Account of which he may be deprived of c. And pag. 23. he says of these Principles That they have poisoned the very Springs and Fountains of Government and so deeply tinctur'd Mens Minds that he prays God we may not still live to see the miserable Effects of it Thus Dr. Sherlock even since his Conversion But you may say how does it appear that this Author now sets up these Principles You shall be Judge Pag. 49. he says That it is ill trusting any one any King with such a Power This is in his c. 3. s 1. n. 8. Again c. 1. n. 10. p. 11. he expresses himself in these Words viz. The antient Government with which he the King was intrusted p. 41. he falls upon those who stopt the Bill of Exclusion with this wholsome Advice Never to trust Men of King James's Principles and Religion with a Power that may destroy us Here the King's Power is onely what the People please to trust him with Pag. 57. He says That it is not the King's Money that pays the Soldiers but the Kingdoms and thence it will follow that they are not the King's Soldiers but the Kingdoms 67. He says That every Law is certainly a Compact between the King and the People wherein by a mutual Consent they agree on a Rule by which he is to govern and according to which they oblige themselves to pay him Obedience That therefore the People may as lawfully dispence with their Allegiance to the King 68. as the King dispence with the Execution of a Law That the Subjects have no other Security for their Liberties 77. Properties and Lives except the Interest they have of chusing their own Representatives in Parliament Whereby he will exclude by very much the greatest part of the Nation from having any security for their Lives c. i. e. all but the Electors of Parliament men for none other have any Vote in chusing their own Representatives But the Author makes them amends by giving every one of them a power to dispence with their Allegiance to the King when ever they think that the King dispences with the Execution of any Law He makes them all Popes to dispence with Oaths or any other Duty when they think it reasonable And as he gives them Power over their Oaths of Allegiance so he does over the King's Treasury and Army It is Their Mony Their Army and why should not They command them The King himself acts but by their Commission and by all Rule and Right every Man is accountable to him from whom he has his Commission But now our Author is upon the Rode you shall see how he improves He derives the Eccles Authorily from the People p. 206. he stops at nothing And since he is a granting to the People they shall have all even the Ecclesiastical Authority which is trusted in the Crown shall be derived from the People and transferrable by them to whom they think fit For he makes King James's breach of trust in the Ecclesiastical Authority a provoking temptation to his People to think of transferring it to some other Person This will gratify the Phanaticks as well as Commonwealth-men That even the Ecclesiastical Authority is derived from the People His Interpretation of its not being Lawful upon any Pretence to take Arms against the King c. pag. 221. n. 3. And now to Crown all He gives as large and loose an Interpretation of that famous Principle of the Ch. of England viz. of it s not being Lawful upon any Pretence whatever to take Arms against the King c. as Bradshaw Rutherford Bellarmin or Mariana could desire viz. He says it was only meant That private Men should not take up the Sword or resist the King upon any Pretence that is says he upon any Pretence of private Injury or Wrong done to them in particular Beyond this none of the Republicans Phanaticks and Jesuits in the World could go So that this was no very distinguishing Principle of the Church of England as we us'd to call it But if you will allow the same Parliament which enacted the abovesaid Principle of Non-Resistance to the King c. to understand their own Meaning or think that the declared Sense of the Legislators is the true Sense of the Law then our Author has widely mistaken his Mark and misinterpreted this Law For 12 Car. 2. c. 30. it is declared That neither the Peers nor Commons nor both together nor the People Collectively nor Representatively in Parliament or out of Parliament nor any other Persons whatsoever have any Coercive Power over the Kings of England Now judge whether all this is meant only of Private Men as our Author would make you believe And take Notice that this is not to be taken as a Grant from that Parliament It is a Recognition wherein they declare what was the Law before them And they vouch that this Prerogative of the King to be exempt from all Coercive Power is by the undoubted and fundamental Laws of this Kingdom And that neither Lords nor Commons nor any other Persons not only now have not or hereafter shall not have any such Power over the King but that they never had or ever ought to have such Power I hope our Author will confess That this is somewhat a greater Authority and ought to have greater Weight with us than his single Opinion which he has taken up but of late And to confound that Distinction of the Parliament being Coordinate with the King and making the King but one of the three Estates which would imply their having something to do with the Sword which is the Supreme Power of Government joyntly with the King and therefore in some Cases might restrain him by Force which was the Pretence in 41. to obviate all this the Militia which is the Sword of England is by Act of Parliament put in the Hands of the King alone And it is declared in express Words 13 Car. 2. That the Sword is solely in the King's Power and that neither one nor both Houses of Parliament can or Lawfully may Raise or Levy any War offensive or defensive against his Majesty c. The Title of this Section p. 221. is King James and his Party endeavoured to destroy the Protestant Religion by misrepresenting the Persons and Principles of Protestants But it is not in the Power of Jesuit or any you can imagine to misrepresent the Protestant Principles more than this Author in this same Section as you have seen that is if you will allow that the Protestants did ever represent them Right before And whereas he Objects in the foremention'd Place That by it the abovesaid Principle of Non-Resistance it was never intended to give up the Constitution of the Government or to part with the Liberties and Privileges of the Kingdom The Answer is very easy for by the Judgment of what he calls the Constitution of the Government viz. King and Parliament
here do tell it The Earl of Inchiquin and Captain Henry Boyle with the generality of the Protestant Gentlemen in the Province of Munster having entred into an Association in Decemb. 88. as the Protestants in Ulster and Connaught had done they resolved to seize upon Corke and Bandon as the places of greatest Strength and Consequence in the Province Their Design took effect at Bandon which joyned with them But the Lord Deputy having notice of their Proceedings sent Major-General Mac-Carty now Lord Mount-Cassell to observe them He pretending to keep fair with them they attempted bringing him over to declare for the P. of Orange and some of them had hopes of it but he proved too cunning for them prevented their seizing of Corke and when Captain Henry Boyle upon that disappointment fortified his House Castle-Martyr he besieged him there Upon this Sir Tho. Southwell in the County of Limerick and several other Protestant Gentlemen marched with the greatest Force they could make to raise the Siege in their march they seiz'd on all the Papists Horses and this Mr. Browne who was then one of them took the Horses of Neagle of Moyallow who was then High-Seriff of the County of Corke and a Man was killed in the Fray and all this our Author calls only making his escape from those who came to plunder him But to tell out my Story Sir T. Southwell and his Company hearing upon their March that Castle Martyr was surrendred he endeavoured to make his way to Sligo to joyn the Lord Kingston and other Associators in Connaught who were all in Arms and as this Author tells p. 170. he and 200 of his Men were taken by a small Party of K. J's Dragoons not much to the Glory of their Courage And this Author says p. 171. That they were over-persuaded to plead Guilty though they had not been guilty of any Overt Act that could be construed Treason What this Author means by Overt Acts or what by Treason he will tell us in the next and likewise give us some probable Reason why K. J. should Reprieve and afterwards Pardon Sir Thomas Southwell and all the rest who were engaged in that business and have such a particular Malice only at Browne whom he knew as little as any of the rest Otherwise he must give us leave to suspend a little our belief of his Narrative in this matter particularly that K. J. should influence either Judge or Jury to take away Mr. Brown's Life and that he should be inexorable in Mr. Brown's Case alone and yet so very merciful to all the rest is a