1. IT is not that I contend, or that I can ra­onally hope to be allowed to speak last (when the Pens of obscure men in Eng­and, and of men Quality in Ireland, are set on work to persecute my Letter to the Duke of Ormnod) I now appear in Print. But having already, by a for­mer Reply, endeavour'd to vindicate opprest Inno­cency, and a most just Cause, from the malevolent Inve­ctives of the Man in the dark, I thought it concerned me to take the same care they should not suffer under that title a­lone, That they were impugned by a Person of Quality. For laying that name aside, I find very little alleg'd which pres­ses for an Answer, or is not already refuted. Yet I confess it is an elaborate Piece, that with all Art imaginable strives to endear the Writer to a prevailing Party. And in truth the late evil times have been guilty of so many changes, and men have been so dexterous, and so supple in their natures, to make application to the thriving side, that we may not wonder to see both the Art it self, and the Oratory that best suits with it, in so long a tract of time, and so many Vicissi­tudes, brought to perfection.

[Page 2] 2. And now, like a purified Muselman, he en­ters the Temple, and would perswade us, that he leaves all malice, all self interest at the Gate, because he declares, that he means not all Irish Papists, although he has occasion Pag. 2. to mention them frequently: And excepts those worthy Persons of that Nation and Religion, that faithfully adhered to the King; or having rebelled, have been truly sorrowful for it, and in the constancy of their subsequent services, have washed themselves clean. Yet he forbears not to call the Nation a Beast, their Country a very Pest-house, their Religion P. 82. P. 2. P. 47. something that pins them upon the sleeve of the Pope. But how this Writer, by his Sophistry, and Logical Quiddities, wherein he would seem to be abundantly versed, can find a way to exempt those his worthy Persons from having their share in those attributes, unless they disclaim in their Na­tion, their Country, and Religion, is more than I can under­stand. This is a meer Hocus Pocus; He has dexterously conveyed the Balls, which we conceived to be in this Cup, under the other. But I am confident, he can hardly meet with any Irish Papist, that will think it a favonr, to be fed with Applause, sauced after his manner.

3. And even those chosen men whom he has laid apart, must not pass without some stain: For they have, Pag. 2. every one of them, so much endanger'd their being polluted a­gain, as interceding for their guilty Country-men does amount unto. This (however, in a strict and rigorous constructi­on of the words, barely taken, or in a benign interpretati­on of them, as such, it might pass; yet in that of our Per­son of Quality's meaning, and to his purpose) is the first of the many Calumnies (wherewith the generality of those worthy Persons, and those others truly sorrowful, &c. are aspersed) we shall hereafter meet with in the progress of a Discourse fraught with Principles that derive their being from the Writers imagination. But however the Bat­teries planted against them suppose somewhat solid to beat upon, and discharge whole Volleys of Dilemmaes, Enthime­maes, Inductions, and Inferences against them; I shall only desire the favour, to know from this Writer, what Irish Papist that is, who intercedes, or pleads either innocence, [Page 3] or justice, or humanity, or necessity, or other excuse whatso­ever, for even any of all those of his Country-men appear­ing in his own particular, or that may be found guilty of the foul Crimes which the rude multitude perpetrated in the be­ginning of the late Rebellion? Or who is he that mediates either unchristianly, or unreasonably for those, that by spurning at his Majesties mercy, denied themselves the be­nefit of his gracious Concessions in the Articles of Peace? And if this mediation, that intercession or plea, be forborn, not only as to the generality, but even in the case of any particular Person (otherwise, at least, than by laying them all prostrate at the feet of the most merciful of Princes, and by acknowledging, with all hearty repentance, the horrour of their enormities, and by minding King Charles the Pious of his Royal unparallel'd Clemency extended to so many other thousands in the three Nations, reputed, and really being no less criminal, yea more, many of them, than those unfortunate Irish) what generous breast can en­tertain so ignoble a thought, as to condemn a Patriot to si­lence, if by speaking he may assist his Country and Nation, specially in such a way as is suitable to the Divine Genius of our good King, and to the publick exigence, where mil­lions of all sides must be destroyed, if mercy does not in­tercede?

4. Although I have a perfect aversion from the manner of writing which this Author observes, and that the School Dialect seldom meets with those that approve it, when it passes the Verge of the University; yet being forc'd for a while to follow him in his wayes, I must raise a triple Bullwark against his tripartite Battery; not giving the Reader at present any Reflections on his Charge against my self, and his Dilemma in pursuance thereof, in the first (and beginning of the second) Page of his Book: but remitting the considerations hereof to the end of this Pa­per, where you may form a more certain judgement of them.

5. My Preface (sayes he) consists of fears and Pag. 3. jealousies, and those in reason must be expected from the gene­rality of the Irish Papists. For the conscience of their own [Page 4] guilt, although the King should make their condition safe, will never suffer them be secure. I appeal to the Writer himself, whether there can be any assertion more temerarious? Can he forget that others are as Criminal? That some have been instrumental in that unparallel'd execrable Murther of Charles the First of ever glorious memory? That other have by reiterated Oaths disavowed a Monarchical Govern­ment, and excluded our sacred Soveraign, and all the Race of the Stuarts, from any right to the Crown? That some have in favour of the principal Regicide, sworn, and sworn again, yea freely, voluntarily, without force (I mean) without compulsion or violence used to necessitate them, if not that of great rewards? Nay, that some have with all in­dustry imaginable, sought to enthrone and make him King in fact? (as, besides other invincible Arguments, the seve­ral Speeches of some of them, in a select Committee waiting on Cromwell, by Order of their mock-Parliament, Anno 1657. and specially that Speech made the 11th. of April, and another of the 16th. of the same Month, which you may read in the Book entituled Monarchy asserted (Printed at London by John Redmayne, Anno 1660.) Pag. 25. and 67. do evidently demonstrate) And that all of them have fought against those that would assert his Majesties Rights; and all have besieged his Cities, and taken his Forts? And will this Writer averr, That after the goodness and indulgence of the best of Kings hath made their condition Pag. 3. safe, the conscience of their own guilt will never suffer them be secure? Observes he not what a Nest of Hornets he hath dis­closed? To what distrust he subjects the inviolable word of his Majesty? And how vain and frivolous he renders Acts of Oblivion and Indempnity all the World over? Had he said, That the Conscience of great Guilts, though forgiven, would exact Repentance, nothing had been more consonant to Justice; but that the Royal word of a Prince cannot se­cure the fears of an Offender, must be the dictate of the Writers private Conscience. For the experience of all Ages, and the practice of all Countries, confirm the unque­stionableness of the Tenet.

[Page 5] 6. Fear is founded on, at least attended with hatred. Pag. 3. This is a Principle whereof he may well assume the honour to have been the first Author; For no man who hath ever writ of the passions of the mind, will contend for that priority, or this consecution, as necessary to that fear of mine, con­sidered as 'tis express'd. I said, The generality of the Catho­liques of Ireland, the Nobility and Gentry, even the Duke of Ormond's fast Friends heretofore, were at that present (when I writ that my first Letter) seized with a fear, and a darkness or dimness of judgement, losing their faith of his fu­ture appearance for them, or hopes of their delivery by him. Now by what Privilege in Logick he can inferr thereupon, That therefore they hate the Duke of Ormond, is a thing, where­in I believe the Reader, notwithstanding the circumstances of universally and intensly, would desire to be satisfied. Pag. 3.

7. What humane society could subsist, if this ra­tiocination might be received as a convincing argument? Would not the Creditor hate the Debtor, because he feared he might demand his money? Would not the Client hate his Council at Law, because he feared he might be remiss in studying his Case? Would not a Suter hate his Judge, be­cause he feared he might give Judgement against him? Would not one Friend hate another, because he feared he might not be sufficiently carefull of his interests? Would not the Wife her Husband, and the Husband his Wife; and Child­ren their Parents, and these again those; and the King even the best of his Subjects, and they likewise him? I am sure a­ny of those things may be said as justisiably, as that the gene­rality of the Irish Papists, because they were seized with fear, &c. and were losing, then when I wrote that Letter, their faith of his future appearance for them, and hopes of their deli­very by him, do hate the Duke of Ormond. But alass! our Person of Quality is not sollicitous of their personal hatred to the Duke of Ormond: A second, and a more venemous in­ference depends on this. Which (sayes he) in plain Eng­lish Pag. 5. is this, That although his Majesty should from time to time nominate for Lord Lieutenant of this Kingdom, the wisest, and the faithfullest of his Subjects; yet because the King Com­missionates them, or because they are such, or both, many [Page 6] (I wish I could not say most) of the Irish Papists will be jealous and fearfu [...] of them.

8. Now the Reader may find wherefore he erect­ed that Pr [...]nciple of fear and hatred; and will hereafter ob­serve into how many shapes our Person of Quality turns him­self, to do the Nation the like good Offices. For my part, lest his Dilemma should pass unanswerable, I avow what I said to be true, That the generality of the Irish Catholicks were then seized with jealousies and fears, losing their faith at that present of the Duke of Ormond's future appearance for them, and hopes of their delivery by him. And this, me­thinks, should rather be alleged by the Writer, as a testi­mony of their excess of confidence in him, than as a mark of the hatred imposed upon them. Yet he must still descant on his own song: And those fears and jealousies, being no other than what I have described them, he averrs, that they are become nationally violent. This is a bitter, but groundless Invective, as is evident by what I have said: And the De­ductions Pag. 4. from it, are the Effects of such a kind of wittiness, as being framed to the elevation of the multitude, concludes nothing solidly.

9. These fears and jealousies are not of the same kind those were of, that hurried on to that horrid Insurrecti­on Pag. 4. in 41. the first Actors: Nor were they fears and jealou­sies alone of what kind soever, which have been the only Passions that so irrationally, so inhumanely transported some of them. As for the generality of Irish Catholicks, specially of the Nobility, Gentry, and Citizens, whereof some within three, others four, some five, and many at six months end, after the first flame of the Rebellion, took Armes in their own very natural defence, whether they have not, not only pretended, but very truly and faithfully alleged, First, By their Commissioners to his late Majesty at Oxford, and since upon several occasions, even publickly, and in their Printed Remonstrances, and other Papers for them­selves, as necessitating Causes of their conjunction with the first Insurrectors (yet not of their conjunction in the Grounds, Motives, and other Designs, charg'd upon those first Contrivers, as peculiar to themselves alone, but [Page 7] in that of a social, and very natural defence, and in that of those other indeed specious pretences, which their Oath of Association contained) whether I say they alleg'd not other kind of jealousies and fears (than those expressed in my Let­ter) to excuse their own actings, or conjunction, against the Laws of the Land? Whether they alleged not, and ve­ry truly alleged a farr other kind of jealousies and fears, that is, even those which all, both Civilians and Canonists al­low as very probable and excusable, if Metus cadens in vi­rum constantem be such? Whether they pleaded not the very Law of Nature (though I do not for them this or any other to justifie their actions, but to lessen the guilt of their ta­king Armes) even that Law (I say) which moves the hand by interposing it self to bear off a stroke aimed at the head? Let the Brief Narrative, Printed and published at London in the Year 1660. resolve our Person of Quality. Wherein, as I am sure, he may find other jealousies and fears, than such as possess now the Catholicks of Ireland: so he shall read farr other Causes of them. Which is the reason I give out of that little and accurate Piece the fol­lowing Passages (and even in the Authors words) which relate to our present purpose.

THey therefore (he means the English Nation) and the The Brief Narra­tive, Pag. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. whole World may be pleas'd to know, that we (to wit the Irish) are so farr from justifying any horrid actions perpetrated at that time, when but a few of any quality raised a Rebellion in the North, as we have, and still make it our request, that those Crimes, and all Massacres and Murthers then, or after committed, whoever shall be found guilty of them, be punished. Yet we may not omit (although no Motive whatsoever could justifie their Undertakings) to represent, that before they f [...]ll from their Obedience to the Government, Sir William Parsons, one of the Lords Justices, that supplyed the Deputies place, at a publick Entertainment, before many witnesses, did positiv [...] ­ly declare, that within a twelve-month no Catholick should be seen in Ireland; Many hands were sought, and thousands were found to subscribe a Petition tending to the introducing of a se­vere Persecution against Catholicks, who were the farr greater [Page 8] number of the Inhabitants of Ireland; And that the menace of an Invasion of a Scotish Army, of which men at that time did frequently discourse, bred frightful apprehensions. So as these and other grounds of suspition, being improved by such among them, whose particular Interests could be most favoured, and better advanced in unquiet times, laid the foundation of that Rebellion. But even these men, and at that time when the Lords Justices did not appear to be prepared for resistance, by their R [...]monstrance humbly begg'd their Grievances might be redressed, by the advice of the two Houses of Parliament, then met at Dublin. But the Lords Justices (who by their words and actions, not only expressed their unwillingness to stop the farther growth of these Distempers, but meant to increase them, and were often heard to wish, that the number were greater of such as became Criminal) by proroguing the Parlia­ment, made them desperate. However the Nation by their Representatives, in the two dayes which were only allowed them to sit, husbanded their time so, as to leave to posterity a monu­ment of their aversion to such attempts, by declaring, that those men had traeiterously and rebelliously taken Armes; and offering to employ their Lives and Fortunes in reducing them to their Obedience, if they might be permitted then to sit. But this was denied them; and by a strange change from the antient form of Government, a Parliament then sitting was prorogued; whereas our Ancestors, upon a farr less occasion than quieting of so high Distempers, were usually called upon to assist the King with their Advice. To this may be added, that the Marquess of Ormond proposed at the Council-Board, the rai­sing of five thousand men in the space of three weeks, if he might be authoriz'd so to do; with which strength he undertook to dissipate those then weak beginnings of the ensuing mischiefs, and to prevent their farther growth; but was refused it. So as thus farr we may observe who they were that widened the wound instead of stanching the blood.

This foundation being thus laid, that which at first was but a spark, and might be easily quenched, began to flame: And freedom of Rapine having suddenly drawn numbers together, the unreprest Conspiratours became a formidable Arme, and be­sieged Tredah, passing the River of Boyne, which was [...]e [Page 9] Rubicon of the Pale, and had in all former Rbeellions been maintained with their blood, by those antient English Colonies planted there. Now it was that the times began to favour the design of the Lords Justices, and their Party in the Council, which was as forward as they to foment the Distractions. For the Ulster Army lying in the bowels of the Country, the Forces being not yet come out of England, and the Natives them­selves both unarm'd and distrusted by the State, they were forced at first, by their regular contribution, to prevent the de­solation which would have followed their refusal to supply them. Hereupon such Contributors began to be looked upon, and cha­racted as men fallen from the Government. And a Party that was sent from Dublin, having killed at Santry (but three miles distant from thence) some innocent Husbandmen (a­mong whom there was two Protestants) and carried their heads as in triumph to the City, the neighbour Inhabitants alarm'd thereat, had recourse to such Weapons as first came to hand, and gathered in a Body. Whereupon the Lords Justices set forth a Proclamation in nature of a safe Conduct, by which these so in Armes, and Mr. King of Clontarffe by special name, had five dayes respite to come in and present their Grievances. But before three nights of the time prefixed were expired, Mr. King's house was pillaged, and burnt by direction of the Lords Justices. Not long after supplyes being arrived out of Eng­land, and the siege of Tredah raised, and consequently the force removed, which necessitated the Inhabitants to comply with the Ulster Army, the Nobility and Gentry of the Pale prevailed with Sir John Read, his Majesties sworn Servant (a Stranger to the Country, un e [...]gaged, and an eye witness of their proceedings, then upon his journey to England) to take the pains to present their Remonstrance to the late King of ever blessed memory, and to beg pardon for what they were thus com­pelled to act. But he, poor Gentleman, coming to Dublin, was apprehended, and not concealing the Message intrusted with him, was put to the Rack; The most part of the questions which were then asked him in that torment, being no other, than such as might lead him to accuse the King and Queen to be Authors and Fomenters of that Rebellion. Moreover, the two Houses of Parliament in England, for the better induci [...]g the Rebells to [Page 10] repent of their wicked Attempts, commended to the Lords Ju­stices, according to the power granted them in that behalf, to bestow his Majesties gracious pardon to all such as within a con­venient time, &c. should return to their Obedience. The Lords Justices (notwithstanding such Order, and his Maje­sties gracious pleasure signified to that effect) by their Procla­mation dated in November 1641. limited such his Majesties, and the Parliaments of England, their favourable and general Intentions, to the Inhabitants of a few Counties, provided al­wayes, they were no Free-holders; and afforded them no longer time than ten dayes after the Proclamation to receive benefit thereby. But notwithstanding these restrictions, the Lord of Dansany, Sir John Nettervill, Patrick Barnewall of Kii­brue, and many others who had notice of his Majesties gracious Inclination towards the Nation, and the Parliament of Eng­lands Order in favour of them, submitted to the Lord Mar­quess of Ormond, then Licutenant General of his Majesties Army, who recommended them to the Lords Justices, inti­mating, that the good usage to be extended to them, would have an influence on many others, and be a great motive to quiet the Distempers which then began to spread. But the Lords Justices, whose Design was not to be carried on with Mercy and Indulgence, to prevent submissions, Imprisoned and Indicted by a Jury, which did not consist of Free-holders, those so submitting, and put the said Mr. Barnewall (of the age of sixty six years) to the torture of the Rack. This not­withstanding, the Noblemen and Gentry inhabiting the Country next to Dublin, applyed themselves humbly by their Letter to the Lords Justices. Which when the Earl of Castle-haven, a Nobleman of English Birth, who freely, before that time, had access to Dublin, came to present, he was made Prisoner. Wherefore, when the Nation observed, That their Advice in Parliament was not only thought unnecessary, but themselves in­volved in a general distrust;

That neither the Parliaments, nor the Marquess of Ormonds offer to suppress the Rebellion, would be accepted;

That the enforced complying of the Nobility and Gentry of the Pale with a powerful Army, which was Master of their Lives and Fortunes, was imputed to them as a malicious aversi­on from the English Government;

That the blood of innocent Husbandmen was drawn, and the heads of men were grown an acceptable spectacle in Dublin;

That the publick Faith was broken, and mens Houses (particularly enabled to claim benefit by it) pillaged and burnt;

That all wayes were obstructed by which they might implore his Majesties mercy, and represent their Conditions;

That the favourable Intentions of the Parliament of England, and his Majesties Gracious Pardon, which was meant should extend to all, save such as were guilty of blood, was so limited by them, as no Estated man could receive benefit by it;

That those, who, notwithstanding their restrictions, cast them­selves freely upon his Majesties mercy, were Imprisoned, In­dicted, and some of them Rackt;

That the Earl of Castle-haven might have found it a Capi­tal Crime to mediate in their behalf, if he had not made his es­cape after twenty weeks Imprisonment;

That the King's sworn Servant was Rackt, and his Mini­sters, whose duty it was to have been zealous of the honour of their Master, endeavoured to asperse it, and to render him, and his Royal Consort, odious to his People, by striving to ex­tort from a tortured man, some testimony by which they might be accused of raising and somenting that Rebellion. When these, and many other Arguments of this kind, which (lest we should be too prolix) we omit, had convinced the Catholicks of Ire­land, that the Lords Justices, and that part of the Council which adhered to them, became unfaithful to his Majesty, and had designed the ruine of that Nation, and the extirpation of their Religion;

That Law which moves the hand by interposing it self to bear off a stroak aimed at the head, convened an Assembly of these, who were exposed to those so eminent dangers, in which they modelled a Goverment, in order to their natural defence, ob­liging themselves by such an Oath to his Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, as well shewed their affection to the Crown, and their unalterable resolutions to maintain his Majesties Rights, and to follow his fortune. Between these divided Governments, there have been Battels fought, Cities and Forts besieged, and [Page 12] much Christian blood spilt, which will one day lye at some mens doors: And who these are, the Eternal Wisdom best knows, and the Reader is left free to determine.

10. All which, and all whatsoever else I Print, I am very well content may fall or stand, as that is true which P. W. averrs in this passage of the Duke of Ormond's Country­men; Pag. 3. (if indeed he averrs the Supposition at all, or the Irish to be such, that is, of the same Country with his Grace, whether they be really so or no) And I no less de­sire, that all our Person of Quality writes on this subject, may stand or fall, as that Proof he brings in his Parenthesis, to ground his own wish for me, is true or false. For his Grace (sayes he) is neither his (he should have more pro­perly said their) Countryman by Birth, Religion, or any o­ther Pag. 3. relation to which that name is applyable. Certainly the name of Roman was appliable to Constantine the Great, even then when first he was Christian, that is, of a different Religion from the State, Senate, People, and Army of Rome, though he was born at York in Great Britain: To Theodosius, and Seneca, though born in Spain: As likewise to so many thousands more, where-ever begotten, or born, or of what Religion soever, who enjoyed the Rights, Pri­vileges, and Title of Roman Citizens. Nor can he deny the name of an Englishman to that Prince was of purpose brought in his Mothers belly to Carnarvan, to appease the warlike humour of the Welshmen, by giving them a Prince of their own Country. Extraction, and the Communion of Blood and Laws, and Titles of Honour, and the Free­dom of Citizens, gave these the name of Roman, though they ceased not therefore to be Britains, Spaniards, Welsh, &c. by their birthright. And shall not the Duke of Or­monds Blood, extracted from the Loins of the most Noble Irish Catholick Families, during the succession of so many Ages, these four or five hundred years, his Predecessours born there, his great Demains and Estate there, his Titles of Honour, and those of his fore-Fathers too, of Baron, Viscount, Earl; and lastly, his own of Marquess, and Duke, all there: shall not so many other Barons, Viscounts, and [Page 13] Earls, descended from the House of Ormond, all Buttlers, and Irish, and Catholicks too; so many Baronets, and Knights; so vast a number of Squires, and other Gentle­men, all of that Nation and Communion; besides all the almost numberless number of his Allyes in all the four Pro­vinces of Ireland, of all the most antient and most illustrious Families of that Kingdom and Religion: Shall not (I say) all these Considerations, besides the Community of the same Laws, Rights, and Privileges (not to regard that of Education, or Language) entitle the Duke of Ormond to the name of Irish, or their [...]ountryman, or to any Relati­on to which that name is appliable? Doubtless the Topick à majori ad minus, will conclude here our Person of Quality in the affirmative, notwithstanding all his Logick. And his own Claim besides to Ireland, or England, or both, will conclude him. And all Historians that distinguish the Peo­ple of Ireland into antient Irish, and antient English, e­vict this Confession from him, being these do never the more cease to be Irish. Finally, The Opinion of the World, and Custom of England in particular, reputing and calling those Irish, who have in many regards less right to the name than the Duke of Ormond hath, force this acknow­legdement from any Contradictor; albeit England, with much reason, challenge him as English withall, by his more antient Extraction from, and his own Birth among them, and by so many other Titles which makes their Claim very just, while they bereave not others of their own; as none doth, that I know, but my two Antagonists, the Man in the dark, and this Person of Quality.

11. But however this be (which indeed is no more ma­terial than it is to shew our Person of Quality's vain confi­dence, erecting imaginary Trophies on the most immaterial passages of my Letter) I will now proceed without leaping Pag. 4. backwards to the year 41. reserving my answer to what he farther a [...]leges [...]ere, until I come to that part of his dis­course where he vents himself more fully, and with no less acrimony upon that Subject.

12. Concerning P. w. his affection to and confidence in his Grace the Duke of Ormond, since this is alleg'd by the Wri­ter Pag. 5. [Page 14] ter for an end of mischief, I may be allowed to say this con­fidence took root, and grew up in difficult times, and upon such occasions, in order to his Majesties service, as perhaps the Writer might heretofore have construed to have been high Treason against Cromwell.

And as we ought not to wonder that the hazardous imploy­ments I underwent, obtained for me at that time free and frequent access (though my Letter speaks nothing at all of such freedom or frequency) to a Minister of State that cherish'd all instruments who might in any measure promote his Majesties affairs: So it is not strange that in so noble a nature as is the Duke of Ormond's, there might remain some such memory of my fidelity, as I should, even in these better times, be frequently admitted to his presence, and allowed to speak my thoughts with accustomed freedom. Upon this occasion the Writer raises such a storm against me, as plainly discovers, that though Malice be a sullen, yet it is a very Airy passion, which rather than it should not blow, will create it self wind of any thing. I beseech the Reader to observe what use this Gentleman makes of mine, and the relyance of o­thers upon the word of the Duke of Ormond mentioned in Pag. 5. that Letter, and how he casts the phrase in a new mould, and then interprets it to such a sense, as no Sophistry can force the expression to bear, nor any but a malevolent spi­rit, give it. My words are, Who have so many years relyed on your Word and Virtue: and within a few lines after, to clear these clouds of darkness, and to clear them in this present conjuncture, by an effectual demonstration of that Justice and favour you intended the Catholicks of Ireland in your Articles of Peace. I appeal to the most interested Adventurer, or Souldier, whether he conceives this word in the same sense it was written, and is obvious to all eyes, could be applyed to any other thing, than that word which the Duke of Or­mond pass'd to the Catholicks of Ireland under his Seal and Signature in the Articles of Peace? And to confirm this, do I not, in speaking of the Articles of Peace to the Duke him­self, call them your Articles of Peace? as if I should say, these are your word, these are your promise. And yet this Gentleman hath the confidence to say, that P. W. would [Page 15] make us believe, as if some word in secret had past by his Grace Pag. 5. to the Irish Papists, which they dare thus mention to himself, and publish to the World.

13. This Gentleman sayes moreover, that I speak of my Pag. 5. dayly care and trouble to support his esteem, and of blaming dis­trusters as ignorant of State affairs, and the intrigues obstruct­ing as yet, or of inconsideration of those wiser ways, though slower than folly or rashness could chaulk out, or of pre­judices and an evil passion. I confess this charge, only the first branch excepted, at least as to the words (or even sense) and manner of expression; my Letter having no where our Person of Quality's phrase of my dayly care to sup­port the Duke of Ormond's esteem; but another very diffe­rent, and no less true than modest: my words being these, My Lord, these are thoughts which more and more trouble me dayly; because I have dayly new occasions to reflect on them. Ergo I said, my dayly care and trouble was to support his esteem? A strange inference, as if the final motives of my trouble must of necessity have been, my desire to support my Lords e­steem; or as if his Grace did need my support; or that if I knew my self valuable for any such thing, I would be so im­modest in my expressions. But allowing this unhandsom ad­vantage, what then will all his Charge here signifie? No­thing less than his purpose. Can any one imagine, that o­ther use might be made of these words, than as of argu­ments form'd by my self, to support the esteem of the Duke of Ormond, (since this Person of Quality will have it so) and to appease the distrust of some of my Country-men? Yet this Gentleman would fix upon me, that I would insinuate, as if those reasons were conveighed unto me by the Duke of Ormond; and therefore gives me the name of his Graces inti­mate Confident. Which if all that have free and frequent ac­cess to his Grace (and that is all the ground I give (if I give even this) for being so called) may be privileg'd to assume, his intimate Confidents will become unreasonable numerous. And with how little reason this Gentleman exaggerate, the matter, by terming me a perfect Enemy to the English Inte­rest, and Protestant Religion, is evident, since neither my Pag. 5 [...] any of my name in Ireland, can pretend to any [Page 16] Estate in that Kingdom, but by an English Interest; and that I daily pray for the long and happy Reign of our Sove­raign Charles the Second, who is the Chief of that Religion. Besides, that I am sufficiently known, even to very many Protestants, and to some of the chiefest and best of them, to be in my Capacity, and to my utmost power, so farr a profest Friend to their Religion, as not only to wish from my very Soul, but to endeavour too in the best way I can, that all Differences 'twixt it and the Roman be composed, not by the Rebellion of Subjects, or any force of Armes, but by such means as those were the blessed Apostles took for appeasing the Controversies of the primitive Christians, and by such others as are suitable to the Gospel of Christ.

14. Now the Reader perhaps may wonder, wherefore this Gentleman made so perverse a Comment upon so inno­cent a Text. And I can imagine no other reason for it, but that being himself desirous to expose the Duke of Ormond to the obloquy and distrust of the English, and not daring to appear bare-fac'd in so foul a practice, he vented his own Conceptions by fathering them upon another, and was wil­ling to give his Grace the blow, although he look'd asquint on me. If this be to betray with a kiss, and by undermining, Pag. 6. the guilt must lye at the Gentleman's own door: For he must excuse me, if I do not lend him my Paw, to rake the Chesnuts out of the Embers.

15. As for my affection to the Duke of Ormond, whereat, in the next place, this Gentleman has a fling, though he Pag. 6. confess (but either forgetfully or wilfully) I said no more in my Letter, for that in particular, than I said in general, for my Countrymens having a right to the Peace made in 1648. I am content his Grace takes his measure of it by his knowledge of my endeavours that all my Countrymen should observe that Peace with the greatest Punctuality, Religion, and Sincerity imaginable. And so the Gentleman hath his belief herein confirmed by my consent. But in as much as he seems to take it ill, that in my Letter I gave him no more ground than he will understand I have, to vent his passion against my affection, I profess to him now, and to all the [Page 17] World, that my affection hath been as great, as good, as constant, as passionate, as truly loyal, and as religiously Christian, in all respects, to his Grace, since ever I had the first honour of his acquaintance, as my Letter expressed it to be unalterable. That I have given since that time, and be­fore that time, invincible arguments thereof; and those too known to thousands, Friends and Foes (amongst whom I could number some, peradventure of this Person of Qua­lity's Friends heretofore, Ludlow, and Jones, and Corbet, sometimes Commissioners in Ireland, under the Usurpers; besides others of greatest rank in England, in the dayes of Anarchy, under the young Protector Cromwell, and the Committee of Safety: And I could call even Spaniards, and as far as Madrid, and the greatest Ministers of State to the Catholick King, to witness. And yet have given such in­vincible arguments hereof, as the Duke of Ormond himself will (I doubt not) if occasion require, acknowledge to have been such, and own both them and me as such.

16. The next Battery is rais'd against that part of my Let­ter which this Gentleman calls my Petition, and immediate­ly a loose shot is made to shew that I am struck with the jea­lousies and fears of my Countrymen, limiting the Duke of Or­mond's Pag. 6. assistance to the present Conjuncture. Certainly no indifferent Person will think this to be precipitation or di­strust in me, when he understands that the Bill of Settlement was then transmitted hither to his Majesty, and that an Act of Parliament once past concludes all Interests.

17. Here I shall beg this favour of the Reader, that he may not judge it essential for his Satisfaction, that I should pursue every flash of wit, that, like sparkles in a new kind­led Char-coal fire, breaks from this Gentleman: And that he deferr giving this of Articling first, and breaking of Arti­cles, Pag. 7. any great applause, untill he shall have understood, in the due place, how those Articles were made, and how they were broken.

18. Now laying aside, as to the punctual formality of the Order, that division of Justice into Distributive Pag. 7. and Commutative, and the branches that spring from it, I shall endeavour to se [...]e [...]t faithfully the substance of the [Page 18] Gentleman's discourse, and reply as truth shall ena­ble me.

19. He will not allow of what I say of the Catholicks putting themselves freely into his Graces hands. He will have the word freely restrain'd here, without any reason, Pag. 7. to his own meaning, and only to signifie gratis, against all the Rules of Divinity, Philosophy, Oratory, History, Grammar; against the nature or imposed signification of the word in it self; against the acception of men, even of the vulgar; against that which the Antecedents, and Conse­quents, and middle, and all parts of my Letter, duely pon­der'd, can make it import; and no less against my intention, abundantly and rationally expressed, not by this word alone, but in the whole contexture of that innocent Piece of mine. For all understanding men know, that the word freely cannot of it self, or without some restriction or limitation by the matter treated of, or by other adjuncts, be more, if not rather much less, restrained to signifie either merit, or equivalency, or other answerable thing by pact, than to express a meer spontaneous inclination, and election, at least without force imposed on the party so determining. And the whole discourse, argument, and final scope of that Letter, shew evidently that my intention there by the word freely, was no other than to express a strong inclination, or desire, and a freedom of will, and voluntary action of the Roman Catholick Confederates, for as much as related to them, in concluding that Peace: Or (at most) to express that freedom which is not lessen'd by external force, coacti­on, or violence. For could it have been rationally ima­gined, that I, who in every other line do mention the Ar­ticles of Peace, should be so foolishly impudent, as to a­verr, that the King granted nothing? What is more fre­quent than, if you delay to perform your promise given up­on pact, to allege, that I did freely put my self into your hands?

20. But to do this Person of Quality right, I must con­fess, he doth not absolutely averr the word freely in that in­stance of mine to sign fie gr [...]tis, but with reservation sayes, If in this insta [...]ce it signifies ought meritoriously, it signifies Pag. 7. [Page 19] the same as gratis. And upon this improbable, ridiculous, im­pertinent supposition he must spend a whole Page disputing against his own imaginary signification, a Chimera, a meer nothing, as being [...]nconceivable by any else but himself. Which is the cause I will now begin to make use of his own so frequent manner of arguing. Our Person of Quality either understood the word freely was not in that instance de­termined to merit, or he understood it was. If that, wherefore so many arguments to overthrow a sense he knew my Letter did not bear? If this, does not he betray his want of judgement and knowledge?

