Ludlow no Lyar, Or a Detection of Dr. HOLLINGWORTH'S Disingenuity IN HIS Second DEFENCE OF King Charles I. AND A further Vindication of the Parlia­ment of the 3 d of Novemb. 1640.

With Exact Copies of the Pope's Letter to K. Charles the First, and of his Answer to the Pope.

In a Letter from General Ludlow, to Dr Hollingworth.

TOGETHER With a Reply to the false and malicious Asserti­ons in the Doctor's lewd P [...]mphlet, Entituled His Defence of the King's Holy Divine BOOK, against the rude and undutiful Assaults of the late Dr. Walker of Essex.

AMSTERDAM, Printed 1692.

To Mr. Luke Milbourn Minister of Great-Yarmouth, and Assistant to Dr. Hollingworth in his migh­ty Undertakings.

SIR,

I Must Confess, that when the Act of Parliament Injoyned the Clergy to take an Oath of Fidelity to our unquestionably Law­ful Soveraigns, Their Sacred Majesties King WILLIAM and Queen MARY; my self and your other Fellow-bowlers upon Yarmouth-Green, were under a Jealousie, that you would, by refusal of that Oath, have spoiled the old Proverb, and parted the honest Man from the good Bowler; but seeing that the Biass of your Inte­rest wrought your Conscience to Compliance in that point, it hath been an amazement to your Friends, that you having left us near a Year since, with promise to come back within a very few weeks, any such Rub could come in your way, as to stop your return to us; and that we never received any Letter from you, nor knew how to direct to you, till now; that yours which I received this day Sennight tells us, that you have constantly Lodg'd at Dr. Hollingworth's, and had been engaged with him in a business of a Close and Comfortable Im­portance, of which we should be farther informed by the return of our next Carrier; Now we all remembred that Comfortable Importance, ac­cording to your Admired Dr. Sam. Parker's refined way of expressing it, meant a Mistress; but when we do daily see here, your vertuous and well-deserving Wife, and hopeful Children, we were utterly at a loss how to understand you, till the Carrier brought us this last Tues­day, the Two Books, Entituled, Dr. Hollingworth's Defence of King Charles the First against Ludlow, and of his Holy and Divine Book against Dr. Walker 's rude and undutiful Assaults; to the Compileing whereof, you say you had not a little Contributed.

In truth (Sr,) till now, at some times I suspected that you had re­pented (as other frail Clergy-men have done before you) of the onely good Deed you ever did, I mean your having Sworn to their Majesties, and had unsworn your Oath, and were Caballing with your endear'd [Page iv] Friends, the Iacobites; At other times it ran in my head, that you and the Dr. having been long in most inward Conversation with them, you had redintigrated your selves, and insinuated into those your old Associates, the present Plotters; with purpose to search out, and dis­cover their horrid design against the invaluable Lives of Their Maje­sties, against our Church and Nation; but your Books have put me out of doubt in the Point; and as you requested, I have given them a reading, and had now presented you with some Transient Remarks upon them both, but to my great Content I find that Ludlow by a Letter to the Dr. (a Copy whereof was sent to a Friend here) hath in great part prevented me, however I shall make some general Obser­vations upon both these famous Tracts, and then speak more particu­larly to that which rudely traduces the Memory of the most pious Dr. Wa [...]ker.

The Arrogance which runs through both these Books is insupporta­ble, the Author boasting proudly of himself, vilifying and censuring others to such a degree, that nothing is more like it than the Moun­tebanks, who after a deal of Scaffold Pageantry to draw Audience, entertain them by decrying all others, with a Panegyrick of their own Balsam: All his Arguing is frivolous and trivial, and tho he knows or should know that the Rhetorick of Barking, never moved any man, he writes as tho he had ingross'd all the Ammunition of Railing; he appears as serious as a mad-man, and answers demonstra­tion with the Lye; 'tis surely the highest indecorum for a Divine to write in such a stile as this, and methinks if our Author had any spark of vertue unextinguished, he should upon considering these things retire to his Closet and there lament and pine away for his desperate folly, for the eternal shame to which he has hereby condemned his own Memory. His Friends should give him good Counsel before his understanding be quite unsettled; or if there be none nere, the Neighbours should be called in, and a Parson sent for, to perswade him in time, and not let it run on thus, till he is fit for no place but Bedlam: nothing will serve him but he must be a Mad-man in Print, and write in Defence of a King, and that at such a rate, that if he were alive he would be out of love with himself; he hath, like those frightful Looking-Glasses made for sport, represented his Idolized Saint in such bloated Lineaments, (as I am confident) if he could see his face in it, he would break the Glass. But to pretermit his defence against Ludlow, I descend to make a few brief Animadversions upon his Treatise against Dr. Walker, wherein I discern all along the footsteps [Page v] of a most inveterate and implacable Malice. However, I am obliged to handle it with the more tenderness, in respect to the venerable Li­cence the Title-page shews in these words, Imprimatur Carol. Alston, R P. D. Hen. Episc. Lond. à Sacris.

In the discharge of my Undertaking, I shall in the first place take leave to recount the heads of some of those proofs, offer'd by Dr. Walker, to demonstrate that Dr. Gauden, and not King Charles was the Author of the Idolized Book, called Eicon Basilice.

‘This good Man in his Introduction saith, that Dr. Hollingworth did put him upon that unwelcome labour by falsely accusing him of telling a false story, without consulting him by word or letter be­fore he did it, and that he was constrained by unavoidable necessity (unless that Doctor expected that as a Felo de se, he should by silence give consent to his unjust Calumnies) to vindicate himself; And he declares his resolution to keep that modest temper, which becomes one who designs no personal Quarrel; nor writes for Victory but Truth, The search and discovery of which needs no Tricks, no little Arts, no big Words; but is best attained by sedate proceedings and plain and open dealing. And he solemnly Appeals to the Searcher of Hearts, Avenger of Falshood, and Revealer of Secrets, that he will write nothing of the Truth of which he is not throughly perswaded.’

‘1. He Asserts (page 4 th) that Dr. Gauden, some time before the Book was finished, acquainted him with his design, and shewed him the heads of diverse Chapters, and some of the discourses written of hem; and asked his Opinion concerning it; who told him he suppo­sed it would be much for the King's Reputation, Honour and Safety; but added he st [...]ck at the lawfulness of it, and asked him how he satisfyed himself so to impose upon the World? To which Dr. Gauden so readily replyed, that he concluded he had thought of it before; look on the Title, 'tis the Portra [...]cture &c. and no man draws his own Picture.’

‘2. That some good time after, Dr. Walker being with Dr. Gauden in London, he went with him to Dr. Duppa Bishop of Salisbury, and in the way thither, Dr. Gauden told him that he was going to the Bishop (whom he had acquainted with his design) to fetch what he had left with him to be perused; or to shew him what he had farther written; that the Bishop had some private Discourse with Dr. Gauden, who, in their return told Dr. W. that the Bish. said there were two Sub­jects more, which he wished he had thought on, and propounded them to him, viz. The Ordinance against the Common-Prayer-Book, and the de­nying [Page vi] his Majesty the Attendance of his Chaplains; (which are now the 16th and 24th Chapters in the Printed Book) and desired Dr. Gauden to write two Chapters upon them, which he said he promised he would, but before they parted, the Bishop recalled that request, and said, pray go you on, to finish what remains, and leave these two to me, I will prepare two Chapters upon them; which he accor­dingly did, as Dr. Gauden owned to Dr. Walker, and others whom he had made privy to the whole, and never pretended to have writ­ten these, as he did to have done all the rest.’

‘3. That Dr. Gauden some time after the King was Murdered, upon Dr. Walker's asking him, whether the King had ever seen the Book, answered, that he did not certainly know; but he used his best en­deavours that he might, for he delivered a Copy of it to the Marquess of Hertford, when he went to the Treaty at the Isle of Wight, and entreated him to deliver it to his Majesty, and humbly desire to know his pleasure concerning it: But the Violence which threatned the King hastning so fast, he ventured to Print it, and never knew what was the Issue of sending it; for when the thing was done, he judged it not prudent to make farther noise about it by enquiry.’

‘4. That Dr. Walker asked Dr. Gauden, whether King Charles the Second knew that he wrote it; he answered, I cannot positively and certainly say he doth, because he was never pleased to take express notice of it to me, But I take it for granted he doth, for I am sure the Duke of York doth, for he hath spoken of it to me, and owned it as a seasonable and acceptable Service; and he knowing it, I questi­on not but the King also doth.’

‘5. That Dr. Gauden's Wife, some others, and Dr. Walker, believed it as much as they could believe any thing; and when they spake of it in his presence, or in his absence, did it without the least doubt of his having writ it; being as much assured of it, as twas possible they could be of any matter of Fact; And there is no shadow of Appearance, why he should put so gross a cheat upon them all; for 'twas before it was finished, and a good while before 'twas Printed, they so believed; and therefore he had not the Temptation to steal the Applause it met with when made publick.’

‘6. That Dr. Gauden delivered to Dr. Walker, with his own hand, what was last sent up, (after part was Printed, or at least in Mr. Roy­ston's hands to be Printed) and after he had shew'd it him, and Seal'd it up, gave him strict Caution with what Wariness to carry and de­liver it, and according to his direction he delivered it, Saturday 23 d of [Page vii] December 1648 in the Evening to one Peacock, who was instructed by what hands he should transmit it to Mr. Royston; and in the same method a few days after, the Impression was finished, and Dr Walker received six Books, by the hand of Peacock, as an acknowledgment of the little he had Contributed to that Service; one of which he affirmed he had still by him, at the time of his writeing this Ac­count.’

‘To these reasons Dr. Walker adds (page 7.) that he meets with Expressions in the devotional part, very frequently used by Dr. Gau­den in his Prayers (for he used Conceived Prayer both in his Family and in Publick) which he never heard from any other man.’

Now Sr. you are not to take these things which I have transcrib'd, to be the Sum total of what Dr. Walker offers to evince, that Dr. Gau­den was the Author of the Book we are talking of; he lays down ma­ny other Arguments of mighty weight in the point, to which I must refer you, and shall onely tell you that he concludes his modest Ac­count of this matter, in these words, ‘These are the Reasons why I believe as I do, the Affirmative part of the Question, that Dr. Gau­den was the Author, and as I believe I have also spoken. And if any Man can produce stronger Reasons for the Negative part, I do not say only I will, but that I must believe that contrary part; for no Man who Considers, can believe as he lists, but the weightiest Arguments will turn the Scale.’

‘And if any Man will be so Charitable as to reclaim me from an Error, he supposes I am in; I even beseech him to write nothing for the Truth, of which he does not make the like Appeals to God which I have done; for if he attempts it by Railery, or Railing, by feeble Conjectures or Stories inconsistent with themselves, or contradicting one another, he may with more discretion spare his pains; for, as no wise man will be influenced farther by such Tools, than to pitty them who use them, or make themselvrs merry, so I confess I am so tired with examining such Ware, and so cloyed with such Quelk-chose, I shall have no sto­mack to such Fare, or think my self concern'd to take notice of it.’

I come now Sr. to Consider Dr. Hollingworth's Answer to Dr. Walker, and before I enter upon his Arguments, I desire you to smell to a Nose-gay of Flowers, which I have gather'd out of the Garden of Their Majesties Chaplain at Ald-gate. His Title-page terms the Reverend Dr. Walker's Assertions, Rude and undutiful Assaults. ‘He Affirms in his Preface, That in his Answer to Dr. Walker's Book, he has omitted many Inconsistencies therein, because he resolved to dwell on matter [Page viii] of Fact; and has forborn returning those Scurrilities and Scorns he had loaded him withal, upon himself; because he was dead. (p. 3. of his Pamphlet) The Ald-gate Doctor saith, that if God the Avenger of the injured and oppressed, had not called the Essex Dr. to an Account before his Book was published, he should have been so bold as to have given, and that by undeniable Proofs, such Instances of the Man, as would have inva [...]idated his whole Testimony, and made him and his Book too, a Scorn to the World; but being dead, he will as much as he ought in this Case, forbear him. (p. 4) he doubts, nay scorns to believe that Dr. Gauden made the Book called the King's, and told Dr. Walker so; and the more, because he Asserts it; who, was he not dead, the Chaplain would give Reasons sufficient to satisfie any Man why he doth not believe it, upon his Authority — Dr. Walk­er's Book saith he, is an unseasonable, false and undutiful Book, which gratifies none but the great Enemies of Monarchy and Episcopacy. 'Tis a Forgery, and to D [...]. Hollingworth's knowledge, has Amazed and Grieved a great part of the Subjects of the Kingdom; — The Sum total of the thing is, to serve the Lusts of a party of Men against Mo­narchy and Episcopacy — That Good, that Pious Man Dr. Walker ▪ does Assert that Dr. Gauden said he Composed the Book; and his words weigh more with us, say the Common-wealths men than a Thousand Witnesses to the Contrary. — The Essex Dr. is a bold man, an audacious Slanderer, — True Church of England men, scorn to carry on their designs by Lyes and Forgeries, by Tricks and De­vises. — I was personally Acquainted with Dr. Walker and know he was an Encourager of, and Comrade with those who had no kindness for the Church at all, — Well done Dr. Walker, if thou hadst a man alone with thee, undoubtedly he was always on thy side, and tho [...] wert always in the right, and when the Man was dead wouldest [...] the Confidence to Print it. — The Common wealths-men say, it look very hard upon the Memory of such a Man as famous Dr. Walker, t [...] give him the Lye. — The Essex Doctor's talk is vain and rash false and undutiful — His Book is vain, shuffling, proud, an [...] inconsistent, — I hope I have made good what I Ass [...]rted, and prov' [...] Dr. Walker's Say soes, but meer Fictions of his own — I wis [...] he had resisted Temptations to Revenge, and Vain glory: Revenge against a Church to which he was never true, so he was an Enemy within our Gates; and then I am sure the Worl [...] would not have been pester'd with a Book, stuft with so many noto [...]rious falshoods.’

[Page ix]Thus, Sir, hath your Host at Aldgate, (whose Mouth wants scowring) unloaded his Lay-stall; and how justly these vile Ca­lumnies might be retorted upon him who utters them, let the World judg. But I shall not rake further in this Dunghil; 'tis most cer­tain, that an ill Man cannot by praising, confer Honour, nor by reproaching, fix an Ignominy. The late Dr. Walker had such a Stock of solid and deserving Reputation, that it is more than a wild rambling Slanderer can spoil or deface, by all his Revilings; he was such a judicious, conscientious, learned and sincere Protestant, so true a Son of the Church of England, that had this hot-headed Turn-coat had any Modesty, he would have blush'd to reproach and load him with Contempt, Malice and Obloquy: but vile and in­solent Language costs him nothing, and therefore he has laid it on so prodigally.

I am now to look a little farther into the Aldgate Doctor's De­fence of that which he will call the King's Book, against the Essex Doctor's Assaults, that I may shew you how he hath left Matters standing between him and his Adversary.

He saith, (pag. 2.) It was for his Holy and Divine Book, that that great King was so highly venerated, so deservedly applauded; and in­deed upon the score of which the greatest part of his Actions were vin­dicated; and therefore this Book must be considered and weighted in a just and proper Ballanse, (indeed so it ought.)

Page 5. he tells us, and who may question it? that what Dr. Walker asserts of Dr. Gauden's writing the Book, is all Sham; and that if he had dared to have told such a Falshood, he must have sat down contented with his Living at Barking, without any Expectation from the Court; without either being Bishop of Exeter, or living in hopes of the Bishoprick of Winchester.

Now who will doubt Dr. Gauden's having possessed the fat Li­ving of Barking? But 'tis all Sham, he was no more Incumbent there, than Dr. Hollingworth was in the See of Canterbury, in the Reign of Charles the First. How then should it happen that he talks of Barking? I was thinking that he pitch'd upon it, in regard of its near resemblance to Railing, which has sometimes proved a good Living to an Ecclesiastical Wrangler. But upon second Thoughts I consider, that the Town of Barking is but seven Miles from London, and contiguous to the small Vicarage of West-Ham, which the Aldgate Doctor once possessed; and learning there, that Barking was a plump Parsonage of four or five hundred Pounds a [Page x] Year, his Ambition might lead him to set his Heart upon it; and his Brain being now crack'd at the Disappoinment, he talks of it at the rate, which we have seen a distracted Lover in Bedlam speaking of his hard-hearted Mistress. But it seems one Falshood would have dash'd all Dr. Gauden's Hopes of Preferment; I say then, Alas poor Dr. Hollingworth! you must sit down contented with your Chaplainship at Aldgate of 8 l. per Annum, without any expecta­tion of Barking, (though it is in their Majesties Gift) or of any other Promotion from the Court; for before I have done, I shall demonstrate, that your whole Book is but one huge Lie, 27 Pages long.

Page 6. the Doctor repeats his old Story of a worthy Person, Sir Iohn Brattle's informing him, ‘That in the Year 1647, the King having drawn up the most considerable part of this Book in loose Papers, desired Bishop Iuxon to get some trusty Friend to look it over, and put it into exact Method. And the Bishop pitch'd upon Sir Iohn's Father; who undertaking the Task, was assisted by this his Son, who sat up some Nights with his Father to assist him in methodizing these Papers, all writ with the King's own Hand.’

You shall see what Dr. Walker said in this Point; ‘I make no Judgment (saith he, pag. 19.) prejudicial, or of disadvantage to the Character here given of Sir Iohn Brattle; but with due re­spect to him, I would ask the Doctor of few Questions.’

‘1. May it not be possible, without any diminution of Sir Iohn's Veracity, that in more than 40 Years, there may be some mistake of other Papers for these, or some other lapse of Memory, about a Mat­ter in which he was concerned but once or twice, and that but transiently, and on the bye? Or was Sir Iohn, who must be then a young Man, and, 'tis likely, but in a private Capacity, so well acquainted with the King's Hand, which 'tis probable he had seldom or never seen? I believe few Country Youths, or young Gentlemen, are so very well used to their Sovereign's Hand­writing, as to make a critical Judgment of it, and to be able with assurance to distinguish it from the Writing of all other Men.’

‘Further; supposing, but by no means granting, that the King desired Bishop Iuxon, as is said, to desire a trusty Friend to do it: Why another rather than the Bishop himself? Had the King any Friend more trusty than Bishop Iuxon? Or was he too good, or above doing such Service for his Master, who had not a Ser­vant [Page xi] who loved or honoured him more? Or was he too busy to attend it, when he was wholly out of all Employment, and en­joy'd the most undisturbed Privacy and Quiet of any Man that had serv'd the King in any eminent Degree? Or was Bishop Iuxon less sit and able than a private Man, when the Book consists of Policy and Piety? And who a sitter Judg of what concerned the first, than one who had so long been a Privy-Counsellor, and Lord-High-Treasurer of England? And for the second, he was one on whom the King relied, as much or more than on any Man, for the conduct of his Conscience, as appeared by his singling him out, to be with him in his preparations for Death. And why must Bishop Iuxon desire another Man to do that Work, for which (had there been any such Work to be done) he was the fittest Man alive, for Fidelity, for Ability, for Inclination to his Master's Service, and for vacancy and leisure?’

Let's soe now what Answers their Majesty's Chaplain at Aldgate makes to these plain Questions, for we find him vaunting, ( pag. 22.) That he hath made out Matter of Fact against Dr. Walker 's Assertions, in his vain, shuffling, proud and inconsistent Book. Why all that the Aldgate Doctor saith hereunto is, ( pag. 9.) ‘He (Dr. Wal­ker) questions Sir Iohn's Memory, and talks of his Youth, to in­validate the Story; but that is so great an Affront to all the young Gentlemen and Apprentices in London, who at the Age of Nineteen, are so very much imployed and trusted in their Master's Books and Ac­counts, that I leave them to vindicate Sir Iohn, upon the score of helping his Father in a thing of such a Nature as this was, at such an Age.’

What ridiculous Stuff is this? 'Tis such an inexcusable Af­front to the London Apprentices, to say, That though they under­stand their Master's Account-Books, they have not at Nineteen, the necessary qualifications of States-men and Divines, that they must be instigated to draw up an Abhorrence against it; and it may be this Doctor, who would cokes them to fall upon Dr. Walker as their common Enemy, designs them a Venison Feast this Season; but (should he do it) I advise you, as his Friend, to caution him to appoint it at some other place than Merchant-Taylors Hall, in regard Dr. Meriton lives opposite to it; and it may be some dimi­nution to his Credit, if that Reverend Divine should take the op­portunity to cross the Street, and tell him, in the midst of his Jol­lity [Page xii] with the Lads, that he hath twice belied him in his malicious Scriblings against Dr. Walker.

The Aldgate Doctor ( pag. 9.) dismisses Sir Iohn Brattle, saying, And this is all I have to say as to Sir John Brattle; and that he told me this, I will depose upon Oath, whenever I am lawfully RECAL­LED.

I have heard of Re-ordaining, Recanting, and Re-recanting; and it is more than probable, that this Learned Gentleman understands the meaning of these words; but 'tis beyond my Capacity to make sense of Recalling in this place, and he will oblige me in telling me his meaning therein: And to requite the Courtesy, you may tell him, that I will produce good Evidence upon Oath, when REqui­red, (there's a Re for his Re) that Sir Iohn Brattle, who I agree is a very worthy Person, doth declare, That he never told Dr. Hol­lingworth, or any other Person, that the Papers he spoke of were writ with the King's own Hand. Their Majesty's Chaplain may not take it ill, or think that his Veracity is called into Question, by en­quiring of Sir Iohn about this Matter, for we had his leave to do it, when he asserted the thing, and said, Thanks be to God, Sir John is yet alive, and is ready to give the same Account to any Man that asks him.

