WHen the Church of England was established under Queen Elizabeth, there was no con­siderable Separation from it by Papists or Fanaticks, until some of the new Society of Jesus invented a method to divide and destroy the Church of Christ a­mong us. Which they endeavoured, first, by opposing those who were Parish-Priests in the days of Queen Mary, but allowed of our Church-Communion; and having prevaile a­gainst them, they rested not there, but en­deavoured by new Artifices to draw off some zealous Protestants into separate Congregations, under a pretence of greater purity of Ordi­nances [Page 28]and Worship than were practised in our Church. And to this end, they imploy some subtil and Eloquent men, in the disguise of zealous Protestant-Ministers, to exercise their gifts of Extemporary prayer, which they reported to be by an extraordinary assistance and gift of the Spirit. Their preaching also was designed to bring the Order of Bishops into contempt, to which they were known enemies; to lay aside the Liturgie, as a stinting of their gifts of the Spirit; and run down those few Ceremonies that were retained, that we might not have the face of a Church, or any decency among us. They opposed al­so the Supremacy of the Queen over things and persons in Religious Administrations; which they contended to belong to Ministers of their rank and order.

And although some of the Popish Priests at that time and afterward, (such as Wid­drington, Preston, Watson, and the Authors of the Jesuites Catechisme) opposed them in these things, as tending to provoke her Majesty to greater severity against them, and wrote ve­ry learnedly against those Jesuits, discovering their designs to be not only against the Pro­testants, but the more moderate Papists; yet were there some troublesome Ministers, (Good­man, Gilby, Whittingham, &c.) and others, that had been at Geneva and other Presbyte­rian [Page 29]Towns, and submitted to that Discipline, which took all those hints from the Jesuits, and made such improvements, that the Disci­ples in a short time exceeded their Masters.

Doctor Cox, Horne, and others, who ad­hered to the Church of England, and had known their turbulent behaviour at Geneva, Frankfort, and other places, opposed their ad­mission to the publick Ministry; and so they and the Jesuits creep first into houses, and lead captive silly women, and beguile the hearts of simple men; and afterward gather distinct and separate Congregations, under pretence of pu­rer Worship, and a more holy Discipline. Of which practice, we have these undeniable in­stances.

In the Ninth year of Queen Elizabeth, one Faithful Commin, of the Order of St. Do­minick, got the reputation of a zealous Prote­stant Minister, by railing against Pius Quin­tus the Pope, and defaming the Liturgie, as being the Mass in English; in opposition to which, the first set up the use of Extempore prayers, as a gift of the Spirit, which ought not to be stinted by Forms and Liturgies: but one Mr. Clerkson, Chaplain to the Archbi­shop, discovered him to be a Popish Priest; which was evidently proved before the Queen and Archbishop. So that he being dis­missed upon Bail to appear at a certain day, [Page 30]and it hapning that on that day the Spanish Ambassador having publick Audience of the Queen, he could not be admitted, though he attended with his Bail; he boasted to his fol­lowers, that the Queen and Council had dis­missed him. But finding how uneasie it would be for him in England, he told his Pro­selytes, he was resolved to go beyond the Seas, to preach the Gospel there: and having ac­quainted his Disciples how poor he was, and commended to them the Cause of God, he got 130 l. which was collected among the Bro­therhood, besides what his compassionate Sisters bestowed on him: and there was no farther news of this godly man, until one John Baker, Master of a Ship, gave this account of him to the Queen, That he had seen this Faithful Commin in the Low-Countries, and that one Martin van Duval, a Merchant of :Amsterdam, told him that Commin had been lately at Rome, and there imprisoned by the Pope; but upon his Letter to the Pope, he was sent for the next day, and being accused for revi­ling the Pope, and railing against his Church among the Hereticks of England, he confes­sed that his lips had uttered what his heart ne­ver thought, and pleaded what considerable service he had done the Pope, by preaching a­gainst set Forms of prayer, and calling the English prayer, English Mass, perswading the [Page 31]people to pray Spiritually and Extempore: by which means the Church of England was become as odious to them to whom he preached, as the Mass was to the Church of England; which would prove a stumbling-block to that Church, while it was a Church. Upon which the Pope commended him, and dismissed him with a gratuity of 2000 Du­cats for his good service.

The next Instance is of one Thomas Heath a Jesuite, in the Eleventh year of Queen Eli­zabeth, whose Brother Nic. Heath had been Bishop of Rochester in H. 8. days. He comes to the Dean of Rochester, desiring him to present him to the Bishop for some Prefer­ment. In order to which, he pretending himself to be a poor Minister, the Dean or­ders him to preach in the Cathedral; which he did on that Text, Acts 12.6. Peter there­fore was kept in prison, but prayers were made without ceasing in the Church to God for him; on which he told the people, that it was not those of the Church of England, but Spiritu­al prayers, that brought Peter out of prison: and where (said he) have we Scripture for any set form in the Church? But it so hapned, that drawing out his Handkerchief in the Pulpit, he let fall a Letter, which the Sexton found, and brought to the Dean; which was as fol­lows:

This Letter was directed under the name of Thomas Finne; and Malt was known to be an English Jesuite at Madrid in Spain; and Hallingham, Coleman, and Benson, with one Button, and some others that went un­der the notion of zealous Preachers, are no­ted by our Historians as active instruments of Separation among us; whom the Letter calls German Hereticks, (i. e.) Lutherans: which Dr. Stillingfleet notes out of Mr. Camb­den, A. D. 1568. agreeing with the date of this Letter; who says, that while Harding, Sanders, and others, attacked our Church on one side, Coleman, Button, Hillingham, Ben­son, and others, were busie on the other; who under a pretence of purer Reformation, oppo­sed the Discipline, Liturgie, and Calling of our Bishops, as approaching too near to the Church of Rome. And these he notes to be the beginners of those Controversies, which after broke out with so great violence. Nec dum finitus Orestes.

So that while the Pope held the hot-Iron of Dissention on the Anvil, the open Jesuite and the Masquerade Presbyter on each side, beat with their Sledges to form the Project after his mind.

But upon the receipt of the Letter, the Dean carried it to Edmond Gest then Bishop of Rochester, who instantly caused the said [Page 34] Heath to be apprehended and examined; and urging against him what he had said in his Sermon against the Liturgie, and for Spiritu­al Prayers, he confessed that he was not whol­ly of the Episcopal party of England, but that he had laboured to refine the Protestants, and to take off all Smacks of Ceremonies, that in the least do tend to the Romish Faith. He confessed also, that he knew the said Sam. Malt, but objected, that the Letter was not directed to him, but to one Thomas Finne; which (as the Bishop observed) was usual a­mong the Jesuites. And to put the matter out of controversie, the Bishop sent to Heaths Lodgings, where in one of his Boots were found his Beads, and a License from the Fra­ternity of the Jesuits, and a Bull dated the first of Pius Quintus, to preach what Do­ctrine that Society pleased, for dividing of Protestants, particularly naming the English as Hereticks. In his Trunk were also seve­ral Books for denying Baptism to Infants, and containing several blasphemies.

Heath being Convicted of these things in open Court, the Bishop offered him, that if he would discover for what causes he ran in­to those Schisms, and reform his course of life, he and the whole Court would intercede for his pardon, and provide for his future maintenance. To which he answered, My [Page 35]Lord, I know not what I might have done had I not been so publickly examined; but seeing my vocation is so publickly known, I shall not ac­knowledge my self to be guilty of any Misde­meanour: for I have fought a good fight for Christ, whose cause I have taken in hand. This Experiment I tryed among my Country-men, that the world may see, that all those who term themselves Protestants are not of the Church of England, though they speak against Rome.

The Bishop hearing him speak so obstinately, said, Behold, my Brethren a Jesuits Confession, how he hath declared he had set up a certain Form of Religion, purposely to withdraw you from the Church of England: but woe be to those deluders, and to those that will be deluded by them: we have a good Law, and the light of the Holy Gospel now flourishing among us, which hath for many years past been absconded: there­fore, my Brethren, consider the condition of your Souls; if you start aside once from your Princi­ples, having the right way so plainly set be­fore you, you will not only run into Popish sla­very again, but be in peril of a total confusion of Soul and body. And if Rome get once her foot on these dominions again, not only your selves and your Children, but your Princes and No­bles shall become slaves to her Idolatry.

Then was he remanded to prison, and for three days brought to the Market-place [Page 36]at Rochester, where he stood by the High-cross with a paper before his breast, in which was written his Crimes: then he was Pillo­red; and on the last day his Ears cut off, his Nose slit, and his Forehead branded with the Letter R, and was condemned to endure per­petual imprisonment. But it lasted not long; for a few Months after he dyed suddenly, not without the suspition of having poysoned himself.

How many other Romish Emissaries did act after this manner, is not known; but certain it is, that they had prevailed with too many to walk in their steps, and to carry on the work in the same method that they had be­gun, to make a Separation among us: for the Authors of the Admonition, in the 14 of Queen Elizabeth, declared they would have neither Papists nor others constrained to Com­municate: which although (as A.B. Whitgift saith) they intended as a plea for their own Separation from the Church, yet (saith he) the Papists could not have met with better Pro­ctors: and elsewhere he tells them, that they did the Pope very good service; and that he would not miss them for any thing: for what is his desire, but to have the Church of England, which he hath accused, utterly de­faced and discredited, by any means over­thrown, if not by Forreign Enemies, yet by [Page 37] domestical Dissentions? and what fitter and apter instruments could he have had for that purpose, than you, who under pretence of zeal, overthrow that which other men have buil­ded; under colour of purity seeking to bring in deformity; and under the cloak of equa­lity and humility, would usurp as great tyran­ny and lofty Lordliness over your Parishes, as ever the Pope did over the whole Church? And in another place, he saith, they were made the Engines of the Popish Conclave, where­by they intended to overthrow this Church by our own folly, which they cannot compass by all their policy. And Archbishop Grindal in a Letter of his, called Fair warning, part the second, expressed his great fear of two things, Atheism and Popery, and both arising out of our needless Divisions and Dissentions, fo­mented by Satan the enemy of Mankind, and the Pope the enemy of Christendome. By these differences the enemies of our Religion gain this, that nothing can be established by Law in the Protestant Religion, whose every part is not opposed by one or other of our own Professors. So that things continuing loose and confused, the Papists have their oportu­nity to urge their Way, which is attended with Order and Government, and our Religion continuing thus distracted and divided, some vile wretches lay hold of the Arguments on [Page 38] one side, to confute the other, and so hope at last to destroy all.

In these practices our Dissenters have for many years followed the directions of the Jesuite Contzen, for inducing Popery into a Country; as 1. That it be done under a pre­tence of ease to tender Consciences. 2. That when liberty is granted, then the parties be for­bid to contend with each other. 3. That those who suspect the design, and preach against it, be traduced as men that preach very unseasonable Doctrine; that they are proud, and self-opinia­tors, and enemies to peace and union. 4. That the Prince make as much use of the divisions of his enemies, as of the agreement of his friends. All which Rules have been obser­ved by the Enemies of our Church, as well Dissenters as Romish Recusants.

In the year 1588. the King of Spain, be­ing thereto incouraged by an information of the great divisions and animosities among us, by reason whereof he expected either a grea­ter Party to joyn with him, or the less oppo­sition, sent his Invincible Armado upon our Coasts; at which time, the Protestant Dissenters, instead of Arming in defence of the Queen and themselves, did with greater importunity and confidence assault her with Pe­tions and Libels; taking advantage of the times, as if they were more ready to assist [Page 39]the Spaniards than her Majesty, in case their unreasonable requests were not granted. Of which see Mr. Cambden in his Annals, Anno 1588.

Notwithstanding all the service that Bi­shop Jewel had done against the Papists, upon his preaching a Sermon at St. Pauls Cross in defence of the Orders of this Church, and obe­dience to them; he was so ungratefully and spitefully used by the then Dissenters, that for his own vindication, he made a solemn Pro­testation on his death-bed, that what he then said, was neither to please some, nor to displease others, but to promote peace and unity among Brethren. Of which Archbishop Whitgift in his Defence, p. 423. saith: It is the manner, except you please their humour in all things. though you otherwise deserve never so well, all is nothing with them, but they will deprave you, rail on you, back-bite you, invent lies of you, and spread false rumors; as though you were the vilest persons on earth. This humour Mr. Baxter observes in those that came from Geneva, &c. No sooner were they called home. saith he, ( p. 150. of his Gildas) but some of them were so intemperate, impatient, and un­peaceable, that some turned to flat Separation, and flew in the faces of the Prelates with revi­lings, ( Quere, Whether Mr. B. doth not do what he condemned in them) and some of [Page 40]them (saith he) fled to New-England, and o­ther Countries in America. Thither went Hooker, Davenport, Shephard, Allen, Cobber Noyes, Parker, &c. p. 157. And some were so hot at home, that they were put to death; a [...] Hacket, Coppinger, &c. who fell to Blasphe­my and Treason. And that Ainsworth, Ro­binson, and Johnson fled beyond Sea, and there gathered Churches, and broke by divisions a­mong themselves.

The Queen also is reported by these Secta­ries, to be a greater friend to the Papists than to her Protestant Subjects, though her design was only to keep up the Church in some decency and splendour, the better to re­tain the Papists in due obedience. For by her Instructions to Secretary Walsingham, Aug. 11. 1570. she affirms, That the heads of the Romish party did ordinarily resort from the be­ginning of her Reign to Divine Service in the Church, without shew of mis-liking. And Sir Ed. Cook in his Charge at Norwich 1605. says, they did so during the ten first years of her Reign: and it is acknowledged by some late Dissenters, p. 64. of their Reply to Doctor Stillingfleet, That the great propension in the Queen to gain the Popish party to her Commu­nion by the alterations made in the Liturgie, making the Sacramental bread round like the wafers, placing the Table where the Altar stood, [Page 41]&c. was attended with the Conformity of many who were cordially addicted to the Church of Rome. So that the Papists seemed to have a better opinion of the Reformation, than some Protestants then or now have; and though the present Church hath laid aside ma­ny of those things, which were then enjoy­ned and practised, retaining only three Ce­remonies for decency, yet the implacable ma­lice of their Successors, still reviles the Church, as making nearer approches to Popery.

By these insolent proceedings, both of Po­pish and other Separatists, the Queen was necessitated to pass both those Acts, of the 23 and 35 of her Raign, to retain her Subjects in due Obedience, which equally respect all the dissenting Parties; and by a just executi­on of those and other good Laws upon some principal Offenders of all sides, the storms which they had raised were prevented: which is well observed by Dr Burnet, in his Preface to his Second Volume, That her strict en­joyning Ʋniformity, making some turbulent per­sons examples, countenancing the Clergie, e­specially the Archbishop Whitgift, and the sin­cerity and watchfulness of the Council and infe­riour Officers, preserved the Nation in peace all her days. (And he adds) If her Successors had held the reins of Government with like steadi­ness of hand, the Nation, how headstrong soe­ver, [Page 42]could never have run into those desperate confusions, from which nothing but the hand of God could have redeemed us. N. B.

But to bring home my discourse to our times, and to the intended design, which is to shew, that the Rise of those Wars which have been lately among us, was from a con­federacy between the Papists and other Dis­senters; I shall only mention what dstast was taken by several Scottish Lords, upon the Kings revocation of those Crown-lands, which during the minority of his Father King James they had seized; and upon the Act for Surrendries of the Tythes, &c. whereup­on they suggested, that their Religion was in danger, and that these things were done in favour of Episcopacy: And so they enter in­to a Covenant for defence of their Religion. And doubting of their own strength, they consult of ingaging the King of France a­gainst their own King; to which end they a­greed on the following Letter, directed, Au Roy; which Title is not wont to be given to any but their Liege Lord from his Subjects: of which his Majesty in his lesser Declarati­on 1640. took special notice, and complained that they courted a Forreign power against him.

This Letter was discovered, and brought to the King, and was proved to be the hand­writing of Loudon, who, being in London, was committed to the Tower; and on examina­tion confessed it to be his hand: but excused the matter, because it was written before the Pacification. However, they had really en­gaged Cardinal Richlien, who governed the [Page 44]affairs of France. He sent one Chamberline his Chaplain, a Scot by birth, to assist the Co­venanters, and to attempt all ways for exaspe­rating the first heats; with order not to de­part till he might return with good news. He appointed one of his Secretaries also to reside in Scotland, and to march with them into England, to be present at the Council of War, and direct their business. Hamilton's Chaplain also had free access unto Con the Popes Nuncio, and a Scotch-man, then in Eng­land on the same designe.

