the Exercile of his Ministrie And that the Presbytrie of Dalkeith And others havers of the Lybels given in against him and Depositions of the Witnesses may make the same patent to him as Law appoints That he may know what is lybelled or may seem to be proven to the effect he may the better clear himself of the samen which is nothing but false lyes and calumnies And whereof several of the Presbyterian Ministers who have seen the Lybels and Depositions Affirm that there is nothing proven But the dancing about the Bon-Fire which is not only clearly redargued to be false as said is there being no Bonfires either on the foresaid day nor for several moneths either before or after But likewise if the persons who have deponed it were known and re-examined it will be found they have deponed falsly And that they have been dealt with so to Depone And that this Falshood may not be discovered not only are the Depositions kept up contrary to express Law and Act of Parliament But likewise no notice can be gotten who were the persons who have deponed it that they may be insisted against Whereas it is pretended That the Lords of their Majesties Privy Council are not Judges competent to the sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts and that as they cannot put in Ministers in Churches so they cannot meddle with sentences of Depositions It is answered 1 mo That be the 1 Act 8 Parl Ja 6 It is Statute and Ordained That his Majestie and Council shall be Judges competent To all persons Spiritual and Temporal in all matters And to pretend that the Council is not Judge competent to sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts is no other then to affirm That these Courts have an Arbitrary power and may do wrong at their pleasure without Remeed or control For it is evident That Mr. Heriot is most unjustly pursued and Deposed And it is also evident that if it be not Redressed be the Council he will never be Restored be those Ministers who have dealt so unjustly with him And whereas it is alledged That as the Council cannot put in Ministers so they cannot meddle with sentences of Deposition It is answered That the Council has not the power of Admission and Ordination of Ministers But if a Minister having a lawful Call the Presbyterie should refuse to Admit and Ordain him albeit they have nothing to object against him upon Application to the Council or Session Letters will be direct to Charge the Presbyterie to Admit and Ordain him but multo magis in this case where a Minister is Deposed from his Ministrie as likewise from his Benefice which is his Livelyhood and Maintenance And yet most unjustly and without Ground or Reason The Council is most proper Judge for Restoring him against the foresaid Oppression Injurie and Unjust Sentence And for a further evidence of this unjust Sentence it is Humbly desired that the Lords of Their Majesties Privy Council will be pleased to take notice That in the first Lybel there are many Articles which are not Relevant And it is said that there is none of them proven but the Dancing about the Bonfire And yet the Presbytery by their Sentence found the Lybel Relevant and Proven which must be understood as to the hail Articles of the Lybel complexlie then which there is nothing more false as will appear by the Lybels and Depositions if they were produced And yet thereupon Mr Heriot is first suspended be the Presbytery and referred be them to the General Assembly for further Censure as if great Immorralities in Life and Errours in Doctine had been proven against him And the Synod to which the Assembly remitted him following the steps of the Presbytery deposed him Now when Presbytery and Synod have acted thus contrary to express Law and have done open and manifest Unjustice and whereof all that heard of it are convinced and sensible And having stated themselves Parties against him there can be no Remedie expected from the said Unjustice Injury and Oppression unless the Lords of Their Majesties Privy Council interpose their Authority If it be alledged That be the late Act of Parliament The Act of Supremacy in Church matters is Rescinded It is Answered That the Act of Parliament 1669 is Rescinded which extended the Supremacy to the Ordering and Disposal of the External Government and Policy of the Church and to the Enacting of Constitutions Acts and Orders in the Church But the foresaid Act of K Ja 6 his 8 Parliament is not Rescinded which is only as to the Judging of Ecclesiastick Persons in matters complained upon And which power is inherent to the Crown otherwayes there should be Regnum in Regno And Church Judicatories should have Arbitrary power without Redress or Control as said is In Regard whereof The Lords of Their MAJESTIES Privy Council are Judge Competent to this Injurie Vnjustice and Oppression And the Desire of the Petitions ought to be Granted A short Relation of the Presbytery of Dalkeith their procedure in Reference to the Sentencing of Mr. Alexander Heriot and their planting of the Congregation of Dalkeith IT is not to be doubted but that a late Pamphlet called An Information for Mr. Alexander Heriot Designed Minister at Dalkeith hath spread through a great part of this Kingdom and it may perhaps be thought strange that none of the Members either of the Presbytery of Dalkeith or Synod of Louthian and Tweddale have appeared to vindicate the Innocency of these Judicatories and to wipe off the soul Aspersions cast upon them by that defamatory Paper But the truth is an Answer to that Paper was prepared about four Moneths ago and the Reason why the publication thereof was at that time delayed was because it was judged convenient to know the mind of the Synod whose integrity was also questioned and reproached by the Informer before any Answer to that Paper should be emitted But the Synod sitting in May last and judging the Calumnies of that Paper obvious enough declined to trouble themselves with any review thereof as a thing not worthy of their time But some of the Synod put it in the hands of a Person whose acquaintance with the process of Mr. Heriot qualified him to descry the Informers lies thereanent And again this Person being diverted with a throng of business till the Plantation of the Kirk of Dalkeith was near an Issue it was thought expedient still to forebear the Answer of that Paper till the Answerer might be able to give a joynt view of the process of Mr. Heriot and of the method taken for the settlement of the Paroch of Dalkeith with a qualifyed Minister Which being now brought to an happy Period it seems high time after so long forbearance to undeceive all that are willing to know the truth and to give in the first place a compendious but distinct account of the Process and then refell the Informers mis-representation of the same only let this be premitted that the reason why
