's Caſe, unleſs in ſuch Caſes Cro. C. 114. as were very exorbitant and notorious. Now unleſs we have loſt another, the moſt ſecret Adultery of the Commandments, is a greater Offence, and a little more expreſly prohibited, than the Contempts puniſhed in that Court. In Drake's Caſe a Prohibition Cro. C. 220. went to ſtop their Proceedings againſt him for Alimony, although this was one of the Articles their Commiſſion authorizes them to hear and determine. Here the Court looked on their Authority to be from the Statute, not the Commiſſion. This is a full Judgment; and many more might be inſtanced againſt thoſe that aſſert, That the King by his Supremacy, or the Common Law, could Erect ſuch a Court, though the Statute were repealed; for in this Caſe he gave Authority to decree Alimony in Caſes of ſeverity; but becauſe the Statute gave none ſuch, their Proceedings were ſtopped by a Prohibition. It is wonderful to me, and ſeems ſomething like an infatuation, That the Projectors of that Court did not, to gain ſome credit to it, and in return for all the miſchiefs they intended, find out ſome real Criminals to make Examples of; ſo that the Nation might ſometimes be ſatisfied with their Judgments, though they could not be with their Juriſdiction. When we ſee vengeance over-take notorious Offendors, it is but rarely that we inquire whence the blow comes; and if we do, we are ſeldom over-ſtrickt in the matter: But ſince they omitted this [Page] common piece of Policy, after-times will rather ſuſpect that they had not Power by the Commiſſion to puniſh ſuch Offendors, then either that ſo populous a Nation ſhould want fit Objects for their wrath; or that ſo famed Politicians ſhould contemn ſo prudent a courſe. All the account I can give of this matter is, that, Quos Jupiter vult perdere prius dimentat.

The fifth Article is, Levying Money for other time, and in other manner than the ſame was granted by Parliament: this, he confeſſes, ought not to have been done by the Petition of Right, and ſome older Statutes he mentions; which is a Confeſſion of the juſtneſs of the Complaint: But then what he did of this kind, he ſays, was by vertue of a Leaſe King Charles the Second was impowred to grant for three years. This is another inſtance how ſmall a matter was ſufficient lately for Appearance of Law, good enough to wreſt the Legiſlative Power out of its proper courſe: For this Leaſe our Author here ſpeaks of, was pretended but to be made by the Commiſſary of the Treaſury the Fifth of February, the day before King Charles dyed, and when he was lying void of all reaſon and ſence, if not of life. This looks ſo like a trick, that it ſuperſedes all neceſſity of enquiry, Whether King Charles had power to make a Leaſe of that part of his Revenue granted him for Life only, for any longer time than his Life. But to ſhew the illegality of that Proceeding, and the inſincerity of the Author, I will give the full account of this matter. And, firſt, it is to be obſerved that the late King, upon his firſt coming to the Crown, levied Money on ſeveral Branches of the Revenue ſetled on King Charles for Life. The Subſidies of Tonnage and Poundage, and other ſums of Money payable on Merchandiſes Exported and Imported, were granted expreſly by the Statute to King Charles during life; yet the late King by his Proclamation of the 9th of February, directs that the ſame ſhall be Collected as in the time of his Brother. Herein he pretends to no other Law for this, but that it is his Will and Pleaſure, the neceſſity [...]f the Government requiring the ſame; there is no three years Leaſe in this Caſe, nor any pretence that King Charles did or could make any ſuch; ſo that as to this, our Author's aſſertion is falſe: But indeed as to the Exciſe, the late King made uſe of that pretence; and by his Proclamation of the 16th of February, tells us, That the late King's Commiſſioners [Page] of the Treaſury did, on the fifth of February, contract and agree with Sir Peter Apſly, Sir Benjamin Bathurſt, and James Grahme, that they ſhould receive the Duty of Exciſe for three years, from the date thereof, at the Rent of 550000 Pounds per annum: And being certified by the Opinion of the Judges, that the ſaid Contract is good and valid in Law, to the intent that the ſaid perſons may have no pretence of with-holding their Rent; and that the Subjects may not incur the Penalties inflicted by the Laws of Exciſe for not making due Entries, or Nonpayment, or concealing any part of the ſaid Duty during the ſaid three years: He does publiſh to all his Subjects, that the Judges have certified him their Opinions, that the ſaid Contract hath continuance notwithſtanding the deceaſe of his Brother: His Will and Pleaſure therefore is, and he thereby Commands the Commiſſioners of the Exciſe, and other Officers, that they be Aiding and Aſſiſting to the ſaid perſons in Collecting and Levying the ſaid Duties; and that all perſons chargeable with the payment thereof, do make due Entries, and pay the ſame upon the pains and penalties to be inflicted thereupon according to the Laws of Exciſe. Though theſe Proclamations were equally illegal, yet the firſt was certainly the more generous; it goes roundly to work, and tells us, in plain terms, he wanted the Money, and therefore would take it; whereas the other pretends to be countenanced by the Law, but inſtead thereof has only that of the Lawyers; the Moiety of the Rent therein mentioned is a fair ſum to be gained for three years, by the private Opinion of the Judges, which is ſufficiently confuted by a bare ſtating of the Caſe: The Exciſe was granted by two Acts of Parliament; the one Moiety by one Act, the other Moiety thereof by another: The firſt is called a Grant of certain Impoſitions for the increaſe of his Majeſty's Revenue during his life; And Enacts, That the Duties therein mentioned ſhall be paid to the King during his life'; the other Act lays the ſame Impoſition on the ſeveral Liquors therein mentioned; and Enacts expreſly, That the ſame ſhall be paid to the King, his Heirs and Succeſſors for ever. Which, being the Statutes of one Parliament, ſhews plainly that it was intended that the one half of the Duty ſhould dye with the King, otherwiſe there was no need of two Acts; and the reaſon of the difference [Page] is obvious, for the laſt Moiety of this Duty was granted to the Crown in ſatisfaction of the Profits of the Court of Wards, and for the Aboliſhing of the King's Pre-emption and Purveyance, in which the Crown had an Inheritance. In both theſe Acts there is a Clauſe for making Leaſes, not exceeding three years; which was laid hold on to continue this Tax on us for three years longer than the expreſs time we granted. Had this Leaſe been made bona fide, and in King Charles's health, it would have been but a frivolous pretence; but conſidering the time it was made it was the ſmalleſt way ever was laid hold of by a ſinking Cauſe.