21. Yet in the next Page he must prosecute an errour by adding to it an imposture. That (sayes he) which his Ma­jesty Pag. 8. calls forced, compelled, and necessitated, P. W. calls freely putting themselves into his Graces hands. Is it possible that so much ignorance (that I may speak modesty) should drop from the Pen of a Person of Quality? I grant his Maje­sty in his gracious Declaration of the 30th. of Novem. 1660. Page 3. has these words, We well remember the Cessation of the Peace; which our Royal Father of blessed memory had been forced, during the late troubles, to make with his Irish Sub­jects of that our Kingdom, and by which he was compelled to give them a full pardon for what they had before done amiss, upon their return to their duty, and their promise to give his Majesty a vigorus assistance. And soon after in the same Page these other words, We could not forget the Peace which Our selves was after necessitated to make with our said Subjects, in the time when they who wickedly usurp'd the Authority, had erected that odious Court for the taking away the life of Our dear Fa­ther, &c. And I further grant all the advantages he can de­rive from that passage of mine, But withall, my Lord, I shall give your Excellence my most earnest and most humble de­sires, that you delay no longer, than shall be necessary, to clear those clouds of darkness, and clear them in this present conjuncture, by an effectual demonstration of that justice and favour you intended the Catholicks of Ireland in your Articles of 48. when they so freely put themselves and their power into your hands. And what then? must it follow, that That which his Majesty calls forced, compelled, and necessitated, [Page 20] P. W. calls freely putting themselves into his Graces hands? By what Rule of Logick I wonder? I am sure not by those of Opposition, either of Contraries, or Contradictories, or by any other than that of this Gentleman's Disparaeta, e­ven that by which he might as well argue and conclude Deus est in Coelo, ergo baculus est in angulo. His Majesty sayes, that both his Father of blessed memory, and himself have been forced: And I say the Confederate Catholicks have been free, and those and these are not the Same, but very Different things: And Opposition must be in the very self­same thing. Must it not follow therefore, that our Person of Quality's Conclusion is from the Staffe to the Corner (as they say)?

22. But to let the Reader see this Gentleman's Ethicks are no better than his Logick (his blind Zeal, or a worse Passion, equally confounding his Judgement here and there) let us grant him what he cannot prove, nor has any kind of colour to allege, that I had said his Majesty was free in concluding that Peace, must it therefore have followed, that I contradict or oppose his most sacred Majesties expressi­ons above related? Or that I said his Father of blessed me­mory was not forced to the Cessation, or himself to that Peace? Surely this Gentlemah hath forgot his Morals, if he think so; or if he think not so, he must speak against his Conscience, by fixing that on me, whereof he knows me unguilty. But however this be, can he deny there are four kinds of Freedom diversly imported by the word freely; one from intrinsick necessity, or natural undeliberation, other­wise called Freedom of election or indifferency; another from extrinsick (that is from coaction, violence, force, or compulsion, derived from external causes, whether natu­ral or free;) a third from both; and a fourth yet from the more violent kinds of outward force, necessity, or coacti­on, imposed or used by men, though not from those other kinds that are not so pressing? Or can he deny the first to be essentially and simply such, specially in relation to the se­cond? Or this to be accidental only, and secundùm quid, or in a certain diminutive sense in respect of that, and in rela­tion to internal, deliberate, or voluntary consent, or [Page 21] dissent, or even to external operations proceeding from them? Can he maintain the word Freedom to be solely ap­propriated to that which is from both internal and external necessity or coaction, in the whole latitude of this word Coaction, or in the sense of it, imports that which is by and from another man, and which moreover amounts to the actu­al restraint of ones person, or danger of his life? Or will he maintain the Merchant, who in a storm casts over-board his goods to save his life, does not act with that freedom and voluntariness, that is primarily, essentially and simply such, or such as may denominate him in that case freely acting, as to this ejection of his goods, though he act withall secundùm quid, or in some degree, or some sense unfreely, or unvo­luntarily? Or likewise maintain, that his Majesties meaning was by the words forced, compelled, necessitated, to signifie that he had not, in concluding with the Irish, that essential or inward freedom, which is called freedom, or liberty of election, or indifferency, and which only excludes inward necessity, or natural undeliberation? Or even to signifie that he had not, moreover that kind also of outward free­dom, which is only from the more violent sorts of external Coaction, viz. from corporal restraint, or danger of death, or any other such violent compulsion (if any such other be) that invalidates Agreements made betwixt a So­veraign Prince, and his Subjects in Armes against him? If our Person of Quality cannot maintain these, or deny those as is evident to all judicious knowing men, he cannot; then must it be no less evident, that even, in case I had said in my Letter, that his Majesty had (on the other side) freely Commission'd my Lord Duke of Ormond for transacting that Peace, and freely consented to, and freely approved of, and ratified the whole transaction, when concluded (as without any peradventure his Majesty has) I had spoken as truly, significantly, and properly, and without any con­tradiction or opposition to his Majesties related expressious, as I did in saying the Roman Catholicks of Ireland had freely put themselves into my Lord of Ormond's hands. Yea, and without any such comparison (lest this Person of Quality suspect what I intend not) had spoken a very known truth, [Page 22] and a truth no way contradicting or opposing those passages of his most sacred Majesties Declaration. For who is so blind, as not to see, that with this kind of accidental un­freedom (imported by the words forced, compelled, neces­sitated) that liberty or freedom which is primarily, essenti­ally, and simply such; That which renders our actions mo­ral, humane, obliging in Conscience, vertuous or vicious before God; That which gives force to contracts and agree­ments before men, doth consist? Or who understands not that this kind of liberty which denominates actions (pro­ceeding thence) simpliciter liberas voluntarias (albeit they may be at the same time secundùm quid involuntariae) hath no opposite, but intrinsick necessity, undeliberation, or na­tural inconsiderancy? Or that the liberty and freedom I would have had in our supposition, asserted to have been in his Majesty, could have no other opposite, but either that intrinsick necessity alone, or with it, or without it, that more violent kind of extrinsick force, to wit, personal re­straint, or danger of ones life? And consequently, that as there is no opposition 'twixt external force, und intrinsick liberty, or 'twixt any other lesser, or milder kind of exter­nal necessity, force, compulsion, and being free from bo­dily restraint, or danger of death only: So there must be none 'twixt his Majesties being forced, compelled, or necessi­tated, as above, and his being simply free (nevertheless) in giving the Commission-Royal to conclude that Peace, and in ratifying after what was concluded.

23. I confess notwithstanding, that if the coaction from External Causes (I mean from other men) be such as to de­prive one of his Corporal liberty, or to endanger inevitably, or notoriously, the life of another, whom they would force by such means to condescend to some Pacts or Concorda­tums; in this case, the Laws and the consent of Nations, and natural reason dictate the rescission of them. Whence it is that the consent of his late Majesty in the Isle of Wight, had he given any, as he did not to the then Parliament, might and ought to be rescinded. But withall I affirm, that Princes are not by any other obvious necessity imposed upon them by disobedient or disloyal Subjects, excused from perform­ing [Page 23] agreements, howsoever otherwise forced, compelled, or necessitated they be; provided the Covenants be not against the Laws of God and Nature. For this being denyed, what should the Plea of Magna Charta, or Charta de Foresta, avail the Barons, that forced both from King John? What so ma­ny pacifications throughout the World? So many Acts of Indempnity, Modern or Antient, Forein or Domestick, which Princes would not (at least in the Latitude they were in) have assented to, had not the Rebellious Contumacy of their Subjects forced, compelled, and necessitated them?

24. It were in truth to be wished that the corrupt Na­ture of Man did at no time fly out to Crimes so fatal and so destructive as Rebellion; which neither the menaces of ha­ving the Nation and their Religion extirpated, nor the Peti­tion, See the Author's m [...]re am­ple Ac­count, from Page 64. to the Page 104. where he demon­strates the unlawful­ness to take A [...]ms again [...]t the Mag [...]st [...]te in any case imi­ginable. Grotius de Jure Bell. & Pac. c 19. n. 6. Quid dicemus de Subditorum [...]ellis adversus Reges alias (que) summas Potestates? His etiamsi causam per se non in justam h [...] ­beant, jus tamen per vi [...] ag [...]ndi d [...]sse ostendimus alibi (l. 1. c. 4) P [...]test inter­dum & tanta esse aut causae injustitia, aut resistendi improbites, ut puniri gravi er possit. Tamen si quasi cum dese toribus aut rebellibus actum sit, poe [...]a p [...]omisso opponi non potest, secundúm ea quae modo dix [...]mus. Nam & servis fid [...]m se [...]vand [...]m Ve [...]e­rum pietas existimavit; cred to L [...]ced em [...]nios iram divinam expertos, quod T [...]na­renses servos contra pact [...] occi [...]ssent. Ae [...]. 6, 7 E Diodoru [...] S [...]culus l. 11. Notat fidem servis datam in fa [...]o Palicorum nunquam à quoquam Domino fuisse viol [...]tem▪ Metus autem illa [...]i exceptio, & hic poterit elidi interposito jurejurando: sicut Mar­cus Pampon [...]us, Tribu [...]us plebis, jurejurando obstrictas servavit quod L Ma [...] ­c [...]actus prom serat. to that effect, with some thousand of hands to it, nor the Lords Justices favouring the party that oppos'd the King, nor any other kind of argument, could justifie in the Irish. But being Rebellion is a mischief that in all ages extended it self to all the parts of the Earth; to prevent perpetual slaughter, and the entire desolation of Mankind, agreements were admitted 'twixt Kings and their Rebellious Subjects, and allowed to be binding by the Law of Nations. Where­of our Person of Quality may read the most Learned Hugo Grotius (one of the reformed Church) in his Work de jure Belli & Pacis. And thus I hope I have demonstrated that, That which his Majesty calls forced, compelled, and necessitated, may stand with that which P. W. calls freely putting themselves into his Graces hands.

[Page 24] 25. And suppose I had not, but, on the contrary, had granted the Gentleman all the advantages his own heart could desire from my allowing a truth in that his charge, or allowing it in the whole Latitude of his meaning, that I had even granted the force had been such on his Majesty, and put on him by the Irish Confederates only, that he had had no internal, no moral freedom left, (at least freedom from those more violent kinds of coaction) and therefore no obligation on him to perform the Articles (which must be the final scope (as it was the great argument at first, of some of this Person of Qualities Partners at London against that Peace) of his repeating so many times, and in so many passages of his book that circumstance of compelled, forced, and necessitated:) will, I say, all this granted, prove those Articles were such as forced from his Majesty all the Regalia both Ecclesiastical and Pag. 7. Temporal? (which this Gentleman says.) Not to give for answer that certainly this is both a bold Assertion, (which the printed Articles will convince of untruth) and a very unworthy Calumny with which the Duke of Ormond is as­pers'd (who farr from betraying his Master to that degree, or in any wise indeed, express'd abundantly his prudent care of his Majestyes Honour and Interests in all his Transactions.) I will only demand of this Gentleman, whether the Guisian League in France forc'd from Henry the Third, all the Regalia both Ecclesiastical and Temperal? Or the Hugonots from Henry [...]e Grand? Or the Barons of England in Magna Char­ta, and Charta de Foresta, from King John and his Successors, all the said Royalties? If not, (as he must grant they did not) let him acknowledge the falsity of his Assertion, since it is apparent that the Articles of the Irish come short of these Agreements, in lessening or imposing on the Prerogative Royal: and that the French Kings, and English Monarchs after, notwithstanding a most Religious observance of the Articles of these Pacifications, have been very absolute, and never thought to have been deprived of either Ecclesiastical or Temporal Regalia.

26. What this Gentleman alleges next, wants but truth to make it a convincing Argument. For if we should [...]low that the Irish Catholicks by contempt, disobedience, and [Page 25] opposition, broke those Articles, what benefit could they claim by them? But nothing can clear this so satisfactorily, as a faithful relation of what pass'd at that time upon that oc­casion.

27. The Prelates, and others of the Clergy, that met at James-town, by their Letters of the 20th. of August (and not in April, as is alleged) deputed the Bishop of Dromore, Pag. 9. and Doctor Charles K [...]lly, to bring a Message from them to his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, the substance of which Message was reduced to writing by his Lordships command, and subsigned by those that brought it; and was in effect un­der pretence of procuring aid from his Majesty for his di­stressed Subjects, to invite him to depart the Kingdom, and to leave the Kings Authority in the hands of some Person or Persons faithful to his Majesty, and trusty to the Nation, &c. In the neck of this, and without taking notice of the An­swer the Lord Lieutenant sent them, that fatal Declaration Pag. 9, 10. and Excommunication issued, in which, besides those set forth by this Gentleman, there are many strange Expressions, which if they could be proved to have proceeded from the Irish Catholicks, or their free Representatives whose publick acts Pag. 13. (sayes this Gentleman) in all societies virtually, and inter­pretatively include all who declaratively oppose not, they might be justly charged with contempt, disobedience, and opposition to the King's Authority.

But I shall appeal to the Duke of Ormond, whom, with­out doubt, my Adversary will allow to be Judge without all exception in this case, who can inform (those that being pre-possessed with this Gentleman of Quality's so positive assertion, That the Irish Papists did sign [...]lly declare their con­temp [...] of him, disobedience to him, and opposition against him, Pag. 9. will certainly have a curiosity to enquire) That in the ge­neral Assembly which concluded the Peace of 48. a select number of the Irish Nobility and Gentry were, by the common Vote of the Nation, appointed to be their Repre­sentatives, in relation principally to those things that con­cerned the Peace; That those Representatives were autho­rized by his Grace to exercise this trust; That they by them­selves, or a Committee of them, did attend upon his Person [Page 26] in the Camp, and in the several places where he did reside, to execute his Commands in order to that trust; That those Representatives were not only dissatisfied with such the pro­ceedings of the Clergy met at James-town, but express'd their resentments of them in their Letter of the 24th. of October 1650. to his Excellency, in these words, We know that by those Censures of the Bishops met at Jame [...]- [...]own, his Ma­jesties Authority was invaded, and an unwarranted Govern­ment set up, contrary to the Laws of the Kingdom, and we are assured, that no Subject could be justly warranted by that Ex­c [...]mmunication to deny Obedience to his Majesties Authority in your Excellency. So as what I have alleg'd, being found true by so unquestionable testimony, certainly the Reader will have reason to wonder that this Gentleman of Quality would impose that upon them for a general silence and s [...]bmis­sion of the body of the Irish Pap [...]sts, which was a disclaimer, and opposition of the Nation in general, if his own Maxim Pag. 11. may take place, Fol. 13. That in all Societies the publick act of free Representatives virtually and interpretativ [...]ly includes all who declaratively oppose it not. Pag. 13.

29. Now let us consider with what Arguments he fortifies this ignorant, or voluntary mistake. The Declaration (sayes he) runs in the name of the Catholicks of Ireland. Pag. 10, 11. Which ought not to be any convincing evidence of their general consent in an Age when publick use was made of the Kings name to engage his Subjects to fight against his Person. For an argument. ex post facto, [...]e askes, Why did not the gen [...]rality punish the transgressours? This indeed had been a very compendious way to assist the Gentleman, and to as­sure Pag. 11. us that the Irish Catholicks had broken the Articles. For how could they punish the transgressours, without re­v [...]ing their Confederacy, and reassuming that Authority which they newly abdicated? And his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, in whom that power was invested by his Ma­jesties Commission, was himself content to sacrifice the bit­ter affronts he had received, to the advancement of his Majesties service, which he knew would suffer in that con­juncture by distraction and dis-union. Thus we see the great Battery this Gentleman rais'd, and the Excursions and sharp [Page 27] closes he makes, fallen to the ground, like some magnifi­cent Palace of Cards, which some Child takes the pains to build, that is destroyed with the first puff of wind.

30. By this time, I hope the Reader is acquainted with this Gentlemans dexterity in commenting to the advantage of his own conceptions without regard to the sense of the Text, or the intention of the Writer.

31. I said that many thousand Protestants in the three King­doms Pag. 11▪ have been farr more hainously Criminal both against his Majesty, and his Father of ever blessed memory, and have con­tributed or intended as little for bringing home his Majesty, as the most wickedly principled of the Roman Catholick Confede­rates of Ireland; and yet that all these Protestants are not only pardoned (except a few of the most immediate Regicides) but equall'd in all Capacities with his Majesties most faithfull and approved Subjects. The fallacy, which this Gentleman makes use of to render this Comparison horridly odious, lyes in the name Protestant, which he would have should extend no farther than those who have adher'd to the Liturgie of the Pag. 12. Church of England. But because I find that the long and short Parliaments, that Cromwell and his brief Successors, that the Rump, the restor'd Members, and the Counsell of Safety in all their publick Transactions both at home and a­broad, involve under that name all those that oppose the Catholick Roman Church, I give the name the same lati­tude; Otherwise I should have been most unjust to the Royal Party that upheld the Tenets of the Church of Eng­land, in the exercise, though clandestinely, and of the Rites of it, and conserved the Principles of that Loyalty which seemed to be a stranger in Israel. And if this Gentleman, following the Method of those that write solidly, had look'd narrowly into my words, and oppugned the most favoura­ble interpretation that might be given them, he would have acknowledged that my intention was to set those Protestants apart, as the words themselves do demonstrate, and then have argued against me. For when I say that all the Pro­testants were not only pardoned, except a very few of the most im­mediate Regicides, but equall'd in all Capacities to the most faithfull and approved Subjects, and since those that pass un­der [Page 28] the title [...] faithfull and approved Subjects, can in no constru [...] [...] taken for other than the Royalists, why Pag. 12. would [...]e con [...]e my intentions to those Protestants whom I meane to exclude, and free those that were evinently the object of my discourse? It is true that P. W. cannot prove any of these many thousands thus wickedly principled to be a Protestant: and it is as true that this Gentleman cannot deny but they pass'd under that notion, and that even the Saints [...]t Edgehi [...]l and Worcester▪ gave themselves that name, and were esteemed to be such in common acceptation.

32. The Parliament of England hath gloriously vindicated the English Nation from the Crime of that execrable Parr [...] ­cide, with which it was aspers'd; and that which was omit­ted by the new Inhabitants of the Corporations in Ireland, hath, in testimony of their joy for the same, been solemnly performed by all the Cities, and most of the Towns in Eng­land. Cromwell hath in a thousand opprobrious forms been executed in Effigie, and his name rendred as odious as the prime part he acted in that horrid Tragedy, could make it. Yet no man will say but many thousands did partake of the guilt, not as immediate Regicides, but as those that assist­ed, supported, and countenanced the Actors in it. And what vizard soever this Gentleman puts on the Crimes of the Irish, unless he proves them to have concurr'd to this, he will, I hope allow me this guilt is not to be parallel'd.

33. The Parliament in Scotland hath in a noble manner done right to that Nation, and freed them from that base im­putation of having [...]old their King. Yet it will not be de­nyed that many thousands of them were Criminal upon that accompt, not as the immediate Merchants, but as the Assist­ers, Supporters, and Countenancers of them. And this is a guilt, for which this Gentleman will not find a Parallel a­mong the Irish: as he will not for those horrid Oaths to maintain a new erected Government written in the blood of our late Soveraign of ever happy memory, and to deba [...] our new King and his Posterity from any access to the Crown; so solemnly and so frequently sworn by many an [...] many thousands in the three Dominions.

34. Must it be said then that P. W's eye is evill, or does [...]e Pag. 12. [Page 29] [...]epine at any grace conferr'd upon others, because he pre­tends a share in the Kings Mercy, and as an inducement thereunto, alleges that his Majesty has already conferr'd it on those who were more faulty?

35. I believe this Gentleman is as ignorant of the Popish Tenet of Merit, as he is sollicito [...]s to invent slaws in the Pag. 13. proceedings of the Irish, and then to comment upon them. Our Saviour engages himself by promise, to bring us to his Kingdom, if we perform the will of his Father: and he gives us way to claim it, by vertue of that Promise, as our own right, although it be himself that gives us vell [...] & agere.

36. Here I must intreat the Reader, that in all passages where he finds mention of the English Protestants, he do re­member with what fallacy my Adversary would circumvent him, and elude my intentions under the notion of that name. And in confidence that he will not forget how I disclaim in having spoken, or intending to speak hereafter any thing of the English Protestant Royalists, but with honour & applause of their resolute Loyalty, I proceed to those which this Gen­tleman calls rational Inducements for his Majesty in the degrees Pag. 13. of his Grace to discriminate between the Irish Papists and Eng­lish Protestants.

1. I am most certain [...], that those who could best repre­sent the hearty affections of the English Nation, would ne­ver The Per­son of Quality's Induce­men [...]s for his Maje­sty to dis­criminate, retorted. consent to cast off his Majesties Authority; and that as soon as the People in general, that for a long time stood a­mazed, and were astonished at these strange things which they saw acted, had recovered their Senses, and were free from the Fright which seized on them, they brought home his Majesty. For let me speak it to their honour, that although many were instrumental, and the Duke of Albemarle emi­nently in performing that duty▪ yet it was the People of Eng­land in general that did the work. The Banks of Power that were rais'd against the Sea of their affections began to shrink: And, as is said of Bees, it was known they were prepared to fight by their unusual humming; King Charles began to be spoken of with reverence in the Market-place. They drank his Health in Taverns. No reproach from the Magistrate, [Page 30] no fear of the Laws of the Times could silence the Multitude. King Charles was prayed for in some Churches, and his Pict­ure was sought for by all men.

When this was observ'd, that which must have been done, was done in the most convenient manner. What is alleg'd Pag. 13. against the Irish in the Comparison, is already abundantly refelled, where we demonstrate, that the Representatives of that Nation opposed the proceedings of the Clergy at Jame-stown. And therefore this Gentleman might well have spar'd the rest of that Paragraph, with that quaint expression of their banishing, and their Excom [...]unicating his Majesty Pag. 13. (in effigie) in his Vice-Roy.

37. 2ly. If those English Protestants submitted absolutely and freely to his Majesty, they cannot deny that they de­ferr'd Pag. 13. so doing too long, and did but their duty when they submitted. And if to obtain a promise from the King by Articles be so hainous a Crime in the Irish Catholicks, what share must they have, that forc'd, that compell'd, that neces­sitated his Majesty to do so? Who were the Contrivers, the Fo­menters, and Maintainers of the late troubles spoken of in the Kings Dcelaration? Who were those that erected that odious Court for taking away the life of his dear Father? Let those English Protestants claim his Majesties Grace: Pag. 13. because, sayes he, they submitted to his Majesty freely and ab­solutely: And let this Gentleman be contented the Irish Ca­tholicks claim the Grace of his Majesties promise in the Ar­ticles of Peace, untill he brings more pregnant arguments to perswade the Reader that the foundation of them is dissolv'd on Pag. 14. all parts. Those Articles are printed, and such as will read them, may find that they merit not the Character they re­ceive from this Gentleman, as if by them the King had transferr'd all the Regalia both Ecclesiastical and Temporal, which is an Hyperbole of the first Magnitude. Yet if a nice judgement should find any thing less moderate in those con­cessions, who are most to be blam'd, either those that ne­cessitated the King to grant them, or those that accepted them? And sure I am, it sufficiently appears out of his Ma­jesties own words, in his fore-mentioned Declaration for the settlement of Ireland, that the force, compulsion, and [Page 31] necessity was put on him by those that erected that odious Court for taking away his Fathers life.

38. [...] ly. The Irish repine not, that those English have been remitted their Forfeitures, and are in possession of their Estates; nor do they oppose the satisfaction set forth Pag. 14. by the Act of Parliament for the Adventurer, according to the intention of it.

39. 4ly If the over powring of a People that fought by the Kings Commission against the Men, the Purse, and the Fleet of England, strengthned with the revolted Party that betrayed Cork, and the rest of his Majesties Towns and Forts in Munster, and assisted by Owen ô Neill, and his Ar­my, shall be call'd a Conquest: those English Protestants can only be said to have been Conquerours in their turn. For the English Catholicks more than four hundred years be­fore had planted the English Interest in all the parts of it, under a much more lawful Authority, than that under which those English Protestants prevail'd. And this Person of Quality in Ireland having made use of those Arguments which the Man in the dark in England gave in against me, concerning the incompatibility of these two Parties living together, and P. W. having disproved that Position by a long discourse in his former Reply, he will not trouble the Reader with Repetitions. This only I will add, that it is Pag. 14. more probable those English Protestants that once held An­ti-Monarchical Principles, should again assume them, than that the Irish Catholicks, who at all times express'd an aver­sion from them, should embrace them. And since both Parties sought at several times by his Majesties Commission, it is more probable that the Irish Papists, who fought longest in the dayes of His adversity, and against all extremities for his Interest at home, and stuck to him in his Banishment a­broad, should have more hearty affection for his Person, and Royal Authority, than those Protestants so principled, t [...]at for a short time, and in the beginning of a War in a plentiful Country served his Father of ever blessed memory, and after deserted him; and still fought in favour of those that would exclude our sacred Soveraign, and his Posterity from all right to the Crown. But is it not strange, men [Page 32] should conceive, that an Act of Indempnity did warrant them to upbraid others for Crimes for which themselves were guilty in a higher nature? He should consider, that al­though the wounds be heal'd, the scarrs remain; which should at least silence his Invectives, when the Party he pleads for is not so generous as to say with Dido,

Haud ignara mali miseris succurrere disco. Virgil.

40. 5ly. It is true that Rebellions of particular men have Pag. 14. been freq [...]ent in Ireland, and it is as true that the Catho­lick Natives have been very instrumental, not only in sup­pressing them, but in repelling forein Invasion. Now with what justice that can be imputed to a Nation as a mark of Infamy, which is the Crime of a few, is a thing which the men of England (where there have been heretofore many such defections) will be curious to enquire.

41. Here again this Gentleman mentions the year 1641. but I shall again deferr giving him any answer upon that sub­ject, untill I come to that place where he discourses more amply of the beginning of the Rebellion.

42. 6ly. Whensoever this Gentleman discourses of the Principles of Catholick Religion, he shews or makes him­self Pag. 15. ignorant of them, and he so confounds the Papal and Royal Authority in this Paragraph, as if we knew not which are the Ke [...]es, and which is the Sword. We give the Pope no Supremacy but in Spiritual affairs, and this Supremacy is of that nature, as it cannot dis-engage our Consciences from the Loyalty we owe to our Soveraign. And although our Remonstrance, Declaration, and Protestation upon this subject, printed not long since, hath left no room for such Cavills, yet we despair to stop the mo [...]ths of those that would e [...]ablish this [...]alumny for a truth; For some men are so strangely bent against Catholicks, as they would enter­tain the Multitude in this Errour, and are much afflicted it should be known that Catholicks profess, and are directed by Loyal Principles.

43. Now a [...] to the Transplantation to Connaght and Clare, Pag. 16. laying asi [...]e the bitterness of the language in that Paragraph, [Page 33] and even tyr'd with following this Gentleman in the way of his Methodical and Collegial discourse, I will only say, that all the Arguments with which he enforces P. W's Conclusion maintained, or▪ which is the same thing, the Person of Quality's Argu­ments for continu­ing the T [...]ansplan­tation rendered in­significant. it, cannot perswade the Reader, that men do that willingly, which if they omit to do, they must starve, or hang, or be sold as slaves (for wil­lingness to do a thing, implyes it to be done, not however freely, but without such extreme vio­lence.) Instances of these have been so frequent, and so often alleg'd, that this Gentleman is com­pell'd to change the Battery, and to say, That although the force of the late horrid Usurpers constrain'd them to goe thither Pag. 18. in person; yet no force lay upon them to sue out Decrees, and ob­tain Possessions of Lands there, in lie [...] of their former forfei [...]ed Estates in the other Provinces.

44. It might perhaps be thought a full and satisfactory Answer to this Objection, that men in whose power it is to redeem their Wives and Children by suing out Decrees (there being no mean but that under Heaven for their re­lief) might be judged Murtherers of them, if they omitted so to do. But besides starving, if hanging be a sufficient excuse in this case, take the proof of this from the Law of the Times, the Proclamation of Cromwell, and his Council, Printed at Dublin by William Bladen, in the Year 1654. by their Order (in pursuance of an Act of Parliament, enti­tuled, An Act for the settlement of Ireland) by which it is declar'd, that they do transplant themselves before the first day of March next ensuing, into the Province of Connaght, and County of Clare, accordi [...]g to former Declarations, and ad­dress themselves to those that are there impow'red for that pur­pose, to take out their respective assig [...]ments for Lands, and proceed to build, and settle themselves there, and make provision for their Families; and this upon the highest penalty.

45. I now demand of our Person of Quality, whether this Proclamation in Ireland, and at that time it was p [...]bl [...]sh­ed, should not rationally produce, as really it did, that kind of fear in the miserable Irish, which is called m [...] us ca­dens in virum constantem? Whether t [...]ere was any such in England, to force the Caval [...]e [...]s to a Composition? Whe­ther [Page 34] bargains forced by such fear, or ex metu cadente in vi­rum constantem, are not void in Law, or at least to be re­scinded? And if our Person of Quality must answer the first and last of these Queries in the affirmative, and the second in the negative, as without any question he must; then must it follow, that although the Cavaliers in England are not re­lieved from their own Act of Composition, the Innocent Irish, and others that articled, and had not after forfeited those Articles, might in justice desire, and petition to be relieved. And it must further follow, that his Majesties words, alleged by this Gentleman (out of his Majesties foresaid Declaration of the 30th. of November) did not sup­pose, because his Majesty was not sufficiently informed of the highest penalties to be inflicted on those would not ad­dress themselves to take out their respective assignments of Lands in Connaght, according to that Proclamation I have related, nor consequently that kind of force which must have rendred those acts of the Irish to be not their own, but the Forcer's, I mean as to a conclusion of the enforced from seeking any redress from the equity of the Laws, and from the justice of the Prince restored to perfect liberty, and in­formed throughly of the case. And therefore it must be like­wise consequent, that P. W. cannot in reason be taxed with in­solency, for having spoken his judgement hereof in his Letter, Pag. 17. or having said therein, That the Transplantation cannot be continued on accompt of Crimes since 48. nor stand with the Ar­ticles, or with the Equity of the Laws, much less with the Justice of a Prince whom God hath restored to redeem the oppressed from the yoak of Tyranny, to lead Captivity captive, and give gifts to men. P. W. writ that Letter before his Majesties De­claration was concluded. The Letter having been delivered to the Duke about the end of October 1660. a whole month before the date of the Declaration. And I am sure it would not then, at least have seemed insolent to say, The Trans­plantation of such of the Irish, as are either Innocents, or Ar­ticlers, and such Articlers too, as never since the date of those Articles, disobeyed, or declined his Majesties Authority, could not be continued on accompt of Crimes since 48. nor stand with the Articles, nor with the Equity of the Laws, much less with the Justice of a Prince, &c.

[Page 35] 46. Besides, P. W. can tell this Gentleman, that before the Declaration was made a Law, by the assent Royal given in Parliament, it could be no insolency to measure the Justice of our Person of Quality's Interpretation of it, by the anti­ent, known, Fundamental Laws of the Land, by those of Nations, and by the Dictates of Reason. And further, that as P. W. is not ignorant, how Laws are the sources of Right, and squares of Justice, and that new Laws may change the old, and render that sometimes very Just, which was very Unjust before, I mean, when the scope of the Law is the publick good, as it ought to be alwayes; so he never intended, as he could not, other in that passage of his Letter, where he sayes, The Transplantation cannot stand with the Justice of a Prince, &c. but only to deliver his own judgement (concurring with all dis-interested per­sons) of that matter, as it was then whole and entire, or as the Prince was not then bound by any Declaration or Law to the contrary: And that if his Majesty hath otherwise de­clared since that time, and that his Royal intent, meaning, or purpose appear sufficiently by his Majesties own explana­tion of such passages of his Declaration, as are subject to di­vers constructions, or by that of those dis-interested Judges, whom his Majesty hath or shall appoint (not by this Per­son of Quality's too much byassed Exposition) P. W. shall with perfect resignation acquiesce, knowing that his Ma­jesty rightly informed, and finally determining, is the Fountain of Justice to his Subjects; that he obliges all (e­ven in Conscience) to a submission; and that as he hath no other Judge but God alone, so they cannot, without of­fending God, appeal from his Majesties ultimate sentence, if not to himself again, or by his permission, to his great Court of Judicature, a Parliament.

47. He adds the presenting of two Petitions (whereof Pag. 19, 20, 21. one was printed) to the Rump, by their publick Agents, Sir Robert Talbot Baronet, and Gerott Moore Esquire, to confirm their being satisfied with such Transplantation, and comments upon them, and the Titles, and addresses of them, after such a manner, as if at the end of every period, the Reader should have no more to do, but to cry out, There [Page 36] needs no more to be said. Yet for my part, I believe the Reader, were he to present a Petition to that Judicatory in those times, and in the distresses to which the Irish Ca­tholicks were reduced, would have wanted words, rather than a will, to shew the lowness of his submission, and to magnifie the Grandeur of their Honours Piety, Justice, and all the Virtues they had not, in those Expressions with which their Votaries were wont to court the Pagan Gods. At what rate of good language, think you, would the Peo­ple of Israel have bought from their Overseers the Straw which was denied them, to make up their task of Bricks? But in all this airy traffick, does any syllable fall from them to sooth those Hogen Mogens with Curses against the Tyran­ny of Charles the First, and against the Family of the Stuarts? Do those Petitions contain any Protestation, that the Go­vernment which those men did manage, was established up­on grounds of Righteousness? As for the Printing of one of the Petitions, and the Elogies, I stood in the Croud, when a smart Answer was given by Mr. Gerott Moore, at the Council Board, to a Nobleman, that belike hath printed somewhat of a higher nature than this concerning Cromwell, yet insisted very much upon the Title given the Rump in that printed Petition.