Contradiction to believe if his Case or Circumstances did in no ways differ from theirs But it is no wonder that this Author cannot keep him self from Contradictions through the whole Series of his Book when the very Titles the Heads of his Discourse are contradictory one to another which one would think an ordinary Care might have avoided C. 2. s 8. n 10. the Title is That K. J's Desire to be absolute induced him to change his Religion And yet c. 3. s 1. n. 5. the Title is Zeal for his Religion made him act against his Interest to that Degree says this Author in his Prosecution of this c. 3. s 1. n. 5. p. 46. that the Protestants could not but conclude that K. J. was so intent upon destroying them that so he compassed that Design he cared not if he enslaved himself and the Kingdoms P. 45. That he had a setled Resolution not to mind any Interest which came in Competition with his grand Design of advancing Popery and the Slavery of the Nations To effect which it is manifest he was content to be a Vassal to France Thus the Author Here are Contradictions upon Contradictions That K. J. should be content to be a Vassal that he might be Absolute If you say that must be understood only of his other Grand Design viz. advancing Popery which had the Ascendant even over his Interest or his desire of being Absolute This will contradict the other Head of Discourse which gives the desire of Absoluteness in him the Ascendant over his Religion as being the Ground-work and Motive which induc'd him to change his Religion And yet page 10. of his Thanksgiving-Sermon Perhaps says he K. J. chiefly desired an Absolute Authority over his Subjects that he might compel them into the bosom of his Church And it does not appear a less Contradiction than any of these that a King should change the Principles of the Church of England as then taught for those of Rome out of a desire to be the more Absolute The Church of Rome 4 Coun. Lat C. 3 c. gives Power to the Popes to Depose Kings and they have shewn many Examples of it On the other hand the Church of England when K. J. forsook her Communion damn'd this Deposing Doctrine and the Practice of it and valued themselves upon the Principle of Non-Resistance to their King upon any Pretence whatsoever as their distinguishing Character and an essential part of their Religion and they had never varied from it nor was it thought by any or themselves that ever they would I am sure if they were not in earnest with it then they can give no demonstration now that they can be in earnâ—st with any thing and it is in every bodies mouth That K. J's trusting too much to their Passive Obedience hastened his Ruin which could not be if he had not thought this to have been their Principle Now for a King of this Opinion to quit this Church and go to that Church which teaches the Deposing Doctrine to do this out of a desire of Abâ—â—luteness is such a Contradiction as this Author would have seen at another time C. 3. s 12. n. 15. p. 153. he makes K. J. most absolute in the Parliament in Ireland That this Parliament openly profess'd it self a Slave to the King's Will and that he was look'd upon as a Man factiously and rebelliously inclin'd that would dare to move any thing after any Favourite in the House had affirm'd that it was contrary to the King's Pleasure Accordingly the Author instances several particulars of K. J's Absoluteness in this Parliament particularly That upon his signifying his dissatisfaction to the Repeal of Poyning's Act the Parliament let it fall with several other Acts tho' the Irish had talk'd much and earnestly desired the Repeal of Poyning's Act it being the greatest sign and means of their Subjection to England Yet p. 37. you have the Irish dispute his Orders and and stand on the Laws and they would not suffer him to dispense with their Act of Attainder c. And yet p. 18. They pish'd at the Laws as Trifles and declared they liked no Government but that of France that they would make the King as Absolute here as that King was there P. 31. The Temper and Genius of these Men were at Enmity to the Laws and fitted for Slavery They promoted and
the Bishop of Derry Hopkins who was then there did protest against their shutting out the King's Forces and refused to joyn with those who did it for which and other Reasons this Author then gave he was against any Bodies going to the North or joyning with them as being a joyning in Rebellion About the Year 86. or 87. After his going from Wexford Waters to several of the Bishops of Munster he wrote a Letter to a Person of undoubted Credit giving an Account of what happened in his Journey and of the Substance of what he Discoursed with the Bishops of Waterford Corke and Cloyne he wrote That among other things he advised them as the only way to prevent the Dangers that were imminent to a steaddiness in their Loyalty and Religion and that he asserted that if the King and our Temporal Governors should enact unjust Laws that the Subject has no Remedy but Patience against whom we allow no other Weapons but Prayers and Tears and that it was a most unlawful thing for any to call in a Foreign Force or erect a New Government to redress unjust Laws And adds That it is a sad thing that it is not observed that Rebellions in the State and Schisme in the Church arise from this one Principle to wit That Subjects may in some Cases resist or seperate from their Lawful Governors set over them by God Whereas the Principle of Non Resistance is a steady Principle of Loyalty and it will be found no easier Matter to shake either the Church or State that is settled on it And he repeats it again That it is intolerable for the Members of any State to flee to Foreign Succors out of Pretence that their own Governors have made Laws against Reason Conscience and Justice and foolish to allege in their Defence That all Mankind is of one Blood and bound to help one another Which now he has made his great Argument in this Book Chap. 1. Sect. 5 What is above-written I have from the Person to whom he wrote it and more to the same purpose and if he desire it his Letters shall be produced The same Person told me that about the beginning of this Revolution he was in Company with the Author and another Gentleman I think it was Dr. Dun who blamed the preaching of Passive Obedience so high as the cause of what had befallen us whom this Author smartly reproved and vindicated the Doctrine of Passive Obedience to the highth But that Zeal and Courage has left him with his Principles or while he counterfeits his Principles there is a difference of assurance in defending some Causes which makes him now shun all those who knew his former Principles and have not changed as well as himself He refused to see all the time he was in London last August and September a Deprived Bishop with whom he was as intimate as any Man and had contracted a great Friendship and when he was minded of it to see his Old Friend he would not said they should fall into Heats And beginning of this last October 1692 being in Oxford on his Road to Ireland Mr. Hudson of University-College was with this Author in the Schools-Quadrangle at the very time Mr. Dodwell his admired Acquaintance was going up to the Library and Mr. Hudson asking whether he should call after him our Author forbad him saying He knew Mr. Dodwell would be angry with him If he thought that Mr. Dodwell was in an Error he ought to have endeavoured to convince him No he knew that Mr. Dodwell stood upon the same Ground where he left him and that it was he himself had Prevaricated and forsaken his first Love and therefore was ashamed to meet with the Man who knew his Principles so well before and who had stuck close to them in the Day of Tryal The very sight of such a Man is an upbraiding of their Cowardise and Unconstancy who have deserted their Principles and raises Guilt in their Faces which their Eyes would discover though they were hardened against a Blush Heu quantum mutatus ab illo From the well reputed and deserving Dr. K. who honoured and admired and loved Mr. Dodwell above most Men would have gone far to see him and was proud of corresponding with him and now shuns his sight as Guilty Sinners would the Face of Heaven O if this Author had retained his Integrity how much greater would he have appeared in the Friendship Esteem and Fellow-Suffering of this Great Man then in his Guilty Purple But Deserters must shew their Zeal and discover their own Shame Behold now how he starts and quotes it as a full Proof of King James's Arbitrary Designs That it was Enacted in their Act of Recognition in Ireland That the Decision in all Cases of a misused Authority by a Lawful Hereditary King must be left to the sole judgment of God Indeed I was amazed to see him quote this as so strange a thing which is over and over to be found in the Acts both of England and Scotland and Ireland as if he had not only forsaken but quite forgot what he had formerly taught He has got new Principles and a new Language p. 182. it ought to be 190. for it