The Aldgate Doctor affirms, ( pag. 10.) ‘That the Reverend Dr. Meriton dining the latter end of the last Year with the Lord Mayor, Sir Thomas Pilkington, happened to meet with Dr. Walker at the same Table; where Dr. Walker was pleased with his usual Confidence, to assert Dr. Gauden the Author of the King's Book: Upon which Dr. Meriton turned upon him with the Story of Mr. Simmonds communicating the whole thing to Dr. Gauden, upon which he was so confounded, that he had nothing to say for himself, and though if none but Dr. Meriton himself had declared to me (quoth he) the Issue of their Debate, it would have satisfied me: yet the further satisfaction I had from my worthy Friend Mr. Marriot, then Chaplain to the Lord-Mayor, and Minister of the Parish Church in Rood-Lane, who stood by and heard the whole Discourse, and withal the silence he put Dr. Walker to; which he professed to my self, gave me so full a satisfaction, that upon that account I ventured to give the World an Account of it in print.’

Now it had been much better either to have let this Story quite alone, or to have given a true Relation of it; but our Author trusts [Page xiii] to Falshoods more than to the Truth of the Cause; he saith in his Preface, If any Man questions the Truth of these Living Evidences I have quoted, if he pleases to come to me, I will wait upon him to them, and he shall have satisfaction from themselves of the truth of what I have writ. I should tell him now, if I did not know him, that he might be ashamed to prevaricate as he doth; but he hath cast off all Shame; he exclaims thus upon Dr. Walker (page 20.) Well done Dr. Walker, if thou ever hadst a Man alone with thee, undoubtedly he was alwaies on thy side, and thou wert always in the right; and when the Man was dead, wouldst assume the confidence to print it.

In what words now shall I bespeak Dr. Hollingworth? he offers to wait upon any Man who is doubtful in the Matter, to the Persons he names; and yet I am at a certainty that he hath assumed the confidence to put these reverend Divines, Dr. Meriton and Mr. Mar­riot (whom he terms his Worthy Friends) in print, (whilst living) without their Privity or Consent, or consulting them of the truth of what he relates; and I am as sure that they will not averr what he asserts they told him; for without putting the Doctor to the trouble of waiting upon him, I engaged a Friend to enquire of these Reverend Persons of the truth of what he writes relating to them; and Dr. Meriton saith, that Dr. Hollingworth hath commit­ted two Mistakes (to give it no harder Name) in the Story; for whereas he affirms that Dr. Walker, with his usual Confidence, be­gan the Discourse at my Lord-Mayor's Table, Dr. Meriton de­clares, that there was no such Discourse at the Table, but that after Dinner he himself began the Discourse, taking Dr. Walker into a Corner of the Room, and Mr. Marriot is pleased to de­clare, that he did not much observe the Discourse, not charge his Memory with the Particulars thereof, but believes that Dr. Meriton began it; and that Dr. Walker did assert, in reply to him, that Dr. Gauden was the Author of the Book. Yet we are to believe, if we please, that poor Dr. Walker was confounded and put to silence: but I am sure the Aldgate Doctor ought to be so, whose very asserting a thing ought to carry in in self an Argu­ment of Credibility; and from henceforth surely he will be for ever banished from the Society of Learned and Honest Men.

Where are we next? Dr. Hollingworth saith, ( pag. 9.) The next thing I shall discourse upon, is the Story of Mr. Simmonds. Is it so? come then, let me hear it; A reverend Friend, the Vicar of Witham acquainted him where the Widow of Mr. Simmonds lived; [Page xiv] The Doctor went to her, and enquired whether she knew any thing of the King's Book, and how far her Husband was concerned in it? she pre­sently answer'd the Doctor, that going into her Husband's Study, she saw upon the Table a Book in writing, which she knew was not her Hus­band's Hand, and therefore asked him whose it was; but he turned her off, with bidding her mind her own Business.

A doughty Story upon my word; and such a Command as this ( to mind his own Business) from my Lord Bishop of London to our Doctor, might have prevented the blotting of abundance of Paper; but seeing 'tis tumbled out, and that with the License of his Lordship's Chaplain, with a vain imagination that it serves the Cause; I will take the liberty to say, That a Friend of mine, without consulting either the Vicar of Witham, or the Vicar of Gotham sound, that Mris. Simmonds lived with Mr. Span in Creed-lane near Black-Fryers; and he assures me, that upon discourse with her, she appeared to be a very discreet and good Woman, (as in earnest I am assured her Reverend Husband was) and did acknowledg that Dr. Hollingworth had been with her; which without further examination of the abovementioned Story, (it deserving no Remark) I will allow to justify the Doctor therein. But (quoth he, pag. 11.) she told me, her Husband never joyed him­self after the King's Murther, but fell sick and died the 29th of March following. So she told my Friend, but with this difference (as the Doctor knows, but he seems resolved never to tell the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth) that his Sickness whereof he died was the Small-Pox.

The Doctor's next living Witness is your honest Name-sake Mr. Milbourn the Printer; he told the Aldgate Chaplain (if a Man may take his word ‘That in 1648 he was Apprentice to Mr. Grisman a Printer; at which time Mr. Simmonds, by Mr. Royston, sent the King's Book to be Printed, and that his Master did Print it; and that Mr. Simmonds alwaies had the Name of sending it to the Press, and that it came to them as from the King.’

Now though it seems as improbable that a Printer's Apprentice should know the Author of a Book which comes to his Master, through several Hands (as 'tis in this Relation) to be Printed with the greatest privacy, as that those London Apprentices who understand the keeping their Master's Accompts, are therefore capable of being Ministers of State: Yet I will not contend this matter with Mr. Milbourn, but be it as he saies.

[Page xv] ‘In the next place ( pag. 13.) I find a Certificate under the Hand of Mr. Clifford, who assisted Mr. Milbourn in Composing and Cor­recting the Book; which backs his Story, with this Addition, that great part of the Book was seized in Mr. Simmond's Lodgings; and he, though in a Shepherd's Habit, was so far discovered, as that he was pursued into Great Carter-Lane, by the Rebels; where he took Refuge, and the bloody Villains fired two Pistols at him, which frighted him up Stairs, and out of the Garret-window he made his escape over the Houses. And he further saith, That he never heard, nay, that he is sure Dr. Gauden never was concerned in that Book, by which Mr. Milbourn and himself printed it.’

This Certificate, I find, Sir, is attested by your self and Mar­garet Hollingworth: And one of your and my Neighbours, was in­quisitive, upon the reading it, to know whether this Iewel, for so they say Margaret is in the Greek, be the Doctor's Wife or Daugh­ter? but I could not resolve it.

Now had Dr. VValker been alive, and had Clifford made Oath of what he here asserts, I know not but he might have been indicted for Perjury, for saying; That he is sure Dr. Gauden was never con­cerned in the Book. And then Dr. Hollingworth, who confesses that he procured and penn'd this Certificate, might have been in some danger of an Indictment for Subornation.

But pray let us compare the Relation of Mr. Clifford with that of good Mrs. Simmonds; She saith, ‘That she lodged with her Husband in Carter-Lane; and that their Lodgings being discovered, a Souldier shot a Pistol to mark the Door, (the very Expression used by Dr. VValker in his Relation of the Story, pag. 30.) but she and her Husband were at that time at Dinner with a Major of the King's, at one Mr. Chibar's a Minister about Old Fish-street; and had no­tice brought thither, that Souldiers had been at their Lodgings; whereupon her Husband went away, bidding her go home: And the Souldiers coming soon after to Mr. Chibars his House, the Major made his escape at a Garret-Window, before the Door of the House was unlock'd. And she further told my Friend, That till he read it to her out of Dr. Hollingworth's Book, She never heard of her Husband's going in a Shepherd's Habit.’ But when this Mat­ter comes to be scrutiniz'd, I foresee that our Doctor will affirm, That by a Shepherd's Habit, he only meant a Gown and Cassock.

[Page xvi]The next material thing which occurs is, ( pag. 17.) If he (the Essex Doctor) had writ nothing but Truth, a Nut-shell would have held it all.

There are more Brains in a Walnut, than in the Aldgate Do­ctor's dry Skull, and their Shells are alike thin and brittle; he is equally a Stranger to Wit and Manners, but a quart Pot will scarce contain the Falshoods which he hath writ.

Page 19. Our Author inserts the Transcripts of two Letters from one Tom. Long of Exeter, as he affirms; which say, That Dr. Gauden told him, that he was fully convinc'd that the Eicon Ba­silice was entirely the King's Work. This famous Story, I observe, is esteemed by their Majesties Aldgate Chaplain, as a stabbing Evi­dence; for before he came at it, we were threatned with it all a­long in his Book: Page 6. he said, By and by I will prove, under the Hand of a more credible Man than ever Dr. Walker was, that Dr. Gauden had another Opinion of the Author of the Book. Page 17. We have the same thing over again in these words; I say, and will prove it by a better Evidence than Dr. Walker can be supposed to be, that Dr. Gauden, after he was Bishop of Exeter, did justify it to be the King's Book. Page 18. this celebrated Witness is produced; and our Doctor tells us, 'Tis Mr. Long, Prebendary, as he takes it, of Exeter. And, page 20. he thus characterizes him; I must tell the Reader, that he is an ancient, grave, Reverend Divine, well known for his Truth and Honesty; one, who as he is a professed Member of the Church of England, so he hath always been true to the Doctrine and Discipline of it, in his Preaching and Practice; and not like my Adversary, who I know (for I was personally acquainted with him) was an Encourager of, and Comrade, principally with those who had no kindness for the Church at all.

I must, with your leave Sir, a little remark upon this most ex­traordinary and remarkable Man. Dr. Hollingworth is, no doubt, sure of the truth of what he saies; we are bound to believe him, though he is not at a certainty what this Long is; for he tells us, that he is Prebendary of Exeter, as he takes it. He hath alwaies been true to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England. That's indeed something, and makes the Prebendary a much more valuable Man than our Chaplain; for he, once upon a time declared, that be thanked God, he had vomited up all his Calvinistical Principles. Whereupon a Person of true Worth, and of high Desert, repli­ed thus to him; Then the Doctrine of the Church of England, and [Page xvii] St. Paul 's Epistles have spew'd you out for an Apostate; and so fare­well to you for a Knave.

But I may not let the Prebendary thus slide out of my hands: I have found there's something more than ordinary in the Man, which recommends him to the Doctor's Favour, and I will not withhold it from you. There's a kind of Sympathy in the na­tures of these two might [...] Church man; our Doctor proposed, page 50. of his second Defence, That every Parish of England should buy the famous [...]icon Basilice (with the other Works of King Charles) and chain it up, to inform the Minds of all good Men: and the Prebendary hath a Cr [...]chet of reading some Portions out of it, in the Church, for the further enlightning our [...]nderstanding. Be­hold how they pis [...] in a Qui [...]; and for ought I know, the next proposal from these Men may be, to read the Arca [...]an Prayer in the same Book, for the furthering of our Devotion.

I proceed to give you something more of Long's [...]ust Character, and leave it to you to judg how much you find of Hollingworth therein. He hath an aking Tooth at Lectures and Sermons too; and a mighty Spleen at Free-Prayer; he would ha [...]e all the publick Ministrations to consist in reading Liturgies and Homilies. But his virulent Book, called Vox Cleri, or the Sense of the Clergy, concern­ing the making of Alterations in the establish'd Liturgy, published in the Year 1690, doth most truly speak the Man's Principles, and discover what sort of Men, are, in our Doctor's esteem, the True Church of England Men; and upon what s [...]ore he terms the pious Dr. Walker an Adversary to the Church.

This Book is Libel upon that great and excellent Person, his Grace my Lord Arch-bishop of Canterbury that now is, and se­veral others of the highly deserving Bishops and Clergy of the Church of England, who were found inclinable to the much long'd-for Vnion of Protestants in the late Convocation.

He glories that the Clergy opposed and overthr [...]w a Bill for Com­prehension, contrived by Bishop Wilkins, Sir Orlando [...], and Judg Hales ▪ because they thought [...] the Church would prove more hur [...]ful than a Schism without it, &c. He rejoice [...]punc; that Dr. Iane was chosen Pro [...]cutor of the Conv [...]c [...]tion, in opposition to Dr. [...], and saies, that 'tis look'd upon as a good Omen of success in their Proceedings for the good of the Church; and throughout the whole Book he puts a [...] high value upon Dr. Iane for opposing any alteration in the liturgy or Ceremonies, with a [Page xviii] Nolumus Leges Angliae mutare, and at the same time casts leering Reflections upon the Friends of Union and Peace, under the name of Latitudinarians. He oft extols and magnifies the Non-swearing Bishops, and calls their deserved Deprivation for their Obstinacy, a dealing with them as the Bishops were dealt with in 1642, by the Scotish and Dissenters Malice. He expresly declares himself against parting with any thing for the Dissenters satisfaction; and perswades to the inforcing them to Uniformity by strict Discipline. But I may not dwell upon his envenom'd Invective; in short both Hol­lingworth and Long appear to be Fiery Zealots, Violent Bigots, who stand at an irreconcilable distance with dissenting Protestants, and will run bot [...] [...]ut of the Church, and their Wits too, if the Parliament should think sit to let the Dissenters in, upon an ho­nourable Accommodation of our Differences. And 'twould be strange indeed, if a Man of Dr. Walker's healing Spirit, should have any Credit with such Men as these: but 'tis his Honour to be traduced by them.

But now he falls with a Witness upon poor Dr. Walker, saying, ( page 22.) I have a Commission from the present Bishop of Gloucester, Dr. Fowler, to present the World with this Narrative attested by him­self, which has a great deal in it, considering the former Testimonies.

The former Testimonies, indeed considered (which have nothing in them but Falshood, and empty or angry Words) I must allow that there is something in this, though not to the Doctor's Purpose: We have here a Certificate attested by my Lord Bishop of Gloucester, which fills almost three Pages, with most undoubted Truth; and this must be esteemed something, and 'tis a rare thing too; for (this Relation excepted) a Man may aver that there is scarce a Paragraph in their Majesties Chaplain's seven and twenty Pages without a Falshood. It behoves then that we look into this Narrative: The Sum of it is this.

‘About 28 Years since Mrs. [...]eighly, a very Religious and Pious Gentlewoman, told Dr. Fowler, that a Captain of the Parliament Army told her, that being appointed to stand every Morning at his Majesty's Bed-Chamber Door, when he was a Priso­ner in the Isle of Wight, he observed, for several days, that he went into his Closet, and there staid a considerable time, and then went into the Garden: And the Cap­tain perceiving that he still left the Key in the Closet Door, he went in, and found that the King had been penning most Devout and Pious Meditations and Prayers, which the Captain read for several Mornings together. And Mrs. [...]eighley said, That he gave such an Account of these Meditations and Prayers, that she was con­fident they were printed in Eicon Basilice, after she came to read the same.’

And I am very inclinable to be of good Mrs. Keighley's Mind; and yet this Rela­tion doth more serve Dr. Walker than Dr. Hollingworth. It must be remembred that the Essex Doctor asserts that Dr. Gauden sent a Copy of the Book by the Marquess of H [...]rtford to the King, when a Prisoner in the Isle of Wight, and that he believes it was corrected by his Majesty. The Design of the Book was, ad Captandum Popu­lum; and this King was no Fool I assure you: He spent some time every Morning [Page xix] in perusing and making such Alterations and Emendations as he thought fit in the Papers, and then took his walk, leaving the Key in his Closet-Door, and the De­vout Papers upon the Table, as a Bait to catch the Captain; for though, as the Aldgate Chaplain most wittily express'd himself, Some Birds are not to be catch'd with Chaff, yet some may: And so I think the Mystery is unriddled.

And now, that I may take a full revenge upon the Doctor, I fall upon him with the But-end of another Bishop; 'tis Dr. Nicholson who was Bishop of Gloucester at the time when the Widow of Dr. Gauden, after her Husband's Death, resided in that City: This Bishop understanding that Mrs. Gauden did declare that her Husband wrote the King's Book, and desiring to be fully satisfied in that Point, did put the Question to her, upon her receiving the Sacrament; and she then affirmed, that it was wrote by her Husband. For the Truth of this, I can appeal to Persons of un­doubted Credit now living in Gloucester; and I am under no doubt but my Lord Bishop of Gloucester that now is, will acknowledg that those Persons have related this Matter to him, as I have now told it. And I do as certainly know that there is a Person of Quality and clear Reputation, who was Mrs. Gauden's Brother, now living, that will affirm that his Sister did constantly in her Conversation with him, declare that her Husband was the Author of that Book: And the same thing is well known to several of her Relations now in being.

I shall now hasten to an end, when I have related a Story which agrees with the Earl of Anglesey's Memorandum, and with Dr. Gauden's telling Dr. Walker, (as he as­serts) that the Duke of York knew that he was the Author of that Book, and own'd it as a seasonable and acceptable Service. There is now in being a Person of Qua­lity, in whose hearing the late King Iames was highly commending the excellent Language of the present Bishop of Rochester's Book, called, The Rye-House Conspi­racy. Whereupon this Person took occasion to say, That his Majesties Father's Book was wrote in an excellent Stile. To which the King replied, My Father did not write that Book, it was wrote by Bishop Gauden. 'Tis very indecent to pub­lish Names without Permission; but I will adventure to say, that the Person I mean, either is at present, or lately was one of the Lords Commissioners of the Ad­miralty.

I observe that Dr. Hollingworth never writes a Pamphlet without a Postscript: in that against Dr. Walker, he tells an idle Story, ‘That Mrs. Simmonds acquainted him, that being at Dinner some Years since at a Citizens House, he, like one of the Fa­ction, and greedy to lessen Monarchy by aspersing King Charles, told her, if she would confess the Truth, that her Husband made the Book called the King's, there were some hundreds of Pounds at her Service: which she scorned, and told him, She was not to be bribed by never so much to so great a Lie.’

'Twould be a very seasonable and good Work, to set some body to bribe this prevaricating and forging Doctor to speak Truth. For Mrs. Simmonds, who is a con­scientious Woman, denies that she told the Doctor that any Body attempted to bribe her to a Lie, or said to her that there were some hundred Pounds, or any Sum at her Service; but she declares she told him, That quickly after the King 's Murder, one Mr. Robinson, who lived about Thredneedle-street, invited her to Dinner, and talk'd with her about her Husband's writing the King's Book, and said, it might be some hundred Pounds in her way, if she would acknowledg the Truth; and that if she would not, she might come into great trouble; and she saith that she never saw him after.

And now after all this wrangling; for Peace sake, and half a Crown to be spent at [Page xx] the Pye-Tavern at Aldgate, I will (so far as I am interessed in the Matter) give that diminutive and inconsiderable thing, the Aldgate Chaplain, his saying: The Book was, without further debate about it, wrote by King Charles, and he Lies that gain-says i [...] But then I must be allowed to observe, that it begins with Falshood, and [...]: So that as Dr. Holling [...]orth told him, (1 st [...], p. 37.) If the Essex [...] Friend Dr. Gauden, [...] for he was a learn [...]d and grive Divine, and would [...] Colou [...], by [...] [...]la [...]le Tyranny, with the [...] [...]eauty of [...].

The King begin [...] [...], saying, That [...] all knowing Men so apparently not true, that a more [...] have come into his Mind. He never lov'd, never fulfilled, never [...] End of Parliaments: But having first tried in vain all und [...]e Way. [...] his Army beaten by the Scots, the Lords Petitioning, and the general [...] the People, almost hissing him and his ill-acted Regality off the [...], compelled at length both by his own Wants and Fears, upon meer Extremity he summon'd this last Parliament.

And as to what we find in the end of this Book, his [...] of Capti­vity. Who would have imagined so little fear in him of the All-seeing Deity; so little care of Truth in his Words, or Honour to himself or to his Friends, or sense of his Afflictions, as immediately before his Death to pop into the Hands of that grave Bishop, Doctor Iaxon, who attended him, as a special Relick of his Saint-like Exercises, a Prayer stollen, word for word, from the Mouth of a Heathen Wo­man praying to a Heathen God, and that not in a serious, but a vain Ama [...]orious Book, Sir Philip Sidney's Arcadia; a Book▪ how full so ever of Wit, not worthy to be [...]amed among Religious Thoughts and Duties: Not to be re [...]d at any time without good Caution, much less in time of Trou [...]le and Affliction to be a Christian's Prayer-Book. 'Tis worthy of rem [...]rk, that he who had acted over us so Tragically, should leave the World at last with such a ridiculous Exit, as to bequeath, among his dei­fying Friends, such a piece of Mockery to be publish'd by them, as must needs co­ver both his and their Heads with shame and confusion. And sure it was the Hand of God that let them fall, and be taken in such a foolish Trap, as hath exposed them to all Derition; is for nothing else, to throw Contempt and Disgrace, in the sight of all Men, upon this his idoliz'd Book, and the whole Rosary of his Prayers.

To conclude, if any Man censures me for using too much [...] in any of my Expression; let him take notice, that Dr. Walker told your [...] That [...]

I am, yours, IOS. WILSON.
[...], Iune 10. 1692.
I [...]nis Veritas [...]
Doctoribus [...].

LUDLOW no Liar, &c. In a Letter to Dr. Hollingsworth.