48. Now having allowed this Gentleman all the words himself could imagine to be in a Pet [...]tion that was to be pre­sented in the behalf of such Suters, to such a power (pro­phane and disloyal expressions, whereof those Petitions are not guilty, always excepted) because I conceived the times and the parties might justifie them, I thought I might have entirely freed my self from being engaged to return a parti­cular answer to his excursions and repetitions, in order to that Subject; But who is it that can pass over these words of his? Those which now pretend to such Loyalty to his Majesty, Pag. 25. voluntarily confess, that no execution was legal that was not de­rived from the Rump. Is not this implicitely, if not expli­citely an owning in the Irish Papists a legality of the Rumps power, even in the bloody murther of his Sacred Majesty, that being derived from those the Irish Papists call their Honours? To give this inference any foundation, we must derive it [Page 37] from such a sort of malice as blinds the judgement of the writer: The words in the Petition are these, they do willing­ly Pag. 20. acquiesce in the Transplantation, albeit it was not executed by any legal power, as not being derived from your Ho [...]ours Can the sense of this be other, than that the execution of the Transplantation was illegal, because the power was not derived from their Honours? And perhaps they mean to claw them in that particular, because the Rump was [...] Rump of that Parliament to which the King had recommend­ed the prosecution of the War in Ireland. Now to in [...]er from this, as if they should have said, that no execution was legal that was not derived from the Rump, is certainly a con­sequence of too vast extent to be derived from so limited an antecedent. But who could imagine that any man in his right senses would have concluded thereupon, that this was implicitely, if not explicitely an owning in the Irish Papists the legality of the Rumps power, even in the bloody murder of his Sa­cred Majesty, that being derived from them the Irish Papists call their Honours?

49. Here is first to be observed, that the Petition sayes, Pag. 20. they do willingly acquiesce in the Transplantation, albeit it was not executed by any legal power. This which of its own Na­ture is an execution in a Civil matter, is converted to an exe­cution upon a Scaffold. Moreover admitting his own words, that no execution was legal, that was not derived from the Rump, even this cannot prove his inference: For although we grant that no execution was legal that was not derived from the Rump; yet this concludes not, that all executions were legal that were derived from their Power. However, rather than fail, he would compel the Irish Catholicks to invest in the Rump a greater infallibility than they give the Pope.

50. But to say the truth, I think he believed the general negative, and the general affirmative were of equal exten­sion. However, to underceive him for the future, he may be pleased to read his Errour in these Propositions and Inferences. No Executions are legal that do not issue out of the Kings Courts; therefore all Executions are legal that issue out of the Kings Courts. No man is a perfect States­man that hath not seen forein Countries, and known forein Aff [...]irs; therefore all men are perfect States-men that have [Page 38] seen forein Countries, and known forein Affairs. No man goes to Heaven, but he that is baptized; therefore all men goe to Heaven that are baptized. The Man in the dark in England was pleased to entertain me with much bitterness: and this Gentleman of Quality in Ireland gives me this Lo­gick to boot.

51. If all this do not satisfie this Person of Quality's very scrupulous Conscience against these Petitions, he is briefly answer'd, That the Transplanted Persons, and generality of Irish Catholicks, openly disown those Petitions, or a­ny Commission from themselves, impowering, in that par­ticular, those Gentlemen; albeit, without any question, they being employed to petition against the Oath of Abjura­tion, and other Oppressions of their Countrymen (not to establish that of Transplantation) their endeavours even in this particular, as matters were then, proceeded from their desires to serve them. Neither doth the continuance of these two Gentlemen, since that time, in their publik employment for the Irish Catholicks, prove what this Person of Quality labours in the 22th. Page of his Book, or that all they did or do is by allowance or command from their Countrymen. It is well known the Irish Catholicks never gave them any such general power, much less a particular allowance or com­mand for this, which indeed few or none of them either knew, heard, or thought of, untill some few did of late, by reading this Gentleman's Book.

52. As for other arguments made use of to answer my as­sertion concerning the Transplanted persons, they signifie nothing: Our Person of Quality has not yet proved the foun­dation of those Articles, and consequently the Articles them­selves Pag. 16. are thrown down by the Irish Papists. Nor hath he told us yet, what those many other Countries and Ages are that have formerly on less grounds used tra [...]splantation, and been justified therein as just and equal by Lawyers and Casuists. Pag. 16. And no more has he told us, what these Lawyers and Casu­ists are, and whether, according to the Law of God, they could on less grounds justifie the like Transplantation.

53. What this Person of Quality further sayes, or in­deed objects in the first place, that my Conclu [...]on (on this Pag. 16. [Page 39] subject) without any proof, with the same facility as it is said may be gainsaid, is answered, That my Letter in general being written to the Duke of Ormond, who concluded, and well remembred the Conditions of the Peace, and the observance of it with much affection by some hundreds, at least if not thousands of the Transplanted persons, my asser­tion in particular, that such could not be deprived of the benefit of the Articles, or their Transplantation continued upon accompt of Crimes after 48. needed no proof to him, or indeed to any other that knew the affairs of Ireland.

54. Concerning Corpo [...]ations, my request discriminates the Innocent from the Nocent. Although that in a time Pag. 28. when his Majesty, out of the abundance of his goodness, makes it his glory to out-goe all his Predecessours in a pro­fusion The Per­son of Quality's Answer to P. W's Determi­nation in the Case of Corporate places, considered. of Mercy, I seek a share for them likewise in the ge­neral dole. And then I descend to those persons that have been Innocent in the most guilty of them. For those I claim as of justice his M [...]jesties Grace, and the benefit of the Ar­ticles, as I do for the generality of those other Corporate places which offended not against the Peace of 48. And I am still of opinion, if I may be again permitted to speak out of my element, that no reason of State could exclude them, even, although there were no matter of Conscience in the Case. For if the Kingdom be to be enriched with traffick, and that encreasing of the publick wealth be a principal point of State-policy, it is evident that most of the Corporations of Ireland are grown despicably poor by excluding the Natives from free commerce and traffique, and that the little life which is yet preserv'd in negotiation, is maintained by the trade they drive a Factors to those that live in those Corpo­rations. Other arguments I omit at this present, being ready nevertheless to give them, when it shall be thought ne­cessary; with answers to all objections, which this person shall or can make, even, on this subject.

55. Had I stood up to justifie Limerick, Waterford, or Gal­way in their affronts done to his Majesties Lieutenant of Ire­land, I could not be upbraided with a more severe expostu­lation than this is, What falshood will P. W. be afraid to sug­gest Pag. 30. [Page 40] to strangers; and what wickedness will he be afraid to pa­tronize at home, when he shall dare thus to assert to the Lord Lieutenant himself, and publish it in print to the world, that no reason of State can accord with the dictates of a good Consci­ence to exclude these Corporations? But when I avow them Criminal, and beg mercy for them, not by extenuating their guilt, but by alleging the examples of his Majesties unbounded goodness, why will this Writer vent his malice to the Nation, by rayling at me in terms unworthy a Person of Quality? Nay wherefore doth he charge me with assert­ing or publishing that which I never did? with that which the clear text or discourse on this subject in my Letter, convin­ces manifestly I did not? And that you Reader may be Judge between me and this Person of Quality, without any further trouble to your self than to read here a few Lines, I give the whole Paragraph, well nigh, wherein I treated of this matter. But withall (my Lord) I will give your Excel­lence my most earnest and humble desires, that you delay no long­er than shall be necessary, to clear these clouds of darkness, and clear them in this present conjuncture by an effectual demonstra­tion of that justice and favour you intended the Catholicks of Ireland in your Articles of 48. when they so freely put them­selves, and their power, into your hands. I am not ignorant that some have after transgressed in a high nature: But you know, my Lord, there are many thousands of Protestants in the three Kingdoms, who have been far more hainously criminal, both against his Majesty, and against his Father of blessed memory, and who have contributed, or intended as little for bringing home his Majesty, as the most wickedly principled of the Roman Confederates of Ireland. And we all know, my Lord, that all the Protestants are not only pardoned (except a very few of the most immediate Regicides) but equall'd in all capacities with his Maj [...]sties most faithfull and most approved Subjects. Yet if these unfortunate Catholick transgressors must be alone in this general Jubilee of the three Nations, held unworthy to rejoyce at [...]he Kings restoration; if they alone, besides their most grievous and unparallel'd sufferings under Tyranny these eight or nine years past, must a new suffer, and yet a more heavy judgement, under the most Clement Prince on Earth; if they alone must ex­perience [Page 41] all the rigour of his Laws and Judicatures for their Of­fences after the Peace of 48. (which Offences, however cri­minal, were not bloody) your Excellence may be nevertheless pleased to consider the Transplantation cannot be continued on any such accompt, nor on any other, which may stand, either with those Articles, or with the Equity of the Laws, and much less with the Justice of a Prince whom God hath restored to re­deem the oppressed from the yoak of Tyranny, to lead Captivity captive, and give gifts to men. And your Excellence may be further pleased to consider, that the Corporations generally, can­not be excluded on this account, nor on any other may stand with his Majesties gracious Concessions in those Articles. Neither do I think there can be any Reasons of State may accord with the Dictates of a good Conscience to exclude them.

56. I now demand of any that understands English or Sense, whether Limerick, Waterford, and Galway, all three, or even any of these three, must be understood there where I say, That the Corporations generally cannot be excluded on this account (that is, on account of Crimes a­gainst the Articles of 48.) or on any other may stand with his Majesties gracious Co [...]cessions in those Articles? Or when I say, that I do not think there can be any Reasons of State may accord with a good Conscience to exclude them? And whether this word, them, demonstrates not, and relates not here to the Generality of Corporations, but by no means to the parti­culars of Limerick, Waterford, and Galway? Or indeed to any other Criminal Town whatsoever, if any other such be? And without question, there are a hundred Iri [...]h Corporati­ons, which are not to this day charged with any such guilt, and which I then did th [...]nk (when I writ that Letter) as I do still, cannot be charged on that account: And therefore on that account not to be excluded: and consequently, and for many other obviou [...] reasons, are such, as I must then have thought, no Reasons of State could accord with a righ­teous Conscience to exclude them. But what hath all this to do with Gal [...]ay, Limer [...]ck, and Waterford? Is it not a ma­nifest a [...]use of the Reader to leave out the word Generally, where he should not, if he had sincerely quoted my words in the 28. Page of his Book? where he treats of the guilt of Pag. 8. [Page 42] Corporations, and charges P. W. with saying indefinitely the Corporations cannot be excluded on that account; where­as P. W. sayes no such thing, but another very different, in these terms, The Corporations generally cannot be excluded, &c. And I am sure this is a true Proposition, yea not­withstanding the inexcusable transgressions of Galway, Li­merick, and Waterford, or any other; and even as true as it is, that the People of England generally desired the Kings Restoration, when this Person of Quality, and his Consorts, did not. But our cunning Sophister did foresee, that the word, generally, added by me, would, if rehers­ed by him, render three whole Pages of his Book imperti­nent. For admit all his charge against those three Cities, were true in the whole latitude of it, and in every particu­lar, as I fear it is in too much; could he therefore conclude, that the Irish Corporations generally had been Criminal a­gainst the Peace of 48? Surely three, and three, and three more added to help him, do not argue the generality of more than a hundred, or do not falsifie my Proposition, that, notwithstanding the Crime of so few particulars, ex­empts the generality of so great a number from that Crime. Yet he must proceed with his malicious impertinent Narra­tive, and having vented all his Choler against the miserable Survivers and Heirs of the dead in these three Towns, [...]e must demand, as in triumph, What falshood will P. W. be afraid to suggest to strangers, and what wickedness will he be afraid to patronize at home, when he dares thus to assert to the Lord Lieutenant himself, and publish it in print to the World, that no Reasons of State can accord with the Dictates of a good Conscience to exclude these Corporations from the future capacity of repeating such signal Acts of Rebellion? If this be other than a meer Leger-demain of words, and an illusion of eyes, and a plain imposture of sense, and words, and even of inten­tion too, may all Strangers and Patriots believe him against me! But if it be, may the suggestion of falshood, and pa­tronage of wickedness be his reward, and a reproach returned upon him by all men, both at home and abroad! And be thou, Reader, here likewise, as above, an impartial Judge. Doth not he change the sentence, alter the sense, [Page 43] foist in these instead of them, add to, and impose on me all that follows in that period, quite contrary to my words, to the obvious meaning of them, and to the very thoughts of my soul, abundantly there, and soon after expressed, where I speak thus, Nevertheless (my Lord) farr be it from my thoughts to desire the obstruction of any lawful and ho­nest course, can be justly taken to secure the Peace of that Coun­try from rational dangers, if any such can be in our dayes from the Catholique Natives? And is it not therefore as manifest, that he charges me without any ground, but his own ground­less perverse construction, with exclaiming insolently against his Ma [...]esties Royal proceedings, in the particular of these Pag. 32. Towns, as unjust, unequal, and such as cannot accord with the dictates of a good Conscience? The word unjust, or even his sense of it, cannot be found in all my Letter. And for that of un­equal, it is so used by P. W. and only in relation to an equal distribution, not of Justice, but of Mercy, becoming the most merciful of Princes, that it is manifest, this Gentleman of Quality abuses not P. W. alone, but himself too, and the Reader. Whereof I give here the full evidence. For after I had, from the special regard of God, to save one just man that was found in Sodom, and from his readiness to forgive the whole Pentapolitan Region for ten such men of justice, nay for one alone to pardon Jerusalem, when most Criminal, and by his revenging justice designed to a gene­ral desolation; and after I had from these arguments of Gods mercy proceeded to his Majesties imitation of Him in pardoning all the Protestant Criminal Cities in his Domini­ons, and then demanded, whether so Merciful a Prince would not pardon the miserable remainders of one poor Ca­tholick Town, or two, or three at most, if perhaps there have been so many that have any way offended; and after I had further adjoyned, that whatever the Crime of these Towns have been, it had been, these many years past, sufficiently punished, and had been, even of the most Cri­minal of them, incomparably less, than what may be charg­ed on most of his Majesties Protestant Cities; and that I was sure, there had been in the very worst of them, and in the most disobedient, more than fifty (the greatest num­ber [Page 44] Abraham proposed for obtaining mercy to Sodom) just men (said I) to his Majesty, and his Excellency the Lord Lieutenant: And after I had, in prosecution of my dis­course, asked, what besides could render these Towns un­fit objects of his Majesties Mercy, if not, perhaps, their Religion; which yet, being so Christian, and allowed by Articles, could be no exception: After all this (I say) this other passage immediately follows, whence our Person of Quality takes his ground, to lay to my charge, that I task his Majesty with unequal proceedings, Yet if notwith­standing all this, the few and miserable Survivers and Heirs of the dead in the general desolation, must suffer again, under his Royal Justice, I beseech you, my Lord, let not the Ta­bles of Sylla and Marius, let not their general Proscriptions, or Confiscations be renewed on this occasion, or affixed in the Courts and Judicatures of the British Monarchy. Let not these bright dayes of universal joy, be rendered to the Irish Catho­licks alone, dark, sad, and dismal; Nor let these dayes be infamously memorable to posterity for a distinction so unequal. Behold Reader, whence this Person of Quality takes his ar­guments, to charge me with exclaiming insolently, against his Majesties Royal proceedings, as unjust and unequal. Can indeed a prayer, and such a prayer, and in such a mood (if I may so speak with Grammarians) and to the then Marquess of Ormond, and a prayer made before the King had deter­mined any thing concerning these Corporations, or settle­ment of Ireland, be an insolent exclumation against his Maje­sties proceedings, which then had no being at all?

57 As for the remainder of this charge, that I should have no less insolently exclaimed against his Majesties Royal proceedings, in relation to these guilty Corporations: Or that I should have said, His Majesties proceedings against them to be such, as cannot accord with a good Conscience, I have al­ready answer'd, that he finds no such thing in my Letter, since my words and sense of t [...]em relate only to the obedient Corporations, and such as had no way transgressed the Arti­cles of 48. And now further add, as to that expression of my judgement then concerning these, that whatever his Ma­jesty hath since determin'd, it can argue no exclaiming inso­lency [Page 45] in a Letter which preceded the knowledge and exist­ence of any such determination. Besides, that I cannot be­lieve yet this Gentleman's interpretation of his Majesties Act of Settlement, or (which is the same thing) that his Maje­sties meaning is, to exclude these obedient Corporations from a Plea of Justice, in purs [...]ance of their Articles: as neither those good men of even Galway, Limerick, and Waterford, that no way concurred to the transgressions of the (some­times) prevailing, either malignant or inconsiderate Party in them.

58. Even my harmless peradventure must not pass without Pag. 28. some unfavourable reflection from this Gentleman, as if it should have related to all the three guilty Corporations, or as if I had doubted, whether any one of them had been guilty. Whereas in truth, it must not import in any equal construction, not even to the most rigorous Logician, Grammarian, or Lawyer (considering what goes before, and follows after) any more than some doubt, or some scruple about some one of the three, granting the other two without any contradiction guilty. And that one, P. W. ingeniously confesses to have been Galway. And the rea­son of his doubt or scruple then concerning this Town (which occasioned the addition of that wary peradventure) to have been, that he had not then had from such hands as he could wish, or could rely upon the perfect relation of that Towns carriage, since 48. towards my Lord Lieute­nant, or the Marquess of Clanrickard. But whatsoever it was, nay whatever that of Waterford, or Limerick either, has been, and however the evidence of their transgressions Pag. 28. amount to much more than P. W's. peradventure, yet is it ve­ry untrue (what this Gentleman further asserts) that the subject reacheth much farther than P. W's. two or three Corpo­rations: Or that the highest Acts of Treachery and Rebellion Pag. 29. have been the general p [...]actice of all such into which his Maje­sties Lord Lieutenant desired admission. But his tongue is no slander, as the Proverb is; especially since he neither doth fix, nor (as I believe) can fix upon (even any) one more since the Peace of 48. For if he should instance any other before that, his allegation would be impertinent [Page 46] against me, even as to such, or to overthrow the Articles of that Peace. And I say moreover, that whatever the transgressions of the said three, and, if you please, add three more, disobedient Corporations have been, I am sure they amount not to the Crimes of those other Towns, possessed, even at that time in Ireland, and ever since the beginning of the Wars to this very day, by English Prote­stants (such, I mean, as went under that Notion) which a Person of as great Quality as this Gentleman, either con­curred with, or induced to manifest Rebellion, and inex­cusable Treachery (both without any comparison surmount­ing the transgressions of Galway, Limerick, and Waterford) even to fall away openly from his Grace, and from his Ma­jesty, and turn professed Enemies to both, even to declare for Cromwell, and the long Parliament, and receive in their Forces, long before Galway, Limerick, and Waterford can be said to have been guilty of any of the transgressions, true or false, charged upon them; and even (I say) to receive those Enemy-Forces without any kind of necessity; nay to declare for them, even before they had seen an Enemy come within sixscore miles of them, nay to have made their bar­gain with them before Cromwell set his foot on Irish ground. And I am yet further certain, that however Waterford, Li­merick, and Galway transgressed, their guilt cannot in ju­stice render the generality of other Corporate places guilty, nor consequently forfeitable; much less the generality of the Catholick people, or Proprietors of Estates in Ireland. Nay not even the faithful honest Inhabitants of those very Towns (I mean Limerick, Waeerford, Galway) or such Inhabitants of them (I say) as were not guilty of the Crimes committed by their fellow-Gitizens; Unless (peradven­ture) this Person of Quality can evince, that the Laws in­volve the Innocent with the Nocent; and that a good King doing Justice to his People (not by the Sword drawn, or Cannon charged, or Legions marshall'd, assaulting a Rebel­lous Town, or Men in Armes, but by the Laws, and Judges, and other Civil Ministers of Justice) ought not to discriminate 'twixt the just and the wicked: Or unless [...]e can maintain, that Kings may, without injustice, confiscate [Page 47] all Cities, Towns, and even whole Kingdomes, where a­ny D [...]sobediences, Contempts, Plots, Conspiracies, or Rebellions, may be truly charged on some of their fellow-Citizens, or Countrymen: Or that his Majesty (whom God preserve from the unjust Contrivements of this Person of Quallty's good Subjects) could, upon his Restoration, or before he was restored, entertain, without injustice, a re­solution to deprive all the honest Loyal Party of London, Bristow, &c. nay all those were faithful to him, and his Father, in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, of their Estates.

59. When I say that the hand of God hath punish'd them (to w [...]t, the refractory Cities of Limerick, Waterford, and Galway, and other such, if indeed any other hath been such) but (sayes this Gentleman) that the Magistrate Pag. 30. should spare because God punishes, is a non sequitur. Though the Lord sent Hornets before Israel, to drive out the Hivite, and Canaanite, and Hittites, yet he commands Israel to de­stroy those Nations, and their name from under Heaven. And although this be true, is it not a non sequitar, that the Magistrate is bound to destroy them, because God punishes them? Will he not leave in his Majesties power to be mer­ciful? And will he not give me leave to intercede for the poor remains of those Citizens whom God was pleased to spare, to the end, perhaps, that the goodness of our So­veraign might be magnified in their deliverance? And cer­tainly himself must grant that Law given to the Israelites for extirpation of the Hittites, &c. must not extend to the de­struction of any other People, and that it binds not any Christian Prince or People.

60. I profess I am ignorant of what this Gentleman Pag. 31. means by the Sin of Apostacy in the Irish; if he means the Catholicks generally, with relation to the Peace of 48. and I believe it was only mentioned to bring in Lots Wife, and the Pillar of Salt, into which, his whole discourse makes it very probable, he could wish every Irish Catholick turn­ed, that would look back either upon City or Country. But however this be, he was very ill advised, to make the Reader, or P. W. reflect on the known, undeniable, re­iterated [Page 48] Apostacy of even a Person of Quality of this Gen­tleman's own good people, even before and after the year 48.

61. This Gentleman allows me, that God delivered Pag. 31. just Lot, yet that he transplanted him to Zoar, and that e­ven so the King has provided a Zoar for the Innocent, whe­ther their souls may escape and live: And I say, that if his Majesty had not provided that Zoar for more company than the Innocent, it would be very thin set with those his Eng­lish Protestants. Besides, that if he would have his Exam­ple parallel in all things (as himself, though unreasonably, would have mine of the Gibeonite [...] to be) he should have told his Majesty, that all the Cities, Towns, and Villages of the Irish should be destroyed, razed even from the very foundations, and the Land it self rendered unhabitable to Catholick or Protestant, or Man or Beast, even as farr as Zoar, and as much as the anger and revenge of man could effect.

62. As it is his Majesties part to provide for securing the Peace of the Kingdom, so it is my part to pray, that no Sword be put into the hands of any, that from their heart Pag. 31. do not think themselves obliged in Conscience to maintain Monarchical Government, the Birth right of our Soveraign, and the Interest of his Crown.

63. Alwayes when there is speech of Catholick Tenets, this Gentleman stumbles unhappily. For where he sayes, The Doctrine of Regicide is common in the Roman Schools, he mistook them for the Schools of Geneva, and of those of Pag. 32. their Principles. Had he but enquired, he might have learn'd, that the Doctrine of Reg [...]cide among Catholicks is heretical, and so declared by a general Council, even that of Constance I mean; though this Gentleman may therefore except against the Fathers there.

64. From their Doctrine thus mistaken, he descends to prove them Regicides in fact, by the same arguments that would conclude all Rebells that ever have been to be Regi­cides: for sure such Rebells must set up a distinct Govern­ment, for by the Laws of the Government they deserted, they must have been hang'd; and sure such Rebells did not fail Pag. 32. [Page 49] to magnifie their Jurisdiction, and give Laws to their Party to avoid confusion. Yet in so many thousand years, no man, besides this Writer, found out the way to make them Regi­cides. But what Royal Peculiars the Irish Papists usurp'd, Pag. 32. that might make them so Criminal beyond others, never came to my knowledge. They neither used Scepter, nor Sword, nor Cap of Maintenance, nor Mace; the Kings Armes were not cut in their Seal: nor did they conferr ho­nours on any. And this Gentleman, that speaks so much of extending the Jurisdiction of their Government throughout Ireland, might do them right, to let the Reader know that precedent to that Article, in their Model of Goverment, this Irish Mo­del of Go­vernment. is inserted, Item, That all and every person or persons with­in this Realm, shall bear Faith and true Allegiance unto our said Soveraign Lord King Charles, by the Grace of God King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, His Heirs and law­ful Successors: And sh [...]ll uphold and maintain His and Their lawful Rights, and lawful Prerogatives, with the uttermost skill and power of every such person and persons, against all manner of persons whatsoever.

65. Among the many particular Observations with which I have, and shall be hereafter forced to charge the memory of the Reader, I beg of him, that he be so just, as not to allow this Gentleman to calumniate the Nation for the Crimes of particular men: And, when he repeats, even to tediousness, the same thing, not to expect from me a re­iteration of the same answer. Here he sayes again, and as untruly as before, that the Irish Papists did distrust, disobey, oppose, and excommunicate the Lord Lieutenant; and this Pag. 33. upon no other ground, than that the Clergy of James-town did so; when I have proved before out of his own Doctrine Observe Reader, that the Person of Quality never once mentions the Bishops convened at James-town, nor James-town it self; not out of any desire to conceal or pass over that un-Bishop-like Errour of theirs, But of purpose to delude thee, and make it seem a general Act of the whole Nation, which was only the Transgression of a few Prelates. of free Representatives, that the Nation opposed their pro­ceedings. Again he sayes, that the Irish Papists did conspire [Page 50] to murther the Lord Lieutenant, or, which is worse, to de­liver Pag. 33. him to the worst sort of Murtherers, that is to Cromwell, whom perhaps this Gentleman served at that time, when he himself Fol. 30. ascribes this design only to the Citizens of Waterford. If Arguments of this nature be admitted, I can prove by the same Logick, that his Majesties Army, under the Command of the Duke of Ormond, was defeated▪ at the Battel of Rosse, in the year 43. for it is certain, that some did shrink, and would have been guided in their retreat at a­ny rate; Therefore the Army ran away.

66. I was astonish'd to find, that this Gentleman, be­cause I writ, that when England, Scotland, and the Prote­stants of Ireland, wholly deserted the Royal Cause, the Irish Pag. 33. Catholicks fought against the Regicides, in defence of his Ma­jesties Rights, should break out into so immoderate passion against me. And asking of some Friends, whence they conceived this should proceed, I was told by one of them, better versed in the propriety of English words than I am, that the words, to desert, in English, are alwayes taken in a bad sense, and among Souldiers, signifie commonly, not only a desisting from action, but a joyning with the Enemy; which, I protest, was not, nor in truth could be my mean­ing, I say in relation to those Protestant Royalists, that, having past unblemish'd through all tryals, and being over­pow'red, and seeing no way (under Heaven) left them to maintain the most just Cause, which they endeavoured through all extremities to assert, deseruerunt causam, gave it over, and laid down Armes. And this and no other be­ing the sense I intended that assertion should carry, I be­lieve this Gentleman himself will say, the Irish Catholicks were the last in the three Dominions that laid down Armes, and gave over to fight for the Royal Cause. And it may be that he himself is a witness beyond all exception in the case, since perhaps he might have assisted to take in Limerick and Galway; after which sieges there was no further exercises of that kind given to Cromwell, and his Associates, any where, in favour of his Majesties interests. And this truth this Irish Papist dares speak in the sight of Heaven, how bitter so­ever Pag. 33. this Person of Quality is pleased to be against him, both [Page 51] in his expressions and silence. And yet further can tell both him and others, that since he is loath to call me Rebel (as he sayes) I am no less him, though if the arguments to prove me a Rebel, and those may be alleged for his having been such, were put in equal ballance, his side would per­haps Pag. 33. overweigh, not only a thousand, but even ten thousand to one.

67. Now setting apart (as I always do) the Protestant Royalists of England and Scotland, and those of Ireland, who know and will aver, that they were dismiss'd where the Irish Catholicks prosecuted the War against the Regicides, under the Lord Lieutenant and the Marquess of Clanrickard Lord Deputy of Ireland, I will proceed to give the Reader a more faithfull Narrative of the actions of those times. As for the Irish Papists their being Regicides themselves, at least so far as conspiring to murther his Majesty in effigie at Pag. 34. Waterford, &c. These are but flourishes that may a­muse the ignorant, but will not satisfie the judicious Reader.

68. King Charles the First, of happy memory, having been forced, during the late troubles in the year 43. to make a Cessation of Armes with his Irish Subjects, the Co­venanting Party of the Scots in Ulstor, and some of the Eng­lish both in Ulster and Connaght that adhered to them, paying no Obedience to his Majesties Authority, by which it was concluded, continued their Acts of Hostility, and found em­ployment both for the Armes of the Irish Catholicks in them parts, and those whom the Lord Lieutenant authorized to joyn to suppress them, while the Party in Munster for some time submitted to his Majesties Commands in accepting the Cessation, and in that space of time sent over Forces to his assistance; following therein the Lord Lieutenants directi­ons and examples, who shipp'd from Dublin upon that oc­casion the greatest part of his Army under his command in Leinster.

69. It is certain, that both English and Irish were enga­ged by duty to transport their Armes into England for his Ma­jesties assistance; but to say, that the Irish were engaged by Pag. 35. Articles to do the same, is a meer fiction, and the more no­table, [Page 52] that at this time, the clamour the Kings Enemies in England had raised against Popery, and his Majesties coun­tenancing of it, was so great, as particular persons of that profession could scarce find admittance to serve in his Maje­sties Army. At length those English Protestants in Mun­ster, in the Month of June 1644. upon pretence of Plots and Machinations against them by the Irish Catholicks, Pag. 35. whereof to this day no proof was produced, nor in that time any colour alleged, without informing the chief Go­vernour of the Kingdom, or giving him the least intimation of their resolutions, deserted the Royal Cause; and thence after, untill the year 48. fought under the banner of his Ma­jesties Enemies, and were enlisted in their pay.

70. I cannot blame this Gentleman, that he seeks good company for those whom he meant to patronize, and would Pag. 36, 34, 35. rank them with those under the Lord Lieutenants immediate Command in Dublin, who near upon four years after, ha­ving seen two Armies of the Confederates, under the Com­mand of the Nuncio, near the City, fearing a second at­tempt, having had their quarters entirely destroyed, obey­ed his Majesties command, in giving up Dublin, and the rest of the Garrisons to the Parliament. To make the parity reach home, the party in Munster should have attended the commands of a lawful power; and although they have obey­ed necessity, and laid down their Armes; yet it had been their duty, as Subjects, and Souldiers, to have behaved themselves as did the generous Officers at Dublin, who neither sued for, nor accepted employment under the Ene­my. And I may well say, that this their defection was fatal to his Majesties interest in Ireland; for had they kept them­selves in a condition to joyn with the rest of the English Protestants in the Peace which was concluded in the year 46. the confusion, which was introduced by the breach of it, had been prevented, and Owen ô Neill had wanted strength to countenance that rupture.

71. In the Year 48. the Lord of Inchiquin having been advertized out of France of the resolution taken again to en­gage the Lord Lieutenant in the service of Ireland, and the supreme Council of the Confederates having received the [Page 53] same advertizement, both readily condescended to a Cessa­tion of Armes in order to the Peace which was to follow. And the Lord of Inchiquin, who, with wonderful dexteri­ty, managed that affair, maugre the opposition of some of the Officers, prevail'd with the Army under his Command to declare for the King. And it cannot be denied that they proved very useful in the Cause, as well in the prosecution, Pag. 34. as after in assisting to take in Drogheda, Dundalk, and other Garrisons kept by the Enemy, after the conclusion of the Peace. But the defeat at Rathmynes, and the landing of Cromwell, made them think of bettering their fortunes, by siding with the more successful Party. And their Fellows having already betrayed the Garrisons intrusted to them, to Cromwell, those that remained in the Army, when they found opportunity, stole away to them. And I appeal to the English Protestant Officers of L [...]i [...]ster, that continued irremovably fixt in their Principles of Loyalty, whether those be not the men, upon whom they kept a watchful eye at Thomas town, when Cromwell past the Barroe? And Pag. 34. whether they, and the Irish Officers, did not throng about the Person of the Lord Lieutenant, when he went to their quarters, to prevent his Excellencies being carried away Prisoner to the Enemy, Whereof the fear was the common discourse of all men? But this Gentleman changes the Guards, and would perswade us, that the Protestants, for Pag. 34. preservation of their lives, were forced to keep as strict Guards against the Irish Papists, as against Cromwell. Which is a notorious Calumny, as the Lord Lieutenant, and the Lein­ster Protestant Officers can testifie; unless this Gentleman intends, that bickerings about quarters, and animosities between particular men, which are frequent in the be [...]t regulated Armies, of the same Nation, should pass for acts of hostility, and unquestionable grounds of a general distrust.