is false Printed he says K. J. was ungrateful to the Irish Protestant Clergy This is very familiar but what was the King's Ingratitude Because if they had been disloyal in Monmouth or Argile's Rebellion they might have made an Insurrection c. So that this Author thinks the King is in their Debt for not Rebelling And I suppose this is all the way that they brought him to the Throne as this Author says in the same place It seems these Irish Clergy have been mighty Men and we have not known it But he says that by their Zeal for King James they lost the Affections of their People This is a Scandal I verily believe upon the Irish Protestants They were I hope better Men I have known some of them and this Author ought to know them better I have not heard that any of the Irish Protestants took Offence at that Passage which this Author Printed in the Preface to a Sermon of the Lord Bishop of Kilmore's preached in the Author's Church of St. Warborrough's in Dublin in March 1684. the first year of King James's Reign It was entituled St. Paul's Confession of Faith There in a Letter of this Author 's to the Lord Bishop which is Printed in the Preface he avers positively in these words viz. It is impossible for any one of our Communion to be disloyal without renouncing his Religion This past better with the Irish Protestants Dr. Till Extent of Loyalty in his Serm. 2 Apr. 80 before K. C. 2. than that Super-Loyal Strain of our famous Dr. Tillotson which he Preached before the King at Whitehall Apr. 2. 1680. upon Josh 24.15 did please the Church of England men here other than those who took the Court for the Standard of their
Security from the Members of the Church of England more than from either Popish or Presbyterian Dissenters That when either of these two last-nam'd take Arms against the King for the Propagation of their Religion they act pursuant both to the Principles and Practice of their Churches but no true church-of-Church-of-England man can take Arms against the King in Defence of his Religion Liberty Property or any pretence whatsoever without at the same time renouncing the Principles of his Church or in Dr. Burnet's words turning Renegado and Apostate from it and from the constant Practices of its true Professors to this present Age. And though God has sifted Her and discovered Her unsound Members most of whom were Phanaticks grafted contrary to Nature yet we may perceive by the Remnant He has left that it will end in rendring her more Pure and Glorious after she has past the Refiner's Fire These Considerations have taken me a little out of the Road if it be out of the Road of the present Business I will return to the Author We have seen his Sincerity in the Original Matter of Fact and Mother of all the rest viz. Who were the Aggressors in the late miserable Revolution of Ireland for they were answerable for all that followed Matter◠of Fact set down by this Author at random But there are many other Particulars besides those to which I have spoken wherein the Author shews great variety of prevarication And tho he pretends to so great exactness which any one would believe by his Method yet it is visible that he set down things at random meerly for want of pains to examin them C. 3. S. 12. at the end p. 165. he pretends to compute what the Estates of all the Jacobites in England and Scotland are worth But this may pass more innocently than where it reflects upon any particular Persons Reputation in these Cases it is not only uncharitable but unjust to say any thing at a venture If we know not the thing to be true we are to err on the charitable side and not mention what may reflect upon another but if we do we must be sure to set down our Vouchers so as to leave no umbrage to suspect the Truth This our Author I am afraid has not so punctually observed through all this Book particularly in the Characters which he takes upon him to give of so many persons C. 3. S. 3. he accuses the Judges particularly the Lord Chief Justice Nugent ibid. n 5. p. 61. of down-right Bribery That he went sharer in Causes before him and not only appeared for them on the Bench but also secretly encouraged and fomented them I have heard others say who are no Admirers of that Judge That they are confident this is a rank Slander and Calumny and that no such thing can be proved against him However an Accusation of so heinous a Nature ought not to have been exhibited especially in Print without some Proofs along with it This Nugent says the Author was pitch'd on by K. J. to judge whether the Outlawries against his Father and his Fellow Rebels should be reversed Now I am assur'd That his Father viz. the Earl of Westmeath was not Outlawed which if so this is such another careless Mistake as this Author makes ibid. n. 3. pag. 60. where he calls Felix O Neil a Master of Chancery in King James's time Son of Turlogh O Neil the great Rebel in 41 and Massacrer of the Protestants That Turlogh O Neil was Brother to the Famous Sir Phelom O Neil and was not Father to this Felix O Neil I have been told by Men of Ireland That this Felix O Neil's Father's Name was Phelom and that he was so far from being a bloody Masacrer in 41. that he was civil to the Protestants in those times particularly to 〈…〉 Guilliam Father to Meredith Guilliam now a Major in K. W's Army whom he obliged by his civil Usage of him when he was Prisoner with the Irish and the same Guilliam's Relations do still acknowlege it But as to the Reversing of these Outlawries this Author has not done right to K. J. For upon the Representation made to his Majesty by the Earl of Clarendon then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland of the ill Consequences of the Reversal of these Outlawries particularly the Jealousie it gave of encroaching upon the Acts of Settlement which you will see more at large in King James's Letter of the Third of May 86. to the Earl of Clarendon and his Lordships proceedings thereupon which are hereunto annexed No. 20 His Majesty did not press that matter any farther and so there was a stop put to these Reversals during the Government of my Lord Clarendon in Ireland and for any thing I can hear afterwards till this Revolution So that this seems rather an Imposition upon the K. as there were many by my Lord Tyrconnel and those of his Party than a thing that sprung immediately from the King 's own Breast or that he pitcht upon Judge Nugent on purpose to carry it on violently as this Author sets it out in his Guesses at Random and would have it pass for some mighty Matter To this Class will justly belong what I have before mentioned of this Author 's bold and positive Politicks upon foreign Princes and States and likewise of the P. of W. Fr. League c. which he had from the same Intelligence and avers with the same Assurance By Innendoes wherein his groundless and unjust Reflection upon the E. of Clarendon He has likewise an Art of making many things pass by Innendo's whose Falshood would have appeared if they had been plainly related For Example c. 3 s 12. p. 144. telling of the assurances sent over by King James to Ireland by the Earl of Clarendon Lord Lieutenant and Sir Charles Porter Lord Chancellor he says These Declarations gained belief from the credulous Protestants especially that made by Sir Charles who behaving himself with Courage and Integrity in his Office went a great way to persuade them which being the Ground of their being persuaded by him more especially than by my Lord Clarendon plainly insinuates as if my Lord Clarendon had not behaved himself with Courage and Integrity in his Office there This Author is the first Irish Protestant I have heard give my Lord Clarendon an ill word as to his Government in Ireland On the contrary they all speak exceeding things of him particularly of his Zeal and Pains for Supporting the Protestant Interest in that Kingdom which gain'd their hearts to as great a degree if not more than most Chief Governours had ever been there they never parted with any Chief Governour with so much regret and as I have been told none courted him more when he was there than this Author who was admitted one of his Excellency's Chaplains but now thinks fit that should be forgotten at least kept for a more seasonable Juncture But C 2. S. 4 n. 1. p. 19. he
