Selected quad for the lemma: land_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
land_n	case_n	lease_n	rent_n	2,101	5	9.6869	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57824	Tythes ended by Christ with the Levitical priesthood and therefore no maintenance for a Gospel-ministry, nor lawful for Christians to pay or take under the dispensation of the Gospel : being an answer to two reviling pamphlets written against the people of God called Quakers, because they refuse to pay tythes : the one by C.N. a Presbyterian, and the other by Cress Wheatly, an Episcopal priest : the said C.N. and C.W. are herein justly rebuked for their enmity and lyes against the people of God, and their arguments and plea for tythes considered and fully answered, and the people of God vindicated in their refusing to pay tythes / by the servants of the Lord, T. Rudyard and W. Gibson ; also a postscript by George Watt ; also some brief observations upon some passages in a book, entituled, Christ's call to professors, by W.G.	Rudyard, Thomas, d. 1692.; Gibson, William, 1629-1684.; Watt, George, Lover of the truth. Tythes no Gospel-ordinance.	1673 (1673)	Wing R2183; ESTC R12032	26,888	46

manner of writing and that will remove thy Scruple 1. Know that Tythes are no distinct and seperate Part of a man's Estate as the Tenth Acre c. but part of that Encrease which man's Labour Industry Care and Prudence which the Blessing of God has brought forth Nor can Pope Priest c. without Consent of the Farmer take the Tenth or any one Sheaf c. as his own but is by Law a Trespasser yea in such a Degree that he 's Inditable for Theft and Robbery as one that sets upon the Person or House of another to extort that by Violence he supposes his Due For it s not their's in the Sense of the Law before Separation made by the Party without which Pope Priest or Impropriator cannot say of one Blade of Grass or Ear of Corn It is mins Which clearly evidences not only Possession but the Propriety and Right to be solely in the Farmer And as a clear Proof see the Statute 2 E. 6. it gives the Priest no such Title as he can bring his Action De placito quod reddat ei decimas of a Plea that he render unto him his Tythes but only an Action of Debt for not setting forth the Tenth which Jure Divino these Law-Makers supposed was the Priests Right and Propriety But had Pope Priest c. such a Propriety as thou wouldst Insinnate they might separate or set them out themselves or bring an Action Quod reddat c. which by the Law they cannot as the meanest Country-Practitioner may inform thee So that Question of What Right in the People to Tythes is but a noval start up Query yet in F. H. his Treatise wants not Answer if persons will take Reason for Answer For 2. Observe the manner of his handling that Case of Tythes it was according to that sure Maxime Errores ad sua principia referre est refellere To bring Errors to their First is to see their Last He has clearly demonstrated how Wickedly they were Introduced at first how Cruelly Maintained for many after Ages the Faithful Testimonies that English Martyrs and Forreigners have born against them all along and that such Forced Maintenance is no Gospel-Maintenance Where 's room left then in Gospel-Days for Scruple But against Causless Cavils there 's no Fence of which I desire with many others to see an End I can omit to observe how frequently thou re-itteratest that Appellation upon us as Thieves and Robbers for taking what 's not our own What is there that we take with Violence or otherwise How do we take what another never had without taking thou supposest no Theft or Robbery as it s very true so callest thou it taking to prove us Thieves for a Detainer without Taking is no Theft Most Horrid Abuse Nay were we Debtors which is the most thou canst pretend to and more then can be proved against us must every one be called a Thief and Robber that payes not what his incensed Adversary charges upon him as a Debt I am sure thy Party cannot deny but in this thou hast been egrediously Abusive yea those Appillations which in the Front of thy former Letter thou termest Bitter Declamations in our Mouthes against our Cruel Adversaries is by thee utterred familarly against us and with how much Reason let the Impartial judge The next Exception to F. Howgill's Discourse is That after his Accompt of the several Kings by name who had granted Tythes c. he alledges that they were Popish Kings and gave them to Popish Priests and that the Poor had a Share of them To all which thou makest Four or five Demands The First Whether every thing that was given by Papists to Papists for that Reason becomes the People's Answ I answer in short It doth not The Second being an Explication of thy First I grant in the Affirmative The Third Might not Popish Kings do what they would with their own Doth their baslowing them to Bad Vses give you or me a Right to them Answ 1. I answer What was their own they might dispose of as they would not Prejudicing the Interest of another But that the People's Labours