'TIS common, Sir, to such despicable and malicious Braw­lers as you are, to rail at those things most, that are most praise-worthy: I should therefore esteem it scan­dalous to the Glorious Cause and Noble Performances of the most worthy Parliament of November 1640, which I have endeavoured to vi [...]dicate, to be commended, and account it a praise to be evil spoken of by you: And it would provoke a Man to laughter to behold you betaking your self to Slanders and Ca­lumnies, to see nothing but Dirt and Filth issuing from your Mouth, when you find your Arguments will little avail.

I should not give my self the trouble to animadvert upon your Follies and Frenzies, but that I hear you are swollen with Pride and Conceit to an incredible degree.

I shall therefore shew, that with a great deal of toil you have done just nothing at all; and that you are fallen under a most pro­digious degree of Stupidity and Madness, to take so much pains to make your Folly visible to the World, which till now, you, in some measure, have concealed; to be so industrious to heap Dis­grace upon your self. What Offence does Heaven punish you for, in making you undertake the Defence of so forlorn and desperate a Cause as that of K. Charles the First, and that with so much confidence and indiscretion; and instead of defending it, to betray it by your Ignorance?

It was as truly as ingenuously observed by the Learned Bishop Burnet, in his Sermon before the House of Commons, Jan. 31. 1688. ‘That if one were to make a Panegyrick on Tyranny, he ought to turn over all the common Places of Wit, all the Stores of Inven­tion, and the liveliest Figures with which his Fancy would fur­nish him, to make so odious a thing look but tolerably; and by sacrificing Truth to Interest, and varnishing it over with Wit and Eloquence, he might shew how gracefully he could plead a very ill Cause.’ And 'tis certain that most Writers used some endeavour to carry on their Discourses by a Stream of Sense and Reason; but [Page 2] you, Sir, have done it by a Course of Reviling and Railing; and it may be truly said, That if the dirty and Tinker-like Names, the scur­rilous and foul-mouth'd Expressions, the spiteful and false Accusations, (I gather these Expressions from your Book) were taken out of your Pamphlet, it would appear but a poor and shrunken thing, un­pleasing to your self when you look upon it, and of small power to work upon others that read it. You seem rather to bawl and hoot at, than to answer my Letter; and your Book is the best Common-Place for Billingsgate that I have lately seen: But it is well known, that a Mountebank can neither draw, nor keep a Croud a­bout his Stage, without the help of a witty, or foul-mouth'd Buf­foon. And the gay Fancy, the cutting Sarcasms, wherewith your Tract is all-bespatter'd, do adorn and render it highly entertain­ing to some Persons. And I must confess, that I find some subtilty in your first setting out, for you begin cunningly, and like an old Cavalier, you place the Right Reverend and pious Bishop Kidder in the Front of the Battel, just as King Charles the First did the Round-heads, whom he had taken Prisoners at the Battel of Edghil; these (as we find the Relation in Husband's Exact Collections, pag. 758.) he set pinion'd in the Front of his Men, when he engaged the Par­liament-Forces at Braintford, to be a Breast-work to receive the Bullets that came from the Brownists and Anabaptists, (of such the King affirmed the Parliament Army to consist) that the Cavaliers might escape them. However, the good Bishop, I plainly foresee will come off, as every of them did; he may be shot through the Clothes, but no way hurt. For your Quotations out of the Sermons of this good Man, and of that great and well-studied Divine Dr. Sher­lock, do only endeavour to aggravate the Iniquity of this Martyr's Murder; whereas there is not one Syllable in either of my Letters relating to it. I only endeavoured to evince, That the King intended to bow or break us, to perswade or force us to Slavery; and that the Parliament, when he was enflamed to take Arms against them, and to put all into a common Combustion, did, in one hand, present their humble Supplications, most earnestly begging to enjoy the English Liberties in Peace; and held in the other hand, the Sword of just and innocent Defence, against the Oppression and Violence of the Enemies of the King's true Honour, and of the Kingdom's Peace. And I am yet to learn, that by any Law of God or Na­tions, this could be judged to be Rebellion: And I cannot see but Dr. Sherlock is of my Opinion; for in his Sermon upon this last 30 th [Page 3] of Ianuary 1691, pag. 6. he saith, ‘He shall not dispute the law­fulness of resisting the King's Authority; whether it were lawful for the Parliament to take Arms against the King, to defend the Laws and Liberties of their Country. He supposes, that in a li­mited Monarchy, the Estates of the Realm have Authority to maintain the Laws and Liberties of their Country, against the illegal Encroachments and Usurpations of their King.’ Now I go no greater length, and I think this comes up to the great Lord Russel's Position, which you had in my Letter, pag. 20. ‘That a free Nation, like this, may defend their Religion and Liberties, when invaded and taken from them, tho under pretence and co­lour of Law.’

Your next step, Sir, is, ( pag. 6.) to my Quotation out of a Ser­mon of Bishop Burnet's, Ian. 30. 1680. which you say you will transcribe, to let the World see what a Cheat I am. Well, seeing you did so, I will also transcribe it, that the World may judg whether you or I be the Knave in this Matter; the words are these, ‘I acknowledg it were better if we could have Iob's Wish, that this Day should perish, and the shadow of Death should cover it, that it should not see the dawning of the Day, nor should the Light shine upon it; it were better to strike it out of the Kalendar, and make our Ianuary terminate at the 29 th, and add these re­maining days to February.’

These words (say you) are wrested by Ludlow, and they appear at first sight, only a Rhetorical Flight, whereby that Right Reverend Person would express the detestableness and horridness of the Fact, which he bewai­led that day. Now, because I ever was against judging any thing upon the first sight, I have twice read the Sermon of this Learned, wise and highly meriting Bishop; and must tell you, that I did not wrest his words, but that he was of Opinion, that the observation of that Day had been too long continued, and that in regard of the great abuse thereof by some hot-headed Ecclesiastical Make-bates, 'twas time to leave it off; and I cannot but think that every Man will conclude as I do, even upon the reading of his Text, Zech. 8.19. Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, The Fast of the fourth Month, and the Fast of the Fifth, and the Fast of the Seventh, and the Fast of the Tenth, shall be to the House of Judah Ioy and Gladness, and chearful Feasts; therefore LOVE THE TRVTH AND PEACE. And I must say, that I am strengthen'd in this Belief, when I remember, that about that Time, and indeed upon the very Day when this Sermon was [Page 2] [...] [Page 3] [...] [Page 4] preached, viz. Ian. 30. 1680. some of the Clergy (I know their Names, but will spare them) did in their Pulpits deliver up our Laws and Liberties to the King's Will; and according to their Do­ctrine, we were to hold all at his Pleasure; and in the three or four succeeding Years, upon that and such-like Occasions, these Beaute­feux did raise Despotick Power to that dangerous height, that England became too hot for Dr. Burnet, as well as for many other good Men; and he and I might with equal safety have returned to­gether. But to put it beyond doubt, what my Lord Bishop of Sa­lisbury's meaning was, in that Expression, It were better if we could have Job 's Wish, &c. which you insinuate that I wrest; I shall lay before you some Expressions in that Sermon: you may read, pag. 4. these words; ‘Upon their loving Truth and Peace, those black and mournful Days should be converted to Days of Gladness.’ Pag. 5. ‘It might have been expected, that our 29 th of May should have worn out the remembrance of the 30 th of Ianuary; and now at the end of two and thirty Years, it may be reasonably ask'd, should we still continue to fast and mourn?’ Pag. 28. ‘[If we come to love the Truth and Peace] to live in Love and Peace one with another, then our Days of Fasting shall be turned into solemn and chearful Feasts: Then should our 29 th of May swal­low up the remembrance of the 30 th of Ianuary: Or perhaps, as the Prophet foretold, such happy Deliverances should come to the Jews, as should make even that out of Egypt to be forgotten; so we might hope for such days, as should outshine and darken the very 29 th of May ▪ — If we come to love Truth and Peace, then shall even this Fast of the 10 th Month, according to the Jewish Account (which according to Arch-Bishop Vsher, is exactly our 30 th of Ianuary) be to us, Joy and Gladness.’

I can now scarce with-hold my self from saying, That 'tis most evident the Doctor at Aldgate doth appear to be the Person who would wrest Bishop Burnet 's well-intended Words, to his own malicious Design. A Design to keep up Animosity, Wrath and Feuds in the Kingdom; a Person who shews himself estranged from Truth and Peace, in contending to perpetuate the observation of this Day. And see­ing we have happily lived to behold the wonderful Deliverances which my Lord Bishop of Salisbury did not only hope for, but seem to foretel: Seeing we have our glorious 5 th of November rendered famous to all succeeding Ages, by our late repeated happy and mi­raculous Deliverance from Popery, and its inseparable Companion, [Page 5] Tyranny: Seeing we behold our thrice happy 30th of April and 4th of November, the Birth-Days of those matchless Princes, our most deservedly admired and beloved Soveraigns, King William and Queen Mary, out-shining and darkening even the 29th of May; I would hope, that I may live to see the time, when his Lordship will make a Motion in Parliament, for the annulling the Law which en­joins the Observation of the 30th of Ianuary; and that, I am sure, would be highly acceptable to the sincere Lovers of Truth and Peace. But,

I already see an Objection against it; You (Doctor) say, Pag. 2. An Act of State has appointed this Day to be FOREVER observed, to bewail the Sin of the Murder of the King. However, I am sure my Lord Bishop of Salisbury doth well remember, that in Times by­past, other Days have been appointed to be observed by Acts of State, upon such like Occasions; and one in particular, to declaim against Gowry's detestable Conspiracy, which is now forgot: His Lordship also knows, that in Numb. 21. when, for the Peoples speaking against God and Moses, the Lord sent Fiery Serpents, which destroyed many of them. Upon their Confession of their Sin, Moses at their Entreaty prayed for them; and (as it is in the 8th and 9th Verses) The Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery Serpent, and set it upon a Pole; and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live: And Moses made a Ser­pent of Brass, and put it upon a Pole; and it came to pass, that if a Ser­pent had bitten any Man, when he beheld the Serpent of Brass, he lived. You see, Sir, this was God's own Institution; and that, I hope, was at least as good as your Act of State. Let us see now what became of this brazen Serpent; 2 Kings 18. The good King Hezekiah, (and there were very few good ones in those days) who did that which was right in the Sight of the Lord, broke in pieces the brazen Serpent that Moses had made [ for unto those days the Children of Israel did burn In­cense to it] and he called it, Nehushtan. And that God highly ap­proved this Act of this glorious Reformer, is evident from the very next Verse, which records, that after him was none like him among all the Kings of Judah, nor any that were before him.

And now, Sir, to dismiss this Black-Day; allow me to observe, that there is not one Syllable in either of my Letters, reflecting on the Act of State, which ordained the Observation of the 30 th of Ianuary; but I term it a Madding-Day, because our Parasitical Court-Priests would not keep the Peace, but on that Day did set the Nation on [Page 6] Madding, by infusing Principles of Slavery into her Free-born Peo­ple.

( Page 7.) You pick a Quarrel with me about my Epistle Dedica­tory, and upbraid me for courting the Populace, and Dedicating to the sincere Lovers of Old-England, in Aldgate- Parish; and say, Sure the King and Queen, or else the Lords of the Council, might have been made the Patrons of a Work that pretends to what Ludlow 's doth. But, whatever you think of your self, or the World of you, methinks 'twas something sawcy, even in you, to prefix their Majesties Sacred Names to so silly a Book, as was your first Defence; and 'tis as arrogant, to entitle, the Most Reverend and Right Reverend the Arch-bishops and Bishops, the Nobility, Gentry, &c. to this Second; and to begin as if seated on the Throne, MY LORDS and GENTLEMEN. And it seems most impudent, to tell them, that upon the Reputa­tion or Dishonour of King Charles the First, and the Principles which maintain the one, or those that propagate the other, (as much as if you had said, upon my Scriblings) depend the Being and Well-being of our present Church and State; and consequently the Life and Preserva­tion of our present King and Queen. But, whatever you may do, 'tis not for the mean Shrubs of the Laity, to soar so high as you pre­sume; and I took mine to be a modest and inoffensive Dedication, and do yet think it ought to be esteemed such, though you snarl, and in your gay or angry Humour, make Distinctions, if not a Schism, and that in your own Parish; and very prodigally throw out to Ludlow a good number of your old Benefactors, because they do not believe that they were the only good Men, who took part with the King against the Parliament; who, you say, only did their Duties in standing by their Prince according to the Laws of the Land, and the Oaths they had taken. Now, if this be not an inconsiderate and weak Way of arguing, why did not you and your Brethren do your Duty; and (as the Iacobites query) stand by King Iames, to whom you were sworn? And as to your Old Englishmen, whom you cull out and set by for your self, under the Notion of Lovers of the Government, by King, Lords, and Commons; I doubt not but there are of your Acquaintance, a great many Pretenders thereto; and yet, if a Man could stand behind the Hangings, at your Club at the Pye Tavern, he might hear many of 'em keck at the Healths of King William and Queen Mary; and yet be the first who will pro­pose and urge the drinking the King's Health: which every Boy understands, is, in their meaning, King Iames's.

[Page 7]To proceed, Page 9. you tell me, that I begin my Epistle with a prophane piece of Wit; namely, THE CHVRCH, THE CLER­GY; but the best of it is but borrowed. Now I hope we of the Laity, may without committing the Sin of Sacrilege, borrow and lend this Commodity amongst our selves; and were all Clergy-Men as dull as your self, Doctor, 'twould be as great a Sin to borrow of them, as to rob a Spittle: The piece of Wit which you here term prophane, was only a seasonable Exhortation to you, to shew a little regard to Sense, Truth and Christianity, in your future Writings; and this your last Book demonstrates, that of all the Scriblers of the Age, you ought to have attended to this Caution. But this was prophane Wit: ay, no doubt of it; there's no Salvation, can there be any Wit out of the Church? Wit is ever prophan'd, say these Borderers upon it, if any Man touches it but themselves. However, I will adven­ture to borrow again, from my Old Lay-Friend, the most ingenious Mr. Andrew Marvell. ‘Albeit (saith he) Wit be not incon­sistent and incompatible with a Clergy-Man; yet neither is it in­separable from them: So that it is of concernment to my Lords the Bishops, henceforward to repress those of 'em who have no Wit, from Writing; and to take care that even those that have it, do husband it better, as not knowing to what Exigency they may be reduced.’

You say, Pag. 10. I shall betake my self, with all the brevity I can, to consider your various Charges, you so impudently draw up against the King and Queen's Grand-Father, both in your Epistle and in your Book it self. And Pag. 11. you fall thus to work, In your Epistle you tell us of a Letter which the Prince wrote to the Pope, which from the begin­ning to the end savours of Popery; and you mention your Particulars to prove it.

First, You tell us, that he professes nothing could affect him so much, as an Alliance with a Prince that had the same apprehensions of true Religion with himself. You are in the right, I did say so; and if I cannot make it out, you deservedly stile me a foul-mouth'd, scandalous and le [...]d Miscreant: And a Man would think that you should not doubt your having caught me, when you bespeak me in these confident Words; For God's sake, Sir, read over the Letter again, and tell [...] where there is such a word, or any thing like it; I have the Letter now before me, as it is in Rushworth, and I assure you, upon reading it again and again, I find nothing like it; and I hope I am not so dull, but I un­derstand common Sense; and if it was not for the unmannerliness [Page 8] of the Expression, I would, I am justly provoked to say, leave your L—.

I must confess, Sir, this your Expostulation struck me with no small astonishment, and your bold and confident Assertion would, if possible, have made me ready to suspect my self (as you represent me▪ for one of the vilest Impostors that ever appeared in the World; for I never doubted but your Mother instructed you in the reading of English, and he who hath attain [...]d thereto, should not mistake in such a case as this. But,

Upon my second reading you; I observed, that you say, I have the Letter now before me. AS IT IS IN RUSHWORTH; this raised a Suspicion in me, that you were conscious that it was elsewhere to be found; why else should you say, AS IT IS IN RUSHWORTH? Turning to Rushworth, which you were po­ring upon when you wrote your Defence, I was confirmed in my Opinion; for in the Margin to that Letter, in Pag. 82. I read, and you will see when you put on Impartial Specta [...]les, this honest In­timation, There is another Copy of the Prince's Letter to the Pope, pub­lished by several Hands, somewhat different from this. Well, though you affirm that you find nothing like what I charge; I can see, (as you presently shall) even in Rushworth, several Things as like it, as I have found a Doctor to be like a Dunce.

Indeed this Letter to the Pope is not found in Dr. Gauden's Fa­mous Book called, Eicon Basilice, nor in the Works of King Charles, neither is it in Pembrook's Arcadia, in Heylin, or in Nalson: But you, good Doctor, may see it in a Book which you have in your Library, for you quote it in your 13th Page; 'tis entituled, Cabala, Myste­ries of State (in Quarto) Pag. 214. The Royal Words there, which you could not, or rather would not find, are these; ‘I shall never be so extreamly affectionate to any thing in the World, as to en­deavour Alliance with a Prince that hath the same apprehension of the true Religion with my self.’ The same thing is expressed by Mr. Rushworth, in these Words; ‘Your Holiness's Conjecture of our Desire to contract an Alliance and Marriage with a Catho­lick Family and Princess, is agreeable both to your Wisdom and Charity; for we would never desire so vehemently to be joined in a strict and indissoluble Bond with any Mortal whatsoever, whose Religion we hated.’

You proceed in the Examination, or rather, as you affirm, De­rection of Ludlow's Lying, in the Particulars excerpted from the King's Letter to the Pope.

[Page 9]2 dly, Quoth you, What, Sir, you say, That he calls Popery the Catholick, Apostolick, Roman Religion; all others, Novelty and Fa­ction? In what part of the Letter find you this? Sir, I tell you 'tis false, there is not one Syllable of this nature throughout the whole; and I challenge the whole World of Malice to shew me any thing like it in the Letter: And now again, Sir, who ought to leave their L—? Why, Sir, to deal honestly with you, I did say as you charge me; but I must also tell you, that I see 'tis not false; for towards the end of the Letter, I find these Syllables; ‘I entreat your Holiness to believe, that I have been always very far from encouraging Novelties, or to be a Partisan of any Faction, a­gainst the Catholick Apostolick Roman Religion.’ And in an­swer to your Question, Who ought to leave their L—? I say, they should who are convicted thereof. Now go on to act your part.

3 dly, You say, That he protested, he did not esteem it a matter of greater Honour to be descended from great Princes, than to imitate them in the Zeal of their Piety, who had so often exposed their Estates and Lives in the exaltation of the Holy Cross: And pray where is the Fault in this? I hope any Man that knows what the Holy Cross means in its proper sense, which is nothing else but the Christian Religion, pur­chased upon the Cross by the Blood of Iesus, will say, that this Prote­station is so far from blackning this great Prince, that it redounds to his Credit and Honour. These are your Words, are they not, Doctor?

This Passage is indeed a little diverting: Ludlow, I observe, is no Lyar here. You admit this Passage to be in the Letter; and ima­gining you can justify it, do not answer this, with thou lyest, for that, in your Canonical way of Arguing, appertains only to things unanswerable. But now, upon reading the Letter, it will seem to some as though I had plaid the Wag in this Point, and laid a Trap for you, as some Body did for me, who gave me to understand that you were once a Presbyterian, with which you make your self very merry, as I see pag. 50. For if you will please to look into the King's Letter, 'tis there HOLY CHAIR, though indeed it is Holy Cross in mine; and I am sure, such a Protestation to expose Estate and Life in the exaltation of the Holy Chair, doth not redound to the Honour of a Protestant King; for we all know that the Holy Chair, (mean the Cross what it will) in its plain proper sense means no­thing but down-right Popery. But you, Doctor, know a ready way [Page 10] to bring your self off with Honour; and if I had not put a Trick upon you, in writing Cross for Chair, your Answer would have run thus; For God's sake, Sir, read over the Letter again, and tell me where there is any Protestation about imitating the Zeal of his Ance­stor's Piety, in exposing his Estate and Life in the Exaltation of the Holy Chair, or any thing like it: I am not so dull, but I understand com­mon Sense; and this indeed (had it been in the Letter) savours of Po­pery, and would have blackned this great Prince; but you Bold-face are past all manner of Shame; and a Man would think you are possessed, for there is not one word like this in the Letter; and I am justly pro­vok'd to say, Leave your L—.

Your next Cavil runs thus, ( pag. 12.) You say that he solemnly en­gaged to the Pope to spare nothing in the World, even to the hazarding his Life and Estate, to settle a thing so pleasing to God, as Vnity with Rome. Surely, Sir, you are past all manner of shame; and a Man would think you were possessed, for there is not one word of this in the Letter; and none but a Person who cares not what Falsities he obtrudes upon the World, in order to deceive the silly and credulous part of Man­kind [THE LAITY] would have so boldly printed such a notorious Falshood as this is; and who ought to leave his L—, Sir?

Why now, Doctor, you are in the right again, and put down my very Words; and as sure as you do so, so sure 'tis, that I charge nothing but the Truth: And to shew you that the King's Letter hath many of the Words, I do here transcribe them; ‘I will ( saith the King) imploy my self, for the time to come, to have but one Religion, and one Faith.—Having resolved in my self to spare nothing in the World, and to suffer all manner of Discommodities, even to the hazarding of my Estate and Life, for a Thing so pleasing to God.’ And who now ought to leave his Lying, let the World judg.

