and that as soon as conveniently could be it should be called in at the value it issued out and accordingly so it was But that is not practicable now at least to the advantage of any more of the Nation than the last Possessors all the other hands it passes through being certainly losers if in the Neighbourhood it be not as much valued as my Silver one which doubtless it will not be It is no strange thing to have Money inhanced something above the intrinsick value it has been the misfortune of most States to be forced in difficult times to make use of this expedient to increase their Coin But then as there always was an assurance from such Government that it should not only be received in all Payments to be made at the Exchequer but also called in at last so there was also some proportion or deâ—orum kept in the Advancement Thus in the worst of the late times when the Duke of Ormond Coined his own Plate and all that the respect to him or the Cause that he defended could gather together he thought it sufficient to add a tenth part and so made Five shillings out of Four and six-pence So in the Harp-money we find a fourth part added and a Nine-pence was issued out for a Shilling So that in the first Case I had Nineteen pounds instead of Twenty pounds and in the worst Fifteen pounds whereas from King James and his People I shall receive but Sixteen shillings Eight-pence for my Twenty pounds which is but the Twenty-fourth part of what I ought to have received This is the first time that ever any thing pretending to the Name of a Government was so Bankrupt as to issue Money that did not carry intrinsick value above the Twenty-fourth part of its Name The Story of the Frogs in the Fable was formerly so Satyrically applied that our Author should have avoided the bringing it into our Memory but he writes without considering the Consequences or how severely his Allegations may be returned England is 'twixt York and Thee The Fable of the Frog He the devouring Stork and Thou the Log. So he justifies the late King 's retiring into France because all Princes and States besides France were actually engaged against him without considering the other edge that there was little Conscience and less Prudence in disobliging all the States of Europe in favour of France or how from hence we may argue That that King who has all the States of Europe on his back will be able to afford but little relief to his Exiled Ally And one would think the usage the late King met with when he was last in France was no temptation to run the risque of a second Command to retire out of the Territories of his most Christian Majesty But in this we must excuse him for certainly he has not only forgotten the Usage he met wiâ—â— there but also that ever he was there otherwise he would not have added to the Causes of his first Exile But then this Reciprocal Love between France and Him was no Argument why he might not have stayed at home his Fear was not from the Rabble as our Author says for they Huzza'd his return from Feversham but the truth is he feared a Parliament and that they would secure the Religion and Liberties of the Subject and so ruin all his hopes of establishing Popery which it seems he feared more than the Abdicating of his Crowns Our Author pretends he would have gone to Scotland but that his Fleet had deserted him and there was danger in the Land way To which I say a single Ship could have carried him to Scotland as well as France but then it was offered him to chuse his place of Residence and at what distance from the Parliament and with what number of Guards he pleased but he liked not this because it supposed a Parliament But since his Fears were so strong upon him that stay he durst not why did he not leave us some sort of Government Was there no Ballast so proper for his Ship as the Broad Seal which was never carried beyond Sea but once before and it was then reckoned as a crime in him that did it though the Cardinal left the King behind him but we had neither shadow nor substance left us which is the first Act of Kindness he ever did this Nation freeing us thereby from those Chains wherewith we had â—ashly bound our selves Towards the latter end our Author would perswade us That it is a Calumny cast upon the late King to say he endeavours to be re-instated singly upon a Popish Interest and goes about to prove this by his Proclamations A weak Argument this time of the day but he enforces it by the good treatment he gives the Irish Protestants But our Author might as well prove that the French King expects the Possession of the Palatinate and the neighbouring Territories from his kind usage of the inhabitants though King James's Army cannot take Towns the â—â—â—nch way yet to shew the World they have learned someâ—â—â—â—g from the French General sent to assist them they have burned them the French way and in this have been so good Scholars that they have out-done their Masters so that all his labour is not lost for they have lately Burned more Towns in Vlster than the King of France in Germany some of them we can reckon as in the County of Derry Newtown Lemaâ—addy-muffe Monymore Dawsons-bridge Kilrea Ballyagby in the County of Donegall Raphae Donegall in Tyrone-Omegh Castleâ—arfeild in Down Newry in the Counties of Cavan and Monaghan Castlesanderson Farnam and other good Houses if not some Towns which is one proof that what they did of this sort was out of rage and malice and not with any design to incommede or prejudice the English Army For what great relief could an