Industries Vnderstandings c. were their's is opposite to the real Priviledge of a Christian and a Free-born English-Man that owns no such Bondage of working for he knows not whom nor yet for what 2. To the second part of thy Demand I answer That my Right preceded their Wrongful Imposition I claim not meerly because of their Bad Vses but because my Right was not in their Power to bestow or continue to any Vse against my Will So I claim not under their Ill Uses but by my Title which was above and before them and shall be when their's is not Thy Fourth If the Clergy ought to give the Poor a Share with them and do not is the Fault yours or their's How are your Consciences conoerned Are Tythes therefore your's c Your selves pay neither Poor nor Priest Answ I answer Thou canst not make us in Fault for the Priests Covetousness but how long they have Robbed the Poor is app●rent But the End of F. H's instancing the Poor had a Share at first was to shew how fairly and speciously the Pope and Devil introduced this Imposition of Tythes I am perswaded much like the Daily Collections at the Doors of the late Licensed Separatists Meeting-places for the Release of Poor and Defraying the Charge of their Gospel-Ministry as they term it of which Contributions sober Men believe the Poor have but a small Share allowed them Thy Fifth Sayest thou May such M●n as are Tenants to Hospital Lands say They will pay no Rents because the Founders were Papists and gave them to Poor People to Pray for them when Dead Answ I answer The Case is no way parallel If I take Land of a Person I 'll pay him his contracted Rent let him do what he please with his Money But who 's my Land-lord for Tythes Of whom do I take a Lease To whom is Rent reserved Unto whom came I into Covenant This Case of thine is so forreign to the Matter that it has not the least Alliance Next Thou tellest thy Reader of thy Thanks to F. H. for thy Information of Stephen Bish●p of Chichester and W. Clifford pag. 10. their giving the Tythes of some particular Lands for the Pardon of their Sins Health of their or their Fa●her's Souls From all which thou obse●vest as if F H. having told thee that Tythes were a Forced Maintenance here hims●lf ●ath proved them to be a Free Gift Answ 1. There might be sufficient Exception t●ken against thy warring the point for which the Instances of R●●tephen c. were brought 't was to prove the Evil and Superstitious Ends for which those Tythes were given which thou om●ttest to answer 2. Here also thou bringest a false Conclusion from his Discou●se and so abuses that Author What! because some particular Tythes were given must Tythes in general be a

Estate Labour Industry c. is backt with Reason The Law has a Maxime C●ssante rati●ne cessat ipsa lex such as is a Valuable Consideration for his Demands expect no less then that the Right I have purchased will defend me from all other Trivial and Vnjust Claims And except thou findest a good and just Foundation for the first Stablishment and Imposition of Tenths upon us look not to Impose either the Use of former Tenants Custom of the Nation Antiquity of Popes Decretals backt with Humane Laws since all manner of Wickedness Cruelty and Oppression have in one Age or other had as equal Colourable Authority to enforce their Continuance and Imposition upon the People Then which I see nothing offered by thee 4th Head To thy 4th Head What Right by Compact or Release from Man to Man Answ I see no more in this then thy be●ting again the former troden Path The Tenant has the Leaser's Right the Farm is the Tenant's the Rent the Land-lord's and whatever was the Leasor's Right to have is in the Lease as to the Land he holds paying his reserved Rent But the Tenants Strength Labour Industry and Understanding the Encrease of Stock is not by Lease from the Land-lord but by the free Gift of God as was said before of and from whom he holds it If Priest Pope c. have a Tenth of the Land why does he not sow it and improve it to his own Advantage 'T is that only we claim under the Land-lord If he pretends to a Right to the Tenth of our Labour Industry c. let him produce his Title and if it precede or be superiour to our's we shall condescend till then our Land-lord's Title has set us free from Priest Pope Presby●er or whoever claims by from or under them 5th Head What Right by virtue of Possession or Occupancy This sayest thou is a Proper Natural and Just Claim to the first Planters and Possessors of any Part of the Earth not before possessed or planted Answ 'T is well then from the beginning it was not so And how then came this Course to be altered The Great God gave Man the Fruit of his Industry Wisdom and Understanding the Pope took part of it away and gives it to his Creatures was not this Inv●ntion of Man that altered the Course that God had made Evil God's Law made void by Man's Traditions So Tythes entred Man coming to God and his Law again denies Tythes that the Devil had settled contrary to the Pure Holy Law And here 's the Quarrel 'twixt the Priest Pope Presbyter