it Their Tongues and Pens are their own Qui vult decipi decipâ—â—â—â— But none of the Presbytery or Synod not any that are acquainted with the Process and Depositions of the Witnesses have said that this was the only Article of the Lybel proven against him 2. The Synod by reviewing the process found that more Articles than that last mentioned were proven against him and the preceeding narrative of the process and of the depositions of the Witnesses makes it evident that there were six or seven other material Articles proven against him 17. We come now to his fourth Reason of appealing from the Synod which has three Branches The first is that he had appealed from the Presbytery and that they were his Party Answ 1. This is false as has been plainly shewn already He never appealed from them 2. If it had been true what would it be to his purpose here as a Reason of his Appeal from the Synod I have appealed from the Presbytery Ergo I must Appeal from the Synod too and that before the Trial of the Process either in Presbytery or Synod it seems this is a good Argument in Mr. Heriots Logicks 3 If their be any seeming strength in this reasoning of Mr. Heriots I think it mostly is this that the Presbytery is my declared party and have Sentenced me and they belong unto and are a part of the Synod therefore saith Mr. Heriots arguing I must Appeal from the Synod also But if this Argument be good it will oblidge him to Appeal also from the General Assembly because both the Presbytery and Synod do belong unto it and help to make it up by their delegated Commissioners and who can but see the absurdity of such reasonings The 2 d Branch of his 4 th Reason of his Appeal from the Synod is that the Presbytery of Dalkeith and Alexander Calderwood interrupted him and reasoned against him as Parties in the face of the Synod and that even in his presence and before he was removed Ans He should have said not the Presbytery but one or two of the Members of the Presbytery of Dalkeith if he had been willing to speak truth and then how little will this make against the Presbytery And far less against the Synod and least of all as a Reason of Appeal from the Synod 2. Was it any wonder that some of the Members of that Presbytery spoke some thing then and there while he was uttering such things as we have heard and answered supra Should his lies make men hold their peace and when he mocketh shall no man make him ashamed Ought he not rather to have thanked them for their Friendly freedom in letting him hear something of his own case that he was ignorant of and was of his concernment to know seing they bad then the opportunity of his presence which was a great delicate to them though he their near neighbour 3. If they be Parties as he calls them why then should they not be heard in the Cause as well as he And that whether he be present or not Had they not Reason to vindicate themselves in his face from the invidious calumnies and manifest lies which he charged them with Is he such a pillar in the Church that no Member of a Judicatory may speak in his presence but all men must give ear and wait and keep silence at his Counsel and their tongue cleave to the roof of their mouth I doubt whether the old Gentleman at Rome himself be so arrogant in such Cases 4. particularly Alexander Calderwood a Ruling Elder and a Member of the Presbytery and Synod had Reason to say something for his own Vindicacation because Mr Heriot according to his wonted modesty and veracity branded him in the face of the Synod with suborning of Witnesses The 3 d Branch of his 4 th Reason of Appeal is that notwithstanding of all that he had said yet the Presbytery of Dalkeith and Alexander Calderwood were not removed but got leave to sit still as his Judges against all Law and Justice Ans 1. How did Mr. Heriot know this By some good Informer no doubt whom he trusted so far as to Print the story for the Information of the ignorant World But how could this if true be a Reason of his Appeal which he gave in to the Synod before this alledged crime was committed although the Copy of the Reasons of his Appeal was given in after the Trial and Sentence By what Spirit could he know when he Appealed that the Synod would not remove the Presbytery of Dalkeith Is he not a man of a deep reach and great foresight 2. Briefly this Reason of his Appeal declares Mr. Heriot to be a man of superabundant confidence for he positively Asserts and that in Print several Weeks after that multitudes and perhaps himself knew it to be a Lie that the Presbytery of Dalkeith were not removed when the Synod proceeded to judge of his Case and process For all the Synod and a great many moe do know that when Mr· Heriots process came to be judged and cognosced upon not only all the Members of the Presbytery of Dalkeith were removed out of the Synod but also the Ministers who had been delegated from other Presbyteries to assist that of Dalkeith were removed And this not because they were suspected as partial and Parties against Mr. Heriot but because their own deed came to be judged by the Synod But how Mr. Heriot could be ignorant of so publick and Notour a matter of Fact wherein he was so much concerned seems to have some Mistery in it not worth the enquiring after Sure I am if his patience and humility had prevailed so far as to make him stay but a little while after he