to do some greater mischief to Church and State than to protect or relieve Mr. Heriot from a deserved Church-Censure There that are wiser than I may enquire into this if they please However when persons manifestly disaffected to the Civil Government come to plead for the enlarging and streaching of the limits thereof some of these Honourable Governours will be in hazard of remembring the saying of the old Trojan Politician quicquid id est timeo Danaos Dona ferentes 23. Amongst others of Mr. Heriots falsehoods and calumnies I suppose that is one he has in this paragraph I am now answering viz. That severals of the Presbyterian Ministers who have seen the Lybels and Depositions affirm that there is nothing proven but the Dancing about the Bonefire for I am sure that no rational man after he has read the Depositions will say that there is nothing proven but his Dancing so that these Persons be speaks of must either not have seen the Depositions or not have said and spoken so as he alledges and I am sure that both Statsemen Lawyers and Ministers after sight of the Process and Depositions have said that the Presbytery might well have deposed him 24. Whereas Mr. Heriot does again and again make a horrible clamour about making the Depositions of the Witnesses patent and their persons known that they may be insisted against c. Here he discovers plainly his malicious design in demanding so often the making patent to him the names and Depositions of the Witnesses viz. Not that he may Answer and vindicate himself though sometimes he pretends to this impossibility but that they may be insisted against and that he may pursue them for telling the Truth and that even after they have sworn it according to the best of their knowledge and conscience And let all rational persons judge if there be any shew of Candor or Honesty here in his threatning to pursue the Witnesses meerly for their declaring and that upon Oath when called to it what they and others saw with their Eyes and heard with their Ears does not this sort of threatning course warrand the Church Judicatories before whom the Process lyes to demand of Mr. Heriot and his party in Dalkeith that they give sufficient security to the Magistrat of their good and peacable behaviour towards these Witnesses before the whole Process can be Printed with safety to the Witnesses especially considering what violence has been already executed upon and is yet farher threatned against others by divers of Mr. Heriot's party in Dalkeith Here also the Reader may percieve a satsfying Reason why in the preceeding short Narrative of the Process the names of the Witnesses are not expressed However Mr. Heriot may remember for he doth know it that some of these Witnesses have avowed and asserted to his face even that Article of his Dancing about the Bonfire and other things too and that even since he emitted his threatning and lying Information and although there were unworthy and indirect means and menaces used by his party to daunt the Witnesses and drive them from their Testimony To all this may be added that the Authentick Depositions of the Witnesses were by the Presbytery given in to the General Assembly to have been publickly seen and read there as they were afterwards again and again before the Synod which shews that the Presbytery were no wayes Jealous of their validity and sufficiency for probation 25 Toward the end of his Information he supplicats the Lords of their Majesties Privy Council to take notice of this as a further evidence of the unjustice of the Sentence that in the first Lybel there are many Articles which are not Relevant and yet the Presbytery by their Sentence found the Lybel relevant and proven which must be understood saith he as to the hail Articles of the Lybel complexly than which there is nothing more false these last words are his but the Reader may take them as the true Answer to what he has said and he aggravates this as a very great miscarriage and boldly alledges that both Presbytery and Synod have Acted contrary to express Law and have done open and manifest unjustice whereof all that heard of it are convinced and sensible c. Ans 1. Bona Verba These things need no confutation they are so evidenty false and ridiculous What need was there for Mr. Heriot to proclaim himself in Print to be a Child in Ecclesiastical affairs How does he affront the Honourable Lords of Privy Council by proposing such Stuff unto them as this and several other things in his Petitions He quarrels and challenges the Presbytery for sustaining the Lybel as Relevant because as he saith there are many Articles in it which are not Relevant this is rare Reasoning indeed Does he not know that if there had been but one Article in the Lybel Relevant and other twenty in it not of that weight yet the Lybel is Relevant notwithstanding For these other lesser Articles do no hurt to the Relevancy of the main Article and consequently of the Lybel and has he forgotten the old Proverb Et quae non prosunt singula juncta juvant But the Reader may judge of the Relevancy of