c. the People called Quakers who cannot put into their Mouthes so Priest Pope Presbyter c. prepare War against them And we do respect the Intention of Buyer and Seller Donor and Donee he that made us Possessors and he that would Dispossess and conclude as Christians That in despight of Popes Decrees Priests Canons c. we are free from all their Dark and Superstitious Gifts and Impositions whatsoever And he who will take the Pains to enquire may be well Informed That this Imposition of Tythes was not the Fruit of Christianity but an Effect of the Christian● Apostacy from the Faith of Jesus For the Christians many Hundred Years after Christ knew no such thing as Tythes till the Popes and Prelatick Authority imposed them by their Bulls Decrees and Canons But that these Bulls Decrees and Canons did meet with many Oppositions from the Faithful Martyrs of Jesus is plentifully set forth in History Fox Acts Mon. p. 564 605 607 621. as of many more we may instance John Wickliff John Huss William Thorpe William Swinderly Walter Brint and many others bear their Testimonies against this Antichristian Imposition and all other Unjust and Forced Priest Maintenance which for Conscience sake towards God they could not no more then we submit unto yet in all their Conversation towards Men were Blameless whose Faithfulness will be had in Everlasting Remembrance with them that fear the Lord and bear Witness to his Holy Name which is set up as a Standard to the Nations and those that put their Trust in him is he pretious although a Stumbling-Stone and a Rock of Offence to all such who have and do wilfully D●spise his Tender of Mercy and this his Day of Visitation In case thou beest an Enquirer I doubt not thy Information if an Imposer upon others I do not in the least suppose its Prevalency with such whose Hearts are towards God However if there yet remains a Spirit in thee to oppose us take the Pains to consult the Learned Rabbies of thy Party and Perswasion and fairly state this Case of Tythes and plainly tell your Opinions and Iudgments 1. Whether Priest Pope or who else have Right to them 2. Who are to pay them and for what 3. By what Authority whether of God Holy Scriptures Edicts and Decrees of Popes Princes Parliaments or Councils by which of them are they to be payed who hath set them up and when set up Let us understand the Title plainly by which they are claimed And if upon a solid Stating the Question and sober Resolve we are found detaining that which of Right belongs to a Just Proprietor whether of our Daily Labour the yearly Produce of the Earth or Encrease of our Herds or what else God has made us Stewards of here we shall be ready to receive Instruction and exercise our Conscience in being content with our own which according to that Wisdom God has given us hitherto we have of which the Lord is our Witness And until we have otherwise learned we must believe 't is rather thy Mistake than our Just Desert that censures out Sufferings as the meet Reward of Thieves and Robbers who have in this Case kept a Conscience void of Offence towards the God of our Peace with whom we have Peace and Satisfaction although in the World we a●others who have been alike Faithful in this Matter have had Trouble Thy Friend Thomas Rudyard London 3d Moneth 1673. An Answer to C. Nedham's second Letter FRIEND THy Former came to me in Manuscript as I intended its Answer this Latter in Print before which I neither saw or h●ard of it However it may please thee or thy Party it s against my Desire to trouble the Press and whatever thy Hopes may be in sowing such Seeds of Contest sure I am thy Joy will be small in Harvest I have not backt thy Question though as subtil as our Enemy could forge it For I am sure Reason and Truth 's on our side which hath and yet will plead our Innocency and prevail whatever Dirt thou attemptest to cast upon us Thou informest in thy Second That thou hast read the Case of Tythes reviewed by F. H. written in 1655. to which thy main Objection is That there 's not therein any one Argument or Reason to prove the People's Right to Tythes Answ Consider but what Tythes are and 2d F. H's

Decretals of Popish Councils and Prelatical Synods since the Apostacy and find the like Instance of Atheism To say It matters not who has Right is begging the Question that will never be granted For certainly if part of my Strength Daily Labour Sweat of my Brows Yearly Encrease of that Substance which God makes me Steward of here to his Praise shall be demanded of me 't is but Reasonable I should know who he is that requires such Servit●ds else wherein I should be God's Freeman I may be the Devil's Slave In my Apprehension it had been most Just and Reasonable first to have asserted the Pope Priests Presbyter c. his Title to the things in demand and when their Propriety had been sufficiently demonstrated it had been early enough to have insinuated the Quakers Th●eves and Robber● for refusing to work and labour under such Tusk-Masters But here thou proclaimest to the World a Design to