of that Government they had set up themselves and if we shall allow to the nature of the times those things which men seduced think necessary for their preservation why should it be a flat contradictory to say that at the same time they bare true Faith and Allegiance to the King not by desisting Pag. 60. from doing those things without which they could not subsist but by performing those eminent duties to which their Faith and Allegiance at all Times upon all Occasions and in all Conditions subject them That is not to pay the Fealty we owe him to any other Prince not to assist or countenance the doing of the least injury to his Person to forbear taking any Oath that tends to exclude him and his Posterity from his Dominions to fight against those that do and since we are unhappily fallen from our Obedience to return to our former state as soon as possibly we can and things of this nature 112. Certainly if this Gentleman be not extremely innocent he is very forgetful that holds so close to the Law And I assure him That to maintain the fundamental Laws of Pag. 60. the Kingdom and the free exercise of the Catholick Religion were in those times thought to be things very compatible however he takes them to be Contradictories 113. He aggravates the matter and so he might if we did forget the nature of the Times with their swearing not to seek or receive any pardon or protection for any thing done or to be done touching the general Cause But allowing not Pag. 61. the Legality but the Existence of their Government what could have preserved it without such tyes 114. This Gentleman is alwayes at a fault when his discourse tends any way to Catholick Religion Our Tenet is quite contrary for we know that we cannot receive nor the Pope give a pardon for sins to come Pag. 61. 115. Now we are come to that part which was added to the Oath in the Year 46. and he tells us they swear not to submit to any Peace made or to be made without the approbation of the general Assembly of the Catholicks Of aâ—l Pag. 61. the parts of the Oath this methinks ought least to be oppugned For it is no wonder that they should expect to have their own consent and approbation to attend any Peace that would be concluded they themselves being the most numerous Representative of the Nation Had they confined it to the supreme Council that in truth might be thought a limitation 116. But this Gentleman to aggravate their guilt makes use in my opinion of a very speculative Argument saying That if the King did not so much as name them but Pag. 61. make a Peace with them as if they had never done any offence they were debarred of it by this Oath And I desire to be informed how it might otherwise be known than by the consent and approbation of an Assembly that they accepted of such a Peace 117. I have already mentioned how the Assembly gave way to the Propositions made by the Clergy and had them confirmed by Oath being loath to displease so powerful a Party in a matter which was no longer binding than an Assembly thought fit And therefore this Gentleman may without Reply from me comment upon those Propositions as he thinks fit But with his leave he will not gather by any thing therein That none should be admitted to live in Pag. 61. Ireland but Papists The French King maintains the Catholick Clergy and Laity in the publick and free exercise of the Roman Catholick Religion and Function throughout France in as full lustre and splendour as it was in the Reign of St. Lewis yet he excludes not the Hugonotts 118. Had this Gentleman dealt fairly with the Reader he had not entertained him with Propositions which interested Pag. 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79. men do commonly make for their own advantage and his Comments upon them nor with Instructions which upon every occasion are subject to alteration and were given those that agitated the affairs in 46. which I hope he will not deny But he should have laid before him the Result and Conclusion in the Articles of Peace in 48. and told him what a numerous People the King was to satisfie who without excluding his Protestant Subjects might partake of his favours But this was not his design He knew nothing could be grateful to the Party he intended to pleasure but the foulest aspersions whether right or wrong that could be laid on those whose Estates they possess And we cannot say but he hath been faithful to them how unjust soever to Catholicks 119. Now passing over those things which the Gentleman Pag. 80. himself calls Digressions and indeed are no other than a methodical way oâ— venting his bitterness I shall present the Reader instead of those horrid Oaths as this Gentleman calls them those than which indeed no written wickedness can ascend higher with other Oaths that have been esteemed more religious Oaths taken by the Saints themselves Oaths taken by the Fautors of Cromwells Tyranny and the Well-wishers of his Kingship I A. B. Being nominated a Member of the Council of State The Form of an Expurgatory Oath taken by the Councâ—l of State Feb. 22. 