the Lybel by the preceeding Narrative 2. As to what he adds that this Acting of the Presbytery and Synod against him is such an open and manifest unjustice as that all that heard of it are convinced and sensible of it This is such a gross and manifest lie that I doubt whether he can make a greater except he have taught his Tongue an extraordinary skill in that Art Is it not time to leave and let him alone when his rage and impudence is arrived at such a hight 26 Yet before I let him go it will not be amiss now in the close of this Paper after having got such a taste of his skill in Divinity and Church-Government to consider his skill in Law and Acts of Parliament and I trow this Informer will be found no happier in the Law-part of his Paper than he was in the Ecclesiastick part thereof 1. He sayes It is pretended that the Lords of Privy Council are not Judges competent to the Sentence of Ecclesiastick Courts and that as they cannot place so they cannot displace or depose Ministers But he Answers that by the first Act 8. Parliament Ja. the 6 It is statute that the King and Council shall be Judges competent to all persons spiritual and temporal in all matters and he sayeth that to affirm that the Council is not Judge competent to the Sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts is to give these Courts an Arbitrary power to do wrong at pleasure without remeed or control Ans To this it is replyed that in a matter that hath been so much debated and is now so well understood it is strange that any man assuming to instruct others should so much darken counsel without knowledge For. 1. To make a Court soveraign is not to make a
Court Arbitrary and yet this is the Informers only Argument why no Ecclesiastick Court can be Soveraign in the matter of Censures Because then it would be Arbitrary 2 The highest Asserters of the Supremacy before the Act of Parliament 1669 Which is now rescinded did never affirm that the King or Council might by themselves reverse or redress Censures purely Ecclesiastick but the outmost by them acclaimed was and is that all remedy by Church Judicatures failing the King or Council might with advice of the sanior pars put a stop to the procedure for some competent time and recommend a review till better order might be re-established But 3 ly The Informer might have found the Act of Parliament that he cites thereafter plainly interpreted and restricted viz. By the first Act of Parliament 12. Ja. 6. Intituled Ratification of the Liberty of the true Kirk whereby it is expresly declared that the Act cited by the Informer shall no wayes be prejudicial to nor derogate any thing from the priviledge that God has given to the spititual Office-bearers in the Church concerning the collation or deprivation of Ministers c. But this last Act the Informer did not or would not think on And certainly to understand the former Act so laxly as he doth and to apply it to a case so plain and obvious as Mr. Heriot's Deposition were no less then to overturn the Church and introduce confusion 2. But in Answer to what is said viz. That the Council cannot put in Ministers and therefore cannot meddle with Sentences deposing them the Informer tells us that though the Council has not the power of Admission and Ordination yet if a Presbyrery should refuse without cause to admitt and ordain a Minister having a lawfull Call Letters may be direct to charge them to do it multo magis in the case of Deposition is the Council the most proper Judge to restore against the oppression of an unjust Sentence Ans But 1. The Informer forgets that the Council Power to charge in the case he supposes was allowed to fortify the presentation of the Patrons when in use and so to maintain that mixed Right partly Civil and partly Ecclesiastical which they pretended to But now that presentations are abolished and that the matter of Calling and of Entering Ministers is by the late Act of Parliament referred to the Determination of the Presbytery of the bounds to be by them concluded the remedy in case of difference upon a Call must no longer be by Letters of Horning but by Appeals to the Synod and from the Synod to the Assembly to be there ultimatly determined And 2 ly There is besides this mistake in the case supposed a great disparity and inconsequence in the Argument thereon founded For Esto that the Lords of Council may put the Presbyteries to do their duty it doth not therefore follow that in case they refuse the Council may do it for them which yet must be the Informers inference or otherwise he concludes nothing But all the Magistrate doth in such a case is to bring the matter before some Superior Ecclesiastick Court that may supply the fault of the Inferior which without the Magistrate's interposing hath through Mr. Heriots importunity been done in this case once and again much more than was necessary 3. But why in the matter of an ordinary Sentence of Deposition judged and rejudged by the judicatories of the Church should the Informer bring things to these extremes as if we were in the case of some great and important matter about which the Church it self was divided and the Magistrat oblidged to interpose for preventing some ruining prejudice Certainly if such clamours be allowed on every occasion of this kind the excellent Establishment which we have lately by Law obtained is of little or no use and both King and People must be in perpetual disquiet For can the Informer upon the smallest reflection think that his clamour should preponderate with the Magistrat to the Sentence of the Presbytery ratified over and again by the Synod and the Assembly whom God and the Law have intrusted with the final Judgment of such matters So that were the Sentence even doubtful as it is not yet it s very Authority should oblidge to an acquiescence How much more is the Informer to be blamed who notwithstanding of Mr. Heriot's undenyable contumacy and several gross Immoralities proven against