the Protestants in Ireland Did the French King use them no Worse than K. James did these Protestants Our Author says as above that K. James used worse Methods towards the Protestants of Ireland than the King of France did with the Hugonots If so Mounsieur Claud has mightily Misinform'd us in his Account of the Persecution of the Hugonots in France And since our Author will have this Comparison because he could not think of another would Render K. James so Odious I have a Curiosity to know his Opinion as to the Cause of these Hugonots viz. Whether their King 's breaking the Edict of Nants and using them as he did was Sufficient to absolve them from their Allegiance and to set up a King of their own Religion where-ever they could find him I doubt not but this Author will Answer in the Affirmative and that it was nothing but want of Power kept them from Abdicating that King who they thought had Abdicated the Government of them by his ill usage of them And this will be a better Plea for the French King to Rid himself of these sort of People than any I have yet heard offered for him But in this Comparison 'twixt King James and the French King our Author makes King James the more wicked Man of the Two using worse Method with his Protestants as you have heard And in his Character of the French King he gives him the Advantage over King James with an Innuendo-reflection upon King James in this same place p. 14. He reports the French King to be a Merciful Man in his own Nature and certainly says he a mighty Zealot for his Honour As if King James were not so indeed he was far from it as this Author represents him You see to what a Height this Authors Zeal has carried him when he will give so fair a Character even of the French King that he may thereby blacken K. J. the more And upon this Head I hope no Man will take it ill at least to do Right to K. James Would any Body desire him to be worse than the French King Therefore give me leave to say and in this I believe I shall have the Major part on my side That if the Hugonots in France had Invited a Forreign Hugonot Prince to enter France with an Army had joyn'd with him and Proclaim'd him for their King and Forc'd K. Lewis to Fly out of France and afterward recovering part of his own he should reduce the Hugonots in Brettaigne for example and they when they were come again under the Power of their Old Master should shew all the Signs of Disloyalty and Disaffection to him Deserting him every day to their new Hugonot King and giving an Account to him of the same disposition in them that could not make their Escape from K. Lewis and K. L. to know all this and that those that staid gave all the Intelligence they could to his Enemies and did all the Mischief they could to him their Natural King under whose Protection they then Liv'd And those of them that were able in Brettaigne to hold out in open Arms against him keeping two Towns in the same Province he had Reduc'd where they Fortify'd themselves and Declared for their Hugonot King and to Rescue those Hugonots that were under King Lewis I say if this had been the Case 'twixt K. Lewis and the Hugonots I believe I shall have the Major part of England of my Opinion That King Lewis would have dealt otherwise with them than King James did with the Protestants in Ireland And perhaps had any King in Christendom but K. James had them in his Power as he had for a whole Summer he would not have left them in a Capacity to have Driven him out of the Kingdom as they did And he was Morally assured they would do so when it was in his Power to have prevented them But rather than Destroy them he put it in their Power to Destroy him which they did without the least sense of all his Goodness to them which they Disdain'd to own but pursued him as a Tyrant Secretary Gorge Assures us in his Large Letter that the Irish Protestants were more Active against King James and were more dreaded by the Irish than any other of K. William's Army If K. James were as great a stranger to us as Caesar or Pompey and the Scene were plac'd as far off as those Times yet who would not have a Zeal to Vindicate the Truth who would not be mov'd to see a King who suffered himself to be visibly Ruin'd by his unprovocable Clemency to Obstinate Rebels represented by them for so doing as the Bloodiest Tyrant in the World To see this Authors Book Transport Men so far without examining as that the Principal Secretary of State should License a Pamphlet call'd The Pretences of the French Invasion Examined which 〈◊〉 14. lays the stress of our Objections against King James upon his Cruelty to the Loyal Irish Protestants while he was among them in Ireland His King James's Carriage in Ireland says the Pamphlet to the Loyal Protestants writ this viz. His implacable hatred to the Protestants in Capital Letters and it must be suppos'd they have Drunk deep of Lethe who can forget all this Thus positively does the Pamphleteer averr upon the Credit of our Author And therefore it is Incumbent upon our Author to produce some Catalogue of these Protestants in Ireland who remain'd Loyal to King James while he was there except those few who were in his Army whom our Author or our Phamphleteer cannot mean because they reckon these among the number of the Persecutors and by some thought worse of than the Papists for Assisting the Papists against the Protestants we desire a List of these Loyal Protestants in Ireland who suffered any thing from King James while he was there Can this Author find so many as their were Righteous Men in Sodom But this is much more certain that King James's Mercy to the Disloyal Protestants in Ireland put them in a Capacity to help to Drive him out of the Kingdom for his pains Does this Author really believe That King Lewis would have used them as kindly as King James did while he knew they were Plotting and would Joyn against him I Appeal to this Author Whether he would have thought himself so Secure in King Lewis's hands if he had been betraying his Councils and giving Intelligence to his Enemies as he was under these Circumstances in King James's Power But our Author never fails to make a round Character That King James should not be so Good a Man as King Lewis is not so great a Matter But now our Author's hand is in you shall see him carry King James's Character to be full as Inhumane as that of the Great Turk himself You have it â—nd of c. 3. § 20. n. 7. p. 224. The Vsage we met with being says the Author full as Inhumane as any thing they the
Book of Common Prayer where-ever they could find it calling it the Mass in English This was the Western Fanatick Rabble who began their Work upon Christmas Day to be witty in their Malice That at Edinburgh it self the Tumult was so high that the Mob forced the King's Palace rifted the Chancellor's Lodgings gutted the Chappel designed for the Order of the Knights of St. Andrew carried the King's Picture to the Mercat-Cross and there publickly stabb'd and tore it with the like Indignities as some ungrateful and bruitish Villains express'd in the rancor of their Hearts against the King's Statue at Newcastle and Glocester That upon these violent Disorders the King being gone from England and no settled Government in the Nation the College of Justice at Edinburgh took Arms and kept Watch and Ward to secure the Peace of the City and their Clergy from being Rabbled That then a Proclamation came from the Prince of Orange commanding all persons to lay down their Arms That the College of Justice did thereupon lay down their Arms but the Fanaticks did not for they said that they knew the Order was not intended against them and they proceeded to greater Insults against the Episcopal Clergy and fell upon those they had not medled with before and a Tumult was raised at Glasgow and those of the Rabbled Clergy who thought themselves protected by the Prince's Proclamation and thereupon returned to their Churches and Livings were much more rudely treated than before and particular Favours were granted to the Town of Glasgow by 15 Act of 2 Sess of 1 Parl. of W. and M. for the Zeal of the Community of the said City who were the principal Rabblers for the Protestant Religion as it is expressed in the Act. That the Rabbled Clergy made application to the P. of O. for Protection from this Outrage and sent Dr. Scot Dean of Glasgow who assisted by Dr. Fall Principal of the College of Glasgow did represent their deplorable Condition to his Highness who gave them no other Answer than to refer them to the Meeting of the Estates which did not assemble till 14 March following That they suffering unspeakable Hardships and Indignities all that time from December to March made the same Request for Protection from the Rabble to the Meeting of Estates then convened In answer to which That the Meeting of Estates by their Act 13 Apr. 89. excluded from the Protection of the Goverument all the Ministers who had been Rabbled before that day and were not then in Possession of their Churches And being turned into a Parliament by their Act 7 June 90. declared That these Rabbled Ministers had Deserted their Churches and therefore adjudged them to be Vacant and ordered those Presbyterian Ministers who without any Law had taken possession of them when the Incumbents were driven away by the Rabble to continue their possession and have Right to the Benefices and Stipends according to their entry in the Year 89. viz. when the Incumbents were Rabbled And to this being an Act of Parliament the Royal Assent was given That these Ministers Rabbled before 13 Apr. 89. and for that only reason declared to have abdicated by the Parliament were about 300. That the foresaid Act 13. Apr. 89. obliged all that remained to Pray for K. W. and Q. M. as King and Queen of