1648. by this present Parliament do testifie that I do adhere to this present Parliament in the Maintenance and Defence of the publick Liberty and Freedom of this Nation as it is now declared by this Parliament by whose Authority I am constituted a Member of the said Council and in the Maintenance and Defence of their Resolutions concerning the setling of the Government of this Nation for the future in way of a Republick without King or House of Peers And I do promise in the sight of God that through his Grace I will be faithful in performance of the Trust committed to me as aforesaid and thâ—rein faithfully pursue the Instructions given to the said Council by this present Parliament and not to reveal or disclose any thing in whole or in part directly or indirectly that shall be debated or resolved upon in the Council without the command and direction of the Parliament or without the order or allowance of the major part of them that shall be present at such Debates or Resolutions In confirmation of the Premisses I have hereto subscribed my Name I A. B. Do hereby declare that I renounce the pretended Oath of Abjuration of the Kâ—ng and Royal Issue Title of Charles Stuart and the whole Line of the late King James and of every other Person as a single Person pretending to the Government of these Nations of England Scotland and Ireland and the Duminions and Territories thereunto belonging And that I will by the grace and assistance of Almighty God be true and faithful to this Common-wealth against any King single Person and House of Peers and
means for defence And he might have seen that considering the powerfull though most ungodly endeavours and wicked arguments used to perswade his most Sacred Majesty not to regard the performance of that Peace P. W. cannot be justly said to have in that occasion unjustly applyed or made use of the Judgements of God on Saul and his Children for being mis-lead by such perfidious Counsels against the Laws of God Nature and Nations Not that P. W. did wish as God knows he did not but was and is from the bottom of his Soul far enough from any such wish that in the conditional contingency of such non-performance or of such a breach by his Majesty with those can justly pretend to the benefit of that Peace the like or indeed any other Judgements should light on himself or on his Posterity but that his Majesty might be minded of this example as of an antidote against the poyson of such Viperous Counsellers as our Person of Qâ—ality seems to be and the rest of his Consorts that with so much importunitie so much falsity and such other evil arguments which I will not mention here did then sollicite as they do still for the perpetual destruction of all Irish Catholicks that is to say of more than a million of people yea of a great though as yet through such arts and the endeavours of this Gentleman and his Associates uncomfortable Nation and Kingdom to the generality of Catholick Natives and did and do sollicite for the ruining them so for ever without any regard of their Articles or of Publick Faith given them with so much solemnity by two great and good Kings and upon considerations so valuable as the World knows Nay did and do at this very present sollicit this destruction to involve even those of that Nation and Religion who are confessedly innocent of the Rebellion or prosecution of it or of any breach of Articles or Peace which yet is so well known to be against the most known fundamental Laws of the Land and against all Divine and Humane Laws and against the very first Dictates or even glimmers of Natural reason that I need not dilate upon it any further 133 But that I may not seem to decline observing the advantages this Person of Quality proposed to himself in that Parallel he would needs frame for me let us consider every Particular apart 1. Josua sayes he knew not the Persons of those with whom he made that League neither did the King know the hearts of those with whom he made that Peace I would fain know of this Gentleman whether Josua knew the hearts of the Gibeonites Or whether any of both sides that make Peace or League whatever they be on Earth the hearts of the other Pag. 90. The French of the Spaniards or Spaniards of the French the English of the Hollanders or Hollanders of the English And since he must answer not then I demand where is the advantage hence for him that his Majesty knew not the hearts of those with whom he made that Peace Or is the Peace therefore not obligatory Indeed were the Persons of the Irish unknown to his Majesty and his Lieutenant who treated with them and so unknown I say to both as to think they had not been of the Irish Nation at all but English or Scots inhabiting some other Tract of Land and some other Cities than those they did or had his Majesty and Lieutenant been so ignorant of those Irish Commissioners that they had taken them at that time to be another People or of another Country not of that which was before and through their Rebellion forfeitable to the Crown and by the Act of 17. Caroli of the Parliament of Westminster if that be of any force in Ireland to be assured to and shared amongst adventurers and Souldiers then might this Gentleman with some reason say the Articles obliged not whereas there was an errour about the very Persons than which nothing seems more against freedom of consent as to that wherein the errour is even that essential freedom I mean without which a man hath no free consent in any sense at all And yet in this case my Parallel would be more plain in the extension of it but his advantage no more but rather less as from thence to any purpose he ought to drive at 2. Those were Neighbours nay lived amongst the Israelites Pag 90. to whom Josuah promised Peace though they said they were of a far Country The Irish were Neighbours at least locally nay they lived long amongst us though at last they would not let us live amongst