him whereof almost any one is sufficient for Deposition doth upon some ill applyed notions of form and other bold falshoods and calumnies in point of Fact ofter to make such a stirr and noise which yet no wise man regards Finally To what is said I add a few words more 1. This Juridico-Theologaster might have remembered if he had not forgotten his Logicks that two Powers as well as other things may be so far distinct as to be neither Co-ordinata nor Subordinata but Disparata And I take it neither to be Heterodoxical nor Paradoxical to say so of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Power for it hath been asserted by no mean men yea sometimes before the Supreme Judicatory of this Kingdom and that upon the highest peril So that Mr. Heriot might very well have spared his idle and ignorant Story of a Regnum in Regno 2. Mr. Heriot by his heterogeneous Appeal has made way for farther extravagancy of this kind For some of his sort I have sâ—umbâ—ed upon a rare kind of Appealing from the Presbytery to the Synod Commission of the Church General Assembly Council of State and the King all at once simul semel and thereby if this sort of saltus come in fashion do enervate and render all Judicatories both Civil and Ecclesiastical in a great measure useless and would bring all to the Kings personal and immediate determination when ever any party finds or but fancies that he is wronged by any Judicatory and what the consequences of this ridiculous sort of Appealing would be some men will not have the fear and cannot have the wit to foresee 3. As to the particular case in hand What ever the Civil power or Supremacy may be or is according to Law I thought it had been reserved for greater and better uses and ends than the sheltering of a Scandalous Curate from the moderate just Legal and deserved Censure and Sentence of Judicatories acting according to the established Laws and if either Civil or Ecclesiastical Judicatories suffer themselves and their legally settled order to be disturbed by such groundless bold and false clamours and alledgeances as these of Mr. Heriot they may be sure of disturbance enough for this and the following Generations But they are wise enough to foresee and prevent this and other evils designed by the common Adversaries POSTSCIRPT SInce the preceeding Answer to Mr. Heriots Information was drawn I have had a sight of a second Edition of that Paper which has these words in the close added to the former And whereas some persons have strongly asserted to
the far greatest and best part of the Heretors and Elders and which is likwise approven by the far greatest and best part of the rest of the Housholders to which likwise the approbation of the far greatest number of the Servants and Women in the Paroch can be had if it were necessary whereas the call given to Mr. Meen is by very few of the Heretors and Elders and few of those of any consideration and by the other persons foresaids whi are likewise in a mean condition and has not the right and priviledge to Call 2. Mr Lundie was formerly Minister at Dalkeith a Person above all exception and eminent in Learning Ability in Preaching Piety Charity and in diligence in all the parts of the Ministerial Function and of singular and exemplar Life and Conversation whom the Heretor Elders and Parishoners of Dalkeith know and by whom they have been greatly edified whereas Mr. Mein Is not known to them and is of meaner Gifts and Abilities and who was rejected and refused by other obscure Parishes And by whom they cannot be edified so that be ought not to be imposed and intruded upon them which will Infalliblly prove as incomfortable to him as troublesome to them And therefore the Heretors and Elders who has called Mr. Lundie protests as formerly against the foresaid unlawful Call given to the said Mr. William Mein and against the Presbyteries proceedings upon the said Call and appeals as formerly from the Presbyterie to the next Synod and to their Majesties and Lords of their Majesties Privy Council for justice and relief therein in the mean time To the first it was Answered that the Presbytery is satisfied as to the Legality of the Election of the Eldership and that they own no Eldership there but that which was erected by them And that because the Act of Parliament restoring Presbytery did put the Government in their hands and such as should be raceived by them and that there is no need of of a setled Minister in order to the Election of an Eldership To the second it was answered that the subscriptions of Deacons is only cumulative and ex abundantia they subscribing only as Consenters Albeit the calling of a Minister be lodged in the Heretors and Elders yet no Law inhibits other parishoners to testify their approbation of the thing by their manual subscriptions to the Call To the 3 which hath two Branches it was answered and 1 st To the first Branch as was above answered to the 2 d Objection Moreover it were no sollecism tho' all the heads of Families within the Parish had subscribed 2. To the other Branch it were tedious and would prove unnecesary to canvass every individual subscription but the Presbytery has done nothing in this case but what the Law allows and is commonly practised To the 4 th wherein a competition is alledged to be between the Call given to Mr. William Mein and another given to Mr. James Lundie it s answered there is no such competition there being no Legal Call at all to Mr. Lundie as appears from what is above mentioned And it may be thought Strange why Gentlemen who its hoped doe value both their own and Mr. Lundie's credit doe borrow his name to a mock Call and urge it in a matter so serious and weighty For whatever Strangers not knowing the case may be made to believe Yet the Presbytery of Dalkeith know That the very Gentlemen that presented this alledged Call did before them judicially confess that there only design was but to prevent the jus Devolutionis But to