Army find in one House But what puts this matter beyond all dispute they left the Town of Strabane seituate within ten Miles of Derry unburnt in the middle of their Rage and Flames because it belonged to the Earl of Abercorn who is a Papist and Lord Strabane of that Kingdom and all this havock has been made since the late King's Arrival there It is needless after this to mention the Plunderings and Robberies of every Protestant in the Kingdom but in fact so it is that not one of them has escaped and if this should be excused as done against his Will and without his Consent and as the out-rage of a cruel and ill-paid Army if it be so let him be blameless but then do not tell us of the good Treatment he hath given the Irish Protestants If the blame thereof be taken from him and placed to the account of the War he has justice done him without pretending to any Merit from his kindness to the Protestants which will be much lessened if we consider that not one single Man of the Nation has been redressed Flocks of Cattel cannot be
Neighbouring Princes will not be denied but whether with more than one of them I question and whether thereby he did not sink the Reputation of his Justice and Honour both abroad and at home will appear by the respect he had at Rome where one would have thought he should have been courted at another rate for a Protestant instance the States denial of Dr. Burnet and not suffering the Doctor to with-draw though he desired it is sufficient and the Carriage of the French at Hudsons-hay shews their kindness as well as respect If our Author had considered these things surely he would not have bragged of the good Correspondence he held with his Neighbour Princes and States or of the Reputation he had acquired to himself abroad When I met the Author praising the late King for his Mercy and Compassion to his Enemies I began to suspect my Eyes and was in hopes that he would have brought us so good news from the West that we should speak no more of the Western Campaign and that the Numbers that were said to be executed there were only in Effigie and that he had the very persons to produce sound and in good health without I could have done this I should not have mentioned the other especially if I had been of the Author's opinion that he was Master of so many other good qualities I should think that the using this had been enough to make people suspect the rest of the Character for if that had been true there had been no need to add this so notoriously otherwise I have read the History of England and upon a serious reflection thereon I believe it may be truly said That so many of the Common people were not put to death by the Hand of Justice and driven into Exile for all the Rebellions of these 600 years as were served for that of Monmouth's which did not last six weeks the weaker Sex not spared But for the Duke of Alva's Government of the Netherlands Foreign Story could not have afforded a precedent but then I do not find that great Man praised for his Lenity in this we are an Original neither do I find that he was more exact in his Scrutiny than we were at Westminster where we were told that the Rebels were 6000 of which 2000 killed and only 2000 brought to Justice the other 2000 our Grand-Jury were directed to find out and yet after all this some people will brag of this Man's forgiving Nature the sobriety of his Life and discountenancing Debauchery may be true as to excessive Drinking but the placing his spurious Issue in the highest degree of Honour is no great discouragement to the other sort of Debauchery For his Assiduity in his Councils and Treasury and the rest of that Paragraph as it is needless to examine them so certainly the truth of them is no proof that the late King intended the happiness of his Subjects in general The next Paragraph asserts That it was the late King's opinion that Liberty of Conscience would be grateful to a great many of his Subjects and would invite Forreigners to fix their Habitations amongst us to our great advantage that it was the best expedient to bring us to a brotherly Love and to prevent the Calamities that befel this Kingdom in his Father's time and that he had this Notion still fixed in him with a design to signalize his Reign thereby In opposition to which I will endeavour to shew that the late King had no such glorious aim and that thereby he only intended to subvert the established Religion of these Kingdoms which will plainly appear if we consider first how different such a method is to the fundamental principles of his Religion as well as the practise of all Ages those that believe there is no Salvation out of the Church which is only one and that theirs if they have any Bowels of Compassion or Charity will endeavour the enlarging the pale of that Church And then that Hereticks are to be extirpated upon the penalty of having their Territories given away to others where this duty is neglected is as essential a part of his Religion as General Councils can make it therefore it were an injury to his Charity and Piety to suspect he would not use his power so as became a zealous and submissive Son of the Church and what could be a greater brand to the sincerity of his Religion than decreeing counter to infallible Councils it were as easie reconciling Toleration to Infallibility as such actions with being a good Catholick unless they were sanctified with a good intention and done for the good of the Church but to say he did not understand so much of the Arcana of his Religion cannot be