72. From the year 48 until the year 60. those this Gen­tlemans Protestants did indeed swim down the stream, and Pag. 36. partake in the actings, and of the rewards of Cromwel. But then they did what became them, and merited a most be­nign interpretation from his Majesty of the duty which they [Page 54] had so early and so eminently p [...]rformed. Yet let us not wholly deprive the people of England of the good effects of that in­fluence, which their so publick expressions of their affecti­ons to the King, had upon Ireland likewise. And for the honour of those be it spoken, who with Oars and Sails made Pag. 37. their way up the River, and would not hear of any restricti­on to be put upon the King, that all their fellows left not the Stream as willingly as they came to it; and that in the con­vention some men have been heard to speak of other matters than of bringing in the King free and unfettered.

73. Although this Gentleman should be so indulgent to those English Protestants, as to endeavour to perswade us they were but Rebells seemingly; Yet I am sure he cannot Pag. 38. have the confidence to say, but that they, who imbrued their hands in the blood of those that avowedly, and under his Majesties authority fought for his Interests, who besieg­ed his Cities and Forts, and took his Ships at Sea, over-act­ed their parts.

74. Here again he repeats the expelling the Kings Au­thority by the Irish Papists, and takes the liberty to compare Pag. 38. the actions of both parties, and favour those he pleads for with the best part of that, which is all but supposition.

75. But at length he is come to an experiment; and a­gainst an experiment (says he) there is no argument, and he constitutes my Lord Duke of Ormond himself the Judge. So Pag. 39. as the Reader may well think the [...]e rema [...]ns nothing but a definitive sentence to be given. In the year 1650 (says he) when it came in question which were the worst, the Irish Papists, or the seduced Protestants, he permitted all the worthy Prote­stants, which till then had served under him, to come off to the rest of the Protestants, though then headed with Ireton him­self, esteeming them safer with that real Regicide so accom­panied, than with those pretended Anti-Regicides so prin­cipled.

76. Had not the Reader already been acquainted with the nature of those inferences which this Gentleman fre­quently makes, sometimes upon illusorie, sometimes upon false grounds, This, which he calls an Experiment, might have past for a Judgement in the Case: Since the Irish Ca­tholicks [Page 55] are ready to acknowledge all for a truth, which his Grace the Duke of Ormond shall relate of their proceedings. But to unriddle the mystery of this Experiment, it will be necessary we should know the truth of the story, and thus you have it. After the revolted Party in Munster had ren­dred Cromwell Master of that Province; and that (to use the Duke of Ormonds own words) for want of due comply­ance from Limerick and Galway, but principally from Lime­rick, it hath been impossible for us to raise or employ an Army against the Rebells; for to attempt this any where on the other side of the Shanon, but near Limerick, and without the abso­lute command of that City to secure it, could be no other than the very certain ruine of the design in the very beginning of it, the Rebells pow [...]r being such, as to dissipate with ease the foun­dation which should be laid there: And to have done it on this side of the Shanon, was impossible, since the ground-work of the Army must be raised and supported from thence, which, whl [...]st it was in forming, would have exhausted all the substance of these parts, and not have effected the work: After (I say) the Lord Lieutenant was brought to these straights, and that the difficulties were increa [...]ed by the unhappy Censures of James-town, his Lordship resolved to leave the Kingdom, hoping the distractions which sprung from that fatal Excom­munication, might be appeased by giving them a Catholick Governour. And, fearing the success of a War managed by a powerful prevailing Enemy, he dismissed the English Troops before Ireton knew of his design of leaving the King­dom, or the weakness of his condition; that so their coming off might be the more acceptable, and the agreement to be made with them, the more advantagious; and that for these Reasons. First, To satisfie their own earnest desires, that would not willingly serve un [...]er other Conduct than his own. Secondly, All the regular wayes of maintaining the Army must have been clear laid aside, the Charges being far greater than the Taxes and Contributions would satisfie: and the English, besides their being unacquainted with that Province, had no inclination to that course the Souldier was necessitated to take for his subsistence, nor his Excel­lency to put them upon it. Thirdly, The Lord Lie [...]tenant [Page 56] might fear, that if the English had to the last gasp continu­ed in Armes, with the Irish, such their perseverance would be accounted an obstinate willfulness, and an unnatural in­clination in them of adhering to so hated a Rebel-party, a­gainst their Countrymen; and that upon the upshot they might have received harder measure than the Irish them­selves. Fourthly, His Excellency might have considered, that their Parents and Kindred, and those that would assist to maintain them, upon laying down Armes, were, either in England, or in those parts of Ireland, possest by the Ene­my. Lastly, He might have considered, that so faithful a Party, as they were, being dispers'd, might be able to have made some impression upon that humour of many a­mong the Rebells that had least rancour in it, and have pre­pared the minds of men for the day of tryal, whensoever God was pleased to give the occasion. And it is not to be doubted, that some amongst them were fully instructed how to proceed in order to his Majesties service.

77. And now this Gentleman must give me leave to say, that Experiments, against which there is no arguing, must be Pag. 39. of some other nature than this he delivers us: And that the Text being such as we find it, the Comments he makes upon it are of the same Edition; save that where he extends the acknowledgement of his Majesties Mercy to his Protestant Subjects, he must allow me to say, that it cannot be more Pag. 40. hearty, and more submiss in them, than in the Irish Ca­tholicks.

78. I am now come to that place, to which, upon for­mer frequent repetitions of the same thing, I transferr'd the Pag. 41. Reader; and that is the Year 1641. And because I find that this Gentleman of Quality, and the Man of the dark in England, do conferr notes, I shall only here repeat what answer I gave the other, upon part of the same subject: Your Grace knows with what horrour the Irish Nation looks up­on those massacres and murthers in the North, in the beginning I [...]ish Colours F [...]lded, Pag. of the Rebellion, committed by the rascal multitude upon their innocent, unarmed, and unprovided Neighbours; but the number of two hundred thousand (although this Writer comes short one hundred thousand in his accompt, of what the Con­vention-Commissioners [Page 57] gave up to his Majesty in their Answer to the Irish Agents) is so exorbitantly vast, that a stranger, who finds the dimensions of Ireland in the Map, and understands this certain tru [...]h, that there were then in Ireland one hundred Natives for every Person these men would pass under the notion of an Englishman, will readily conclude, that th [...] whole Island is but one City, so throng'd with Inhabitants, as men cannot walk in the streets unjustled.

79. I will not extenuate the sufferings of the English in their personal Estate, which indeed is very great: Nay, I Pag. 41. hope to be able to say, That it was more than the fee-simple of all the Lands which his Majesties mercy will allow to have been forfeited in Ireland, is worth. But that this Gentle­man should impute to the Irish Catholicks, that they did pretend his Majesties Authority for raising the Rebellion, is Pag. 41. to lay that to their charge, which was the sole and individual act of Sir Phelim ô Neill, who shewing the People the broad-seal of an old Patent he had lying by him, published that to be the Warrant from his Majesty for what he acted. And I hope that unfortunate Gentleman himself hath made some satisfaction to the Divine Justice for so hainous a sin, by his free acknowledging it at the time of his Execution, and by his penitent tears, and freq [...]ent and publick cryes, that God would be merciful to him for so foul a Crime.

80. Yet, as there have been some of our late King's Ministers in Ireland, that, in favour of his Enemies, have endeavoured industriously by the exam [...]nation of Witnesses, even upon the Rack, to cause this Imposture to pass for Truth: So this Gentleman, out of the abundance of his kindness to the Irish Catholicks, dictates the fiction, and makes all of them partake of that, which Sir Phelim ô Neill did wholly ascribe to himself.

81. When this Gentleman cites these words of King Charles the First, of ever happy memory, Albeit We do ex­tremely Pag. 4 [...]. detest the odious Rebellion which the Recusants of Ire­land have, without ground or colour, raised against Us, Our Crown, and Dignity, he might have remem [...]red those that immediately follow, viz. Which words [...]e do in all humility conceive to have proceeded from the m [...]s-represe [...]tations of our [Page 58] Adversaries, and therefore do protest we have been most mali­ciously traduced to your Majesty. And nothing can be more evident, than that Sir William Parsons, and Sir John Bur­lace, then Lords Justices, and such of the Council, who from the beginning favoured those that opposed his Majesty in England, gave them this Character, being glad to make the King Author of so indefinite a Charge, as themselves had retracted before. For having issued forth a Proclamati­on the very day they discovered the Conspiracy, and pub­lished that it was intended by some evil-affected Irish: they having found mens general resentment of those so general words, soon after, by a second Proclamation, printed and published, declared, That they only intended by the word, Irish Papists, such of the meer Irish in the Province of Ulster, as had plotted, contrived, and been Actors in that Treason, and others, who adher'd to them: and that they did not any way intend, or mean thereby any of the old English of the Pale, or any other parts of the Kingdom. We may joyn this to this Gentleman's former Experiment, and say with much truth, that mis-informations were the least of those Ministers crimes. As for those killing inferences which he drives from such springs, and builds on such foundations, I leave them to the Reader to be considered.

82. I must not hope to dis-intangle even that particular Fallacy which this Gentleman makes use of, almost in every Page, of attributing what is the Crime of Particular men to the whole Nation, untill he gives over to write upon this subject.

83. Here we have him, in the Year 46. making the At­tempt of Owen ô Neill to surprize the Lord Lieutenant, and Pag. 42, & Pag. 43. his Party, in their return to Dublin, the general Act of the Nation: and laying to their charge, that the Council and Congregation obliged General Preston to exercise all acts of hostility against the Lord Lieutenant by name. Al­though this be the first time that ever I heard of such an Oath; yet I will easily believe, that the Nuncio, and those that went to besiege his Excellency at Dublin, would not scruple at the exacting of such an Oath. But wherefore doth not this Gentleman deal so ingenuously with the Rea­der, [Page 59] as to let him know, that those who gave Order to prosecute the Lord Lieutenant, were those only that gave Orders to prosecute all Confederate Irish Catholicks, who stood in Armes against them, and had before seized on their very Persons, who, by the general Assembly of the Con­federate Catholiques, were established Governours over themselves, and made them Prisoners in the City of Kilke­ny? Will any man say, that the English Nation is answera­ble for the actings of Cromwell, or the Rump? It is much pitty, that the Gentleman, who has so good a faculty in com­menting sharply, hath no [...] chosen better Texts.

84. We are now come to the Year 1647. in which year this Gentleman sayes, that the general Assembly of the Confederate Catholiques of Ireland employed Commissioners Pag. 44 to Rome, France, and Spain, to invite a forein Power to Ireland. It were to be wish'd, this Person of Quality did not imagine Truth to be such a Rock, as he dares not ap­proach, but by several windings. The plain relation of that Affair is here given the Reader, by a Person of Quality en­trusted with that Negotiation.

85. The Power of those who were in Armes in England against his late Majesty of ever blessed memory, was in the Year 1647. considerable in Ireland, The Defence of his Ma­jesties Roman Catho­lick Subjects of Ire­land, against the O [...] ­jection made lately, touching their proceed­ings in the Y [...]a [...] 164 [...], relating to the Protect [...] ­on of some forei [...] Prince. who being then free from any opposition in England, and in absolute power to dispose of their Forces for carrying on their Design in Ire­land, the said Catholicks fore-see [...]ng the danger they were in, met in the winter season of that year, in a general Assembly at Kilkeny, where they took in Consideration, That his said late Majesty was in restraint; That all addresses to him were forbidden; And that some of the Members of the Parliament, who spake in favour of his said Majesty, were excluded.

86. In that sad extremity there being no access to his said late Majesty, for imploring either his Justice or Mercy, all Laws Humane and Divine did allow the said Catholicks to take some other Course in order to their Defence and Pre­servation; not against his said Majesty, but against those [Page 60] who laid violent hands on his sacred Person, who designed the abolishing of the Regal Authority, and resolved to de­stroy and extirpate the said Catholicks.

87. The said Catholicks therefore, in the Month of Ja­nuary, in the said Year 1647. did in the same Assembly conclude, that the Marq [...]ess [...] Antrim, Viscount Musker, now Earl of Clankar [...]hy, [...] [...]coffry Brown Esquire, should be employed into France, [...]e Bishop of Ferns, and Ni­cholas Plunkett Esquire, into Rome; and some others to Spai [...]. That the said Agents sent [...] France, were by their applications to his now sacred Majesty, then Prince of Wales, and to the Queen his Mother, to declare the danger the said Catholicks apprehended, and humbly to beseech them to find out some expedient, by which those Calami­ties might be diverted. That the said Agents were likewise intrusted, in case of absolute necessity, to implore the aid and protection of some forein Princes; but they were lim [...] ­ted not to act any thing in order to such forein protection, other than by the direction of the said Persons who were employed to receive his Majesties commands. That upon the said application made to his Majesty, the Duke of Or­monds Commission was renewed for his being Lord Lieute­nant of Ireland, and his Excellency qualified with Power to conclude a Peace with the said Catholicks. Whereupon, without excepting the Concessions to be had on the Conclu­sion of that Peace, all further proceedings concerning the Protection of any Foreiner were stopt, and the said Agents recalled, they, nor any of them, having ever moved or acted any thing relating to any Foreiners protection. That t [...]e Agents so employed to Rome, on their return, in the Year 1648. did in the publick Assembly then sitting, give [...] a satisfactory account of their said Negotiation, that it encouraged the whole Assembly to hasten the Conclusion of the Peace then in agitation. Which can be testified by very many yet living, whereof several are now in this City: and that accordingly a Peace was soon after concluded in the said year 1648. Wherein the Concessions which are absolute, are only removing of Incapacities, and Indempnity, for [...]e lives of the said Catholicks: the rest being temporary, [Page 61] untill his Majesties further pleasure in Parliament were known.

88. And the said Catholicks are so conscious to them­selves of the resolution they took from the beginning to per­severe irremovably faithful, through all extremities, to his Majesties Interest, that they are well assured, though those who now possess their E [...]tates, have the Books of the said Irish Assemblies, and the Transactions of the Councills in­trusted by those Assemblies, in their hands; yet can they not make it appear, that there was any actual Treaty or Of­fer, for transferring the Subjection, naturally due from them to his Majesty, or the Right of his Majesties Domi­nion over them, to any Foreiner whatsoever: or any thing tending thereunto, but what is herein acknow­ledged.

89. To aggravate the hainousness of this Mission, which was no other than is related, he adds, that the Commissi­oners to Rome were authorized to declare, they raised Armes Pag. 44, 45. for the freedom of the Catholick Religion: And then he flies out to those Excursions, with which he garnishes each Dish of the great Feast he has with so much pain and industry pre­pared for his Party. Certainly (sayes he) if ever they may be believed to speak truth, it is when they speak to the Pope. Pag. 45. And this truth, which is sought to be extorted from them by so witty an argument, is a truth I never heard denied by any of them, viz. That they, in part, raised Armes for the freedom of the Catholick Religion: (though partly too, nay primarily, at first, and in relation to the generality of Irish Catholicks, who were forc'd out, for the safety of their lives and natural being) Nay, it is probable, that they instruct­ed their Commissioners to press this Article, wherein his Holiness was most interested, to the Pope, as an especial motive to procure them assistance. But was this the whole truth? Did they raise Armes for no other end, than for the freedom of the Catholick Religion? Nay did they raise Armes for no other end than this, and the safety of their lives too? Will not this Gentleman, that believes them so obliged to tell the Pope the Truth, have so much charity for them, as to think they likewise spake truth in the sight of [Page 62] Heaven, when they protest and swear before God, his Saints, and his Angels, that they will bear, during their lives, true Faith and Allegiance to their Soveraign Lord Charles, by the Grace of God King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, his Heirs, and lawful Successors; and that they will, to their power, during their lives, defend, uphold and maintain all his and their just Prerogatives, Estates and Rights, &c? Could this Gentleman, that set down in his Book the very Oath, be ignorant of what himself writes? Or can his ma­lice be so great, as to think, that those who meant to per­form that part of the Oath which concerned Religion, were resolved to be willful Perjurers in that which concerns the King?

90. This Gentleman, to shew how rigorously penal this freedom of the Catholick Religion was to be to the Pro­testants, Pag. 45. instances Dean York, who was forced to bury his own Children, that dyed at Galway, in a Garden. Cer­tainly if there had not been many indiscreet Zealots in Ire­land, the Kingdom had not felt the miseries to which it is reduced. But they were farr from being all so. And to op­pose an instance to this, Sir Cyprian Horsfall, a Protestant, by the allowance of David Rooth, Bishop of Ossorie, was buried within the Cathedral Church of Kilkeny.

91. Taking only upon trust (for this Gentleman ac­knowledges he has our Papers) what he speaks of those in­structions, Pag. 46. to which he again resorts, we may well say, that his Logick has taught him to make strong inferences up­on weak grounds. For taking both the Texts together, which this Gentleman, to make the Comment the fuller, hath divided; and reflecting upon the evill times, and the necessity to which the Catholicks were reduced, and how nothing was to be acted, but by the advice of those that were employed into France to his Majesty, and the Queen his Mother, it was no wonder, supposing the Pope would be munificent towards the maintenance of that War, which, besides the interests of Catholick Religion, had for scope the re-inthroning of the King, that his Holiness should be admitted to receive reasonable satisfaction by the Articles: and to oblige the Pope to descend to such Conditions, as [Page 63] might be granted in matters of Religion, that they were to represent to his Holiness the lowness of their own conditi­on, the power and strength of their Enemies; and to soli­cit for considerable aides whereby to maintain a War; And not only that, but to ascertain and secure the same. Pag. 46.

92. This, and no other, being the sense of those Instru­ctions, cited by this Gentleman himself: And that their imploring of aid and protection tending to no other end: Is it not strange, he could conclude with saying, Still the Pag. 47. Pope is their King? Does it appear by this, That the Irish Papists hang, as their Faith in God, so their Loyalty to the Prince, on the Popes sleeve? Yet after his accustomed man­ner, Pag. 47. he comments thus upon that Text, and would liken the protection they sought to the power of the Protector Pag. 47. in England, which beyond Royal was Tyrannical; although some men by elaborated speeches strove to make it Legiti­mate, by conferring Kingship on Cromwell.

93. We are now come to the Year 1648. and here again we find this Gentleman forgets not to allege, with the same truth he had before, that the Irish Papists disowned the Peace Pag. 47. then made, disobeyed, opposed, conspired to murther, ex­communicated, and banished his Majesties Vice-Roy. But should I repeat my Answers, as often as he reiterates his Charge, my Reply would grow to a Volume. And there­fore I referr the Reader to what is formerly said: as I do to what belongs to his summary Conclusion.

94. It is true, that in some points of Faith, the Catho­licks oppose both the Protestants and Sectaries; but the Ca­tholick Pag. 48. and Protestant Royalist agree in point of Loyalty. The fight­ing against the Regi­cides, or Sectaries. And to prove this by an Experiment, more convincing than that which this Gentleman formerly gave us, these two Par­ties joyned for two or three years under the same Com­mand, in the same Army, to fight against those this Gen­tleman's Protestants, which can be no other than Sectaries. And if not the fighting, but the ground and end of the fight­ing Pag. 48. proves which is the good Subject: This reaches home to those, that to palliate their evill intentions, feigned them­selves Protestant Royalists. And when Cromwell went into Ireland, deserting his Majesties service, presented him with [Page 64] the fruits of their treachery, the City of Cork, and the rest of those strong holds in Munster, whilst the true Prote­stant Royalist, and the Irish Catholick, stuck to their Principles: And not content to abstain from the Rebells in Ireland, many of them adhered to his Majesty in his banish­ment, and followed his fortune abroad. Now how could Sampson himself tye their tails together, that scarce ever met, but as Enemies, is a riddle to me. Pag. 49.

95. The reason why I said that the power of this Gen­tleman's Protestants in Ireland, was no greater than his Ma­jesty was pleased to make it, was grounded on the reports which were daily brought to London of the Phanaticks mena­ces, Pag. 49. not to give way to the execution of any of the Kings Orders, by which any of the Natives was to be restored: And knowing that there wanted no hands among the Prote­stant Royalists, and the Irish Catholicks, sufficient to bring them to reason, I slighted their threats, and their power, to second them, by saying, that it is no greater (as in truth it is not) than his Majesty is pleased to make it. As for the Elogium that follows, if the Gentleman holds himself to my intention, he must allow that it wholly concerns the Pha­naticks.

96. This Gentleman sayes after his manner, That the Contents of those Articles are in themselves unwarrantable, ex­cept Pag. 50. in case of necessity, which hath no Law. His Majesty Concern­ing the Ple [...] of Justice grounded on the Ar­ticles. (sayes he) having condescended by them, that the Militia, Treasury, and Army of fifteen thousand Foot, two thousand five hundred Horse, of Irish Papists, and even, in effect, the Legistative power, should be in the hands of twelve men to be chosen by Irish Papists; and that there should be no alteration in England, of what they in Ireland should thi [...]k sit to trans­mit to his Majesty; and that the Rebells should be pardoned, without consent of Parliament, when his Ma [...]esty in Parliament adjudged such pardons before conviction to be ru [...]l and void; and that they assumed the Legislative power by repealing Poynings Act; all which (sayes he) is against Law, and the Oath the King takes at his Coronation.

97. What a task would the answering of all these Heads, this Gentleman vents at a breath, prove to me, if these [Page 65] Articles of Peace were not so common, as to be in the hands of very many.

This Gentleman will give me leave to ask him whether he himself believes the King broke his Coronation Oath, or Pag. 51. gave away his Militia, because he granted that this so consi­derable an Army should be kept on foot under the conduct of his Lieutenant of Ireland, for maintenance of his interests, in so great streights as his Majesty was reduced to, at a time when his enemies had thrice that number in the Field against him? Did the King break his Oath, or give away his right in the Treasury, because he gave power to his Lieutenant, with the advice of certain select Persons of the Natives to levy money for the maintenance of this Army, and for o­ther charges incident to the Government? Or do those se­lect persons assume the legislative power of the Kingdom, because it is inserted in those Articles, that both Houses of Parliament may consider what they shall think convenient touching the repeal or suspension of the Statute commonly called Poynings Act? And cannot his Majesty pardon his Subjects of Ireland, although he give his Royal Assent to an Act past in the Parliament of England, by which such par­don before conviction is declared null and void?

98. He adds, That although the Irish Catholicks chiefly Pag. 51. pleaded for restitution of their Estates by vertue of those Arti­cles; yet if they had prevailed therein upon the score of that plea, it must in consequence have adjudged for them the bene­fit of all the other Articles as a Right. But this Gentleman foresees not, that he is to convince himself of an untruth, fol. 79. where he says, and that truly, That the most essential parts of the Articles of Peace were to be finally obliging, Pag. 79. but as they were to be confirmed by Act of Parliament, in the next Parliament which should be assembled after the perfecting of the said Articles of Peace. So as his Majesties promises are partly absolute, partly relative to his further pleasure: But no Wood comes amiss to this Gentleman, of which Ar­rows may be made to shoot at the Irish Catholicks. And although we find contradiction in his Words; yet there is never any in his Intentions, when the question is of aspersing them.

[Page 66] 99. This Gentleman might have taken notice, that the Irish Catholicks have in all the Papers published by them, Pag. 52. and in all their pleadings before his Majesty, been so careful of the intention his Royal Father of happy memory expres­sed to see the just Adventurer satisfied, that they made no opposition thereunto. And although both Parties were al­lowed, while the substance of his Majesties gracious Decla­ration of the 30th. of November 1660. was controverted, to speak their minds: yet since his Majesties sentence is de­finitive in the point, their duty obliges him to acqu [...]esce, as they did, long before, in order to the Declaration at Breda.

100. And let not this Gentleman trouble himself to find an answer for that which P. W never intended to object. For he is confident His Majesty was not under an Obligation precedent and opposite to those Articles, which might extend to Pag. 52, & 53. Ireland as a legal engagement. And therefore his excuses in behalf of the late King were very superfluous: As it is un­true, that the breach of those Articles on the Irish side, occasioned so long and so tedious a War. But the dividing Pag. 53, 54. of the Bear's skin, as farr as it will goe, hath at this time raised the malice of men to the height it is grown into: As the hope to attain the dividing of it did at first foment the Rebellion, by the testimony of the best of Kings, in that incomparable Legacy, which not long before his death he left to the World. But some kind of Zeales counts all merci­ful moderation lukewarmness, and rather be counted cruel, than cold, and is not seldom more greedy to kill the Bear for his skin, than for any harm he has done; the Confiscation of mens Estates being more beneficial, than the charity of saving their Lives, or mending their Errours.

101. I shall intreat the Reader to observe, that in the several Dishes served at this Feast, all is but Pork in a dif­ferent dress. The difficult Conditions which the murtherers of his Father forced, compelled, and necessitated his Majesty to grant, are written in Capital Letters: and the breach of the Peace, which cannot be proved, is taken pro concesso: And thence, but not without too much straining, this Gentle­man inferrs, That the breach on their side contributed to, if Pag. 54. [Page 67] not acted that unparallel'd Crime. And he again comments upon the word freely, as if his Majesty driven to so great streights, might not do that freely, which he did upon difficult Pag. 54. Conditions.

102. Again we have the broken Peace served up. But now he adds, to garnish the Dish, That he had proved the Pag. 55. violation of it by undeniable evidences, when the Reader is yet to seek even for any plausible argument to induce him to be­lieve the breach of it. And again, The Irish Papists despi­sed, disowned, rejected, expelled, banish'd, and excom­municated Pag. 55. the Lord Lieutenant, and all adhering to him, and in him, his Majesttes Authority: Whereas we have al­ready demonstrated, that the Nation was innocent of that Crime.

103. I cannot imagine, wherefore a man, that shews himself so witty in expressing his malice, should repeat in every Leaf, the Heads of his odious Accusation against the Irish Catholicks: unless that like a Fidler, who had in charge to sing the Ballad, he meant at every close to put his party in mind of the Burden of the Song.

104. Now indeed we have somewhat new, but of the same stamp. For this Gentleman alleges, That the Irish Papists being not able to keep the Condition expressed in their Pag. 56. Recognition which preceded the Articles, inviolable, they broke them. And because the Reader may have all before him, I do here insert that Act of Recognition.

His Majesties Roman Catholick Subjects (as thereunto bound by Allegiance, Duty, and Nature) do most humbly and Articles of Peace, Pag. 1, or 6. freely acknowledge, and recognize their Soveraign Lord King Charles to be lawful and undoubted King of this Kingdom of Ireland, and other his Highness Realms and Dominions. And his Majesties said Roman Catholick Subjects apprehending with a deep sense the sad condition whereunto his Majesty is reduced, as a further humble testimony of their Loyalty, do declare, that they, and their posterity, for ever, to the uttermost of their power, even to the expence of their blood and fortunes, will maintain and uphold his Majesty, his Heirs, and lawful Successors, their Rights, Prerogatives, Government, and [Page 68] Authority, and thereunto freely and heartily will render all due Obedience.

105. No man denies that this Recognition was made by their ruling power. And it might be accounted a natural and genuine Inference, that those that brake it denied themselves the benefit of the Articles of Peace. But that the ruling Power of the Irish Catholicks published the breach thereof to the World, or that their ruling Power made that Do­claration Pag. 56. of the 12th. of August 1650. is an evident un­truth, as is formerly proved.

106. As for this Gentleman's Dilemma here in the 56. Page of his Book, to prove, That even those who made these Articles with the Lord Lieutenant, were guilty of their breach, Pag. 56. it is answered, That such of that Assembly as broke them, or did not effectually observe, as much as lay in them, the Conditions of the Recognition, did really transgress the duty expressed therein; yet not when they made those Ar­ticles, but when they broke them so. For it is evident, that every one had sufficient power and liberty to observe them in his own particular, if he pleased. But to say there­fore, that such of that Assembly as preserved themselves from disobedience, were answerable for other men (spe­cially since it is acknowledged that they resigned the power to others, even by those Articles) or were abusers of his Majesties Authority and service, must be a very wild infe­ference. Wherefore our Gentleman's conditional not able, and were able, and his Conclusion intended thence, is a meer Fallacy, confounding Times and Abilities, and Univer­sall, with Particulars, and Effects with their Causes, and the obligations of using their best endeavours with that of the future being of things, and of a success which God alone could ascertain.

107. Now we are come to the Oaths of Association, and to another Oath, by which this Gentleman would prove, Pag. 57. that the Peace was designedly broken before it was made. As nothing did ever yet conduce more to the vindication of Charles the First, of ever blessed memory, from the horrid Calumnies with which his Enemies did asperse him, than [Page 69] the printing of his Letters taken at the Battel of Nasby: So with due reverence to his Sacred name, I may say, that nothing could have befallen of more advantage to the Irish Catholicks, than that all their Books, and all the original Papers of their home and forein Transactions, have come into the hands of their Adversaries; and that the whole sub­stance of them should be thus spread abroad, and be thus il­lustrated with such a Comment, as leaves nothing unsaid that Art or Mal [...]ce could suggest. For if they had not been masters of those Books, and Papers, they who now accuse the Roman Catholicks to have sought for assistance, in their greatest necessities, from a forein protection; would then proclame to the World, that they were become the Sub­jects of another Prince, and had sworn Fealty to him. They that now, by all the Cavills and Fallacies imaginable, en­deavour to find out Contradictions in their Oaths, and do comment only upon their Intentions; would then publish, that they had expresly sworn to exclude his Majesty, and to choose a King of the Nation. They who now by weak in­ferences would prove, that the Irish Papists mea [...]t to sup­press Protestant Religion; would then averr, that they had sworn to extirpate all Protestants, the Protestant Prelates especially. They who now only upbraid them for having proceeded against the Laws of the Kingdom; would then loudly declare, that they had clean, laid them aside; and that they had introduced, and were sworn to maintain the Bre­hon Law. Their Crimes would have been as many, and as hainous as their Adversaries could fancy them; and their actions would have been conveighed to Posterity in a tor­rent of horrour and perfidy. But now they give us the Text out of their own Record, and nothing is left them but to comment upon it; which this Gentleman omits not to doe, with such a sophistry, and so great a willingness, to make them seem black and hideous, as the Catholicks may esteem it happy for them, that he is not wholly left at large to fol­low his invention.

108. But although this Person of Quality may have those Records in his custody, yet I will give him my assistance to sort them, by letting him know the Time and Occasion upon [Page 70] which these several Oaths were taken. And with his good leave I must tell him, that this which he sets forth to be in the first roul, is a complicated Oath, to which the later part, which begins Moreover, was not added untill the Year Pag. 58. Pag. 59. 1646. In which year likewise, the Oath of adhering to the present Union of the Confederate Catholicks that rejected the Peace was administred. And it might very well have happen­ed, that the Grand Committee, upon failer of the perform­ance of the Articles of Peace then to be concluded, obliged themselves to reassume their Union. But this must have been in the Year 1645. before the Peace of 46. was assent­ed unto by a Party, that in favour of the Nuncio, who op­posed it, moved all scruples imaginable; and might have objected, that if such another as Sir William Parsons, who would not perform those Articles, came to govern the Kingdom, what was to be done in that Case? This remedy might perhaps have been thought proper for their satisfacti­on. But that this should have happened in the Year 48. is an assertion as vain, as it is malicious. For the World knows that the Peace of 48. was treated and concluded una­nimously by the Assembly, the Lord Lieutenant being in the same City with them. And as to the Committee, the name and use of it was very superfluous in a place where a few Persons daily brought the sense of the House in difficult matters to his Excellency, and what seemed to be knotty of the part of his Excellency, was upon all occasions resolved by the Assembly, that constantly sate at so near a di­stance.

109. I shall likewise give the Reader this faithful relati­on, as to the other Oaths. When the Peace of 46. was re­jected by the greater Vote of those, who, by the terrour of the Northern Army, by the suggestion of the Nuncio's Pag. 64, 65. active Emissaries, and by the affright of an Excommunicati­on, were induced to violate the publick Faith; Which un­doubtedly is the ground of all the sufferings of the Nation: Then it was that the same Assembly framed that Oath of ad­hering to the Union of the Confederate Roman Catholicks that rejected the Peace. And having chosen a supreme Council, composed for the most part of the rejecters of the [Page 71] Peace, they for that time conceived themselves secure. But the People having had some respite from the fears they had before entertained, coming to a new Election for the suc­ceeding Assembly, such, for the most part, were chosen to be of the supreme Council, that had served in that place before, and were known to have good inclinations to settle the Kingdom under his Majesties Government. Wherefore the Prelates distrusting those hands, into which the power of the Confederates was committed, got that part which be­gins with the word Moreover, to be added to the Oath of Pag. 59. Association; and the general Assembly, that knew it was, and alwayes kept it in their power to approve of, or con­sent to any Peace they thought fit, gave them satisfaction in that which could no longer interrupt a settlement, than they list.