gave in his Appeal he would have seen the Presbytery of Dalkeith removed as well as himself But it seems Mr. Heriot having in haste given in his Appeal he gets quickly away that he may get leasure to seek find or make Reasons for what he had done And in his search and Consultation about this matter he found that the not removing of the Prebytery of Dalkeith would be a pretty plausible Reason for his Appeal from the Synod And therefore he would needs put it in whether true or false among the rest of his Reasons And it had been a pity we had wanted it It may be he or some of his Advocats will object that though the Presbytery of Dalkeith were at last removed yet they were not removed together with him and as soon as he but had leave to sit still after he was gone out and to discourse in the Cause But I Answer 1. Notwithstanding of this Answer and Objection yet the falshood of Mr. Heriot's reason remains conspicuous for he plainly saith that the Presbytery of Dalkeith were not removed but sat to judge him 2. Mr Heriot removed sooner then he needed or ought to have done yea when he was desired to stay and hear the process
the Exercile of his Ministrie And that the Presbytrie of Dalkeith And others havers of the Lybels given in against him and Depositions of the Witnesses may make the same patent to him as Law appoints That he may know what is lybelled or may seem to be proven to the effect he may the better clear himself of the samen which is nothing but false lyes and calumnies And whereof several of the Presbyterian Ministers who have seen the Lybels and Depositions Affirm that there is nothing proven But the dancing about the Bon-Fire which is not only clearly redargued to be false as said is there being no Bonfires either on the foresaid day nor for several moneths either before or after But likewise if the persons who have deponed it were known and re-examined it will be found they have deponed falsly And that they have been dealt with so to Depone And that this Falshood may not be discovered not only are the Depositions kept up contrary to express Law and Act of Parliament But likewise no notice can be gotten who were the persons who have deponed it that they may be insisted against Whereas it is pretended That the Lords of their Majesties Privy Council are not Judges competent to the sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts and that as they cannot put in Ministers in Churches so they cannot meddle with sentences of Depositions It is answered 1 mo That be the 1 Act 8 Parl Ja 6 It is Statute and Ordained That his Majestie and Council shall be Judges competent To all persons Spiritual and Temporal in all matters And to pretend that the Council is not Judge competent to sentences of Ecclesiastick Courts is no other then to affirm That these Courts have an Arbitrary power and may do wrong at their pleasure without Remeed or control For it is evident That Mr. Heriot is most unjustly pursued and Deposed And it is also evident that if it be not Redressed be the Council he will never be Restored be those Ministers who have dealt so unjustly with him And whereas it is alledged That as the Council cannot put in Ministers so they cannot meddle with sentences of Deposition It is answered That the Council has not the power of Admission and Ordination of Ministers But if a Minister having a lawful Call the Presbyterie should refuse to Admit and Ordain him albeit they have nothing to object against him upon Application to the Council or Session Letters will be direct to Charge the Presbyterie to Admit and Ordain him but multo magis in this case where a Minister is Deposed from his Ministrie as likewise from his Benefice which is his Livelyhood and Maintenance And yet most unjustly and without Ground or Reason The Council is most proper Judge for Restoring him against the foresaid Oppression Injurie and Unjust Sentence And for a further evidence of this unjust Sentence it is Humbly desired that the Lords of Their Majesties Privy Council will be pleased to take notice That in the first Lybel there are many Articles which are not Relevant And it is said that there is none of them proven but the Dancing about the Bonfire And yet the Presbytery by their Sentence found the Lybel Relevant and Proven which must be understood as to the hail Articles of the Lybel complexlie then which there is nothing more false as will appear by the Lybels and Depositions if they were produced And yet thereupon Mr Heriot is first suspended be the Presbytery and referred be them to the General Assembly for further Censure as if great Immorralities in Life and Errours in Doctine had been proven against him And the Synod to which the Assembly remitted him following the steps of the Presbytery deposed him Now when Presbytery and Synod have acted thus contrary to express Law and have done open and manifest Unjustice and whereof all that heard of it are convinced and sensible And having stated themselves Parties against him there can be no Remedie expected from the said Unjustice Injury and Oppression unless the Lords of Their Majesties Privy Council interpose their Authority If it be alledged That be the late Act of Parliament The Act of Supremacy in Church matters is Rescinded It is Answered That the Act of Parliament 1669 is Rescinded which extended the Supremacy to the Ordering and Disposal of