And if Mr. Rushworth the Parliaments Historian may be credited, there were also at that time some Applications made to the King of Spain, who was then the most potent Monarch. For, p. 970, & 971. he says. That in the year 1639, when the Spanish Armado came on the Coasts of England, Scotland be­ing then in a great ferment by the Covenanters, some of them thus argued: That there could be no Fleet strong enough to attempt them by Sea, except all the Kingdom did contribute to it; which, say they, cannot be done, except all the States joyn; of which we of the Confederacy shall be the greater part: and so the Enemy shall be forthwith forced to give liberty of Con­science to the Catholicks, or put themselves in danger of losing all. From whence it is col­lected, 1. That the Scots thought no Enemies [Page 45]so great, as the King and his Party. 2. That liberty of Conscience was desired for the Pa­pists as well as themselves. 3. That the Co­venanters thought themselves the greater part of the States. And 4. That there was a secret Confederacy between them and the Papists; and this Armado was designed for their assistance. And as for the King of Great Britain, the Relator says, If he will not give liberty of Conscience, he shall be reduced to it with no little damage.

As for Argyle, whose Father was a known Papist, I suppose he was as much of that as of any Religion, though he were the Head of the Covenanters: his interest was his Religion, as this Action of his doth demonstrate. His Father left a second Wife, by whose last Will there was given to the Daughters 12000 l. sterling; and Argyle prevailed to be admit­ted Administrator, he giving security to per­form the Will: but shortly after he caused the eldest, whose Portion was 5000 l. to marry a Gentleman who accepted onely 1000 l. with her; which was paid by Ar­gyle's Surety, and not repayed to this day, saith my Author. As to the other Daugh­ters, there was a clause in the Will, That if a­ny of them should enter into Nunneries, (for it seems they were inclinable to the Popish Re­ligion) they should have onely 300 l. And [Page 46]being defrauded of their due Maintenance, two of them did enter into Nunneries; and the third, through his neglect, was ready to do the like. But the Covenanter cared for none of these things. See the History of Inde­pendency, Appendix, p. 7. Nor was Hamil­ton, whom the King intrusted as his Commis­sioner in that Kingdom, free from a shrewd suspicion of corresponding with the Papists his Chaplain making frequent Applications to Con the Popes Nuntio, by whom he was commended as a man fit for his purpose; as shall appear in the discovery made by Sir Will. Boswell; of which hereafter.

The King, during the interval of Parlia­ments, which was for thirteen years, resolved on a Journy to Scotland, to be there crowned He had requested that the Crown might be sent into England, to save that Journy; but the Covenanters and Papists sent word they durst not do it. Marquess Huntly, who ob­tained a Toleration of Popery there, told the Council there, When his Majesty shall come and be crowned here, he will no doubt be sworn to our Laws: mean while, seeing he hath intru­sted us with them, we will look they shall be ob­served. And both Papist and Covenanter a­greed to tell the King, that should he long de­fer that duty, they might perhaps be inclined to make choice of another King. The King [Page 47]therefore goes into Scotland, and is crowned with great solemnity. But being there, he makes a revocation of such Lands as had been taken from the Crown in his Fathers mino­rity.

And by the foresaid Commission of Sur­rendries (upon a Petition of many of the Gentry, Ministry, and Commons) he frees the Ministers and People from the Vassalage of some great men that had ingrossed the Tythes of the Nation, allowing the Ministers onely an inconsiderable Pension, keeping the gene­rality of the People in dependance on them, and so oppressing them, that no one durst car­ry home his nine parts until the Lay-Impro­priator had housed his Tenth. For this the King received great Honour and Thanks from the greatest part of the Nation; but the Lords that were concerned, caused it to be re­ported abroad, that this was done to the pre­judice of their Religion, and to make greater provision for the power and splendour of Bi­shops: and from this time they confederate against the King, and provide for a Rebelli­on: Et hinc illoe Lachrymoe. But to look back a little into England.

In the last Parliament called by King James, Feb. 19. there was, as the King called it, a stinging Petition presented against the Papists; on which the King spake thus: It [Page 48]hath been talked of my remisness in Religion, and a suspicion of a Toleration; but as God shall judge me, I never thought, or in word expressed any thing that savoured of it. It is true, that for reasons best known to my self, I did at times forbear the execution of the Laws, which might have hindred more weighty affairs, &c. The King therefore consented, 1. That all Jesuits and Seminary Priests, having taken Orders from the See of Rome, be forthwith commanded to depart out of his Majesties Dominions. and not to return under the penalty of the Laws now in force; and that none harbour or conceal them. 2. That all Armour and Ammunition be taken from them. 3. That all Papists be confined within five miles of their Dwelling-houses, and come not within ten miles of London, or the Kings or Princes Court. 4. That all Subjects be restrained from hearing Mass, or other Ex­ercises of Romish Religion, in the houses of for­reign Embassadours. 5. That none be intru­sted as Justices of the Peace, Lord-Lieutenants, Deputies, Captains, &c. who resort not to Di­vine-Service. 6. That the Laws made against Recusants be put in execution, and not slacken them on any Treaty of Marriage, or otherwise with any forreign Princes.

To these the King answered, I cannot but commend your Zeal in offering this Petition; yet I hold my self unfortunate, that I am thought [Page 49]to need a Spur to do that which my Conscience and Duty bind me to. What Religion I am of, my Books, my Profession and Behaviour declare: and I wish it may be written in Marble, and re­main as a Mark on me to posterity, when I shall swerve from my Religion: for he that doth dissemble with God, is not to be trusted by men. The increase of Popery hath been my grief; and my endeavour hath been to prevent it: and if I have not been a Martyr, I have been a Con­fessor, though I have been far from prosecution— I therefore grant your Petition, That all Priests and Jesuits depart at a day; and will com­mand my Judges to put the Laws in execution against them; I will restrain the resort to Em­bassadours houses, and provide for the educa­tion of Popish Children: for it is a shame they should be brought up here, as if they were at Rome. And assure your selves, I shall never hearken to the intercession of foreign Princes a­gainst the Laws. Hereupon many Noblemen and others that were in places of trust, were put out. So that King James could not be suspected of Popery.

In the first year of King Charles, a Parlia­ment being called, June 18. a Petition of the like nature is presented; to which the King answered, That he was glad of their forward­ness in Religion, and assures them of his readi­ness to comply with them. The particulars be­ing [Page 50]like those in the former, and the Answer [...] agreeable, I here omit: but the King grant­ing all, added, That he would have done th [...] same things, had he not been desired; and wh [...] he now did, was from his Conscience, and hi [...] Duty to his Father, who in his last Spee [...] commended to him the person, but not the Re­ligion of the Queen. Accordingly the King by Proclamation recals the Children of PA­PISTS from beyond the Seas, commands [...] JESUITS, &c. to depart his Dominion [...] to disarm all Recusants, and forbid the meeting of Papists; injoyns the Judges to put the La [...] in execution against them. And many Lord and others suspected of Popery, were put o [...] of Commission.

But King Charles being left intangled [...] many expensive affairs by his Father Kin [...] James, for the discharge of which his Reve­nues were insufficient; was resolved to ca [...] to the Parliament for a Supply; which takin [...] advantage of his necessities, would not gran [...] him any thing considerable, unless he woul [...] part with what was of greater value than th [...] Crown. And the Priviledge of Parliame [...] was made a Rival to the Kings Prerogative for several years together. The particula [...] are too large to be here repeated: but, Si [...] Edward Cooke told the Parliament, That th [...] French Embassadour told his Master what had [Page 51]done during this last Parliament in sowing Divisions between the King and his People; and he was well rewarded for it. And at a Con­ference with the Lords, Sir Edward told them, That the Jesuits did vaunt at home, and sent Letters abroad, that all would be well, and doubted not to win ground upon us by our Di­visions. Which Divisions were then visibly made by some leading men in the Parliament, such as Sir John Elliot, Mr. Pym, and others: but by whom they were acted, it doth not appear, though the mischievous effects of them brought the three Nations into Confu­sion.

What sport the Jesuits made of these tran­sactions, appears by a Letter taken among some other Papers at Clerkenwel.

After the dissolution of the Parliament, Anno 1628, some refractory Members were sent for to the Council-Table; Mr. Hollis, Sir John Elliot, Sir Miles Hobart, Sir Peter Hay­man, Sir Jo. Barrington, Mr Selden, Mr. Stroud another of the five Members, Mr. Correton, Mr. Valentine, Mr. Long, Mr. Kirton. Hol­lis was questioned, Why on the day the Parlia­ment was dissolved, he placed himself next the [Page 55]Speakers Chair. He answered, That he had seated himself there formerly, and took it his due to be there, as in any place whatsoever, (un­less at the Council-Table, to sit above those Privy-Counsellors): That he came into the House with as good intention to serve his Maje­sty as any other; yet finding his Majesty offen­ded, he humbly desired to be the Subject rather of his Majesties mercy than his power. The Lord Treasurer replied, You mean, rather of his Majesties mercy than his justice. I say (an­swered Hollis) of his Majesties power, my Lord. Hobart's offence was for locking the Parliaments doors, and putting the Key in his pocket. Which (he said) was the command of the House. The rest were questioned for reproving the Speaker when he came to do the Kings command. To which they pleaded Priviledge of Parliament. But they were all imprisoned, and fined at the Kings-bench-bar, and gave 2000 l. security for good behavi­our. But this was the first Seed which took root in Parliament, and brought forth bitter Fruits. And these things manent altâ mente reposta. For,

Before the calling of the long Parliament in 41, the factious Party, who were disappointed in the former Parliament, and had been que­stioned for their insolencies, kept together in a secret Committee in London; foreseeing that [Page 56]the necessity of his Majesties affairs would re­quire another Parliament. For they had ani­mated the Scots to an Insurrection, with whom they had constant correspondence; for which his Majesty charged the five Members at the beginning of that Parliament, having suffici­ent evidence against them, if the iniquity [...] the times had not obstructed the course o [...] Justice. This Committee made it their busi­ness, not onely by Letters and Correspondents but by riding into several Counties, to pro­mote the Election of such persons as were disaffected both to the Church and Government and upon promises of reforming the Church and redressing Grievances in the State, they prevailed in most places to chuse such Mem­bers as were of their own Perswasion. That which added both fuel and fire to that flame which in time caused a general Conflagration of the three Nations, was the zeal of some popular and factious Preachers, whose Pulpit [...] were as so many Trumpets sounding an Alar [...] to War: the pretences were then, as they are now, the fears of Popery, and Arbitrary Go­vernment. By these means they obtained a prevalent Party in that Parliament, who were no sooner met, but they made it their busi­ness to purge the Houses of disaffected and malignant Lords and Commons. Mr. Hol­li [...] was sent to the House of Lords to demand [Page 57]the names of the dissenting Lords; whom they posted up, to expose them to the fury of the Rabble, which in great tumults they drew from the City to the Kings Palace and the Parliament-doors, to hinder the access of the Loyal Party: and when any such came, the Rabble cried, Make Rome, Rome for such or such a person: and in a short time they had driven the King from his Palace, and all the Loyal Party from both Houses.

And now the Pulpits sound with Prayers for their mortal Gods and Saviours, and for the Parliament of their prayers. The Religious and Loyal Clergie were ejected; about forty Doctors of Divinity, and many hundreds of learned and grave Divines, for no other crime but their Loyalty and good Benefices; of which a Treatise called Persecutio Ʋndecima, gives a particular account: against whom the chief Articles were, for preaching Obedience to the King, against Sacriledge and Rebellion, and for keeping their Parish-Churches; for rea­ding the Liturgie, and bowing at the Name of Jesus; for having Popish Books, or being seen in the company of Papists. Insomuch as Mr. Selden, one of their Members, said to a Per­son of Honour, That Learning and Honesty were sins enough in a Clergie-man, to undo him. The reputation of being Popish Priests, or but Caesar's Friends, was crime e­nough. [Page 58]One Mr. White published his Cen­turies of sequestred and ejected Ministers, lay­ing to their charge such things as were never attempted to be proved against them. And it was observed at that time, that he was greatly troubled in Conscience for abusing and ruining so many Clergy-men, and died in a distracted condition: which hitherto I have not seen or heard to be contradicted. Certain it is, that none of them had any one point of Popery proved against them. The Lord Fairfax accused Dr. Cosens, then Vice-chancellor of Cambridge, that he had perver­ted a young man to Popery: but upon exa­mination, it was found that he had expelled the person that perverted him from the Uni­versity; and some who were then Members of the Parliament, testified as much in behalf of the Doctor. Whereupon, after some weeks imprisonment, he was set free; and no man gave better proof of his aversion to Po­pery, both in the time of his exile, and after his return, than that eminent Doctor did. So unhappy have the Fanatick Party always been, to impeach them most as being Popishly inclined, who have given the greatest demon­stration of their opposition to it. But to re­turn:

If they wanted any numbers to petition for what they had in designe, or any money to [Page 59]begin the Wars; Mr. Pym and some other of the five Members, were sent into the City; who in conjunction with some eminent Prea­chers, such as Mr. Marshal, Calamy, &c. by their long Speeches and fair pretences, decei­ved the hearts, and opened the purses of the deluded people. From hence came those Tu­mults that petitioned against the Bishops and Popish Lords, and for the bringing the Earl of Strafford and the Archbishop to their Try­als. The good Lord of Essex said, He never knew but one Bishop, (viz. Bishop Williams, who betrayed his Lord and Master) that stood for the good of the Commonwealth. As for the rest, Mr. Nathaniel Fiennes made a large Speech, to shew that Episcopacy was an Enemy to Monarchy: whereas his Father spoke and printed to the contrary, That the Bishops were too much devoted to the King. And the young Gentleman was (not long after) condemed by Martial Law.

Now that the Papists had a great hand in our Troubles at home (as well as in Scotland) doth clearly appear from the Testimony of Sir Edward Cooke, and other Transactions al­ready mentioned. But it will yet more evi­dently appear, that the Popish Party were chief Agents in animating the English Re­bels, with whom they held correspon­dence to that end, by the discovery made to [Page 60]Sir W. Boswel by one Andreas ab Habernfield, and communicated to the Archbishop, Sep­tember 6. 1640. Which Relation Mr. Prynne found among the Archbishops Papers, and caused it to be printed by Order of a Com­mittee of the House of Commons. Mr. Prynne urgeth many Arguments to evince the truth of that Plot, and says, That not onely he, but the Parliament, as well as the King and Archbishop, did believe it; and that he must be a Monster of incredulity that doth not believe it.

The particulars of the discovery that are most to our purpose, are as follow:

• 1. That the Discoverer was bred a Papist, and an Ecclesiastick, and judged a fit person to be Coadjutor to Con the Popes Nuntio, by Cardinal Barbarino, who under the Pope was made President of the Congregation of Jesuits in England, for propagation of Religion. But the horrour of this Plot, which was to de­stroy the King and the Archbishop, and in­volve three Nations in Bloud, so troubled his Conscience, that he not onely discovered the Plot, but forsook the Religion that allowed of such bloudy practices.
• 2. That from Con he received and dispat­ched all the intelligence concerning the Plot, which was communicated to Con from a Consult of political Jesuits which met private­ly in the Province of Wales.
• [Page 61]3. That there were at least fifty Scotish Jesuits at that time in and about London. That one Maxwell a Scotish Earl and Papist, was sent into Scotland by the Popish Party, with whom two other Scotish Earls were Correspondents; whose business it was to ex­cite the Scots to a Rebellion, by aggravating the Actions of the English Court, particularly the punishment of Prynne, Burton, and Bast­wick, and the imposing of the English Litur­gie on them.
• 4. That a Chaplain of Hamiltons (the Kings Commissioner) had often secret con­ference with Con: concerning whom, the In­former asking merrily whether the Jews also agreed with the Samaritans, Con replied, I would to God all Ministers were like him.
• 5. That Cardinal Richlieu sent Mr. Tho. Chamberlain his Chaplain and Almoner, to whom a Bishoprick was promised, into Scot­land; who tarried there four months, and was not to return till he brought good news.
• 6. That Sir Toby Matthews a politick Je­suit, did diligently enquire, and transmit In­telligence to Rome.
• 7. That in the house of one Capt. Read was a constant meeting of the Jesuits every Post-day, where they received Letters from Rome, and made returns in feigned names.
• [Page 62]8. That Mr. Porter and Windebank, the Lord Arundel and his Countess, the Coun­tess of Buckingham, and others, were privy to the Plot, and betrayed the Kings Counsels.

Upon the whole, Mr. Prynne makes these remarks: That the Conspirators have almost brought their designe to maturity. to our shame and grief, by new-raised Civil Wars, both in England and Ireland, (but he adds not a word of Scotland): That Secretary Winde­bank, and Captain Read, with some others, went secretly into Ireland to raise a Rebellion there; who assured them that there would be such Broils in England, that no Force could be sent thence. But not a word yet of what was done in Scotland, where they were in a­ctual Arms against the King, and ceased not till they had effected the death of the Arch­bishop and the King, as this discovery had fore­told.