Our Author comes next to repreſent our preſent Condition to us; and though he make a fearful Picture of it, it is not ſo dreadful as Popery and Arbitrary Power in their beſt Dreſs: He ſays we muſt pay great Taxes, and reckons up ſome Millions; I am not ſo converſant in the Affairs of the Treaſury, as to tell whether his Computation be right: but be it ſo, we had rather pay that and much more, than fall into our former miſery; it is ſome ſatisfaction to our minds, that when our Taxes are paid, the reſt is our own. But to ſet this matter right, and to diſcover the Author's diſingenuity, we muſt take notice that the Statute taking away the Hearth-money, one of the moſt grievous burthens this Nation ever groaned under, Peter-pence and Danegeld not excepted, paſſed the Royal Aſſent the 24th of April—89. And that our Author in ſeveral places of his Book takes notice of Statutes paſſed, and other matters happening afterwards; as the Pole-bill the firſt of May, the Declaration of War againſt France the 7th of May, the Eaſe to Diſſenters the 24th of May, and the Act for ſatisfying the States-General the 20th of Auguſt—89. But yet he ſpeaks not one word of the other; and his reaſon is, becauſe if he had done that, the great Taxes he ſpeaks of would dwindle into nothing; for if that Duty amounted to 200000 Pound per annum, we have not yet given the King Twenty years Purchaſe for it, which is the rate moſt of his Subjects ſell at. He tells us next, The War cannot be carried on without Money, and that at the end of it, it muſt coſt in a great Sum to Disband the Army; which he would perſwade us to ſave by reſtoring King James: This is a declaring War againſt the Army, and will leſſen the [Page] number of his Friends, if he have any there; and then if the Nation, by reſtoring that King, will avoid paying their own Army, they muſt pay his, which is as numerous, and to whom there is as great an Arrear due, beſides all that is due to the French King: So that if any be ſo ſordid as to wiſh a change in the Government, it muſt be on other Motives than to ſave his Money, the reſtitution of the Hearth-money being all he is like to get by that bargain. He tells us next, That we who feared the coming of the French in King James's time, have taken a way by declaring War againſt them to bring them upon us with a vengeance. But I would have him know, this Nation would rather ſee the French here open and profeſſed Enemies, than pretended Friends; and that we fear them leſs in the one capacity, than the other; and ſurely we never had leſs reaſon to fear them, than at preſent, though it were too great preſumption to gueſs at the Divine Councils; or to ſay that God now deſigns to be avenged on him for his Blaſphemy and many Oppreſſions; or that he has at laſt heard the Groans of the Fatherleſs and Widows, though doubtleſs he will, in his own due time, inquire and viſit for theſe things; yet if we conſider how he ſtands with the Kings of the Earth, we may rationally hope that his Glory is near an end; for the Emperour and Princes of the Empire are exaſperated againſt him, not only by his ſeizing and barbarouſly deſtroying their Territories, but by his ſtopping their Victories over the Turks, and by aſſiſting them by ſo great a diverſion: But it hath pleaſed God to bleſs their juſt Cauſe with ſucceſs both againſt the one and the other; with the King of Spain and the States of Holland he has actual War; the Cantons of Switzerland, at beſt but Neutral; and ſome think they are almoſt over-come by the late Pope's advice to quit it; who not only ſtyled him the Common Enemy of the Chriſtian part of Europe, but with his laſt Breath adviſed the Cardinals to oppoſe his unjuſt deſigns: Had England ever a better time to humble his Pride, or to force him to do juſtice to themſelves and Allies for the many injuries and provocations he has from time to time heaped upon them? If we cannot deal with him now that he has no Allies to ſupport but the Turks, Iriſh, and Algerines, we muſt deſpair of ever ſeeing an end to the Miſeries of Europe.

[Page] The ſixth is, Keeping a ſtanding Army in time of Peace, without conſent of Parliament. He wiſely omits Quartering Souldiers contrary to Law, being neither able to ſay any thing in defence of it, nor to retort it on the preſent Government: All that he ſays to this Article is, That his Officers were enriched by his Pay, and that they were his delight; but he does not tell us they were ſo, becauſe he hoped to over-throw our Religion and Laws by their aſſiſtance, and to throw off Parliaments, thoſe Shakells on his deſigns. He tells us next, King James uſed no Forreign force, but contented himſelf with his Natural-born Subjects. But was not there ſome of them as ill as either Dutch or Brandenburger? The Iriſh are more oppoſite to our Religion and Civll Intereſt, than either of the other: But our Author is angry we have an Army in being, not deſigned to enſlave the Nation, as the laſt was, but ready to oppoſe all that ſhall endeavour to bring us under our old Bondage, and ſome to ſpare, to oppoſe the French deſign on Flanders, by whoſe Courage he has already received one defeat; and durſt his General have ſtayed, and not retreated ſo very faſt, he might have had another. Our Author in his laſt Leaf gives us ſo true a repreſentation of the inconveniencies and burthens the Nation groaned under from the Army, that I cannot better expreſs them than in the Author's words: Some Rake-hells of the Army took liberty to diſgrace the Service, who, to ſupply their extravagant Expences, put the Souldier's Pay into their own Pockets, for which they allowed them, under-hand, to ſharp upon the Country, and too often leave their Quarters unpaid, to the diſhonour of the King, and ruin of many an honeſt Man: And to add to that Infamy, they forced the Conſtables by threats to give them Certificates that they had paid their Quarters, and behaved themſelves well in them, when, in truth, they had done neither. But to heal the matter, he ſays further, That thoſe that were averſe to the King's intereſt, with a deſign to ruin him in the affections of the People, either quite concealed this from him, or at leaſt ſo minced the matter, that the difficulty the poor Country-man lay under of being heard or relieved, made the remedy often prove worſe than the diſeaſe. Doubtleſs, if there had not been too many inſtances of the fruitleſs Complaints of the Nation, upon the abuſes of the Army, we ſhould not have had ſo full a confeſſion as this from our Author.

[Page] The ſeventh Article is, Cauſing ſeveral good Subjects, being Proteſtants, to be diſarmed: But our Author omits the other half, That Papiſts at the ſame time were both armed and employed contrary to Law. What is ſaid to this, is ſo little to the purpoſe, that I ſcarce know how to Anſwer it: He cannot tell when this was done, nor whether thoſe diſarmed Proteſtants were not of the Geneva-Cuit; but ſure it does not therefore follow that it was not done. I muſt confeſs I do not know the time it was done in England; but I can tell our Author it was twice done in Ireland before the fears of this laſt Revolution made them rob us of our Horſes, and other Goods, as well as Arms; and both after the ſuppreſſion of Monmouth's Rebellion. If the Parliament have no other Inſtance to juſtifie this Charge, ſurely theſe are ſufficient; for we were both good Subjects and Proteſtants: And if it be conſidered that many of us lived in danger of their private Villains; a numerous ſwarm, that infeſt all retired places in hopes of Plunder; and that we were all in danger of their publick and general hatred, with ſome other circumſtances that might be mentioned; the diſarming us was the more unkind to us, and hazardous to the Proteſtant Intereſt. He further pretends, That the neceſſity of Self-preſervation made the late King at laſt arm Papiſts. What was done of this ſort ſince October—88, that he heard of the intended Invaſion, has ſome colour of a pretence, but that is none for what was done before: And if enquiry were made into the new Levies, which our Author calls 20000 Men, I believe but few Papiſts, in proportion to the old Army, will be found amongſt them; and the reaſon is, all the Papiſts that could be found before were in-liſted. But as to them, I have ſaid enough already.