them But indeed they were from a very far Country even from Rome it self Behold Reader two manifest impostures in a few lines The Confederate Catholicks when such or come to be joyned in a body or social defence and have a general Assembly which they had very soon after the first insurrection were so far from denying English Scots or any other Protestant Subjects to his Majesty to live amongst them that even in their printed model of Government which I suppose this Gentleman hath they invited all such as Pleased to come and live amâ—â—g 〈◊〉 oâ— Gâ—â—â—rnment them And their being from a very far Country even as far as Rome in this Gentlemans sense or their being so from Rome that they acknowledge any dependence from the Pope in Temporal affairs or any that are not purely Spiritual or such a dependence as cannot stand with a most Christian most Loyal and indispensable Allegiance by any on Earth to his Sacred Majesty King Charles the â— of England Ireland and Scotland the former Declarations Protestations and their famous opposition of the Lord Nâ—ncio and of his Excommunications and Interdicts in tâ—e Case of the Cessation with the then Baron now Eaâ—l of Inchiquin and the Book printed at Kilkeny and subscribed by David Osoriensis and approved by Thomas Midensis and subscribed and approved by the rest of the Divines convoked to that purpose entituled Quaeries concerning the lawfulness of the present Cessation c. whereof P. W. is known and confesses himself to have been the Author manifestly convince they are not Yet I confess most freely and truly they are as to their Religion from a Country as farr as Rome because they received it thence and from Countries too in that as farr as Constantinople Antioch Alexandria or Hierusalem as all the People of England have had theirs even from Rome I say for a 1000. years and amongst them a hundred millions of people that have been all their lives as unalterably loyal to their Princes as any people could be and more loyal without comparison than I doubt this Person of Quality can pretend himself to be or at least to have been sometime in his life past But suppose that notwithstanding their being Neighbours at least locally and their living long with this Person of Quality and amongst those he makes his own they have after a War
this Reply and partly in my Printed Letter and Irish Colours Folded and others have more amply in several occasions and his Majesty whose testimony and authority is above all exception most graciously and truly declares in his publick Act of Settlement as we have now seen That what this Trifling Author of Horae subsecivae objects of an interloping Conquerer c. makes no alteration in the Case For 1. I must tell this Gentleman he doth no less ignorantly than improperly style the success of the Usurper a Conquest or him a Conquerer The raising of Armes by Subjects against their Soveraign had never yet any name in England or Ireland or in the Laws of either but Rebellion and Treason And the effects of Treason and Rebellion can never be termed properly or truly a Conquest nor the prevailing Traytor a Conquerour For that were to give a Right and Title that might pass to the Traytor 's Posterity in succession 2. That Charles the 2. whom God preserve and his Father are looked on by this Author and by this Objection as dispossess'd by the Usurper Which is plain ignorance or at least a willful and malicious mistake of the Laws of England which so preserve the Possessions of the Crown as the King cannot be dispossessed by a Subject A Subject may intrude and take the profits of the Land belonging to the King But this in Law can never amount to the dispossessing of the King Where-ever Charles the 2. was the 30th of January in the Year 1648. being the fatal day of his Father's death eo instanti he began his Reign and therefore now is the 16. Year thereof Whereas if he could be dispossess'd of his Crown by his rebellious Subjects and that horrid Action could be styled a Conquest and his regaining thereof again a new Conquest this should be but the fourth Year of his Reign And who sees not it were a very ill exchange for his Majesty to forgoe his antient and undoubted Right to the Crown of England and to own his holding and enjoyment thereof by Conquest on an Usurper who could pretend no right thereunto 3. That that his ground of his former bold impious and bloody Assertion or after-conclusion thence derived of an interloping usurping Conquerour if admitted for sound or solid for good or true Doctrine might prove very disadvantagious and injurious to his Majesties Subjects in general English and Scots of what Religion soever no less than Irish Papists even I say in their Estates Liberties and Lives For if a King come even to a Christ an Kingdom by Conquest he hath Vitae Necis potestatem He may at his pleasure alter and change the Laws of that Kingdom as appears in Cook l. 7. Report Calamy s Case 4. That he falsly charges the Irish Papists to have owned c. the Usuprer as I have a little above declared 5. That he doth as falsly and ignorantly or at least out of designed malice and against his own Conscience averr That the Civilians have in like Cases long since decided this Case of the Irish truly stated as I have above or any way decided for him that of an interloping usurping Conquerour c. applyed to Charles the 2. and his good Subjects whether English Scots or Irish even I mean those very Irish Papists that formerly had been Confederates and