supposed without saying he understood nothing of it and though he did not it cannot be doubted but he would have been told of his duty by some Monitory Briefs from Rome St. Peter's Successor used to be so kind to Princes as to lay before them the guilt and danger of actions less favourable to Hereticks and to call upon them to avoid both by executing the Decrees of the Church against them if it be said that the Roman Church at least the Guides of it approved what King James did in this matter and that to preserve his Conscience the Decrees of the Councils were suspended as to him I do verily believe it and think that it follows from thence that they knew what hook lay under that gilded bait otherwise I know not how the same persons could approve of the French King's Edict of October 85. annulling the perpetual and irrevocable Edict of Nantes and the barbarous manner of the execution of it and the late King's Declaration in 87. giving a general Liberty of Conscience two Decrees that concur only in one thing that they are both against the Laws of their several Lands In my opinion this would look so like an affront to that mighty Monarch's Conduct that unless he were likewise privy to the plot his Resentment would not be satisfied with less than a solemn Renunciation and taking new measures now he has the late King so much at his devotion And I doubt not if this proceeding had displeased him but in his late Contests with the Pope we should have heard him upbraiding his Holiness with this kindness to Hereticks but since neither of these have followed and that neither the King of France nor the Pope is offended at our Indulgence we may lawfully conclude there was little kindness thereby intended to us Secondly If this Notion had been still fixed in the late King and had he always been of opinion that none ought to be oppressed and persecuted for matters of Religion he would still have acted consonant to this principle which that he did not do is plain from his concurring with and promoting the enacting of the severest Laws against Dissenters in his Brother's time and also from his first Act of Government the rigorous imposing
the Test of Scotland when he represented his Brother there and lastly from the severe prosecution of the Dissenters in the beginning of his own Reign in all his Kingdoms and as to Scotland the 8th of May 85. he passed an Act of Parliament there making it Death to preach or be present at an House or Field-Conventicle which severity would certainly have lasted to the end could he have brought the Church of England to have complied with his unreasonable Desires in relation to the Test And if we look into his Letter which carried the first Indulgence to Scotland and into the Proclamation itself we shall find several Restrictions that do not seem to flow from that principle He thereby recommends the rooting out of the Field-Conventiclers with all the Severities of the Law and the most vigorous prosecution of his Forces And then except the Papist only the Quakers and the moderate Presbyterians were tolerated which either were so few or by a Court-interpretation might have been declared so that had the matter gone smoothly with the Papists it might easily have been rendred useless to all but themselves and surely no other Reason could be given for restraining them from using their Barns or Out-Houses or building Meeting-Houses a Quaker's Conscience knew no difference between a Barn Church or Meeting-House where-ever the Spirit moved he must hold forth notwithstanding the Restrictions of the Proclamation Thirdly If the easing scrupulous Consciences had been the late King 's only Aim he would have been contented with the Repeal of the Penal Laws and not have insisted so stifly for the Repeal of the Test-Acts also nothing therein being any restraint on any Dissenter's worship unless they believed God would not hear their Prayers unless they were in Scarlet or in an Alderman's Gown And he was so fond of his Design of Repealing the Test-Acts that thô he found how averse the generality of the Nation were thereunto thô he found by Pensionary Fagel's Letter what was the Prince and Princess of Orange's Opinions in the matter how they did concur with him in the Repeal of the Penal Laws but not of the Test-Acts because those Acts had no other tendency but the Security of the Established Religion and keeping the Papists from the means of oveâ—turning it with other plain and solid Reasons yet he still persisted in his Design and was no ways satisfied with the Distinction made of the Test from the Penal Laws as appears by Mr. Stewart's Letter of October the Nineteenth 1687. From hence I think it appears more clearly than from the mouth of many Witnesses that the late King 's main Design was to get the Papists into Both Houses of Parliament where new Creations could have made a majority in the House of Peers and a House of Commons might as easily have been made Popish by force or fraud in the Elections or Returns to facilitate which we wanted neither Sheriffs nor Regulators and then how easie had it been for them to enact Laws to destroy our Religion we having before-hand Repealed all those made for its preservation And to those that require a Witness we have Coleman telling us That a general Liberty of Conscience is the best way to introduce Popery and the greatest blow to the Protestant Religion here that ever it received since its birth that King Charles's Renuntiation of his Declaration for Liberty of Conscience was an injury to the Papists and