110. Having thus placed the Gentlemans Records in due order, and given the Reader some light to lead him through Pag. 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68. a discourse knotty and perplext, and endeavoured to be made so, if I be not much deceived, I shall descend to the Commentary. But I shall first desire the Reader to consi­der, that I take not upon me, with relation to these hap­py times, when the Restoration of his Majesty hath given life to his Laws, to justifie the Irish Catholicks against Mr. Attorney at the Bar. His Majesties Mercy is their sole plea, and the Sanctuary to which they resort.

111. Wherefore laying aside those legal Tryals (by which infallibly, those who set up a Government, in op­position to his Majesties, by what hand soever that Govern­ment was managed, those that swear to obey and ratifie all the Orders and Decrees made, and to be made by such a Go­vernment, would be adjudged Traytors) let us resort back to those confused times, and examine whether, as things then were carried, it might stand with the rules of Reason, and Self-preservation, to admit, that (to swear) to bear true Faith and Allegiance to the King, and to swear to obey and ratifie all the Orders and Decrees made, and to be made by the Supreme Council, are flat and known contradictories? To prevent confusion, they swear to obey the Orders of that Government they had set up themselves; and if we [Page 72] shall allow to the nature of the times those things which men seduced think necessary for their preservation, why should it be a flat contradictory to say, that at the same time they bare true Faith and Allegiance to the King, not by desisting Pag. 60. from doing those things, without which they could not sub­sist, but by performing those eminent duties to which their Faith and Allegiance at all Times, upon all Occasions, and in all Conditions subject them? That is, not to pay the Fealty we owe him to any other Prince; not to assist or counte­nance the doing of the least injury to his Person; to forbear taking any Oath that tends to exclude him, and his Poste­rity, from his Dominions; to fight against those that do; and since we are unhappily fallen from our Obedience, to return to our former state, as soon as possibly we can; and things of this nature.

112. Certainly if this Gentleman be not extremely inno­cent, he is very forgetful, that holds so close to the Law. And I assure him, That to maintain the fundamental Laws of Pag. 60. the Kingdom, and the free exercise of the Catholick Religion, were, in those times, thought to be things very compatible, however he takes them to be Contradictories.

113. He aggravates the matter (and so he might, if we did forget the nature of the Times) with their swearing not to seek or receive any pardon or protection for any thing done, or to be done, touching the general Cause. But allowing not Pag. 61. the Legality, but the Existence of their Government, what could have preserved it without such tyes?

114. This Gentleman is alwayes at a fault when his dis­course tends any way to Catholick Religion. Our Tenet is quite contrary; for we know, that we cannot receive, nor the Pope give a pardon for sins to come. Pag. 61.

115. Now we are come to that part which was added to the Oath in the Year 46. and he tells us, they swear not to submit to any Peace, made, or to be made, without the ap­probation of the general Assembly of the Catholicks. Of a [...]l Pag. 61. the parts of the Oath, this methinks, ought least to be op­pugned. For it is no wonder, that they should expect to have their own consent and approbation to attend any Peace, that would be concluded, they themselves being the [Page 73] most numerous Representative of the Nation. Had they confined it to the supreme Council, that in truth might be thought a limitation.

116. But this Gentleman, to aggravate their guilt, makes use, in my opinion, of a very speculative Argument, saying, That if the King did not so much as name them, but Pag. 61. make a Peace with them, as if they had never done any offence, they were debarred of it by this Oath. And I desire to be in­formed, how it might otherwise be known, than by the con­sent and approbation of an Assembly, that they accepted of such a Peace?

117. I have already mentioned how the Assembly gave way to the Propositions made by the Clergy, and had them confirmed by Oath, being loath to displease so powerful a Party, in a matter which was no longer binding than an As­sembly thought fit. And therefore this Gentleman may, without Reply from me, comment upon those Propositions as he thinks fit. But, with his leave, he will not gather by any thing therein, That none should be admitted to live in Pag. 61. Ireland but Papists. The French King maintains the Catho­lick Clergy and Laity in the publick and free exercise of the Roman Catholick Religion and Function throughout France, in as full lustre and splendour as it was in the Reign of St. Lewis, yet he excludes not the Hugonotts.

118. Had this Gentleman dealt fairly with the Reader, he had not entertained him with Propositions which interest­ed Pag. 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79. men do commonly make for their own advantage, and his Comments upon them: nor with Instructions which up­on every occasion are subject to alteration, and were given those that agitated the affairs in 46. which I hope he will not deny. But he should have laid before him the Result and Conclusion in the Articles of Peace in 48. and told him what a numerous People the King was to satisfie, who, without excluding his Protestant Subjects, might partake of his fa­vours. But this was not his design. He knew nothing could be grateful to the Party he intended to pleasure, but the foulest aspersions, whether right or wrong, that could be laid on those, whose Estates they possess. And we cannot say, but he hath been faithful to them, how unjust soever to Ca­tholicks.

[Page 74] 119. Now passing over those things, which the Gentle­man Pag. 80. himself calls Digressions, and indeed are no other than a methodical way o [...] venting his bitterness, I shall present the Reader, instead of those horrid Oaths (as this Gentle­man calls them) those, than which indeed no written wick­edness can ascend higher, with other Oaths that have been esteemed more religious: Oaths taken by the Saints them­selves: Oaths taken by the Fautors of Cromwells Tyranny, and the Well-wishers of his Kingship.

I A. B. Being nominated a Member of the Council of State The Form of an Ex­purgatory Oath, ta­ken by the Coun­c [...]l of State, Feb. 22. 1648. by this present Parliament, do testifie, that I do adhere to this present Parliament in the Maintenance and Defence of the publick Liberty, and Freedom of this Nation, as it is now declared by this Parliament (by whose Authority I am con­stituted a Member of the said Council) and in the Maintenance and Defence of their Resolutions concerning the setling of the Government of this Nation for the future in way of a Republick, without King, or House of Peers; And I do promise in the sight of God, that (through his Grace) I will be faithful in performance of the Trust committed to me, as aforesaid, and th [...]rein faithfully pursue the Instructions given to the said Coun­cil by this present Parliament; and not to reveal or disclose any thing in whole, or in part, directly or indirectly, that shall be debated or resolved upon in the Council, without the command and direction of the Parliament, or without the order or al­lowance of the major part of them that shall be present at such Debates or Resolutions. In confirmation of the Premisses I have hereto subscribed my Name.

I A. B. Do hereby declare, that I renounce the pretended Oath of Abjurati­on of the K [...]ng, and Royal Issue. Title of Charles Stuart, and the whole Line of the late King James, and of every other Person, as a single Person pretend­ing to the Government of these Nations of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the Duminions and Territories thereunto be­longing; And that I will, by the grace and assistance of Al­mighty God, be true and faithful to this Common-wealth, a­gainst any King, single Person, and House of Peers, and every of them; And hereunto I subscribe my Name.

And I shall give the Reader that pure, that holy Oath indeed, the Solemn League and Covenant, which was the Head-spring of those others, and the Fountain of all Evills that overflowed the three Nations.

WE Noblemen, Barons, Knights, Gentlemen, Citi­zens, The Solemn League and Covenant Burgesses, Ministers of the Gospel, and Com­mons of all sorts, in the Kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, by the Providence of God living under one King, and being of one Reformed Religion, having before our eyes the Glory of God, and the Advancement of the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the Honour and Happiness of the Kings Majesty, and his Posterity, and the true publick Liberty, Safety, and Peace of the Kingdoms, wherein every ones private Condition is included: And calling to mind the treacherous and bloody Plots, Conspiracies, Attempts, and Practices of the Enemies of God against the true Religion, and Professors thereof, in all places, especially in these three King­doms, ever since the Reformation of Religion; and how much their rage, power and presumption are of late, and at this time increased and exercised, whereof the deplorable Estate of the Church and Kingdom of Ireland, the d [...]stressed Estate of the Church and Kingdom of England, and the dangerous Estate of the Church and Kingdom of Scotland, are present and publick testimonies: We have now at last (after other means of Sup­plication, Remonstrance, Protestations, and Sufferings) for the preservation of our selves, and our Religion, from utter ruine and destruction, according to the commendable practice of these Kingdoms in former times, and the example of Gods peo­ple in other Nations, after mature deliberation, resolved and determined to enter into a mutual and solemn League and Covenant; wherein we all subscribe, and each one of us for himself, with our hands lifted up to the most High, do Swear,

1. That we shall sincerely, really, and constantly, through the Grace of God, endeavour in our several Places and cal­lings, the Preservation of the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland, in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Govern­ment, against our common Enemies: The Reforma [...]on of Re­ligion [Page 76] in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland, in Doctrine, Worship, Discipline, and Government, according to the Word of God, and the Example of the best Reformed Churches. And shall endeavour to bring the Churches of God, in the three King­doms, to the nearest Conjunction and Uniformity, in Religion, Co [...]fession of Faith, Form of Church-Government, Directory for Worship and Catechising, that we, and our Posterity after us, may as Brethren, live in Faith and Love, the Lord may de­light to dwell in the midst of us.

2. That we shall in like manner, without respect of persons, endeavour the extirpation of Popery, Prelacy (that is Church-government by Archbishops, Bishops, their Chancellours and Commissaries, Deans, Deans and Chapters, Arch-Deacons, and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierar­chy) Superstition, Heresie, Schism, Prophaness, and whatsoever shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine, and the power of Godliness, lest we partake in other mens sins, and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues: And that the Lord may be one, and his Name one in the three King­doms.

3. We shall with the same sincerity, reality, and constancy in our several vocations endeavour with our Estates and Lives, mutually to preserve the Rights and Privileges of the Parlia­ments, and the Liberties of the Kingdoms, and to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties Person and Authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms. That the World may bear witness with our Consciences of our Loyalty, and that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish his. Majesties just power and great­ness.

4. We shall also, with all faithfulness, endeavour the dis­covery of all such, as have been, or shall be Incendiaries, Ma­lignants, or evil Instruments, by hindering the Reformation of Religion, dividing the King from his People, or one of the Kingdoms from another, or making any faction or parties a­mongst the people, contrary to this League and Covenant, that they may be brought to publique Tryal, and receive condign [...]unishment, as the degree of their offences shall require, or de­serve; or the Supreme Judicatories of both Kingdoms respe­ctively, [Page 77] or others having power from them, for that effect, shall judge convenient.

5. And whereas the happiness of a blessed Peace between these Kingdoms, denyed in former times to our Progenitors, is by the good Providence of God granted unto us, and hath been lately concluded; and setled by both Parliaments, We shall, each one of us, according to our place and interest, endeavour, that they may remain conjoyned in a firm Peace and Union to all Posterity; and that Justice may be done upon the wilfull Opposers thereof, in manner expressed in the precedent Article.

6. Wee shall also, according to our places and callings in this common Cause of Religion, Liberty, and Peace of the King­doms, assist and defend all those that enter into this League and Covenant, in the maintaining and pursuing thereof, and shall not suffer our selves directly or indirectly, by whatsoever com­bination, perswasion, or terrour, to be divided and withdrawn from this blessed Union, and conjunction, whether to make de­fection to the contrary part, or to give our selves to a detestable indifferencie or neutrality in this Cause, which so much concern­eth the glory of God, the good of the Kingdoms, and honour of the King; but shall all the days of our lives, zealously and con­stantly continue therein, against all opposition, and promote the same, according to our power, against all lets and impediments whatsoever; And what we are not able our selves to suppress, or overcome, we shall reveal and make known, that it may be timely prevented and removed: All which we shall do as in the sight of God.

And because these Kingdoms are guilty of many Sins and provocations against God, and his Son Jesus Christ, as is too manifest by our present distresses and dangers, the fruits thereof; We profess and declare before God and the World our unfeigned desire to be humbled for our own sins, and for the sins of these Kingdoms; especially that we have not, as we ought, valu­ed the inestimable benefit of the Gospel; that we have not la­boured for the purity and power thereof; a [...]d that we have not endeavoured to receive Christ in our hearts, nor to walk wor­thy of him in our Lives; which are the causes of other sins and transgressions so much abounding amongst us: And our true [Page 78] and unfeigned purpose, desire and endeavour for our selves and all others under our power and charge, both in publick and in private, in all duties we owe to God and Man, to amend our lives, and each one to goe before another in the example of a real Reformation; That the Lord may turn away his wrath, and heavy indignation, and establish these Churches and King­doms in Truth and Peace. And this Covenant we make in the presence of Almighty God the searcher of all hearts, and with a true intention to perform the same, as we shall answer at that great Day, when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed; Most humbly besee hing the Lord to strengthen us by his holy Spirit for this end, and to bless our desires and proceedings with such success, as may be deliverance and safety to his People, and encouragement to other Christian Churches, groaning un­der, or in danger of the yoak of Anti-Christian Tyranny, to joyn in the same, or like Association and Covenant, To the Glory of God, the enlargement of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the Peace and tranquillity of Christian Kingdoms and Commonwealths.

120. Now this Gentleman, to compleat the work of his parties entire satisfaction should give us Commentaries in excuse of these Oaths, and where he found the matter grow knotty and hard, he might, as in the Case of the Irish, against whom he averr'd with confidence, the most part Pag. 40. of the Protestants of Ireland only served under the Usurpers to bring them to reason; So in this say, That his Party only swore those Oaths in order to bring in the King.

121. Here he descants upon my saying, that to deny the Irish Catholicks the benefit of the Peace, while those that were no great Friends to his Majesty possessed their whole substance and livelyhood, would estrange the hearts of Pag. 81. R [...]ad my Book, En­tituled, The more Ample Account, &c. Pag. 67. Pag. 81. the Irish from him. And it is probable, nay very natural, that the ardencies of mens zeal should remit, when they conceive themselves to be hardly used; though I withall a­verr, that no pretence of injury, can in Conscience be a sufficient warrant for them to transgress the limits of duty and loyalty. Whence it is inferred, God wot, very pre­posterously, That the Irish follow the King for nought but the [Page 79] loaves. Of this malicious obloquy his Majesty himself is the best Judge, who saw the Irish Catholicks, through Zeal to his service, cast away the Loaves they had in assu­rance, and fed upon Turnops when they could get them: Who saw them follow his Person in the lowest condition of his fortune from Spain to France, from France to Flanders. The rest of his Deductions were but to usher in that notable close, with which he thinks he tickles his Party, and there­fore writes it in Capital Letters, The Beast, if pamper'd, will Pag. 82. kick, if kept low, obey: That is, my Friends, the Land is for you, and servitude for them.

122. As for the judicious Protestants, all what this Gen­tleman hath said in favour of them, cannot convince, me, Pag. 82. but that even from the top of this so perfect an obedience, they sometimes make reflections upon the state of other men.

123. Now passing over that part where he musters up the Heads of his Invectiues, and praying as heartily as he, that credulity, and too hasty a belief of real Conversions, do not bring a prejudice upon his Majesties interests in Ireland, I come to the fearful Judgements which I said were wonder­fully inflicted on the Irish Nation for their breach of the Peace in 46. and such as were inflicted on Sauls House for his breach with the Gibeonites. And this Gentleman blames my me­mory, as having forgot those other breaches in 1641, and Pag. 83. 1648. but never considers, that in neither of them the publick Faith (whereof the breach attracts those Judge­ments) was violated. In 41. a few not very eminent Persons, of desperate fortunes, rebelled, and stood single in the guilt they had contracted, untill the mis-government of the Lords Justices, and that part of the Council which savoured those that opposed the King in England, forced the Nation to be Criminal in providing for their safety. This was a Rebellion; who denies it? Yet although all Re­bellions be grievous sins, they pass not under the Notion of the breach of publick Faith; such as Sauls House was pu­shed for; And although this Gentleman have turned himself into a thousand shapes, to deprive the Nation of the bene­fit of the Peace in 48. yet he hath not to this hour given the [Page 80] Reader any ground or colour to believe, that it was violated by breach of publick Faith; as is evident by what we former­ly said.

124. But (sayes he) if all were pardoned by the Peace Pag. 83. made in the Year 1648. why does he remember the Judge­ments for the breaches in 1646? If he thinks all were not, why does he not remember the breaches made in 41, and at length attribute some Judgements to that breach? Alass! I could wish that all were pardoned by the Peace in 48. But the punishment of the breach of publick Faith is an incom­municable privilege which the King of Kings reserves for himself. And our Answer to that of 1641. you have already. But all this preparation was made to introduce the Popes Bull with the more solemnity.

125. This Gentleman must afford me leave, not to give entire credence to his Ad futuram rei memoriam, or pre­tended Bull of Urban the 8. unless the Original can be pro­duced. Pag. 84. Not but that I know, that where there is question of the propagation of Catholick Religion, many Popes have been accustomed, in those later Ages, not to spare giving Encouragements by Bulls and Benedictions to those, even Subjects, I say, who are engaged in that Cause (though I approve not the practice or Doctrine whence it flows, when the question is of Subjects, but openly disavow both in that case, as very unlawful, unchristian, and uncatho­lick, even, I say, when the Subjects rebell against an He­retick or Infidel King.) But because I have read an original Bull, which a Friend of mine hath at this present in his cu­stody, from the same Pope, sent with his Minister Petrus Franciscus Scarampus, bearing date the 18th. of April 1643. which is but a few dayes above a Month before the date of this other Bull: and that Popes do not usually send Bulls so thick upon the same subject, into the same Countries. And to give the Reader all the light I can, I do here insert this Bull, which I have seen faithfully translated into English.

126. The Reader may observe this Bull preceded that other which this Gentleman pretends to have, and that in this the Pope makes it part of the Charge of his Minister to promove the Conservation of the Submission and Obedience, which is fit to be paid to the King. And therefore to make these two Bulls stand together (if there be any such Bull as this Gentleman speaks of) it must be said, That the Pope excited the Irish against those only, whom he well knew to be Enemies, both to the Religion, and to the King; For it were a strange way of paying Obedience to the King, to weaken his Party, and to root out those that fought for him.

127. But if our Person of Quality, notwithstanding this other Bull, and contradiction of it to his own, and my ra­tional Comment on both, will needs have his Bull to be a real one, and that indeed the Pope therein declared his mind throughly, declining the former, as to that part of Scarampus Charge, To promove the Conservation of that Obe­dience and Subjection, which is fit to be paid to the King; And that indeed his Holiness (that was then) truly intended (as much as lay in him) to sanctifie the Rebellion, or the Armes of the Irish against his Majesties Father of blessed me­mory, I say, that all this granted, makes nothing for him, no [...] against the Irish in general. For as much as it is very well [...] [...]hat it was never so much as heard of, either by the supreme Council, or general Assembly of the Confederates, [...] [...]ndeed by any at all of the Irish Catholicks, either Lay or Ecclesiastical, for any thing I could ever yet learn (and I call Go [...] t [...] witness that I speak truth.) And I am sure, had the Keepers of that Bull, if any such hath been, ever made it known to others, I should have heard of it some way. Ye [...] I w [...]ll not de [...], but it may be probable, there might [Page 83] have been some such Letters procured from his Holiness Ur­ban the 8th. and that those who were of the Cabal among the more disaffected Irish (for I know some such persons have been) might have had such Letters in their custody, wait­ing a fit time, when their Designs had been ripe, to pub­lish them, or make use of them at least amongst a disloyal Par­ty, or such, as would alienate the Crown, and warr a­gainst the Right English Interest. But I averr withall, that the keeping of it so secret for so many years, and in all the Revolutions of the Irish War, must be rather an argument of the aversion of the Catholick Confederates, or Irish Ca­tholicks in general, from the belief, or Doctrine, or pra­ctice of Indulgences in such a Case a theirs was, and in the sense of that Bull, understood by this Gentleman, than of any approbation of it. From which I profess my self to the World so averse, that I would have to my power opposed all three, or the practice, Doctrine, and belief of Pardons in that case and sense, and no less that of the hopes of a holy Martyrdom, as no part of the Catholick Faith professed by the greatest Nations in Christendom, which yet are in a most holy strict Communion with the Roman See.

128. But however this be, or any thing else I have hither­to alleged of my own judgement, or of my own knowledge of the judgement of others, in answer to this Person of Quality's arguments, grounded on his either true or forged Bull; and supposing the Reader expects not from me, that I should walk after this Gentleman in all the paths of those Comments he makes upon ill grounded Texts, not that I should deny him the privilege to feast his Party with those hideous words of general, if not universal massacring, and bloody Principles and Designs (but I write not to fill the ea [...]s Pag. 88. of men, but I write truth, and that will prevail) yet that I may endeavour to reclaim this Gentleman, if it be possi­ble, from that savage humour that makes him express his ma­lice with so much acrimony against Irish Catholicks, and shew him how absurdly he charges their Religion with dis­loyal Principles, and shew this by manifest Arguments which he cannot deny, and Arguments by this time known throughout England, Ireland, Scotland, nay in most King­doms [Page 84] of Europe, even at Rome it self, I give the Reader those printed Remonstrances, Declarations, Protestati­ons, &c. presented to his Majesty, in the original Wri­tings and Subscriptions.

129. Notwithstanding this Gentlemans rare faculty of commenting, I believe he will find little to be said upon this subject. And now we will descend to his Pa [...]allels up­on my example of Sauls Children, and the Gibeonites. Pag. 90.

130. Where, in the first place, I must tell our Person of Quality he hath very ill endeavoured to shew how far that is Pag. 90. parallel to the present Case of the Irish, and how far it is not, And I must tell him, that neither his paralleling, differen­cing, The Pa­rallel made, and the Differ­ences gi­ven, by the Person of Quality, in the Case or Exam­ple of Saul's Children, and the Gibeon­ites, pro­ved rid [...] ­lous, end unconclu­di [...]g, &c. or indeed imposing here on the Reader, and on holy Scripture too, can prove that I have unjustly applyed t [...]ose examples of Gods most righteous Judgements.

131. He might without any labour have seen in that Let­ter, which without any reason, he took so much pains to con­tradict, matter enough for a more pertinent, and more ample parallel. He might have observed the great King of Heaven and Earth, in a Parliament of Angels, bestowing the Land Canaan▪ on the Descendants of Abraham, for the Rebellion of the Inhabitants, and this gift again confirm­ed by him to them many hundred years after, even in that other great Parliament of Angels and Men, both which he held on Sina Mount, amidst lightnings and thunders, and those terrible voices, and the sound of Clarions mingled in that loud dinn; confirmed, I say, with so much solemnity, and even confirmed in his written Laws, given there by Moses to the Children of Israel; and yet confirmed in a special command, given them, never to make Peace or Truce with the old Inhabitants of Palestine, not even with [Page 93] the Amorhites by name. He might have remembred the vast expence of an Army of 600000 fighting men, employ­ed by him to get possession of them, even by force and blood, and by so many prodigious miracles and wonders, and Kings slain, and Monsters quell'd, and Cities over­thrown, and Kingdoms harraz'd and ruined for ever, to make way for his beloved People to enjoy the gift he had once made to them so solemnly. He might, after this, have considered, a Treaty of Peace entertained, nevertheless, with some of those very Nations, with the Gibeonites, I say, who were the Children of Amorheus, and a Peace con­cluded with them by Josuah, even God's own Lieutenant over his peculiar chosen people, and by his 12 great Cap­tains, and without the knowledge or consent of any other Assembly, Council, or Parliament of Israel, or of his great Army, or of the infinite number of other persons, young men, old men, and women, and children of Abraham and Jacobs posterity, who yet were all highly concerned in the effects of it, as being in part destructive to their rights, and lessening the gift which God made to them, and quitting their claim to so many great Cities, and the territories ad­joyning. He might further have remembred the delusion and circumvention were such, whereby those Gibeonites ob­tained the Peace, that they were not known, or thought by Josua, or by his Captains, to be Inhabitants of that Land, which God had bestowed on the Children of Israel: the tatter'd rags, and old Shooes and wine bottles rent, and the dry and mouldy bread of these crafty Inhabitants, and e­ven those manifest express verbal lyes, which the Book of Josuah relates, having been made use of by the fearful Gi­beonites to circumvent Josuah, till he concluded with them. He might likewise have remembered the advancing of the Camp within three dayes after this Treaty perfected, to the very Cities of the Gibeonites, to storm them, as being with­in the Lot of that Army of God, and such as they had been long before commanded by God himself, and in his Law, to Conquer, even by destroying utterly the Inhabitants, root and branch: And might remember the Countermand given by Josuah nevertheless, when he understood they belonged [Page 94] to those he made Peace with, and this Countermand given, and yet a further command, to observe strictly the Articles, yea notwithstanding the general murmurings of his Army and people against him: This great Commander of the Legions of God, who had in all his enterprizes the Spirit of God, judging it without any peradventure, to be the pleasure of this great King of Kings, as flowing from the Dictates of natural Reason, that such as, though by such arts, had un­disposed themselves to a War, and their own defence, and wholly relyed on his word, should be protected in all their rights, and their Articles observed most religiously to them, and that no commands of God in his positive Laws, though in general terms seemingly against it, did reach to this, or such a particular Case. Finally, our Person of Quality might have considered the Gibeonites not only interceded for four principal Cities in particular, and for the te [...]ritories adjoyning, but were even themselves and their Cities, pro­fessors of Idolatry, and Heathenisme, and worshipers of false Gods: as on the other side Josuah and his Army, and people, the propagators of the only true worship of the God of Heaven.

132. Our Person of Quality might have considered all this; which if he had, and then reflected on the Rebellion of Ireland, even of those very Septs, which without que­stion he accounts not only as pricks in his sides, and thorns in his eyes, but even as bad as the Canaanites, Hittites, &c. or the very worst of the Amorhites, and to be extirpated, as these were, out of the good Land flowing with milk and honey (but not the Land of Promise, I hope, to him alone, or to the Saints of his Calender) and after did reflect on a good King, his late Majesty so justly incensed by this provo­cation, and on his Parliament, and Laws of 17 Caroli, and on his donation and division therein of the Rebels Estates, and on the Army employed, and Captains made, and the great Commander of them in that Kingdom under his Maje­sty, and on the bloody, though just prosecution of that War, and Battails fought, and Legions vanquished, and the better part of the four Provinces of Ireland utterly de­stroyed; if he had then remembered the application made [Page 95] to his Majesty and his Lieutenant, and the Treaty admitted, and a Peace concluded even with those very Septs, before designed for destruction, even that very Peace of 48. I mean: if, I say, our Person of Quality had soberly consider­ed all this, and the circumstances, and the advantages, which are for me, certainly he might have seen matter e­nough for a more pertinent and more ample parallel; and might have seen it in the Kings, in the Subjects, in the Lands or Countries, in the Crimes, in the just offences, in the resolutions of punishment, in the Parliaments, in the Laws of Donation and Partition, in the Armies and Com­manders, in the sharp prosecutions of the War, in the Treaties nevertheless entertained with the Rebels, and Peaces concluded with them; in the murmuring complaints of Armies, and of inconsiderate People, and in their un­just endeavours to ruine those for ever, and specially four Cities, who relying on the words of their great Command­ers, unfurnished themselves of all means for defence. And he might have seen, that considering the powerfull, though most ungodly, endeavours, and wicked arguments used to perswade his most Sacred Majesty not to regard the perfor­mance of that Peace, P. W. cannot be justly said to have in that occasion unjustly applyed, or made use of the Judge­ments of God on Saul and his Children, for being mis-lead by such perfidious Counsels against the Laws of God, Nature, and Nations. Not that P. W. did wish, (as God knows he did not, but was and is from the bottom of his Soul far e­nough from any such wish) that in the conditional contin­gency of such non-performance, or of such a breach by his Majesty with those can justly pretend to the benefit of that Peace, the like, or indeed any other Judgements should light on himself, or on his Posterity; but that his Majesty might be minded of this example, as of an antidote against the poyson of such Viperous Counsellers, as our Person of Q [...]a­lity seems to be, and the rest of his Consorts, that with so much importunitie, so much falsity, and such other evil arguments (which I will not mention here) did then solli­cite, as they do still, for the perpetual destruction of all Irish Catholicks, that is to say, of more than a million of [Page 96] people; yea of a great, though as yet (through such arts, and the endeavours of this Gentleman, and his Associates) uncomfortable Nation and Kingdom to the generality of Ca­tholick Natives, and did and do sollicite for the ruining them so for ever, without any regard of their Articles, or of Publick Faith given them with so much solemnity by two great and good Kings, and upon considerations so valuable, as the World knows; Nay did, and do at this very present, sollicit this destruction, to involve even those of that Na­tion and Religion, who are confessedly innocent (of the Rebellion or prosecution of it, or of any breach of Arti­cles, or Peace) which yet is so well known, to be against the most known fundamental Laws of the Land, and against all Divine and Humane Laws, and against the very first Dictates, or even glimmers of Natural reason, that I need not dilate upon it any further.

133 But that I may not seem to decline observing the ad­vantages this Person of Quality proposed to himself in that Parallel he would needs frame for me, let us consider every Particular apart.

1. Josua (sayes he) knew not the Persons of those with whom he made that League; neither did the King know the hearts of those with whom he made that Peace. I would fain know of this Gentleman, whether Josua knew the hearts of the Gibeon­ites? Or whether any of both sides, that make Peace or League, whatever they be on Earth, the hearts of the o­ther? Pag. 90. The French of the Spaniards, or Spaniards of the French; the English of the Hollanders, or Hollanders of the English? And since he must answer not, then I demand, where is the advantage hence for him, that his Majesty knew not the hearts of those with whom he made that Peace? Or is the Peace therefore not obligatory? Indeed were the Persons of the Irish unknown to his Majesty, and his Lieutenant, who treated with them, and so unknown (I say) to both, as to think they had not been of the Irish Nation at all, but English or Scots inhabiting some other Tract of Land, and some other Cities than those they did; or had his Majesty, and Lieutenant, been so ignorant of those Irish Commissioners, that they had taken them at that [Page 97] time to be another People, or of another Country, not of that which was before, and through their Rebellion, for­feitable to the Crown, and by the Act of 17. Caroli, of the Parliament of Westminster (if that be of any force in Ireland) to be assured to, and shared amongst adventurers and Soul­diers; then might this Gentleman with some reason say the Articles obliged not; whereas there was an errour about the very Persons; than which nothing seems more against freedom of consent, as to that wherein the errour is, even that essential freedom, I mean, without which a man hath no free consent in any sense at all. And yet in this case my Parallel would be more plain in the extension of it; but his advantage no more, but rather less, as from thence, to any purpose he ought to drive at.

2. Those were Neighbours, nay lived amongst the Israelites, Pag 90. to whom Josuah promised Peace, though they said they were of a far Country. The Irish were Neighbours at least locally; nay they lived long amongst us, though at last they would not let us live amongst them: But indeed they were from a very far Country, even from Rome it self. Behold Reader two manifest impostures in a few lines. The Confederate Catholicks, when such, or come to be joyned in a body, or social de­fence, and have a general Assembly, which they had very soon after the first insurrection, were so far from denying English, Scots, or any other Protestant Subjects to his Majesty to live amongst them, that even in their printed model of Government, which I suppose this Gentleman hath, they invited all such as Pleased, to come, and live am [...]g [...] o [...] G [...] ­ [...]rn­ment. them. And their being from a very far Country, even as far as Rome, in this Gentlemans sense, or their being so from Rome, that they acknowledge any dependence from the Pope in Temporal affairs, or any that are not purely Spiritual, or such a dependence, as cannot stand with a most Christian, most Loyal, and indispensable Allegiance by any on Earth, to his Sacred Majesty King Charles the [...]. of England, Ireland and Scotland, the former Declarations, Protestations, and their famous opposition of the Lord N [...]n­cio, and of his Excommunications and Interdicts in t [...]e Case of the Cessation with the then Baron, now Ea [...]l of In­chiquin, [Page 98] and the Book printed at Kilkeny, and subscribed by David Osoriensis, and approved by Thomas Midensis, and subscribed and approved by the rest of the Divines con­voked to that purpose, entituled, Quaeries concerning the lawfulness of the present Cessation, &c. (whereof P. W. is known, and confesses himself to have been the Author) manifestly convince they are not. Yet I confess most free­ly and truly, they are, as to their Religion, from a Coun­try, as farr as Rome, because they received it thence, and from Countries too, in that, as farr as Constantinople, An­tioch, Alexandria, or Hierusalem, as all the People of England have had theirs (even from Rome I say) for a 1000. years, and amongst them a hundred millions of peo­ple, that have been all their lives, as unalterably loyal to their Princes, as any people could be, and more loyal with­out comparison, than I doubt this Person of Quality can pre­tend himself to be, or at least to have been sometime in his life past.