stigmatize others rather then to clear the Innocency of thy own Party so without Breach of Charity thou 'lt incur the censure a Partial Controvertist And now to the Question What Right have the People to Tythes● I might answer by this Question What Right has any others to them For certainly the Law presumes every Man to have a good Right to what he possesses till his Opposer Out him by shewing a better Title Therefore have we a common Anglicism That of Twelve Possession is Eleaven Points of the Law And that Man hath good Right to enjoy the Fruit of his Labours Strength and Industry as to those outward Concerns wherewith God has blest him and to be accomptable to his Creator is most consonant to the Rule of Holy Scriptures and Right Reason This in general but to thy Particulars Thou proposest in thy Plea for Tythes That all manner of Right and Propriety must needs be conveyed to Men in or by some of these five Wayes viz. 1. Either Free Gift or Donation from God or Man to Man 2. Or Right of Inheritance from Ancestors 3. Or Purchase one Man from another 4. Or Compact Bargain or Release 5. Or Possession or Occupancy I shall not oppose thy Distinctions but grant that these or such like must be the Wayes whereby Right ought to be conveyed and Propriety settled amongst Men adding only that it s still absolutely necessary in every of these 1. As to the Gift that it be not given to a void End and so becomes null 2. That there be a Lawful Heir that claimeth by Inheritance 3. That for a Purchase Compact or Bargain 'twixt Man and Man there be a Real Consideration given Vender has right to sell 4. That Right attend the Occupancy or Possession Give but these their due Place and Reason shall be Judge betwixt us Whether Pope Priest or their Assignes have absolute Right to the things in demand or we whom God has made Possessors of them And truly if under any of these reasonable Titles our Adversaries had made their Claim and we refused to render Right it had been colour of Censure But to declaim against a People for detaining that which no Man claims for ought appears by thine is Unjust Clamour Bear with me if I term thy Proprietor No Man For its a Common Maxime Idem est non esse non appavere 't is the same not to be as not to appear And when the Priest Pope Presbyter or any who will produce a better Title to Imbondage then we have to evidence our Freedom I question not but we shall avoid to be justly censured for detaining what 's not our own But that we as well as others shall have all manner of Evil spoke against us falsly for the sake of our Master no wise doubt And although our Possession be a Plea sufficient against the Decimators Cract Title to the things in demand yet to remove all Scruple relating to our Just Interest I shall be willing to enter into Examination of what is offered against us and descend to the Particulars as laid down in thy Letter 1. First Of the first viz. Donation of God or Man Here thou tellest us That thou presumest that we denying them to be a Divine Right to the Clergy will not so claim them Answ Here I must tell thee that thou grandly Mistakes us For I answer We claim as the free Gift of God our Understanding Strength Ability to Labour the Product and Encrease of the Fruit of our Fields and the Fleece of our Flocks out of which our Enemies would extort a Tenth which we know the Lord God above gives and thereof has made us Stewards requiring us to be faithful that when he calls we may render unto him who is the Giver of all a Just Accompt And not to be found as Prodigalls wasting our Substance amongst Harlo●s but that with all we have and do enjoy we may render unto him the Praise of all who is worthy having laid a holy Constraint upon our Souls not to put into the Mouths of Pope Priest Presbyter or such like who are Enemies unto his Truth Nor we cannot own those Laws of Pope Priest c. to be Just that would take away from us what God freely gives unto us to uphold their false Worships So is our Testimony from God against them and their Laws although to the Loss of our outward Liberty and Estates and to the incurring of such bitter Censures as thy self utters forth against us And as to Man's Donation which thou counts to be considered under thy next Head may be there taken notice of 2. What right sayest thou is due to Men by Inheritance from Ancestors Sayest thou to clear our Understanding in this Question 't is necessary to enquire into the Strength or Truth of that common Objection viz. That Tythes were originally a forced Payment by Injustice of humane Laws and that what is Vnjustly taken at first can never be made Lawful by Duration of Time or Possession For Answer of which Objection thou tellest us it s worthy Consideration whether the Objection strikes not more at our Nine parts then at the Clergy's Tenths of the things in Contest undertaking to demonstrate it from the Norman's Conquest of this Nation by forreign Force distributing the Lands to Natives or others to hold of him as chief Lord reserving Rents Duties and Services then continuing the Tenths to the Clergy forcing the Lands in great part from the Owners gave them to others of whom we purchased alledging further that Ethelwolph a Saxon Conquerer four hundred Years before conquered this Nation and enriched the Church viz. the Clergy with Tythes of all Lands Goods c. since which time they have held them without Force or not so forced as the other Part of the Conquests Answ How little this makes for thy Party or against us will appear upon Examination I observe to this second Question of what Right is due to Men by Inheritance from Ancestors thou first offerest this 1. That common Objection