the External Government and Policy of the Church and to the Enacting of Constitutions Acts and Orders in the Church But the foresaid Act of K Ja 6 his 8 Parliament is not Rescinded which is only as to the Judging of Ecclesiastick Persons in matters complained upon And which power is inherent to the Crown otherwayes there should be Regnum in Regno And Church Judicatories should have Arbitrary power without Redress or Control as said is In Regard whereof The Lords of Their MAJESTIES Privy Council are Judge Competent to this Injurie Vnjustice and Oppression And the Desire of the Petitions ought to be Granted A short Relation of the Presbytery of Dalkeith their procedure in Reference to the Sentencing of Mr. Alexander Heriot and their planting of the Congregation of Dalkeith IT is not to be doubted but that a late Pamphlet called An Information for Mr. Alexander Heriot Designed Minister at Dalkeith hath spread through a great part of this Kingdom and it may perhaps be thought strange that none of the Members either of the Presbytery of Dalkeith or Synod of Louthian and Tweddale have appeared to vindicate the Innocency of these Judicatories and to wipe off the soul Aspersions cast upon them by that defamatory Paper But the truth is an Answer to that Paper was prepared about four Moneths ago and the Reason why the publication thereof was at that time delayed was because it was judged convenient to know the mind of the Synod whose integrity was also questioned and reproached by the Informer before any Answer to that Paper should be emitted But the Synod sitting in May last and judging the Calumnies of that Paper obvious enough declined to trouble themselves with any review thereof as a thing not worthy of their time But some of the Synod put it in the hands of a Person whose acquaintance with the process of Mr. Heriot qualified him to descry the Informers lies thereanent And again this Person being diverted with a throng of business till the Plantation of the Kirk of Dalkeith was near an Issue it was thought expedient still to forebear the Answer of that Paper till the Answerer might be able to give a joynt view of the process of Mr. Heriot and of the method taken for the settlement of the Paroch of Dalkeith with a qualifyed Minister Which being now brought to an happy Period it seems high time after so long forbearance to undeceive all that are willing to know the truth and to give in the first place a compendious but distinct account of the Process and then refell the Informers mis-representation of the same only let this be premitted that the reason why
Copy of it and exclaimes wickedly against the Presbytery for this and their procedure thereupon and in the bitterness of his Spirit dictates to the World his Censure of it in these Words than all which saith he there can be nothing in Judicial procedures more partial pernicious and unjust Ans Herein he shews more ignorance and malice than either wit or honesty And if he would be sober and calmly compose himself to hear truth and reason I would tell him that he was still under citation to the Presbytery till he declined them and after that to what purpose should he have been cited to appear before them whose Authority he had simply declined Besides he may know if he please that there was no Addition made to the Lybel after that Diet of the Presbytery unto which he was cited apud Acta by the Moderator in face of the Presbytery And if he had appeared at that Diet to which he was cited he had got the Copy of that Additional Lybel as well as he got of the former and time also to prepare and give in his Answers to it So that he has no reason to complain of the want of a Copy of any Addition that then was made for he would no more bear from nor meddle with the Presbytery but declined them before they did any thing in his affair that he could or did complain of as appears by the Declinature it self 10. He saith with an admirable either ignorance or impudence that he appealed from the Presbytery to the General Assembly Doubtless the mans own Conscience cannot but tell him that there was not the least hint of any such thing There was indeed a pretended Factory to one Mr. James Hamiltoun presented to the Presbytery a true Copy whereof is herewith Printed supra in the Narrative which bears a Declinature of the Presbyteries Jurisdiction but not the least shew of an Appeal So that both malice and weakness appear in his thus making lies his refuge In this his Declinature he would not so much as call them the Presbytery but in contempt the Ministers met at Dalkeith and disclaimed their Authority as incompetent Judges of him forsooth yea expresly denies them to be the Presbytery of Dalkeith And thus he did stubbornly and proudly trample upon both the constitution and Government of this Church and also the Civil Authority of King and Parliament establishing it And for this his Contumacy the Presbytery might well have forthwith deposed him and that by Law and according to their duty but to evite the shew or appearance and Clamours of Rigidity they proceeded to the process It may also here be observed that in this his declinature he declines the Ministers he should have added and Elders if his memory had been good as no Presbytery and that because they could have no Power to Act as a Presbytery till they received it from the General Assembly Which