But suppose, that notwithstanding their being Neigh­bours at least locally, and their living long with this Person of Quality, and amongst those he makes his own, they have, after a War begun, not suffered Protestants live a­mong them; and suppose likewise they had been all that while, in his meaning, from a Country as farr as Rome it self, what will he conclude? Were they farther off in judgement than the Gibeonites from Israel? Or would the Gibeonites more endure, if they could help it, the Israel­ites to live with them? Or whatever may be said to this, or whatever the carriage of the Irish was to the English, or Protestants, or their affections too, or dependence from Rome in temporal things, or such as could not stand with their true Allegiance to their King, before the Peace, mu [...]t it have been so after? Or did not the Articles of Peace which themselves freely concluded, tye them to a contrary resolution? As the League did the Gibeonites from that alie­dation they had before? Or did the Gibeonites really per­form? And could not, nay did not the Generality, or the Representative of the Irish likewise? I have manifestly pro­ [...]d they did so, whatever this Gentleman imposes on them: [Page 99] And however, through the contradiction of some, and the fatal division of all amongst themselves, their endeavours, either for his Majesty, or themselves, proved unsuccessful, as to the great end was driven at, and expected from them. But if the want of success be made use of to asperse them, must not the Protestant Caval [...]ers lye under the like aspersi­on? Must not all the just men that ever have been in the World, and have been withall unfortunate, suffer like­wise?

Was the Poets answer to those that measured the justice of endeavours by success.

And if notwithstanding all this, our Person of Quality will insist on the being of the Irish Papists from Rome, I would fain know what Country Geneva is in? Or cannot this Person of Quality's most religious Brethren Presbyters, either Scots, Irish, or English, be said to be as truly from Geneva, as the Papists from Rome? And whether of both these beings, especially considering that sense the Irish Pa­pists own theirs, must be most dangerous to the King, or e­ven to Kingship it self? And I am sure it matters not, that Rome be farther off in Place, if Geneva be farther in Princi­ples, that relate to the Royal Person, Dignity, and Crown, and to the Obedience and Faith of Subjects to his Majesty.

3. Those deluded Jos [...]ah into that League, and said they were his Servants when they were his Enemies. The Irish Papists Pag. 91. did also delude the King into that Peace, and said they were Subjects, when indeed they were Rebels. But how can it [...]e true, that the Parallel holds in this delusion, which yet this Gentleman so confidently averrs immediately after, where he hath those words, Thus far the Parallel holds. Did not Pag. 91. my Lord Lieutenant, who in behalf of his Majesty conclu­ded that Peace, know whether the Irish, that on the other side concluded it, were Subjects, or indeed Re [...]els? Did not his Grace, nay did not his Majesty, both by his Grace, and by many other ways, abundantly know, for so many years they warred, and treated before the Peace of 48. all [Page 100] the several humours, inclinations, intrigues, interests, af­fections, and aversions of the several known parties, where­of the Confederates were composed? Or was the diffe­rence with the Nuncio at that time unknown to his Majesty? Or the Civil war that succeeded in the very bowels of the Confederates, where the Supreme Council, and their ad­herents (who were indeed the far more considerable part) and even the generality of the Confe [...]erates, upon con­junction with the Lord of Inchiquin, in order to reduce themselves and the whole Kingdom to submit throughly to, and o [...]ey his Majesty, and the Lord Lieutenant, pursued with fire and sword, and all other acts of open hostility, e­ven fights and sieges, those refractory Confederates, that under Owen ô Neill, and in conjunction with him, opposed their very loyal designes? Or could his Majesty, or my Lord Lieutenant, but know the danger they saw manifest­ly, that a Party would still, as long as they could, oppose all conditions of Peace, and endeavour to frustrate both his Majesties designs, and that of the Supreme Council too and General Assembly, and of those Irish Commissioners from both, and from the people they represented in concluding that Peace? Or did these Commissioners assure, or the Ar­ticles they concluded on, warrant for them that Owen O Neils party would submit, or would drive at the main de­sign of his Majesty? All which Queries must be answered so for my advantage, that this Gentleman will find none at all to justifie any delusion of the part of the Irish Catholiques that concluded this Peace, not although I granted him that the Irish Papists did say they were Subjects, when indeed they were Reb [...]ll; For yet there could be no delusion, since they were known to be in Armes, and professed their resolution not to lay them down without Articles; and yet they had spoken a known truth, saying, They were Subjects, since their Birth, and the Laws made them still remain Subjects, even when they were most disobedient and refractory. And they were not only Subjects, but loyal obedient Subjects too, when they had concluded those Articles, and really devested themselves of that power, whereof they made use t [...]ll then to defend themselves, or offend others, and when [Page 101] his Majesties Lieutenant, the then Marquess of Ormond, and his Majesty himself, had assented to those Articles, and accordingly governed the Irish Catholicks, and no more accounted them Rebells, but owned them indeed, and in-very clear express terms (both in the Articles themselves, immediately after the Act of Recognition, and in the Procla­mation prefixed unto them, and in a thousand other in­stances) as His Majesties Roman Catholick Subjects of Ire­land, Articles of P [...]ce, Pag. 6. or 1. and Pag. 3. and His loyal and dutiful Subjects. But this Gentle­man, not forgetting, as it seems, the greater guilt of o­thers, whom he wished better than he did the Irish, and whom yet he knew to have been farr more hainously, and more obstinately guilty of both particulars charged here on these, he would be sure to cry Whore first, and would be sure by no means to use the language of his Majesty, or of the Lord Lieutenant.

134. Having done with his Parallel, the Reader may next consider, how well this Gentleman will now shew, as he promises, in what, and how much, that Scripture Example of mine differs from the Case it was applyed unto in my Letter.

1. The Gibeonites deluded Joshua into a Peace; but the Irish Pag. 91. Papists (to use his sacred Majesties own words) forced, com­pelled, necessitated him into Cessations and Peaces. Had this been true, there had indeed appeared some difference, though none material to his purpose. But as it is manifest, that no force, compulsion, necessity, put on his Majesty, by whomsoever, [...], hath been such as deprived him of that freedom was sufficient to render his Articles with the Ca­tholicks of Ireland binding as to his Majesty, and binding e­ven before God and Man, in order to such as have not for­feited them (whereon I said enough before) and that therefore it is impertinent for any material difference, or to this Gentleman's purpose, whether I reject or admit his Charge here, being it cannot be denied, that the delusion whereof the Gibeonites made use, imposed a farr greater, and even an intrinsick force, compulsion, or necessity on Joshua, or such as deprived of essential freedom, and all kind of consent, as to these Gibeonites, or to any had been [Page 102] within the Lot appointed in the Law for his People, which yet I have shewed the force, compulsion, or necessity, impo­sed on his Majesty (by whomsoever) to conclude any of those Cessations or Peaces with the Irish, cannot be said to have imposed: So it is no less manifest, this Gentleman im­poses on his Majesty that which he shall never prove, or that his Majesty should have said, that the Irish Papists forced, compelled, necessitated, him into Cessations and Peaces. Whereas indeed, if we make any true construction of his Majesties words in his Declaration, whence only this Gen­tleman must pretend his ground, for an assertion so false, it must be obvious, even to the most common understanding, that his Majesty sayes, that force, compulsion, necessity, for concluding a Peace with the Irish, were imposed upon him by those that erected that odious Court for taking away the life of his dear Father, as I have before demonstrated, by giving and granting at large his Majesties very words.

2. The Gibeon tes were strangers, but the Irish Papists were (at least ought to have been) Subjects. All true; but nothing Pag. 91. to his purpose. Articles made by a King with his Subjects in Armes, bind, even by the Law of Nations, even be­fore they are confirmed in Parliament, else what could the Barons plead before a Parliament sate, if Magna Charta did not bind the King that gave it? What so many other agree­ments in the world, as I have before said? Or how should Kings, or their Rebellious Subjects, when a Parliament can not be held without them, ever come to an attonement? And surely this very Gentleman would plead for his life, and his estate too (since he can now to possess other mens) the Letters from Breda, even before the Act of Indempnity was passed: and when he was in Armes against the King, (as I suppose he was sometimes) had he yielded in some ex­tremity upon Articles of War, wherein he had conditioned for life, liberty, and estate, for himself and his party, he would plead these Articles, if he saw any danger of his or their estates, and even plead them, before such Articles were confirmed by a Parliament; nay plead them, I say, even in case his own estate and all those belonging to his party, had been formerly sold or bestowed by the King on Adven­turers [Page 103] in Parliament. And yet both he and his party would be in that case, by the Laws and Conditions of his and their Birth, Subjects. Whether he or they be so by inclination, or longer at least than the loaves will hold, I know not cer­tainly; though I hope better of them all, than this Person of Quality seems to do of me or my Countrymen.

3. The Gibeonites never broke those conditions granted to Pag. 91. them, though by those conditions they were in effect Slaves; but the Irish Papists broke, yea often, if not alwayes, theirs, though after an unparalleld Rebellion they were in effect made Lords of all the Land, even the bloody Stage upon which they had acted their guilt. Lest this Gentleman should have in­tended it as material to say, that the Gibeonites were in effect Slaves, I must tell the Reader, these Gibeonites enjoyed peaceably, without fear, or danger, when their Articles had been once published and debated, not their lives only, nor their liberty alone, but life and liberty, and houses, and goods, and lands, and Cities, and all they did pretend either of religious or civil right. And that their slavery was no other than to provide Water and Wood for the Sacrifi­ces and publick House of the God of Heaven. And there­fore any man will think they had a great deal of reason never to break those conditions granted. And albeit I think there was as little reason for any Irish Catholick to break the conditions given them, especially in that Peace of 48. and that I know nevertheless some, if not many, have; yet I do (and will constantly, till I be convinced with other arguments, than this answerer gives, which I be­lieve I shall never be) always deny the universality, gene­rality, or indefiniteness of this proposition, The Irish Pa­pists broke, yea often, if not always, theirs, in that sense at least he must have had, or intended to import, if he would speak to any purpose; that is, in relation to the Peace of 48. in which meaning, as I have before sufficiently declared, by relating this Gentleman's proofs, and otherwise, the falsity of this assertion: so I now again briefly averr, that neither the universality, or generality, nor greater part, nor ru­ling power; nor the formal or virtual representatives of the Irish Papists, broke as much as once that Peace: so far were [Page 104] they from brcaking often, if not alwayes the conditions of it. And if none of all these did, though confessedly some of the Irish did, or the lesser, or even a great, or considerable part of them (if he will have it so) did, what is that to the Universality, or Generality at least, which that indefinite charge of his imports? or what indeed, to any other Irish Catholick (to conclude them) but the very individuals that did so? He might as well, and as truly have said, that the Protestants of England, or English Nation were against the King, and for Cromwel, or the Rump Parliament; when both or either did most cruelly Tyranize: For not only some of those Protestants, or of that Nation, but even so great and considerable a party were so; nay, which is more, both the representing and ruling power, which the Pro­testants, or Nation of England were known at that time to own, or at least, which in effect, and even with all for­malities represented and ruled them (whether by force and coaction, or not, it matters not here) without any contra­diction were so. Whence it is that I may advance a little further yet, and may tell this Gentleman, that can be no refuge for him, if he should say, that he can maintain per­adventure, some appearance of Truth in some part, at least of this proposition, that the Irish Papists broke, yea often, if not alwayes, theirs: or, (which is the thing I mean) that he can maintain that latitude, universality, generality, or inde­finiteness, in relation at least to some one breach, and some one Peace, viz. that of 46. For I can averr confidently, that all his arguments to prove this, will by a manifest sequel of reason, prove, that the Protestants or Nation of England, broke all their ties of Duty, and Allegiance, and Faith to his late Majesty, and his lawfull Successor (whom God, of his mercy, cont [...]n [...]e long and happi [...]y, a [...]d g [...]oriously sitting on his Fathers Throne, and his Posterity to the Worlds end) I confess that Peace was rejected, and most perfidiously, scandalously, and fatally too, rejected; but I will ever say, nevertheless, it was rejected by a disobedient Army, by some (in that) ungodly Clergy men, and a few other con­trivers of mischief, who by their numbers, proceedings, hy­pocrisie, force, craft, &c. and by their breach of their own [Page 105] Oath of Association, and by their faithfulness to their own acknowledged supreme Governours of the Confederacy, the Council, and general Assembly, and by making them­selves by such arts the prevailing party amongst the Irish Catholicks, at that very nick of time when the Peace of 46. was proclamed in Dublin & Kilkenny, not only may be said to have had in many things a perfect resemblance unto the Ja­nizaries of England, and their Adherents there in the Par­liament, and Council, and amongst the Clergy and Laity in general, but even to have had the same proportion to the Confederate Catholicks in general, which those English Mamalukes, and their partakers, had to the loyal Prote­stants, and mournful (at that time) Nation of England. To demonstrate which, I shall give more evident proofs, if it shall, and when it shall be necessary, as now it is not in answer to this Gentleman's present Design, or Book, than he shall be able to give satisfactory answers. And shall at this time content my self with telling the Reader, that if the (then Donogh) Lord Viscount of Muskry (now Earl of Clancarthy) Edmond Lord Viscount Montgarrett, Wal­ter Bagnell Esquire, Sir Robert Talbott Baronet, Thomas Tyrell Esquire, Richard Beallings Esquire, Gerott Fennel Esquire, Sir Lucas Dillon Knight, Jeoffry Brown Esquire, Sir Pierce Crosby Knight, Sir Richard Blake, and other Members of the supreme Council, and Commissioners, who concluded that Peace, and published it at Kilkenny, and in pursuance thereof, received there the Lord Lieutenant with all due respects and demonstrations of hearty joy and loyalty, their imprisonments soon after, both there, at Wexford, and other places, and their other sufferings then, by, and under their lately before fellow-Confederates, and the power or authority by which they were so imprisoned, and under which they so much suffered, & the illegal, violent, forcible usurpation of it, even▪ I say, against the Laws of the Confederacy, and Oath of Association, and without any con­sent, or even advice, or requisition, but plainly against the known will and inclinations of the generality of the Confederates, when the Lord Nuncio, and two or three more, by the countenance and terrour of armed Legions [Page 106] beeking them, made a new supreme Council, and himself President of it, and joyned Council and Congregation to­gether, and immediately after hurried on two Armies, in an evil hour, to besiege the Lord Lieutenant at Dublin, and harass'd the Country in their march, und being disap­pointed by the justice of God towards them, and favour of Heaven to the Loyal Party, and to the general [...]y, even of the Confederatss, returned in great displeasure and rage, and through despair, convoked an Assembly, which other­wise he was never like to do, but of such men where they could possibly, as were known to be most averse from all thoughts of Peace, and being sate, overawed them, and took away all freedom from them, however they were composed, and even forced them by threats of Excom­munications, and power of that Army (near the Town) whereof they were sure for such designes, to reject the Peace, even after the Commissioners, who concluded it, were cleared upon too manifest evidence to have proceeded according to their instructions to a tittle, and by a full Au­thority given them by the precedent General, and free As­sembly of the Nation: I say, that if all these proceedings be considered, and particularly the force that lay then upon all the Provinces, and Quarters, and People that should o­therwise have freedom of Election to Assemblies, and Suf­frages in them, and that would, in case of such due free­dom, unquestionably vote for a perfect submission to that Peace, the resemblance and proportion above given will appear manifestly to all indifferent men, that have but even a very ordinary knowledge of the Irish Nation, and affairs since 41. and of the difference of interests among that Peo­ple these 500. years past, since the first English Conquest under Henry 2. and consequently it will appear, that our Person of Quality will find himself obliged either to main­tain a truth in this very false assertion (which yet I believe he will not dare) The Protestants and Nation of England were guilty of the sacrilegious breach with Charles the 1. which through so many wiles brought him at last to the Scaffold: Or to confess, that the Irish Catholicks, or Nation of Ireland, cannot be said to be guilty, even of that one persidious [Page 107] breach of the Articles of 46. much less guilty of having often, if not always, broke the Conditions, either of that, or any other. And yet I alwayes grant him what I know to be true, and am right sorry to know, that even some thousands have been guilty of that horrible breach in 46. Nay grant moreover, all my Conscience, or knowledge, or (which is the same thing to me) all that the truth it self will permit me to grant him, that some few Persons of Quality, and some Regiments, and some Towns too of the Irish Catholicks, have often, if not alwayes broke the Conditions, either of the first, or last Peace, or of both, but withall say, that some Persons of Quality, and some Regiments of England (and Scotland both) and some Towns too, broke their Allegiance and Faith, and often too, if not alwayes, in a farr more per­nicious and horrible nature, with his late and present Ma­jesty. And that my Answerer will not therefore charge their Crimes on the Protestants, or Nation of England, or on the universality, generality, or greater part of them, which yet such an indefinite expression had he used it must do.

135. But however this be, or any thing else I have said in relation to that Peace of 46, it can neither make nor marr his Objections or my Answers on the subject of the last Peace, or that of 48. which is that only where on our con­test is, and must be. Neither can any thing said here be drawn to a consequence that I would recall, or decline what I have confessed in my Letter of the Judgements of God, most justly pursuing the Irish Nation in general for the breach of publick Faith so notorious and scandalous in that of 46. albeit the Nation in general be not guilty of it. We know the very Army of God hath been defeated for the Judges, Chap. 7. V 4. a [...]d 5. sin even of one man alone, as we find in the case of Achan at Ai, and whole Nations, and great Kingdoms, and flou­rishing Empires most exemplarly punished, and by conquest, and slavery and subjection to a forein power for the sins of the lesser part of the people, and sometimes for those of a very few; and Innocents too involved in the common cala­mity, but involved justly by him who is above all Laws, by his Soveraign Dominion over all Creatures, and by that privilege which is incommunicable to any earthly Judge or [Page 108] King, doing Justice in a legal way, where he may discrimi­nate persons.

136. To that which our Person of Quality adds here, to end his third difference, that the Irish after, an unparalleld Rebellion were in effect made Lords of all Ireland, even the bloo­dy Pag. 91. stage upon which they had acted their guilt, I say that in a few words are two manifest untruths, and one superfluous impertinent exaggeration, so often repeated; and one too, which may be returned on himself, and those he pleads for, not only with so many wicked Maxims, and sinfull advices, but with so many known falsities and impertinencies.

137. Though I detest all kind of Rebellion against law­full power, as being condemned by the Laws of God and Nature, yet I can tell this Gentleman, that Rebellion of Ireland was not only parallel'd, but surpassed, and surpassed too in a thousand degrees by many Rebellions of other Countries, even amongst Christians. For not to speak of that of Catalonia in our own days, the Sicilian Vespers, and the Butchery of Suisses, and the murther of the Danes in England, and a hundred others which we read in History, did surpass it, and surpass it so. And all those did that by design, and in effect subverted the very fundamentals of all Government, Civil and Religious. And I am sure if none else did, that of this Gentlemans Clients, and their parta­kers must have done so, who made their Rebellion the most unparallel'd indeed, by the most execrable Parricide that ever was; not to mention so many other adjuncts to render it in­comparably worse than that of the Irish, the cruel butchery of so many thousand subjects, the perpetual ruine of so ma­ny millions of innocent people in the three Nations, and the subversion, in part executed, and for the rest intended of all the very fundamentals of the Commonwealth, both Temporal and Ecclestical; yea of all Religion, and of all propriety and birth-right whatsoever.

And though I acknowledge (and hope all Irish Catholicks do) his Majesties very gracious Concessions and favours in the Articles of 48. Yet I must tell this Gentleman those ve­ry Articles no less manifestly convince of untruth what he says here, that by them, or otherwise, the Irish were in ef­fect Pag. 9 [Page 109] made Lords of all Ireland, then it is apparent out of the very Articles (and no man of reason would believe other­wise, though he never had read them, and yet seen this Gentlemans assertion to the contrary) they were not such as forced from his Majesty all the Regalia, both Ecclesiasti­cal and Temporal; nay I say now, nor any essential or in­tegral part of the Regalia; albeit this Gentleman affirms in another they were; and I have already proved they were not. And if this be true, my answer to his O [...]jection, con­cerning the Regalia, as it is evidently such, without any question or contradiction, but that very untrue and very irra­tional one of this Person of Quality; how can it be true, that the Irish were in effect by these Articles made Lords of all Ireland? (For to have been made otherwise, he doth not dispute, as there is no ground for any such dispute) Nay since the Irish Catholicks, by these Articles, or otherwise, were not made Lords, or did not pretend the Lordship, Right, Possession, or Use of any Protestants Goods, Lands, Houses, Estates, &c. either English, Scots, Welsh, Irish, or of any other Nation, having right by his Majesties Laws, or pretending such to live in Ireland, how could they, in effect, be made Lords of all Ireland? So farr they were from any such thing, that they excluded not any, nor were made capable to exclude any at all, from any kind of Rights, either Civil or Religious; the very possession of such Churches, as they then held in their own quarters, at the making of that Peace, not being assured them otherwise by Articles of Peace, Pag. 8. Art. 1. those Articles, than that they should be permitted, or should not be disturbed from that possession, till a Parliament were convened.

As for his exaggerating repetition of the bloody Stage up­on which they had acted their guilt, I am sure he may be up­on Pag. 91. certain grounds, and particular instances, answered:

1. by charging those who are his white boyes with having made that Stage more bloody, and as inhumanly too; nay yet far more than those very Irish miscreants of the rascal multi­tude have, that acted their guilt even of so barbarous mur­thers, either precedently, concomitantly, or subsequent­ly (however this Gentleman will have it) upon their fellow [Page 110] Subjects of the Protestant Religion in that Country: Where­of if he will see some particulars, I refer him to R. S. in his Book printed at London, 1662. intituled, A Collection of some of the Murthers and Massacres committed on the Irish in Ireland, since the 23. of October, 1641.

2. By denying his supposition of the Irish Nation, or Ca­tholicks of Ireland, or of their known Representatives (the Supreme Council, or General Assembly, or Commissio­ners that concluded that Peace) or of the generality, nay of any considerable party of the people, after at any time confederated with the rest, or that submitted to that Peace, or now desire the benefit of it, to have so acted their guilt upon that Stage, as to be guilty of the bloodiness of it by any barbarous or inhumane Crimes of Murther (which I know this Gentleman aims at in this exaggerating repetition) For if he mean any thing else, or that of the breach, it is answered already. And that he may see I give him not a bare denyal for an answer, I refer him to the 18 Article of that Peace of 48. where, in the 21 Page of these Articles, printed, he may read the publick desires of that whole Na­tion: For there he will find it, provided (by them) that such barbarous and inhumane crimes as shall be particularized Articles of Peace in 48. Pag. 21. and agreed upon by the said Lord Lieutenant, and the said Tho­mas Lord Viscount Dillon of Costilloe, Lord President of Con­naght, Donogh, Lord Viscount Muskery, Francis Lord Ba­ron of Athenry, Alexander M. Domel Esquire, Sir Lucas Dillon Knight, Sir Nicholas Plunket Knight, Sir Richard Barnewall Baronet, Jeffrey Brown, Donagh O Callaghan, Tirlagh O Neile, Miles Relly, and Gerrald Fennel Esquire, or any seven or more of them, as to the actors and procurers thereof, be left to be tryed and adjudged by such indifferent Commissioners, as shall be agreed upon by the said Lord Lieu­tenant, and the said Thomas Lord Viscount Dillon of Costil­loe, &c. or any seven or more of them, and that the power of the said Commissioners shall continue only for two years next en­suing after the date of their Commission, &c. And I refer him (besides) to the several Petitions of late exhibited by Sir Robert Talbott Baronet, and Colo [...]e [...] Gerro [...]t Moore, and others in behalf of their Countrymen to his Majesty at Lon­don, [Page 111] when a Committee of the Council sate there, or the whole Council did upon the debate betwixt the Convention Commissioners first, and after these betwixt the present Parliament of Dublins Commissioners of one side, and those of the Irish Catholicks of the other, at several times; And referr him likewise to some other Papers, then printed at London, in answer to some writings published or given by those of the Convention against the said Catholicks, and on this Subject. In which Petitions and printed Papers, as likewise in so many other publick and private addresses at both times, the request of the Catholick Irish Nobility and Gentry there, was very urgent in behalf of themselves and the whole Nation of their party, that all murthers on both sides, might be without any exception tryed, and punished according to Law.

139. Now wherefore the publick and known Represen­tatives of the Confederates, the general Assembly of the whole Nation, which consisted of their Lords Spiritual and Temporal, Knights of Shires, and Burgesses of Corporati­ons, did provide so for the punishment of all barbarous and inhumane Crimes committed by any of their own sides; and the Commissioners, Nobility, and Gentry at London, since his Majesties Restauration, did petition and desire, that all murthers of both sides may be exempted from any pardon, or out of any general Act of Oblivion and Indempnity, and that this Gentleman's Friends, for whom he pleads, would not assent to this, there is no man of reason but un­derstands it was therefore because the Irish Nation, who concluded and submitted to that Peace, were not guilty of the bloodiness of that Stage, by barbarous or inhumane Crimes or by Murthers, notwithstanding any other guilt that might be justly charg'd upon them: And that those who charge them so exorbitantly with such, found themselves, or those of their Party, more truly chargeable with more numerous, and more barbarous, and more inhumane Crimes and Mur­thers, which in a superlative degree blooded that very Stage too of Ireland, whereon they had acted, and yet but p [...]rtly, their own proper guilt: For many of them did likewise partly act their guilt, also, on that of Great Britain, even [Page 112] the most horrid guilt imaginable, by the most bloody, and most execrable Murther (and in the most unheard of, and most hideous manner) of the best and most innocent of Kings.

4. But his 4th. and last difference (in the Cases) remains Pag. 91. as yet. Saul's Children were not executed (sayes he) for their Father his having made the Gibeonites hewers of wood, and drawers of water (the utmost that the Protestants desire e­ven to the worst principled of the Irish Papists) but for killing the Gibeonites after they were peaceably slaves; So that those Judgements P. W. seems to threaten his Majesty with, if they have not the Articles of 1648. made good, he and his Country­men have only reason to fear; for his Majesty kept them, and they have broke them. The Man in the dark in England was once upon thoughts of relying on this difference; but im­mediately after, finding the unsignificancy of that evasion, and his own weakness therein, or rather indeed the clear­ness, and evidence, and applicableness of my Example to the purpose I drove, and of all passages of holy Scripture made use of by me in my Letter, changed his resolution, and confessed in plain terms, he would not answer me at this weapon: Adding too some prophane expressions, that not unsignificantly imported he would not have the Saints go­verned by the Oracles of God, or believe in them, but when they made for gaining or preserving to them the good things of the Earth. And that so manifest confession of his made me slight in my Reply to his Irish Colours displayed, the transient reflection he made on the Gibeonites being made hewers of wood, and drawers of water.

140. But for as much as a Person of Quality professedly insists upon it, as his very last refuge, to shew at least some kind of difference that might seem not immaterial, I will not slight his Animadversions on this subject, but take the pains to prove them as unfortunate, as any of those he hath given all along, either in his Parallel or difference of both Cases, or indeed in any other passage of his Book since he turned Divine. I must therfore let the Reader know, this Gen­tleman hath not yet declined his customary arts, of endea­vouring to impose on the simplicity of some, and careless [Page 113] observation of others, in running over his lines, not eve [...] to impose (as much as in him lyes) on holy Scripture in this very passage. For I demand of himself, whether he would not have the Reader understand him here, as if King Saul had been the man, that made the Gibeonites hewers of wood, and drawers of water? And this to have been a slave­ry and oppression so grievous, as it might be answerable to that he would perswade his Majesty to lay on the Irish, by depriving them for ever of their Estates, of their Cities, Corporations, Villages, Houses, Lands, of all their Li­berties, either Civil or Religious? And to have been more­over against the Articles of the League made with Joshua? And besides that, King Sauls Children were executed only for their Fathers killing of those Gibeonites? And the three years mortal Famine on the twelve Tribes of Israel was for that killing alone? And that neither this Famine, nor that Execution, have been, even in any part, for any of those other oppressions the Gibeonites suffered from Saul! And further yet, that no kind of unjust oppressions of these peaceable Slaves, would have had provoked the wrath of God in any wise against Saul, or his Children, or the People, had he abstained only from that of killing? And lastly, that all that Vengeance upon their Tribes, aad the seven Child­ren of Saul, had no relation to the breach of Arricles, or of the League formerly made with the Gibeonites, and should have been either deserved by, or inflicted for the cruelty of Saul to these poor people, had they never made by themselves, or by their Predecessors before them, any kind of League with the Israelites? If our Person of Qua­lity shall answer, his meaning was not to abuse the Reader so, or to perswade him to any of those Particulars, I demand of him then, what will his acute Animadversion signifie, to prove any difference here, that is not very immaterial? Would it not be (think you Reader) an excellent Ratio­cination if this Gentleman discoursed thus in plain terms. Saul's Children were not executed, nor the twelve Tribes of Israel punished with a grievous Famine of three years, because the Gibeonites had been continued by Saul, hewers of wood, and drawers of Water, unto the House of the Lord, [Page 114] as they had been many hundreds of years before, and had been so without any injury or breach of their first Articles, or any farther slavery imposed upon them; but Saul's Child­ren were executed, and the twelve Tribes punished so, because that King did kill some of them, and did not simply kill them, but killed them against Articles, and against Ar­ticles sworn unto by invocation of the God of Israel; and did not only kill some of them against Articles so confirmed, but attempted to destroy all their Countrymen for ever, and consequently brought on such as did survive all those o­ther miseries and oppressions, which must have attended his cruel attempt, to deprive them, & their Wives, and Children, and all their Nation, of their Cities, of their Corporations, of their Houses, of their Lands, of all their Liberties Reli­gious and Civil, and by consequence of their Lives too, or certainly to bring evills on them worse than death. There­fore his Majesty needs not fear the application of that Ex­ample, or of that Judgement of God on the House of Saul, or of any part of it, or the like, or of any proportionable to the publick and horrid sin of the notorious breach of Ar­ticles, and even the breach of them, by destroying not four Cities, nor four Corporations alone, but a hundred, and twenty or thirty thousand Proprietors, and a million of Relations depending of them; yea a whole and great Nati­on, by depriving them all for ever of all their Towns, Vil­lages, Houses, Lands, Liberties, both Religious and Civil, and (I say) by depriving them thus against the ex­press letter and sense of Articles of Peace, and of such Ar­ticles too, as they had, for their parts, punctually kept; provided only, that his Majesty killed not the Gibeonites, by shedding their blood, though he make them groan perpetu­ally under oppressions more unsupportable to free-born Sub­jects than death it self.

141. Think you not (Reader) this would be a most excellent Retiocination in plain terms? That is, a very false imperti­nent Conclusion, derived without any Cause, from very true, and very pertinent Premisses? And yet behold that which our Person of Quality, our acute Logician, and very Christian Divine must own, as contained in his fourth [Page 115] Difference, if he do not own that first meaning I gave, and all the particulars of it above by me explained, as that in­deed which to inferr his wicked Conclusion, must have been virtually contained in so few lines of his fourth Dif­ference.

142. But lest our Person of Quality be more troubled, that he should be thought to have committed an Errour a­gainst the Topicks of Aristotle, and Rules which Logick teaches to guide Argumentations, than he could be known to have, either ignorantly or willfully, imposed on holy Scripture, and no less wickedly for such a purpose, than ungroundedly have commented on it, I will save you, Reader, some pains, by examining here every of those Particulars, which he must of necessity insist upon, to main­tain that meaning, or any rational inference from such pre­misses, or material difference in the cases.

143. And to begin with that of Saul his having made the Gibeonites hewers of wood, and drawers of water, I shall give you no further trouble, than to read the ninth Chapter of the Book of Joshua, where you shall find that convinced of Joshua 9 v. 23. manifest imposture. For the one and twentieth, and three and twentieth Verse of that Chapter, tell plainly, it was Joshua himself, and the Princes and People with him (long before Saul's dayes, God wot, even some hundreds of years) that made the Predecessors of those Gibeonites, and Posterity after them for ever, and consequently those in Saul's time, hewers of wood, and drawers of water, for the House of my God, sayes Joshua himself.

144. That this condition imposed on the Gibeonites by Joshua, was neither against Articles, nor at all an oppressi­on so grievous as to be answerable in any kind to those mer­ciless oppressions this Gentleman would press his Majesty to lay for ever on the Catholick Irish, cannot be denied. Not that I mean to say, the Articles did not oblige Joshua before he confirmed them, after true knowledge had of the Coun­try of the People, with whom he made that League, (though I might, upon very good grounds, deny, there was, before then, any obligation on him arising from that League, as barely such, or as abstracting from other circumstances of [Page 116] natural equity, or of some special revelation of Gods plea­sure to confirm it: whereas, relying thereon, the Gibeo­nites had unfurnished themselves of all defence, and made themselves new enemies of all their old friends, the adjoyn­ing Kings) but because the slavery imposed was not against Articles, or the nature of a league made with Strangers be­come Subjects, or even against the Liberties of natural Sub­jects, especially in that Commonwealth, where viler mini­steries imposed for the House of God, were accounted no burden, nor oppression: and because the Gibeonites not­withstanding their slavery, which this Gentleman of pur­pose, would heighten to abuse the Reader with that of Hewers of Wood, and Drawers of Water, enjoyed their Goods, their Houses, and their Villages, and their Lands, and their Ter­ritories, and their mighty Cities, whereof the tenth Chap­ter Joshua c. 10. v. 2. of Joshua tells that Gabaa was a Royal one. Which kind of slavery I dare promise the Catholicks of Ireland would freely undergoe, to serve the Tabernacle of God, if our Person of Quality and his friends would be content, that his Majesty should let them enjoy withall the other ad­vantages of their Peace, as the Gibeonites did of theirs.