I shall adde an Observation of Hammond L'Estrange. The Presbyterian Party (saith he) were not the onely men in the Conspiracy [...] for in case of general disturbances, nothing i [...] more familiar than for several Factions of con­trary inclinations and interests to unite, aiming at their own several ends. And a foul blemish it would have been to the Society of Jesus, should they have sate still in a work so pro­per to their Employment, as these Scotish [Page 63]Broils: Though they did not reach at the external glory of the Enterprize, which they rendred to the Presbyterians; yet were they as diligent in their Machinations as possibly they could be, hoping to be greatest gainers at last. But the Jesuits had done their busi­ness, having set their Journey-men at work both in England and Scotland; and they were ready as Auxiliaries to assist them: to which end they mix themselves with the Councils and Armies both of England and Scotland, obstructing all Overtures and Trea­ties of Peace. It was not for any love to the King or his Cause, that some few of them en­gaged with his Party, but to help on the pub­lick Calamity of the two Nations, and to keep on the Wars, that they might raise themselves on the ruines of both Parties. For, that there were more Papists engaged with the Parlia­ment-Armies than the King's, appears by his Majesties Declaration after the Fight at Edg­hill, Oct. 1643. All men know the great num­ber of Papists Commanders and others that serve in their Armies, the great industry they used to corrupt the Loyalty and affection of Our loving Subjests of that Religion, the private promises and undertakings that they made if they would assist them against Ʋs; all the Laws made in their prejudice should be repealed; when nothing could prevail with Ʋs to invite [Page 64]them to Our Succour, or recal Our Proclamation which forbad them so to do. We know that a far greater number of Papists are in their Army than Our own. And one Robert de Sal­monet a Popish Priest and Scotish man, who wrote a History of our Wars in French, saith of this Fight, That which most surprised every one, was, that they found among the dead at Edge-hill several Popish Priests: For although in their Declarations they called the Kings Army a Popish Army, to render it odious; yet they had in their Army two Companies of Walloons, and other Roman Catholicks. And they omitted no endeavours to ingage Sir Arthur Ashton, an eminent Roman Catho­lick, to their party.

In Mr. Prynnes Relation of the Tryal of the Archbishop, one Mr. Chaloner was produced, who deposed, that he being at Bruxels, and discoursing with an English Traveller, heard him to affirm, that Popery would be brought into England, and the Introducers should be the Protestants themselves: whereat when he wondred, the Gentleman told him, that the War should be so disguised under false notions and pretences, as that the Protestants should ignorantly become the Jesuits servants, and by the effusion of their own blood set up Popery, p. 415. And because Mr. Prynne mentioned some per­sons sent into Ireland, to stir up the Rebellion [Page 65]there, I shall mention also that which the King says of it in his Chapter of that Rebel­lion: I believe (saith he) it will at last appear, that they who first began to embroil my other Kingdoms, are in great part guilty if not of the first letting out, yet of the not timely stopping those horrid effusions of blood in Ireland. And it was observed, that when the Design against the Earl of Strafford, as also against the King, was managing, there was a great cor­respondence between the Leaders of both par­ties in Ireland; of which the Author of the History of Independencie gives so large an ac­count, that I shall only select some passages, and refer the Reader to see the whole Trans­action at his leasure, in the History of Indepen­dency, p. 150, 198, p. 230. &c. 245.

But I shall first insert that which the Royal Martyr hath said in his own vindication con­cerning the Irish Rebellion.

That Sea of Blood, which hath there been cruelly and barbarously shed, is enough to drown any man in eternal both infamy and misery whom God shall find the malicious Author or instigator of its effusion. Some men take it very ill not to be believed, when they affirmed that what the I­rish Rebels did, was done with my privity, at least, if not by my Commission. But these knew too well, that it is no news for some of my Sub­jects to fight not only without my Commission; [Page 66]but against my Command and Person too; ye [...] all the while to pretend they fight by my autho­rity, and for my safety. I would to God th [...] Irish had nothing to alleadge for their imitati­on against those whose blame must needs be th [...] greater, by how much Protestant principles ar [...] more against all Rebellion than those of Papists Nor will the goodness of mens intentions excus [...] the scaudal and contagion of their example [...] It is thought by many wise men, that the pre­posterous rigour and unreasonable severity, which some men carried before them in England, w [...] not the least incentive that kindled and blew [...] into those horrid flames, which wanted not pre­disposed fuel for Rebellion in Ireland, whe [...] despair being added to their former discontent [...] and their fears of utter extirpation to the [...] wonted oppressions, it was easie to provoke to [...] open Rebellion, a people prone enough to brea [...] out to all exorbitant violence, both by some principles of their Religion, and the natur [...] desires of liberty. I would to God no man h [...] been less affected with Irelands sad estate th [...] my self. I offered to go in person on that expe­dition: but some men were afraid I should ha [...] any one Kingdom quieted; or loath they were to shoot at any mark here less than my self, [...] that any should have the glory of my destruct [...] on but themselves. Had my many offers been accepted, I am confident neither the ruine had [Page 67]been so great, nor the calamity so long, nor the remedy so desperate. So that next to the sin of those that began that Rebellion, theirs must needs be, who either hindred the speedy sup­pression of it by domestick Dissentions, or di­verted the Aids, Sir William Par­sons said at a pub­lick meeting, That within 12 months, no Catholick should be seen in Ireland. or exaspera­ted the Rebels to the most de­sperate resolutions and actions, by threatning extremities not only to the known Heads and chief Incendiaries, but to the whole Community of that Nation. When at the earnest intreaty of the chief of the Prote­stant party there, I effected a Cessation in the best sort that the necessary difficulty of affairs would permit, I was then to suffer again in my reputation and honour, because I suffered not the Rebels utterly to devour the remaining handfuls of the Protestants there. I believe it will at last appear, that they who first began to embroil my other Kingdoms, are in great part guilty, if not of the first letting out, yet of the not time­ly stopping those horrid effusions of blood in Ireland. Thus far the Royal Martyr.

And whether the examples of England and Scotland imbroyling those two King­doms, and proceeding successfully in the Wars against the King, did not animate the I­rish to those horrid proceedings, as in the I­rish Letter mentioned in the Introduction, is [Page 68] sub Judice. The following transactions, un­der the Parliament and Cromwel, are a more clear evidence of an actual conjunction with the Irish Rebels against the King.

Sir John Temple was of the Privy Coun­cil in Ireland, at the Insurrection and after; a person that thought himself disobliged by the King, a Parliament-man here in England, and one that too much adhered to the Facti­on. He is confident that the chief aim of the Irish was to shake off the English yoke, and settle the power in the Natives. One Cooke deposed, that Tirlogh Brady said, That the Irish would within a fortnight have a King of their own, p. 83. & 66. p. 50, 51. The same was deposed by others. As was also, That they took the Scots for a president: they would have the Kingdom in their own hands, Laws of their own, a Deputy of their own, without molestation from another Nation, p. 19. That they cared not for King Charles, having a King of their own. In the Remonstrance, p. 54. they called Tyrone their King; and his Commission, the Kings Commission. They af­firmed the Scots to be of their side, p. 37. That they had the Earl of Argyles hand, and most of the Nobility of Scotland.

Macguire, a chief contriver of the Rebel­lion, falling into the Parliaments power, was much importun'd by promises and threats to [Page 69]discover whether the King were privy to the Rebellion: but he did still acquit the King and all other English from being guilty as much as of knowing it. And it is very re­markable, that he did this not only while he was under a sentence of Condemnation; but when he had been turned off the Cart, and recovered again after a most barbarous man­ner, yet still he acquitted the King to his death, and denied that ever he saw any Com­mission from him.

And whereas the King was accused of granting them a Toleration: it is true, that he was necessitated to offer that, which they had forced from him before; but it was with such restrictions, that they liked it not, but took it on their own terms. And indeed the King told them by one of his Secretaries; You insist on something in Religion more than for­merly you were contented with: I am therefore commanded to let you know, that were His Ma­jesties condition much lower, you shall never force him to any further Concessions, to the pre­judice of his Conscience, and of the Protestant Religion, in which he is resolved to live, and for which he is ready to dye: and that he will joyn with any Protestant Prince; nay, with his Rebels at home, rather than yield the least to you in this particular. And this was the joynt opinion of the Papists in England and Ire­land, [Page 70]that the King would give them all up as a Sacrifice, to compass a Peace with his Parliament, though they had been Loyal to him in his extremity.

The Marquess of Ormond, and those that acted for the King under his Lieutenancy in Ireland, was so prosperous in his endeavours to reduce that Kingdom to the obedience of the Crown, that a Peace was made with the most considerable of the Confederate Irish. But they being otherwise tampered with by the Parliament-party, contrary to their Faith and promise, the Popes Nuntio, and some I­rish Clergy prevailed with the Ʋlster-Irish un­der Owen Roe Oneale, to refuse to come under the Kings Authority.

Of which the Author of the History of Independency, p. 150. of the Second part, tells us in the Margent, that the Council of Offi­cers endeavour to joyn interests with the Pa­pists in England and Ireland: And then says, The King had offended the Papists in the last Treaty, in granting so much to the Parliament for their suppression. The Independents per­ceiving it, and willing to joyn with any interest to make good their design, it was proposed at the Council of Officers, that the Papists should raise and pay Ten thousand additional Forces for the Army; in recompence whereof, all pe­nal Laws concerning them should be repealed, all [Page 71]Taxes and Contributions taken off, and they to have the protection of the Parliament and Ar­my. Ʋnder the same notion they endeavoured to joyn interests with Owen Roe Oneale, who commanded that bloody party of Massacring I­rish, with which they had formerly taxed the King. They supplyed him with Ammunition, and admitted O Rely the Popes Irish Nuntio to a Treaty here in England. Sir John Win­ter was taken into imployment, and the arrears of his Rent gathered for him by Souldiers, to the regret of the Country; Sir Kenelme Dig­by had a Pass to come into England, and came, as he was foretold by a Letter, by an Indepen­dent Agent for the Army from Paris, to an In­dependent Member of the House of Commons, a creature of the Army, dated 28 November, 1648 and printed at the later end of The true and full relation of the Officers and Armies forcible seizing of divers eminent Members. Walter Mountague was let forth on bail.

What becomes of this Negotiation, & whe­ther those that played fast and loose with all interests in the Kingdom, have not done the like with the Papists, this Author shews in the following relation: for p. 198. he says, the under-hand combination between the Indepen­dent party and Owen Roe Oncale, is now o­penly declared and avowed by their own licensed News books: Owen Roe, and Colonel M. are [Page 72]joyned, says the modest Narrative. Our par­ty have permitted Three hundred of Oneal [...] own Regiment to quarter in our parts among the Creats, within two miles of Dundalk, saith the Scout. Owen Roe and Berne are come toward [...] Colonel Jones and Colonel M. 's quarters [...] he is so fair as to pay Contribution: his quar­ters are to the Scots side of Dublin, to prevent their giving aid to Ormond in his attempt up on Dublin. Who can blame necessity? Nor d [...] our Grandees now deny this Confederacy with the bloody Popish Massacring Rebels, although they had the impudence to make the only supposition thereof, one of the principal charges against the late King, and to raise a great outcry against the Marquess of Ormond, and Lord Inchi­quine, for their cessation with Preston; which was to prevent the Cromwellists, who offered to associate with him on conditions much more prejudicial to the Protestant Religion and Eng­lish interest, than the Marquess gave them: they offered Oneale all the Lands in Ulster for­feited by his Grandfather Tyrone, Shan Oneale, and others attainted, thereby destroying the British Planters there, &c. P. 2 [...]. He re­fers to a paper called The Association between Oneale, &c. And another called The true state of the Transactions with Owen Roe O­neale, as it was reported to the Parliament by the Council of State; printed by Edw. Hus­bands, [Page 73]15 Aug. 1649. This was so abhorred by the English Souldiery, that many there took occasion to forsake the English Parlia­ment, and many here disbanded rather than they would accompany Cromwel in so wick­ed an Expedition; and I doubt not but the imposing on some of the Independent Offi­cers such a vile drudgery, did so much dissa­tisfie them, as to make them, after they had extricated themselves from their toyls, to bethink themselves how they might serve a better Master. I shall therefore beg par­don for transcribing the progress of this af­fair, referring the Reader to the former Quo­tations.

Cromwel writes Letters to his Creatures of the Council of State, complaining how much the miscarriage of that agreement had re­tarded his voyage; desiring them, for satis­faction of the Souldiery and people, to treat with some body to take the whole business on himself, and to clear the Council of State, the Parliament, and Cromwel himself, from ha­ving any hand in it. And to carry on the Scene, this Agreement was with much heat of zeal complained of in the House of Com­mons by a Brother, who had his Cue before­hand, and by the Juncto was referred to the Council of State, as was forelaid; where after some private conference with him whom [Page 74]they had intrusted to accommodate the bu­siness, they publickly voted their dislike of it; Bradshaw reprehending him for it; and at last they ordered that the whole business, with the reasons for his justification, should be reported by Tho Scot to the House of Com­mons: which was done on Friday Aug. 10. whereupon their Commissioner was called to the Bar, where the Speaker asked him What persons he meant in his Letter to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, wherein he saith, he made the agreement with Oneale with the ad­vice of some others. He answered, That he did it on his own score, (for so he was in­structed and cautioned before; and his life had been in danger, if he had done otherwise without advice of any; only having discourse with Colonel Jones, he told him if he could keep Owen Roe and Ormond from joyning, i [...] would be a good Service. This Answer was taken for satisfactory. The next demand was, Whether he had any advice or directions from the Parliament, Council of State, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, or any other person [...] do the same; which he expresly denyed, say­ing, He did it on his own score. Whereupon the House Voted, Resolved, &c. That the House doth utterly disapprove of the proceed­ings of Colonel M. in the Treaty and Cessation (as they called it) made between him and O­wen [Page 75]Roe Oneale; and that this House doth detest thoughts of any closing with any Party of Popish Rebels there, who have had their hands in shedding English Bloud. Nevertheless, the House being satisfied that what the said Colonel did therein was in his apprehension necessary for the preservation of the Parliaments interest, the House is content that the farther considera­tion thereof, as to him, be laid aside, and shall not at any time hereafter be called in questi­on.

Upon these proceedings the Author notes, 1. The Armies Doctrine and Ʋse of appre­hended necessity and good intentions, to justifie evil actions, approved of by this Parliament. 2. This Agreement, though it were twelve weeks before publickly known in England, and divulged in licensed News-books, was ne­ver scrupled, until that first the said Agree­ment was expired. And, 3. That Oneale was so beaten by the Lord Inchiquine, that (as their News-books said) he was inconsi­derable, and must suddenly joyn with Or­mond, or be destroyed. 4. That these Votes call this Agreement but a Treaty and Cessa­tion, which was a League offensive and de­fensive against Ormond, Inchiquine, and all that upheld Monarchy.

For which the Author gives these Rea­sons: Because the second Article says, That [Page 76]on all occasions both Parties be ready to assist one another, till a more absolute Agreement be made by the Parliament of England. And the third Article saith, That the Creats of Ul­ster residing in the Quarters of the Parliaments Army, shall pay Contribution to General Owen Oneale, (which is a granting of Taxes a­gainst Law) and it seems Oneale became a Mercenary, being taken into pay. Article the fourth saith, That if Oneale shall happen to fight against the Forces under Ormond, In­chiquine, or other Enemies of the Parliament, and thereby spend his Ammunition; if he be near to their Quarters, and want Ammunition, they shall then furnish him. This was actu­ally performed, when Inchiquine besieged Dundalk. The fifth Article allowed Oneale the use of any Harbours within their liber­ty.

By which Premises we may rationally conclude, that the Factions are not so averse from the most bloudy Papists, but if occasion require, they are ready to joyn interest with them, to maintain their Good Old Cause a­gainst the Crown and Church of England; which will farther appear, by the Correspon­dency and Agents which the successive Parties that were uppermost maintained in foreign parts, to betray the present Kings Counsels while he was in banishment; for which Man­ning [Page 77]a Papist was executed: for whom ma­ny Dirgies were sung in several Churches.

And when his Majesty was invited into Scotland, the Marquess of Huntly, and other Lords and Heads of the Popish Faction, made a great Party to oppose his Reception, unless he would grant a Toleration of their Religi­on. But the Presbyterian Party having then the greatest power, admitted him on such terms as they thought fit; and served him no longer than they could serve their own de­signes.