The eighth Article is, The Violating the Freedom of Election of Members to ſerve in Parliament. To which our Author ſays, That if this be meant by purchaſing peoples Votes, it might have been rectified by the Committee of Elections; but if it be meant of regulating Corporations, and the Quo Warranto's, he ſays King James's Parliament that would not yield to the taking away the Teſt, was Elected in the ſame method; and that the preſent Speaker Mr. Powle was Elected by vertue of a late Charter of King Charles the Second. To the firſt of theſe I ſay, That if the King had purchaſed but a few Votes, that Irregularity might have been remedied, as the [Page] Author ſays, though not without much charge and trouble; But if by ſuch indirect courſes he had gotten a Majority of the Houſe, it was not remediable, becauſe the Houſe would never cenſure thoſe that were no more guilty than themſelves. As to the other, it is true the ſervice that Parliament did the Nation in that one Act, of ſo early oppoſing the Growth of Popery, has made amends for any Irregularities that were in the Election of them. But what, had we no more Regulations of Corporations after the Calling of that Parliament? Did one Repulſe put the King ſo much in deſpair of gaining his Point, that there was no enquiry what perſons Gentlemen would chuſe hereafter for Members? Were no perſons diſplaced from their Imployments of Honour and Profit, for not engaging how to Vote both in the Houſe, and at Elections? But may be our Author does not think this any Violation of our Freedoms; for clearing whereof, I need ſay no more than I have already done; which ſufficiently ſhews how little the Author ſays to this Accuſation of the Violating our Freedom in Elections; the reſt, he ſays, gives us a fair inſtance how inconſiſtent he is with himſelf: In the beginning he tells us the Committee of Elections may rectifie the Miſcarriages of Elections; and yet in a few Lines afterwards we find him Mutinying againſt the Speaker's Election, though approved of by that Committee, and the Houſe alſo; ſo that Mr. Powle being declared duly Elected by the proper Judges. I need ſay no more of the matter in Anſwer to the Author, but for the ſatisfaction of thoſe that are ſtrangers thereto; and that they may not be impoſed upon by the Author, or any of the other Pamphlets that harp on this ſtring, I will lay the ſtate of that Caſe before them. And, firſt, it is to be obſerved that there has been many Debates about the Election of New-Windſor; from whence the Speaker is Returned: And the Queſtion, as in this Caſe, has always been, Whether the whole Inhabitants of the Town, or the Corporation, had the Right of Electing their Repreſentatives to ſerve in Parliament? And to ſay the truth, it has been vexata queſtio, and reſolved both ways: But then I ſay, That if the Author be true to any principle, he will lay but little weight on the former Reſolutions againſt the Speaker's Right, ſince they were the Parliaments of 1640, and—79, that ſo adjudged it. But without inſiſting [Page] on the diſorders and ſtruggles of thoſe times; I ſay we have the Reſolution of the Parliament—61 for us; wherein it was Reſolved, That the Right of Election is in the Mayor, Bailiffs, and Burgeſſes, not exceeding Thirty in number: So that Judgments being on both ſides, we are to enquire, as in all ſuch caſes, which is ſupported by the beſt Reaſons, and doubtleſs they are on our ſide; for the Reſolution in favour of the Populace was grounded upon the miſtake that Windſor was a Borough by Preſcription; whereas the Inhabitants were incorporated by a Charter of the Fifth of Edward the Firſt; the Clauſe wherein, Quod de cetero ſit liber Curgus, and the Name Nova Windſor, are great preſumptions, that the Town was not then very Old, or a Burrough before; which is more plain, when we conſider that thoſe are really words of Creation, not of Confirmation; and we have no foot-ſteps of any return from this Town before this Charter. One of the firſt, is the 30th of his Reign; and there it is ſaid, that the Mayor and Common Burgers, elegerunt; and ſo it is in the 29th of Henry the ſixth. Now if this be not very plain, the Community or Body of the Burgeſſes, the ſubſequent uſage puts the matter beyond all doubt; where it is expreſly ſaid, That the Mayor, Bailiffs, and Burgeſſes, elegerunt, as 35 H. 6. 1 Ed. 6. 14. 30th and 43. of Eliz. 1. 7. 18 and 20. of King James the firſt, 1ſt and 3d of King Charles the firſt, and the 13th of King Charles the ſecond. So that here is a full Jury of Parliaments to juſtifie what has been done in this caſe; and then all theſe, and ſome older and darker Returns are under the Common Seal, and dated at the Guild-Hall, both Evidences of Corporation-Acts. From all which I think it very plain, That the Right of Election is in the Corporation, and that from the beginning it has been ſo; but were it otherwiſe, the Author is a Miſrepreſenter in this Caſe, becauſe the Conteſt was not occaſioned by a late Charter of King Charles the Second's; but was upon a Point conteſted before his Reign, and afterwards in his Reign, before the Regulation of Corporations was thought upon.

Next our Author ſays, This Violation of our Freedom was but intended, never put in execution; no more was the deſtruction of our Religion and Liberties: God Almighty was pleaſed in mercy to us to over-throw their Babel, when they had almoſt brought it, [Page] as they fancied, to perfection: And urges further, That the King being willing to have his laſt intended Parliament as free as his People could deſire, had actually reſtored the old Charters to all the Corporations in England long before the Prince Landed. Here the Author nifies the King's good intentions to us, and would have us look upon his laſt Acts of kindneſs as the ſole effects of his Goodneſs, when, alas, they proceeded only from his Fears; which will appear plain, if we conſider the Times of the ſeveral Paſſages relating to this matter. The 9th of September, New-Stile, Mr. d' Avaux's Memorial to the States-General, telling them of the ſtrict Alliance between the two Crowns, tells us of the Preparations making againſt us, and came to our Court the 10th of September, Old-Stile. After ten days Conſideration a Parliament is reſolved on, and the 21ſt the King by his Proclamation aſſures us of his kind Intentions to the Nation and Church; and therein tells us, he is willing the Roman Catholicks ſhould remain incapable of being Members of the Houſe of Commons; a mighty favour! The 26th of September, the Lord-Lieutenants were authorized to grant Deputations to ſuch Gentlemen as had been lately removed from the Lieutenancy; and ſuch Gentlemen were to be reſtored to the Commiſſion of the Peace, as had been lately laid aſide. The 28th of September, his Majeſty by Proclamation acquaints the Nation with the intended Invaſion, and recalls the Writs for the Parliament. The 2d of October, the King declared he would reſtore the Charter of London, and gives us a General Pardon of the ſame date. The 5th, he Diſſolves the Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſion. The 17th of October, the other Corporations of the Kingdom are reſtored; all which favours were conferred on us, after they were terrified with the News of the Invaſion; ſo that we may reſt fully aſſured they were the firſt fruits of that bleſſed deſign; and the meeting of the Parliament was diſcharged Twenty days before the Reſtitution of the Corporations; which, by our Author's computation, is a long time, otherwiſe the Corporations were not reſtored long before the Prince Landed, as our Author ſays they were.

The 9th Article is againſt Proſecutions in the King's Bench for Matters and Cauſes cogniſable only in Parliament, and by divers other arbitrary and illegal courſes. The laſt Clauſe is omitted, and ſo might all our Author thinks fit to ſay in anſwer to the firſt; being [Page] only, That be doubts not but thoſe Judges c [...]n juſtifie their Proceedings, and that ſome Parliaments have brought matters before them, that were not properly cogniſable by them. But what thoſe things are, he does not tell us; but be it ſo, and let them and their Advocates juſtifie them if they can: But in the mean time does it follow, that becauſe one Court exceeds its bounds ſometimes, that therefore the King's-Bench may? or how does this make the Parallel between the preſent and the late Times? If he had told us that our Speaker had been Proſecuted in the King's-Bench for his Actings as ſuch, and Fined 5 or 10000 l. he had ſaid more to the purpoſe, than he has done in the whole Book.