come to the Reasons alledging Mr. Lundie's Call to be preferable to the other 1. To the first it s answered that all the Elders subscribe Mr. Meins Call and none Mr. Lundie's and that the Presbytery understands Mr. Meins Call to be subscribed by the most considerable part of the Heretours especially the Dutches of Buccleuch who is the cheif Heretour having given consent to it by her Grace's Honourable Commissioners To the 2 d. It s answered 1. That whatever relation Mr. Lundie might have had to the Parish of Dalkeith formerly yet he hath none at present 2. That tho' the Presbytery thinks it not fit to compare Mr. Meins and Mr. Lundie's Gifts or other endowments together nor yet to flater the one and derogat from the other Yet they are satisfied with the Ministerial qualifications of Mr. William Mein as also with his practice Conversation and fitness for the Parish of Dalkeith And the Presbytery makes no question but through the Blessing of God upon his Labours he may prove an useful Instrument in that Corner of our Lords Vinyeard 3. It s a most calumnious untruth that ever Mr. William Mein was refused or rejected by any Parish whether famous or obscure Whoso are acquaint with him know that he is of another Spirit than to thrust Himself upon a People that are not sueing for Him Neither is the Presbytery resolved to intrude him upon the Parish of Dalkeith but fairly to settle him there upon a Legal Call from the plurality of the Heretours and all the Elders And as no faithful Minister of Christ can warrantably expect immunity from troubles So its hoped God shall support Mr. Mein under what he may meet with The Presbytery having considered the Objections and found them by the Answeres given to be non relevant and laying no weight on them nor upon the protestation founded thereon did without farther Demurr judicially tender the Call to Mr. William Mein and upon his modest Submission appointed the day whereon he might be addmitted And accordingly upon the Seventh of July 1691. After a Sermon Preached with Reference to the occasion Mr. William Mein was admitted Minister of the Gospel at Dalkeith in the Kirk of Dalkeith The Presbytery having given him the Right hand of Fellowship and the Heretours and Elders having received him as their Minister It s true the two Persons above mentioned and Mungo Strachan appeared upon this occasion also and renewed their respective protestations but the Presbytery having answered them formerly proceeded now notwithstanding thereof An Answer to Mr. Heriots Information NOw for Answer to the Paper called Information for Mr. Alexander Heriot wherein his Case and Cause is grosly mis-represented we say with the wise man He that is first in his own Cause seemeth just but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him and then there is a further discovery of Truth and Equity and therefore although it would be both needless and nauseous to give a particular and distinct Answer to every thing in that Printed Information yet for satisfaction of some that may be ignorant or mis-informed and so puzled with many positive Assertions of great untruths lies and calumnies therein contained it is thought fit at present to remark these few things following in order according to the Method of the foresaid Information 1. He calls the Synod of the three Louthians and Tweddale the Synod of Mid-Louthian
disowned in the Prelatick Government which owns no other Officers than these Patriarchs Primates Metropolitans Arch-Bishops Bishops Arch-Deans Deans Prebends Rectors Vicars Priests Deacons Curats Church-Wardens Sides-Men Sextons and the rest of the Apocriphal Tribe of Mr. Heriots Regular Clergy which he again and again talks of in his Information And I needed not to have omitted the Pope for he belongs to the same Tribe and diverse of the Prelatick Protestants do own him as the first Bishop that is to say the Head of the Clan And for my part I am content that all go together as birds of the same Feather 3 As to the alledged inconsiderableness of these Elders chosen by the more regular party in Dalkeith they are nothing inferior to Mr. Heriots nominal Elders in any thing that is good and considerable And for their number they exceed not what they were wont to be in times of Reformation 4. As for their design to obtrude a Minister upon the Parish contrary to the profession of Presbyterians c. Ans 1· Is it not pleasant to see Mr. Heriot teaching Presbyterians their own Principles and pleading for them Who can but laugh at it especially if they consider how ill he has learned either his own or theirs as we have seen Supra 2. The Prelatick principles and practices are in this thing too well know to be so soon forgotten And Mr. Heriot seeming to plead for the power of Ruling Elders and the liberty of the Parish in choosing and calling a Minister shews him to be no true Prelatist and consequently neither good Fish nor Flesh. It may be he will say that this was but his Argumentum ad Hominem But then let him take the Answer here given both ad hominem ad rem that his Argument is really ad neutrum 3. It is also well known that Presbyterians deny no member of the Congregation liberty to object against the Intrant and if their objections bear weight and be found just and relevant they are regarded if not rejected And if this course had been observed all alongst it may be questioned whether Mr. Heriot would have got entrance there 4. It may very easily and rationally be supposed that the present Eldership of Dalkeith with the advice and concurrence of the Presbytery when needed and desired may have as good skill of choosing a fit Minister as Mr Heriot and his Party 22. Mr. Heriot not being content with all the insolent Language and usage he has given to the Church Judicatories goes yet farther and ventures upon an untroden Path that he may rid himself of all Church Judicatories and by a Salius quite extra oleas betakes himself to the Lords of their Majesties