For the clearer manifestation of the ASSO­CIATION between Oneale and the Par­liament, there are lately come to the Council of State (saith the Author of the Hist. of In­depend. p. 245.) two Letters out of Conaught from Sir Charles Coote, dated the 14th and 15th of August (49) informing them with how much zeal to the Parliaments interest O­wen Oneale had freely raised the Siege of Lon­don-derry. On which Letters, and the Votes and Proceedings of Pride 's Parliament, I com­mend to the Readers observation these particu­lars: First, the 15th of August the Letters inform them that Oneale freely offered his as­sistance to Coote, professing much affection to the Parliament of England, and an earnest de­sire to maintain their interest. He had for­merly stiled the Parliament, Monstrosum Par­liamentum; [Page 78] but now the case is altered, [...] calls them the Honourable Parliament, as dri­ving his interest against Monarchy and Pro­testancy. In the Letter of the 14th, he in­forms the Parliament that he hath found O­neale and his Army very punctual and faithful in all their promises and ingagements, and make [...] no doubt but they will continue so to the end The 16th of August, he says that Oneale i [...] his Express to Coote inclosed some Letters re­ceived from Col. M. and among the rest [...] Copy of a Letter in answer to a Letter of the Lord Inchiquine, charging the Colonel for joyn­ing with Oneale and his party; wherein the Co­lonel insinuated as if Oneale 's submission to use the Parliaments power, were already accepted by them. In that of the 15th, Coote hath this expression in his Letter:—Calling to mind that it is no new thing for the most wise God to make use of wicked Instruments to bring about a good designe. Aug. 15. the Letter says that Coote called a Council of War, and resolved it was better to accept of the Assistance of those who proclaimed themselves Friends to us, and our interest we fight for. The same Letter says, that we added to the Article this proviso, Not use their Assistance longer than the approbation of the State of England should go along with us therein. In that of the 14th, Coote says Oneale was pleased to [Page 79]communicate to him certain proposals, which were long since transmitted to the Parliament; and though for his part, and the prime Officers with him, they do not doubt but the proposals are already yielded to by the State; yet in regard their Army and party in all other parts of the Kingdom cannot be satisfied therewith till the Parliament declare more publickly therein, he hath therefore desired me humbly to intreat your Lordships to declare your Resolutions there­in with as much speed as may be. And in a Vote of Parliament, it's said, The House is well satisfied of the diligence, faithfulness, and integrity of Sir Charles Coote, in preserving the Garison of London-derry. Which (says my Author) was preserved by the conjunction of Oneale, who raised the Siege.

But to return to England, where, though the Jesuits and Priests did not appear so vi­sibly as in the Wars of Ireland, yet that they had great influence on the Councils and Ar­mies of the Fanaticks, from the beginning to the end of the War, is industriously proved by Mr. Prynne in several books, especially in his Introduction to the Archbishop's Tryal, and in Romes Master-piece; Works of Darkness brought to light; The Royal Favourite, &c.

The first War begun with the clamour of Popery: That it was admitted not onely at the Court, but into the Church; particularly [Page 80]that the King was a great favourer of Papists; and the House of Commons instance in one Goodman a Romish Priest, who was condem­ned at the Sessions in the Old-baily. Where­upon the House remonstrates, That it was more necessary to put the Laws in execution at that time, than in any before: That at that time divers Petitions from several parts of the Kingdom, complained of the great increase of Popery and Superstition; and the people call earnestly to have the Laws put in execution. (When these Petitions were promoted by their own Members; and that Decency which was used in the Church, the Superstition and Popery which they remonstrated against: but not one word of putting the Laws in execution against the Separatists.) 2. That Priests and Jesuits swarmed in great numbers: That of late years about the City of London, Priests and Jesuits have been discharged out of prison: That the Pope had then a Nuntio in the City: The great resort to Mass at Demark-house: That on the reprieve of Goodman, the City of London refused the advance of Money for sup­ply of his Majesties Army, for that reason. Therefore they desire that Goodman may be left to Justice.

To this the King answered: Concerning Goodman, that he being found guilty onely as being a Priest, on which account neither King [Page 81]James nor Queen Elizabeth put any to death, be did reprieve him; desiring them to consider the inconvenience that may fall on his Subjects and other Protestants abroad, by executing of such severity. That he will put the Laws in execution against Popery and Superstition, the increase whereof was much against his mind: That he would speedily issue out a Proclamation for all Priests and Jesuits to depart the King­dom within one month, or to be proceeded a­gainst according to Law. As for Rosetti the Popes Nuntio, that he had no commission, but was onely to correspond between the Queen and the Pope; which was warranted by Articles of Marriage: yet he had perswaded her to dis­miss him within a time, to take away the offence. That he would restrain the resort of Papists to Denmark-house, and the Chappels of Embas­sadours.

But instead of being satisfied with these Answers, four Members of Parliament ac­quaint the Lords of a monstrous designe of the Papists; an Army of fifteen thousand in Lancashire, eight thousand Irish Papists under the Earl of Strafford, and many thousands in divers other places, well armed, and payed by the Earl of Worcester. Of which, Sander­son in the Life of King Charles, says, p. 360. After-Ages will think these Hyperboles; there being no such Armies possible by them, nor no [Page 82]such fears in others. Yet this Message was carried from the Lower to the Ʋpper House and gave occasion to a multitude of people to frame Petitions sutable to Plots, Fears, and Jealousies, for the Parliaments purpose. And Alderman Pennington, with some hundred [...] of the Rabble, presents a Petition in the name of fifteen thousand Citizens, against Bishops and their Jurisdiction.

How little they cared for Religion, though their actions sufficiently declared, yet their expressions were not wanting. A Great Crea­ture of theirs said modestly, That they ha [...] power enough to take the Crown from the King if the Gospel did not hinder them: but the [...] did it with a Non Obstante. Mr. Hambde [...] being asked by a Minister in the beginning of the War, Why Religion was made a cause [...] it: answered, Because the people would not st [...] else. But H. Martyn told them in the House They need not lye for a good Cause; it was n [...] Religion, but Liberty they fought for. And so little did some of them value their Religi­on, that as Col. Morley and others with hi [...] said, They would cast themselves upon any Na­tion, even the Turk, rather than let the King subdue them.

Mr. B.'s Key for Catholicks mentioneth se­veral of the Popish designes; which (saith he are grounded on this Maxime, That their [Page 83]foundation must be Mutation, which will cause a Relaxation, and serve as so many violent Di­seases, as Stone or Gout, to a speedy Destruction, p. 318. Upon which he adds this Consulta­tion of the Jesuits: We shall necessitate the Pu­ritan Protestants to keep the King as Prisoner, or else to put him to death. If they keep him as a Prisoner, his diligence and friends, and their own divisions, will either work his deliverance, and give him the day again by our help, or at least will keep the State in a perpetual unset­ledness, and will bring an odium on them: or if they cut him off, which we will rather pro­mote, lest they should make use of his extremi­ties to any advantage; then first we shall pro­cure the odium of King killing to fall on them, which they are wont to cast upon us, and so shall be able to disburthen our selves. Secondly, And we shall have them all to pieces in Distra­ctions: for they will either set up a new King, or the Parliament will keep the power, chang­ing the Government into a Democracy. The first cannot be done without great Concussi­ons, and new Wars; and we shall have an opportunity to have a hand in all: and if it be done, it may be much to our advantage. The second will apparently, by Factions and Distra­ctions, give us footing for continual attempts. But to make all sure, we will have our footing a­mong the Puritans too, that we may be sure to [Page 84]maintain our interest, which way soever the world goes. This was the Frame of the Papists Plot.

In the next page, he tells us of the Letters of the Agents of the Agitators in France, published in the weekly News-books, commen­ding the Jesuits for good men, and how a­greeable they were to them in their Princi­ples for a Democracy; and what meet Mate­rials for such a Commonwealth the Jesuits would be. The Agencies of particular men with Jesuits (he says) I purposely omit, p. 321. Mr. Baxter doubtless knew more than [...] mentions; he had an Idea of all their Plots and Principles in's own brain. And, p. 329 saith, It is opened by many in print, how far th [...] Jesuits crept into all Societies under the name of Independents. He tells us a story of on [...] that came from Scotland, pretending himself a Jew, who gave the Anabaptists the glory o [...] his Conversion, and was rebaptized at He [...] ­ham; but was discovered at Newcastle to be [...] Jesuit. The whole story is in print. And p. 321. he acquaints us that Sexby and other [...] of the Army, did confederate with Spain t [...] murther Cromwel, when they found that h [...] attempted to make himself a King. And hereupon it was that Cromwel took distaste a [...] the Papists, and prevailed to make an Ac [...] with this Preamble, Anno 1656. Forasmu [...] [Page 85]as there is a great increase of Popish Recusants within this Commonwealth, by reason whereof great danger may follow to the Commonwealth, they being persons very active in mischievous Plots and Conspiracies, &c. This doubtless was well known by Cromwel, who had made great use of them to effect his mischievous designes.

Peter du Moulin in his Answer to Phila­nax Anglicus, p. 59. observes, that a year be­fore the Kings death, a select number of En­glish Jesuits were sent from their Party in England, first to Paris, to consult with the Faculty of Sorbone, who were then wholly Jesuited, about this Question: Whether see­ing the State of England was in a likely posture to change Government, it was lawful for the Ca­tholicks to work that change, for the advancing and securing the Catholick Cause in England, by making away the King, whom there was no hope to turn from his Heresie. This was an­swered affirmatively; after which, the same persons went to Rome, where the same Que­stion being propounded and debated, it was concluded by the Pope, That it was both law­ful and expedient for the Catholicks to promote that alteration of State, &c. When that hor­rid Parricide had taken effect, the Pope com­manded all the Papers about that Question to be gathered, and burnt: In obedience to [Page 86]which Order, a Roman Catholick in Paris was demanded a Copy which he had of these Papers: but the Gentleman, who had time to consider and detest the wickedness of that Project, refused to give it, and shewed it to a Protestant friend of his, relating to him the whole carriage of this Negotiation, with great abhorrency of the Practices of the Jesuits. And when these Jesuits returned from Rome, they brought many more after them, to help on the same Work; which at last they ef­fected, to their great joy.

The Roman Priest and Confessor is known, who when he saw the fatal stroak given to our holy King and Martyr, flourished with his Sword, and said, Now the greatest Enemy that we had in the world is gone. A Protestant Lady living in Paris, was perswaded by a Jesuit to turn Catholick: when the dismal news of the King's Murther came to Paris, this Lady, as all other good Subjects, was deeply afflicted with it; and when this Jesu­ite came to see her, and found her melted in Tears for that Disaster, he told her with a smiling countenance, That she had no reason to lament, but rejoyce rather, seeing the Catho­licks were rid of their greatest Enemy, and that Cause was much furthered by his death. Upon which the Lady in great anger put him down the stairs, saying, If that be your Religion, I [Page 87]have done with you for ever: and God hath given her grace to make her words good hi­therto. Many intelligent Travellers can tell of the great joy among the English Convents and Seminaries about the Kings death, as ha­ving overcome their Enemy, and done their main work for their settlement in England: of which they made themselves so sure, that the Benedictines were in great care, that the Jesuits should not get their Land: and the English Nuns were contending who should be Abbasses in England. An understanding Gentleman visiting the Fryars in Dunkirk, put them on the discourse of the King's death; and to pump out their sence about it, said, That the Jesuits had laboured very much to compass that work. To which they answered, That the Jesuits would ingross to themselves the glory of all great and good works, and of this a­mong others; whereas they had laboured as di­ligently and effectually for it as they. So that both the Jesuits and Seculars had laboured to bring the King to death: and the Army of Fanaticks were their Instruments to put it in execution.

Monsieur de Bourdeaux the French Em­bassadour, being resident in London when General Monk had gotten the power of the City, and the affections of the People, earnest­ly desired to interest the King of France and [Page 88]Cardinal Mazarine in the Revolution of Go­vernment; and made way for an Address to the General, by his Brother-in-law Clergis; to whom he imparted, that Cardinal Mazarine would be glad to have the honour of his friendship, and assist him faithfully in all his Enterprizes: and that the General might be more confident of the Cardinal, he assured him that Oliver Cromwel kept so strict a League with him, that he did not assume the Government without his privity, and was directed step by step by him in the progress of that action: and therefore if he resolved on that course, he should not onely have the Cardinals friendship and counsel in the attempt, but a safe Retreat and honourable Support in France, if he sailed in it. But Mr. Clergis as­sured him, that the General did not intend to take the Government upon him, but to sub­mit all to the determination of the next Par­liament.

The King being in the Territories of the King of Spain, when the General was minded to declare for him, Sir Jo. Greenvil was dis­patched by the General to his Majesty, to de­sire him to depart out of the King of Spain's Dominions, to Breda, or some other place under the Government of the States of the Ʋnited Provinces; for that he had certain in­telligence he would be detained by the King [Page 89]of Spain's Ministers, if he stayed in his Do­minions. Upon which Advice, within two or three days he went to Breda, where he continued till he was invited to his King­doms.

There was found in the Study of Francis Young, after his death, a Paper containing Ad­vices given to him by Seignior Bellarini con­cerning the best way of managing the Popish interest in England upon the Kings Restaura­tion. The first Advice is, to make the ob­struction of Settlement their great designe, e­specially upon the fundamental Constitutions of the Kingdom; whereunto if things should fall, they would be more firm than ever. Se­condly, To remove the Jealousies raised by Prynne, Baxter, &c. of their designe upon the late Factions, and to set up the prosperous way of fears and jealousies of the King and Bishops. Thirdly, To make it appear under-hand, how neer the Doctrine, Worship, and Discipline of the Church of England comes to us; at how little distance their Common-prayer is from our Mass; and that the wisest and ablest men of that Way, are so moderate, that they would willingly come over to us, or at least meet us half way: hereby the most stayed men will become more odious, and others will run out of all Religion, for fear of Popery. Fourthly, That there be an Indulgence promoted by [Page 90]the Factious, and seconded by You. Fifthly, That the Trade and Treasure of the Nation may be engrossed between themselves and o­ther discontented Parties. Sixthly, That the Bishops and Ministers of the Church of Eng­land be aspersed, as either worldly and careless on one hand; or so factious; that it were well they were removed. All these Directions will appear to have been followed precisely by both Parties.

The Grandees of the Committee at Derby-house, and the Army, sollicite the detaining of the Prince in France, and delaying his Journy for England, lest he should trouble the yet-unsetled Kingdom of the Saints. To negoti­ate which, they have an Agent lying Lieger with Cardinal Mazarine, who is so well sup­plied with Money, and so open-handed, that it hath been heard from Mazarine's own mouth, that all the Money the Queen and Prince had cost the Crown of France, came out of the Par­liaments Purse, with a good advantage. It is likewise said, Mazarine had an Agent here, to drive on the interest of France in England, Hist. of Independ. 2 part, p. 112. And it is known that Cromwel's interest with France, when the present King fled thither, after Wor­cester-fight, was so great, that he prevailed to have the King driven thence, to seek his safe­ty in other Countries.

And it is credibly reported, that Cromwel maintained or encouraged a company of Benedictine Monks to betray the Kings Coun­sels: That Manning, who was executed be­yong the Seas for disclosing the Kings Coun­sels, was a Papist, and had Masses sung for him after his death: That Lambert, who had been suspected as a Papist thirty years, with the help of a Popish Priest, contrived Crom­wels new Government. And the Jesuits per­ceiving, that if the Scotish and English Pres­byterians should cleerly and entirely grasp the power of the Nation, it would be a diffi­cult task to take it out of their hands; they abetted the Independent party, and other growing Sects; they mixed themselves with their Counsels and Armies; as Mr. Prynne affirmed. And a good Author says, that a Protestant Gentleman met with about thirty of them at one time, between Roan and Diep; who enquiring their design, and they taking him for one of their party, was in­formed by them, that they were going into England, and would take Arms in the Inde­pendant Army, and endeavour to be Agita­tors: and what work those creatures made, is too well known!

Nor is it less notorious, who they were that pleaded so strenuously for Liberty of Con­science. Such Tracts as directly urged the [Page 92]Toleration of Popery, as well as of other Sects, were penned and dispersed by the Jesuits: and the Indulgence granted to them by Cromwel, who was never known to punish any of them for their Recusancy, as long as they served his interest, argues his connivance, if not his approbation of them. By these was that Treatise of Father Parsons concern­ing the Succession, under the Title of Doleman, Reprinted, and dispersed, to keep us in confu­sion. Then it was that White wrote his Je­suitical books, and Milton seconded him. And the Pamphlets written to justifie the Proceed­ings of the Army, were dictated or written by the Jesuits.

In the year 1652. William Birchly publi­shed a Treatise, called The Moderator: or, Persecution for Religion condemned. In a Postscript to which, he says, that he subscribed his name according to an Order of Parliament; yet is not ashamed to say, that he had his Ar­guments from some of the Romish Priests; for a Toleration of whom he pleads as passio­nately, as if a whole Consult of them had penned the Pamphlet.