The Author ſays the tenth Article is about partial, corrupt, and unqualified Juries: But he ſhould alſo have added, That divers Jurors in Tryals for High Treaſon were not Free-holders: He knew the conſequence of this matter in the brave Lord Ruſſel's Caſe, and therefore thought fit to paſs it over in ſilence: but tells us, That the noiſe againſt Graham and Burton, for ſuch practiſes, is now ouer for want of proof. To which, I ſay, the thing is obvious, though the ſteps of thoſe that managed this work of darkneſs is not yet made plain; and no wonder, though the ſame ſhould never happen, conſidering how few perſons, but thoſe concerned, can have any knowledge of it; it is not likely the party corrupted will proclaim his own villany and ſhame; ſo that if the ſaid perſons, if they were the managers, do but keep their, own Counſel, no poſitive Witneſſes can be had againſt them: But then, conſidering the Nature of the Caſe, the great Sums of Money ſaid to be laid out privately at Law, will ſatisfie Men not over-credulous. But if our Author will have a little patience, he may hear what proof there is againſt thoſe Gentlemen, the Houſe of Commons having lately ordered a Charge to be brought In againſt them; which was not done ſooner, becauſe they had matters of far greater importance to diſpatch.

The eleventh Article is requiring exceſſive Bail in Criminal Caſes, to elude the benefit of the Laws made for the Liberty of the Subject. The truth of this is not denied, neither is it juſtified; only the late Acts ſuſpending the Habeas Corpus Act are exclaimed againſt, which I muſt ſay is one of the greateſt favours imaginable to thoſe moſt concerned in it; if it but prevent them from running too far [Page] in dangerous courſes, it had been a great Bleſſing to the Lord Dundee and his Family, if the Eſtates of Scotland had committed his Perſon when they firſt obſerved him tampering; though my kindneſs for ſome of thoſe unfortunate perſons, then in cuſtody, makes me hope they were kept there, as well to ſecure themſelves as the Government; yet I believe there are not many of them dare pretend to that innocency.

It muſt not be forgotten in this place how his Majeſty, like him whoſe Vicegerent he is, mingles Mercy with his Juſtice, and that he ſent one of theſe Priſoners a conſiderable Sum of Money to ſupport him from want, not knowing how plentifully he might be provided from his own Eſtate, with which it was not eaſie for him to hold any Communication; our Author will find it hard to give me ſuch an inſtance of Generoſity in his King.

I have only one Remark more on this matter; which is, That if all Princes were endued with ſuch Moderation and Clemency as our preſent King, there would be but little need to ſecure us by Laws againſt that Wolf the Prerogative; and that it is much better truſting Power with ſome Kings, than others. The late King could commit ſeven of our Peers at one time without and againſt the Law; whereas his Majeſty, though encompaſſed with avowed Enemies in two of his Kingdoms, and ſome as diſcontented as the Author in the third. And though by the late Statutes he had Power to commit, I may ſay, at his pleaſure, yet I believe thoſe ſo committed by him, will ſcarce exceed the number lately carried to the Tower at one time; ſo that upon experience of his prudent Moderation, and that he does not uſe his Power for the Oppreſſion of thoſe that do not love him: I ſee not why the Parliament may not continue this Truſt for ſome time longer, at leaſt until Ireland be as well ſetled as the reſt of the Kingdoms.

The 12th Article is, by our Author, made up of two, I ſuppoſe on purpoſe to leſſen the number; and is, That exceſſive Fines have been impoſed, and illegal and cruel Puniſhments inflicted. To which he ſays, That the perſons ſo Fined were adjudged to deſerve them; and if ſo, they were not exceſſive; or the King out of his extraordinary Clemency remitted a great part of them. But our Author does not [Page] tell us how many were ſo fortunate as to meet with this extraordinary Clemency; I am confident he might have incerted that Liſt without ſwelling his Book to any extraordinary ſize; I know none that received any relief this way; I have heard that the Fine of 30000 Pounds, impoſed on my Lord Devonſhire, againſt the Rules of Honour as well as Juſtice, was not remitted; but that his Lordſhip was forced to give his Bond for the ſame, which hung over his head until King William's coming to the Throne; ſo this cannot be ſaid to have been remitted, though it was not paid; and one would think this had been as fit a Caſe for the Experiment our Author ſpeaks of, as any that happened in his Reign; if we conſider that ſuch beinous Offences, as Aſſaults uſed anciently to be puniſhed by a Fine of Ten Groats; the reſtoring the Five thouſand Pounds to Mr. Solicitor Williams, that had formerly been exacted of him as Speaker, does neither excuſe the Judges from the injury they did the Houſe of Commons in that matter; nor can the Author ſay it was remitted, nor can I believe it proceeded barely from his forgiving Nature. I am ſure no part of Oate [...]'s Puniſhment was forgiven, though there was ſcope enough to have pardoned much, and to have him ſtill under the laſh. Our Author upbraids the Convention in being Advocates for Oates, and Countenancers of Perjury by this Article. If there had been no other perſons cruelly or illegally handled, there might have been ſome ſuſpicion of, as if this Article had reſpected his Caſe: but ſince this is the caſe of many others, it is hard judging it done in favour of any one of them: But without turning Advocate for Oates, I may ſay, That though he were guilty of what he is accuſed of by thoſe two Indictments; yet if the reſt, or the material parts of his Evidence were true, the eaſieſt diſcipline had been hard meaſure: But ſuppoſing there had been no Popiſh Plot, that his whole ſtory had been a fiction, his Crime had then been very heinous, and had deſerved the ſevereſt Puniſhment the Law could inflict, but no more: And if the King or his Judges had thought that this monſtrous Perjury had deſerved a ſeverer Puniſhment than the Laws in being preſcribed, as (certainly it did, ſuppoſing it really ſo) the matter ſhould have been repreſented to the Parliament, which in this caſe might have been done without any delay, the Parliament being [Page] to meet within three days after the Paſſing of this Arbitrary Sentence. And if they had been ſatisfied of his Villany, doubtleſs they would have made him a perpetual Object of the Legiſlative Juſtice; but certainly a Power of perpetually Tormenting, Burying people alive, and Fining beyond ability of payment, or any regard to the Rule Salvo contenemento, is too great a Power to be intruſted with beneplacito Judges. If the Author had come through their hands for ſuch a Libel againſt that Government, as his Book is againſt this, I dare ſay he would have been convinced of the truth of theſe two Articles.

In the handling of theſe Heads, our Author inſinuates King James's Clemency from the many Pardons by him granted, which is ſcarce worth the diſputing now; but that he does thence encourage us to come again within his Power. To the end therefore, that he may not impoſe too much upon unwary people by this Topick; Let us remember, firſt, That he ſuffered his Coronation to paſs over without any Pardon, though the Nations were then in a profound Peace: The excuſe for this is, That this was reſerved for the Parliament; of this we are aſſured by himſelf, and that Monmouth's Rebellion hindered it from Paſſing then. But how to reconcile this to a forgiving Nature, I ſee not; that Rebellion made a Pardon, as well more neceſſary as generous: But then how ſhould thoſe rebellious Vermin have been rooted out? Jeffery's Campaign was the more effectual way; therefore it was not fitting to throw ſuch a rub therein, that might have reſerved ſome of thoſe ill-principled Men for the next miſchief; therefore it was agreed that a competent time ſhould be allowed to rid the Kingdom of them. That after ten Months had been ſucceſsfully ſpent in this proſecution, the Nation on the tenth of March—85, is bleſſed with a Proclamation called, A moſt Gracious and General Pardon. It is well his Majeſty gave it a Name, for otherwiſe people would ſcarce have known what to have called it; for we find near Two hundred, by name, excepted out of it; a number greater than ever ſuffered for any former Rebellion; about a fourth part of thoſe were Women; which is enough to make one believe, that the Duke's Army was compoſed of Amazons: And further, all that Lan [...]e [...] with the Duke of Monmouth, or were Officers in his Army, or re [...]uted ſo, [Page] are excepted by another Clauſe, and all Bodies polltick and incorporate. Theſe things would almoſt tempt one to credit the report, that they excepted all perſons out of that Pardon whoſe Names they could learn; and rather than let one eſcape, they excepted them by half their Names; for in ſo unchriſtian a matter, they regarded not Chriſtian Names; and that their rage was levelled againſt all perſons concerned in that unfortunate buſineſs, will appear more plain, if we conſider the Quality of the perſons excepted in that General Indempnity. Marriners and Semſtrices are of ſo conſiderable a rank, as to be expreſly mentioned; and ſo many of them were of that mean quality, that ſome judged it a greater Indignity to Lord Macklesfeild to be ranked with ſuch fellows, than to be excepted out of the Pardon.