that Tythes were Originally forced by Injustice of humane Laws and that what is unjustly taken at first can never be made Lawfull by duration of Time or Possession 2. Endeavours a Solution of it by alledging Our Estates were Originally forced by often Conquests 3. A Conclusion to thy own Discourse that Tythes were never so forced Thefe being the Substance of that Paragraph le ts examine them apart and in order 1st Whether the Strength or Truth of the Objection be removed that in thy Sence defends ours or that Allegation proved and made good which defends our Adversaries Title Answ 1. I admit the Objection is full to the Purpose and clear thy Tythes from the Strength and Truth thereof and the Case is altered from what I have understood it to be 2. Thou givest us an Historical Discourse of England's often Conquests and Invasions particularly by the Norman who dispossessed a great part of the Inhabitants of their Lands which was a Force upon the Inhabitants and a Piece of Injustice done them gave much of it to his Vassals or Subjects of whom we purchased Therefore infinuates we have more Reason to question all ours then the Decimat●rs Part and this thou wouldst have thy Reader take for Solution of the Objection Alas its not thy Dixi but Reason in others that must conclude on which side the Ballance falls What hast thou said that 's true but would have been granted without such Pains to write what 's otherwise might have been spared Yet all that said little to the End proposed viz. to remove the strength or truth of that Objection 1. I grant that the Nation was Invaded and Conquered by the Norman 2. But sayest thou He forced the Lands in great part at least from the Owners and gave to his Vassals What thou meanest by great part at least from the Owners I acknowledge my self Ignorant A strange sort of fraimed Expression But thy after words would explain Sayest thou From these Vassal● Sales have been made from hand to hand till they are come down to you and I. So by the words the Lands in great part at least from the Owners we must understand in thy sense All the Lands in England without Exception Here I am sure thou hast abused thy Reader for History speaks no such Matter many Families having the Titles of their Land by which they held them before the Conquest confirmed unto him as thou alledgest Tythes were to the Clergy It s true Those who are in Actual War in such Revolutions are often debarr'd of the Enjoyment of their Estates as late Experience has shewen in this Nation but that all were Outed their Possessions nothing less So upon an Uncertain Fictitious and Groundless Supposition thou hast drawn that strange Conclusion Yet hast not weakened or removed the Objection For I observe thou neither denyest or wavest the latter part of the Objection but it yet remains upon thee What is unjustly taken at first can never be made Lawful by Duration of Time or Possession but opposest the first part of the Objection by telling us that Tythes were never so forced The Contrary if prov'd by us will evidence whether has been Injurious we or thee in this Matter● and that falls to be considered under the 3d Head Sayest thou Tythes were not so forced Answ I have not a little wondered at thy ●xpression which is no better then a direct Untruth by what thy self writest for in a few Lines after thou makest the Force of our Nine Parts and the Clergy's Tenths so parallel that I cannot see the Difference Sayest thou Ethelwolph King of the Saxons was of Forraign ●ace and came in by Conquest as did the Norman What then alters these Cases that they differ in thy sense I know not But let us query a little 1. Was Ethelwolph the first Possessor or Planter of this Nation Nothing less 2. Does it appear that Ethelwolph was Peaceably and without Force possessed of this Land Sayest thou he Conquered it as did the Norm●n 3. Had he an Authority and Jurisdiction over the Minds Persons Understandings Estates Labours and Industries of the People whereby he could grant and dispose such a Share to one and such to another as he pleased Unreasonable to believe 4. Nay further Had he these without Force or Violence No nor with it 5. Were the Tenths of all these separate from the People's Nine Parts as thou termest them whereby the Force and Violence of Ethelwolph could not touch them Reason denyes it Yet thou sayst These were not so forced I must tell thee this is to thy Reader a