And a good Author saith, he hath been credibly informed, that a Jesuit of St. Omers declared, that they were Twenty years in hammering out the Sect of the Quakers. And whoever considers the Tenets of that Sect, [Page 93]will easily see whose off-spring they are. They refuse all Oaths; which serves the Jesuits to evade the Tests of the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy: they despite the Scriptures, as the Jesuits do: they contemn our Sacra­ments, especially the Eucharist, as the Papists do; vilifie the Ministers; and in matters of Doctrine have a great analogie with the Papists. Dr. Oates his Narrative and Depositions, Para­graph 34. speaks of the Jesuits and one Green, with eight other Fifth Monarchy-men, who clubbed together for firing the City of Lon­don.

I have told you what White the Jesuit did, and that wretched Milton, Cromwel's Secreta­ry, who had been at Rome, and in his wri­tings speaks of great kindness received there; and holding correspondence with some Ita­lians, could have no other design in printing those books of Divorce, against Tythes and Clergy-men, and to justifie the Regicides, but to bring us to Atheism first, and then to Confusion. He was by very many suspected to be a Papist; and if Dr. Oates may be be­lieved, was a known frequenter of the Po­pish Club, though he were Cromwel's Latine Secretary. The same Dr. tells us, that a Party of the Jesuits at Putney, were the Pro­jectors of our troubles, and the Kings ruine: That they broke up the Treaty at Ʋxbridge: [Page 94]That a Popish Lord brought a Petition to the Regicides, signed by above 500 Papists, pro­mising, That on condition of a Toleration, they would exclude the Family of the Stuarts from the Crown.

Having said so much to prove the agree­ment of Papists and Fanaticks for the de­struction of the Government of Church and State, I shall add a few lines, to vindicate the Chief Governours from those accusations of Popery which were charged on them.

In the year 1658. ten years after the death of the Royal Martyr, Mr. Baxter prints his Grotian Religion, and through Groti­us's sides strikes at the heads and members of the Church of Eng­land with the same blow. One reason of condemning Grotius as a Papist, may be, the Character which he gives of such men in his Book de Antichristo: Circumferamus oculos per omnem Historiam, quod un­quam seculum vidit tot subditorum in Principes bella sub religionis titu­lo? & horum concitatores ubique re­periuntur Ministri Evangelici, ut qui­dam se vocant: Quod genus homi­num, in quae pericula etiam nunc opti­mos Civitatis Amstelodamensis Magi­siratus conjicerit, videat si cui libet, de Presbyterorum in Reges audacia, li­brum Jacobi Britanniarum Regis cui nomen Donum Regium: videbit eum ut erat magni judicii ea praedixisse, quae nunc cum dolore & horrore conspici­mus. For the Grotian de­sign, i. e. Popery, (saith he) was carrying on in the Church of Eng­land: and this was the cause of all our Wars and changes, p. 105. where he thus talks of the Royal Martyr, [Page 95]beyond any thing that his barbarous Judges could accuse him of.

How far the King was inclined to a reconci­liation with the Church of Rome (saith Mr. Baxter) I onely desire you to judge, First, by the Articles of the Spanish and French Match sworn to. Secondly, by his Letter to the Pope written in Spain. Thirdly, by his choice of A­gents in Church and State. Fourthly, by the residence of the Popes Nuntio here, and the Col­ledge of the Jesuits, &c. Fifthly, by the ille­gal Innovations in Worship so resolvedly gra­datim introduced. All which I speak, not with the least desire to perswade men that he was a Papist, but onely to shew, that while he as a moderate Protestant, (i. e. a Papist in Masque­rade, as they are now termed) took hands with the Queen a moderate Papist, the Grotian Design had great advantage in England, which he himself boasted of, p. 106.

Of this indignity to that Religious Prince, the learned Bishop Bramhal, p. 617. of his Works, took notice, and vindicated him. Of which Mr. B. being informed, he says. p. 100. of his Defence, that he printed the contrary in times of Ʋsurpation, and that the Informer could not prove it, and that Bishop Bramhal was a Calumniator. The Book he refers to, was, (I suppose) dedicated to Richard Crom­well, whom he did not call an Ʋsurper, but [Page 96]one who piously, prudently, and faithfully, to his immortal honour, exercised the Government, 1659. Where, p. 327. having accused the Now Episcopal party for following Grotius, he says: As for the King himself, that was their Head, if any conjecture that he was a flat Pa­pist, I believe him not: but he was the head of the Grotian Papists, and he himself boasted of it, (ubi supra.) Now if any would know how far Grotius, and consequently the King was a Papist, he says, He (i. e. Grotius) was a more arrant Papist than Cassander, (who dy­ed in that Communion, and was one that own­ed the Council of Trent) and such I think are flat Papists.

But if Mr. B. did not believe the King to be a flat Papist, then his iniquity was the grea­ter, to give so many (though frivolous) in­stances by way of proof, that others might believe what Mr. B. did not. Did not Mr. B. know, that the fear of introducing Popery was made a chief ground of the War against the King? And may he not as well make it a ground of another War against the pre­sent King, because he adheres to his Bishops, whom Mr. B. calls Popish Clergie-men? And he says, that the Parliament, whom they were bound to believe, made it their great argument and advantage against the King, that he favou­red the Papists: and on this supposition (saith [Page 97]he) thousands came in to fight for their Cause.

And they made one Article against the Archbishop of Canterbury, that he endeavou­red to introduce Popery: whose life on that account they took away; though he were in­deed one of their greatest adversaries: which, as it appears by the discovery of the Plot of the Jesuits to take away his life, mentioned in the relation of Andreas ab Habernfield, and printed by Mr. Prynne; wherein, because of his constancy to the Established Religion, from which he could not be tempted by the offer of a Cardinals Cap made to him from the then Pope, by Con his Nuncio, they plotted his death: so it will appear to be a gross slander, by that which followeth. And first, it shall not be denied, that his promoting of decent Ceremonies, and some Executions on Seditious persons, procured him that ill report among the Fanaticks. But he refuted it sufficiently, by declaring openly at the Council-Table a­gainst the great resort of Papists to Denmark-house; of which also he complained to the King with passion, as a thing of dangerous consequence; and particularly against Sir To­by Matthews and Walter Mountague, two active Papists mentioned in Habernfields Dis­covery. And before that time, he published his Conference with Fisher the Jesuit; one of the best discourses yet extant against them. [Page 98]After which time, though he could not wipe off the aspersion among the Fanaticks, yet he was lookt on by the Papists as their grea­test enemy. He prevailed to banish both Matthews and Mountague from the Court whereat the Queen shewed some displeasure against him: but knowing how able and faithful a Minister he was for the Kings ser­vice, He reconciled the Queen to him again.

His Conference with Fisher was for the sa­tisfaction of some persons of Quality, on whom the Jesuits had practised. Sir Edward Dee [...] ­ing, his professed Adversary, says, That by [...] the Bishop had muzled the Jesuit, and struck the Papist under the fifth Rib. In his Preface [...] King Charles, he says, God forbid your Majesty should let the Laws and Discipline sleep, for fe [...] of the name of Persecution, and suffer Mr. Fish­er and his fellows to angle in all parts of your Dominions for your Subjects. Let us have [...] dissolving of Oaths of Allegiance, no depos [...] of Kings, and blowing up of States: for [...] their Religion were as good as they pretend, they cannot compass it by good means, I am [...] they ought not to attempt it by bad: for if the [...] will do evil that good may come of it, the [...] damnation is just. He complains there, tha [...] the Church was between two Factions as between two Milstones; wherefore he thought it his du [...] to deliver her from both: for he tells the [Page 99]King, that no one thing did make conscientious men to waver more in their minds, and to be drawn from the sincerity of Religion professed in the Church of England, than the want of uni­form and decent Order; the Romanist being apt to say, the Houses of God could not be suffered to lye so nastily, were the true Worship of God observed in them; the external worship of God in his Church, being the great witness to the world that our hearts stand right in that Ser­vice. And to deal clearly with your Majesty, these thoughts, and no other, made me labour so much for decency, and an orderly settlement of the external Worship of God. To this I add, that the Archbishop did no other than what was practised with good success upon the Pa­pists in Queen Elizabeths days; of which I have taken notice before, to be acknowledged by our present Dissenters.

This most Reverend Archbishop was not more averse from the Doctrine of the Papists, than from any acquaintance or correspondence with them. Panzani and Con, two of the Popes Nuncio's often endeavoured some Con­ference with him; but he still put them off, though some persons of Quality sollicited it. He suppressed Socinian and Popish Books espe­cially that called An Introduction to a devout life, written by Francis Sales Bishop of Gene­va. And to omit many other arguments, [Page 100]his Protestation at his death (of which hereaf­ter) is enough to satisfie all but Infidels.

Bishop Beadle, Anno 1633. certifyed Bi­shop Laud (then of London) of the dange­rous condition of Ireland, by the growth of Popery; and informed the Earl of Strafford, who was newly made Lord Deputy, that the Pope had a greater power in that Kingdom than the King; governing there by a Con­gregation de propaganda fide, established not long before at Rome: That the Popes Clergie there, was double in number to the Kings; and they were bound by Oath to maintain the Popes power and greatness against all per­sons: That the Pope had erected a Colledge in Dublin, to affront the Kings Colledge. One Harris, Dean of the New Colledge, printed a Treatise against Bishop Ʋshers Sermon at Wansteed: and after the dissolving of the new Frieries in Dublin, they erected others in the Country, where the people flocked in great multitudes to hear Mass, forgetting the Principles of Religion: That a Synodical meeting of their Clergy had been held in Drogheda, in which they decreed, That it was not lawful to take the Oath of Allegiance; and therefore it was thought necessary to re­strain them by a standing Army. Where­upon the Lord Deputy was advised to sum­mon a Parliament; and so ordered his affairs, [Page 101]as to raise an Army of Twenty thousand men, which was maintained mostly out of the Estates of the Papists; by which means he kept the Irish in awe; and had he been con­tinued there, that Hellish Massacre on the English Protestants, which followed on the withdrawing of that Great man, might in all probability have been prevented.

But these two Great men, the one of which made it his business to prevent Rebellion in the State, the other to suppress Faction and Confusion in the Church, were made the chief marks at which all the Plots and Darts, both of Jesuits and Fanaticks, were aimed; that by their fall, they might more easily destroy the King, as it afterward hapned: and not­withstanding their serious and succesful endea­vours to suppress Popery in Ireland, they are reputed and accused for Papists in England; but the true reason was, the Earl of Straf­ford and the Archbishop being two of the most faithful Ministers of State that the King had, the Scots endeavour in the first place to take them out of the way. For,

A Parliament being called on Novemb. 3. 1640. the Scots, under pretence of Religion, got a considerable Party in both Houses, to help on their designe. To which end, at their entrance into England, they made a Remon­strance, That their just desires so necessary for [Page 102]the good of both Kingdoms, could find no access to the ears of their gracious King, by reason of the powerful diversion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Deputy of Ireland; who being strengthened with a mighty Faction of Papists near the King, did rule in all matters both Temporal and Ecclesiastical, making the ne­cessity of their service to his Majesty to appear, in being the onely fit Instruments, under a pre­text of vindicating his Majesties Honour, is oppress the Liberties of his free Subjects, and the true reformed Religion. And this Remon­strance they seconded with another Libel, cal­led, The Intention of the Army: signifying to the People of England, That they had no de­signe to waste their Goods, or spoil their Coun­try, but onely to petition his Majesty to call a Parliament, and to bring the Archbishop and Deputy to condign punishment. At this time they set forth a Book against the Archbishop, called Laudensium Autocatacrisis, endeavour­ing to prove out of the Archbishop's Wri­tings, that he designed to bring in Supersti­tion, Popery, and Arminianism. There comes also a Petition from some Lords, complain­ing of the great increase of Popery, and of many inconveniencies drawn on the Kingdom by engaging against the Scots. This was signed by the Earls of Essex, Hartford, Rutland, Bedford, Exeter, Warwick, Mulgrave, and [Page 103] Bullingbrooke; the Lords Say, Mandevil, Brook, and Howard. And this was seconded by another from London.

The day for the sitting of the Parliament being appointed on the third of November, the Archbishop was advised that the Parlia­ment in the 20 of Hen. 8. which began in the fall of Cardinal Wolsey and the diminution of the power and priviledges of the Clergie, and ended in the dissolution of Religious houses, was begun on the same day; and therefore he should move the King to respite their sitting for a day or two. The event proved too sadly ominous: for this begun with the fall of the Archbishop, the Rites and Priviledges of the English Clergie, Bishops, Deans and Chapters; and the Cathedrals left without any means to repair them.

But there were other strange accidents ob­served by Dr. Heylen, in the Life of the Arch­shop, p. 450. On Friday-night, Jan. 24. 1639. he dreamt that his Father came to him, and askt him what he did there: and he asked his Father how long he would stay there: who replied, He would stay till he had him a­long with him. This Dream he noted in his Breviate. In December that year, the Boats that were drawn on land neer Lambeth, were by a violent tempest dasht against one another and broken in pieces. And the tops of two [Page 104]Chimneys were blown down, and beat through the Lead and Rafters on the Bed in which he was wont to lie; but the roughness of the water kept him that night at his Cham­ber in White-hall. The same night, at Croy­den, one of the Pinacles fell from the Steeple, and beat down the Lead and Roof of the Church twenty foot square. The same night, at the Metropolitical Church in Canter­bury, one of the Pinacles which carried a Vane with the Archbishop's Arms upon it, was blown down, and carried a good distance off; falling on the Roof of a Cloyster, where the Arms of the See of Canterbury were ingraven in Stone, which by the fall of the Pinacle were broken in pieces: whereat some did conje­cture, that he should not onely fall himself, but the Archiepiscopal Dignity should fall with him. But the Archbishop took most notice of anotheer Accident on St. Simon and Jude's Eve, a week before the sitting of the Parlia­ment; when going into his upper Study where his Picture in full length was wont to hang, he found it fallen on the ground, and lying flat on its face.

On Saturday, May 9. 1640. a Paper was posted on the Exchange, animating the Ap­prentices to sack his House at Lambeth: the Munday following, he therefore so fortified his Palace, that though five hundred persons at­tempted [Page 105]it, they could do nothing: but they broke open the Prisons in Southwark, and freed their Comrades; for which actions one Ben­steed a Leader of the Rabble was condemned and executed.

The great cry was, That he endeavoured to bring in Popery. Mr. Prynne says, he was at least a Cassandrian Papist, and endeavoured a reconciliation between us and Rome. A Book written against him, called The English Pope, printed 1643. tells us how far the King and Pope had agreed. The King (saith he) requi­red a Dispensation from the Pope that the En­glish Catholicks might resort to the Protestant Churches, & take the Oaths of Allegiance and Su­premacy; and that the Popes Supremacy was to be changed into a Priority; and that marriage should be permitted to the Priests, the Commu­nion administred under both kinds, and the Li­turgie in the English Tongue. But though these Concessions were more than the Pope would grant, yet another Libel says, There were general Propositions made for this agree­ment; and that the Archbishop had made some Innovations in order thereto, Popes Nuncio, p. 11. But what the Archbishop did, was not with a respect to peace with Rome, but to the setling of the Church of England on the first Principles of Reformation, and to make it more amiable even to the Papists, whom he [Page 106]aimed to win over first by Conferences, and then by an external Decency in the publick Service; the Catholicks being much offended at the slovenly keeping of our Churches, and the irreverence of the People at their Devo­tion. And though some accounted the Arch­bishop's actions in renewing ancient Rites to give advantage to Popery, yet others more knowing said, that it would tend to the ho­nour and advantage of the Church of England: for Dr. Heylin reports, that he heard from a person of known Nobility, that being with a Father of the English Colledge at Rome, one of the Novices told him with great joy, that the English were about to set up Altars, and offici­ate in Copes, to adorn their Churches, and paint their Windows; and were returning to the Church of Rome. To whom the Father replied with some indignation, That he talked like an ignorant Novice, and that these proceedings ra­ther tended to the ruine than advancement of the Catholick Cause, because the Church of Eng­land coming nearer to the ancient Ʋsages, the Catholicks there would be sooner drawn off from them, than any of that Nation would fall off to Rome.