As for the General Pardon of the 2d of October—88, it did reach more Offenders than moſt Kings have had occaſion to pardon; but then they were ſuch as were made ſo by his own inſtigation; ſo that the leaſt he could do, was to pardon thoſe Offences, of which he was not only an acceſſory, but the chief promoter; for all others, it came in a time as little needed as regarded; and the ſame or worſe may be ſaid of his Salisbury Pardon of the 22d of September. So that I think there is but little encouragement from any, or all of theſe, to truſt him any more.

The laſt Article is, That ſeveral Grants and Promiſes were made of Fines and Forfeitures before Conviction. This is ſo great a breach of the Law, and leaves ſo great a ſtain, that our Author chuſes rather to deny the truth of it, than to juſtifie or extenuate it; and though of the whole number it is the only one he dares venture to deny, yet it is as great a truth as the others, though I am but little acquainted with the private Intreigues of this ſort. Yet I can tell him of one Tucker, that had not only his Eſtate granted from him, but his Wife alſo perſwaded to leave him and marry another Man; and the poor Man, after a miſerable languiſhing in Gaol, without that ſmall ſupport he was promiſed by thoſe that perſwaded him to plead Guilty to his Indictment of Treaſon, has a Petition now lying before the Houſe to be relieved in both, and to have his Eſtate reſtored without [Page] the incumbrance of his Wife; which is no extravagant requeſt, if It be true that ſhe forſook him in his miſery.

Though the Parliament were pleaſed to mention no other Grievances, yet I would not have our Author too confident there were no other; for certainly the diſplacing of the Judges ſo frequently, and upon all occaſions, was a great one in it ſelf, and occaſioned many more. This made ſome of them ſtick cloſer to their directions from Court, than to the Law, in many Caſes; but for fear of this Judgment, had never paſſed ſo quickly in Sir Edward Hale's Caſe. I ſhould be glad to know what our Author thinks of proſecuting the Subject with great rigour upon pretended Crimes; As the Biſhop of London for not Suſpending Dr. Sharp; the Seven Biſhops for Petitioning him in the moſt humble manner; Dr. Burnet for the ſlip of his Pen in a private Letter, or for a leſs offence, as we may judge by their quitting the firſt, as ſoon as they had the other to lay hold on; Mr. Baxter for his Notes on the New Teſtament; theſe and many ſuch like that might be inſtanced, ſhewed as if the Government lay at catch, and were glad of an opportunity, no matter how, juſt or honourable, to be rid or revenged of any perſon they had no fancy to: This kept all perſons under jealouſies and apprehenſions. Has our Author read the Statute of Charles the Second, repealing the Act for Triennial Parliaments? If he has, let him tell me whether it was well obſerved; if it had, it might have prevented many of our other Grievances; for the King would not have gotten Miniſters ſo fool-hardy as to have executed his Orders, if they had thought that a Parliament was likely ſoon to over-take them. Laſtly, I ſhould be glad to know what our Author thinks of thoſe many Grievances relating to Ireland. I ſhall only inſtance in my Lord Tyrconnel's Government, that being the foundation and ſupport of moſt of the reſt.

The Sword was no ſooner put into his hands, but he diſplaces our Proteſtant Lord Chancellor, Attorney-General and prime Serjeant, and Lord Chief Baron, before Term; and the Judges, who were always appointed in Hillary-Term for the Lent-Circuit, waited beyond that for his Approbation; the conſequence whereof was, That the two Proteſtant Serjeants were put by, and Paplſts, their Juniors, ſent in their ſtead.

[Page] His next bleſſing to the Nation was ſuch a ſett of Sheriffs, the like whereof that or no other Nation ever ſaw; and his Majeſty was ſo eager for theſe Tools, that Lord Clarendon was ordered not to name them; and though uſually the Sheriffs are named in November, this Year, waiting for his coming, we had them not until the middle of February; and then many of them were Men of no Eſtates. To repriſe the Country in caſe they injured them, little underſtanding, and leſs honeſty to direct them in the due execution of their Offices; which diſcouraged many ſo much, that they choſe rather to venture the loſs of their Debts by not Suing, than by Suing, venture it in the Sheriff's hands; and in that Vacation he attacked all the Corporations in the Kingdom with Quo Warranto's, and ſoon afterwards diſſeiſed ſeveral perſons of their Offices, wherein they had Free-holds, by putting others in their places; as Bruno Talbot was made Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the place of Sir Charles Meridith; and Captain Giles Lieutenant-General of the Ordnance, in the place of Sir Albert Coningham, though they both had Patents of their Imployments for their Lives. I might go on with the mention of other Injuries heaped by him on the Proteſtants, to the length of a juſt Volume. But in hopes that we ſhall not be any more troubled with him, I will forbear.

Having ſo long followed our Author cloſe to his own method, without omitting any thing that he can judge material: For the future I will only conſider the principal of his Aſſertions and Inſinuations, having already been ſo much longer than I at firſt intended.

I have ſpoken to the late King's Conceſſions before the Prince's Landing: To which I ſhall now add, becauſe our Author lays ſo great ſtreſs thereon, That if his Intentions had been ſo Candid and Princely, as the Author phraſes it, why did he not ſuffer the Parliament to meet in January, as he promiſed? Why was he ſo angry at the Peers that deſired it the 17th of November? Why did he ſo long reſiſt its Sitting, until he ſhould be in a condition to keep his Word, or not as he pleaſed. This he denied to thoſe Biſhops our Author ſays he granted ſo much to.

[Page] Laſtly, It muſt be noted, that though the King redreſſed ſome of our Grievances, yet he did not take away the great Cauſe of our jealouſie and complaint: As for inſtance, he cancelled the Eccleſiaſtical Commiſſion, but did not diſclaim the Power of ſetting up another when he ſhould think fit; nay, did not ſo much as promiſe not to do it: And for any aſſurance that we had, he might by another Court have puniſhed theſe Biſhops for their preſent preſumption, and medling with State-affairs; neither did he ever diſclaim his abſolute Power over us, nor lay aſide his Diſpenſing Power, by which alone he could have rendred all our relief in Parliament uſeleſs; therefore ſo long as he kept that, all that he could do for us could not ſatisfie; becauſe without it we could not be ſecure for any longer time than the Jeſuit's fears kept them in order.