their Designs And why should we not rather believe him than the Author especially since we know that it is an old Maxime of the Society And further it is not to be imagined that Coleman and his Confederates would have been so zealous in their time in promoting Liberty of Conscience and with the assistance of France barely for the Ease of the Nation The whole Kingdom was lately so sensible of this and so plainly saw whether this Project tended that the Dissenters thô they had not forgotten the smart of the Penal Laws at least the Men of Reason amongst them desired their continuance rather than by Repealing them as demanded to run the hazard of loosing the Protestant Religion after which surely we need produce no further proof to this point Our Author next tells us how much the late King hated Hypocrisie and that he looked upon it as the most detestable Vice In answer to which I shall only say that if he was a Papist so early as most people believe he dissembled many Years with God and Man if attending at the Prayers of our Church and receiving the Sacrament there be so in a Papist I know not how to evade this but by saying he abstained from both as soon as he was a Papist But if this take off one Objection it lays him open to another as ill viz. In so silently parting with his Religion as not to call to one of our many Clergy-men that were at hand for help This shews he had but little value for the Old and if so I should suspect he had not all the Zeal for the New that he pretended but this as it is in the dark so there let it remain until the Secrets of all Hearts are opened But there is another thing looks very like Hypocrisie and a dissembling his Religion when the whole Nation seemed satisfied what it was and that is prosecuting people by Actions of Scandalum Magnatum and Indictments for calling him a Papist many Instances whereof might be given in both Kingdoms this was certainly as much below the Honour of a Gentleman as the Sincerity of a Christian But not to enlarge hereon our Author in pag. 4 tells us That the late King chose the easiest Methods and used all the caution and moderation imaginable to effect his Design which he calls only The making of all Parties live easie under his Government And tells us the Opinion of some Lawyers and the Judgment he had to support his Dispensing Power opened the Door for the admission of both kind of Dissenters to Places of Trust Military and Civil but that he made but little use of it till necessity compelled him to it In answer to which I must say That the Methods the late King took to procure the Repeal of the Penal Laws and Test were not only mean if going round a great part of the Nation to sollicite Votes or closseting to that end were so but also violent if displacing all Men from their Offices and Imployments that would not promise to consent to the Repeal nay they must go further to secure their Places and promise to be aiding and assisting thereunto were not the changes of Corporations as violent as scandalous Lastly The universal inquiry how Men designed to Vote if Elected Parliament-men and what sort of Members they designed to chuse was not only unusual and without precedent but took away and destroyed the very Essence of an English Parliament freedom both of Choice and Debate But now as to the instance by which our Author proves
the late King's moderation in the matter which is That having consulted the Judges and others Learned in the Law and finding them not only ready to countenance the Vndertaking but assuring him he had a Power of Dispensing with the Penalties of those Statutes he might therefore lawfully exercise that Power so confidently declared in him To this I say that thô it should be granted that such a Dispensing Power had been vested in him yet it cannot be denyed but that it was accompanied with a Trust not to make use thereof but for the Good of his People and it can never be made out that what he did was so so long as the preservation of the Protestant Religion is the great Interest of the Nation This Answer supposes the King acting according to Law but if we take the Case as it really was we shall find that the Long Robe did not make the King of their pretended Opinion but that he made them of his which is plain by the many Removes he made on the Benches before he could get a Sett for his purpose and then the famous Judgment so much insisted on was such a piece of pageantry as was never acted in Westminster-Hall The Judges may deny as they do that they knew who was Plantiff or that he wore the Defendant's Livery or that the Defendant or Graham paid the Fees of both sides but herein their luck was very bad to be ignorant of what few of the Nation were But supposing this the dispatch they made was very extraordinary for it was obvious to all Men of Sence as well as Law that the Case was of some consequence and deserved more than a short Vacations Consideration and more Arguments than one and if what a late Author tells us be true and one that had any regard to his Credit could scarce publish a Lye in so notorious a matter and so easie to be disproved the Court denied to hear Mr. Wallop argue the Case for which Sir Edward Herbert makes no excuse in his Book neither could he if it be true But what further clears the matter beyond all dispute is that in delivering the Judgment they carried the matter further then the necessity of the Case before them required which amongst Lawyers always lessens the Authority of such Resolutions but I forbear entring on the Legal part of