Having thus, Sir, offered what occurs for the right placing the before-charged Lies, allow me to make a Parallel-observation up­on you. You insert into your Title Page this Expression; Let the lying Lips be put to silence; which cruelly, disdainfully and despitefully speak against the Righteous, Psal. 31. Now at the rate of your talk­ing, I might well say, For God's sake turn to your Bible again, and tell me where you find these words. The Text which I find in my Bible, Psal. 31.18. runs thus; Let the lying Lips be put to silence; which speak grievous things, proudly and contemptuously against the Righteous. But then you will reply, This is the wonted Custom [Page 11] of your Party; these Presbyterians have their constant recourse to the Bible, to oppose the Liturgy; but we Laudean Church-men ne­ver cite the Bible, when we can make the Common-Prayer to serve the turn; and the pestilent Letter-writter must know, that I took my Quotation out of the Psalter, not Psalms; and there in the 31 st and 20 th Verse, (tho it be the 18 th in the Bible) are the very words which I put down. 'Tis true, Sir, I do find it thus; but how had I been intrapp'd, if I had never seen, or had not had the Common-Prayer Book by me, and found that you had an Au­thentick Author for what you put down? What a Nest of Eccle­siastical Wasps should I have brought about my Ears, had I said, Leave your L—, 'tis false, 'tis not so in my Bible? And, pray, why may not I, (there being neither Statute nor Canon-Law prohibiting it) take the liberty to quote the Bible and Cabala, when I quarrel not you for reading the Common-Prayer Book and Rushworth?

To return to what you were upon; the last thing you said, was, And who ought to leave his Lying? You then say, ( pag. 12.) And as for his [the King's] Reply to the Pope's Nuncio, which you mention; after these Falsehoods, pray tell me in what Authentick Au­thor I may find it? for I assure you, you have put so many false things together before, that you have so much lost your Credit with me, that I will believe nothing of your bare Assertion; and I do not doubt but every body that reads both, will be of my mind.

Your Conclusion here, Sir, looks something fair, you seem con­tent that every body should read both, and speak as he finds. I think they ought to do it; and I address you, in all humility, to be so ingenuous, as to get Allowance that the Press may be open to both Sides for what shall be hereafter published in this Controversy; for 'tis unreasonable that you should rail for what you idely call the Church of England, without controul, and un­der the publick Licence and Protection; and 'tis not only incon­venient to print at Amsterdam, but in regard there are so many Tories and Iacobites employed in the Custom-House, 'tis no small Risque that every Man runs, who would bring over any thing which is wrote for the Service of Old-England, I mean, the Govern­ment of England, by King William and Queen Mary, with Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament; and that you agree to be Old-England indeed. But I have too long digress'd.

[Page 12]You were telling me, that I have so much lost my Credit with you, that you will believe nothing of my bare Assertion. Upon this you must allow me to say, that you are laid so flat by the Re­verend and pious Dr. Walker, in relation to the idle Story of Sir Iohn Brattle, about Dr. Gauden's Book, commonly called the King's, (and which they say Sir Iohn doth deny) and you have put down so many things in your Defence of the Martyr, which are incredible, that your Credit is so much impaired with me, that I cannot believe every thing you assert: I therefore desire, that for the future you would give your Authorities (as I shall) for what you write, so that our Readers may know how to make a true Judgment of Things: And I must tell you, that you be­ing deficient in this Point, in your First Defence of King Charles, I rather play'd than argued with you in my former Letter. But I will now tell you, that I had the King's Reply to the Nuncio, upon his delivering the Pope's Letter to him, from Cabala, Mysteries of State, pag. 214. where you may read it in these words.

‘I kiss his Holiness Feet, for the Favour and Honour he doth me, so much the more esteemed, by how much the less deser­ved of me hitherto; and his Holiness shall see what I do here­after.’ [And so did England, Scotland, Ireland, and the whole World; his Bishops and Chaplains pressed Popish Innovations, and preached Doctrines of gross Popery.] ‘And I think my Father will do the like; so that his Holiness shall not repent him of what he hath done.’

Now, Sir, Cabala is a Book of clear Credit, and not to be gain-say'd by you, for you unluckily quote the same Book in the very same Paragraph, wherein you raise your Huy and Cry after my Authentick Author.

And now, for the further illustration of the Matters which I have too long dwelt upon, I shall here transcribe, not only that Letter we have been talking of, but that of the Pope's to the King, which he answered in so highly obliging terms; and for your bet­ter Satisfaction, you may compare them with Cabala, p. 212, &c.

Pope Gregory the 15th's Letter to the Prince of Wales; afterwards K. Charles the First.

Most Noble Prince, Health and Light of Divine Grace, &c.

GReat Britain abounding with worthy Men, and fertile Vir­tues, so that the whole Earth is full of the Glory of her Re­nown, induceth many times the Thoughts of the great Shepherd to the consideration of her Praises. In regard, that presently in the In­fancy of his Church, the King of Kings vouchsased to choose her with so great Affection for his Inheritance, that almost it seems there entred into her at the same time the Eagles of the Roman Standard, and the Ensigns of the Cross. And not few of her Kings indoctrinated in the true Knowledg of Salvation, gave exam­ple of Christian Piety to other Nations, and after-Ages, preferring the Cross to the Scepter, and the Defence of Religion to the Desire of Command. So that meriting Heaven thereby (the Crown of eter­nal Bliss) they obtained likewise upon Earth the Lustre, and glori­ous Ornaments of Sanctity. But in this time of the Britanick Church, how much is the case altered? yet we see that to this day the English Court is fenced and guarded with moral Virtues, which were suf­ficient Motives to induce us to love this Nation, it being some Orna­ment to the Christian Name, if it were likewise a Defence and Sanctu­ary of Catholick Virtues.

Wherefore the more the Glory of your most Serene Father, and the Property of your natural Disposition delighteth us, the more ar­dently we desire, that the Gates of Heaven should be opened unto you, and that you should purchase the universal Love of the Church. For whereas that Bishop, Gregory the Great of most pious Me­mory, introduced amongst the English People, and taught their Kings the Gospel, and a Reverence to the Apostolical Authority; We much inferiour to him in Virtue and Sanctity, as equal in Name, and height of Dignity, it is reason we should follow his most holy Steps, and procure the Salvation of those Kingdoms, especially (most Serene Prince) there being great hopes offered to us at this time of some successful Issue of your Determination.

[Page 14]Wherefore you having come to Spain and the Court of the Catholick King, with desire to match with the House of Austria, it seemed good to us most affectionately to commend this your Intent, and to give clear testimony, that at this time your Person is the most principal Care that our Church hath. For seeing you pretend to match with a Catholick Damosel, it may easily be presu­med, that the antient Seed of Christian Piety, which so happily flourished in the Minds of British Kings, may by God's Grace, reverberate in your Breast. For it is not probable, that he, that desires such a Wife, should abhor the Catholick Religion, and rejoice at the overthrow of the holy Roman Church. To which purpose, we have caused continual Prayers to be made, and most vigilant Orisons to the Father of Lights for you (fair Flower of the Christian World, and only Hope of Great Britain) that he would bring you to the Possession of that most noble Inheritance, which your Ancestors got you by the Defence of the Apostolick Authority, and Destructi­on of Monsters of Heresies. Puritans. Call to memory the times of old; ask your Fore-fathers, and they will shew you what way leads to Heaven, and perceiving what Path mortal Princes pass to the hea­venly Kingdom, behold the Gates of Heaven open. Those most holy Kings of England, which parting from Rome accompanied with Angels, most piously reverenced the Lord of Lords, and the Prince of the Apostles in his Chair. Their Works and Examples are Mouths wherewith God speaks, and warneth you, that you should imitate their Customs, in whose Kingdoms you succeed.

Can you suffer that they be called Hereticks, and condemned for wicked Men, when the Faith of the Church testifieth, that they reign with Christ in Heaven, and are exalted above all the Princes of the Earth, and that they at this time reached you their hands from that most blessed Country, and brought you safely to the Court of the Catholick King, and desire to turn you to the Womb of the Roman Church; wherein praying most humbly with most unspeakable Groans to the God of Mercy for your Salvation, to reach you the Arms of Apostolical Charity to embrace most lovingly your Children, so often desired, These Desires of the Pope, were seconded with continu­al Endeavours of Swarms of Jesuits and Priests per­mitted to reside amongst us. and to point out as it were with a Finger the blessed Hopes of Heaven. And truly you could do no Act of greater Comfort to all Nations of Christen­dom, than to return the Possession of those most no­ble Isles to the Prince of the Apostles, whose Au­thority for so many Ages, was held in England for the defence of [Page 15] the Kingdom, and divine Oracle, which will not be uneasy to do if you open your Breast (upon which depends the Prosperity of those Kingdoms) to God, who is knocking. And we have so great desire of the Honour and Exaltation of your Royal Name, that we wish, that you should be called through the whole World (together with your most Serene Father, The Pope well knew that his Design of destroying the Northern Heresy, had been considerably advanced in K. James 's time. the Freer of Great Britain, and Restorer of her an­tient Religion. Whereof we will not lose all hopes, putting them in mind in whose hands the Hearts of Kings lie, and he that rules all Nations of the World, by whose Grace The Roman Strumpet is very industrious to corrupt the Earth with her Fornica­tions, Rev. 19.2. we will with all possible Di­ligence, labour to effect it. And you cannot choose but acknowledg in these Letters the Care of our Apostolical Charity to procure your Happiness, which it will never repent us to have written, if the Reading thereof shall at leastwise stir some Sparks of Catholick Religion in the Heart of so great a Prince, who we desire may enjoy Eternal Comforts, and flourish with the Glory of all Virtues.

Given in Rome in the Palace of St. Peter the 20 th of April, 1623. In the third of our Pontificado.

The Prince of Wales his Reply to the Pope's Letter.

Most Holy Father,

I Received the Dispatch from your Holiness with great Content, and with that Respect which the Piety and Care wherewith your Holiness writes, doth require: It was an unspeakable Plea­sure to me to read the generous Exploits of the Kings my Prede­cessors, in whose Memory, Posterity hath not given those Praises and Elogies of Honour as were due to them: I do believe that your Holiness hath set their Examples before my Eyes, to the end I might imitate them in all my Actions, for in truth they have often exposed their Estates and Lives for the Exaltation of the Holy Chair; and the Courage with which they have assaulted the Enemies of the Cross of Jesus Christ, hath not been less than the [Page 16] Care and Thought which I have, to the end that the Peace and Intelligence which hath hitherto been wanting in Christendom, might be bound with a true and stronge Concord: For The I [...]terests of Popery and Tyranny were always found [...] well to agree▪ and this Prince was lastly persuaded that his Crown, and the Pope's Chair had common Friends and common Ene­mies. as the common Enemy of the Peace watcheth always to put Hatred and Dissention amongst Christian Princes; so I believe that the Glory of God re­quires that we should endeavour to unite them: And I do not esteem it a greater Honour to be descended from so great Princes, than to imitate them in the Zeal of their Piety. In which it helps me very much to have known the Mind and Will of our thrice honoured Lord and Father, and the holy Intentions of his Catholick Majesty to give a happy Concurrence to so lauda­ble a Design: for it grieves him exceedingly to see the great E­vils that grow from the Division of Christian Princes, which the Wisdom of your Holiness foresaw, The Pope prepared a strange Wife for him, which according to Scripture-truth, is a dangerous Preparative for a strange God; surely they will turn away your Heart after their Gods, 1 King. 11.2. when it judged the Marriage which you pleased to design between the Infanta of Spain and my self, to be necessary to procure so great a Good; for 'tis very certain, that I shall never be so extreamly affectionate to any thing in the World, as to endeavour Alli­ance with a Prince that hath the same Ap­prehension of the true Religion with my self: Therefore I in­treat your Holiness to believe, that I have been always very far from Novelties, or to be a Partisan of any Faction against the Catholick Apostolick Roman Religion: But on the contra­ry, I have sought all Occasions to take away the Suspicion that might rest upon me, and that I will imploy my self for the time to come, to have but one Religion and one Faith, seeing that we all believe in one Jesus Christ. Having resolved in my self, to spare nothing that I have in the World, and to suffer all manner of Discommodities, even to the hazarding of my Estate and Life, for a thing so pleasing unto God: It rests only that I thank your Holiness for the Permission you have been pleased to afford me, and I pray God to give you a blessed Health and his Glory, after so much pains which your Holiness takes in his Church.

[Page 17]This Letter to the Pope was presently printed in Spain, in se­veral Languages. And I can shew it you in many Authors of Credit; it is found recorded by Andrew de Chesne, Chronographer to the French King, in his History of England, Scotland, and Ire­land, Lib. 22. The French Mercury (a never controlled Author) hath it also, as I here give it you, in Tom. 9. p. 509, 510. printed Anno 1623. Mr. Iames Howel, an Attendant upon the King in the Spanish Expedition, (and who ever remained firm to him, be­ing imprison'd by the Parliament for a Malignant in the time of the War) doth also point at it in his Dodonas Grove, or Vocal Fo­rest, printed Anno 1640. he saith there, pag. 128. ‘That the Pope was a great Friend to the intended Alliance with Spain, and wrote to the Prince.’ This Letter is also printed in Pryn's Popish Royal Favorite, p. 40. in French, and likewise in English, agreeing ex­actly with the Copy in Cabala: And Mr. Pryn saith, ‘That he hath seen another Copy of this Letter long since in English, be­ing somewhat different from the French in some Expressions, though not in Substance, and perchance he wrote two of this Na­ture; but it appears that such Letters really passed between the King and the Pope, by divers ancient printed Copies of them in sundry Languages.’ Thus speaks Mr. Pryn himself, and you will credit him, because you tell me he was a Convert, and rectified many of his Errors; yet he never retracted or acknowledged this to be one.

And now, Sir, to expostulate this Matter with you; Is it cre­dible, that a Man of common Honesty, nay a D. D. who stiles himself their Majesties Chaplain, and dedicates to them, that a pretender to Learning and good Manners, who had notice from Rushworth, that there was another Copy of the King's Letter to the Pope, published by several Hands, different from his; that he, who by his own Confession hath Cabala, and uses it to serve his Purpose, should treat a Person who writes Truth out of the same Author, with the unbecoming Expression, and that three times over in one Leaf, of Leave your L—; that such a Man as you, in such a Case as this, should say, 'Tis false, you are past all manner of shame, and one would think that you are possessed? But let us see what follows, my honest Tell-troth.

Pag. 14. you fall upon Dr. Leighton's Case, and calls the most barbarous and diabolical Sentence, which Bishop Laud procured to be pronounced, and most cruelly executed upon him, his Punish­ment; [Page 18] and say, That you are something of the mind that he met with hard Fate, and such, as had you been one of his Iudges, [with your present sense of things] you should not have consented to. So that it seems you cannot be confident but you might have been as wicked as Laud himself. And by the discovery which you indiscreetly make of your self a little after, (of which more presently) I have reason to suspect that you would have made the worst Bishop of the two; and then I am sure you had been a very wicked Bishop indeed. You say, Let me tell you, Sir, Dr. Leighton was a great Transgressor, and deserved a severe Punishment.—Must it be Persecution, to call such a foul-mouth'd Person to an Account, and to punish him? But you, of all Men, Dr. Brazen-face, ought to be ve­ry tender to justifying the severe punishment of a foul Mouth, lest a Jury of your Neighbours (should you be called to an account, if for nothing more than your malicious slandering of that Reve­rend Divine Dr. Walker) should find you to be a foul-mouth'd Per­son; for in such a case [according to your present sense of things] I am something of the mind, you would esteem it hard Fate, to have your Ears cut, your Nose slit; to be branded in the Face, stand in the Pillory, pay ten thousand Pounds Fine, and be perpetually impri­son'd.

You proceed next ( pag. 15.) saying, I have look'd into the Case of Pryn, Burton, and Bastwick.— [I do, upon a full conside­ration of the whole, wish from my Heart their Punishment had been some other way]; I do not think that the way of punishing these Persons was at all Politick or Prudent, [because not for the Interest, as things then stood, either of the King or the Church]. And if Bishop Laud had kept in his Study at that time, and not appeared at all, either to hear the Trial, or assist in the Sentence, it had been better for him, and [those Designs of Vniformity he had so much set his Heart upon.]

Whoever weighs this last Paragraph, must agree in what I but now hinted, that you, even you Doctor, would have been a worse Bi­shop than Laud. You well approve the punishing of these three Per­sons; but the way was not Politick or Prudent, because not for the Interest [ as things then stood] of King or Church. Let you (sub­til Doctor) alone for Mischief, though you have a very unhappy Talent at writing in Defence thereof; you would have done it as effectually, but in a more cunning manner; you would have been found as Arch and Crafty, but a more close Youth; like the Per­secutors in Ancient Times, whose Practices are most ingenuously [Page 19] express'd by Mr. Marvel in these words; ‘In Persecution, the Clergy as yet, wisely interposed the Magistrate betwixt them­selves and the People, not caring, so their End were attained, how odious they render'd him: And you may observe, that for the most part hitherto, they stood crouching, and shot either over the Emperor's Back, or under his Belly: But in process of Time they became bolder and open-fac'd, and persecuted before the Sun at Mid-day; Bishops grew worse, but Bishopricks every day better and better.’

You, Politick Doctor, in your great Wisdom, would have taken a more prudent course than Bishop Laud, you would, in your Study, have laid such a Scheme as this; A Iefferies or a Wright should have been made Lord Chief Iustice; a Graham and a Burton should have pack'd a Iury of London Tories, to give such a Verdict as they should have directed: Hereby these Gentlemen should have been Whip'd, Pilloried, Stigmatized, and what else Bishop Hollingworth pleas'd, and all by the Hands of the Laity, and that according to Law; the Bishop, good Man, neither assisting at Trial, nor Sentence, but close at his Book, as innocent as a wild Boar, and as harmless as a Tyger.

Well, it had been better for Laud, and those Designs of Vniformity which he had so much set his Heart upon.

And pray, tell me Sir, in all Love, what Uniformity was this which thus run in Laud's Head, and which you seem so much to approve? It must certainly be the honest Design of coming to a due Temper, to a uniting of Protestants: No, no, nothing like it. Mr. Whit­lock was a good Man; and you say, pag. 14. That you do not in the least question the Truth of what he writes. Take then his Account of this Monster, rather than Martyr, and you will see which way his Head turn'd. Whitl. Mem. pag. 97. ‘In Arch-Bishop Laud's Diary, under his Hand, (produced in Evidence against him at his Trial) are Passages of his being offered to be made a Car­dinal; which he said, that he could not suffer till Rome were other than it is.’

[He wickedly and traiterously design'd, that upon the Pope's yielding, in some few Points, as the Common Prayers to be conti­nued in English, and such other Tri [...]les, he would deliver over the possession of these most noble Isles to the Prince of the Apo­stles.]

[Page 20] Whitl. pag. 92. It was proved against him, that he should say, ‘The Pope was not Antichrist, but the Head of the Church; and that the Protestant Religion, and Romish Religion were all one; and if the one was false, so was the other.’

‘He chid Dr. Hall (as in Whitlock, p. 91.) for giving the Holy Father the Epithets of Antichristian, &c. He held the Pope to be Metropolitan Bishop of the World.’

‘He furnished the King's Chappel, (they are Mr. Whitlock's own words, p. 85.) 'that Seminary Priests would come thither for their Devotion and Adoration; and some of them were instanc'd, ( this was at his Trial still) who said, they knew no difference be­tween their Churches and this Chappel, and some other of our Churches, as they were ordered.’

To this I shall subjoin a few Words out of Rushworth's Third Collection, Vol. 2. pag. 818. ‘Arch-Bishop Laud endeavoured to advance the Power of the Council-Table, the Canons of the Church, and the King's Prerogative, above the Laws of the Land▪ and said, that as long as he sat at the Council-Board, they should know, that an Order of that Board should be of equal Force with an Act of Parliament.’ And at another time said, ‘That he would crush them to pieces that would not yield to the King's Power. He stiled the Parliament Puritans, and com­mended the Papists for harmless and peaceable Subjects.’ He said, ‘That there must be a Blow given to the Church, such as had not been given, before it could be brought to Conformity.’

Was not this a rare Head of the Church of England? Why may not a Man for once, and not practise it, borrow your Words, (dear Doctor) pag. 53. and say, I cannot think Laud would have talked thus, unless he had been acted by seven Devils worse thau himself, and then I am sure they must be Devils indeed?

But no more of Laud in this place; I return to you, Mr. Chap­lain at Aldgate. Though you do not commend the doing of the Business of Pryn, Burton, and Bastwick, in Laud's imprudent way, and that for a weighty Reason, because you would have done it bet­ter. You proceed, pag. 16. saying, The Iustice of the Nation ought not to be afraid of accounting with such bold Men, as they shew'd them­selves.— Mr. Burton speaking of the Bishops; instead of Pil­lars, calls them Caterpillers; instead of Fathers, Step-fathers. O horrid! is this true? Why, this was almost as bad as his laying open the Innovations in Doctrine, Worship, and Ceremonies, which [Page 21] had lately crept into the Church, and wishing the People to beware of them: which I mention to be charg'd upon him; and I question whether his Eares, and 5000 l. Fine would have paid the Reckoning, if Hollingworth had been in Laud's place.