Next our Author would inſinuate a ſtrange Propoſition, That the States contributed to the Invaſion with a deſign to ruin our Trade. In anſwer to which, I ſay, That it cannot be ſuppoſed that they have forgotten what helped well, if not laid the firſt foundation of their Trade and Greatneſs; and why they ſhould not expect as much profit from the ſtruggles about Religion in King James's time, as from thoſe in Queen Mary's time, I cannot tell: Surely Popery is not leſs terrible to us now, than it was then, that we ſhould more tamely ſubmit to it than we did then. We have ſeen in France ſome late effects of prevailing Popery, that does not more ſurprize than inſtruct us to be on our Guards; to which the danger of our Civil Rights being joyned, all undermined by the Diſpenſing Power and Obedience without reſerve: Surely the ſame, or worſe effects as to us, might have been expected now, than followed in thoſe days, that only contended about Religion. Where that Perſecution forced an Hundred abroad, in all probability King James, if he had not been diverted, would have forced away a Thouſand with their effects; moſt whereof, as they did in thoſe days, muſt, for the old reaſon, have ſetled in the Low-Countries. Would not Perſecution here have forced our Labourers and Marriners to take ſhelter with them, which had [Page] been a double advantage, one by leſſening our ſtock, another by adding to theirs? They were not ſo dull-ſighted as not to ſee this, but compaſſion to us, and to the Proteſtant Intereſt, made them neglect that and other advantages they could have made of our home diſtractions. But then it is hard to conj [...]cture how their Trade could thrive or get any advantage of o [...]rs in a joynt War, when, in all probability, the firſt fury of the Enemy would light on them: One would think it were eaſier for the French to make a Deſcent on ſome of the Dutch Territories, than on ours, unleſs their Rivers were more unpaſſable than our Ocean: It is not ſo long ſince the French were there, that one ſhould forget the way, or the other the diſmal havock they then made, although they managed a fairer ſort of War than they now do: If they had not provided a good Army this Summer, the Palatinate had not ſingly complained of the French Fires: But the Tide is turned, and I hope we are both equally free. If Convoys, as he ſays, will ſecure their Trade, that will ſecure ours as much; ſo that this is only thrown in out of hopes to diſcontent ſome perſons, who have not forgotten the hard words given to the Dutch in the two laſt Reigns; though now it appears that the Wars then carried on againſt them were the firſt ſtep of the deſign laid againſt the Proteſtant Religion, though Emulation in Trade and ſome other things were inſiſted on to keep up the Reſentments of the Nation, juſt in the Author's Gant. But the cheat being at laſt, though too late perceived, we remember how zealous the Long Parliament was for the laſt Peace with Holland, and a ſtrict Alliance with them againſt France; neither have we forgotten how many Prorogations this coſt them. So that now, in relation to Holland, we are arrived to that happy Union with them the Nation ſo long ago deſired; and that Parliament which gave ſo many extravagant Sums for the carrying on both thoſe Wars, when they were made believe they were either neceſſary or honourable, cannot be ſuppoſed to have changed their noat ſo much out of kindneſs to the Dutch, as out of a juſt regard to the true intereſt of the Natio [...].

[Page] To the ſame purpoſe is our Author's complaint of admitting the Dutch into our Harbors, viewing our Docks and ſtrong Holds, and making our Ports and Shipping intirely theirs: For ſurely our King knows as much of their Harbors and Government, as their State-holder does of ours; and ſo we are even with them: But indeed we were even before, each knowing as much of the other as is requiſite; and unleſs Lord Torrington be no Engliſh-man, and all our Sea-men, as well as Captains, have lately changed their Country, our Fleet cannot be ſaid to be theirs: If there be any Factious Men in Holland, they may more juſtly make this complaint, ſince their Fleet has this Summer been Commanded by an Engliſh-man, and the King of England's Commiſſion. Our Author brings in the Name of Piers Gaveſton here only to amuſe the Vulgar; for the having an influence over a Prince is not the harm, that is in the ill uſe made thereof, which is not to be done but where our Princes are weak Men: As in the Caſe of the Spencers in Edward the Second's time; Father Peters in another Reign; and others that might be named: But our King has no Favourite but his People, norany Intereſt ſeparate from theirs.

Page 31. our Author tells us, ſuch a delivery up of ones Country was never known before, nor acted by any Party of Engliſh-men: But I can tell him of a worſe, and that is the delivery up of Ireland to the Iriſh, the ancient and ſworn Enemies of the Engliſh Nation; they were ſo before Religion came to make any difference, and rebelled as often againſt their Popiſh as Proteſtant Princes, never miſſing any opportunity they could lay hold on; their hatred is ſo inveterate, and has gone ſo far, as to deſtroy the Engliſh Cattel, rather than preſerve them for their own uſe, though of a far better breed than theirs; and all out of hatred to the Country from whence they came; out of the ſame averſion ſevere Statutes has not been able to learn them the Language in many Generations, nor to Aboliſh many of their barbarous Cuſtoms; and let no Man juſtifie or excuſe this by the ſeeming ſucceſs, for all the relief they can afford him, will not keep him long out of the Monaſtry our Author ſpeaks of. But then, I ſay, King James could not foreſee [Page] what has fallen out; for as hot as his Zeal is, if we may judge by what he did on the News of the intended Invaſion, he would have taken other meaſures, if his Prieſts had not fooled him with hopes of better ſucceſs, and that he ſhould be able to accompliſh his deſigns. So this was not the reaſon that induced King James to take a method ſo different from all his Popiſh Predeceſſors with the Iriſh. Next, I ſay, that his relying ſo much, as really he did, on Succours from Ireland; and the expectation of the mighty Power he had there, emboldened him to attempt what otherwiſe he would have thought too hazardous here, out of affinity with the matter in hand. I cannot omit taking notice of that Aſſertion of our Authors, That divine Providence, in conſideration, as he ſuppoſes, of the unjuſtneſs of the late King's Sufferings, hath with little effuſion of blood given him the intire poſſeſſion of Ireland: Which is ſo true, that he was not able at the Expence of Ten thouſand Lives, and three Months cloſe Siege, to take in the ſmall Town of Derry. And that other part of the Aſſertion, as to the intire poſſeſſion, is ſo much otherwiſe, that the Proteſtants of Ireland have all this time had twelve Garriſons in their poſſeſſion, wherein many Proteſtants were ſheltred from the rage of their Enemies, and the neighbouring Country ſecured from their French Tricks.

When our Author tells us of the Dutch Stivers, and the changing our Gold for Braſs, certainly he did not think of King James's new Iriſh Coin; by which a piece of Copper, leſs than an Engliſh farthing, with the Royal Image and Inſcription, paſſes from him for Six-pence, and ſo proportionably; but yet it muſt not be re-paid to him in his Revenue, which is another Invention to rob the Proteſtants there of all that the Army or Rapperies have left them. This is ſo palpable a Violation of our Property, and in ſo high a degree, that no Story can parallel it. In former times, when Leather-money paſſed amongſt us, the inducement to perſwade the uſing of it was, That it ſhould be received in the Revenue; and that as ſoon as conveniently could be, it ſhould be called in at the value it iſſued out; and accordingly ſo it was: But that is not practicable [Page] now, at leaſt to the advantage of any more of the Nation, than the laſt Poſſeſſors; all the other hands it paſſes through being certainly loſers, if in the Neighbourhood it be not as much valued as my Silver one, which doubtleſs it will not be. It is no ſtrange thing to have Money inhanced ſomething above the intrinſick value; it has been the misfortune of moſt States to be forced in difficult times to make uſe of this expedient to increaſe their Coin: But then as there always was an aſſurance from ſuch Government, that it ſhould not only be received in all Payments to be made at the Exchequer, but alſo called in at laſt; ſo there was alſo ſome proportion or de [...]orum kept in the Advancement. Thus in the worſt of the late times, when the Duke of Ormond Coined his own Plate, and all that the reſpect to him, or the Cauſe that he defended could gather together, he thought it ſufficient to add a tenth part, and ſo made Five ſhillings out of Four and ſix-pence: So in the Harp-money, we find a fourth part added; and a Nine-pence was iſſued out for a Shilling: So that in the firſt Caſe I had Nineteen pounds inſtead of Twenty pounds; and in the worſt Fifteen pounds; whereas from King James and his People, I ſhall receive but Sixteen ſhillings Eight-pence for my Twenty pounds; which is but the Twenty-fourth part of what I ought to have received. This is the firſt time that ever any thing, pretending to the Name of a Government, was ſo Bankrupt as to iſſue Money that did not carry intrinſick value above the Twenty-fourth part of its Name.