Some things are objected against him in relation to the Doctrine and Devotion of the Church: as, That the Church of Rome was held to be a true Church: That the Pope hath [Page 107]a primacy over other Bishops: That it apper­tains to him to call General Councils: That Altars might be erected: That he was not wil­ling the Pope should be called Antichrist; or that every raw Preacher should trouble his peo­ple with Popish Controversies. Some of which were false Insinuations, and others vain and frivolous. In the Liturgies of Henry the 8th, and Edward the 6th, was this Expression: From the Tyranny of the Bishop of Rome, and all his detestable Enormi­ties, Good Lord, &c. Which words were expunged in the first of Queen Elizabeth, lest they should affright the Catholicks from co­ming to our Churches: on which ground the Archbishop finding in a Book of Prayer for the fifth of November (not confirmed by Law) these passages: Root out the Babylo­nish and Antichristian Sect, which say of Jeru­salem, Down with it, &c. And again, Cut off those workers of iniquity, whose Religion is Re­bellion, and whose Faith is Faction: He made these small alterations. In the first, thus: Root out the Babylonish and Antichristian Sect [of them] which say, &c. In the second, thus: Cut off those workers of iniquity who turn Religion into Rebellion, &c. Against which, some being conscious it was intended against them, made Objections. Which the Archbi­shop did, onely to avoid the giving of cause­less [Page 108]offences to the Romish Party. Which doubtless he endeavoured with all his skill to suppress. And besides his learned Disputati­ons against them, he procured a Canon to be pass'd in the Convocation, For suppressing the further growth of Popery, and reducing Papists to Church: and issued very strict and effectual Orders for the execution thereof. But it was the method, whether of the Jesuits, or Puri­tans, or both, to defame them most for Pa­pists, who acted most successfully against them; as did this Bishop, and Bishop Bramhall.

A passage or two in the Archbishop's Speech at his death, may satisfie all sober Rea­ders. I pray God (says he) the clamours of venient Romani (of which I have given no cause) help not to bring them in. Concerning the King. I shall be bold to say, He hath been much traduced for bringing in of Popery: but on my Conscience (of which I shall give God a very present account) I know him to be as free from this charge as any man living: and I hold him to be as sound a Protestant (according to the Religion by Law established) as any man in this Kingdom; and that he will venture his life as far and as freely for it: And I think I do or should know both his affection to Religion, and his grounds for it, as fully as any man in Eng­land. For my self, I was born and baptized in the Church of England, and the Religion by [Page 109]Law established: in that I have ever since li­ved, and in that I come now to die. This is no time to dissemble with God, least of all in mat­ters of Religion; and therefore I desire it may be remembred, I have always lived in the Pro­testant Religion established in England, and in that I come now to die. What clamours and slanders I have endured for labouring a Ʋni­formity in the external Service of God, accor­ding to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church, all men know, and I have abundantly felt.

We have observed the Principles of Jesuits and Fanaticks, wherein they agree, and have joyntly acted against the Government in Church and State, for the ruine of both; and how, like Janus his head, they did not onely look backward, to the Justification of the Mur­ther of the old King, but forward, to prevent the Restauration of his present Majesty. And hitherto their Practices have been according. It remains now that we consider, what these Factions have practised to hinder that happy Restauration, by Gods miraculous providence, and the wise conduct of the noble General Monk, now established. What the Popish Party did to hinder him from coming to his Fathers Throne, hath been partly discovered already; I shall now shew what the Fana­ticks [Page 110]did. And will begin with the Scots, who called him home first, to vex and tor­ment him with their unrighteous dealings, and temptations between hopes and fears, and af­fronted him with unsufferable Reproaches for the sins of his Father and Grandfather, as well as his own: insomuch that he often attempted to leave them, fearing, as it came to pass, that they would at last betray him.

What provocations he met with in private, may be guessed at by their publick actions The Thursday before the Coronation, was se [...] apart as a Solemn day of Humiliation for the sins of the Royal Family; and Robert Douglas in the Coronation-Sermon told the King, That his Grandfather King James remembred not the kindness of them who had held the Crown upon his head; yea, he persecuted faithful Ministers; he never rested till he had undone Presbyterial Government and Kirk-Assemblies, setting up Bishops, and bringing in Ceremonies, and laid the foundation whereon his Son our late King di [...] build much mischief in Religion all the days of his life, p. 73. And p. 52. he tells our Sove­raign to his face, That a King abusing his power to the overthrow of Religion, Laws, and Liber­ties, which are the Fundamentals of that Cove­nant, may be controuled and opposed: and if he set himself to overthrow all these by Arms, they who have the power, as the Estates of the [Page 111]Land, may and ought to resist by Arms; because he doth by that opposition break the very Bonds, and overthrow the Essentials of this Contract and Covenant. This may serve (says he) to justifie the proceedings of this Kingdom against the late King, who in a hostile way set himself to overthrow Religion, Parliaments, Laws, and Liberties. Thus was the Scotish Crown lined with Thorns; and the King had Gall and Vine­gar given him to drink, instead of the Royal Ʋn­ction; of which he says, p. 34. The Bishops be­hoved to perform this Right, and the King be­hoved to be sworn to them: but now, by the blessing of God, Popery and Prelacy are removed, let the anointing of Kings with Oyl go to the door with them, and let them never come in a­gain. So that although the Scots Army were overthrown at Worcester, yet his Majesty e­scaping with safety and liberty (by a won­derful Providence) he was (as the event now shews) a very great Gainer by that Loss.

And as to his Majesties return into England, it is very evident that they had not forgot­ten their old Doctrine of binding their Kings in Chains; and therefore they endeavoured to lay such Conditions and Fetters on the King, as neither his Father could, nor He would be able to bear. As soon as ever the General's intent to bring home the King was [Page 112]known, there were frequent and zealous Ap­plications made, That the godly Ministers of the Land might be provided for, and the King might be a Covenanting King. And he was dehorted from calling him home, by one Mr. Baxter, Because (as he said) Profaneness was so inseparable from the Royal Party, that if e­ver the King returned, the power of Godliness would be lost.

The same person being admitted to preach before that remainder of the House of Com­mons when they were consulting to call home the King, he delivered not one word that might promote that Noble Designe, but many things that might hinder, or clog it with very dishonourable terms. He intimates the Su­preme Power to be still in the two Houses, ac­cording to his Holy Commonwealth's Maximes. He says indeed, That Rom. 13. is part of the Rule of his Religion; but adds, There hath un­happily been a difference amongst us which is the Higher Power: but he was fully of the mind as he had formerly declared, That it was in the two Houses: and therefore he adds, It was not the intent of St. Peter or St. Paul to determine whether the Emperour or the Senate were Supreme.

In the same Humiliation-Sermon, he mag­nifies the Loyalty of the Presbyterians; ad­jures the Commons to oppose Episcopacy (though [Page 113]the King in his Message commended it to be as ancient as the Monarchy in this Island) and under the titles of sound Doctrine and Church-Government, pleads for Presbytery; and that the Church-Revenues might be setled on them. p. 46. saying, Give first to God the things that are Gods. For them he pleads, as being the godly, peaceable, and prudent people of the Land, in opposition to Profaness. And to insinuate new fears and jealousies, cries out, O what happy times did we once see! He did not mean the peaceable time of King Charles the First; those were, in his account, days of Profaness and Persecution: He must mean either under the Long Parliament, or some o­ther of the Revolutions of Government, when he was a Souldier, or enjoyed a Sequestrati­on, and Plunder, &c. And yet this man boa­steth that the King was voted home the next day after that Sermon of his; as if that had not been done, if he had not preached: where­as he seems to me to be of the same mind that he was of a year before, when he decla­red, p. 486. of Holy Com. That having often searched into his heart whether he did lawfully engage in the (first) War or not, and encoura­ged so many thousands, he could not see that he was mistaken in the main Cause; nor dares he repent of it, nor forbear doing the same, if it were to do again, in the same state of things.

There is one mysterious transaction of the Fanatick Party, whereby they endeavoured to impose upon the King before his return: they had (it seems) drawn up some Heads in favour of Presbytery, and to the prejudice of the Episcopal Government; which they de­sired the King to publish in a Declaration: and the King, in compliance with the exigen­cy of the times, and the necessity of his own affairs, did publish in a Declaration from Bre­da; but with a Reservation expressed there­in, That he would leave the particulars therein mentioned to be considered and established by a free Parliament. To this Declaration (saith Mr. Baxter, p. 87. of part 2. of his third Plea) they would have conformed, on this Supposi­tion, that the Species of Prelacy was altered by it. And Mr. B. foreseeing that the Epis­copal Party would be grieved by it, makes this Objection (against those that extorted that Declaration) in the name of the Bi­shops.

Object. You did but obtrude on us your own Opinions: for when you had drawn up most of those words, his Majesty was forced to seem for the present to grant them to you.

To this Mr. B. answers: If we did offer such things (which is a confession) let the world judge what we sought by them (viz. by your own confession, to change the Species of Episco­pal Government).

2. He says, There is most of that about ru­ral Deans put in, I suppose by the Bishops con­sent, after it went FROM US.

So that it is evident, that they did what they could to bring the King under their Chains, before he came to his Crown; and had not a superiour power, by the conduct of the ever-renowned General, otherwise deter­mined, he should have been a King and no King to this day. But in a free and full Par­liament, the Ancient Government was establi­shed in its full splendour, to the great regret of these unpeaceable men.

And whereas his Majesty desired them to read so much of the Common-Prayer as they had no just exceptions against, we heard not of any compliance to that just desire, though they confessed they could use the greatest part of it. But instead thereof, they clamour for a Reformation of Doctrie, Discipline, and Wor­ship; and petition his Majesty that some Di­vines of both Parties might be employed to compile such a new Form as they there descri­bed; or at least to revise and reform the old, &c. The King denies the first part (viz.) of making a new Liturgie, having in his Decla­ration of Octob. 5. expressed his esteem of the Old; but grants the second, and issues out his Commission to that end, impowering them to compare it with the most ancient Liturgies, [Page 116]and to make such reasonable and necessary alterations and amendments as should be thought fit, avoiding all unnecessary abbrevia­tions of the Forms wherewith the people were acquainted.

But instead of this, they draw up another Liturgie, or rather Directory, which was pen­ned by Mr. Baxter (as he says) in eight days; and against the consent of the greatest part, offers that, in opposition to the established Li­turgie. And in a threatning Petition for Peace, p. 5. he thus speaks: Take heed how you drive men by penalties on that which they judge doth tend to their damnation. And p 14. The denial of their desires would renew all our troubles. And they also desire the King to leave out of his Declaration these words: We do not in our judgments believe the practice of those particular Ceremonies we except against to be in it self unlawful, ( i. e. we do account them sinful.) And in the close of the second Paper, they tell the King, if he grant those favours, It would revive their hearts to pray for his prosperity: but (p. 12.) should we lose the opportunity of our desired Reconciliati­on, it astonisheth us to foresee what doleful ef­fects our Divisions would produce; which we will not mention in particular, lest our words should be misunderstood.

Mr. Baxter made a Prognostication, dated [Page 117]1661. When by the Kings Commission (says he) we in vain treated for Concord, to tell the Bi­shops what they are, and what they must expect: That they are worldly, proud, covetous, domi­neering, malignant, and lazy; the plague of the world, troublers of Princes, and dividers of Churches, p. 32. & p. 9. 12, 13. and animates the people to revile, p. 14. 20. 22. and, which is notorious, p. 28. n. 105. That where PA­PISTS OR HERETICKS are shut out by Law, they will secretly contribute the utmost of their endeavours to make the sufferings of dissenting Protestants as grievous as possibly they can; that in despite of them, their own necessities may compel them to cry out for Li­berty, till they procured a common Toleration for all, and opened the door for Papists and He­reticks, as well as for themselves. And he hath lived to make good his Prognostick, like Nostredamus his Son, who having pro­phesied that on such a day the City should be burnt, he set it on fire himself.

As to the Toleration, by which Papists were indulged as well as other Dissenters, it is evi­dent that it was obtained by the mutual en­deavours of both Parties. Coleman confesseth it in behalf of the Papists, who thereby in­tended the ruine of our Church, to which they thought it a most probable means. And for the other Dissenters, Mr. Humfrys in his [Page 118] peaceable Designe, p. 71. speaks, in the name of his Brethren, to this effect: What shall we say then to the Papist? Answ. The Papist in our account is but one sort of Recusants, and the con­scientious and peaceable among them must be held in the same predicament with those among our selves, that likewise refuse to come to Common-Prayer. And, p. 72. As for the common Pa­pist who lives innocently in his way, he is to us as other Separatists, and so comes under the like Toleration. And I (saith Mr. Baxter) so lit­tle fear the noise of the censorious, that even now while the Plot doth render them most odious, say freely, 1. That I would have Papists used like men. 2. I would have no man put to death for being a Priest. 3. I would have no Writ de Excommunicato capiendo, or any Law compel them to our Communion and Sacra­ments, p. 19. of second Defence. And p. 235. of his first Plea, he says, It is but reasonable, if on such necessity ( i. e. the Penalties for Non­conformity) they should accept of favour from any Papist that should save them, &c. So that they are resolved to live in compliance with the Papists, rather than in conformity with the established Church. And here it appears, whether the Conformist or Nonconformist is the greater Friend to Popery.

Dr. Stillingfleet's Defence, penned by an ingenious person, says, p. 68. I will tell Mr. B. [Page 119] a Secret which I have heard, but hope he will not put me to prove it: That the Parliament made good Laws; the Papist out of a pretended reverence to tender Consciences, hindred the execution of them; and some leading Fana­ticks had a private encouragement (to say no more) to set up a mighty cry of Persecution, to cast all the odium on a persecuting Church, and Diocesan Canoneers.

Dr. Owen takes this hint. Some have re­ported (says he) that some of the Noncon­formists do or have received money from the Pa­pists to act their affairs, and promote their in­terests; which he calls a putrid Calumny, &c. and avows, That never any person in Authori­ty, Dignity, or Power in the Nation, or that had any relation to pullick affairs, nor any from them, Papist or Protestant, did once speak one word to him, or advise with him about any In­dulgence or Toleration to be granted to the Pa­pists. He says not, That he never received a­ny Moneys or Message to promote a general To­leration; which, he thinking himself particu­larly reflected on, might have done in few words. And my Author desires Dr. O. to resolve him why a Fast was appointed by a certain Independent Pastor at that time, on the fifth of November, which (as he notes) is no Popish Festival. Mr. Hunt (one of their Confederates) says, It is well known several [Page 120]of them ( i. e. the Nonconformists) were in Pension to the D. And no men have been bet­ter received of the D. than J. J. J. O. E. B. and W. P. &c. Ringleaders of the Separation. And p. 98. Consider how the Church of England is used, which is truly the Bulwark of the Prote­stant Religion.

If one Party, saith Mr. Baxter, (viz. the Authority of the Nation) would bring them to such a pass, that they must be hanged, imprison­ed, ruined, or worse, (as if they were in the hands of Canibals) unless the favour of the Papists deliver them; and the other Party ( viz. the Nonconformists) had rather be sa­ved by the Papists, than be hanged or ruined by Protestants; they ought not to be suspected of Popery. This is not onely to open a door to let the Papists in, but upon meer Fears and Jealousies to flee out to them.

Now judge who is a greater friend to Po­pery; the old Protestants, who have made Law to keep it out; or the Dissenters, who would destroy those Laws to let it in. And that their obstinate separation from the Church-Communion is an effectual means thereunto, I shall give the judgment of Mr. Phil. Nye, a great Covenanter, who, not long before his death, foreseeing the mischievous consequence of those extravagant heats the people were running into, wrote a Discourse on purpose to [Page 121]prove it lawful to hear the conforming Mini­sters; and answers all the common Objections against it; and wonders how the different Parties came to be so agreed, in thinking it unlawful to hear us preach. But he saith he is perswaded, it is one constant designe of Sa­tan, in the variety of ways of Religion he hath set on foot by Jesuits among us: Let us therefore be more aware of whatsoever tends that way. So that Mr. Nye plainly acknow­ledgeth that the Jesuits were very busie a­mong them; and that they and the Devil joyned together in setting them at the grea­test distance possible from the Church of Eng­land; and that those who would countermine the Devil and the Jesuits, must avoid what­ever tends to that height of Separation.

Mr. Baxter seemed to be of the same judgment, p. 17. of his Preface to the Defence of the Cure of Church-divisions, where he saith, Our Divisions gratifie the Papists, and greatly hazard the Protestant Religion more than most of you seem to believe or regard. And had Mr. B. regarded as he ought, he would not have hardened the People in that Separation, as he hath since done. For he says again, That among the many inconveniencies of Sepa­ration, this is one, that Popery will get by it so great advantage, as may hazard us all; and we may lose that which the several Parties do con­tend [Page 122]about. Yet, as you have heard, these men joyned interest with the Papists to pro­cure this mischievous Toleration. Coleman at his Tryal owned that he was of opinion, That Popery might come in, if liberty of Conscience had been granted. And the Author of the two Conferences between Le Chese and the four Jesuits, owns that the Declaration of Indul­gence was procured by help of the Papists, who were included in it; but saith, The Pres­byterians presently suspected the kindness, and like wise men closed with the Conformists; when on the contrary, they wrote in defence of it, and so increased the Schism, that we feel the effects of it to this day. And I my self have observed, how much a Popish Lord of these Western parts, was caressed by the Dissen­ters in these parts, upon the Indulgence; and how kind he was to them.