most Honourable privy Council and supplicates them upon the matter utterly to overthrowthe Government of the Church and the Laws establishing it and to take upon them to judge and pass definitive Sentences in causes meerly Ecclesiastick For he and his Party have petitioned their Lordships to discharge the calling of a Minister while the Appeal be discust and that in the mean time he may be restored to the exercise of his Ministry c. Answer 1. By this trick of Mr. Heriot's if it pass into an approven example and precedent he has cut out abundance of new work for the Honourable Lords of Council I may say for all the dayes of the year not excepting even these dayes which Mr. Heriot calls Sundayes But their Lordships are wise enough to foresee what a vast deal of their precious time it would require to concert and adjust all these differences that arise through the Kingdome about the settling and unsettling of Ministers I suppose their Lordships would soon wearie of it and truly Mr. Heriot in his betaking himself unto their Lordships seems not to have been sufficiently sensible of the greatness of their work otherwise but it is like Mr. Heriot thinks himself and his concern so considerable that it deserves time and place amongst the most weighty affairs of the Kingdom and therefore he puts their Lordships in minde that he is not only deposed from his Ministry but likwise from his Benefice which is his Livelyhood and Maintenance and herein tandem aliquando he speaks ingenuously and brings forth the great Gravamen and quarrel which has occasioned all the clamour and noise we have heard Oh it is the grand lose of his Benefice Livleyhood and Maintinence Quis taliu fando temperet a Lachrymis But who lamented the case when several hundreds of a better character were for smaller faults turned out of their Livelyhoods Surely none of his party 3. This device of Mr. Heriots seems to aim at and tend unto nothing less in some mens apprehension at least than the overthrow of the Civil Government it self for upon the matter he supplicates the Council to invade the late Claim of Right and bring back again that Supremacy which the Convention of Estates claimed to be abrogated as one the grievances of the Nation And in prosecution of this wicked design he cites an antiquated and abrogated Act of Parliament of which more anon and suggests falsly and ignorantly that by the Churches enjoying her wonted and just liberties and priviledges there would be Regnum in Regno and a liberty for the Church to do wrong at her pleasure without controle But we may easily know whose heifer he plougheth with here this is but a new towt in an old horn our worthy Ancestors have solidly and learnedly answered and anticipated these suggestions and because their Testimony and judgment may perhaps have but little weight with Mr. Heriot I would minde him of the Judgement and practice of some of his more sound and honest Brethren and Fathers viz. Those seven Prelates who were put in the Tower of London in the time of the late King James for their Legal adherence unto and asserting of the Churches power and priviledge and that in a strain far contrary to this of Mr. Heriots and it were easie to adduce other instances of more learned and sound men of the prelatical way than Mr. Heriot as to this head of Church-power But I suppose it is needless neither are the Honourable Lords of their Majesties Council so easily imposed upon as to be cheated by such a silly Cavil as this which Mr. Heriot here suggests for they know that Church-Officers do not deny nor refuse the Allegiance of Subjects nor does their power reach mens persons further than what is necessary for suppressing of wickedness and Scandal which Mr. Heriot and his Advocats seem to reckon a doing of wrong without controle nor does the Ecclesiastick power claimed and exerced by Presbyterians reach mens properties any way at all 4 What if there be the hand of some Joab in this contrivance of disturbing the Honourable Privy Council with a business of this nature What if some greater Head-piece than Mr. Heriot has hood-winked him and put him upon this desperate Course and that on purpose
Hereditary Traitor another Rebel and Disturbers of our Israel and other stuff to this purpose 5. His rejoycing and shewing evidences of cheerfulness at the News of the Defeat of the Kings Army at Gillicrankie Three Witnesses being examined concurred in this that Mr. Alexander Heriot at the News of the Defeat of the Kings Forces at Gillicrankie shewed signal evidences of his Joy and Satisfaction and caused give the Reporter thereof a Drink And shall he that is Glad at Calamities pass unpunished 6. That in his seeming Observance of the late publick Thanksgiving for the Preservation of their Majesties Persons and Government the Defeat of the Irish Armie and discovery of the late Plot he made no mention of any of them either in Praying or Preaching whereby there was plain dissembling with God and Man Three Witnesses having deponed concurr in this that on the late publick Thanksgiving enjoyned by Authority Mr. Alexander Heriot did neither by any preliminary Discourse nor in Sermon or Prayer make any mention of the Defeat of the Irish Armie the preservation of their Majesties Persons and Government nor of the discovery of the late Bloody Plot. 7. His perscuting of Sober People in his paroch for their Presbyterian Principles Four Witnesses agree in this that by Mr. Aelxander Heriots Instigation and influence upon the Magistrates some were Fyned and forced to fly the place for Baptizing their Children with Presbyterian Ministers 8. Negligence of Discipline in the case of gross Scandals And particularlie in the case of Thomas Finlaw and Janet Somervell who lived together as married Persons Notwithstanding it was notourly known that the said Janets first Husband was alive Three Witnesses concurr that William Gardiner William Sadler and John Dicksone were guilty of Fornication