The Story of the Frogs in the Fable was formerly ſo Satyrically applied, that our Author ſhould have avoided the bringing it into our Memory; but he writes without conſidering the Conſequences, or how ſeverely his Allegations may be returned.

England is 'twixt York and Thee,

The Fable of the Frog;

He the devouring Stork, and Thou the Log.

[Page] So he juſtifies the late King's retiring into France, becauſe all Princes and States beſides France were actually engaged againſt him; without conſidering the other edge, that there was little Conſcience, and leſs Prudence in diſobliging all the States of Europe in favour of France; or how from hence we may argue, That that King, who has all the States of Europe on his back, will be able to afford but little relief to his Exiled Ally: And one would think the uſage the late King met with, when he was laſt in France, was no temptation to run the riſque of a ſecond Command, to retire out of the Territories of his moſt Chriſtian Majeſty. But in this we muſt excuſe him, for certainly he has not only forgotten the Uſage he met wi [...] there, but alſo that ever he was there, otherwiſe he would not have added to the Cauſes of his firſt Exile. But then this Reciprocal Love between France and Him, was no Argument why he might not have ſtayed at home; his Fear was not from the Rabble, as our Author ſays, for they Huzza'd his return from Feverſham; but the truth is, he feared a Parliament, and that they would ſecure the Religion and Liberties of the Subject, and ſo ruin all his hopes of eſtabliſhing Popery, which it ſeems he feared more than the Abdicating of his Crowns. Our Author pretends he would have gone to Scotland, but that his Fleet had deſerted him, and there was danger in the Land way. To which I ſay, a ſingle Ship could have carried him to Scotland, as well as France; but then it was offered him to chuſe his place of Reſidence; and at what diſtance from the Parliament; and with what number of Guards he pleaſed: but he liked not this, becauſe it ſuppoſed a Parliament. But ſince his Fears were ſo ſtrong upon him, that ſtay he durſt not, why did he not leave us ſome ſort of Government? Was there no Ballaſt ſo proper for his Ship as the Broad Seal, which was never carried beyond Sea but once before? and it was then reckoned as a crime in him that did it, though the Cardinal left the King behind him; but we had neither ſhadow nor ſubſtance left us, which is the firſt Act of Kindneſs he ever did this Nation, freeing us thereby from thoſe Chains wherewith we had [...]aſhly bound our ſelves.

[Page] Towards the latter end, our Author would perſwade us, That it is a Calumny caſt upon the late King, to ſay he endeavours to be re-inſtated ſingly upon a Popiſh Intereſt, and goes about to prove this by his Proclamations: A weak Argument this time of the day; but he enforces it by the good treatment he gives the Iriſh Proteſtants. But our Author might as well prove that the French King expects the Poſſeſſion of the Palatinate, and the neighbouring Territories, from his kind uſage of the inhabitants, though King James's Army cannot take Towns the [...]nch way; yet to ſhew the World they have learned ſome [...]g from the French General, ſent to aſſiſt them; they have burned them the French way; and in this have been ſo good Scholars, that they have out-done their Maſters; ſo that all his labour is not loſt, for they have lately Burned more Towns in Ʋlſter, than the King of France in Germany: ſome of them we can reckon; as in the County of Derry, Newtown, Lema [...]addy-muffe, Monymore, Dawſons-bridge, Kilrea, Ballyagby; in the County of Donegall, Raphae Donegall; in Tyrone-Omegh, Caſtle [...]arfeild; in Down, Newry; in the Counties of Cavan and Monaghan, Caſtleſanderſon, Farnam, and other good Houſes, (if not ſome Towns) which is one proof, that what they did of this ſort, was out of rage and malice, and not with any deſign to incommede or prejudice the Engliſh Army: For what great relief could an Army find in one Houſe? But what puts this matter beyond all diſpute, they left the Town of Strabane, ſeituate within ten Miles of Derry, unburnt, in the middle of their Rage and Flames, becauſe it belonged to the Earl of Abercorn, who is a Papiſt, and Lord Strabane of that Kingdom; and all this havock has been made ſince the late King's Arrival there.

It is needleſs, after this, to mention the Plunderings and Robberies of every Proteſtant in the Kingdom: but, in fact, ſo it is, that not one of them has eſcaped; and if this ſhould be excuſed, as done againſt his Will, and without his Conſent, and as the out-rage of a cruel and ill-paid Army; if it be ſo, [Page] let him be blameleſs; but then do not tell us of the good Treatment he hath given the Iriſh Proteſtants: If the blame thereof be taken from him, and placed to the account of the War, he has juſtice done him, without pretending to any Merit from his kindneſs to the Proteſtants; which will be much leſſened, if we conſider, that not one ſingle Man of the Nation has been redreſſed: Flocks of Cattel cannot be ſo ſpirited away, but ſome part of them may and have been found out; but little Reſtitution to the Proprietors, and leſs of Puniſhment on the Offendors. Then again, though Robberies might have been in the Country, and at a diſtan [...] from him, yet it is ſomething ſtrange that he could not p [...] ſerve the place of his own Reſidence, and the Country about it from ſuch Violences; for which he has done ſo little, that no part of the Kingdom has greater reaſon to complain than they.

From theſe Conſiderations I am as much ſatisfied, that the Royal Aſſent accompanied theſe Rapines, as that it did; that far greater one, the Repeal of the Acts of Settlement. How the Advocates of King James will maintain this Treatment of his Proteſtant Subjects, I cannot tell; neither can I tell how to reconcile his Speech to his pretended Parliament on the 7th of May, propoſing their relief againſt the Acts of Settlement, as he ſoftly phraſed it; and his Declaration to his pretended Subjects in England, dated the day after that moſt Gracious Speech; wherein he tells us, That the Priviledges and Properties of his Proteſtant Subjects was his Care; unleſs they ſay it was his Care and Endeavour how to deſtroy them.

We have heard of Mr. d'Avaux's demand, That all Proteſtants ſhould be diſmiſſed the Council-Board, for otherwiſe he could not diſcloſe his Maſter's Secrets there; which was immediately done.

We have heard from one of his Lords, That both the late King and his Popiſh Council, would rather hazard and loſe Forty Crowns, than be obliged to the Proteſtants for the poſſeſſion of the Kingdom, and deſign to re-gain his Dominions [Page] by the Arms of good Catholicks, and the glorious Monarch of France; and their reaſon for this is very comfortable to all Engliſh-men and Proteſtants: being that in the firſt Caſe, he muſt be tied and fettered with Conditions; but in the other Caſe he would come in free and boundleſs, and, like an Abſolute Conqueror, might do what he pleaſed.