Scotland and read a Proclamation publickly from their Pulpits against the owning of King James And that they might not have too long time to consider of it it was to be read under pain of Deprivation the next day viz. 14 Apr. 89. by all the Ministers of Edinburgh the 21st by all on that side the River Tay on the 28th by all be-north Tay which was hardly time to have the Proclamation transmitted to them all At Edinburgh the Proclamation came not from the Press till late on Saturday night and it was to be read at Morning-Service next day so that many of them it is supposed had not an hours time to resolve That this severe Act was more severely executed by the Earl of Crawford then President of the Council and other Presbyterian Lords and that near as many were turn'd out by the Rabble within doors as the Field-Rabble had done That Matters being thus prepared for total Abolition of Episcopacy all haste was made to do it An Act was framed for that purpose and Instructions were sent to the Commissioner in these words You are to Touch the Act already passed Abolishing Episcopacy as soon as you can and to Rescind all Acts inconsistent therewith That the haste required was observed for these Instructions were signed by King William at Whitehall the 17th of July 89. and the Act was Touched at Edinburgh the 22d of the same month Thus fell Episcopacy in Scotland Two Months and eleven Days after King William and Queen Mary took upon them the Crown of that Kingdom which was the eleventh of May 89. That those Presbyterian Ministers who were ejected by Law Anno 1662. upon the Restoration of Episcopacy were restored to the Churches they had before by Act of this Parliament 25 April 90. without any Provision made for those who were ejected That they did not pretend to that Regard to any who should be Deprived as the Parliament of England seemed to do by allowing Twelve of the Clergy who should refuse the Oaths the Third of their Bishopricks or Livings during their Life and left it to K. W. to apply it to which Twelve of them he thought fit But that he has applied it to none lest they should fare better than their Deprived Brethren in Scotland That not only those Presbyterian Ministers who were outed by the Bishops Anno 1662. but even those who had been Deposed and put under Censure as Incendiaries and wicked Men by their own Presbyterian Synods Anno 1660 and 1661. without being released from those Censures by any Synod or Ecclesiastical Authority of their own were Restored Anno 1690. by Act of Parliament That these as being most violent were most esteem'd and one of them Mr. Hugh Kennedy was made Moderator of the General Assembly Anno 1690. while he lay under the Censure of their own Kirk which was not taken off till the end of that same Assembly That thus their Church was established by Men thrust out of their Church as the State by Men Forefaulted by the State That by Act of their Parliament 7 June 90. Setling Presbyterian Church Government the whole Church-Government and Authority is placed in the hands of those Presbyterian Ministers outed since the first of January 1661. who were not then above Fifty or Sixty in number and such as they should admit exclusive of all other Presbyters which was a greater Superiority settled in one Presbyter above another than that which they Abolished in the Bishops as an insupportable Grievance And these new-modell'd Presbyters invested with Episcopal Power in Opposition to Episcopacy did exercise it with a Tyranny and Lordliness the Bishops had never
shewn For being by a particular Clause in that Act enabled by themselves or whom they should appoint to try and purge out all insufficient negligent scandalous and erroneous Ministers they erected Tribunals in every Presbytery as arbitrary but more senseless than the Inquisition and did but one good Act to purge out those Episcopal Presbyters who complied with their Schism and Usurpation for which they could never want a pretence because Ordination or Collation from Prelates was always made one Article in their Visitations and thought erroneous enough to spew any out of their Churches But as to these Deprived Clergy I must here take notice of a distinction much used in England to mollifie Lay-Deprivations viz. That the Bishops and Clergy Deprived by Act of Parliament lose not their Character only are barr'd by the Secular Power to exercise it in such Districts But Act 35. of Sess 2. of the first Parliament of William and Mary in Scotland those Ministers who did not Pray for King William and Queen Mary and were therefore Depriv'd were afterwards prohibited to preach or exercise any part of the Ministerial Function either in Churches or elsewhere upon any pretext whatsoever And in the 38th Act of the same Session they do as much confound our State-distinction of de Facto and de Jure which they say is cunningly of late spread abroad to weaken and invalidate the Allegiance sworn to their Majesties And therefore they order a Certificate to be subscrib'd by all who take the Oath declaring K. W. and Q. M. to be King and Queen as well de Jure as de Facto And they say That in all these things they have dealt more frankly and plainly if not more honestly and sincerely than we have done in England They think it more fair and open Dealing plainly to Foresault the King for Male-administration than to Abdicate him for flying to save his Life And when he is gone that he should not take the Right to the Crown along with him and leave K. W. nothing but a de Facto Possession which they think a Betraying K. W. to the last Degree and making him no better than an Usurper They think it the same thing to debar Clergy-men from the Exercise of the Ministerial Function as to leave them no Place to exercise it in And as Charitable to allow nothing to the Depriv'd as to name something for them and put it into Hands where they are sure never to come by it But I know not so well how they 'll solve that Contradiction which seems to be betwixt their Claim of Right 11 Ap. 89. and their Confession of Faith Ratified and Established Act 5. of 2 Sess 1 Parl. William and Mary Read over in their Presence and inserted Verbatim in the Body of the Act. The Claim of Right begins in these Words Whereas King James being a profest Papist did assume the Regal Power c. And the first of their Claims is in these Words That by the Law of this Kingdom no Papist can be King or Queen of this Realm And yet in the abovesaid Confession of Faith Chap. 23. It is Decreed and Established as the true Christian Doctrine in these Words viz. Infidelity or Difference in Religion doth not make void the Magistrates just and legal Authority nor free the People from their due Obedience to him But I must not exceed the bounds of a Preface For if I should only Name all the Hardships and Oppressions the illegal and arbitrary Proceedings of which the Jacobites complain of in Scotland say they are ready to make good by undeniable Vouchers I should swell this beyond the Bulk of Dr. King's Book and that the Truths of the Proceedings in Scotland would if possible out-number the Falstoods he relates of Ireland But for a fuller Account of these Scots Affairs I refer you to a small Tract called A Letter to a Friend giving an Account of all the Treatises that have been Publish'd with Relation to the present Persecution against the Church of Scotland Printed for Jo. Hindmarsh Among these as to the State Affairs be pleased to consult that Tract called The late Proceedings and Votes of the Parliament of Scotland contained in an Address delivered to the King And for the Affairs of the Church An Account of the present Persecution of the Church of Scotland in several Letters The Case of the present Afflicted Clergy of Scotland The Historical Relation of the late General Assembly held at Edinburgh And the Presbyterian Inquisition And there you will find such Cruelties used towards the Loyal and Episcopal Party in Scotland as were unheard of in Ireland and by Dr. King's Principles would justifie any Foreign Prince to interpâ—se on their behalf And if it be true which he lays down as the Foundation upon which he builds all that he says in his Book viz. That if a King design to destroy one main Part of his People in favour if anâ—ther whom he loves better he does Abdicate the Government of those whom he designs to destroy contrary to Justice and the Laws If this be true the Episcopal Party in Scotland think it would free them from all Obligation to K. William's Government But how far it is Applicable to the Protestants in Ireland to justifie their Carriage towards King James will be seen in what follows Suppose say they it were true which Dr. King asserts as it is most false That K. James while he was in Ireland did endeavour totally to overthrow the Church Established by Law there and set up that which was most agreeable to the Inclinations of the major Number of the People in that Kingdom who are Roman Catholicks The Jacobites ask if this were so Whether it be not fully vindicated in the 4th Instruction of those which King William sent to his Commissioner in Scotland dated at Copt-Hall 31. May 89. in these Words You are to pass an Act Establishing that Church Government which is most agreeable to the Inclinations of the People By which Rule they say That it was as just to set uâ— Popery in Ireland as Presbytery in Scotland And that the Law was not more against the one in Ireland than against the other in Scotland That the Parliament in Ireland was liable to less Exception than that in Scotlandâ— The one called in the usual Form by Writs from their Natural King to whom they had Sworn the other by Circular Letters from a Foreign Prince to whom they ow'd no Obedience who could not nor did pretend any other Authority over them or Right to the Crown besides The Inclinations of the People Which therefore they say in return for their Kindness he has made the Standard for Church Government as well as the Government of the State That it is only alleged that King James intended to do in Ireland what he did not do when it was in his Power and what King William actually did in Scotland viz. To overturn the Church then by Law Established