is such a piece of Non-sense as needs no confutation For who knows not that Presbyteries are established by the Law and General Assemblies made up of Delegates from them Besides that by this sort of rare reasoning Mr Heriot bewrayes both Ignorance and infidelity in the Protestant Doctrine about the Jus Divinum of Church Government and the intrinsick power of Ministers and Elders as the judicious Reader will easiely perceive at the first hearing of his Argument And after all this and much more of arrogant stubborn and obstinate carriage towards the Presbytery was it any wonder that the Presbytery declared him contumacious had they not great and Just cause so to do Could they do less Nay let the most bigot Prelatists upon a supposition of the Presbyteries Authority but consider Mr. Alexander Heriots conduct towards them and if he be a Person of any Ingenuity and Candor we might refer this unto his Determination whether or not the Presbytery had reason to declare the said Mr. Alexander contumacious Was he not evidently and eminently such And doth he not still continue and shew himself more and more such even to the Superlative degree Has he not Treated the Synod as Insolently in his Language as the Presbytery as appears from his printed Information doth he not appear to be a scornful and Stout hearted Person that is far from righteousness Doth he not utter vain knowledge and fill his Belly with the East Wind 11. But this vain man proceeds to lye also upon the late General Assembly and boldly saith that they found no contumacy in his Appeal But for Answ 1. Doth he not know that there was no such thing as an Appeal of his from the Presbytery to the General Assembly and that his appearing before the Assembly was upon the Summonds raised at the Instance of the Presbytery of Dalkeith to which Assembly they had referred him Hath he forgot that he appeared not there to prosecute any appeal which never was but to answer the Summonds 2. If there had been any such thing as an appeal of his from the Presbytery to the General Assembly yet it would have been Illegal and Unformal and also unjust and unreasonable because of these Rules of the Cannon Laws 1. Appellaridebet ab Inferiore Judiâ—â— gradatim non per Saltum ad Superiorem 2. Prohibetur Appellatio 1. A regularis Disciplinae correctione 2. A gravamine futuro 3. He speaks as if the Assembly had cognosced upon the Cause whereas it is well known that the Assembly did not at all enter upon the Cause but leaving it intacta integra referred it to the Synod of Louthian and Tweddale giving them full power to determine therein as they should find meet 4. Is it not pleasant here to remember that Mr. Heriot when before the General Assembly called his Paper which he sent in to the Presbytery his Declinature and passed from it yet now in this Information be again and again calls it an Appeal and owns and pleads it as such in his plea against the Presbytery and Synods How shall we understand these contradictions Must he to save others the labour of it give himself the lye It would seem that Mr. Heriot has had some more ingenuity before the General Assembly than he has elsewhere and at other times for that Paper was indeed only a Declinature and he then gave it its true name neither could he have passed from an Appeal if any such thing had been for his so doing would have imported his approbation of the Presbyteries procedure in his affair and even his passing from his Declinature imported little less However he should have remembered the known Proverb that a Lyer has need of a good Memory 12. He injuriously and falsly alledges that the Presbytery founded his contumacy upon his Appeal from them For it s referred to his own Conscience 1. If ever he appeared before the said Presbytery but once 2. If he offered directly or indirectly to make any Appeal from the Presbytery at his then compearance 3. If he did not
in his Declinature afterwards retract his first and only compearance expresly denying that it imported any acknowledgment of or submission unto the Presbyteries Authority and Jurisdiction 4. If any commissionated by him appeared before them while his Process was in Dependence except once the fore-mentioned Mr. James Hamiltoun 5. If the said Mr. Hamiltoun did in his name make any Appeal But to undeceive the World be it known that Mr. Heriots being declared Contumacious was founded 1. Upon his declining of the Presbytery and Jurisdiction thereof plainly affirming them not to be the Presbytery of Dalkeith 2. Upon his obstinat refusing to compear before the Presbytery of Dalkeith and their Assistants from the adjacent Presbyteries Authorized by the General Meeting of the Ministers and Elders of this Church conform to the Act of Parliament to try Incumbents For though he appeared once yet did he pass from the same in his above mentioned Declinature In both which there was manifest contempt not only of the Ecclesiastick Government but also of the Civil Establishing the Ecclesiastick and consequently a valide ground whereupon to declare him Contumacious It is true Mr. Heriot did with more cunning subtilty then consciencious ingenuity before the General Assembly pass from his foresaid Declinature and consequently from his pretended and falsely alledged Appeal to the Assembly for he had done nothing else that he could call his Appeal and even this