after submitted to his Majesty or his Father upon Articles fought constantly for him and under his Banner and by his Commission against the Usurper and never submitted since to any other Power whatsoever but with his said Majesties own consent If this Gentleman can allege but even one Civilian for himself even I say in this Case of his or any other such interloping usurping Conquerour truly applyed I will grant him somewhat to excuse his no less inhumane than uncharistian and most horrid Assertion But I am confident all his malice cannot find one whom he dares quote in writing or print So farr doth he speak as out of all reason so out of all Books 6. That by consequence necessary following the obligation of publick Agreements the Irish cannot be punished by the King as this Author sayes they may Lege Talionis no more than he can by any other Law as is before shewed of God or Man War or Nations For the King hath already bound his own hands from acting against them by retaliation or otherwise acknowledges himself to be so bound in honour and justice according I mean to those Articles of 48. and to such as cannot be proved to have by after disobedience or siding with an Enemy forfeited them And so I bid this learned honest prudent Author of Horaesubsecivae adieu and to his impertinent reflections on this subject and my self And will only add this to thee judicious Reader to be considered whether it be not agreeable to all justice and equity that those who lost their lives and fortunes in asserting his Majesties Cause as they have been losers and afflicted with him and for him too in his adversity ought not in these dayes of his Majesties power and prosperity regain thereby their lost fortunes especially where the Publick Faith was engaged for their restitution As for that scruple which peradventure some may think uncleared as yet of some few or even many of those Articling Papists of Ireland to have forfeited the benefit of those Articles and not for themselves alone but even for all the rest of their Countrymen though not in their own persons guilty of any such breach as those were or any at all And for the ground or reason alleged by some for this scruple viz. That by the prevarication of those few or many whether the greater or lesser part of that People whether the Representatives of the whole or nor the Kings end in granting those Articles was frustrated forasmuch as thereby it happened that he could not carry on his main Design then against the Usurpers And as for that too which is further alleged to this purpose or for the illustration of it and further grounding of that scruple That if a Garrison be dismissed out of a Town upon certain Articles of War to be freely and safely conveighed to their own Quarters or General and that any part of them break any of these Articles which they were to observe at their peril the whole number have forfeited their right to any such free passage or safe convey and are at the mercy of the Conquerour It is answer'd That the End by either side proposed to themselves in making a Peace or Articles being frustrated doth not invalidate such Peace or Articles unless such End be in those Articles expressed and further clear express caution inserted in the Agreement that otherwise it shall be void Else I pray what Stipulation Pact Agreement or Peace on Earth can hold or oblige either side And for that Example of a Garrison Town or Souldiers capitulating on Articles of War it s answered The condition of Subjects enjoying the benefit and protection of the Laws is faâ—r different from that of Enemies A just Coâ—querour may without injustice if he please so he break not his word take from his Enemies even thâ—ir lives and that not only for the crime or breach of some but in some cases without any such crime or breach by any of them But a just King cannot so carry himself towards his own Subjects whom he doth once own as such and as such to be protected and governed by his Laws as other free-born Subjects For such he cannot without injustice punish for the Disobedience Breach or Rebellion of any other lesser or even greater part of their fellow Subjects whether these represent the whole body of his Subjects or not whether they frustrate or not his best Designes and his greatest most glorious and just Enterprizes or nor Otherwise what should become according to such Law and Justice I speak of all the good Subjects of England Ireland Scotland if the King pleased to proceed according to that rigour of Justice against them when he was re-inthroned Nay what should become of all other good Subjects of any Prince or State on Earth ' gainst whom there have been such frequent Rebellions Besides it is against the true meaning of all Laws Divine and Humane that a Judge or Prince doing Justice to his â—ubjects in a legal way not by force of Armes should involve the Innocent in the guilt or punishment of the Nocent And therefore it is plain that neither that Scruple Reason of it nor Example or Similitude brought to strengthen it can make any thing for them that would thence conclude the King is wholly free from any Obligation to any part of the Irish Catholicks arising from the Articles of 48. They have been since that Peace of 48 Subjects not Enemies And those Articles had not any such Clause inserted that in case any part lesser or greater Representatives or not should break the Conditions the rest should likewise forfeit and the End frustrated doth not make them to forfeit FINIS