But, what then would have aton'd for Dr. Bastwick's Trans­gression? He (say you) in his Answer to the Information against him, inserted these words; That the Prelates are Invaders of the King's Prerogative; Contemners and Despisers of the Holy Scripture; Advancers of Popery and Superstition▪ Idolatry and Profaneness: Also they abuse the King's Authority, to the Oppression of his Loyal Subjects; and therein exercise great Cruelty, Tyranny and Injustice; and in Exe­cution of those impious Performances, they shew neither Wit, Honesty nor Temperance; nor are they either Servants of God, or of the King, but of the Devil: being Enemies to God, and of every living Thing that is good: And concluded, that he the said Dr. Bastwick is ready to maintain these things thus put down.

Now, seeing that they cut off his Ears, for these Expressions, without bringing the Point to trial; I will put my self in his place, and stake mine against yours, that I will make good every Syllable in this Charge against that Caterpiller Laud, and some of his Bre­thren; when I see you take it to pieces, and say in your Rheto­rical Flights, This is false; That's a Lie. And I will give it under my hand into the Bargain, that I will prove that these Bishops were a Generation of Vipers, which on any terms, would have eaten their way to Preferment, through the Intrails of either Church or State; you may make your best on't Doctor.

In your 17 th Page, you affirm, That these three Men suffered for Libelling the Government, and putting Indignities and Affronts upon the then legal Administrators. I have shown you the heinous Trans­gressions of Dr. Bastwick and Mr. Burton; but you leave us in the dark as to Mr. Pryn's; therefore pray let this put you in mind, when you write next, to tell the World what those Indignities and Affronts were, for which Mr. Pryn suffered; because I have been told, 'twas for publishing a Book, which Dr. Buckner, Chaplain to the Arch-bishop (I do not mean the Villain Laud, but that excellent Pattern for Bishops, Dr. Abbot) did approve and license to be printed.

Having finished your Vindication of the Punishment of these Per­sons, you dismiss it thus, pag. 17. And so much by way of Answer so that part of your Book, by which you have endeavoured to blacken the [Page 22] good King's Reign, and to run down the Reputation of Bishop Laud; and to express your Indignation against me, for saying otherways he was a very good Man. [I see a Man cannot for his Heart prevail upon this Hare-brain'd Doctor, to let Laud alone; but whether we will or not, he will go on to murder the Reputation of this his Martyr:] You run on thus, (without Fear, Wit or Honesty) I say still he was a good Man, and have a very good Man to back me, Iudg Whitlock, a Man of a clear Credit and sound Iudgment; who, as his Son tells me in his Memoirs; said of him, that he had too much Fire, but was a just and good Man. [This is to purpose, if it hath the necessary Ingredient of Truth:] But I observe now, that when you have a sure Se­cond, one upon whom you can depend, you constantly quote the Page as well as Author; but you left me here very unkindly, to turn over a large Folio; to find Judg Whitlock's Character of Laud; and at length I pitch'd upon it in the Mem. pag. 32. in these very words; Laud was more busy in Temporal Affairs and Matters of State, than his Predecessors of late times had been: Iudg Whitlock, who was anciently and throughly acquainted with him, and his Disposition, would say, he was too full of Fire, though a just and good Man; and that his want of Experience in State-Matters, and his too much Zeal for the Church, and Heat, if he proceeded in the way he was then in, would set this Nation on fire. But this you intended to conceal: And now I think that the Iudg did not only speak like a very good Man, but like a Prophet; and I wish you much Joy of Mr. Whitlock's Autho­rity; whom some will tell you, you had much better have let a­lone.

Well; that I may once for all rid my hands of this troublesome Bishop, such you make him to this day, I will give you his Character from another very good Man, a Person of clear Credit and sound Judgment, we all know, that is, Sir Harbottle Grimston; 'tis in his Speech upon the Arch-bishops Impeachment, in 1641, which you will find printed in the Continuation of Rushworth's Collections, now published.

We are (saith he) fallen upon the great Man, the Arch-bishop of Can­terbury; look upon him as he is in his Highness, and he is the Sty of all pestilent Filth, that hath infected the State, and Government of the Church and Common-wealth; look upon him in his Dependencies, and he is the Man, the only Man that hath raised and advanced all those (that together with himself) have been the Authors and Causers of all the Ru­ins, Miseries and Calamities we now groan under.

[Page 23] Who is it but he only, that brought in the Earl of Strafford, a fit In­strument and Spirit to act and execute all his wicked and bloody Designs in these Kingdoms?

Who is it but he only, that brought in Secretary Windebank, the very Broker and Pander to the Whore of Babylon?

Who is it but he only, that hath advanc'd Bishop Manwaring, the Bishop of Bath and Wells, the Bishop of Oxford, and Bishop W [...]en; the least of all but the most unclean one?

These are Men that should have fed Christ's Flock, but they are the Wolves that devoured them: It was the Happiness of our Church, when the Zeal of God's House did eat up the Bishops; glorious and brave Martyrs, that went to the Stake in the defence of the Protestant Religion; but the Zeal of these Bishops, hath been to eat up and persecute the Church. He hath been and is the common Enemy to all Goodness, and good Men. So much for this, otherways good Man. What have we next?

You say, Pag. 18. I come now to make some Reflections upon your Scotch [...] Story, which you have told with so much Venom and Partiality, that you have every ways acted like your malicious and ungodly self. —You begin with a Relation of Bishop Laud 's (what more of Laud still?) composing a Common-Prayer-Book for them; and tell us how the Mutinies and Disturbances in Scotland sprung from thence, which truly I am very sorry for.

'Tis well, we are agreed in this point, that from the imposing this Liturgy, the Scotish Troubles did arise; so that hitherto, there's no Ungodliness in my Story. But (you proceed) I am sure it had been better for them, and [the Christian Religion] profess'd amongst them, if they had submitted to the Vsage of that Book, and continued it ever since.

This, in truth, Sir, is ungodly and malicious all over; you are sure it had been better for the Christian Religion, &c. Why not Protestant Religion? CHRISTIAN RELIGION is indeed in its true and genuine Sense, so good an Expression, that a better cannot be found for the only true Religion: but these Laudean Church-men, the Papists in disguise, must be narrowly watch'd; for 'tis notoriously known, that they hold the Roman-Church to be a true Church, though we know 'tis idolatrous. We must hold them to the Shiboleth, [PRO­TESTANT] when they pretend to tell us what is best for the Christian Religion: Laud himself spoke at the rate which you (crafty Turn-Goat) here do; his Letters expressed his fear of delay in bringing in the Common-Prayer-Book, for the great good (not of the Church of Scotland, but) of the Church.

[Page 24]My Lord Bishop of Salisbury may surely be allowed to be a more competent Judg, in this matter, than you: He saith Pag. 30. of his Memoires; ‘The Liturgy had some Alterations from the Eng­lish, which made it more invidious, and less satisfactory. — The imposing it, really varied from their former Practices and Con­stitutions. —. Pag. 33. The Lords petitioned, complaining against the Liturgy, and Book of Canons; offering, under the highest Penalties, to prove they contained things both contrary to Reli­gion and the Laws of the Land. Pag. 36. The Earls of Traquaire and Roxburgh, by Letter to the King, advised him to secure the People of that which they so much apprehended, the fear of Inno­vation of Religion; saying, that they found few or none well sa­tisfied. — Pag. 33. The Earl of Trequaire went to Court, and gave account that all the Troubles were occasioned by the in­troducing the Liturgy: with which, scarce a Member of Council (except Bishops) was well satisfied; neither were all these cordi­ally for it, for the Arch-bishop of St. Andrews from the beginning had withstood these Designs; and the Arch-bishop of Glasgow was worse pleased.’

See now what the Scotish Nation offered against this Liturgy, which you, Doctor, are sure, it had been better for them and the Christi­an Religion, if they had received and used it; Their Commissioners in their Charge against Laud (exhibited in our Parliament in 1641) say, ( Pag. 11, &c.) ‘This Book inverteth the Order of the Com­munion in the Book of England; of the divers secret Reasons of this change, we mention one only: In joining the Spiritual Praise and Thanksgiving, which is in the Book of England, pertinently after the Communion, with the Prayer of Consecration before the Communion; and that under the Name of Memorial or Ob­lation, for no other end, but that the Memorial and Sacrifice of Praise, mentioned in it, may be understood according to the Po­pish Meaning; Bellar. de Missâ, lib. 2. cap. 21. Not of the Spi­ritual Sacrifice, but of the Oblation of the Body of the Lord.’

‘The corporal Presence of Christ's Body, is also to be found here; for the words of the Mass-Book, serving to this purpose, which are not to be found in the Book of England, are taken in here; Almighty God is incall'd, that of his Almighty Goodness he may vouchsafe so to bless and sanctify with his Word and Spi­rit, these Gifts of Bread and Wine, that they be unto us the Body and Blood of Christ. — On the other part, the Expressions [Page 25] of the Book of England, at the delivery of the Elements; Of feeding on Christ by Faith, and of eating and drinking in re­membrance that Christ died for thee, are utterly deleted.’

Now one would think, that if such a whissling Doctor as you are, were not past all shame, (as you affirm me to be) it would make you blush, (but we may sooner expect to see you burst) that you, who appeared but now very tender of passing a Judgment upon the Actions of the accused Star-Chamber, should be found so pragma­tical, so arrogant, as to censure King, Charles the First, (who damn'd this very Book by Act of Parliament) and the Kingdom and Church of Scotland in this Point; and declare, That you are sure it had been better for them, and the Christian Religion, if they had submitted to the Vsage of this Babylonish Book, and continued it ever since. But you are so inflexible, that there's little hope of recon­ciling you to that Nation, (I had almost said to the King and Queen) unless this well-approved Liturgy be sent down once more and entertained there. For then (you say, pag. 18.) the Worship of God would be performed with [Order and Decency], and in a way suitable to his Divine Nature and Perfections: And consequently could not have been nauseous to the soberly, wise and seriously devout part of that Kingdom, [as now it is] by reason of those rude and undigested Addresses, those ex-tempore and unpremeditated Expostulations with God; those bold and saucy Applications, that for want of a good Book, or a well-framed Form of Prayer, [of their own before-hand, and com­mitted to memory] are so commonly made use of in their Pulpits; too many of the accounts of which we have lately, since the great Turn in Scotland, received from very good Hands, and undeniable Testimo­nies.

This is, I am sure, a nauseating, if not an ungodly and pro­phane way of Talking: You, poor weak Man as you are, run away with a gross Mistake; that because there were Bishops in Scotland till the great Turn, (as you term the legal Settlement of that Church by their present Majesties) they had also a Common-Prayer Book: but believe me, or let it alone, as you please, they had no such thing, it was detested, even by many of their Episco­pal Clergy. I shall not pretend to remark upon your most unbe­coming and malicious Representation of the praying of the present Ministers of that Kingdom; but 'tis well known that their Divines are of good Ability, and every way well qualified for the discharge of the Ministerial Function. And whereas you pretend to recom­mend [Page 26] a well-framed Form of Prayer of their own before-hand, and committed to Memory, for the prevention of rude and undigested Addresses, bold and saucy Applications; I would fain know of you what Canon allows a Minister of the Church of England to frame his own Prayer, and to mutter out a good part of it, so as no body can tell what he says: And then to rise constantly in his Voice, when he comes to the Ox — and the Ass—.

But to talk seriously of this most serious Matter; pray see what the Devout and Learned Bishop of Salisbury says of such Doctors as your self, in his Sermon Ian. 30. 1680. pag. 9. ‘Many weak Per­sons, who by the Heat of their Tempers are inclined to enter­tain Prejudices, hold, that Addressing to God in Prayer, and the being gaided by the inward Motions of Grace, and God's Holy Spirit, are but illusions of Fancy, if not the Contrivances of designing Men.’

Pag. 10. ‘Earnestness in Prayer, and depending on the inward Assistances of God's Holy Spirit: How have Men, who know or value these things little themselves, taken occasion to disparage them with much Impudence and Scorn?’

Now, Sir, upon the whole Matter, I do think it might tend to the Publick Peace, if my Lord Bishop of London would please to suspend such a dry and insipid Doctor as you are, from publishing even ex-tempore and unpremeditated Defences, and to injoin you a well-framed Form of Defending, so that it may be performed with Order and Decency, and not be exposed to Contempt and Scorn, by reason of any rude and undigested Addresses, bold and saucy Ap­plications to their most Sacred Majesties, the Most Reverend and Right Reverend, the Arch-Bishops and Bishops, &c. For I per­swade my self, that the Ex-tempore Rhimes of some Antick Iack-Pudding, may deserve Printing better than your empty and non­sensical Pamphlets; and that it had been better to have set some Ballad-Singer to have bewailed the King's Misfortunes, than so ri­diculous an Orator as you are found to be, who are so insipid, that there's not the least Spirit in any thing you say.

Where are you now, Sir? I, but this Bold face says, This Li­turgy [ for Scotland] was not only composed by Bishop Laud, but sent by him to the Pope and Cardinals for their Approbation, and this Story I must not dare to deny. But with your leave, Mr. Modesty, I will ven­ture upon that piece of Confidence, as to tell you, I do not believe it, and that because you assert it. Now I do agree that I did say so; and [Page 27] I am indeed a Bold-face, if I have not good Authority for what [...] thus charge upon Arch-Bishop Laud; for no Man's bare Assertion may pass in such a Case as this. But there is more in this Matter, than the Short-sighted Chaplain at Aldgate is aware of.

You may find the Story of Laud's sending, the Scots Common-Prayer, to be approved by the Pope and Cardinals (as I told it) in a Book of good Credit, entituled, A new Survey of the West-Indies, wrote by a Reverend Divine of the Church of England, Mr. Tho­mas Gage, Minister of Deal in Kent, 'tis in Page 280, in the Folio Im­pression; He there tells you, ‘That being a Friar, he went to Rome with Letters of Recommendation to Cardinal Barbarini, the Pope's Nephew, intituled, The Protector of England: That coming acquainted with Father Fitz-Herbert, Rector of the English Colledg of jesuits, he highly praised Arch-Bishop Laud, and said, That he not long since sent a Common-Prayer Book, (which he had composed for the Church of Scotland) to be first viewed and approved by the Pope and Cardinals; and that they liked it very well for Protestants to be trained up in a Form of Prayer and Service; yet the Cardinals (first giving him Thanks for his Respect) sent him word, that they thought it was not fit­ting for Scotland. That Father Fitz-Herbert told him, he was Witness of all this, being sent for by the Cardinal to give them his Opinion about it, and of the Temper of the Scots. And that Laud hearing the Censure of the Cardinals concerning his In­tention and Form of Prayer, to ingratiate himself the more in their Favour, corrected some things in it, and made it more harsh and unreasonable for that Nation.’

This good Man, Mr. Gage, after he had there related the Mat­ter as above, expresses himself thus; ‘This most true Relation of Arch-Bishop Laud, I have oft spoke of in private Discourse, and publickly in Preaching; and I could not in Conscience omit it here, both to vindicate the just Censure of Death, which the Parliament gave against him, and to reprove the ungrounded Opi­nion and Error of some ignorant Spirits, who have since his Death highly exalted and cried him up for a Martyr.’

You may also find something like this of Mr. Gage in Bishop Bur­net's Memoirs, pag. 83. he relates, ‘That in the Year 1638, one Abernethy, who from a Jesuit turned a zealous Presbyterian, spread a Story in Scotland, which took wonderfully, of the Litur­gy of that Kingdom, being sent to Rome to some Cardinals to [Page 28] be revised by them; and that Signior Con (the Popes Nuncio to the Court of England) had shewed it to Abernethy at Rome. Indeed the Bishop adds, 'That the Marquess of Hamilton wrote to Con about it; but he protested seriously, he never so much as had heard of a Liturgy designed for Scotland, till he came last to England; that he had never seen Abernethy at Rome but once; and finding him light-headed, had never again taken notice of him.’

Now it takes not much from the Credit of Abernethy's Relation, that Con denied it, for it must be noted, that he was a Jesuit; and according to the Tenets of the Romish Church, 'twas lawful, if not his Duty, to lie for Holy Church.

You come next, with a most convincing Argument, to shew the Falshood of my last Assertion: What! (say you, pag. 19.) Bishop Laud send to the Pope and Cardinals for their Approbation of a Litur­gy almost the same with ours? I think this vexatious Ghost will ne­ver be laid; I thought we had done with Laud, but here he ap­pears again: What! Laud send to the Pope to approve a Liturgy al­most the same with ours? Ay, Laud, the most likely Bishop in Eng­land to do it! You say, That his Heart was set upon Designs of Vni­formity: And was not this the most probable Course to accomplish them? Mr. Whitlock (whom you will credit) shews (as I but now told you) that Laud declared, That the Protestant Religion, and Romish Religion, were all one; and if the one was false, so was the other. That he brought the Romish and English Churches (I think I must say Steeple-houses to be rightly understood) to such a Vnifor­mity, that the Popish Priests knew no difference between theirs and ours. Why then may we not believe, that in pursuit of that Plot of Vni­formity his Heart was so much set upon, he sought the Pope's Ap­probation of the Liturgy; whom (as Mr. Whitlock himself de­clares) he held to be the Metropolitan Bishop of the World; so that Laud was to him, as that Traitor Turner, late Bishop of Ely, to San­crost, but a younger Brother?

Proceeding to argue the Point, you say; Sure, Sir, you have forgot the Bull of the Pope, in the 10 th of Queen Elizabeth, which commands all his pretended Catholick Children, not to attend upon the publick Liturgical Devotions of our Church; and you have forgot that [the Papists upon that account, and by virtue of the Authority of that Bull, have declined our Publick Service ever since]; and therefore it is very likely Bishop Laud should send a Liturgy to Rome for its Appro­bation. [Page 29] Most likely, for this very reason, and one who did not well know you to be a Hare-brain'd Blunderbuss, would be ready to conclude with that ingenious Iacobite of the Lacedemonian Society; who inveighing against my Letter, told a Friend of mine, it must be answered by a better Pen, for the Doctor writes, said he, as though he play'd booty. I appeal to any Man of common Understanding, whether a better Reason can be invented, to persuade the World of the Probability of Laud's sending the Common-Prayer-Book to be approved at Rome, than you here assigned: The Point is al­ready settled, that his Head was set upon Designs of Vniformity; the Pope was his elder Brother; the Papists came to the Common-Prayers of our Church for the first 10 years of Q. Elizabeth; and by conse­quence, might have so done to this day, had not Pope Pius the 5 th prohibited them. Let any Man shew me a more probable way to obtain a Repeal of that Bull, which hath made the Papists ever since decline our Liturgical Church-Devotions, and to bring them to Church again, or rather to bring us to go to Church with them, than by introducing a Liturgy allowed and approved by his Holi­ness; a Liturgy in which (as I said, and you do not deny) all the material Parts of the Mass-Book seminally were; and wherein Tran­substantiation was rather allowed, than denied. But that empty Head of yours, is carried round, that you do not know what is fit to be said. What have we next?

Page 20. Well, Sir, you say, If [the Common-Prayer-Book] was sent into Scotland; pray let me ask you one Question; In whose Name, and by whose Authority was it sent?

The Answer is as obvious as short, and you needed not to have sent to Switzerland to have a Resolution in the point; 'twas sent in the name of one, who had not Authority to impose it upon the Scots according to their Laws.

You go on, saying, Why, if they did not like it, did they not first sub­missively petition their lawful King, and let him know how disgustful the Liturgy was to many of his Subjects in that Kingdom?

Why, 'tis most evident from all the Historians of that time, that they did in the very beginning, petition in the most submissive man­ner against the imposing this Liturgy; and that thereupon, after the first reading it in the great Church of Edinburgh, upon the 23 d of Iuly, 1637, the Council of Scotland yielded that it should not be further urged by the Bishops, till his Majesty's Pleasure were known. Upon which, the Petitioners returned satisfied to their Habitati­ons. [Page 30] But upon the 18 th of October, there being a great conflux of People at Edinburgh, to hear the King's Determinations, a Proclama­tion was published, commanding them upon pain of Rebellion to depart the City; and shortly after, the King commanded the Privy Council to receive no more Petitions against the Common-Prayer-Book. Never­theless you confidently demand, Why, if they did not like it, did they not first submissively petition? But the Scots shall here answer for themselves; take their own words in their Charge exhibited in Parliament against Laud; ‘Our Supplications (say they) were many against this Book, but Canterbury procured them to be an­swer'd with terrible Proclamations: we were constrained to use the remedy of Protestation; but for our Protestations, Canterbury procured us to be declared Rebels and Traitors in all the Parish-Kirks of England. When we were seeking to possess our Religion in Peace, against these Devices and Novations, Canterbury kind­led War against us. — Our Scotish Prelates petitioned that some­thing might be abated of the English Ceremonies, as the Cross in Baptism, &c. but he would not only have these kept, but others super-added; which was nothing else but the adding Fewel to the Fire.’

Read also their Expostulation in their Remonstrance, 1639, Pag. 4. ‘Certainly Posterity will hardly believe (as we who have seen it cannot but wonder) how it hath come to pass that we should have so long petitioned our Native Prince to do us Justice, where­of he is Debtor to his People; and to hear our just Complaints a­gainst the Usurpation of a few Men, who were undermining the professed Religion and the Government of the State, and to suffer us to live according to our Laws, and yet could never be heard nor answer'd in the point of our just Desires; far less will they guess what hath been the ground of that merit and trust of one domineering Prelate, in the Affection of the King, that it should be more forcible to diswade, than all the Supplications and Intercessions of so ancient and faithful a Nation, should have po­wer to move.’

Well, what say you next, Mr. Tittle-tattle? The Scots took a Covenant against Compliance with the Church of England.