and yet had from Mr. Alexander Heriot the benifite of a sealing Ordinance without satisfaction previously required And as to the particular instance above mentioned four or five Witnesses deponed that they saw Janet Somervels first Husband after she was Married to Thomas Finlaw It was also deponed not only that this was notourly known but also came to Mr. Heriots Ears and one at least of his Elders deponed that he knew no diligence done for censuring either of them The same was declared by the parties themselves There were other two Articles proven in the process which being of lesser weight for Brevities sake shall be omitted When the Presbytery and assistants had seriously and a long time deliberated upon this whole process that they might not proceed rashly in a matter of moment they delayed to pass any Sentence till another day Upon the twelvth day of September The Presbytery and assistants did again revise cognosce and judge upon the whole process and first they judged Mr. Alexander Heriot upon the account of his declinator and rest of his conduct to be contumacious and then having deliberately advised the articles of the Lybel with the depositions adduced to instruct the same they concluded him to be censurable and therefore did Suspend him from all Ministerial function and referred him for further Censure to the next enshewing General Assembly or next Synod of Louthian and Tweddal if either of these should judge him farther Censurable And so tender were they of Mr. Alexander Heriot that notwithstanding of his declinator yet before sentence past they called him and also sent to his House to hear if he had ought to alledge why sentence should not be pronounced But he did not Compear And therefore after Sentence an Extract thereof was presently sent to him And upon the whole I darre appeal to any Person whom prejudice hath not Blinded whither or not the Presbytery of Dalkeith and Assistants joyned with them have not proceeded upon a relevant Lybel and plenary Probation And also with that Candor Singleness and deliberation as becomes in a Case of such Weight But to proceed Mr. Alexander Heriot being cited after six free Dayes to compeare before the General Assembly and accordingly upon the 3 d of November 1690. He compeared and declared he past from his Declinature and submitted his Case intirely to the General Assembly Who thereupon did referr the same to the cognition and decision of the Synod of Lothian and Tweddale as their Act Dated the said third of Novâ—mber bears Upon _____ the day of December immediatly following Mr. Alexander Heriot being called compeared before the Synod and not only before Sentence past but even before the process was considered made an appeal from the Synod to the next General Assembly But notwithstanding thereof according to the trust committed unto them by the Assembly the Synod considered and revised the whole process and pronounced Sentence of Deposition against Mr. Alexander Heriot and appointed one of the Members of the Presbytery of Dalketth to intimate the said Sentence the next Lords day and to declare the Church of Dalkeith Vacant After this the Presbytery of Dalkeith finding the Church of Dalkeith Vacant in order to the legal settlement thereof proceeded to the Election of a Session after this manner They appointed one of their own number to Preach there upon a Lords day and after the Sermon publickly to desire the Heritors and heads of Families to meet upon a convenient day which was also specially condescended upon to make a list of Persons fit to be Elders and Deacons in that Paroch Which list being brought to the Presbytery and the Persons Nominate being tryed an edict for them was publickly served in the Church of Dalkeith and being returned to the Presbytery no objection was alledged against any Person named in the list only a Protestation was made in behalf of Mr Alexander Heriot against the Election of any Eldership there upon pretence of his standing Relation to that Congregation But the ground of that Protestation being null the Presbytery did forthwith appoint one of their number upon a Lords day following to preach in the Church of Dalkeith and with the usual Solemnities to ordain the Persons named in the List to be Elders and Deacons there Which was accordingly done upon the Eight of February of this present year of God 1691. This it seems did alarum Mr Alexander Heriot For shortly after some Person I shall not say ex foece Populi But who seems to be neither Divine nor Lawyer hath had the imprudence or rather the impudence to cause Print Reasons of Mr. Heriots appeal from the Synod and some Notes in Relation to the Presbyteries procedure against him whereby his case is most grosly misrepresented Yet thereupon does he Petition their Majesties privy Council as the Judges competent to repone him to the exercise of his Ministry and to interpose their Authority in discharging to call any Minister to the Church of Dalkeith But the Right Honourable the Lords of their Majesties Privy Council knowing their duty better then Mr. Heriot or his Advocates can inform them And considering the extent of the power belonging to the civil Magistrate in such cases did