quotes an Authority against him which is Bishop Bilson whom our Author too quotes for having set down this Opinion of Grotius with what he supposes to be the Ground of it he immediately subjoyns a contrary Authority But Bishop Bilson says he speaking of such Popish Cruelties adds That if the Laws of the Land do not permit them to guard their Lives when they are assaulted with unjust Force against Law or if they take Arms as you do to depose Princes we will never excuse them from Rebellion Thus Bilson as Faulkner there quotes him Now judge what reason this Author had to produce this Passage of Faulkner and how sore the was put to it when he could find nothing else to say to bring himself off from that Declaration which pursuant to the Law of the Land he had so solemnly read in the Presence of God and His Church in the Time of Divine Service The Evils of Tyranny and of a Civil War compar'd But leaving his Quotations to be Examin'd in their proper Place Let us go on with him to the Merit of the Cause to the Reasons he has to offer why submitting to the Tyranny of our Lawful Governors is a greater Evil than raising a Civil War in the Nation to prevent it for that is the Case And is the Explanation of what he meant above by Tolerable and Universal Evils N. 3. p. 3. viz That we ought to bear only with Tolerable Evils from our Governors or when the Mischief is not Universal or if it be Universal where it is yet Tolerable and not so mischievous in the Consequence as a Civil War Thus our Author And indeed he has given advantage enough against him in this Comparison which he advances of the Evils of Tyranny and Rebellion or a Civil War as he more gracefully Words it For do but bear with any King and think nothing Intolerable from him till he destroy as many as a Civil War I will not take the full advantage of the Comparison Do but stay till he destroys the thousand part as many or bring such universal Ruin and Devastation to the Kingdom and I 'll undertake there is no Passive-Obedience-man in the World but would conclude him as mad as Nebuchadnezzar and no more to be obey'd than a Man Raging in a Feaver So vast a Disproportion there is 'twixt the Evils of Tyranny and Rebellion So much is the Remedy worse than the Disease The Cruelty of a Tyrant says one is like a Clap of Thunder it strikes with great terror But a Civil War is like an Inundation which sweeps down all before it without noise Thus one Man brought upon the Scaffold by the Arbitrary Command of a Tyrant makes more noise than Ten thousand kill'd in the Field in a Civil War But that does not make the Evil the less but the greater while we are made willing to destroy our selves And do it more effectually in one day than the bloodiest Tyrant could find in Heart to do in his whole Reign All the Men put to death by the Arbitrary Command of Tyrants since the beginning of the World in all the Kingdoms of the World will not amount to half the Number of those who perished in the Roman or the English Civil Wars Those who have perished within these Three years in Ireland are many more than all the English Tyrants ever put to death So much safer are we in God's hands than in our own In their hands where God has plac'd us and though he often makes them like the Sun and Sea scourges for our Sin yet he has promis'd to keep their hearts in his hand and to turn them as seemeth best to him Prov. 21.1 we have more promise of Safety there than when we are delivered over to the Beasts of the People whose madness David compares the Raging of the Sea Psal 68.30 In short the Restraint of Government is the true Liberty and Freedom of the People since if they were at Liberty from Government they would be expos'd to one another which would be the greaten Slavery in the World The great Mistake is in the foolish Notion we have of Liberty which generally is thought to consist in being free from the Lash of Government as School-boys from their Master and proves in the Consequence only a Liberty to destroy one another This Author's Remedy for Tyranny to kill half the Nation And yet to purchase this Liberty our Author thinks it worth the while to cut the Throats of one half of the Nation These are his Words To lose even half the Subjects in a Civil War is more tolerable than the loss of Liberty Here is a terrible Sentence one half of a Nation cut down at a Blow we must expect some very good Reason for this He says An Age or two will repair the Loss of Subjects But if Liberty be Lost it is never to be retrieved Now I thought the quite contrary to this had been true That Men might be Rescu'd from Prison but not from Death That therefore Liberty might be retriev'd but Lives never He says An Age or two will repair the Loss of Lives that is other Men will live But does that Retrieve those that are Lost He may as well say That I regain my Liberty if another Man gets his Liberty But he says If Liberty be lost it is never to be retrieved Why then would he Sacrifice half the Nation to seek to retrieve it He says It brings certain and infallible Destruction And will he contend against Infallible Destruction I would ask whether he thinks the Irish Protestants did not loose their Liberty under King James If they did not His whole Book is false If they did Has not K. W. retriev'd it If not Let him answer his Thansgiving Sermon But if K. W. has retriev'd their lost Liberty then his Position is false viz That if Liberty be lost it is never to be retrieved So far is it from being certain and infallible as our Author assures us But let us see if we can find out the Reason of this strange Assertion And you have it not obscurely hinted in the Words immediately before viz. And indeed the greatest Mischief of a Civil War is the Danger of subjecting the State to the Absolute Power of some potent General as it hapned at Rome Florence and in England in the late Civil War This indeed is the Mischief and Danger of a Civil War Since the same Power that enabled your Deliverer to Rescue you will enable him also to keep the Power when he has got it And who will not keep it when it is in his Power As Oliver did in the late Civil War of England and happen'd in Rome Florence c. But now our Author has told us the Disease he ought to have given us the Remedy if he knows any For you cannot take Arms against a Tyrant but under the Command of some General And then how do you know but he
make a Return of near a Hundred Voices These this Author leaves out Was it for the length do you think No it would have quite Ruined his Plot of making a Parallel 'twixt the Reasons for K. James's holding a Parliament in England 17. Nov. 88. and in Ireland May 89. viz. That there was an Enemy in the Kingdom which is indeed no reason and none of the Reason the King gave But such an Enemy as can make a Return of near a Hundred Voices would indeed hinder the Freedom of a Parliament in all its Circumstances Now let us see how many Voices the Enemy could Return in Ireland not one but of two Burroughs that is Derry and Enneskillen all the other Burroughs and all the Countys in the Kingdom were in the Kings Hands Now let our Author Judge of his Parallel and of his Ingenuity in Misquoting the King's Answer For he that does not tell the whole Truth that is Material is a False-witness He says p. 152. Several Corporations had no Representatives because they were in the Enemies Hands And yet the whole Number is but two as abovesaid But he thought the Word several would carry more in the Reading Add to this the difference there is 'twixt a Forreign Enemy being in the Country and the Insurrection of the Subjects A Subject that Rebels and will not Obey the King's Summons to Attend him in Parliament is a different Case from his being under a Forreign Power that will not let him come In the first Case he has forfeited his Right to Sit in Parliament and there is no reason that there