Against Compliance with the Church of England; Ay, now 'tis out, there's the ground of the Quarrel; the Scots traiterously refused to comply with Bp. Laud: But they shall speak for themselves; they answer you thus, Doctor. ‘We are free of the heavy Censures of [Page 31] Rebellion and Treason, which are so ordinarily thunder'd out, that they are become the less formidable to us. We are supported with this inward Testimony, that we fear God, and still honour the King; although our Adversaries will not be pleased, except we will follow their Rules, which are not unlike those of the Je­suits sound at Padua, when they were expelled the Territory of Venice: One of them was, [ that Men should take heed, that they press or inculcate not too much the Grace of God:] Another was, [ that Men must believe the Hierarchical Church, although it tells us, that that is black which our Eye judgeth to be white] Unto which we may add the third, invented by Ignatius Loyola, [of blind Obedience,] which we have no mind to practise.’ To move for­ward.

Page 22. We find (say you,) their Seditious, Remonstrances, De­clarations and Pamphlets were dispersed.—

Now I cannot find that Mr. Whitlock, whom you quote, informs you, that their Remonstrances, &c. were seditious: this is maliciously foisted in by you, and if you were in Scotland, you would, as you deserve, be severely punished (which you would call Persecution) upon the Statute against Leising-makers.

Mr. Whitlock, in Pag. 28. which you cite, gives this Relation; ‘About the year 1560, the Earl of Murray, with Knox, Buchanan, and others, gave such a shock to Popery, as made every thing (and by consequence Episcopacy) which stood near it, to reel.’ He then shews how Episcopacy and Presbytery took their turns of Govern­ment; and giving an Account of the King's Resolution to inforce the Common-Prayer-Book; and by an Army to bring the Scots to o­bedience, (or as you phrase it, to compliance with the Church of England); he saith, ‘That because this was the Bishop's War, it was held fit that they should contribute largely towards the Preservation of their own Hierarchy; and accordingly, the Cler­gy were assembled by the Bishops, in their Diocesses, and invited to a liberal Aid.’

I shall now, (Sir,) in a short Digression, shew you from Mr. Whitlock, how this was growing up, from being the Bishop's, to be a Popish War; he relates, Page 31. ‘That the Queen employed Sir Kenelm Digby, and Mr. Walter Mountague’ (who at that very time, as we have it in Gage's Survey of the West-Indies, p. 209, stood Candidates at Rome for a Cardinal's-Cap;) ‘to labour the Papists for a liberal Contribution, which they gained; and Sir Basil Brooks, [Page 32] a Person afterwards very active in the Irish Rebellion, was ap­pointed Treasurer for the Monies, thus raised by the Queen's So­licitation for this War against the Scots: hereupon some stiled the Forces raised against the Scots, in the beginning of the year 1640, THE POPISH ARMY.’ But to return to what I intended; I will shew you the Heads of the Scotch Declaration, which Mr. Whit­lock puts down upon the Page you mention; and that I may not be accused of Partiality, take first the King's Declaration; ‘His Ma­jesty saith, he sets it forth to inform his Subjects of the seditious Practices of some in Scotland, seeking the overthrow of Regal Power, under false pretext of Religion, &c. He takes God to witness, he is constrained by their Treasons, to take Arms for the safety of that and this Kingdom. He resolves to maintain Episco­pacy there, &c.’

The Scots answer; ‘That though the Secrets of God's Ways cannot be sounded, yet considering his Providence in their per­sonal Affairs, the Lord is about some great Work on Earth; for the Cup of Affliction propined to other Reformed Kirks is now presented to them: —That instead of a gracious return to their humble Petitions, from time to time, the return is a late Declaration libell'd against them; though the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against their Cause, and the Kingdom of Jesus Christ now in question. Which Declaration proceeds from the Unchri­stian Prelates and their Party. They conclude, setting forth their long suffering of the Prelates Insolency, &c. and fearing Popery to be introduced. And they say, for doing any harm to England, cursed be their Breasts, if they harbour any such Thought, &c.’

Your next Accusation, Doctor, against the Scots, is, Page 23. The King consents to a Treaty: Commissioners were appointed on both sides; and they came to a Conclusion, agreeing upon seven Articles; The King justly performed the Articles on his side, notwithstanding the first Article agreed upon, was to disband the Forces of Scotland within 24 hours, yet these perfidious Persons kept part of their Forces in a body; and all their Officers in pay, and kept up their Fortisications at Leith. And now let the Reader judg by this, how deserving these Men are of such Commendations, as this pestilent and bold Letter-Writer gives them.

[Page 33]Take a full Answer to this Slander, from the Representation of the Proceedings of the Kingdom of Scotland, since the late Pacification by the Estates of the Kingdom, pag. 35. ‘We within the space of forty eight hours, the time appointed by his Majesty, dissolved our Army. Concerning the Officers, we were careful, both to observe that Article of the Pacification to his Majesty, and also to keep promise to them; which did bind us not to hold them in Mi­litary Pay, but to vouchsafe them Entertainment, till they should be restored to their own, or called to other Service; which ought not to be taken for any Breach, Contempt, or Disobedience, but for an observation of the Law of Nature, and common Equity, they being our own Natives, and having forsaken their Places and Means, for Defence of Us and their Native Country; less than this neither could they expect, nor we perform, although the Peace had been most firmly settled.’

‘ All Forts and Castles were speedily restored, although they be now used for a Terror and Invasion against us. Some part of the For­tifications at Leith was demolished, for his Majesty's Satisfaction; and the whole remitted by his Majesty to the Town of Edinburgh, as having right to the same.’

See further what they say in Refutation of this vile Calumny, in their Remonstrance concerning the present Troubles, pag. 7. ‘We delivered all Places into his Majesty's Hands, which were desired, in testimony of our Obedience; and although they might have been in our Hands, Pledges of Assurance for performance of those Articles that were agreed to be granted in the following Assembly and Parliament; and now, contrary to our Expectation, are tur­ned for Engines of Terror, and Fetters of Slavery, to frustrate us from obtaining the benefit of that Capitulation.’

Now to put you, Doctor, to eternal silence, I shall subjoin an unconquerable Evidence against your bold Assertion; The Pacifica­tion was made upon the 18 th of June 1639. And upon the 24 th the Marquess of Hamilton received possession of the Castle of Edinburgh for the King. This is in Bishop Burnet's Memoirs of the two Ha­miltons, pag. 144. 'tis a Book you have heard of, though I doubt never seen, (you shall presently see why I say so▪) If this Trea­tise be partial, it must incline to the King against the Scots, because the Marquess was deeply engaged in the Royal Cause: This was not only wrote by the Bishop when he was a Chaplain to King Charles the Second, from the Marquesses own Memoirs, but is dedicated to [Page 34] the King, and was published with his Royal Testimonial, that he had seen and approved it. And is there room now for any Man to believe, that if the Scots had not acted with the highest Simplicity and Integrity in this Treaty, they would have instantly and volun­tarily quitted the best Strength in that Kingdom to his Majesty? And now let the Reader judg by this, whether one word that such a paltry Doctor as you utter, out of your Pulpit, [...]e to be credi­ted?

Well, what comes next? e'ne what lies uppermost, pag. 23. And whereas this scandalizing Person has the confidence to assert, that the King, when he came home, burnt, by the common Hangman, the Paci­fication he had made: I must tell him, he talks, as he has done all along throughout his Letter, falsly, and [against his own Reading and Know­ledg]: and for this I appeal to Bishop Burnet in his Memoirs of the two Hamiltons, where, pag. 782. he acquaints us, That the Scots published a false and scandalous Paper, entituled, Some of his Majesties Treaties with his Subjects of Scotland; so Vntrue and Seditious, that it was burnt by the Hands of the Common Hangman. And are not you a base Person then, to oberude such a Lie upon the World as you have done? But it is no wonder, the Father, whose Cause you have served in this rude and seditions Libel, is the Father of Lies.

Why, now most unhappy Doctor, you are catch'd again; and whereas you say that I talk falsly against my reading, it will be found that you talk at random for want of reading. I told you that I su­spected you had never seen Bishop Burnet's Alemoirs, you shall now see my reason for it; You quote pag. 782. and there are but 436 Pages in that Book, and 47 in the Appendix. And for my part, I have read it some Years since, and now turn'd it over, but cannot find therein the Story for which you vouch him: I am apt to think, (as you told me pag. 50.) That some crafty Knave, finding you rea­dy to pick up any Story, whereby you might serve your Cause, had a mind to put a Trick upon you, and to expose the Truth of the rest of your Book, by telling you, that Bishop Burnet 's Evidence against the Scots, would outweigh a thousand Witnesses; and that he had declared what false Loons they were, in a certain Book called his Memoirs. But is not he a Blockhead then that will be so imposed upon?

Nevertheless, to deal openly, and without reserve in this Mat­ter; I find these Memoirs speaking thus, ( pag. 143.) ‘When the Scotch Commissioners came back to the Camp, they gave an account of their Negotiation; and besides Articles of Treaty, they pro­duced [Page 35] another Paper, [ which passed among all for the Conditions of Agreement]; it was a Note containing some Points which were alledged to have been agreed to at Berwick, verbally, though not set down in the written Treaty; which was made up of some down-right Mistakes, [this Term comes something short of False, Scandalous, Vntrue and Seditious, which are your Ep [...]thets]; and of other things which the King in discourse had indeed said, but not positively, nor as a Determination on which he had concluded.—’

It were now worth the knowing, what, in particular, these down-right Mistakes, and these other things, were; but this History leaving us in the dark therein, I shall shew you what was the main thing which gave distaste, in that Paper which Bishop Burnet saith, passed among all for the Conditions of the Agreement; and how the Estates of Scotland justified that Paper from the Imputation of Mistakes. The Paper is intituled, Some Conditions of his Majesty's Treaty with his Subjects of Scotland, before the English Nobility.

‘It is there remembred, that it being with all Instancy and Hu­mility prest, Saturday, June 15. that his Majesty would satisfy that main Desire of his Subjects, by declaring, that he would quit Episcopacy; did answer, That it was not sought in our De­sires. And when it was replied, That our first Desire to have the Acts of the General Assembly ratified, imported the same: His Majesty acknowledged it to be so, and averred, that he did not refuse it, but would advise till Monday the 17 th. At which time his Majesty being prest to give some Signification of his quit­ting Episcopacy: And it being plainly shown to his Majesty, That if he would labour to maintain Episcopacy, it would breed a miserable Schism in this Kirk, and make such a Rapture and Division in this Kingdom, as would prove uncurable: And if his Majesty would let the Kirk and Country be freed of them, his Majesty would re­ceive as hearty and dutiful Obedience as ever Prince received of a People: His Majesty answer'd, that he could not prelimit and forestal his Voice, but had appointed a Free Assembly, which might judg of all Ecclesiastical Matters; the Constitutions whereof he promised to ratify in the ensuing Parliament.’

See now what the Estates of Scotland said, in vindication of themselves in this Matter; you will find them thus expressing it, in their Representation of the Proceedings of the Kingdom, pag. 15.

‘After much Agitation, and many Consultations, his Majesties Declaration, touching the intended Pacification was read to our [Page 36] Commissioners; who, upon their Dislike and Exceptions taken both at Matter and Expressions, as contrary to our Minds, and prejudicial to our Cause, did humbly remonstrate, that the Declaration, as it was conceived, could not give Satisfaction to us from whom they were sent. His Majesty was graciously pleased to command some words to be deleted, other words to be changed; and many parts thereof were, by verbal Promises and Interpretation, from his Majesty's own Mouth, mitigated: Which in our Estimation, were equal to that which was written, some of the Counsellors of England, assuring our Commissioners, that what was spoken and promised be­fore Men of Honour, and in the Face of two Armies, was no less cer­tain, and would (no doubt) be as really performed, as if it had been written in Capital Letters; which therefore were diligently ob­served, carefully remembred, and punctually related by our Commissioners, at their delivering of his Majesty's Declaration to us: And without which, we nor could nor would have condescended and consented to the Articles of the Declaration, more than we could or would, against the Light of our Minds and Consciences, have sinned against God, and condemned our own Deed. Thus way was made to the Pacification, and for preoccupying all Mistakes, whether wilful possibly by some, or through weakness of Memory by others. These vocal Interpretations and Expressions, were collected, keeped by our selves, and in Papers delivered to some of the Commis­sioners of England.’

It may now be observed, upon the whole Matter, that this Pa­per contained nothing contrary to the Articles, or the Pacification, but was a mollifying of his Majesty's Declaration, that it might be the more readily received by the People. And it had been more than imaginable Impudence, to put into the Hands of the Nobility of England, a Paper professing what was openly spoken but just be­fore in their own hearing; and yet containing Untruths and sedi­tious Positions, contrary to all that was done for Peace.

The Truth of the Case is this; The King had promised them a General Assembly, to be holden the 6 th of August, and a Parliament upon the 20 th, to ratify what should be decreed in the Assembly: But he was reprimanded by the Queen and the Bishops, who vili­fied the Pacification, and upbraided him, that he had brought home a dishonourable Peace. Whereupon he altered his Mind, declaring, that what had been agreed, would be unprofitable for the Kirk, be­cause he well knew that nothing short of the extirpation of Prolacy [Page 37] could satisfy that People. He therefore, about a Month after the Pacification, set himself to pick a Quarrel with them; and upon the 18 th of Iuly, 1639, he charged them with no less than Eigh­teen Criminal Articles; whereof they denied some, and made full Answers to the rest. I shall touch upon two of them, because they refer to your Discourse which we are now examining.

The third Article was, ‘Forces not dismissed; and in particu­lar, Monro's Regiment yet kept on foot.’

The Answer was this;

‘Since his Majesty will have that Regiment disbanded, the same shall be done presently: But we humbly beg, that his Majesty would be pleased to dismiss the Garisons in Berwick, Carlisle, and the rest of the Borders.’

The 18 th Article was; ‘The Paper divulged; and if they a­vow the same?’

Which had this modest Answer:

‘As we are most unwilling to fall upon any Question which may seem to import the least Contradiction with his Majesty; so if it had not been the Trust which we gave to the Relation of our Commissioners, the written Declaration would not have been ac­ceptable, nor the Castle of Edinburgh Rendered, except for the Trust we reposed in their Relation, and Con [...]idence in his Maje­sty's Royal Word, which we believe they did not forget: which Paper was only written for that cause, left his Majesty, or his Subjects should aver, that they spake any thing without War­rant.’

But having fully shewn that this Paper suffered innocently, I detain you no longer upon this Head.

In the next place, pag. 24. you exhibit a most heinous Article, not only against the Scots, but the English also; They sent (you say) NEW COMMISSIONERS to the King. They did so; but I question whether you understand the reason why they were called New Commissioners; and therefore this may inform you, that they sent Commissioners not long before to supplicate for Peace; but they were denied access to the King's Presence, and commanded to re­turn Home. You go on, saying, that Mr. Whitlock informs you, pag. 31. they had great resort to them, and many secret Counsels held with them by the discontented English, especially those who favoured Presbytery, and were no Friends to Bishops. Having consulted Mr. Whitlock, I find you are so far right; but you break off in the [Page 38] middle of the Sentence, and omit these words, [ or had suffered in the late Censures in the Star-Chamber, Exchequer, High-Commission, and other Iudicatories]; and I would fain know what you infer from this Tale, and what harm you see in it. Mr. Whitlock gave you the Names of some Honourable and never to be forgotten Pa­triots, who resorted to these Comm [...]ssi [...]ners, to whose Names you ought to pay more deference, than to make a ma [...]i [...]ious R [...]presen­tation of their Visits and Conversation; the Earls of [...]ssex, Bed­ford, Holland, the Lord Say, Mr. Hambd [...]n, Mr. Pym, &c. w [...]re Men, who with sad Hearts beheld the Innovati [...]n in Religion, and the infringing of Fundamental Laws and Libe [...]ties in both King­doms. Surely then, Doctor, without your license, such Men as these, may lawfully consult what means are proper to support the [...]a­brick, when they see Religion and Justice, which are the Pillars of the Government, to be undermined.

But, say you, The Scots implored Aid from the French King, by a Letter under the Hands of many of their principal Actors. You then put in an Appeal ( pag. 25.) to your Reader, Whether his Majesty had not just Reason, after such Discoveries as these were, to clap some of them in Prison; and whether he had been to blame, if for such trai­terous Correspondencies with a Popish Prince, he had chopt off some of their Heads?

I have a word or two which might be offer'd for stay of Execu­tion of this hard Sentence, and desire to be heard, or rather that the whole Kingdom of Scotland may be p [...]rmitted to speak in this case. ‘This is that French Letter [...]s [...]ith that Parliament) so much insisted upon, as to open a Gate to let in Foreign Power to rule over England and our selves; which, by what Consequence it can be inferred, we would fain know? When a People is sore distressed by Sea and Land, i [...] it unlawful, by the Law of God and Man, to call for Help from God and Man? Is th [...]re no Help nor Assistance by In­tercession, by Supply of Money, &c? Is all Assistance by the Sword, and by Men? We love not Shrouds nor Disguisements, we speak the plain Truth, and fear nothing so much as that Truth be not known. Great Forces by Sea and Land were coming upon us: Informations went abroad in other Nations, to the prejudice of Us and our Cause. This made us resolve to write unto the French King, apprehending that upon sinister Relation, his Power might be used against Us. Aid and Assistance hath been given in former Times. If we have called now upon Denmark, Holland, [Page 39] Sweden, Poland, or other Nations for Help, are we therefore in­viting them all to a Soveraignty over Us? And when all is said or done, the Letter was but an Embrio, forsaken in the Birth, as con­taining some unfit Expressions, and not agreeable to our Instru­ctions, and therefore slighted by the Subscribers, but catch'd by this treacherous and secret Accuser of the Kingdom. Another Letter was formed consonant to the Instructions, and signed by many Hands; but neither was this sent from us, because we con­ceived that Mediation from France would be but late to avert the Danger which was so near.— It is universally known, that it was written in May 1639. and therefore ought to have been buried in the Pacification.—We love not to harp upon Subscribing, or sending of Letters to other Princes, and to the Pope himself, from Ex [...]m­ples of Old, and of Late, which are not hid from the Eyes o [...] the World. It is sufficient to us to have justified our selves, and to shew how innocently the Lord Lowdon suffereth, for putting his Hand to such a Letter, the Guiltiness or Innocence, not being personal or proper to the Lord London, but national and common to us all. And although it had been a Fault, and his alone, yet whatsoever it was, it did in time, and for a long time, go before his C [...]mmission and Imployment; and there [...]ore ought not to have been challenged till he had returned to his Country, un­cloathed himself of his Commission, and turned again to be what he was, a private Nobleman; The Dignity and Safety of Nations, Kingdoms, Estates, and Republicks, are much interessed in their Com­missioners and Legats, (whether they be sent from one Prince to ano­ther, or from a Kingdom, Province or Republick to their own Prince.) Their Dignity; for what is done to the Legat, is interpreted to be done to them that sent him. Their Safety; because if Legats be wronged, there can be no more composing of Differences, nor possibili­ty of Reconciliation.— Moreover, his Majesty's own Royal and inviolable Warrant for the coming of our Commissioners to his Pre­sence at this time, is enough for their safe Conduct and Security. If they have committed any thing at home against their King, Coun­try, or any particular Subject; the fundamental Liberties and In­dependency of the Kingdom, do require, that they be tried and judged at Home, and in a legal way, by the ordinary Judicatories of the Land.— We earnestly intreat for their Liberty and Safety, who are to us as our selves.’

[Page 40]Methinks, now, if the King, according to the rash Advice of you their Majesties frantick Chaplain at Aldgate, should have chop'd off the Head of my Lord of Lowdon, one of the Scotch Commissio­ners, it would have offered Violence to the Peace and Quiet of his Mind all the days of his Life. But I must think again, his Lordship was a Presbyterian, a Heretick, who would not comply with the Church of England; that considered, you could do it with the greatest Complacency, and 'twould (I am satisfied) be highly to your con­tent, that that People had but one Neck, so that you might do their business at a blow.

I remember that you told me, upon the occasion of my talking of Laud's sending the Scotch Common-Prayer-Book to be approved at Rome, that you thought I had got a Secret. Whether I then had or not, you bring one into my Remembrance, by your enquiry whe­ther the King had been to blame, if he had chop'd off some of the Scotch Commissioners Heads; and you shall have it.

I have heard, and do believe, that the King having, against all Justice, imprisoned the Earl of Lowdon (one of the Commissio­ners from the Scotch Parliament) in the Tower; he about three of the Clock in the Afternoon, sent his own Letter to Sir William Balfour, Lieutenant of the Tower, commanding him to see my Lord of Lowdon 's Head struck off within the Tower, before nine the next Morning: Up­on the Receipt of this Command, the Lieutenant of the Tower, that his Lordship might prepare for Death, gave him notice of it: He being surprized, as well he might, prevailed with Sir William to find out the Marquess of Hamilton (then in great favour with the King, and Master of the Horse) and to tell him, that he e­steemed him to be engaged in Honour, to interpose in this mat­ter. The Letter being thereupon carried and shewn to the Mar­quess, it struck him with Astonishment; and with no small difficul­ty, he made his way to the King, being then in Bed, and humbly enquired whether his Majesty had given such a Command for beheading the Earl of Lowdon? the King answered▪ Yes, and I will be obeyed therein, he shall die. The Marquess finding him inexora­ble, told his Majesty, that he would kiss his Hand, and instantly take his Horse and be gone; for he would not stay to see his Ma­jesty massacred, as most certainly he would; for before the next Night, the whole City would come upon him. Hereby the King was wrought upon to hold his Hand, and countermand the fatal Warrant.