Ridiculous Riddle yea meer Non-sense 6. But Sixthly That thou mayst know the Sacredness of this King's Grant read the History of those Times and 't will inform what Condition Ethelwolph was in when this Royal Grant was made 1. When he was under the Horror of Conscience for the Innocent Blood shed by him 2. The heavy Pressures of Danish Invasions 3. The Land under intestine Wars Then said Ethelwolph Promeo Remedi● Animae Regni c. to remove the sore Judgments that were upon him and this Land I give the Tythes of all the Land unto God and his Servants as the Phrase then was So under these Circumstances of Horror Wars and Distraction did the Zeal of this King offer up the People's Just Interest and Propriety as a Sacrifice to his Devotion and that in the Mid-night of Popery And if Ethelwolph's Conquest was not as Violent and Forcible as the No man's yea m●re I unde●stand nothing For sayst thou The Saxon took the whole Land into his Deme●zn Which the Normans ●●ver did so for more Cruel to its Inhabit●nts out of which he granted a lenth to the Popish Clergy If this was not Force what is Freedom So that the Tenths appear not only to be so forced as our Estates but under Instances of more dism●l and 〈◊〉 C●mplections so that I see not the least colour of Doubt but that Tythes were originally a Forced Payment by Justice of huma●e Laws So by thy own Shewing Duration of ●ime cannot make them Lawful Sayest thou But admitting it true that T●thes were forced from the true Owners of the Lands It will not concern the present People you or me unless we peruse our Lineal Descent f●om the Persons to whom the Injustice was first done Answ 1. Then 't is granted that the Persons Line 〈◊〉 Heirs who have suffered such Wrong at first have Reason to b● Righted Why then since there 's good Reason to believe this Nation 's Anci●nt Inhabitants have many of thei● Right Heirs yet living why were not they excepted out of that Promiscuous Censure of thine to be Thieves and Robbers for detaining what possibly might be their own Here thou hast been Uncharitable 2. But surely thou canst not be Ignorant that if I purchase an Estate of another I have as absolute Right Interest and Title to have and enjoy all and every the Rights Interests and

Priviledge which the Seller of Right had at the Time of the Sale yea as much as any former Heir or Possessor of the Land had hath or ought to have so I that purchase am in the state stead and place of the Right Heir and have all that he hath or ought to have In this Matter also thy Objection is of no Force Sayest thou If you or I came in by way of Purchase since that Injustice done had Abatement in the Purchase for the consideration of the Tenths therefore but Nine Parts ours and puttest a Case of two Fields of an equal value purchased one Tythable the other Not we pay a Rate accordingly Answ 1. Generally thou drawest a positive Conclusion from an uncertain Effect which is Falacious Argumentation Sayest thou If you or I came in by way of Purchase c. which concludes not that so we came in but might be Heirs Lineally descended which I shall now let pass and answer thee in thy own Sense more particularly 2. Then 2dly The Fallacy and Abfurdity of this Position of thine appears thus 1st As to the Purchase We never purchased Nine Parts of Ten as thou affirmest but the Whole with the Rights Members and Appertenances thereof For if but Nine why then do not the Decimators take their Tenth themselves I demand of thee if ever thou sawest in all thy Observation such a Deed of Purchase Yea further Had there been such a Reserve of the Tenth Part to the Sellor or Holy Church as the Pretenders to it termed thou hadst had Colour of Exception 2dly Consider what Tenth is demanded Not of the Land the Soyl or the Renewing Grass of the Field only which we purchased but the Tenth of our Labour Industry Vnderstanding Corn Grain Flocks Herds the Produce of whatever Care and good Husbandry with the Blessing of God improves toward a Lively-hood these were the People's or our's before Pope Priest or Presbyter had any footing in them and these we purchase not of the Seller of the Land So that if they have any Right in these it must be by that old Claim the Churches Jur● Divino as has been their Plea for many Centeries for our Labour Industry c. as before we never purchased at the Hands of Pope Presbyter Vassal or any others But 3dly Was this Injustice done our Predecessors Well then is it Just to intail it to their Heirs and Successors forever Was my Father and Grand-father oppressed by ill Neighbours must I therefore undergo the like Bondage and not seek a Remedy because they endured it That were offering Violence to Reason Say●st thou We had Abatement in the Purchase therefore it concerns us not to scruple at the Incumbrance Answ I 'll put one of many Cases Parallel to this Purpose then judge of it viz. In many Parts of this Nation particularly in Kent by reason of the many frequent Robberies committed on Travellers wh●se Relief is to Implead the particular Hundred or Neighbourhood