should not be a Parliament because he will not come But in the other Case it cannot be a Free and Full Parliament where so many Members are under a Forreign Power But our Author has protested before GOD That he has not Aggravated nor Misrepresented any Thing and therefore we must suppose That it was only to Save himself the pains of Writing or his Reader of viewing these eight words which he leaves out in the Kings Answer to the Lords 〈◊〉 of the four Words ut Colonies ibi faciat which he forgot in his Quotation out of Grotius of which I made mention before Tho' it is plain that both these Ommissions do quite alter the Sence of the Words our Author quotes against that Interpretation which he would put upon them And therefore it must be confest that they were very Materially and if I were not awed by this Authors serious appeal to God I should have said Designedly omitted by this Author to Misrepresent the Sence of both these Quotations and for an Aggravation against K. James But for the present I shall only say this That where this Author seems most Exact and sets his Quotations as you would think Verbatim in the Mangent that you might suspect nothing as he does in these two Quotations of Grotius and K. James's Answer to the Lords there you are chiefly to suspect and you must stand upon your Guard C. 1. n. 6. He brings another Quotation out of Grotius de Jure c. l. 2. c. 25. n. 8. to shew That Tho' Subjects might not take Arms Lawfully even in the extreamest necessity it would not follow from thence that others might not take Arms in their behalf I know no No-body that sayes it would follow from thence But as to his Quotation Grotius sayes in the very same place That this pretence of Helping others has in all Ages been made use of to colour their Designs who intend to Invade their Neighbors Right Scimus quidem ex Veterib Novisque Historiis alieni Cupiditatem hos sibi quaerere obtentus sed non ideo statim Jus esse desinit si quid a malis Usurpatur Navigant Piretae ferro utuntur Latrones and that meer Possession does not give Right for that there are Pirats and Robbers who get things by Force All this the Author has wisely left out of his Quotation it would have spoiled the Design for which he brought it But I cannot imagin to what end he sets down another Quotation out of the same Book Lib. 2. c. 20. § 40. Where he tells us That it is so much more Honourable to Avenge the Injuries done to another than our selves by how much there is less Danger that the sense of anothers Pain should make us exceed in exacting such Revenge than of our own or Byass our judgment By this Rule he that Avenges the Injuries done to another must have no By-Ends of his own no Profit or Advantage accrue to himself by such Revenge else it may Byass his Judgment and make him Exceed in his Revenge viz. Instead of reducing his Neighbour to Reason to Seize upon all he has for himself How far this is Conducing to the End for which the Author produc'd it I leave to himself to consider But I will make an end of this unsavory Subject raking up the Absurdities and Contradictons into which a Mans Malice does betray him I will give but one Instance more upon this Head You have heard before now positively he asserted that the Irish were the Aggressons in the late Revolution that not one Protestant Acted any thing in opposition to the Government but only defending themselves against Robbers nor Acted against these Robbers till actually Assaulted by them c. as you have it p. 105. Yet c. 3. § 13. p. 178. as it is printed for it is wrong pag'd it ought to be p. 186. n. 4. He forgets this and gives several Reasons why the Irish papists Were not the Aggressors as That they lay under the strictest Obligations not to begin Acts of Cruelty from the Odium and Ill Success their Murders in Forty One had That the Protestants were extreamly Cautious not to give the least offence That it would hurt K. James's Interest in England c. The Matter is he was here Answering the Objection That very few Protestants lâ—st their Lives in Ireland under K. J. This he Grants to be true and it was a severe Objection For to represent a Man as the most Bigotted and Merciless Tyrant that design'd no less than the Total Extirpation of one main part of his people upon which Supposition this Author Grounds his whole Book and then when he has Subdu'd these Subjects of his and Redâ—c'd them by Arms after what to be sure he thought Rebellion in them and their Proclaiming another for their King and some part of them still standing out in Arms against him and those under his Power Betraying him all they could aâ—d deserting him every day which gave him just Grounds to believe that they wou'd all as they did joyn with the P. of Orange when he Landed These were the Greatest Provocations can be suppos'd and the Fairest Occasion given to such a Cruel Tyrant to wreck his Malice upon those whom he design'd to Destroy And yet after Representing a Man to be such a Bloody Monster to find that he Kills none
of these People would make any Body suspect he had not been sairly Represented and that he did not really design any such thing as the Destruction of these People at least not altogether so fully as the French King resolved the voiding the Edict of Nants which this Author avers p. 19. I say who would believe that K. James did as fully determin our Ruin as our Author there Words it since he not only refused to do it when it was in his Power and he Apprehended so great Danger from them but took Pains and used his utmost Authority to keep back others from doing it who were ready and zealous to have done it and thought it their Interest to do it Therefore in this Distress our Author was obliged to find out some other Reasons for this besides K. Jame's Clemency And a Man of less Ingenuity than his cou'd make a shift to find Reasons for any thing There is no Subject upon which something may not be said Pro and Câ—n and so here our Author contrives Reasons for this Clemency of K. James which may not spoil that Bloody Character he had given of him and he turns it upon Policy Interest not to Provoke England c. not foreseeing that the same Interest must remain while ever he was King of England and so secure the Protestants in Ireland and disapoint this Authors whole Book And likewise he was under a Necessity of Contradicting what he had said before of making the Irish the Assaylants and Murderers c. because he is now forced to give Reasons why they were not so You know who should have good Memorys and it is very difficult when a Cause has several and Contrary Aspects It runs a Man some times to bespatter that side which he means to Defend As truly I think has happened in the present Case For if the most Malicious Jacobite had gone about to expose the present Government under the Name of K. James This Author Wounds the Present Government in the Person of K. James and the Papists he could not have done it more effectually than it is done in this Book For Example when England found the old Oath of Supremacy inconsistent with the Present Settlement they wisely abrogated it and made a new one But Ireland could not do this wanting a Parliament And in the Acts of Parliament in Ireland as in England there is a Penalty upon the refusal of this Oath which the then Civil and Military Officers in Ireland avoided by ordering it so That that Oath should not be tender'd to them as it was not at first to the Military nor to all the Civil Officers Now see how our Author exposes this Practice in the Person of the Papists c. 2. p. 38. § 9. He tells of an Horrible Artifice the Papists had to avoid the Oath enjoin'd on all Officers Civil and Military by Act. 28. Hen. 8. c. 13. and 2. Eliza. c. 1. viz. The Oath was never tender'd to their new Officers and Consequently said they they never refused it neither are they lyable to the Penalties of the Act. This was plainly against the design of the Statute a playing with the Words of it and shewed us that Laws are Insufficient to secure us against such Jesuitical Prevarications Thus our Author not Considering that the same Jesuitical Prevarications must by his Rule be Charged not only upon the Irish Protestants as abovesaid but upon the Roman Catholicks in K. Williams Army who are many more in England than K. James had in his Army here and before the Alteration of the Oaths here by Act of Parliament they must either have this same excuse for avoiding these Oaths or have none at all p. 114. He says the Protestants in Ireland chose rather to ly in Jayl than take some new invented Oath that was put to them without any Law to enjoin it Why would not this Author tell us what Oath this was I am told that there was no new Oath Imposed upon the Protestants in Ireland by K. James and it is not very likely where as you have heard from the Sovereign of Belfast and other Vouchers before Nam'd K. James did not trouble the Protestants even with the Oaths enjoyn'd by Law But I have been told that in Cork Limerick and other Garrisons upon the Sea Coast