[Page 41]This is so incredible a piece of Tyranny, that I cannot expect you should believe it upon my bare Assertion: I shall therefore shew you, that it seems to be pointed at in Bishop Burne [...]'s Me­moirs, Page 161. in these words; ‘There were some ill Instruments about the King [ Bishops no doubt on' [...]] who advised him to pro­ceed capitally against Lowdon; which is believed went very far: But the Marquess of Hamilton opposed this vigorous [...]y; assuring the King, that if that were done, Scotland was for ever lost.’

Now, if Curiosity shall lead you to enquire further into this matter, you may do well to learn what is meant by the obscure Expression, [ which is believed went very far:] and if that do not o­pen the whole business to you, you will not fail of Satisfaction, if you can, by any Friend, make way to the Original Papers, from which my Lord Bishop of Salisbury took his Memoirs, and which now are in the Hands of his Grace my Lord Duke of Ha­milton.

A word or two more about Scotland, and we will cast an Eye on your Impeachment against our own Nation: you very often term the Actions of that Kingdom, factious, seditious, rebellious, traite­rous: Now let me shew you how the Scotch Parliament defined Treason; ‘We entreat our Adversaries ( say they) to shew us in good earnest, and not by way of Railing, in what sense we have incurred the Censure of Rebellion and Treason; We cannot be moved to think, but the Mitre of a usurping Prelate, by the Au­thority of a National Council, may be thrown to the ground without the Violation or smallest Touch of the Crown or Scepter of Imperial Majesty: To dethrone a Prelate, and to overturn Prelacy, we judg it no Treason against the King.—Traitors to God and their Country, must be Traitors to the King; and such as are faithful to God and their Country, must be the King's best Subjects: The Right of his Majesty's Crown, and the Acts of Parliament, command all the Subjects to rise with the King, and to assist him, when he riseth for God and the Country; but no Law, nor Act of Parliament, forbiddeth to stand for God and the Country, in the case of publick Invasion.’

Take now from Bp. Burnet's Memoirs, a true Account of these Scotch Troubles, which have now been so troublesome to you and me, and I'll return to Old England: ‘The Lord's of the Council (saith he,) Page 31, (not 782.) laid the greatest blame upon [Page 42] Bishops, which appears from the Earl of Traquaire's Letter to the Marquess of Hamilton, date 27. Aug. 1631. viz.’

‘At the meeting of the Council, 23 d Instant, we found so much appearance of Trouble and Stir like to be, amongst People of all Qualities and Degrees, upon the urging of this New-Service-Book, that we durst no longer forbear to acquaint his Majesty therewith. —Some of the leading Men of the Clergy are so violent, and many times without ground or true judgment; that their want of right Understanding how to compass business of this nature and weight, doth often breed as many Difficulties; and their rash and foolish Expressions and Attempts, have bred such a Fear and Jealousy in the Hearts of many, that if his Majesty were rightly informed thereof, he would blame them, and justly think that from them arises the ground of many Mistakes amongst us.—[This Bu­siness, in good Faith is, by the Folly and Misgovernment of some of our Clergy, come to that height, that the like has not been seen in this Kingdom of a long time.]’

No more of Scotland. Let's see what's next. You declare your Resolution, to apply your self to the Defence of what you had for­merly said in behalf of King Charles; and proceed thus ( Page 26.) You say, That those Gracious Acts which I mention, were bought of him, and what then? What hath been more usual ever since Parliaments had a being in England? Pray look into the Statute-Book, and tell me what Gracious Favours can you find bestowed by the several Kings of this Realm, upon their People, that those People have not made their acknow­ledgments for them, by presenting their Soveraigns with great Sums of Money?

What ridiculous Stuff is this? Gracious Acts, Gracious Favours, &c. It hath been heretofore well observed, that some who call them­selves Church-men, have left their Station to become ignorant and unhappy States-men, who have made the Church, and the Tenets thereof, an Instrument of Bondage to the Subject. These Men tell us that Parliaments are not assembled to ease the Grievances of the Subject, but to fill the Coffers of the Prince: These Men teach Princes that all the Rights and Liberties of the Subject, and the maintenance of them, are Doals of Grace, and Gifts of meer Fa­vour, proceeding from the Prince, (and not the true Birth-right of the Subject, which they may truly challenge) which are to be continued or changed as Princes shall think fit. But pray let us see what these Gracious Acts, these Gracious Favours, were, which we [Page 43] bought, as in your Opinion we ought: They were Acts to declare the levying Money by way of forced Loan, Ship-Money, Coat and Conduct-Money, to be illegal, and against the undoubted Liberty of the Subject; to suppress the most accursed and tyrannical Courts called the Star-Chamber and High-Commission; to bring a Tray­tor to Justice; to secure us of the sitting of a Parliament once in three Years, when the antient Laws gave us a right to Annual Par­liaments, and when he had, to the high violation of those Laws, kept us without a Parliament for about eleven Years. These Acts, say you (their Majesties Malapert Chaplain at Aldgate) are such Gracious Favours, that if we will have them, we ought in all Con­science to buy them. But our English Parliaments have always been of another Mind; and Sir Robert Cotton tells us in the Life of King Henry the Third, That that King was told in full Parliament, that they would not pay his Debts, nor give him a Groat, postquam coepit esse dilapidator Regni, so long as he continued to destroy the Kingdom. And pray now turn to your Bible, and tell me what Text there, doth warrant this your wild Opinion. Where are we now?

But buy these Acts did they? Pray who had the disposal of the Money? how was it laid out? was it given to the King to do what he listed withal? No, you know a great part of it was bestowed on the Scots, for the good Service they did in rebelling against their King, and putting two King­doms into a Flame.

I did observe (in my Letter to you) that the King had out of the Subjects Purse in the first Year of the Parliament, Nov. 1640. one Million and an half of Money. I also remember that the King upon the Conclusion of the Treaty at Rippon, agreed to allow the Scots 850 l. per diem; and in answer to your question, I say, the King had the disposal of the Money; and as to what part of it the Scots received, the King paid it to them, for his having done against all Law and Reason what he listed. And I will shew you from the Demand of that Nation, who ought to have paid the Reckoning. They say, ‘We were constrained to take Arms for our Defe [...]ce; The War on our part was Defensive, and all Men do acknowledg, that in common Equity, the Defendant should not be suffered to perish in his just and necessary Defence; but that the Pursuer ought to bear the Charges of the Defendant. The prevalent Fa­ction of Prelates and Papists have moved every Stone against us, and used all sorts of Means, not only their Counsels, Subsidies and [Page 44] Forces, but their Church-Canons and Prayers, for our utter Ruine, which make them obnoxious to our just Accusations, and guilty of all the Losses and Wrongs which we have sustained. And there­fore we may now with the greater Reason and Confidence press our Demand, that the Parliament, the Kingdom, and the King himself may see us repaired in our Losses, at the Cost of that Faction, by whose Means we have sustained so much damage. We will never doubt but the Parliament in their Wisdom and Justice, will provide that a proportionable part of the Cost and Charges be born by the Delinquents. We wish the Justice of the Parlia­ment may be declared in making the Burden more sensible to the Prelates and Papists, than to others who never have wronged us, which will conduce much to the Honour of the King and Parlia­ment.’

Page 27. You take notice of my Charge; that the King demur­red to pass the Bills for taking away the S [...]ar-Chamber and High-Commission Courts, at the time when he passed the Poll-Bill, though presented together to him for the Royal Assent; and demand whe­ther he ought to have passed them, without a Why or a Wherefore?

No, by no means, you talk now like a Rational Creature: We are then to look for the Why's and Wherefore's. You acknowledg in your first Defence, that these Courts were Grievances to the Na­tion; and I said, and by many sad Instances proved, that they were Arbitrary and Tyrannical Courts, Forges of Misery, Oppression and Violence: There's then a Why, for you Doctor. The Parliament agreed with the King, to give him the Poll-Bill to remove these ac­cursed Courts of Oppression and Tyranny; There's also a Where­fore. Nevertheless, though the Parliament voted that he should pass all the three Bills, or none at all; he snatching up their Mo­ney, runs away, and delays to pass the Bills for abrogating the Star-Chamber and High-Commission Courts; and yet you affirmed, That HE READILY passed whats [...]ever Bills the Parliament offered to him for redress of the Nations Grievances: And whether he did or not, was the point in Controversy between you and me.

The next thing in course, is, ( Page 28.) the unhappy Earl of Strafford's Case, in relation whereunto you, most learned Doctor, whose Head is swell'd like any Bladder with Wind and Vapour, do [...]hus impeach the Lords and Commons; Do not you know they were so little satisfied with the Legality of their Proceedings, that they in the ve­ry Bill [for his Attainder] inserted a Clause, that this should not be [Page 45] made use of, as a Precedent for the time to come. This is well enough urged for a D. D. and is passable, the Man who utters it being considered: But I must tell you, Sir, what I have heard as wife a Man as you say about this Clause, of not bringing it into Precedent; that in such Cases it could not be otherwise, without leaving the same Power to the Judges in Westminster-Hall, which by the Statute of Edward the Third, is intrusted only with the Parliament; for that Statute, ennumerating all Treason cognizable by the Judges, reserves to the Parliament declarative Treason; as that which they might be safely intrusted with: though it could not be so in the Hands of any other Jurisdiction. And that this is the reason of that Clause, I am told no Lawyer, though never so much a Tory, will deny.

Allow me now, Sir, seeing we are talking of Strafford, to lay before you a pleasant Dialogue, which I find in Whitlock's Memoirs, pag. 41. between your three Martyrs, the King, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Earl of Strafford, together with the Lord Cot­tington, a Papist; and that upon the 5th of May 1640. the very Day upon which the Parliament was dissolved for their refusing to furnish Money to carry on the wicked War then resolved upon a­gainst Scotland; the Paper is entituled,

No Danger of a War with Scotland; if Offensive, not Defensive.

‘ K. Charles. How can we undertake Offensive War, if we have no Money?’

‘ E. of Strafford. Borrow of the City 100000 l. go on vigorously to levy Ship-Money; your Majesty having tryed the Affection of your People, you are absolved and loose from all Rule of Government, and to do what Power will admit: Your Majesty having tried all ways, and being refused, shall be acquitted before God and Man. And you have an Army in Ireland, that you may imploy to reduce this Kingdom to Obedience: For I am confident the Scots cannot hold out five Months.’

‘ Arch-bishop. You have tried all ways, and have always been de­nied; IT IS NOW LAWFVL TO TAKE IT BY FORCE.’

‘ Lord Cottington. Leagues abroad there may be made for the De­fence of the Kingdom; the Lower House are weary of the King and Church: [The Enemies of Popery, were even in that Day Common­wealths-men.]’ ‘All Ways shall be just to raise Money by, in this inevitable Necessity, and are to be used, being lawful.’

Arch-bishop. For an Offensive, not a Defensive War.

[Page 46] ‘ Strafford. The Town is full of Lords, put the Commission of Array on Foot; and if any of them stir, We will make 'em smart.’

Now you will readily agree that this is no Sham, in regard it comes from Mr. Whitlock, whom you quote four or five times. Besides, I assure you that it was given in Evidence upon Oath at the Earl of Strafford's Tryal; and which further evinces the Truth thereof, the King instantly required the Loan of the City of Lon­don, as here advised, and for refusal to comply therein, Ludlow tells you pag. 17. he imprisoned Sir Stephen Soame, Sir Nicholas Rainton, and other eminent Citizens. And were not these Halcion Days? were not these a rare Set of blessed Saints?

Pag. 32. You lash me for my Relation of the King's tampering with the Army, to [...]urb the Parliament and subdue them to his Will, and say, that I tell a Story of Piercy and Goring, &c. such a one as the Faction was wont to make use of upon all occasions to amuse and heat the People▪ but the best of it is, there are so many incredible Things (you say) in the Account, that I must tell you it hath not gained upon my belief at all; amongst the rest, you tell us that two of the Parties con­cerned, confess that all the French that were about the Town were to be mounted: but that which is the Nicker, is, that the Clergy would raise 1000 Horse to assist them, and yet this Conspiracy was under an Oath of Secrecy: And VERY LIKELY INDEED WHEN SO MANY CLERGY-MEN MVST BE ACQVAINTED WITH IT. Sure­ly, Sir, you have a mighty Opinion of your self.—

Surely, Sir, you have a very bad Opinion of your Brethren of the Cassock, or else a most weak way of arguing; and the more you say, the more you discover your Rashness and want of Judg­ment: The Clergy will not con you Thanks for representing them to the World as Blabs of their Tongues, to the pr [...]judice of the Cause of Mother-Church; as an Order of Men, who may not be trusted with a Secret, committed to them under a strict Oath. But this Story (you say) has not gained upon your Belief: who can help it? Our Saviour converted many of divers States and Conditions to the Faith, but we do not find that ever he converted a Priest: That the King did tamper with the Army to bring them against the Parlia­ment, as I relate it, appears most evidently in Whitlock's Memoirs, Pag. 44. and also by the several Informations, Examinations and Confessions upon Oath, (before a Committee of the House of Lords) of the Parties engaged in it, most of them Men of Quality, and highly in Favour with the King. You may read them at large in [Page 47] Husband's exact Collections (a Book in esteem with you) beginning at Pag. 220. I there find that the two Parties who confessed that the French about the Town were to be mounted, and that the Clergy were to find 1000 Horse, were Lieutenant Colonel Ballard and Captain Chudleigh. But in regard you have taken the Pains to relate what his Majesty's Declaration said to this Point; I shall, for the setting the matter in its true Light, transcribe a brief Account thereof from the Declaration of the Parliament, (which you most rudely call the Faction) as you will find it in Husband's Collections, Pag. 200. There, speaking of the intended Force upon the Par­liament, they declare themselves thus. ‘Certainly we have been more tender of his Majesty's Honour in this point, than he, who­soever he was, that did write his Majesty's Declaration; where he calls God to witness he never had any such Thought, or knew of any such Resolution of bringing up the Army; which truly will seem strange to those who shall read the Depositions of Mr. Goring, Information of Mr. Piercy, the Examination of Mr. Wilmot, Mr. Pollard and others; with the other Examination of Capt. Legg, Sir Iacob Ashley, and Sir Iohn Conyers: and consider the Condition and Nature of the Petition, which was sent unto Sir Iacob Ashley, under the Approbation of C. R. which his Ma­jesty doth now acknowledg to be his own Hand; and being full of Scandal to the Parliament, might have proved dangerous to the whole Kingdom, if the Army should have interposed betwixt the King and them as was desired.’

You tell me, pag. 43. That I have been so bold in my Assertion a­bout the Tumults, that I give the Lie to almost all the Historians that have writ the Transactions of those Times; and you refer me to the Votes of the Common Council, Dec. 31. 1641. Now, because you are short in the Relation of that Matter, I shall give you it as it is in Husband's Collection, pag. 30. The Lord Newburgh, upon Dec. 31. 1641, delivered a Message from his Majesty to the Common Council, to this effect; ‘There having been of late many tumul­tuary Assemblies about Whitehal and Westminster, the King recom­mended to their Care the preventing the like Tumults; and de­clared, That he was so well assured of the good Affections of the City, that he could in no wise understand it to have any share in the Fault of these Tumults, but that they proceed meerly from the mean and unruly People of the Suburbs, &c.’

[Page 48]Hereupon the Common Council returned Answer, ‘That they had no hand in these tumultuous Proceedings, and disavowed the same; and promised their best Endeavours to prevent and suppress, in time to come, all such tumultuous Assemblies, and all mutinous rebellious Persons: And they humbly desired, that all the De­linquents, and Causers of Tumults, being apprehended, may re­ceive condign Punishment.’ And,

‘They ordered every Member of the Common Council to make it known, That if any Person should neglect his Duty of Watch and Ward, &c. and not do his best Endeavour to suppress or prevent Tumults, he shall receive condign Punishment.’

Now, Sir, I appeal to all Mankind, whether this doth any way serve your Purpose? You refer to the Votes of the Common Council, and would thence argue, that the King was necessitated, by reason of the Tumults, to leave Whitehal. But the contrary is most evident, from the King's Message, and the Answer and Re­solutions of the City. The King declares, That he was well assured of the good Affections of the City, and that they had not any share in the Fault of the Tumults, but that they proceeded meer­ly from the mean and unruly People of the Suburbs. The Com­mon Council promises to prevent and suppress all Tumults, and command strict Watch and Ward to be kept to that purpose. And might not the King have been hereby perswaded, that he was in no danger from Tumults? Were not these Votes a full Security a­gainst Fear, from such Disorders for the future? No doubt but they were; but the King had other Designs than those of Peace in his Head. I told you of his Majesty's fortifying Whitehal, and that armed Men sallied out thence, reviling, menacing, and wounding many Citizens passing by with Petitions to the Parliament; and that when the Parliament and People complained of those Assaults, the King justified the Authors thereof; so that I must needs conclude (as I did before) that the Tumults were made at Whitehal by the King's own People; that all his fear of Tumults, was but a meer Pretence and Occasion taken, of his resolved Absence from the Parlia­ment, that he might turn his flashing at the Court-Gate, to slaughtering in the Field.

Pag. 44. you tell me, that another Calumny wherewith I reproach the Memory of King Charles, is his unwillingness to issue out his Procla­mations against the Irish Rebels; and when he did, commanded but 40 to be printed. You then say, The truth of it is, was this Story true, it [Page 49] ' [...]would be an inexcusable Fault in the King; but to Rufute me, you transcribe his Majesties own Vindication of himself, which saith, that he was in Scotland when the Rebellion broke forth, that he immediately re­commended the care of that business to the Parliament here; —. That if no Proclamation issued sooner (of which for the present he was not certain, but thinks that others were issued out before) it was because the Lords Iustices of Ireland, desired them no sooner, and when they did, the number they desired was but twenty.

Now in Truth Sir, this doth little mend the matter; 'tis most strange that the King should publish to all the World in Print, that he thinks other Proclamations were issued before; he might without doubt have easily been at a certainty in this point, for had there been any such thing, his Council Books, his Secretary of State, his Clerks of the Council, would have remembred him thereof; but to this day, no such thing hath appeared nor ever will: And 'tis a poor excuse to say, that the Proclamation was no sooner issued, because not sooner desired. We of this Age, do remember in what manner our Late Princes (Fathers 'nown Sons) have pursued the least suspition of Rebellion: You know that King Charles the Second, upon the pretence of a Plot, in the year 1683 was so far from deferring by the space of three Months, to issue a Proclamation against his own Son, the Duke of Monmouth; that we had it in three days, and I do think there were rather forty Thousand than forty Printed; for after we had it by it self, for the better spreading thereof, it was published in the Gazette; the like course you well know, was taken by the Late King Iames; First in the case of the Duke of Monmouth, and then in that of the Prince of Orange. But I will shew you what the Parliament said in this case of the Irish Rebels in a Declaration in 1642.

‘That when the Lords and Commons, had upon the first breaking out of the Irish Rebellion, immediately sent over 20000 l. and en­gaged themselves for the reduceing of the Rebels, yet the King af­ter his Return from Scotland, was not pleased to take notice of it, until after some in the House of Commons, had truly observed how forward his mischievous Counsellors were, to incite him against his Protestant Subjects of Scotland, and how slow to resent the proceedings of his Papist Traytors in Ireland.’

[Page 50] ‘That altho the Rebels had most impudently stiled themselves, The Queen's Army, and profest that the Cause of their Rising was, to maintain the King's prerogative, and the Queen's Religion, against the Puritan Par­liament of England; and that thereupon the Parliament advised his Majesty to wipe away this dangerous scandal by proclaiming them Rebels; which then would have weakned the Conspirators in the be­ginning, and have encouraged both the Parliament here, and good people there, the more vigorously to have opposed their proceedings; yet no Proclamation was set forth to that purpose, till almost three Months after the breaking out of this Rebellion, and then Command given, that but forty should be Printed, nor they published, till further directi­ons should be given by his Majesty.’

‘That the Parliament and Adventurers, had long since designed 5000 Foot and 500 Horse for the Relief of Munster, to be sent under the Command of the Lord Wharton; but no Commission for his Lordship could be obtained from his Majesty, whereby Lymerick was wholly lost.’

‘That when divers well affected persons had prepared twelve Ships and Six Pinnaces, with more than 1000 Land Forces, at their own charge, for the service of Ireland, and desired nothing but a Commission from his Majesty to enable them thereunto; That Com­mission, after twice sending to York for the same, was likewise de­nied.’

‘That altho the Lords Justices of Ireland, have three Months since earnestly desired to have two pieces of Battery sent over for that Service, yet such Commands are given to the Officers of the Tow­er, that none of his Majesties Ordnance must be sent to save his Maje­sties Kingdom.’

‘That the Kings Souldiers took away at one time, Six hundred Suits of Cloaths; and at another time Three hundred Suits; which were sent by the Parliament for the poor Souldiers in Ireland.’

‘That the Rebels did lately send a Petition to his Majesty, Institu­ [...]ing themselves his Majesties Catholick Subjects of Ireland, com­plaining of the Puritan Parliament of England, and desiring, that since his Majesty comes not thither, according to their expectation, that they may [...]me into England to his Majesty.’