his slight sort of seeming repentance contributs more than he is aware of to justify the Presbyteries having formerly declared him contumanious For upon the matter he hereby before the General Assembly declared himself to have been contumacious and recanted it though now again he denies his contumacy and so recants his recantation and Repents of his Repentance and that even while he is going on in a greater contumacy against the Synod 13. But let us behold yet more of the impudence of this man he knows and in part acknowledges that the General Assembly referred his Case and Cause untouched unto the Synod of Louthian and Tweddale whereby the said Synod had the Assemblies full Power quoad hunc effectum committed unto them to cognosce upon and determine in his Cause yet with abundance of confidence and contrary to all reason and order of Judicatories this man appeals back again from the laid Synod unto the next Lawfull General Assembly and this also he does before he did or could understand what would be the Synods Judgment of his Process even as he served the Presbytery with his Declinature the man is so very quick and foresighty by the help of a guilty Conscience Perhaps he thinks that his qualifying the next Assembly with the word Lawfull gives him a reserve not to discuss his Appeal before an Assembly constituted according to the present Establishment but framed after his own corrupted judgment however I shall not easily be perswaded that the man who so irregularly and irrationally counter Acts and Rebels against the renewed Sentences of the Inferior Judicatories has any purpose to appear and plead such a desperate Cause before the Supreme Judicatory of this Church yet I deny not but Mr. Heriot is a very bold man and may venture upon great and hard matters of this kind I must here also crave leave to tell him that by this his Appealing from the Synod he has transgressed against several Texts of his and his Brethrens dearly beloved Canon Law ex gr 1. Se Delegans carius Causae Jurisdictionem subdelegato mandato mandaverit in hoc Casu um ipse nihil Jurisdictionis sibi refervârit non ad cum sed eius Superiorem facienda provocatio 2. Apellare non potest qui condemnatus est ob contumaciam veram and others of the same kind may be added 14 Now let us consider the Reasons he gives of this his Irregular Appeal from the Synod The first is that the Petition of the Heretors and People of Dalkeith attesting his faithfulness in the Ministry and his innocency as to the things Lybelled against him and craving that the depositions of the Witnesses might be made patent was not suffered to be read in the Synod Ans The Synod were Authorized by the General Assembly only to review the Process led against Mr. Heriot before the Presbytery of Dalkeith and not to enter upon any new Process or upon Petitions extrinsick to that process Wherefore also when some of the Parishoners of Dalkeith offered a new Additional Lybel against Mr. Heriot the Synod refused to take notice of it so that the Synod gave equal measure both to his party and to his opposits 2. It was utterly impertinent for Mr. Heriots party instead of a Petition to offer to the Synod an attestation of his Innocency and the Synod acted rationally in slighting such insignificant Testimonials for there is no guilty person sifted before any judge who could not procure a company of his own stamp to attest his honesty and petition for him if that could avail to hinder the Judges cognoscing upon the Cause and passing Sentence upon clear evidence neither would Mr. Heriot I suppose have used this unwarry and supitious way of vindicating himself if he had remembred the old Scots Proverb about such Cases 3. Something of an Answer to this his first Reason may easily be gathered from what is formerly said about some mens verbal Testimony for Mr. Heriot and disowning of his Lybel before the Presbytery Supra § Of this Answer to the Information 4. If this Petition he lays so much weight upon were worth the enquiring after I suppose sufficient evidences would be found of its being first drawn up betwixt Mr. Heriot and his Associats and then subscriptions gathered through the Town of Dalkeith and even from some persons very young 5. The Subscribers of the pretended Petition could attest nothing but according to their own knowledge or Judgement which in some of them at least was not very considerable and if others of the Parrishiners were conscious of Mr. Heriots unfaithfulness it were hard for the former to attest the Negative All which make it evident that his first Reason of Appeal from the Synod hath no weight nor relevancy in it but Savours of a bad Cause 15. His 2 d Reason of Appeal is because when he craved a Copy of the Additional Lybel and that the Depositions of the Witnesses might be read before him and made patent to him yet this was refused by the Synod and hereupon he huffs and exclaimes and tells us by guess that this was contrary to Law and undoubtedly saith this Dictator for this Reason because the probation was weak and might not abide the light nor Trial for Veritas non querit angulos Ans 1. This is an untruth for the Synod told him that when they entered upon the Cause he would be allowed to hear the whole Process and Depositions of the Witnesses if he would stay yet he would not stay but withdrew immediatly after he heard his Lybel