this Controversie because it has already been done and is not within the Task I have undertaken The rest of this Page is taken up in magnifying the late King's kindness to the Church of England in assuring them all their Rights and the sole Injoyment of their Dignities Offices and Benefices thereto belonging and that no Persons were presented to any Ecclesiastical Dignities belonging to the Hierarchy but Members of the Church Something has been already said to the kindness designed for the Church in general and more shall be said when we consider the Author's Objections in the mean time it is sufficient to say we have heard of the Reproaches thrown by him on the Church where in one of his kind fits to Alsop he threatned Ours should be the last Church to which he would turn And that we know not whether Sam. Oxon or his Brother of Chester should be accounted of our Church but if they were we know no difference between imposing such Men and professed Papists on us That we look upon the Preferments in our Universities to be of great concern to our Church yet there we find Obadiah Walker a great Ruler and a whole swarm at Magdalen-Colledge If theirs were not Ecclesiastical Preferments what had our late Ecclesiastical Commissioners to do with them though they deprived the Fellows as Visitors yet sure their incapacitating Decree was by vertue of their Ecclesiastical Supremacy Next we find our Author giving some instances of the late King's with-drawing his Protection from the Church of England which he modestly calls one Objection instead of many For the clearing whereof he tells us That as soon as the King published his Declaration for Indulgence there presently began a great ferment in the Nation and that the Roman Catholicks finding the Church of England imbittered against them he means unwilling to submit to the Romish Yoke which our Forefathers were not able to bear they fell a Caressing the Dissenters vainly supposing them the most powerful Interest of the Nation All that I shall observe from hence is That this procedure exactly follows their old measures in keeping up the Divisions amongst Protestants they had not forgotten the Old saying Divide impera But I have not seen the end of keeping up these differences so plainly owned by any of the Party as by our Author who says plainly That when the Church of England would not serve their turn they joyned with the Dissenters in confidence that in conjunction with them they had the most powerful interest of the Nation which I always looked upon as the true reason of the Indulgence when I reflected on the time when we were blessed with it it was then that the generality of the Dissenters were better satisfied with the Church than ever they had been they were then fully satisfied the Church had no inclination or warping towards Popery so that it was really timed so as to blast the fair hopes we had of a perfect Union amongst our selves From hence let us learn how to regard such as promote the old or any new difference amongst us for let the Pretensions be never so plausible the Design is to weaken us by dividing us which hopes are not quite dead in the Author as we may imagine by his attributing all that was done against any Member of the Church os England to their struggle with the Dissenter I am confident the Bishop of London and the Fellows of Magdalen know where to place it better viz. to their struggle with the Papists which is plain if we consider the time when these things happened the Bishop of London's Persecution began the 14th of July 86 that being the Date of the King's Letter to him and his first Appearance was on the 4th of August following and the King's Declaration for Liberty of Conscience was not until the 4th of April after so that it is impossible to ascribe what was done to this Member of the Church to any struggle with the Dissenter occasioned by the Declaration of Liberty and how the business of Magdalen should be attributed to that I cannot see when the Letter in behalf of Farmer bore date the day after the Indulgence it was of a mighty force if it could set the Nation so soon in a ferment as the Author says it did and Alban Francis's Letter bore date the 7th of March before the Indulgence on which Dr. Peachell was deprived so that our Author must either mean that these were no Members of the Church of England or what is as ridiculous that there was nothing done against them or his Proposition is false that the Dissenters
on the Obligation there of in opposition to his Will if they had he that upbraided them for not reading Mass would never have missed so late an instance But then what was the need of enquiring into Farmer 's qualifications without any the King knew he wanted the chief one requisite the established Religion yet that did not hinder his recommending of him but then if they had stayed where was the mighty savour in easing them of Farmer and imposing the Bishop on them both were equally contrary to their Statutes and Oaths Our Author must excuse me if I cannot take his word for what he says In the last place what had Mr. Walker's Zeal no aim but the good of the Protestant Religion and was not Farmer well qualified for the promoting thereof was it King James's love to Protestants made him disgust the whole Protestant part of the Nation there are some things carry their own evidence with them and few with greater clearness than this For if the King had not designed this Colledge to the Roman Catholicks from the beginning of the Controversie he might have given it to