[Page 51]You come (page 46) to Examine who were the first Beginners of the War, and say, The Parliament did really, and indeed first draw the Sword, and found the Trumpet to Battle—Whereas the King set up his Standard at Nottingham in August, did not the Lords and Com­mons in June before, make an Order for bringing in of Mony, or Plate, to maintain Horses, Horse-men and Arms?

And did not the King long before, in the beginning of the year 1642. when all things were in perfect Peace, send over the Crown Iewels, to buy Arms and Ammunition in Holland? did not he at that time, write to the King of Denmark, complaining of the Parliament, and asking Supplies from him, ad propulsandos Hostes, to subdue h [...]s Ene­mies? You were told of these things before, but you will not touch them, I shall not therefore trifle away more time with you, upon this point of the first beginning of the War; only I will mind you that the King upon the 4 th. of July 1642. Rendezvoused an Army at Bever­ly in York-shire, tho the Parliament did not Vote the Raising of an Army till the 12th. And which is more, I will give you the Name of the first Martyr who fell in that War in defence of the Laws and Liber­ties of his Country; 'twas one Percival of Kirkman Shalme in Lanca­shire; he was Murdered the 15th. of Iuly 1642. near Manchester, by the Kings Forces, under the Command of the Lord Strange, Son to the Earl of Derby; for which that Lord was impeached in Parliament; you may see a particular Account of this, in May's History of the War, pa. 109. in Husbands Collections 611. and in Rushworth's Col­lections 3d. Part. Vol. 1st. pa. 680.

Well, I see to my Comfort that we shall soon draw to a Conclu­sion; you say p. 49. I have Answered your Grand Impeachments and Ac­cusations of this great and Excellent Prince: As for the other things, with which you stuft your Libell, I say, alas Sr. you must not think to catch some Birds, (and there are thanks be to God, great numbers of them in the King­dom) with such Chaffe as this.

There are indeed in England a great many kinds of Birds and of Beasts also, and a great many of every kind, and before we part we will a little recreate our selves with some of them: you must not think to catch such Birds with Chaffe: A witty Conceit upon my word; and had your dull fancy chopt upon this other flight, neither must Chicken think to feed Capons, it would have made you as proud as a Peacock, [Page 52] and you would have clapt your Wings & crow'd like any fighting Cock, at the wit of the Expression; ‘But (begging pardon of your Gravity) I will tell you that it hath been observed, that of all Creatures in the Creation, the Owle of Birds, and the Ass of Beasts are the most grave, and Sr. William Temple in his Memoires of what past in Christendom from 1672, to 1679, page 57, saith, that Old Prince Maurice of Nassau when he was about 76 years of Age (having ever passed for an honest and pious man) informed him, that when he was Gover­nor of Brafil, he heard of a Parrot, that spoke, and asked, and answered common questions like a reasonable Creature, and tho he believed nothing of it, his curiosity lead him to send for it; That when it came first into the Roome where the Prince was, with a great many Dutch men about him, it said presently, What a Company of White Men are here? they asked it, what he thought that Man was? pointing to the Prince, it answered, Some General or other; the Prince asked it, whence came you? it answered, from Marinnan; the Prince, to whom do you belong? the Parrot, to a Portugez; Prince, what do you do heere? Parrot, I look after the Chickens; the Prince laughed and said, you, look after the Chickens? the Parrot answered, yes I, and I know well enough how to do it, and made the Chuck four or five times, that People use to make to Chickens when they call them.’

Now one would hope that this pritty Bird which discoursed so ratio­nally, might put a braying Beast to silence, if any thing but pulling out the Asses. Tongue could do it: you see Doctor, that this Under­standing Parrot could distinguish White from Black, knew its own Capa­city, and undertook no other Task than it could well perform, cry­ing Chuck, Chuck, Chuck, to the Chickens very pertinently, which is more than you do to your Birds; that this ingenious fair dealing Parrot, when it talked with the Prince (not thinking it would pass for an answer to have told him, you must not think to catch such Birds as me with Chaffe) came close to the point, and gave direct and sensible Answers to plain and honest Questions, whereas you prevaricate in a most shameful manner, and prate, as tho you were only fit for the Conversation of a Flock of Magpies, Iackdaws, Wood-cocks, Owles, and Buz [...]ods. Tis evident that your itch of Vain glory, and unpa­ralleld Confidence, makes you affirm that you have answered me, and you would be thought to have said all that can be said, when you hard­ly say any thing, but bl [...]e what you know nothing of; you have heap'd up [...] many [...], abundance of Rubbish and Trifles, [Page 55] but treated of nothing with Solidity and Judgment, nor so much as touched the Tenth part of the matters charged in my Letter, but in your natural levity, skipping them over, would perswade the Birds of your Feather, (I gave you their names but now) that as Chaffe, you make them to vanish with a puff of your mouth: But indeed, when I consider how miserable a Wretch of an Answerer you do here render your self, and yet how you persist still in your huffing and strutting, and do more and more revile and rail, I cannot (especially seeing it relates to one of your own Birds) but present you with another piece of Mr. Marvel's profane Wit, as you will call it; ‘I have seen (saith he) with some pleasure, the Hawking at the Magpye; the poor Bird un­derstands very well the terrible pounces of that Vulture, but there­fore she chatters amain most rufully, and spreads and cocks her tail, so that one that first saw and heard the sport, would think that she insulted over the Hawk in that Chatter, and huffed her Train in token of Courage and Victory; when, alas! tis all from her fear, and another way of crying the Hawke mercy; and to the end that the Hawke finding nothing but Tail and Feather to strike at, she may so perhaps shelter her Body.’ I have been too long trifling at this Boyes Play of Bird-catching; I return now to a more manly Re­creation, and having already dispatched the Wild Bear, the [...] Tygre, dull Ass, I pass by the Monkey, the Ape, the Baboon, and that great Herd of the many other despicable Animals, and will a little hunt the barking Woolf.

Quoth you Doctor, (page 5 [...]) I am ready to take my leave of you, but before we part, I must needs reckon with you upon the [...] of a Reflection you have made upon myself, you are pleased to say, you understand I was a Presbyterian Minister in Essex, which words have almost forced me to a smile.

Now, if I were mistaken as to your being a Presbyterian Minister in Essex, you are not to make your self too merry with it, nor may you deny your having changed your Opinion from what it formerly was; for you know there are many of your Contemporaries in the University of Cambridge, who knew you to be a Presbyterian there and I could name you an honest Gentleman now in being, who you know hath reason to be acquainted with all the steps you have taken from your youth and by saith that you left the Univesity upon a [...] of the Ceremonies, and pers [...]sed in that dislike, [...] [Page 56] Preferment to be got but by Conformity; so that I may with truth say, you are one of Dr. Wild's Changlings, and that he gave us your exact Marks, when he thus described you in his Poem called, The Recantation of a Penitent Proteus, or the Changling.

The Doctor saith P. 51. of 2 d Defence, I tooke time to Con­sider the Nature and Terms of Conformity, which by my former Education I was wholly a Stranger to.
My Conscience first, like Balaam's Ass was shy,
Boggl'd and Winc'd, which when I did espy,
I cudgel'd her and spur'd her on each side,
Untill the Jade her Paces all could ride.
When first I mounted on her tender Back,
She would not leave the Protestant Dull Rack,
Till in her Mouth the Cov'nant Bit I got,
And made her learn the Presbyterian Trot.
'Twas an hard Trot, and fretted her (alas)
The Independent Amble easier was;
I taught her that, and out of that to fall
To the [...] of Prelatical,
Now with a Snaffle, or a twined Thread,
To any Government she'l turn her head:
I have so broke her, She will never slaet,
And that's the meaning of my Broken heart.
Cambridge I left with grief, and great disgrace,
To seek my Fortune in some other place,
And that I might the better save my stake,
I took an Order, and did Orders take
Amongst Conformists I my self did list,
A Son o'th Church as good as ever pist;
[Page 57]But tho I bow'd, and cring'd, and crost and all,
I only got a
The Vicaridge of Westhom in Essex
Vicaridge very small.
Oh! I am almost mad, 'twould make one so,
To see which way Preferment's-game doth go,
I ever thought I had her in the Wind,
And yet I'm cast above three years behind.
Three times already I have turn'd my Coat,
Three times already I have chang'd my Note;
I'le make it Four, and four and Twenty more,
And turn the Compass round e're I'le give o're.
Ambition, my great Goddess and my Muse,
Inspire thy Prophets all such Arts to use,
As may exalt; betwixt this and my Grave,
A Mitre, or a Halter I must have.
Tell me Ambition! prithee tell me why,
So many Dunces, Doctors, and not I?
A Scarlet Gown I must and will obtain.
I cannot else Commence a Priest in Grain.

If this Poets Ecclesiastical Pencil has not drawn you to the Life, you shall see that Lay Prose comes pritty nea [...] you, Mr. Marvel (whom I choose always to ply you with, above all other Authors) describes you thus,

‘He was sent to Cambridge to be bred up to the Ministry; There in a short time, he entered himself into the Company of some young Students, who were used to Fast and Pray weekly together; he pick'd Acquaintance with the Brotherhood, and train'd himself up in attending upon their Sermons and Prayers, till he had gained such Proficience, that he too, began to Exercise in the Meetings, and by Preaching Mr. Baxter's Sermons, he got the Reputation of one of the Preciousest young Men in the Vniversity: But when thus after se­ [...]ral [Page 58] years Approbation, he was even ready to have taken the Charge, not of an Admiring Drove, or Herd, as he now calls them, but of a F [...]ock upon him; by great misfortune to him, the King came in, nevertheless he broke not off yet from his former habitudes; he persisted, as far as in him was (that is by Praying, Caballing, and [...]) to obstruct the Restoring! of the Episcopal Government, Revenues and Authority; insomuch that being discountenanced, he went away from the University without his Degree, scrupling forsooth, the Subscription then required: From thence he came to London, where he spent a considerable time in creeping into all Cor­ners and Companies, horoscoping up and down concerning the du­ration of the Government, not considering any thing as best, but as most lasting and profitable; and after having many times cast a Fi­gure, he at last satisfyed himself, that the Episcopal Government would endure as long as he lived; and from thence forward cast a­bout how to be admitted into the Church of England, and find the High-way to her Preferments; In order to this, he daily inlarged not only his Conversation, but his Conscience, and was made free of some of the Town-Vices; imagining, like Muleasses King of Tu [...]s, that by hiding himself among the Onions, he should escape being traced by his perfumes: Ignorant and mistaken Man! that thought it necessary to part with any Vertue to get a Living; or that the Church of England did not require and encourage more sobriety than he could ever be guilty of: But neither was this yet in his opi­nion sufficient, and therefore he resolved to try a shorter Path, which some few men have trode not unsuccessfully; that is, to Print a Book; if that would not do, a Second, if not that, a Third, and so forward, to give Experience of a keen stile, and a ductile Judgment: After this, he was ready to leap over the Moone; No scruple of Consci­ence could stand in his way, and no Preferment seemed too high for his Ambition.’

In the next place D [...]ctor, you spit your Venome, and that even a­gainst their Majesties, page 51, you say, Since the late Persecution in Scotland by that Party of Men [the Presbyterians] it is a greater scandal to be called a Presbyterian than it was before.

I here observe, with what Reverence and Duty you speak of your Superiours and their Actions, when they are not so happy as to please you; this last thing is uttered most scandalously, and with a leering re­flection [Page 59] upon the Government; and tis a dangerous thing I perceive for their Majesties to lose your favour. When you talke page 15. of the Accursed Court of Star-Chamber, you do it with great Modesty and Manners saying, If it be lawful for a private Person as I am, to pass a Iudgment upon the publick Actions of a then Legal Court; But here the King and Queen seeming to be fallen into disgrace with you, you assume the impudence to call their establishing Presbytery by Act of Parliament; A Persecution; So that what the Scots said in the year 1640, they may well repeat at this day; All means (said they) are used to disgrace this Kirk, Books, Pasquils, honouring of our Cursed Bishops, advancing of our deposed Ministers, &c.

'Twas it should seem scandalous in some measure, to be a persecuted Presbyterian, in the two By-past Reigns; but (in your Opinion Do­ctor,) 'tis so in a much higher degree, to be a Presbyterian, now that Presbytery has the Royal Favour and is settled by Act of Parlia­ment, and yet you Sr, did heretofore esteem it no longer scandalous to be of the Church of England, than till she obtain'd a legal Establish­ment, and I can tell you the exact day when it became a scandal to you to be called a Presbyterian; 'twas Bartholomew day 1662. the day when the Act of Vniformity took place, and would a man take the liberty which you do, I should say when the Bishops Persecution was revived in England.

Well, 'Tis a Scandal to be a Presbyterian, and it will puzzle a man to find out what you are, for you seem to esteem it a Persecu­tion, that you may not compell all men to be of the Church of England, and yet you say p. 52. It is true Sr. I have always been kind to Dissen­ters, and when the great Storm [in plain English Persecution] Eight and Nine years ago, fell upon, the Dissenters, I preserved my own Parish from Charge and Trouble, to the great endangering of my self. Alas! good Man, did you so, and yet do they abuse you? pray was all this kind­ness for naught? did not you interlope with Dr. Pinf [...]? I have been told that you ought to have said that what you did in that day, was to the great enriching of your self, and that you had your Why's and your Wherefore's for your kindness to the Dissenters; that you received a constant Contribution from such of them as you preserved from Doctors Commons; and I know it may be made out, that at your own entreaty, a Collection was made amongst them, by Mr. Ogden and Mr. H [...]bster, to raise the Money for to defray your Charges of Commencing Doctor; [Page 60] and is it not an Act of foolish Prodigality in you, to throw off such generous Benefactors as these?

Having thus Examined your Second Defence, I shall now Sir recount the Heads of some things which you asserted in your First, and which being answered by me, you pass over in silence.

You affirmed page 7th. of your first Defence, that the Parliament in their Remonstrance Dec. 1641. made Reflections upon the King's for­mer Government, unmanner's and false; and that the King answered it and vindicated himself from those horrid aspersions, wherewith they Loaded him: Now, pa. 35. I denied the falsehood thereof, and said, that the King only answer'd it, in saying, We shall in few words pass over that part of the Narrative wherein the misfortunes of this Kingdom, from our first entring to the Crown, to the beginning of this Parliament, are remembred in so sen­sible expressions.

You asserted pa 12. that the King could by good Evidence prove, the Lord Mandevile, Mr. Holles, Sir Arthur Hasterig, Mr. Hambden, Mr. Pym and Mr. Strode, Members of the House of Commons Guilty of Treason; Page 37, &c. I gave you the full History of that matter, and shew'd that the King retracted that rash accusation, which I see is more than you will do, tho good manners one would think should oblige you thereto, and to beg pardon especially of the right Honourable, the present Earl of Manchester, as he is a Peer of the Realm; and of the right Honourable and most eminently deserving Patriot Mr. Hambden, as he is Chancellour of the their Majesties Exchequer and one of their most Honourable Privy-Council, for such a horrid slander brought upon their highly deserving Families; but you find it a grie­vous thing to forgo a falsehood that is serviceable to your great un­dertaking.

You affirm pa. 26. first defence, that the Scots sold the King to the English Parliament. I denied it pa. 67. and shew'd that the Scots might, with the consent of the Parliament, have taken him home to his Native Country; but that they refused it, fearing he might raise new Commotions there, and you have not thought fit to contradict me in this nei­ther.

[Page 61]You, amongst other gracious concessions of the King's, wherein you glory, speak, pa. 11. 1st. Defence; of his consenting to a Treaty at Vx­bridge. I (page 61) mentioned many things relating to that Treaty; and to shew the King's insincerity in his pretensions of Peace, gave a Relation how that at the very instant of that Treaty, he used all imagi­nable means to bring not only 10000 Lorrainers, but the Irish Cut-Throats against the Parliament; That he declared himself resolved to adhere not only to the Bishops, but also to the Papists, &c. These are Reproaches which you ought to wipe off, if you would defend this King to any purpose, but you touch them not.

View now I beseech you, the Heads of many of the Articles of mis­government which I recounted, and which you have overlookt, only saying in relation to them, that some Birds are not to be catcht with such Chasse, and I have done.

‘I. King Charles I. favoured Popery; by his Marriage Articles he agreed that Papists should not be molested; he put above a hun­dred Popish Lords and Gentlemen into great Trusts.’

‘II. His Bishops were unsound in their principles; in particular Land allowed Books which favoured Popery, but refused to License Books written against it. His Chaplains endeavoured to reconcile England to Rome, and got preferment by it.’

‘III. He Lent Ships to the French King to destroy the Protestants of Rochel, which as the French boasted mowed the Hereticks down like Grass.’

‘IV. He Raised an Army, and required the Country to furnish Coat and Conduct Mony; and Levied Mony by way of Loane, and the Re­fusers of the meaner Rank (Men of Quality being imprisoned) were compelled to go for Souldiers, or to serve at Sea.’

‘V. He Suspended and Confined the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury (not Land, but Dr. Abbot) because he refused to make that good by Di­vinity, which the King had done against the Laws. He imprisoned Dr. Williams Bishop of Lincoln, for speaking against the Loane and not prosecuting Puritans.’

[Page 62] ‘VI. He turned out the Lord Chief Iustice Crew for opposing the Loane.’

‘VII. He remitted 30000l. to Holland for the Levying Horse and Men there, to serve his Arbitrary purposes.’

‘VIII. He violated the Petition of Right, so soon as it was passed into a Law.’

‘IX. He confined the Earl of Bristol near two years, without any Accusation; and he Imprisoned the Earl of Arundel in the time of Parliament, without expressing any Cause of his Commitment.’

‘X. He shelter'd the Duke of Buckingham when he was Prosecuted in Parliament, as the Patron of a Popish Faction; and he Dissol­ved Parliaments when they were intent upon the Duke's Prosecu­tion, and charged him in effect with the Murder of King Iames; In Relation whereunto, Sir Edward Peyton who was a Member of Parli­ament in that time, doth thus express himself in a Treatise called the Divine Catastrophe; The Duke of Buckingham rewarded King Iames by Poyson, as appeared plainly in Parliament by the Evidence of divers Physitians, especially Dr. Ramsey; and King Charles, to save the Duke, dissolved the Parliament when he was Impeached for it, and never after had the Truth Tryed, to clear himself from Con­federacy, or the Duke from so heinous a scandal.’

‘XI. He imprisoned Members of Parliament in the time of Parlia­ment, for refusing to Answer out of the Parliament, what was said and done there, &c.’

‘XII. He threatned the House of Commons, that if they did not give him Supplies, he would betake himself to New Counsels; he assert­ed, that Parliaments were altogether in his Power, and therefore as they humour'd him, were to continue or not to be.’

You may here see Sir, to your shame (had you any) what a small advance you have made, in the defence of that Cause which you so briskly engaged in; and how much of your Work you have devolved upon your better Pens. Before I take my leave of you, I shall ob­serve [Page 63] how little you, the mighty defender of Princes, are to be relyed upon; for tho you tell their Majesties in the Dedication of your first Defence, that you wrote it to secure them from Danger; and the most Reverend, Right Reverend &c. had your word for it, in your Dedi­cation of this Second Pamphlet, that you had nothing more in your aim, in putting it out, than to preserve the present Government in Church and State; (A most commendable and highly meriting Undertaking upon my word) yet, (which is a melancholy consideration) you their Ma­jesties great Preserver, who so bravely engaged never to drop the Cause as long as you could hold a Pen; do now flinch and give ground, and as vanquished by a grey-headed Man with one foot in the Grave (as you Confess me to be) you say page 13. that you will not give your self the trouble of Answering me [a decrepit, crazy Adversary] but will spare your self the labour because you understand it is recommended to a better hand. It is astonishingly strange that you, this vaunting Goliah, who came out strutting in a gigantick garb of Pace and Language, and with a terrible look, to Act a piece of Ecclesiastical Knight Errantry: That you, who in an unpresidented manner, huff'd and threatned the World with that vast magazine of stuff, which you had amass'd to annoy the Man that should be found in your way; that you, whom nothing must atone, but a pray Master forgive me and I'le do so no more; That such a Doctor such a Champion as you, should on the sudden be crying out for the aid of better Hands, of better Pens than your own; and that in a quarrel of your own picking; upon the success whereof you vainly conceit the Being and Well-being of their Majesties and of every thing that is worth the preserving depends. But I see you Inferiour Clergy­men do oft stand in need of Guides, and let who will come to your assistance, tho I am decrepit, this good old Cause I rest assured, will abide firm and unshaken, against all the attempts of such Assailants as you can list and draw up against it: I mean the true Government of old England, by King, Lords, and Commons.

No more at present (dear Doctor) only I acquaint you at parting, that I am sensible I have not paid you the Tithe of what I owe you, but it lies ready for you, when you shall draw a Bill upon

Your Debtor, Edmund Ludlow.
Geneva, May 29. 1692.
[Page]
ALLatres licet usque nos & usque,
Et gannitibus improbis lacessas;
Ignotus pereas Miser, Necesse est.
Non deerunt tamen hac in Urbe forsan
Unus, vel duo, tresve, quatuorve,
Pellem rodere qui velint Caninam;
Nos hac a scabie tenemus ungues.
Rail on, poor feeble Scribler, speak of me,
In as base Terms as the World speaks of thee;
Sit swelling in thy Hole like a vex'd Toad,
And full of Malice spit thy spleen abroad;
Thou canst blast no man's Fame with thy ill word,
Thy Pen is just as harmless as thy Sword.
FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.