One thing more I cannot o [...]t in Mr. B's Prognostick, p. 200. speaking to the Bishops and Clergie, he says, It may be your great Pa­trons may die, or FALL, or forsake you; and then your hearts are broken: it may be death may enter into your Families, and make you think what bloud-thirstiness doth tend to. Now what manner of Fall and Death he means, he explains, p. 204. One Felton may end the great Duke of Buckingham, p. 205. Or they may meet with such Executioners as Cardinal [Page 123]Beton. Nor was Mr. Baxter a false Prophet, though perhaps a bloudy one in this Progno­stick; witness that horrid Assassination of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, one of his Maje­sties Privy Counsellors, May 3. 1679; who coming from Edinburg in his Coach with one Daughter, was assaulted by twelve men well armed. The Coachman perceiving it, drove as fast as six good horses could run. But they pursued, shooting into the Coach. And one Balfour rid up to the Postilion, woun­ded him with a Sword on his face, shot one of the forehorses, hamstring'd another, and so stopt the Coach; and the rest of the Mur­therers being come up, one of them fired a Pistol so near his breast, that his Daughter rubbed off the burning from his Gown. Then calling him Dog, Villain, Apostate, and Persecutor of the Godly, Decrier of Jesus Christ and his Church, bid him come out of his Coach to receive what he deserved for his wickedness against the Kirk of Scotland. Upon which his Daughter got out of the Coach, and fell on her knees, begging her Fathers life: but they regarding not her Prayers or Tears, threw her on the ground, trampling on her, and wounding her: which her tender-hear­ted Father seeing, after many threatnings came meekly out of the Coach, and calmly said to them, I know not that I ever injured [Page 124]any of you; or if I did, I am ready to make you reparation; and therefore I beseech you to spare my life, and I promise I will never pursue you for this violence. And I pray you consider, be­fore you bring the guilt of innocent bloud upon your selves. This made them stand a while, and one of them relenting, cried, Spare these gray hairs; but the rest replied, He must die, he must die: and then repeating their re­proachful words, said, Thou shalt now receive the reward of thy Apostacy, and Enmity to the people of God. At which the Archbishop beg­ged a little time to pray, telling them he would pray for them: but they scornfully told him, They cared not for his Prayers, being sure that God would not hear so base a Dog as he was. Then looking stedfastly on one of the Assassines whom he seemed to know, he kneeled before him, saying, Sir, you are a Gentleman, and I must beg my last favour from you: Since you are resolved that I must die, have pity on my poor Child, and spare her life; and for this, Sir, give me your hand. And stretching out his hand, he had for a return a very great blow with a Shable, which almost cut off his hand. And the Villain redoub­ling his stroak, gave him another violent wound on the lest eye, which cut him two inches above it, and one below it. This stroak knocked him down: but getting on [Page 125]his knees again, he said, Gentlemen, it is now enough, you have done your work: and holding up his hands to Heaven as well as he could, he fervently cried out, Lord Jesus, have mer­cy on my Soul, and receive my Spirit. While he was in this posture of Devotion, they wounded him in his hands which he held up to Heaven, and in other parts of his body, till in a kind of composure he laid down his head on his arm, saying, God forgive you, and I forgive you all. These were his last words: after which, they gave him about sixteen wounds in his head, so that it seemed to be but one wound; and pieces of his Skull and Brains were found on the ground. And ha­ving left him, some fancied that they heard him groan; which made them go back, and to make sure work, stirred his Brains with the points of their Swords. Then they made his Servants swear not to discover them; and bad them in derision take up their Priest; and rode back to Magus. And one of them, John Balfour of Kinlock, passing by that Town, was heard to say, that Now Judas was killed.

These things were testified before the Privy-Council by the Oaths of his Daughter and Servants; and the Wounds given him were particularly mentioned in a Certificate of a Doctor of Physick and three Chirurgeons, [Page 126]who by Order of the Council did view and em­balm his body. The Assassines were notori­ous Fanaticks, Frequenters of Field-Conventi­cles, and Followers of Mr. Welsh and other trai­terous and rebellious Preachers. Nine of the Actors were discovered by their names. The Depositions of the Witnesses against them lie on record, to satisfie all men particularly. One James Anderson, Farmour, says, that George Balfour came to his Brothers house after the Murther, at Gilston, and told him it was done; and that the rest of the Murther­ers waited for him on Tace's Moore; and that he returning to them, they possessed them­selves of a Barn at Toukits about three in the afternoon, and parted thence about seven; when all of them spake with the said Ander­son, who knew them all particularly, and thus named them; John Balfour of Kinlock, David Hacston of Rathillet, George Balfour of Gilston, James Russel of Kingscattle, Robert Dingwall a Farmer's Son in Cadham, Andrew Guillan a Weaver in Balmerinock, Alexander Henderson, and Andrew Henderson Son of Sir John Henderson in Kilbrackmont, George Flem­ming Son to George Flemming in Balbathy.

This discovery being made, the late Re­bellion on the 29th of May broke out; which forced the Privy-Council to desist from the pursuit of the Murtherers, that they might [Page 127]suppress that Insurrection; which would have shaken the Government, if the Rebels had got the first Victory, or kept their ground. In which Army the Murtherers sheltred them­selves with the Conventiclers, who called themselves the Covenanting Army: which be­ing beaten, the Murtherers fled the King­dom: but while the Army lay at Glascow, one of the Balfours openly boasted of the Murther as a glorious fact; and said, holding up his Arm, This hand helped to kill the Fox. And five of their Confederates chose to die and hang in Chains on the place, rather than to confess the sinfulness of the Action, or ac­knowledge it to be a Murther or a Sin.

One Mitchel, who attempted the Murder of this Archbishop eleven years before, was applauded for it by some Covenanters. My Author quotes the Principles on which these Murtherers acted. Goodman, p. 27. of Pope­ry and Tyranny, says, That all men are bound to see the Laws of God kept, and to suppress and resist Idolatry by force: nor is it sufficient for Subjects not to obey the wicked commands of Princes, but they must resist them, and deliver the children of God out of the hands of their ene­mies, as we would deliver a Sheep in danger to be devoured by a Wolf: and if the Magistrate shall refuse to put Mass-mongers and false Prea­chers to death, the people in seeing it performed [Page 128]shew that zeal of God which was commended in Phinees.

Gilby says, That Kings, Princes, and Gover­nours have their Authority from the People, and on occasion the People may take it away again, as men may revoke their Proxies. It is lawful (saith he) to kill wicked Kings and Tyrants. The Subjects did kill the Queens Highness A­thaliah; John killed the Queens Majesty Je­zabel; Elias, being no Magistrate, killed the Queens Majesties Chaplains, Baal 's Priests.

Knox in his Debate with Lithinton, ( Hist. of Reformat. p. 390.) justifies the killing of Ty­rannical Princes, and men in publick places, by private persons, from the Example of Phinees, who, he says, was a private person, whose fact was approved and rewarded; and affirms that it ought to be imitated by those who prefer the true Worship and Glory of God, to the af­fection of fleshly and wicked Princes: and says, that this Example approved by God, stands instead of a Command: for as God is im­mutable, so he cannot condemn that which he hath approved in his Servants before us.

The Book called Naphtali, justifieth the Rebellion at Pentland-Hills, Anno 1666, from the same Example, ascribing it to the Holy Spirit of God; asserting, that the Rebels were no more Traytors, than Phinees was a Murder­er; being led by the same Spirit, and had as [Page 129]good warrant, p. 21, &c. The same Doctrine as defended by a Book called Jus populi vin­dicatum, ch. 20. p. 409, &c. On this Prin­ciple Mr. Mitchel attempted to murther the Archbishop, Anno 1668. and did mortally wound the Bishop of Orkney; for which he was executed: (See Ravilliack Redivivus:) but died impenitently, believing he was led to this heroical act by the Spirit of God.

These and such Books, are used by the Field-Conventiclers more than the Practice of Piety. One of them being taken and search­ed, had Naphtali in one Pocket, and a Pistol charged with two Bullets in the other; i. e. (as a Gentleman said) The Doctrine for one hand, and the Application for the other. Ma­ny other Pamphlets, such as was the Apologie, and Apologetical Narration, The poor mans Cup, The History of the Indulgence, were printed in Scotland; and many to the like purpose in England, under the Titles of Pleas for Peace, the Celeusma, &c. defaming the Bishops, as Apostate perjured Prelates, Traytors to Christ, Enemies to his People, Thorns and Thistles, bloudy Persecutors, Popish Clergie-men, &c. to prepare the people to another Rebellion, and Assassinations.

It would be too large to repeat the Tu­mults, Wars, and malicious Murthers com­mitted in Scotland by the Conventiclers upon [Page 130]such as according to the Laws sought to sup­press them; and how they justified them all in several Pamphlets, which are in the hand of almost all that can read them. How ob­stinately they died, justifying themselves in those horrid Actions: chusing rather to die, than confess the sinfulness of them, and to beg pardon, or to pray for the King, and promise o­bedience. Mitchel at his death said, That he laid down his life willingly, in opposition to the perfidious Prelates, and in testimony of the Cause of Christ; and in his Speech, saith, Blessed are all they that take the proud Prelates and dash their brains against the stones. And yet we have had some at home, who have not onely pitied these men, but promoted their Practices there, and frequently attempted the same in England.

Since his Majesties return, who can but wonder at the Enthusiastick madness of Ven­ner and the Fifth-monarchy-men, who with less than half an hundred of men, attempted the whole City of London! And the Plot in December 1662, to cut off Root and Branch, King. Queen, Duke, Bishops, and Gentry, that none of them might run beyond Sea; for which Tong, Philips, Stubbs, Hinde, Sallers, and Gibbs, were executed at Tyburn: which Plot was to be carried on upon the fear and jealousie of a Popish Massacre. And seditious [Page 131] Letters were dispersed to that purpose; a copy of which was read in the Court: and the Fifth-monarchy-men, Quakers, Anabaptists, and all sorts of Fanaticks were invited to joyn in the Plot.

The next year, March 21. 1663. another Plot was discovered in the North, of which the King says in his Speech, That it was of a large extent, and very near execution, had he not by Gods goodness come to the knowledge of the principal Contrivers, and secured them from executing their intended mischief.

In the year 1666. there was another Plot to murther his Majesty, and overthrow the Go­vernment; to kill the General, surprize the Tower, fire the City; and a Junto setled in London, and Money provided to carry on this designe: for which Rathbone, Sanders, Tuc­ker, Flint, Evans, Miles, Westcot, and Coles, were executed.

And whether such bloudy practices as these have not been encouraged by those Principles which the Jesuits and Fanaticks, especially Mr. White and Mr. Baxter have published in print, is so evident, that it can admit of no dispute or contradiction; especially if it be considered of what a cruel disposition that man who hath published so many Pleas for Peace (but such a Peace as the Historian speaks of; Desolationem volunt, & Pacem vocant, cannot [Page 132]be had but by the ruine of Church and State) was, who kept the Field against the King from the beginning of the Wars, till he became a Prisoner, as hath been collected out of his own boasting Confessions, in a little Tract called The second part of the History of Separation; to which I shall adde the following Relation.

Mr. Vernon in his Life of Dr. Heylin (Pre­face ad finem:) Mr. Baxter (says he) may be pleased to call to mind what was done to old Major Jennings in the last War, in the Fight that was between Linsel and Longford in Sa­lop; where the Kings Party being worsted, the Major was stript almost naked, and left for dead in the Field: but Mr. Baxter and one Lieute­nant Hurdman walking among the wounded and dead bodies, perceived some life left in the Ma­jor; and Hurdman run him through the body in cold bloud, Mr. Baxter all the while looking on, and taking off with his own hand the Kings Pi­cture from about his neck; telling him, as he was swimming in his Gore, that he was a Popish Rogue, and that was his Crucifix: which Pi­cture was kept by Mr. Baxter for many years, till it was got from him, but not without much difficulty, by one Mr. Summerfield, who then lived with Sir Tho. Rous, and generously resto­red it to the poor man, now alive at Wiche near Parshore in Worcestershire, although at the Fight supposed to be dead, being, after the [Page 133]wounds given him, dragged up and down the Field by the merciless Souldiers; Mr. Baxter approving of the inhumanity, by feeding his eyes with so bloudy and barbarous a Spectacle. For the truth of which, we have this Subscripti­on:

But to return. That which I desire the Reader chiefly to observe, is, that all the de­signes of the Dissenting Parties ever since Q. Elizabeth's time, have been ushered in with Remonstances and Intelligences of Popish Plots, and Massacres, and the change of our Religion, and loss of Liberties. This is the common Prologue to all their intended Tragedies; as in the Plot of Tong and his Confederates, Sir Jo. Maynard observed, About five thousand Let­ters were to be dispersed through the Nation. to possess the people that the Papists would about that time massacre the Protestants; which was done (says he) to raise a fear and discontent in the Nation, to induce them to joyn in the de­signe, which was to kill the King, and alter the Government. The Letter then read in Court, was to this effect.

Another Intrigue of the two Factions, was to effect the dissolution of the late long Par­liament; of whose Loyalty and love to the Church, the King had such signal proofs, that he kept them between fourteen and fifteen years together, notwithstanding many at­tempts to have them dissolved. They found all things in confusion, and met with great dif­ficulties and opposition; the Revenues of the Crown were exhausted, the Church was razed [Page 135]to the very foundations, and the Three King­doms turn'd into that which the Factions cal­led a Common-wealth, but indeed was a Com­mon woe: but by their Conduct, the Kings Revenues were increased to such a competen­cy as might support the Royal Crown and dig­nity, and freed Him from that precarious and necessitous condition which was the occasion of his Royal Fathers ruine: the Church also was by good and wholsome Laws so well esta­blished for holiness and beauty too, as that it was once more the envy of the Factions. The Laws made for conformity to the Publick Wor­ship were so full, that there needed nothing but a due execution of them, to destroy the Se­paration. And as to Popery, the old Laws were not only revived, but a new Test con­trived, to discover and disable those of that Perswasion from doing mischief. There was a Bill prepared by the House of Lords for se­curing the Protestant Religion as it was then established, especially against Popery; which was so contrived by a select Committee of the most Religious and Loyal Lords Spiritual and Temporal, that the Popish Party said, If that past into an Act, they must expect fire and fag­got. These things exasperated both Par­ties.

The Earl of Shaftsbury, who had been of all parties, but never true to the interest of [Page 136] any, had serew'd himself into the quality of a Chief Minister of State; but not content therewith, he aspired to ingross the whole conduct of Affairs both at home and abroad; which the King and his Royal Brother not per­mitting, he became an enemy to both, and made it his business to perplex and embroil the affairs of the Three Nations. And the better to effect it, made himself the Head of the Fanatick Party; who thinking them­selves oppressed for want of liberty to ruine themselves and others, and finding no hopes of such a liberty from that Parliament, used all possible arts to bring it into contempt, in order to its dissolution; being confident, that if that could be effected, they should be able to make such a choice of Parliament-men a­gainst another Session, as would espouse their interest. And indeed they were not deceived: for in the succeeding Parliaments, they had retrieved the Good old Cause, if the great prudence of His Majesty, and the Religious Loyalty of the House of Peers, had not pre­vented it.

And herein they might be assured of the mutual assistance of the Popish party, who had conceived as great a prejudice against this Par­liament, as the other; and whose hopes were grounded on our Divisions which they also, in conjunction with the Fanaticks, thought [Page 137]would most probably be effected, by the new Election of Parliament-men. Coleman is made chief Agent of the Popish party; upon whom though Shaftsbury looked asquint, yet they both acted the same thing, (viz.) the dissolution of the Parliament. Some said they were a company of young raw States-men, that gran­ted whatever the King desired, without any deliberation. To this the King answered, that if they were young and beardless now, he would keep them till their beards were grown, and they had got more experience. Then comes forth in print a Narrator, which tells the people, that the House of Commons are a company of indigent and out-lawed persons, The Court-Favourites, or the Dukes Creatures, and Pensioners to the King of France; and as such, the Names of the most Loyal Members were posted up in the City, and published in the Country, to render them odious, and uncapa­ble of another Election. The Bishops also are reviled, as in 41, as being Popishly af­fected.