where such Injustice is done By reason of the frequent Suits brought against them their Lands are sold 1 2. or 3. years Purchase under the Rate of their Neighbours Now I appeal to thee Whether it be Unreason●ble that the Inhabitants should concern themselves to prevent such accustomed Robberies because they or their Predecessors had a former Abatement in the Purchase Compare but the Cases and thou wilt easily discern the Complexion of thy own Assertion viz. That it concerns not us because we had Abatement The next Argument thou drawest is That ●e that conveys the Estate to us by Deed sells the Estate under such Rents Duties and Services as are chargeable at that time upon it and we that purchase set our Hands as Parties to such Conveyances implying our Acceptance of the Lands with all known Incumbrances of which Tythes are one Answ 1. I ab●●lutely deny as absurd that Tythes are Part of the Rents and Services reserved Purchase and admire thou shouldst impose that upon thy Reader which probably thou must or mayst know to be clearly otherwise Read but the Clause in our Deed of Purchas● and it will explain it self viz. To be holden of the Chief Lord or Lord of the Fee or Fees of the Premises for the Rents and Services therefore Due and of Right Accustomed Ask but the meanest Man of Reason and he 'll correct thy Understanding if thou pleadest Ignorance in this Point So that I shall conclude this Head that Tythes being originally a Forced Payment by Injustice of Humane Laws which thou hast not evidenced to the contrary and that What is Vnjustly taken at first can never be made Lawful by Duration of Time or Possession which thou layest down and denyest not and is certainly true That whatever our Ancestors were abused in by Popes Bull● Tyrannical Impositions Vnreasonable Bondages of Prelatical Decrees 't is consistant with Reason we should be cased thereof and is no Plea or Ground for their Continuance Right being our Due not Bondage our Inheritance from Ancestors 3d Head Sayest thou What Right by way of Purchas● To answer this it being an Appendent upon the former thither thou referrest thy Reader back rather Repeating then Adding to what was said before alledging Our Ancestors purchased their Lands with this Imposition of Tythes Answ 1. I answer That they were Rightfully imposed or Justly settled there 's nothing offered but much to the Contrary And that our Ancestors could purchase Injustice and intail it to their Successors I absolutely deny and thou provest not If that were practicable what would have become of their Successors by this day Reflect at Leasure upon those Violations of the People's Liberties that have in former Ages been frequently acted upon the Stage of this Nation some of them under Colour of Law See Cook 2 Inst by no less then by an Act of Parliament Mag. Charta yet not Authority to Entail Injustice to after Generation 2. And if I purchase an Estate I buy it with all the Right Interest c. which the Vendor hath or ought to have in to or out of the same and if any pretends he has an Incumbrance upon my Estate he must evidence it was righly charged viz. That there was a valuable Consideration for such Charge upon it which certain I am none was given for this Demand or Incumbrance of Tythes Yea what Value could be given to part with what God gave Man and expects from Man to he knows not whom God requires his Service all the Day long Shall he work one or two Hours thereof for the Devil and answer God He was Hired as his Fore-Fathers were Hired or a Covenant was long since made with Hell and Death by some other Persons that had as assumed a Jurisdiction over us it concerns us not But a Covenant from us he never had nor can our Adversaries pretend it Where 's then the Reason for such Incumbrance So unless thou doest produce one whose Pretence to the Tenth of my

Free Gift as thy words insinuate But 3. I answer Further What was in their Power to give as the Tenth of their Mannors c. or the Tenth of the Rents c. relates not to us but was free for them to give but to give the Tenth of Man's Time or his Labour c. was not their's and they could not intail it to after Generations as I instanced before and this is no Proof against us or Matter of just Exception against him Yet upon this Trivial and Groundless Exception attended with thy strained Observation art thou pleased to make Four or Five further Demands which as they require I shall return an Answer The Substance of thy First is Whether if we or thou should give a Ninth Part of our Estate to Teachers of our Perswasion pag. 10. and then sell the Eight Parts and abate the Buyer proportionably in the Price would not we accompt the Buyer a Thief that should take that Ninth and call it his own Tell me whether this be the Case Answ 1. I answer It s not our Case yet 2. I grant that I may sell or give a Ninth Eighth Seventh a Quarter or Third or what part or parts I will of my Estate and make him to whom I give or sell an Unquestionable Title respecting the Law c. as also the Remainder to whom I please