145. Concerning the particular of Saul's Children to have been executed only for killing the Gibeonites, I be­lieve the testimony of the very executioners, those other Gibeonites themselves, who escaped the designs and fury of Saul, nay beyond exception, disprove him, and prove ma­nifestly this truth, that Saul's Children were not executed by them for his only killing of their brethren, but for his other oppressions also, and for his farther designs against all their Countrymen universally: Virum qui attrivit nos, & oppressit iniquè, ita delere debemus, ut ne unus quidem residu­us sit de stirpeillius in cunctis finibus Israel. Dentur nobis sep­tem viri de filiis ejus, ut crucifigamus eos Domino in Gabaa. Saul, quondam electi Domini. The man that consumed u [...], 1 Samu­el, 2. Chap. 5, and 6. Verse. and that devised against us, that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the Coasts of Israel, let 7. men of his Son [...] be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, whom the Lord did chuse, are the very words of the Gibeonites that executed them, and witness this [Page 117] truth in the one and twentieth Chapter of the second Book of Kings (as the Title and Order of these Books are in the vulgar Edition) Without question these men that speak here, were then alive, or not killed when they spake thus. And surely the plundering of their Goods, and the beating them out of their Cities, Houses, and Lands, the Inheritance of their Fathers, and the bringing upon them all the miseries that are consequent to such a Design and Enterprize, and actual effecting of it, even by the armed power of a King, were other oppressions, and most grievous too, as they were a­gainst the very nature and essence of their League in the highest nature. And therefore the Children of Saul were not only executed for having killed their Brethren, but also for these other cruel injustices done to such others as did with their lives escape his fury; if, I say, the testimony of the very Executioners of these Children be admitted. Whence, and out of those other natural reasons concomitant, as like­wise out of the known Declaration of Gods intention and prom [...]se, in so many Places and Books of holy Writ (which I omit to give, because I am in hast to conclude my Obser­vations on this Difference, and that those reasons and places are obvious, and by none denied that is a Christian) to pu­nish even whole Kingdomes with most exemplar scourges, even sometimes with the translation of the Principality to an­other people, for such publick injustices; and out of the rule, moreover of comparing Scriptutes, which rule this Gentleman must admit, the falsity of the three next ensuing Particulars must appear; and the byassed evill comment which I justly suppose our Person of Quality will make on that of t [...]e first Verse of the 21. Chapter 2 of Samuel, because he slew the Gibeonites, must appear likewise: being the words a [...]e not exclusive or negative, but positive or affirmative only: and being we may easily understand how the Oracle would have expressed in the fewest words, and most signifi­cant, all those evills of Saul against the poor Gibeonites, which provoked Heaven to a punishment so exemplary, e­ven upon the whole Nation represented by him.

146. But in answer to the last particular I need not allege more than the very known Law of God to Moyses, where [Page 118] express command was given the Israelites to kill every Mothers [...] 7. [...], 2, and 3. Child of the Amorrhites, and never to make truce or peace, or league with them. Which is the reason our Person of Quality must confess, if he deny not Scripture, e­ven in his own sense of it, that Saul and his people had not sinned at all, nor consequently brought any Judgements of God upon himself or his Children, or Kingdom after him, had not his killing the Gibeonites been against the conditions and Articles of that league.

147. So that from first to last, and more especially out of this observation on that last particular of the meaning, which he must have, if he mean to say any thing against me, I may evidently conclude, that in what ever sense this Gen­tleman would have his fourth Difference understood, or in­to what ever kind of argumentation he would have it mould­ed, he cannot inferr any difference that will not appear to an understanding man, very immaterial, and very imperti­nent, and no way becoming an Argumentator so acute and subtile, and laborious too.

148. I had almost forgot what he said in the perclose of this undiffering difference, that his Majesty kept them (to Pag. 92. wit the Articles of 48.) and they (that is, the Irish) have broke them. Indeed his Majesty hath not only kept them while he had any power left him (or his Lieutenant or De­puty in Ireland) by this Gentleman's friends, but I am con­fident will keep them now again, and ever henceforward, if this Gentleman or his Associates do not put, anew, such necessities on him, as may hinder the free current of Justice to all his Subjects indifferently. Which I hope the Provi­dence that restored our good King so miraculously, and pre­served the poor Catholicks of Ireland alive under so many changes of Tyrants, will never give any the power to do. And for his assertion of their having broken them, I have al­ready [...]. 92. more than sufficiently disproved it in his meaning, or as to the generality of that Nation.

149. Yet his Parenthesis (Or that the utmost that the Pro­testants desire, even to the worst principled of the Irish Papists, [...]. 91. is to make them hewers of wood, and drawers of water) I do allow in a good sense. For indeed such as are truly the Pro­testants, [Page 119] have more of compassion, to even the greatest Delinquents of the Irish, than to desire their Transplanta­tion, to the Isles of America, and to send them away even naked, as this Gentleman's Protestants have done to whole Townships of them, and intended to do with all the residue, had not the great mercy of God, and fortune of Charles the Second, put a sooner period to their tyranny, than this Gentleman peradventure sometime either expected or de­sired.

150. As for his observing transiently that P. W. seems to threaten his Majesty with those Judgements come upon the Pa [...] [...] Kingdom of Israel, and Saul's Children, for the breach of Articles: P. W. sayes, the manner of relating those Judge­ments, the modesty of the language, and his own hearty wishes (in the Letter) immediately following his relation of that Example, leave no ground for this injurious note. May Providence, and the Kings Righteousness, and your sage Council (my Lord) obstruct all occasions of reflecting on this (and so many other Examples of God's revenge of Article-breaking) any further, than that the best of Kings may see the worst of evills attending the Counsells of our Adver­saries, and that their Power, whatever it be, cannot be so dan­gorous as their Demands against our Articles, is the hearty prayer of P. W. there, against those, or the like, or indeed rather against any kind of Judgements on his Majesty; so false it is that P. W. seems to threaten his Majesty with those Judgements. Unless peradventure his Majesties most loyal Counsellours, and fastest Friends, and godliest Prelates, debating a Case, and reasoning for the justice of it, in the absence, or even in the presence too (if you will have it so) of his Majesty, or making publick speeches in the Par­liament House, or preaching in the Church, even before all the Estates of the Kingdom, and alleging exemplar pu­nishments of God in former ages, and in the particular of such a controverted Case (as for example, in that of Arti­cle-breaking, or of any other you please) and alleging them out of holy Scriptures, and pertinently, and only to dis­swade his Majesty from embracing, or to lay before him the dangers of regarding some ungodly wicked Counsells that [Page 120] others would suggest, and yet alleging such with all due re­spects for, and answerable affections to his most sacred Ma­jesty: I say, that unless such men, and in such Cases, or in such Auditories, or Places, would seem to threaten his Majesty with those Judgements, they should relate as infli­cted exemplarily upon other Princes in the like Case. Nei­ther can P. W. justly be taxed even with seeming to threaten his Majesty with any such: Or if they in such cases would seem indeed to threaten so, and yet be no way blamed, nor blameable therefore, but esteemed by his Majesty, and all good men, faithful, truly loving, and nothing less obser­vant and respectful Subjects: Neither can that Observation of this Person of Quality prejudice P. W. in the Judgement of his sacred Majesty, or of any good man, or of any indif­ferent or judicious Reader; especially when P. W. may be known to such as please to enquire after him, to be such a man, as having already given sufficient asguments of his faith, and his affection, and respects, and reverence, and veneration too, of his Majesties most sacred Person, is rea­dy alwayes to run all kind of hazards for him, which any, the most loyal Subject ought, even without expectation of other reward in this World, but what the discharge of his duty, and satisfaction of a good Conscience must make him professor of.

151. After this Gentleman had proved himself (though a cunning, yet) a very bad Expositour, and no less unfor­tunately given all along, and perclosed his Differences, than he made a Parallel to his own disadvantage, he must seek applause from the Reader, at least for some godly ad­vice to the Irish Nation first, and then to P. W. Since the breach of Faith is so foul a sin, and deserves such heavy pu­nishments, even by P. W's own confession, and since it is fully Pag. 92. proved, those, for whom he pleads, have not only once, but often, yea alwayes, broken their agreements; let them with patience bear what they have drawn upon themselves: and let him henceforth employ his Pen, and his Press, in inviting his Coun­trymen, rather to acknowledge his Majesties mercy, that no more are punished, than some are, and that so little too, com­paratively to their Crimes. But if that undeniable Maxim [Page 121] hold, Bonum ex integra causa, malum ex quocunque defectu, how can this holy Preacher, expect even upon this passage that applause of his Auditory which he proposed to himself? For not to take notice of a Confession attributed by him here to P. W. where he should ingenuously have himself confessed it was the grand assertion of P. W. in that Letter (so famous now by the man in the dark, and the Person of Quality's im­pugnation of it in two several books) that the breach of Faith is so foul a sin, and deserves such heavy punishments, and therefore allowing (as I must) his first supposition here, without exception, I am confident the Judicious Readers of this impartial Reply will not be perswaded, without far­ther proof than any, or all he hath given, that it is fully pro­ved, those for whom P. W. pleads, have not only once, but of­ten, yea always broken their agreements. P. W. pleads the Ju­stice of publick Articles, and of the performance of pub­lique Faith, only to, and for the Iri [...]h Nation in general, or as to the generality, or greater part, or (in all contingen­cies) for those only, who cannot be disproved (before his Majesty or the Lord Lieutenant, or those other men of Honour appointed by his Majesty as impartial Commissio­ners and Judges) to have forfeited the benefit of those Ar­ticles, by an unlawfull breach of them. And P. W. desires only his Majesties Royal and mercifull regard of such unfor­tunate Irish Catholicks as have unlawfully transgressed a­gainst that Peace. And I am sure the first (admitted) sup­position, or the confession, or assertion too of Gods Judge­ments pursuing most justly the breach of publique Faith, will not argue any unlawfulness, injustice, or unchristianity, ei­ther in that plea, or this desire of P. W. Yet I grant him notwithstanding, that his advice of bearing with patience, simply taken in it self, or (which is the same thing) with­out m [...]xture of ungranted, unproved, or even untrue sup­posals, would be commendable, whoever gave it, and the practice of it more, whether such as gave it made other addition, true or false. And therefore I cannot allow his meaning in those words, what they have drawn upon themselves.

152. For the Irish Nation, or Catholicks of Ireland ge­nerally [Page 122] taken, or taken only for the greater part, or, if he please, for the Representatives alone, never drew upon themselves, by a publick breach of those Articles of 48. whereof they may be said to have been guilty, that, what­soever it be this Gentleman intends in the fore mentioned words. Well they might, by other sins, have provoked Heaven to involve them in the common punishment, and so drawn upon themselves that, which they have suffered hi­therto, either from the justice of God immediately, or from the injustice, violence, or tyranny of men. But that they have, by any sins whatsoever, drawn upon them­selves what this Gentleman further, or indeed solely intends here, to wit, an absolute final resolution of his Majesty, by a clear significative Declaration of his will in his Laws, or Acts of Parliament, to make the Irish Nation evermore hewers of wood, and drawers of water, in this Gentleman's in­terpretation, or in that of the Man in the dark, that is, to let them live only, and make them ten million of times more pittiful slaves than the Gibeonitet were, by taking a­way from them all their Cities, Castles, Mannours, Vil­lages, Houses, Lands, even to a foot, and make them the contempt and scorn of all Christian Countries, of Man­kind, I must confess I want both Revelation and Reason to believe this Gentleman's bare word for it.

153. Upon his advice to my self I shall not demurr, be­ing I have anticipated it long agoe, and not by my Pen or Press alone, but my Tongue, and Voice, and Mouth, and Lungs also, and by all the very faculties of my Soul, and Pag. 92. not only to acknowledge his Majesties mercy, that no more are punished, (of those, I mean, who are by the Laws punishable) than that some are (whether by his Majesty or not, I dispute not) and that (as by his Majesty) so little too comparatively to their Crimes; but also to celebrate his Majesties Justice, that notwithstanding all those, even disobedient Oppositions, and prevaricating Contradictions of this Gentleman's Party, these two years past, some, (though very few) are in some measure delivered already out of the Lions throat, and Harpies tallons. And I hope to have daily more and more cause to magnifie this Justice, [Page 123] and that Mercy, and to sing to his Majesty as David did sometime to God, Misericordiam & Judicium cantabo tibi Domine.

154. Yet I cannot but observe here, how much more incomparably this Gentleman is bound to employ his own Pen, and his own Press, in inviting his own beloved peo­ple, even to super-magnifie, and super-exalt his Majesties unspeakable Mercy to themselves, and not his mercy alone, but his munificence, and his bounteous goodness, and ex­traordinary favours: being that not only none of them (ex­cept those very few of the most immediate Actors in that horrible Tragedy on the Scaffold at White-Hall) are punish­ed, either so little, comparatively to their superlative Crimes, or at all, positively, without any such comparison: And being they are not only pardoned, not only indemnified in all respects, but even equalled in all capacities (and by act­ual instances, and those too very manifold, of titles of ho­nour, and places of greatest authority, profit, and trust) with his Majesties most faithful and approved Subjects.

155. And I cannot but further observe the indiscretion of this Gentleman, that by upbraiding others with a repe­tition of lesser Crimes (or suppose them equivalent, which they cannot be justly supposed) and a repetition of such e­ven to loathing, leaves himself, or his Cause and Party, (let himself be guiltless) open to the same reproach, or a farr greater. He should have remebred how the godly Malefactor on the Cross did rebuke his fellow, that railed, Neque tu Deum times, qui in eadem damnatione es? Dost Luc. 26. 40. not thou fear God, since thou art in the same condemnation? Or at least reflected on that of the King in the Parable to the cruel inexorable Servant, Serve nequam, omne debitum di­misi tibi quia rogasti me, nunquid ergo oportuit te misereri con­servi tui, sicut & ego tui misertus sum? Matth. 18. O Mat. 18. 32. thou wicked servant, I pardoned thee ten thousand talents, and pardoned thee so great a debt only of pure compassion, only be­cause thou desiredst me; shouldst not thou also have compassion for thy fellow servant, and not presently take him by the throat, and throw him in prison for a hundred pence, and be nothing moved with his extreme poverty, and his unfeigned humilia­tion, [Page 124] or with all his pittiful intreaties, or with all his best pur­poses, promises, and offers? Our Person of Quality might have reflected hereon, if he pleased, and on the terrible sentence immediately given▪ on that hard-hearted Servant▪ and on the Ministers of Justice apprehending him, and bind­ing him hand and foot, and throwing him into utter dark­ness, even into a place of weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth. And this Person of Quality might have (on consideration of all) determined with himself, that he had done much better to have spared himself, and me both, some ink, and some paper, and some labour too.

156. But I fear he is one of those we read in Solomon's Wisdom, Blinded with their own malice; or of those in Esay, Wisdom c. 2. v. 21 Esay, c. 6. v. 10. Jeremy, c. 13. v. 23. Who hear, and will not understand. But whether also that question of the Prophet Jeremy in the 13 Chapter of his Book may not be, and that very pertinently too, asked here in relation to him, Nunquid potest Aethiops mutare pellem suam, aut Pardus varietates suas? Can the Aethiopi­an change his Skin, or the Leopard his spots? the Reader may determine. For my part, I cannot otherwise think, than that it may, when I see this Gentleman t [...]ke a rise from P. W's. Parallel for the inserting of those two particulars, which imme­diately Pag. 92. follow his former advice: and when I yet see the fur­ther, and plain explication of them both, and the period of his, otherwise incredible malignity, in that which next comes after, and which he calls, and is indeed, the conclusion of his whole infamous Book.

The first is, If any of the Children of P. W's. Clyents lose their Lands, though actually they were not guilty of their Pag. 92. Fathers Rebellion, let him remember, even in the Case which he instances, that the seven Sons of Saul were hanged up to the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, though they had not actually slain these Gibeonites, for which they themselves were punished. Let him also remember, that till justice was done the famine la­sted, and after it was done the famine ceased. Those lost their lives for their Fathers sin; but these (if any) lose but their Fa­thers forfeited Lands for their Fathers crimes.

157. Supposing, Reader, thou wilt not be abused by this Gentlemans if any twice repeated here, either through some [Page 125] uncertainty belike of what he apprehended may be future, or of purpose to conceal the Design (which yet he cannot conceal in his next Particular, joyned with his concluding Wish, specially if you compare these to his very invidious, and very false, both suppositions and assertions, before gi­ven of the whole Irish Nations having broken the Peace, and consequently forfeited their Estates: And moreover, if you compare that his Particular, and his conclusive Wish, to the strict Qualifications of Innocents, could he or his friends enact such as they strugled for) I must beg your patience a little, if I alter the Scene, and place this Gentleman and his Party on the Stage, to answer this first Particular, instead of P. W. and his Countrymen and Clients.

158. For put the case that some fourteeen years past, in the very heat of War, when the long Parliament was ram­pant, and his late most sacred Majesty, of glorious remem­brance, was forced to put himself into the power of his Enemies, this Person of Quality, and those he pleads for, had out of remorse of Conscience, and real sense of their du­ty (though withall out of a desire to provide for their own safety, under Kingly Government, according to the Laws established in the Kingdom) returned willingly and passion­ately to their Obedience, and this too upon publick Articles of Peace; but with intent partly, and of design to rescue his Majesty, whom they had never intended to dethrone, or to exclude his Line or Family from the Crowns of England, Ireland, or Scotland, notwithstanding any other evills, which the nature of a War into which they had been hurri­ed, and partly constrained to undertake, might be charged upon them; yea notwithstanding the murther of some hun­dreds of innocent people, which the rascal multitude a­mongst them, had upon the first Insurrection committed, and the plundring withall of many thousands, and the killing also of yet a farr greater number in the prosecution of War, and of Souldiers, or men armed, coming against them in ho­stile manner: And suppose they had withall submitted, or brought in with them, to obey his Majesty, so many strong Cities, Forts, Castles, so many great Shires, and fruitful Provinces, and an Army so numerous of Horse and Foot, [Page 126] as the Catholick Irish did, even a whole Kingdom for the matter; two Cities alone, and some few Regiments, and other scattered Companies, adherents to them, in Boggs, and Woods, and Mountains, only excepted: And that notwithstanding, through some hidden causes, or secret displeasure of God, or accidents of War, that are very or­dinary, or through some unlucky division, arising, or newly kindled, or revived, and heightned, and strength­ned too, of purpose, either by a distrustful or malevolent Party amongst them, the common Enemy (and suppose that Enemy had been the Irish) did prevail: And suppose moreover, those repentant Converts of our Person of Qua­lity, as to their generality, or greater part, and even as to their Representatives, had sadly beheld many of their own People, and even some of their own Towns, proving dis­obedient and refractory to commands, and even most grie­vous affronts done, and (if you please too) some thoughts of treachery entertained by a few Citizens of one, or two, or three of their Towns, and services lost, and the Ene­mies power escaped through the peevish refractoriness or unreasonable distrusts of some, and the heads of their Clergy besides, endeavouring, by threats of spiritual censures, to withdraw the obedience of all their great and numerous Bo­dy from his Majesties Lieutenant over them, but not pre­vailing herein, as to the generality, or farr greater part, though hindring very much the service against the common Enemy: And put the case too, that all had been finally un­done, and the Kingdom lost occasionally through such un­lawful oppositions of a few, or the lesser part; and yet that both sides of them, as well the disobedient as obedient, had to the last man refused any Capitulations with such their common Enemy, to serve him against the King; but had e­ven very many thousands, even three or four legions of them, withdrawn out of the Country, and ran his Majesties fortune abroad, or waited his commands, and in all Coun­tries roamed after him perpetually, fixing all their hopes upon, and quitting all other services under forein Princes for him, but such only as might stand with his pleasure; al­wayes ready to venture again limb and life to reinthrone his [Page 127] Majesty, as likewise the remainders of them at home, un­der the prevalent Usurpers, had been waiting all opportuni­ties for that end, and therefore upon that account partly, if not principally, as persons suspected, made the most mi­serable slaves in the World, and every new Moon confined to Gaols: And suppose that after many years had been so past over, by this Person of Quality, and his Party, some wandring in exile abroad, others at home groaning in cap­tivity, all waiting with impatience the occasion and hour, God of his mercy were pleased at last to throw an Apple of Discord amongst those in that case now supposed usurping Victours (to wit, P. W. and his Party) and raise between them such irreconcileable feuds, as, together with the con­tinual fears, arising partly from those abroad in banishment, and those at home in bondage, though peradventure princi­pally from the more numerous Party of old Cavalliers, and from their Friends dispersed in the three Nations, had for­ced them (viz. the said usurping Victours) to concurr to, though with much reluctancy, or rather to behold (but with heavy hearts, and armes across) the calling home of his Majesty to the possession of his Fathers Throne, admini­stration of Justice, or dispensation of Mercy, to each one of his people, throughout the British Empire, answerable to their several capacities, and to the Laws, and to the e­quity of them, and above all to his own gracious, benign, and merciful Genius: And suppose yet further, that that usurping people which had partly so called, or so looked up­on his Majesty returning home, and which had kept too this Person of Quality, and his Friends, for so many years in exile and slavery, had been those too who had all along con­curred, and even acted with such others as bereaved his Ma­jesties dear Father of his life, contrived the Oath of Abju­ration, and so many others, took it, and the rest all, and fur­ther made, and to their power observed, and forced upon others the observation of all those Oaths and Acts we have seen against the Line of King James, and Family of the Stuarts, and that the same Usurpers (the supposed Enemies in our present case) had for that concurrence of theirs, and prosecution of it, enjoyed so long the Lands and Estates [Page 128] of this very Person of Quality, and his Friends, even a great Kingdom: And suppose lastly, that (after all) his Maje­sty were sitting, as he now is, to administer Justice to all his Subjects indifferently, and to give withall incomparable arguments of his Clemency, and that P. W. were pleading there for himself, and his own Party (supposed still in such a case to be of that side, whereof our Person of Quality, and his People are now) and were pleading there, not for Par­don or Indempnity alone to himself, and his Friends, but for the acquisition, moreover, and continuation, and that by a new Law too, or by a Law to be made anew for that purpose against all former fundamental Laws, and for the enjoyment for ever, by his Majesties grant, all the Lands, Houses, &c. belonging formerly, o [...] before the Wars to this Person of Quality, and other his Friends (who fighting so many years continually for the King, were in that Cause dispossessed of them by him, that is, by P. W. and his Part­ners, and that P. W. were pleading too against innocent Children the Rebellion at any time of their Fathers, al­though early Converts, and alwayes after constant Sub­jects, and were pleading, I say, for the acquisition, or continuation to himself, and his, of the Rights and Lands belonging othewise to them, even by entail made in consi­deration of a Marriage-Portion given by their Mothers: I demand, in such a case (not whether this Person of Quality pleading on the other side, admitted unquestionably by all indifferent to be the better side, would allow P. W. the im­pudence of such a Plea, but) whether he would find it any difficult matter to shew the unfitness of that Example of the Seven Sons of Saul hanged up to the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, to justifie in that supposed case, or to perswade, or even to move his Majesty to the cutting off all Entails, even such as were made before the War begun, and such too, as were made in consideration of a Marriage-Portion paid, or move his Majesty to the bereaving of all right of succession or inhe­ritance in their Fathers Estates, the Children of his (in such a case) long suffering and loyal Party, even those very Children that were not actually guilty of their Fathers Rebelli­on? Or would he think it an hard task to prove the unsigni­ficancy [Page 129] of the next allusion, That till Justice was done the Fa­mine lasted, and after it was done the Famine ceased? Or the ineptitude also (to his end) of that following Antithe­sis, Those lost their Lives for their Fathers Sin; but these (if any) lose but their Fathers forfeited Lands for their Fathers Crimes? And whether he would not think, that not only his Majesty, and all the Court, but all indifferent Persons on Earth, would laugh even to scorn the brazen face of P. W. or at least his very extreme lack both of Grace, and of Reason, if in such a case he made use of this Rhetorical Divi­nity (which our Person of Quality uses against him) to get the Lands of all such Innocents, the Children (in our sup­position) of this Person of Quality's repentant early Con­verts, bestowed on himself, and his Clients, still supposed in the case to have fought all along against his Majesty, and continued obstinate even to the last hour in pursuance of the Good Old Cause, and to have dispossessed those very Child­ren of this Person of Quality, and his Friends, and to have dispossessed their Fathers too, fighting for the Royal Quarrel.

159. But not to perplex the Reader any more with this imaginary case, or the Person of Quality with troublesome apprehensions, how to answer in it, without speaking his own condemnation out of his own mouth, let us on both sides put off our suppositious Persons, and return again to our own, he to his, and I to mine, and both to the case in­deed, which has a real being. And let the Reader judge of my following Answers to his evill Application of that Ex­ample of Saul's Children, &c. For I must tell him,

First, That the hanging up to the Lord of the Children of Saul in Gibeah of Saul, cannot be a Precedent to any mortal Man, King, or inferiour Judge, to warrant the like, or o­ther punishment of Innocents, unless an Oracle of God, or a special Revelation or Inspiration extraordinary from Hea­ven, did speak the pleasure of God to that purpose; as in the permission given by David to put those Children of Saul to death.

That otherwise, or without such an Oracle, or some hea­venly Inspiration that were indubitably such, David had [Page 130] most grievously sinned, in putting to death the Children of Saul, for that breach of Saul; even sinned, I say, a­gainst the ordinary known Law of God in Deuteron. 20. Chapter, 16 Verse, N [...]n occidentur Patres pro Filiis, nec Filii pro Patribus, sed u [...]uquis (que) pro peccato suo morietur: The Fathers shall not be put to death for the Children, neither the Children shall be put death for the Fathers; every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Which the Prophet Ezechiel some Ages after did again declare to be the will of God. The Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Fa [...]her, neither shall the Father bear the iniquity of the Son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself, the Soul that sinneth it shall dye. Eze­chiel, 18 Chap. 20 Verse. And therefore, that instead of diverting the wrath of God from the People, David were more like to incense it more and more, and continue the Fa­mine, and other scourges, had he, without a special dis­pensation from God, given over to death innocent Children for the sin of their Father.

That it is more than our Person of Quality can be assured of, whether the seven Sons of Saul, who were hanged to R [...]bby Salomon apud Lyran hic. 2 Reg [...]1. v. 6. the Lord in Gibeah of Saul, had been guiltless, or not actu­ally guilty in their own persons of the blood or oppression of the Gibeonites.

That however this be, or whatever may be thought of that Law in Deuteronomy, or of the repetition of it in Eze­chiel, our Person of Q [...]ality will not say, his Majesty, or any other earthly King, is bound in Conscience by that pre­cedent of David, or that it may be either convenient or ex­dient for his Majesty to look upon it now as a pattern for himself, either in relation to the Children of such Fathers, as are known to have washed off the guilt of their Insurrecti­on by a very early Repentance, and a very constant Obedi­ence ever since 48. And who moreover can plead the justice and indempnity of Articles which they have not forfeited; or even to the Children of those others, who have been so unfortunate the second time, as to have broke that Peace of 48. albeit they did never submit to, or concurr with the Regicides. For if our Person of Quality will insist upon any [Page 131] such Obligation of Conscience, or even Expediency, as a­rising thence, and that his Majesty were once perswaded thereof, what should then become of this Gentleman, and his beloved People, in relation to whom there must be in all Contingencies a farr greater tye of Conscience or a farr greater Expediency arising from that very Example to pu­nish them? What, I say, of his or their Children, even such as have not been actually guilty of their Fathers Rebellions? Rebellions ten thousand times more hainons, more execrable, than that of the worst principled of the Irish can be justly said to have been.

160. And if our Person of Quality would, in case of a­ny such resolution in his Majesty, enter into a Plea of Ju­stice, grounded now indeed upon that of the Letters from Breda, or Acts of Indempnity confirmed by assent Royal, and would enter this Plea of Justice, not for the innocent Children alone, but their Fathers too, of his Party, who had not since that Oblivion trespassed against the Laws: Why may not à fortiori, the Catholicks of Ireland, who broke not their Articles, be admitted likewise to a Plea of Justice, yea notwithstanding their former Rebellions? Their Crimes have been less, and their Repentance earlyer, and their Suffering for the King without any compare by him or his: for those of this Person of Quality's Party never suffer­ed the least affliction, or one sole moment for his Ma­jesty.

161. Or if the dispute had been before the Act of In­demnity, or Letters of Breda, or any Promise given, or if this Gentleman's Plea must have been Mercy alone, as ve­rily it should be in that Case, or before any such Letters, Acts, or Promises, even for the Children of his People, even for such of their Children as were not actually guilty of their Fathers most truly unpar [...]ll [...]l [...]d Rebellions; Wherefore may not the Irish, that even forfeited (so as above-said) the benefit of their Articles in 48. be admitted to that P [...]ea too, and hope even for that Mercy to themselves, and to their Children also, which this Person of Quality would sue for to his own, in this last Case?

162. And if to these, or to their sute for Mercy, in such a case, [Page 132] that example of Saul's Children hang'd in Gibeah of Saul, could be no obstruction, no hinderance of his Majesties con­sciencious, gracious, and mercifull pardon, or gift even to their Children after them, of their Fathers Inheritance be­fore the Wars, and not only of such as were entayl'd; nei­ther can it be in the present case of the Irish, or of such of them as have broke, even the Peace of 48. any more, but rather much less groundedly alleged to debarr his Majesties compassion of their Children, or themselves either.

163. Secondly, Or to his allusion to the Famine continu­ed until Justice was done, &c. I must tell him also, the an­swer is very obvious; that for the wrong done the Gibeo­nites, Pag. 92. there was no punishment inflicted, no reparation made, no Justice done by the hand of Man, before the se­ven Sons of Saul were hanged: And therefore we may con­ceive it is very suitable to the Justice of God that Famine should last, until, even some descending from his very loyns, that so cruelly oppressed the Gibeonites against publick Faith or Covenant, were punished by the very hands of the self same people. Whereby to teach the world how horrible must be the Sin of Article-breaking: Whereon peradven­ture, the very chosen Israelites themselves had not other­wise much reflected. But for the wrongs done by the Irish Catholicks at any time, since the first insurrection on the 23 of October 41. not seven persons alone, but seven thou­sand, nay sevenscore (if not seventy times seven score) thousand have been long since punished by the Justice, and by the hands of men, and punished even most exemplarly, and not the nocent only, but the innocent, without any distinction or compassion, even armless and harmless day-la­bourers, and women, and children, even babes, and Chry­some-sucklings, hanging at their Mothers breasts; yea very many punished in a legal way, tryed in open Courts, con­demned, executed, hang'd, shot, beheaded, and quartered. So that to pretend in this case of Ireland any defect of exem­plary punishment, or sufficient publick Justice, even by the hand of Man, and from such defect a Famine, or other visible Judgement upon the Kingdom now, or since the Restoration of his Majesty, were to allege a cause that is [Page 133] not, and an effect which we perceive not; being we can­not but see and acknowledge ever since that happy return of his Majestie, a return likewise of all plenty, and other both earthly, and heavenly blessings throughout his Majesties Do­minions. Which had this Person of Quality better consider­ed, it is like he would not have mentioned here, in this al­lusion, the lasting of the Famine till Justice was done, and the ceaslng of it, after that was done. For if his allusion hold, the cessation of all those foregoing publique Judgements, and the succession of the greatest mercies throughout the English Empire, must be rather an argument that so much Justice is done already, as the just anger of God required, than that any more should be.

164. Thirdly, Or to shew the ineptitude likewise (to his end) of his Antithesis; Those lost their lives for their Fa­thers Sin; but these (if any) lose but their Fathers forfeited Pag. 92. Estates. P. W. entreats the Reader to weigh this following Ratiocination, which our Person of Quality will find himself obliged to build upon it.

165. By Miracle, and by Oracle, or by a special Reve­lation or Inspiration from Heaven, and by wonderful Judge­ments on the twelve Tribes of Israel universally, for three whole years, David the Prophet, and Familiar of God, was instructed, that it was the good will of God, notwith­standing the Law of Moses to the contrary, he should resign to the Gibeonites the 7 Sons of Saul, though innocent of their Fathers Crimes, to lose their lives. Therefore his Majesty, without any kind of Miracle, Oracle, Revelatiō, Inspiration, or any visible Judgement inducing him, may for the sin of others, long since repented, or at least pardoned by Articles, resign over, and for ever also, to such men as this Person of Qua­lity, and his Associates are, the Rights, Estates, and In­heritances of above seventy thousand innocent Children, and Children unquestionably innocent, and Children to Fa­thers too, that fighting as became loyal Subjects, did through Gods permission thereby make themselves, and these their Children so miserable as they are known to be at present, and to have been those ten years past; And his Ma­jesty not only may, but ought to do so. And not only may, [Page 134] or ought not to regard the condition of Innocency, or the justice of publick Articles of Peace, or the Laws of God or Nations in this Case, but even to forget his never to be for­gotten Clemency to a million of other Children, and Child­ren to Parents guilty of more atrocious Rebellions, than the most frequently, or most obstinately guilty of these Irish Childrens Fathers.