where there were many Protestants the Officers without any Order from K. James thought it reasonable to take that Security of these Protestants when they drew their Men out of these Garrisons into the Field and when they were Alaram'd with the English Fleet that these Protestants would not Joyn with their Enemies but be true to K. J. And I am told likewise that none of these Protestants did refuse it But if they did as this Author says could they take it ill to be secured in Prison who when the Enemy was hourly expected refused to promise not to Joyn with them or betray the Garrison to them Secondly this is an ill Reason for what the Author told us before viz. That K. James had not the least Reason to suspect or Disarm the Protestants and therefore this Author calls it perfect Dragooning of them as bad as was done in France But this Author tells his own Reason why they would rather ly in Jayl than take this Oath viz. Because there was not any Law to enjoyn it and they thought this a Violation of the Law and therefore that they ought to Suffer any hardship rather than Comply with it For if you break one Law you may break all c. Now this is perfect Wounding the present Government and Condemning what the Protestants in Ireland even this Author himself has done viz. Taking an Oath of Fidelity to K. William and Q. Mary without any Law to enjoyn it That is before this late Act of Parliament for abrogating the Old Oaths of Allegiance and Imposing the new Oaths in Ireland But here I must not be mistaken for I am not of our Author's Opinion that there was no Law to enjoyn these Oaths I have shewn before That by the Common Law there is an Oath of Allegiance may be required from the Subjects which for greater Satisfaction I have set down in the Appendix n. 13. as it was Taken to K. J. in Ireland by these Protestants With some Authorities out of the Common Law to Justify the Legality of it But our Author either knew not this or was willing not to remember it and would rather Wound the present Government than miss such a Blow and Reflection upon the Government of K. J. whether this was done in the full sincerity of his Heart without Aggravation or Misrepresenting against K. J. he has taken GOD to witness and there we must leave it The 26. Septemb. 90. There Issued three Proclamations from the Lords Justices of Ireland which I have hereunto Annex'd one Banishing the Wives Children and Familys of all in Rebellion against their Majesties or Kill'd in that Rebellion and of all
227 Alben Howell 17 Dec. 88 Back Isle of Wight Cast away 5 Lively Prize 250 W. Tichburne Oct. 89 at Sea Retaken by the French  Fire-Ships Charles and Henry 120 W. Stone 29 Nov. 89 Plymouth Cast away  Alexander 150 Tho. Jennings 21 June 89 at Sea Burnt by accident  Eliz. and Sarah 100 28 Oct. 90 Sherenesse Sunk for securing the graving place  Hopewell 253 Tho. Warren 3 June 90 Downes Burnt  Emanuel 170 25 Feb. 89 Portsmouth Delivered to the Prize-Officers to be sold  John of Dublin 90 Portsmouth   Sampson 240 27 Oct. 89 Sherenesse Sunk for the graving pl.  Bomb-vessel Fire-Drake 202 John Votear 12 Nov. 89 at Sea Taken by the French 6 Dragon Sloop 57 Fred. Weyman 12 Jan. 89 Isle of Thanet Cast away 6 Drake 151 Thomas Spragg 90 Jamaica Cast on Survey 6 Blade of Wheat 150 25 Dec. 89 Plymouth Cast away 6 Supply Geo. Cross Delivered to her Owners 6 Dumbarton 191 Simon Row 90 Virginia Cast on Survey 6 Deptford Ketch 79 Tho. Berry 26 Aug. 89 Virginia Cast away 6 King's-Fisher Ketch 61 Rob. Audley 23 Mar. 89 at Sea Taken by the French 6 Talbot 91 Ch. Staggens 19 July 91 at Sea Taken by the French  Hulk Stadthouse 440 28 Oct. 90 Shereness Sunk for securing the graving place  Stephen 716 Woolwich Broke up SHIPS that have been Damaged by running on Shoar Rate Ships Names Tuns Captains Time and Place 2 Vanguard 1397 Richard Carter the 10th of September 1691. on the Goodwin Sands 3 Northumberland 1048 Andrew Cotton  Royal Oak 1107 George Byng  Elizabeth 1097 Henry Priestman  Warspight 892 Stafford Fairborne 3d of Septemb. 1691. at the Hamose at Plymouth  Hope 1048 Peter Pritchard  Eagle 1065 John Leake  Sterling Castle 1059 Benj. Watters Note That this List extends onely to the 13th of November 1691. There is a large List of Men of War lost since that time besides above Two Thousand Merchant-men Numb 13. The Oath of Allegiance given to the Protestants in Cork Limerick and some other Garrisons by the Officers when King James drew out the Soldiers from these Garrisons into the Field YOU shall Swear that from this Day forward you shall be true and faithful to our Sovereign Lord King James and his Heirs and Truth and Faith shall bear of Life and Member and Terrene Honour and you shall neither know nor hear of any Ill or Damage intended unto him that you shall not defend so help you Almighty God 7 E. 2. tit Avowric 211. 4 E. 3. fol. 42. 13 E. 3. and in Britton 5 E. 1. c. 29. Numb 14. A Letter written to my Lord Russel in Newgate July 20. 1683. My Lord I Was heartily glad to see your Lordship this Morning in that calm and devout Temper at the Receiving of the Blessed Sacrament but Peace of Mind unless it be well-grounded will avail little And because transient Discourse many times hath little effect for want of time to weigh and consider it therefore in tender compassion of your Lordships case and from all the good Will that one Man can bear to another I do humbly offer to your Lordships deliberate thoughts these following Considerations concerning the points of Resistance if our Religion and Rights should be invaded as your Lordship puts the Case concerning which I understand by Dr. B. that your Lordship had once received satisfaction and am sorry to find a Change First That the Christian Religion doth plainly forbid the Resistance of Authority Secondly That though our Religion be establish'd by Law which your Lordship urges as a Difference between our Case and that of the Primitive Christians yet in the same Law which establishes our Religion it is declared That it is not Lawful upon any Pretence whatsoever to take up Arms c. Besides that there is a particular Law declaring the Power of the Militia to be solely in the King And that ties the Hands of Subjects though the Law of Nature and the General Rules of Scripture had left us at liberty which I be-believe they do not because the Government and Peace of Humane Society could not well subsist upon these Terms Thirdly Your Lordships Opinion is contrary to the declared Doctrine of all Protestant Churches and though some particular Persons have taught otherwise yet they have been contradicted herein and condemned for it by the generality of Protestants And I beg your Lordship to consider how it will agree with an avowed asserting of the Protestant Religion to go contrary to the General Doctrine of Protestants My end in this is to convince your Lordship that you are in a very great and dangerous mistake and being so convinced that which before was a Sin of Ignorance will appear of much more heinous Nature as in Truth it is and call for a very particular and deep repentance which if your Lorship sincerely exercise upon the sight of your Error by a penitent acknowledgement of it to God and Men you will not only obtain forgiveness of God but prevent a mighty Scandal to the Reformed Religion I am very loath to give your Lordship any disquiet in the distress you are in which I commiserate from my Heart but am much more concerned that you do not leave the World in a delusion and false Peace to the hindrance of your Eternal Happiness I heartily pray for you and beseech your Ldship to believe that I am with the greatest sincerity and compassion in the World My Lord Your Lordship 's most faithful and afflicted Servant J. Tillotson Printed for R. Baldwin 1683. Numb 15. The Earl of Sunderland's LETTER to a Friend in London Plainly discovering the Designs of the Romish Party and others for the subverting of the Protestant Religion and the Laws of the Kingdom Licensed and Entred March 23. 1689. TO comply with what you desire I will explain some things which we talked of before I left England I have been in a Station of great Noise without Power or Advantage whilst I was in it and to my Ruine now I am out of it I know I cannot justifie my self by saying though it is true that I thought to have prevented much mischief for when I found that I could not I ought to have quitted the service Neither is it an Excuse that I have got none of those things which usually engage men in publick Affairs my Quality is still the same it ever was and my Estate much worse even ruined though I was born to a very considerable one which I am ashamed to have spoiled though not so much as if I had encreased it by indirect means But to go on to what you expect The pretence to a Dispensing Power being not onely the first thing which was much disliked since the Death of the late King but the foundation of all the rest I ought to begin with that which I had so little to doe with that I never heard it spoken of till the