provided hereby each knows his own then let them dispose of it to what Uses they please one hurts not the other But I cannot sell or intail the Labour Strength Industry c. of any Man to the Service of another or to Evil or to my supposed Good Uses But if he whoh as any of the parts tilling his own for that part or in Consideration of that Land according to the Mind or Will of the Giver Worship an Idol pray for a Soul departed c. or with the Increase and Profits thereof sacrifices to the Devil or Heathenish Godds it concerns not him who has the other yet if I sell the whole to one as all our Deeds of Purchase are having dedicated a Ninth or Tenth to one or other Godd of my Imagination this shall not obliege him to whom I have sold to Pray for Worship his Godd Labour for his Deity or such like to the Infringing of his Just Liberty or Imposing upon that Person whom God in Christ has made a free Agent to Labour for him All the Hours in the Day and the Dayes of his Life and to dedicate the Fruit of his Industry to the Lord only to whom he is accomptable So I agree a Ninth of the Land which is certain I may give or sell which is certain and partionable but part of Man's Labour c. neither give nor sell I can it s not to be partitioned or divided Man cannot serve two Masters God and the Devil for he 's wholely the Lord's I gave him not his Strength his Industry c. I cannot require it of him without his Consent I set him or Lease him Lands I may require it from him according to my Contract and do him no Wrong And here 's the Difference so that if Men have been so Wicked to give or grant or thou or we be so Wicked and Unjust to give grant or sell what 's not our own our grant is void and hurts not him whom we would Wrong And he that 's so Injurious is the Thief and Agressor and not he that denyeth to subject himself to such Injustice And this is our Case Thy Second Demand is but a Repetition of a former which had its Answer in its place pag 10. so I shall pass it over Thy Third Demand is Whether we may not as fairly teach such as are Tenants to Papists at this Day or to vitious Land-lords p. 10 11. to pay no Rents because employed to Popish or Prophane Vses c Answ I answer We neither teach others nor deny to pay our Rents to our Land-lords for being Vitious in their Conversation or being Papistical Episcopal Presbyterian c. in their Judgment nor doth the Evil Uses to which they imploy their Rents which we are not probably privy much less accessary unto when in their hands concern us or them as Tenants But Tythes if we pay we know the Uses and abet them and cannot plead Ignorance to God and Man as I may instance a short Case As if I delivered a Knife this day to one and to morrow he kill a man therewith I having neither been in his Counsel nor abetted such Action am not guilty of such Blood nor an Accessory in the Law But 't is otherwise if I give it to that End or abet such Design the Blood will then also lie at my Door The Case then of Rent to Land-lords and Tythes to Priests differeth in this the first abets not but is Ignorant of the Evil Use or Murder so Innocent the second knows them and is an Accessory thereto so Guilty of the Fact Therefore do we Pay the Former but Deny the Latter Again Thou queriest Do not Contracts between Buyers and Sellers of Land equally obliege as between Land lord and Tenant Answ I answer They do equally obliege I perceive this Query is but a Relick of the former mistaken Assertion in thy former Letter That Tythes are part of the Rents and Services reserved in our Deeds of Purchase which has Answer in its place And he that 's but a N●vice of a Conveyancer knows very well that there 's not one Clause in our Deeds that oblieges us to pay Tythes but to pay Rent to the Land-lord be sure there wants not such a Covenant in our Lease And further that I may explain to thy Understanding That Tythes for which thou pleadest and the Priest persecutes are neither a Reserved Rent nor a Tenth of my Estate that I never purchased nor a distinct Part that the Seller reserved upon the Sale to some other Proprietor as thou wouldst insinuate appears in this that they differ from the nature and tenure of all such Proprieties and Interests as for Instance 1. If I have a Third or other Part of a House Land c. which I have purchased I can have Writ of Partition for such part and know my own 2. If Land-lord I can enter and Seize for my Rent 3. If chief Lord of the Fee I can make a Distress for the chief Rent c. 4. If Title to any part of Land in others Possession I can bring an Ejectment or other real Action and Recover my Interest But the Priest Pope Presbyter● c. for Tythes can neither Distrain Re enter Seise Eject or Enter upon any man's Possession which shews the Mistake thou hast run upon throughout thy whole Discourse and that they have no such Interest as Tenth one or other part or just Propriety in our Estates as thôu supposest and doest unadvisedly suggest And here 's the mistaken Foundation thou hast unadvisedly built upon Thy Fourth Demand is rather