166. Behold, Reader, the Argument contained in that rare Antithesis. And if this be not Logick out of Schools, and Divinity out of Hell, I confess I know not what it may be. But this Person of Quality will perhaps defend both with his English Interest, and his Protestant Religion, though I am perswaded he could sometimes have shaken hands for his own Interest, and his own Religion, with the most disloyal Genevians in Scotland, and thrive there too, a­mongst them.

The second Particular is, Though even the Spirit of God it self Pag. 92. witnesseth, that Saul sought to slay the Gibeonites in his Zeal to the Children of Israel and Juda, yet that it self could not si­lence, or suspend the Justice of God. And therefore let P. W. know, that though in the third Article of their Instructions to the titular Bishop of Fernes, and Sir Nicholas Plunkett (their Commissioners to Rome) they own to the Pope, that in their Zeal they raised Armes for the freedom of the Catholick Religion, yet no Zeal in Religion can apologize for, or will hinder the effects of Gods Justice on his Countrymen, for their unparallel'd Murthers, and their often breaches against Na­ture, and against Stipulation. To do evill that good may come of it, may be the Doctrine of Rome, but is not the Doctrine of Christ; and by the fruit the tree is best known.

167. I am inclinable to believe there is nothing of Zeal, as this Gentleman gives it, in that passage, or any other of these Instructions, not that I think it had been improper to such as had been reduced to the straights the Confederates were in then, although some of themselves brought them­selves, and all the rest to such, even by a very unlawful rejection of the first Peace in 46. But that I know my self, those of the supreme Council was then, to have been of this perswasion, that no Zeal of Religion could warrant before [Page 135] God or Man the justice of raising Armes against the Prince, Magistrate, or Laws: And that I know the Commissioners sent by the Confederates to Oxford and Dublin, pleaded al­wayes the necessity was put upon them by the Lords Justices, even for the safety of their lives, to take Armes. Besides this Gentleman, who is curious enough in distinguishing material words (related unto) by a different Character from the Roman, that is by Italick Letters, omitted to give so here that word Zeal, albeit the only word was ma­terial above all the rest there, which yet he delivers in Ita­lique, as part of that third Instruction. And this partly too makes me suspect it, as a pretty additional invention, of purpose to parallel the Zeal of Saul in killing the Gibeonites, which I said in my Letter could not divert the wrath of God incensed against Saul.

168. But whether it be so or no, or whether this Gen­tleman relates those Instructions truly or not, it matters not, being the contest is not indeed material, and that he disputes against me, whose constant belief is (even as part of Catholick Doctrine, clearly delivered in the Scriptures, and in the Fathers, and would this Gentleman's, and his Party's perswasion were so too) that no Zeal in Religion can apologize for any kind of Rebellion, much less for unparal­lel'd Murthers, or often breaches against Nature, or against stipulation committed therein, or indeed for any murther at all, or any one even single breach of a just promise.

169. Yet I must dissent from this Gentleman in two things he says here: And must affirm again, because he pro­vokes me again, That even those very horrid murthers, (and be they as numerous too, as he will have them▪) com­mitted by a very few of the rude rabble amongst the Irish, are not only not unparalleld in Histories of former ages, and Pag. 93. other Countries, and by very many instances, but not e­ven in the History of our own days, or that of England, since the prodigious murther committed on the Scaffold at Whitehall by those that shaked hands all along with this Gen­tleman's Clyents. And that all those Irish murthers, even quintessenced into one, have been unquestionably not so little hainous comparatively as parallel'd, but even as over­parallel'd [Page 136] by that only one; yea had the Actors in it com­mitted no more, as yet they are known to have ten thou­sand before and after. And I must affirm, that although it be confessedly true, that no zeal in Religion can apologize for the sins either Personal or National of my Countrymen, as nei­ther (if not rather much less) for those yet more hideous, and more abominable crimes of some of this Person of Quali­ty's Brethren; yet both he, and I too, (if Christians, if ra­tional men) cannot but affirm also, That a Godly repen­tance, with all due circumstances of it, according to the Religion and Faith of God, taught us in the Word of God, may for the time to come, hinder the effects of Gods Justice on my Countrymen, even those very effects which this Per­son of Quality wisheth from his very Soul (I am sure) that no Pag. 93. godliness may hinder, and which he no less positively de­nounces than if he had the mercy of God in his power, and the knowledge of Gods decrees, or of all future contingen­cies reveal'd to him. But he is neither a Prophet, nor the Son of a Prophet, if I may guess. And what ever he be, 'tis like he hath neither the Mercy nor the Justice and power of God at his devotion more, nor the knowledge of Gods eternal or temporary pleasure (concerning my Countrymen) more certainly revealed to him, than the Prophet Jonas had all of them together, in relation to the Ninivites. And therefore notwithstanding this Gentleman's prediction here, of, or against the Irish, be so positive, so absolute an as­sertion of the effects of Gods Justice to fall upon them here­after, viz. (in his conception, and according to his affection) the loss of all their Lands for ever, and the transplanting of them all from one end of the borders of Egypt, to the other end thereof, as presently you shall see in his Conclusion; yet he must grant me that this prediction of his can be no more in­fallible than that of Jonas, Adhuc quadraginta dies & Ninive Jon. 3 Ch. V. 4. subvertetur, yet forty dayes and Ninive shall be overthrown. And we know this prediction of Jonas the very Prophet of God, yea preached by the very command of God himself, was notwithstanding falsified, and Ninive saved then from V. 7, 8, 9, 10. any such, or other Judgement threatned by the Prophet, because the Ninivites humbled themselves truly before God, [Page 137] and with faith and hope cryed unto him for mercy. And I believe my Countrymen may imitate them, and hope they will.

As for his occasional assertion, That to do evil that good Pag. 93. may come of it, may be the Doctrine of Rome, no Romanist I am certain will ever allow. Nor can he charge any of all their Communion with that wicked Maxim in any kind of sense, that may not be returned on himself again with very much disadvantage to his party. For if he say (for example) that some Papist writers teach, that Subjects may rebel a­gainst the Soveraign power, to the end that Religion may be restored or preserved; and therefore teach to doe evil, that good may come of it, Rebellion questionless being a very great evil in it self, and true Religion as great a good: I would fain know, whether his own Religious Clients have not in a thousand Pamphlets, and ten thousand Pulpits, and for 20. years compleat, maintained that un-catholick, wick­ed, sinful Position, against the Laws of God, N [...]t [...]ral and Positive, and against the Laws of Man, Civil and Ecclesi­astical? And whether they have not all that while taught, all of them, and practiced too, a most impious Rebellion, partly to introduce the very worst Religion in the World, and partly, to have none at all? Nay, whether they have not taught, and practiced also, that infernal Doctrine of meer design, first to ruine Monarchy, and then Prelacy, and after these Magistracy and Ministery both in general, could they drive on their design; and so devour the Tythes, and then pull down the Steeple-houses (for so the Saints did name all Churches) and, in a word, set Hell wide open upon the face of the Earth, and make themselves the sole Masters of it, yea absolute Lords of all the good things in it: of all other mens fortunes, and lives too, and at their own pleasure wash their hands in the blood of the wicked, as they term all honest men, because not of their cabal? And if this Doctrine, and this Practice be not incomparably worse than that which (though wickedly) teacheth by word or example, to do evill that good may come of it; nay if it lead not by the hand to do many great evills, that many o­ther, yet farr greater, yea all imaginable evills in the world [Page 138] may follow, I understand nothing at all by this word evill. But if such Diabolical Maxims and Practices flow naturally from the Doctrine of Geneva, Rome needs not blush hereaf­ter, not even for the most unchristian Maxims charg'd hi­therto (though falsely) upon her. And since by the fruit the tree is best known, what will our Person of Quality think of his own tree, that bears abundance continually of so evill, so deadly poysonous fruit? Or will not he think of it, as our Saviour did, foretelling in general what would become of all such? Omnis arbor, quae non facit fructum bonum, excide­tur, Mat. 7. & in ignem mittetur. Math. 7. Nay, will not he think, that if by our Saviours prediction or judgement, Every tree that bears not good fruit, shall be cut down, and thrown into the fire, those that bear so evill, even the most evill fruit conceiveable, are by the j [...]stice of God reserved for such a fire as ever shall burn, and never consume throughly, but alwayes reserve them for new punishment, unless they timely change their Nature, and receive Siens of Grace inoculated on the old wicked stock.

171. Albeit I have no cause to quarrel at the first part of this Gentleman's Conclusion of his Book, or of his concluding Wish, That his Grace the Duke of Ormond may be as another Pag. 93. Joseph to his Brethren, being it is, and was my own Wish, in the perclose of that Letter, so diligently commented up­on by this Person of Quality, and so just, and so good a Wish too, as (by his confession) drew the hearts of the Pro­testants of Ireland to close with, desiring that his Grace may be a Joseph, not only to the Israel of God (the Religious Prote­stants) Pag. 93. but also a Joseph even to the Egyptians thems [...]lves, feeding and preserving them, yet so as becomes Pharaoh's Stew­ard: And although I dispute not, at this time, the limitation or extension of this Author's meaning under these notions; the Protestants of Ireland, the Israel of God, the Religious Pro­testants, nor his allusions moreover, to the Egyptians them­selves, and Pharaoh's Steward; on all which I could say e­nough to his confusion: and notwithstanding himself makes it appear sufficiently, that his feeding and preserving them, was not so much an effect of his Charity, as a further argu­ment of his Hypocrisie; yet for the second part of his own [Page 139] additional Wish (which I am sure he had not from my Letter, or from elsewhere, but from the abundance of his own heart, and from theirs who are such as himself) I know not what to admire most therein; his extreme hatred and malice, or his extreme impudence and rashness: that, in harbouring in his own breast, or thoughts, a desire so merciless, cruel, so unjust, and tyrannical, even beyond almost all imagi­nation: this, in giving it as a good Wish to the Duke of Or­mond, and publishing it in print to all others, and in these very words, Yet so as becomes Pharaoh's Steward, reserving Pag. 93. the Lands of all, but the Priests, to the King's free dispose, and removing, that is transplanting the people from one end of the borders of Egypt to the other end thereof. No regard of a­ny Innocents, no remembrance of any Articles, no more thoughts of the services and sufferances of any, no Justice to, no Pitty for the Irish Nation; but the Laws of Nations, even in that of Publick Faith, and the Laws of God too, in so many particulars, and the Laws of the Land also, even the very Fundamental Laws of England, and Ireland both, must be controuled by a new Law against all those former, of purpose to make Slaves of the King's Friends to the King's Enemies, even hewers of Wood, and drawers of Water, even in the very worst sense of such hewers, or such drawers, and to bestow for ever the Estates of those upon these, and even to transplant their very persons, Men, Women, and Children, from one end of the borders of Ireland to another, and even to transplant them to a very narrow nook there, and that too for most of the transplanted so (if it should so happen) set out in Boggs and Rocks, and uncouth horrid Wildernesses: and the Duke of Ormond must be the great instrument hereof, and the King himself the primary efficient, by this Person of Quality's good wish to the Duke, and just desire from him. And the Lands of the Priests, and the King's free dispose must cloak all this: As if our Person of Quality, and his Consorts, had not long since deprived of Lands and Houses, both the Priests of the Egyptians, and the Priests of the Israel of God; or that he would now exempt either, had he had the least hope to prevail, or the least pretence to quarrel aga [...]nst these. And as if that must be termed the Kings free dispose, [Page 140] which the dayly Machinations, and bloody Contrivings, and threatning Demeanour of so many of this Person of Quality's most godly Brethren necessitates his Majesty at present seemingly to own, or connive at. Or that any freedom whatsoever in disposing the lands of Innocent Subjects to him and his against the Laws, or the Lands of the Article-makers that never transgressed, after such Articles made, could excuse from a breach of the Laws, and a breach of Co­venant, or Publick Faith, such disposal. And I am sure, this Person of Quality will insist no longer on the Kings free dis­pose, than it shall relate to himself, and his party, or that the Estates of the Irish▪ be disposed to his advan­tage.

172. But if notwithstanding all this he will struggle yet in justification of his good wish or desire, I would fain know of him, what would himself or his party think of P. W. or even of the Protestant Cavaliers that from the first of the War to the last, continued unchangeably faithfull to his late and present Majesty, if I s [...]y P. W. or these Loyal Gentlemen of all the three Nations, or of any of them, would, even, in the present conjuncture, and reflecting on so many horrid Plots, dayly set on foot, wish, desire, and labour with the Duke of Ormond, and present Parliament of England, and with his Majesty, that a new Law should be made, and a new Act re­voking the late Act of Indempnity; or a new and far other Declaration set forth by his Majesty, and by the Parliament after, and with his Majesties Royal consent made a Law, whereby all the Lands belonging at any time, even by a just title, or before the Wars, to this Person of Quality's good friends, whether Anabaptists, Quakers, Fifth Monarchy men, Independents, or even Presbyterians, or any other sect, of what Judgement soever, throughout the three Kingdoms, should be reserved to the Kings free dispose, that is, for ever disposed by his Majesties Royal grant to these Cavaliers, and a fit proportion too, to P. W. and such of his Clyents as lost themselves, and adher'd unalterably, at least since 48 to his Majesties interests, and whereby, moreover, all the a­bove named, our Person of Quality's good friends, should be removed, that is transplanted from one end of the borders of [Page 141] Egypt, to the other end thereof, all those in Scotland, to some narrow steril corner in the Highlands, or to the Hebrides, or Isles of Orkney; and all their conforts in England, to the most barren and mountainous part of Wales, and all his belov­ed in Ireland to Iarchonnaght and Barrin? I would fain (I say) know what in such case our Person of Quality, and his friends would think of P. W. and his Cavaliers, wishing, desiring, and labouring so? Nay what if the case had thus only stood with the Person of Quality, and all those his friends, that they might have alleged to themselves Articles of Peace and Publick Faith given them in such Articles, made (suppose it so) with his Majesty before his return from Breda? And what if the case had thus moreover stood with them, and P. W. and his Clients, and even with all those Cavaliers, that our Person of Quality, and his people, might have alleged a­gainst all for themselves, so many years constant fighting, Warring, suffering for, and adhering to the Kings Interest, in bondage, and in banishment, and that P. W.'s Irish friends, and the English Cavaliers had been the very persons, who had for so many years too, and ever since 41 unalterably, even to the year 59 or 60. (when they could no longer) fought against the King and them, and brought all the mise­ries of those times on all? would not he and his in such cases, and specially in the later, except against the unreasonable, groundless, unmercifull rigour, and against the inhumanity, injustice, and against the impudence also of P. W. and his Clients, and of the Cavaliers too? Would not he and his admire to see men, and, in the later case, men too so crimi­nal, so guilty themselves, and yet forgiven all their Crimes through the merciful indulgence of a good King, devest themselves notwithstanding, of all mercy, and all modesty, and all shame (and not of justice only) of purpose to make that very King, and for their own sakes who were (in the supposed case) always his enemies, destroy a million of his friends, and without any new cause given, ruine them for ever, without regard of either Mercy, or Justice, even to Articlers, or Innocents, or Widows, or Orphans, who had their Estates entayled upon them before the Wars, and ne­ver acted in the Wars any thing against the Laws? And yet, [Page 142] I dare say, that such a wish or endeavour of the Cavaliers, or even of P. W. and his Clients alone, would be in the former case, or in that which really is of both sides now, compa­ratively far more suiting with reason, and more excusable by necessity, than that of our Person of Quality here. Though I withall confess my self to be of this Judgement (as I have al­ways been, and as my Letter all along, and after that my Irish Colours folded, but most especially and plainly, in the Irish Co­lours folded, Pag: 32. conclusion demonstrates I have) that abstracting from the comparison, all such desires or wishes, and much more o­ther answerable endeavours, either of this Person of Quality, or of P. W. should he entertain the thoughts of any such, must be very uncharitable, and very unreasonable, and very unjust, and very unchristian, yea and inhumane too I say, and becoming rather some Turk, or some Tartar, or a Le­strigon and Canibal, than a man bred up amongst men, who know any thing of Religion, and retain any part of the com­mon resentments of Nature.

173. And for the practice of Joseph (which herein, that is, in reserving the Lands of all to the Kings free dispose, and transplanting the People, this Gentleman further wishes may Pag. 93. be his Grace's the Duke of Ormonds pattern) it is as farr as from East to West from giving any, even probable argu­ment, that may justifie that our Person of Quality's most cruel, barbarous, and savage desire: however he give this in the name of the Protestants of Ireland, but I believe without the concurrence of those who are truly such. Joseph reserved the Lands of all the Egyptians, the Priests only ex­cepted, to the free dispose of Pharaoh, because all the ve­ry Gen. 47. 26. Egyptians themselves, every man freely of himself, with­out any force, coaction, or necessity put upon them by Pha­raoh, or by Joseph, or by any mortal Creature, sold all their Lands to Joseph for meat in the seven years of the general Famine, and Joseph bought all for the use of Pha­raoh. And Joseph removed the people from one end of the borders of Egypt to the other end thereof, because the people themselves had upon the same occasion freely (as above) sold themselves, even their own Bodies, I say, for Bread, and Joseph had bought them all to Pharaoh's use for ever. [Page 143] But Joseph notwithstanding so just a title, dealed so equita­bly with them all, that albeit he saved their lives for seven years together, and preserved their stocks, and gave them seed to sowe their lands, and bought (as I have said) all both lands and stocks, and bodies too; yet when he remo­ved them, or those he thought fit, he removed them not into one little corner of Egypt, not into mountains, rocks, and boggs, nor into uncouth Wildernesses, but into a large and fruitfull soyl, abounding with all good things, as their own was, even into all the rich lands of Egypt, and into the mighty, opulent, and pleasant Cities in all those borders and quarters, and midland too of Egypt, and removed them al­so without encroaching on any others right, without preju­dicing any others title, without forcing any of the antient Inhabitants out of their own dwellings or lands, without a­ny kind of injury done to any, or any reluctancy or unwil­lingness being in any, either these that took the new posses­sions, or those that quitted their old habitations to give the new comers place; because all, as well these as those by their free act, without any kind of constraint, bound them­selves to acquiesce, and accordingly did so, and even ac­knowledged publickly and thankfully that they did so. And yet he dealed with them so equitably, that notwithstanding he transplanted them, all the Land of Egypt was still planted by those very transplanted persons, no share in the lands of Egypt given to strangers, none such brought or admitted in to supplant those Egyptians, not even the very true Israelites of God themselves acquiring, or possessing anew, but what they had before the Famine, and before any such bargain, and without the prejudice of any Egyptian, a little parcel in the land of Ramesses to graze the Cattle belonging to a small fam [...]ly of 70 Souls. And further yet he dealed so equi­tably with them, in reserving to Pharaoh's free dispose the rights they had formerly, and which now themselves had, in as much as in them lay, for ever bereaved themselves of, by their own free consent, and deed, that nevertheless by a new Law, which he made after all this, to hold forever in that Kingdom, those very Egyptians were entitled anew to four entire parts, and Pharaoh only to a fifth of the encrease [Page 144] of those very lands, which otherwise did for all parts wholly belong to him, as likewise did the very Oxen that ploughed Gen. 47. 26. the lands, and the very seed, and the very persons that did sowe them.

174. And this being the practice of Joseph, and that which I related, his title, how can our Person of Quality expect any advantage from either to his purpose? Certainly no sale of Lands, much less of Bodies to the Duke of Or­mond, or to his Majesty, or to any else for his Majesties use, or even for any other Persons use, as made by the Catho­licks of Ireland themselves, not only, not so freely, or without any kind of violence, force, compulsion, or neces­sity put upon them by any mortal man, but not even con­strainedly made by them, can be alleged by this Person of Quality, nor donation, nor exchange, nor promise of ei­ther, nor any other title whatsoever, if not his false pre­tence of a general breach of the Articles of 48. Which because I have abundantly shewed to be such, that is, de non ente, or a pretence of that which never had a being yet, and have shewed this too, by clearing most evidently all his Ar­guments to the contrary, and even by shewing them to be ridiculous, absurd, and very meer non sense: how can the practice of Joseph be a Pat [...]ern to the Duke of Ormond for confiscating all the estates of the Irish, and for the trans­planting of all their persons, even I say, in case the con­fiscation and transplantation of them, intended by this Gen­tleman were as mild, and as tollerable, as that of the Egyp­tians by Joseph? And since it is not by very many, and those too most highly considerable degrees, how can yet the practice of Joseph be a pattern to the Duke therein, even I say in case he had for such reservation, and such transplan­tation of the Lands and Persons of the Irish, the very same, or like right, or some other equivalent to that which Joseph had to r [...]serve the lands, and remove the People of Egypt? The reservation enacted by Joseph to the use of Pharaoh was of the fifth part only throughout all Egypt, leaving four an­swerable entire proportions for the Egyptians themselves: but the reservation, or confiscation this Gentleman drives at in Ireland, is of [...]ll the five parts, even of the whole; not so [Page 145] much as leaving one sole foot of Land u [...]to the Catholick Irish. And the Transplantation made by Joseph was into a Land as rich, and as large as the fields and whole extent of Egypt, and even unto the pleasant and beautiful Cities of that Country: But the Transplantation this Gentleman in­tends of the Irish, must be from all the best Land of Ireland, into the very worst of it, and must be from nineteen parts of the Land of Ireland, whereof they were the lawful Proprie­tors, and lately the Possessors, into farr less than the twen­tieth part of the whole, divided into twenty equal propor­tions; and must be into barren, desert, horrid places too, and must be without Cattel to stock that very Land, with­out Seed to sow, or Plough to manure it, without Servants, without Shelter, without House or Cabbin to lodge these Transplanted People in, or defend them from the Wolves, or from the Robbers, or Heat, or Cold, or other Inju­ries of the open Air. And the miserable Irish Transplanted so, must not even in those small Tracts allotted for them, within the narrow precincts of some parts of three or four Counties in Connaght and Tuomond, pitch in any place, or fix their dwelling Houses, or take any Lands within two miles of the River Shanon, four of the Sea, and four of Galway, the only City within their precinct: They must not enter this Town, or any other Corporate or Garrison'd Place, without particular Orders, at their peril, even of being taken by the throat, and thrown presently into Gaol; but if to look back on the Country of their Nativity, they dare set foot on the Bridge of Athlone without Pass, woe be unto them, either a builet or a cord must end their dayes. And none of them all must as much as bear the Office of a petty Constable, even amongst themselves, even within those very narrow precincts assigned for them to sojourn in. For the dwelling intended them, even there, can be no o­ther than that of Sojourners, or at least of Tenants at Will, since all the Lands of Ireland, except those of the Priests, are desired by this Gentleman to be reserved by Law to the Kings free dispose, viz. to be disposed again by the King to him, and to his People. So that if he prevail, the whole Irish Nation must be perpetual Bondslaves in their own [Page 146] Country, or like the accursed Jewes, wandring and roam­ing abroad for ever amongst Foreiners.

175. Behold Reader, the Transplantation of the People of Ireland, and the Reservation of their Lands, which our Person of Quality drives at, even the very same Transplanta­tion, and the very same Reservation invented first (but not for the Kings use) and put in execution after by Usurpers, and by Tyrants, by the Rump Parliament, and by the Pro­tector Cromwel, and by Ludlow, and Corbet, and Jones, and Fleetwood their Commissioners in Ireland in the days of dread and darkness. And whether such reserving of the Irish lands, and such Transplanting of the Irish People to be made into a Law for ever by the Duke of Ormonds furtherance, or by him to be renewed, or by him to be as much as either conti­nued or permitted, have the practice of Joseph for a pattern, do you judge, even I mean in case the Duke had undeniably the very title of sale, or emption, or the right acquired by forfeiture, or any other answerable to that which Joseph had.

176. But forasmuch as our Person of Quality's malice to the Irish, and Catholicks in general, is known to be such, that he will make use of any thing, how weak and insignifi­cant soever, to give some colour of Justice, or some right, or some title at least to enact or continue this Transplantati­on so unmercifull, and because I doubt not he will endea­vour to abuse those that will believe him, with a pretext of some exchange, or some bargain made by the Irish them­selves, when they were thrown out of their own habitati­ons, and put to Conaght, and the proprietors of, or dwel­lers in such lands in Conaght as were assigned to the rest of the Irish, were likewise constrained to flit; You (good Reader) may be pleased to observe,

1. That of twenty or thirty, nay I may say, thirty and twice thirty thousand Irish Proprietors, not one thousand of all, or near a thousand received the least kind of compensa­tion, not so much as one foot of land, either in Conaght or Clare, or elsewhere from the Tyrants, or from any else since their time.

2. That the twentieth part, nay the fortieth of those [Page 147] that sued for Decrees, Intents, or Charitable subsistence, or whatever else you call it (according to the language and rule in the then Courts of Athlone, & Logriagh, held for such pur­poses, and according to the variety of Qualifications prescri­bed by the cruel mercy of those Parliamentary Cromwellians, who then ruled all) nay not the fortieth part of such as pre­vailed in their sute, and were looked upon with some kind of pity, had yet any valuable consideration of lands assigned them, not only not for Inheritance, but not even for tenan­cy at will, for which any rational man in the world might pre­sume they had made an exchange of their own proper estates, whereunto no body else but Rebels then and Usurpers did then any way pretend, and whereof themselves, I mean the Irish then, or a little before, were lawfully possess'd, and their posterity after them should have the lawfull inheri­tance.

3. That we know some of those had not above ten pound Lands per annum assigned them in Conaght, whose proper Estates at home in their own Countries, whence they had been so removed, were worth a thousand a year.

4. That in case a bargain could be alleged here, as it can not; and although it be true that a bargain is a bargain; yet it is likewise true, that a forced bargain is still a forced bar­gain, and not, simply or properly speaking, any bargain at all, when it is betwixt Subjects, or twixt a Loyal Subject and a Rebel, or with an usurping Tyrannical Traytor, that by plain force and starving, and threats of exile and death, put in execution on some to terrifie others, and signified to all by open Proclamation, and really so intended for all, ex­torts from his fellow Subjects such a bargain. And that he must be a very bad Christian, and a very bad Subject, and of very little honesty or reason, that would perswade the law­full Prince to confirm such bargains, when he can otherwise choose, and when such bargains (were there any such) re­late unto a case as ours at present is, where so many thou­sands, where a whole Nation of his good Subjects must be lost for ever by a general Transplantation of them all, enact­ed by law, or continued otherwise, and upon such grounds, and even to gratifie such people, as both invented and exe­cuted it.

[Page 148] 5. That as well others that received such inconsiderable assignments of land in Connaght, and others too that got no­thing at all, and yet were transplanted thither, allege all for themselves, that manifest violence, force, necessity put upon them, as well by turning them out of their own houses and lands, and fleecing them of all their goods, monies, and stocks, and so reducing them to a starving condition, by hunger, and cold, as by the Proclamation (which I have before given, treating of this very same subject, in another part of this book) for transplanting, and (which is more) for suing out Decrees in the Courts of Athlone, and both at their highest peril, and by the rigorous execution of that Proclamation, (the long imprisonment of some, and the exile of others, and the death of Hedrington in the Market-place at Dublin, for not obeying it, as the Paper on his breast, when he was executed, expressing the Cause of his death, did manifest) and by the general rule so well known, they had to force the obedience of all the Irish to that Pro­clamation, Turning them to the Barbados, or putting them to death, expressed in plain English at Killkenny, by Colonel Axtel in the case of Mrs. Martha Harpoll.

6. That how-ever this be, all the transplanted Irish to a man, at least, the generality of them, (and hereof I am very certain) deny any kind of exchange or bargain made by them for such lands, in lieu of their own proper Estates, or any release given, or evidences delivered, or disclaim made, or writings drawn, or promise engaged to quit from thence­forth, or at any time after, their own former titles to those Estates, whence they had been so forcibly removed. And likewise deny, that they could, if they would, prejudice or bind those of their children, who had, by ancient, or late agreements, before the Wars, those very Estates entayled upon them.

7. Finally, that if there be any law in England or Ireland that in the letter may seem to confirm bargains of such a na­ture, as binding, were there, I say, any bargains at all of what nature soever, relating to the generality of the trans­planted Irish, or to the right of transplanting them; or if there be any law, which in the Letter seems to intitle his Ma­jesty [Page 149] to a right of continuing, or enacting a Transplantation, so illegally invented first, and so tyrannically executed after, P. W. thinks all good men, and good Lawyers in the world, will be notwithstanding of opinion, that the sense and equity of such municipal laws, (if there be any such) must be other­wise, and the laws of God far otherwise, and the laws of Nations too.

177. Yet, if our Person of Quality can prove, that any one, or more, of all these poor transplanted Irish, have, with­out any such constraint, force, necessity put upon, or vio­lence used towards him or them, or without any rational fear of running the hazard of the penalties threatned by the said Proclamation, and by the rules for observing it, gone into Connaght, or sued for Decrees, accepted other Lands, or otherwise given up hs own former Estate, and quitted all his rights to it for ever; and if our Person of Quality would be so modest, as to desire the Transplantation of such only to be continued, or enacted by law, provided such be not transplanted into any other Loyal Subjects Lands, or into the Estates of those Connaght Irish, who have themselves the just plea of Articles, or Innocence, as well as others: and if our Person of Quality would be yet further so modest in that other of Reservation as to desire only the reserving of such Lands of the Irish to the King's free dispose, as before indifferent Judges shall be proved in open Court, upon a legal trial, to have traytorously or perfidiously broke the Articles of 48. by any rebellious or contumacious disobedi­ence to his Majesties Lieutenant the Duke of Ormond, or to the Lord Marquess of Clanrickard, for a time after Deputy, P. W. promises, in case of such modesty, or such moderation at any time hereafter to be used by our Person of Quality, to joyn with him, not in wish onely or desire, but in prayer also to God, that herein the practise of Joseph may be his Grace' [...] (the Duke of Ormond's) pattern, reserving the fifth part only to his Majesties free dispose of Lands forfeitable, and removing the persons transplantable, if any be such, into as good Land as their own was, and removing them even to the good Cities in all the borders of Ireland; yet with a proviso (if he please) that the true English interest, and even the [Page 150] true English Religion be evermore secured. And whether our Person of Quality do so reform or no, his own desires, or his own wishes, or intentions, as to that of the practise of Joseph to be the Duke's pattern herein; yet P. W. shall ever, and from the very bottom of his soul devoutly pray the bles­sings of Joseph may be the Duke's portion, even by the God of his Father who shall help him, and the Almighty who shall bless Gen. 49. V. 25, and 26. him with blessings of Heaven above, and blessings of the deep that lyeth under, and the blessings of the breasts, and of the womb, That all these blessings be on the head of this Joseph, and on the Crown of the head of him that was separate from (those which call themselves) his brethren, and who was made such, Gen. 45. V. 7, and 8. or separated by God himself, to preserve them a posterity on earth, and to save their lives by a great deliverance.

And so, Reader, concluding here my animadversions upon this Person of Qualitie's Comments, it remains that I leave both to thy Judgment, whatever party thou art of; and that withall you determine freely of the truth or falsity of his grand charge against my letter, in the first page of his book, where he says, that in effect he hath found it (whatever the words of it are) extremely undutiful to his Sacred Majesty, very Pag. 1. disrespectful to the Duke of Ormond Lord Lieutenant of Ire­land, and most scandalous, not only to the Protestants of Ireland, but also to those of the same Religion in his Sacred Majecties other Kingdomes. And further, that with the same freedome you determine whether I cannot groundedly answer his fol­lowing and first Dilemma there, and boldly say, that I writ that Letter out of very much respect to his Grace, and out Pag. 2. of no less respect did print it; and that you determine like­wise whether my light in the Triangle, acknowledged in that very Letter to be such that it cannot be extinguished, give any ground to this Gentleman's fond conception of P. W's de­spairing to receive from his Grace the effects of his (not unjust, as this Person of Quality speaks, but) very just desires for his Countrymen? Or of P. W's choosing this way to acquaint them, 'twas not for want of his sollicitation, and to let them see, since he could not make them beholding to my Lord Lieute­nant, Pag. 2. that they were so to him? But I freely pardon the Gen­tleman's erronious conjecture all along of my despair, or of [Page 151] my design, being the Holy Week, and the Ceremony of Te­nebrae, and the Triangle, and the only Light remaining unex­tinguished, which yet he might have seen in that Letter, seem to be Mysteries, wherewith he is not so well acquaint­ed, as to understand thereby a hope remaining still in P. W. and surmounting at last all the despair of others.

And I will say no more, but that we have heard from a Person of Quality Reproaches, which by the number of them seek to make up their want of truth: And have seen Wit made the Slave of Malice, and the foulest obloquies put into a formal dress; and have beheld the degrees of Crimes inverted, and while the more hainous pass with im­punity, the lesser offences condemned to the chastisement due to those of the first rank. And have likewise heard good intentions alleged to justifie murthers, rapines, desolation, and standing in Arms against the King. And have finally observed that self-interest, and complying with a prevail­ing party, hath managed a very elaborate discourse to the worst end a man by writing could propose to himself, which is to deceive his Reader: and that nothing would be want­ing to compleat the Iniquity of the Design, but to find out that this Unknown Author was a Person who had the experi­ence of more guilt in himself than he imposed upon others.