by their Act dated the 17. day of March 1691 contrary to Mr Heriots expectation only recommend to the Presbytery of Dalkeith Synod of Lothian and next General Assembly respective before whom the process and Sentence of deposition was led and pronounced against the said Mr. Heriot to revise and reconsider the same and to do all Justice thereupon to him according to Law And to have due regard how and in what manner the Church of Dalkeith should be legally provided of a Minister Now Mr. Heriot having missed the mark he aimed at by this arrow dipt in Poyson and resolving to trample upon all Government Civil and Ecclesiastick not only continues to dwell still in the manss whereto now he hath no real right but in the hight of contempt hath therein erected a meeting-house where he exercises all parts of the Ministerial function to the great disturbance not only of the Town of Dalkeith but also of the whole Countrey round about Conform unto the Interloquitor of the Privy Council and in complyance therewith the Synod of Lothian and Tweddale in the beginning of May did again diligently peruse the whole process of Mr. Alexander Heriot reconsidered the Probation And having revised the same publickly found no ground to make any alteration in the former Sentence but did by an unanimous Vote adhere to and ratify the same and appointed a Minister of their number to intimate their adherence to and ratification of it in the Pulpit of Dalkeith And appointed the Presbytery of Dalkeith to have special regard to the Paroch of Dalkeith and to plant the same with their first Conveniency Upon the eight of June a Gentleman presented to the Presbytery a Letter from my Lord Raith dated at Mommeal 30. May 1691. And directed to the Moderator of the Presbytery to be communicated to the Presbytery and parochin of Dalkeith bearing that the Dutches of Buccleuch since the Church of Dalkeith is Vacant recommends Mr. William Mein to be Minister of Dalkeith and gives her Graces consent to him to be admitted there Herewith joyned an Elder of Dalkeith shewing that the Session there inclined to choose Mr. William Mein for their Minister whereupon the Presbytery appointed one of their number to goe to Dalkeith and after due intimation given to the Heretours and Elders to meet upon a convenient day to meet with them and according to order to preside in the Election and Call of a Minister At the next Dyet of the Presbytery the Brother reported that according to appointment he had seen the plurality of the Heretours and all the Elders of the Parish of Dalkeith subscribe a Call to Mr William Meine And withall that some of the Heretores and others came in and Subscribed a Paper which they said was a Call to Mr. James Lundie Minister at North-Leith to be their Minister in the mean time protesting that it was without prejudice to Mr. Alexander Heriot his Right which protestation made him conclude that they were not in earnest and therefore to take no notice of what they did After this report appeared two of the Ruling Elders of the Parish of Dalkeith with a full Commission presenting a Call to Mr. William Mein subscribed attested and duly endorsed upon the back and supplicating the Presbytery to prosecute the said Call with all expedition Appeared also two Gentlemen or three from the Parish of Dalkeith with some Papers alledging they had a Call to Mr. Lundie But being demanded if they had any Commission plainly answered they had none Wherefore the Presbytery finding that they pretended to represent a Community and yet had no Commission to negotiate in their name thought it not fit to enter upon the cause with them And therefore finding no competition in this pretended Call judged themselves oblidged to prosecute the Call given to Mr. William Mein And to that effect appointed two or three of their number with some of the Session of Dalkeith to go and in their name and in name of the said Session to tender the Call to the said Mr. William Mein and one of them to Preach and serve Mr. Meins edict at the Kirk of Dalkeith next Sabbath being the 21. of June When the execution of the Edict was returned There appeared two or three Persons and gave in objections against Mr. Mein his being Minister of Dalkeith appeared also one Mungo Strachan and in Mr. Heriots name protested against both the Calls given to Mr. Mein and Mr. Lundie when the Presbytery had duly considered the objections they answered them as follows OBJECTIONS by the Heretors and Elders of Dalkeith against the Call given to Mr. William Mein to be Minister at Dalkeith and protestation and appeal thereupon FIrst the said Call is null because it is given by some Persons as Elders and Deacons who are neither Elders nor Deacons for the Kirk-Session was not disolved by the pretended Deposition of Mr. Alexander Heriot the Minister But the said Session stands and continues while a Minister be settled in the Kirk and untill the Minister and Session choise a new one and as there was no settled Minister at this pretended Election so there was none of the Session thereat but two Persons and the rest of the Electors were for the most part of the meanest of the People 2. Although the Session had been Lawfully Elected and constitute as it is not yet the Call is null in so for as it is given by Deacons for by the Act of Parliament the Righe and priviledge of calling of Ministers is given to Heretors and Elders and not to Deacons 3. No respect can be had to the said Call in so far as it proceeds from many Persons who are neither Heretors nor Elders For 1st Although the Act of Parliament require the approbation of the Parochiners to the Call given by the Heretors and Elders yet it does not give to the Parishiners a Right and Priviledge of Calling But in case of the Parishiners their not approbation of the Call given by the Heretors and Elders In that case the Heretors and Elders are to call another Preson so that this Call In so fare as it is given by Parochiners it is not to be respected 2dly The said Call and Approbation thereof is null in so far at it is given by Tutors and Curators of Minors at least by Curators without the Minors whom they could only Authorize therein or by Persons as Tutors and Curators who have not accepted these Offices upon them or by Servants or hy Women because that by the Act of Parliament as none of those Persons has the Right and Priviledge to call a Minister So it requires not their Approbation to the said Call 4 And as the forsaid Call given to Mr. Mein is a Null Call for the reasons forsaids so likewise it cannot be admitted in competition with the Call given to Mr. James Lundie Minister at North-Leith for the Reasons following 1 Because the call given to Mr. Lundie is by