I thought I had done with our Author, when I caſt my Eye on a line as true as moſt of the reſt, That the King never tempted any of the Men of Honour to change their Religion. I never had the honour of being Cloſetted, ſo know not the Diſcourſes uſually practiſed there; but it would be ſome diſparagement to his, and his Father-Confeſſor's Zeal, to think that always forgotten. But without inſiſting on that, it is not to be imagined that ſo many turned Apoſtates without temptation; or that the Treaſurer's Staff carried none with it. Our Author makes him kinder herein, than his Promiſe in the Scotch Declaration, not to uſe invincible neceſſity. The Reflections due to this have been done by ſo much a better hand, that I will forbear.

And having thus done with the Author, it is time to draw to a Concluſion: In order to which, I will only obſerve upon the whole matter, That the Subjects of this Kingdom, during the Reign of King James, were in ſo miſerable a condition, that they could call nothing their own, but their Fears and ſad Apprehenſions of the worſe things that were preparing for them.

When we heard we were to Obey without reſerve, we could not forget the Times of our happy Anceſtors, whoſe Obedience was guided by the known Laws of the Land, and lament our own and Childrens fate that were to be ruled by the Arbitrary Will of one Man, for whoſe Prudence and Moderation we could have no ſecurity. When we ſaw a Power to Suſpend ſome Laws put in Execution, we could not but look on all the reſt as loſt, ſince our Tenure was [Page] ſo precarious. When we ſaw our Clergy ſo much oppreſſed in thoſe early days, we did not doubt Father Peter's Will or Power to improve that Spirit of Perſecution, as far as a blind Zeal, or the French Pattern could carry it. When we ſaw an Army maintained in time of Peace, we could not forbear thinking ſometimes on the French Dragoons, and their way of Propagating the Faith. In a word; when we ſaw the ſtrange Methods that were taken to procure a right Houſe of Commons, we could not but fear, that our Miſery would be perfected by thoſe we formerly thought the Preſervers of our Liberties and Properties.

And now that it hath pleaſed God to put an end to all theſe things; and that we are not only free, but have a long proſpect of Happineſs before us; not to be deſtroyed, but by our ſelves; not to be leſſened or impaired, but by the influence of ſuch Diſcourſes as the Author's on weak or unwary Men. Let us remember how much it concerns every one of us to oppoſe thoſe deſigns, which tend only to bring us into the ſame ſlavery we have ſo lately eſcaped: The ſame did I ſay? Alas, as ill as we were before the Abdication upon his return, that would be a deſirable State; unleſs we believe he has learned Mercy in France, or that he is leſs a Papiſt than he was, or of leſs Arbitrary Principles. When Gratitude for the higheſt Obligations, both the ſetting and keeping the Crown on his Head, could not preſerve us, our Laws or Religion, what muſt we expect from his Anger and Revenge? And if we conſider with what ſeverity the weak Endeavours of Monmonth and his Party, to Dethrone him, were puniſhed. It is hard to imagine what Puniſhment is reſerved for thoſe that have actually diſplaced him, or taken him at his word, which he accounts the ſame thing; and we muſt not think that his Thunder would only purſue thoſe that have been active in the late Revolution, but the whole Nation muſt be ſtruck with it, that it may not be in their power to do the ſame thing again; and it would be a mighty Army, he would think, big enough to ſecure him from the like affront; [Page] and of what ſort they muſt be, is not hard to determine. I know it is needleſs to inlarge on theſe hints, becauſe you are fully perſwaded that it is the moſt prudent, as well as juſt Courſe, to remain contented with the preſent Government, and to contribute in our ſeveral Stations, what in us lies, to the ſupport thereof.

FINIS.

Advertiſement.

[Page]

HIbernia Anglicana, or the Hiſtory of Ireland; from the Conqueſt thereof by the Engliſh, to this time: with an Introductory Diſcourſe touching the Antient State of that Kingdom; and a new and exact Map of the ſame: Part the Firſt: By Richard Cox, Eſq

The Second Part; from the beginning of the Reign of King James the Firſt, to this preſent Time, by the ſame Author, will be Publiſhed the next Term. Both Printed for Joſeph Watts, at the Angel in St. Paul's Church-yard.

§

[Page]

THE Preſent Settlement VINDICATED, And the Late MIS-GOVERNMENT PROVED: In ANSWER to a SEDITIOUS LETTER FROM A (Pretended) LOYAL MEMBER OF THE CHƲRCH of ENGLAND, To a RELENTING ABDICATOR.

By a Gentleman of Ireland.

LONDON: Printed for Ioſeph Watts, at the Angel in St. Paul's Church-Yard. 1690.

[Page]

[...]

[Page]

[...]

ERRATA.

PAg. 3. Line 31. for October, Read November. P. 4. l. 32. r. ſo ſerved. P. 7. l. 34. r. November. P. 37. l. 3. r. December. P. 40. l. 19. after another, r. Commandment. In the ſame Line dele of the Commandments. P. 41. l. 17. r. Commiſſioners. P. 43. l. 10. r. twig, inſtead of way. P. 44. l. 36. r. ſupport him. P. 48. l. 11. r. Burgus. P. 49. l. 5. r. Magnifies. P. 52. l. 26. dele firſt of.

BOOKS Printed for J [...]ſeph Watts at th [...] Angel in St. Pauls Church-yard.

[Page]

THE Hiſtory of Ireland from the Firſt Conqueſt of it by the Engliſh, to this time, in two Parts, Folio.

The Trial of the Lord Ruſſel, &c.

—Of Colonel Sidney, Folio.

—Of Edward Fitzharris, &c.

An Exact Diary of the late Expedition of his Majeſty into England, Quarto.

Repreſentation of the Threatning Dangers Impending over Proteſtants in Great Britain before the coming of their Majeſties King William and Queen Mary.

Treatiſe of Monarchy, in two Parts, 1. Concerning Monarchy in General, and ſecond concerning this Particular Monarchy. Wherein all the Queſtions occurrent in both are ſtated, diſputed, and determin'd.

Diſcourſe of the Oppoſition of the Doctrine, Worſhip and Practice of the Roman Church, to the nature, deſigns, and characters of the Chriſtian Faith, by Gilbert Lord Biſhop of Salisbury, Quarto.

The True Teſt of the Jeſuits, or the ſpirit of that Society Diſloyal to God, their King and Neighbour, Quarto.

Monſieur Jurieu's Account of the Extaſies of the Shepperdeſs of Saou in Dauphine, Quarto.

Reformed Devotions, in Meditations, Hymns and Petitions, for every Day in the Week, and every Holiday in the Year. Twelves.

[Page]

Information about this book

Title statement

The present settlement vindicated, and the late mis-government proved in answer to a seditious letter from a pretended loyal member of the Church of England to a relenting abdicator / by a gentleman of Ireland.

Gentleman of Ireland.

Edition statement

1690

Publication

Publisher

Text Creation Partnership,

Place of publication

Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :

Date

2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).

ID [DLPS]

A55705

ID [STC]

Wing P3250

ID [STC]

ESTC R9106

ID [EEBO-CITATION]

13742071

ID [OCLC]

ocm 13742071

ID [VID]

101666

Availability

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

Series

Early English books online.

Notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A55705)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 101666)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 847:48)

Source

— The present settlement vindicated, and the late mis-government proved in answer to a seditious letter from a pretended loyal member of the Church of England to a relenting abdicator / by a gentleman of Ireland., Gentleman of Ireland..

Extent

[4], 67, [1] p.

Printed for Joseph Watts ...,. London :: 1690.. (Caption title: An answer to a late seditious letter from a pretended loyal member of the Church of England.) (Errata: p. 67.) (Advertisements on p. [2] at beginning and p. [1] at end.) (Reproduction of original in Huntington Library.)

Creation

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial practices

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.