his new friends and this had been a greater proof of his real kindness for them than his famed Indulgence The last thing that I shall observe in this matter is That our Author ought not only to have cleared the King and his Commissioner's Jurisdiction in the case but also have justified their manner of proceeding and should have shewed us how Dr. Hough could justly be deprived without calling him to answer for himself surely those Commissioners had this in their head when they rejected the Bishop of London's Plea that he could not suspend Dr. Sharp without calling him to answer it was ill done of him that he would not set them a precedent how they might deal with such as they feared might be too hard for them and upon what Law or Reason they founded that cruel Sentence rendring them uncapablâ— of any Ecclesiastical Benefice Promotion or Holy Orders I do not see The Reformed Church could afford them no precedent for this and I question whether the Roman Cruelty ever came up to it But of all this there is not a word of excuse the reason may be easily guessed Our Author comes next to the business of the Seven Bishops and what he says on this Head is as lame as what he said on the former First he pretends that the sole design of having the Declaration read in the Churches was That all might be assured of the grounds of it But surely reading it in a Coffee-house a Market-house or in any other place had done that as well as was truly observed by the Author of the Clergy-man's Letter the substance whereof might properly be inserted here but I rather chuse to refer my Reader thereto He next quarrels at some indecent circumstances of their Actions the first he mentions is That the King was not acquainted with their design to be excused until the Friday night before it was to be published in the Churches of London This is otherwise if we will believe the King who at the delivery of the Petition to him told them he had heard of their design before but could not believe it How could the Bishops help that they then undeceived him This he says was excused by waiting for a Welsh Bishop But by his favour I have another excuse which is That the King appointed the Reading of the Declaration so soon after the Order for that purpose that the Clergy had too little time allowed them to consider of so great a matter the Order of Council for Reading the Declaration bore date the 4th of May and was published in the Gazette the 7th and directed the Declaration to be Read in London on the 20th so that the Bishops were but Ten days consulting If they had taken less time the Act would have been censured as rash and that they had not well considered of it but if the King had not long enough time to deliberate on the matter or to have signified his pleasure therein to the City before Sunday yet surely he might have been content with the sinful compliance of those that did Read it the first Sunday and had time enough to signifie his pleasure before the second Sunday it was appointed to be Read in the City or before the third of June that it was appointed to be Read in the Countrey and he might afterwards have taken what time he pleased to have considered how to deal with those that did not Read it He next says That they put the proof on the King that they delivered their Petition knowing that none were then present but themselves and insisted thereon until by the Candor of the Archbishop it was owned Those that will look into their Tryal will see what reason they had for so doing and will be able to judge whether it was generous in the King to make evidence of what passed at the Board which passage we shall find mis-represented by the Author if we look into Page 91. of the Bishops Tryal where Mr. Musgrave on his Oath gives an account of what passed there He says That when the Paper was read they were asked if they owned it or if it was their Hands That the Archbishop in the Name of the rest declined answering Upon the account they were there as Criminals and not obliged to say any thing to their own prejudice or that might hurt them thereafter But if his Majesty would command them and if he would promise no advantage should be made of what they confessed then they would answer the question His Majesty said He would do nothing but according to Law that then they were ordered to with-draw and being called in again they were asked the same question and then the Archbishop answered We will rely upon your Majesty and then they did own their Hands Now if silence be giving consent the King consented or made them believe he consented to their just request so that this Debate was only as to their Hands being to the Petition nothing said of the Delivery All the Witnesses the King's Counsel produced could not say that ever any question was asked them about the Delivery or that they either confessed or denied that and at last they were forced to own that there was no positive proof thereof either by confession or otherwise and went about to supply this with circumstances If the Chancellor had thought how material this question would have been upon the Tryal he would not have omitted the asking of it and would have gotten an answer under the same trust with the former This being the state of that matter I appeal to all Men that understand the difference between denying and not owning their Hands Whether there was any Ill in this part of that Transaction Our Author next says That the Law of the Land the benefit of Peerage and the Bishop's insisting thereon was a surprize to the King and