At length, the King having, for reasons best known to himself, Prorogued this Parliament for fifteen Months, being to meet again on the fifteenth of February, 1675. they were no sooner met, but the Earl of Shaftsbury had got a small Party in the House of Lords to question the legality of their sitting as a [Page 138]Parliament. And first, the Duke of Buck­ingham insists, 4 Edw. 3. c. 14. & 36 Edw. 3. o. 10. that there being divers Acts of Parliament is force for Annual Parliaments, this Prorogation for fifteen Months, made those Acts impracticable, and so in effect the Parliament was dissolved. This Motion and Argument was followed by the Earls of Shaftsbury, Salisbury, and the Lord Wharton; but so ill resented by the House of Lords, that they were all four sent to the Tower. Yet the dispute ended not here; for several Pam­phlets are written and dispersed, to perswade the people that the Parliament was actually dissolved, and they were now only a Conver­tion, and no Parliament; and that no Taxt [...] imposed by them, ought to be paid, nor any of their Orders obligatory. One Pamphlet [...] intituled, The Long Parliament dissolved Another called, A seasonable Question, and useful Answer. The Question is put, in a Let­ter from a person pretending to be chosen [...] fit in that Parliament, to a Bencher, desiring to be resolved before he took his Journey, Whether the Parliament were not dissolved [...] the Prorogation of fifteen Months: which th [...] Bencher resolved in the Affirmative. But th [...] artifice was quite ruined, by the Submission of the Lords in the Tower, before they could obtain their liberty. But both this and th [...] [Page 139] other Faction were so restless, that they pur­sued their designs till they brought them to the desired end, the dissolution of that Loyal Parliament.

During this interval of Parliaments, the two Factions are very industrious to provide [...]or the choice of such men as were known e­nemies to the Church and Government establi­shed; and several such were chosen, who had been actually engaged against the King in the [...]ate Wars, or were the Children and next re­lations of such. And in the next Parliament, the [...]ld leaven began to ferment; the methods of Sedition in 41 are renewed, fears and jea­lousies of Popery and Arbitrary Government a­ [...]muse the whole Nation; Supplies for necessa­rily occasions are denyed; Comprehension and Toleration pleaded for; and in one of the sub­sequent Parliaments, the Act of 35 of Queen Eliz. is voted a grievance, and thought fit to be abrogated: whereat all that knew the o­pinion of the Dissenters, (viz.) that that Act was principally, if not solely intended a­gainst the Papists) did greatly wonder; for most certainly that Act laid a restraint on the Papists, under very severe penalties; from which though the Dissenters pleaded that they were exempted, yet it was the judgment is well of the Judges that then were, as of all those that have been in the succeeding times [Page 140]ever since, that they were as abnoxious to it a [...] the Papists. And indeed, the occasion which procured that Act, and the preamble there [...] do plainly evince that it equally respected th [...] Recusants and Non-conformists of both parties [...] for the end of it was to retein her Majesties Subjects in due obedience. And doubtless the Popish party would have purchased the abroga­tion of that Act with a great sum of money but the other Dissenters were ready to grati­fie them in the disannulling of it; to which the House of Commons had agreed by a plurality of voices: but it proved abortive for want of that Authority which gives lif [...] to all Laws. And so the Factions remain [...] statu quo to this day.

How violent and unjustifiable the Action and Speeches of divers persons in the follow­ing Parliaments were, and of what evil con­sequences, the ensuing particulars will demon­strate.

It is credibly reported, that the late Scot­tish Stirs (as some are pleased to call them were fomented not only by several Jesuitical persons that acted secretly among them, and preached in some of their Conventicles; but by some correspondence and intelligence from England, particularly by an Harangue of [...] great Lord, who (as himself says) spake by the Dictates of the Spirit within him, to this purpose.

By the very next Post after this Speech was said to have been spoken, forty written Copies of it were sent from London to Edinburgh; and the Fanaticks grew so insolent and daring on it, that several loyal Gentlemen wrote up accounts to what height of insolencies this Speech had blown up the enemies of the Church and Monarchy; and that they had just reasons to fear, that very dangerous attempts, if not a down-right Rebellion, would speedily ensue thereupon. For now they began to look and speak big in Edinburgh; and many were heard and seen on the Crown of the Causway, who had skulked about in darkness before. And as for the disaffected parts of the Country, they now displayed the Banners of Jesus Christ, as they blasphemously called their Colours at their Conventicles every­where: and their Preachers now told them. That the time of their deliverance, and Gods taking vengeance on their enemies, was now at hand; onely they must repent, and be strong and of a good courage to fight the battels of the Lord. They also threatned in all places such as they thought were seriously active against them, talking of great Changes and Revolu­tions [Page 144]in England; and in publick places drop­ped Lists of the names of those men whom they had a mind should fall by Heroical hands: particularly at Cupar the Shire-town in Fyffe, a threatning Declaration was found, while the Deputy-Sheriff was there deman­ding the legal Fines from those who had been convicted of frequenting Field-Conventicles, and entertaining declared and attainted Tray­tors and Fugitives, and intercommuned Rebels. The Declaration was thus directed.

On this followed the Murther of the Arch­bishop upon the third of May 1679. because, as their first Declaration said, It was appoin­ted as a day of solemn Thanksgiving for set­ting up an Ʋsurper to destroy the Interest of Christ, and assume the power which is proper to him alone.

These Assassinations were commended to this barbarous people by Mr. Knox of old, who in his History of Scotland approves of the pri­vate murthering of the Cardinal Beton by Norman Lesley Son to the Earl of Rothsey, and James Melvin; calling it a godly fact, and proposing it as an Example to be followed by Posterity. And in a Scotish Pamphlet printed at the beginning of the late Wars, called Si­ons Plea, the Heroical Fact of Felton is com­mended, as fit to be followed by the Nobles of Scotland, saying, God hath chalked out a way, guiding you by the hand, in giving this first [Page 146]blow; will you not follow him? Mr. Hunt and Baxter of later days, insist on the same Ex­ample. So that we see the Fanaticks come nothing short of the Jesuits in the practice of Assassinations, and promoting Open Rebellions: concerning which, we have this ingenious Distick, accommodated both to Ignatius the Founder of the Jesuits, and Lesley the Cham­pion of the Presbyterians.

How mischievous the designes of these men were, appears partly by their obstinate perse­vering in their treasonable opinions, and justi­fying their rebellious practices, even to their deaths, and refusing to save their lives by asking pardon, and praying for the King; and partly by the following Declarations which were taken with some of them.

But that the hand of Joab ( i.e. the Jesuits) was in all these Tumults and Rebellions, will thus appear:

Dr. Oates, whose Testimony ad homines is very creditable, assures us, That the Jesuits creep in among Dissenters under the disguise of Nonconforming Ministers, to divide and exa­sperate, to blow up Animosities and Calumnies into actual Rebellion against the Civil Govern­ment, under a pretence of the dislike of the Ec­clesiastical. Thus in his printed Narrative, part 1. he says, That Rich. Strange Provin­cial, John Keins, Basil Langworth, John Fen­wick, and Harcourt, Jesuits, did write a trea­sonable Letter to one Father Suiman an Irish Jesuit at Madrid in Spain, in which was con­tained the plotting and contriving a Rebellion of the Presbyterians in Scotland, against the Episcopal Government: in order to which, [Page 152]they employed Matthew Wright, Will. Mor­gan, and one Ireland, to go and preach under the notion of Presbyterians, and give the dis­affected Scots a true understanding of their sad estate and condition by Episcopal Tyranny; and to tell them, they had now a fair opportunity to vindicate their Liberty and Religion; and that it could be done no other way but by the Sword. Paragr. 18. That the Fathers of the Society in Ireland were very vigilant to prepare the peo­ple to rise for their Liberty and Religion, and to recover their Estates. Parag. 35. That the Jesuits, by order of their Provincial, were to send new Messengers into Scotland, to promote the Commotions there, and to inform the people of the great Tyranny they lay under, by being de­nied liberty of Conscience; and that not being to be procured but by the Sword, they must take that course to purchase their liberty. Parag. 43. That two new Ministers were sent into Scotland on the fifth of Aug. 78. one by the name of Fa­ther Moore, the other of Sanders, alias Brown, with instructions to carry themselves like Non­conformist-Ministers, and to preach to the dis­affected Scots the necessity of taking up the Sword for defence of liberty of Conscience, These Dr. Oates saw dispatched, Parag. 150. The Do­ctor saw a Letter from Father Ireland, Aug. 7. 1678. where he intimates the joy he had that the disaffected Scots would not lay aside their [Page 153]endeavours for liberty of Religion, and that the Catholicks of Scotland had promised to use their utmost interest to keep up the Commotions there. (And a good Author observes what fell out in the tragical end of the Lord Forester in Scotland, who after the defeat of the Rebels at Bothwel-bridge, took occasion, on the In­dulgence granted by his Majesty, to erect a house within two miles of Edinburgh, for a publick Conventicle of Nonconformists: and for building this [...]agogue, he went for a zealous man among them: but not long after, he was murthered by a woman-relation with whom he had lived incestuously many years. After his death, a Dispensation was found in his Closet from the Pope to marry her; which he delaying to do, she took his life in repa­ration of her abused Honour. Which shews that the Supporters of the Nonconformists may be secret Papists.) Parag. 51. John Keins told the Doctor, That the Provincial had ta­ken care of keeping alive the Differences be­tween the disaffected Scots and Duke Lauder­dale; that Mum and Chocolet should be put down, and the Order of the Magpies should be turned to their primitive institution and habit; by Mum; and Chocolet meaning the Protestant Peers, and by Magpies the Bishops. Paragr. 67. n. 7. One means (he says) they were to use to bring in Popery, was by Seditious Prea­chers [Page 154]and Catechists set up and maintained, and directed what to preach in their own or other private or publick Conventicles and Field-mee­tings. And my Author says, I have heard Mr. Prance affirm, that both Gauan and White-bread used to preach frequently in Conventicles in Southwark and other places: and that he was able to prove, Whitebread the Provincial of the Jesuits, who was executed for the Plot, did not many months before the discovery preach in a Conventicle as a Nonconformist at Spald­wick within five miles of Huntingdon; and that he had several times done the like before, as was attested by several of the Congregation before divers Gentlemen in the County of Hun­tingdon.

But to return for England; where we are told by a marvelous cunning man, That the next Scene that opened, would be Rome or Pa­ris. But the Prophet saw nothing of Geneva or Scotland, which was also so nearly conjoyn­ed in the Intrigue, that I scarce know how to separate them. For as I believe there was, is, and will be a Popish Designe to overthrow the Government, as long as the Jesuits re­tain their Principles and avowed Obedience to the See of Rome: so I am confident, there was, is, and will be a Fanatick Plot against the Church and State, as long as so many Factious and Seditious persons retain their [Page 155] Antimonarchical and Separating Principles.

As for the Papists, they thought their work was sufficiently carried on, by the Di­visions which they had increased among our selves by the Toleration; and therefore for a while they contented themselves with wor­king, as so many Moles, under ground, hea­ving at the Foundations of our Government. But, through the mercy of God, Parturiunt Montes—their intended Babel proved but a Mole-hill which was easily scattered. For,

Die Lunoe 1678. it was Resolved (Nemi­ne Contradicente) in the Parliament, That there was, is, and for several years last past, hath been a horrid and treasonable Plot and Conspiracy, contrived and carried on by those of the Popish Religion, for murthering of his Ma­jesties sacred Person, and for subverting the Pro­testant Religion, and the ancient and well-esta­blished Government of this Kingdom. Of which Coleman, by several Evidences, and his own Letters, was found guilty, in conspiring the death of the King, and endeavouring to subvert the Protestant Religion, and to bring in Popery, by the aid of foreign Powers; for which he was executed, December 3. 1678. Ireland, Pickering, and Grove, were executed for the like Treasons, Jan. 24. Green, Ber­ry, and Hill, were condemned, Feb. 10. for the Murther of Sir Edmond-bury Godfrey. [Page 156]Whitebread, Harcourt, Fenwick, Gauan, and Turner, were condemned on the 14th of June 1679. And Richard Langhorne was condemned the same day. And the Lord Stafford was also executed for the same Plot and Conspiracy.

It is true, that all these ( Coleman onely excepted, whose Letters then produced were so plain, that they admitted of no evasion) denied their guiltiness to the last breath; but it was a practice allowed to men under their circumstances, and had been practised by other of their Perswasion, in the like case: for Garnet ( Whitebread's Predecessor, a Prin­cipal of the Jesuits) being accused for the Gunpowder-treason, as holding correspondence with one Hall then in the Tower, utterly de­nied it with horrid Imprecations: which when Hall confessed, he beg'd pardon, and confes­sed he had offended, if Equivocation did not help him. Tresham, another of the Conspira­tors, had confessed that Garnet was privy to the Treason; but afterward, by the impor­tunity of his Wife, he protested a little be­fore his death, that his former Confession was false, and that he had not seen Garnet in six­teen years before. Which Protestation of his was afterward proved to be false, and Garnet himself confessed that he had seen him many times within that space. And in a Book cal­led [Page 157] The Jesuits Catechism, penned, as is said, by some Secular Priests, Anno 1602, they say, That a Jesuit being condemned to die, af­ter he hath made his Confession to a Priest, he is not tyed to reveal his guilt to the Judge, but it is lawful for him to stand in a stiff denial of it at the time of Execution, as being clear before God, although he persist in a Lye, after he hath discharged his Conscience to his Confessor, p. 166, 167.

The Author of Remarks on the Debates of the House at Oxford, tells us, That those De­bates were as great a Witness for the King, as any he had: For R. M. (says he) said, That the King's telling them in his Speech that he would stick to his Resolutions as to the Succes­sion, and his proposing an Expedient, is arbitra­ry, and French; and that it was the Kings de­signe to cow the Parliament, to bring them to Oxford: And that neither Bishops, nor Coun­sellors, nor Ministers of State, nor those of the Gospel, have endeavoured to preserve Religion or Safety. T. B. says plainly, They must let bloud. Sir N. C. says, As I understand, it is proposed the Government shall be in Regency du­ring the Duke's life: I would be satisfied, if the D. will not submit to that, whether those that fight against him are not Traytors in Law. H. B. says, The same interest that passeth the Bill here, will do it in Scotland. Another in­sists, [Page 158]That all about the King should be remo­ved; and that, though Ministers have been al­tered, yet the Government hath been in such hands, as that the same Principles remain. Sir W. C. says, That the weight of England is the people; and the more they know, the heavier they will be; and that in all Ages they have sunk ill Ministers of State. (And doubtless good ones too.) R. H. looks on the slipping the Bill for Repealing the Act of 35 of Eliz. to be a breach of the Constitution of the Govern­ment; which if it had been moved in Queen E­lizabeth 's days, that motion would certainly have been so thought. B. W. says of the King's Speech, That it was none of his; that it had nothing of his in it; that it is flat and short; That his Majesty was a better man, and a bet­ter Protestant, than to make it himself; and that they who advised it, must answer for it. And yet to shew on whom he meant to throw this Dirt, he says afterward, The King hath gone on in a resolution as far as this in his Speech, in his Declaration formerly. Sir W. J. observes, That no man knowing in Laws or Hi­story, but can tell us, that to Bills grateful and popular, the King gives his consent. L. G. is dissatisfied with these hands in which the Govern­ment is, and fears the Kings being Absolute: And therefore Sir F. W. says, The same Au­thority that can make a descent of the Crown, can modifie it.

All their Votes and Speeches must be Prin­ted, to shew they are not ashamed of what they do. Col. M. hopes that his Posterity will do as he among the rest hath that Meeting and the former done.

This Bill of Exclusion to alter the Successi­on and modifie the Crown, and the Repeal of the Act 35 Eliz. is the means used to secure the King's Person, and the Protestant Religion. Though the King and the established Church are of a quite contrary judgment. And the Act 13 Car. 2. 1660, which says, That by the undoubted fundamental Laws of this Kingdom, neither the Peers of this Kingdom, nor the Com­mons, nor both together in Parliament, nor any other person whatsoever, ever had, hath, or ought to have any Coercive power over the per­sons of the Kings of this Realm. And by the person of the King, is meant all such persons to whom the Crown legally descends.

The mischiefs of altering the Succession, hath cost too dear already, to attempt another Experiment. The Dispute between the Houses of York and Lancaster cost the Nation the lives of Eight Kings and Princes; Forty Dukes, Marquesses, and Earls; Two hundred thousand of the People; besides Barons and Gentlemen; and so much Money and Spoil, as cannot be valued.

So that it is sufficiently evident, that [Page 160]these irregular and violent Proceedings were a Prologue to some intended Tragedy. There were hot Irons on the Forge; we heard the blows throughout the Nation, and sparks of fire flew about our ears. But, God be than­ked, none of those Weapons which were forged against the King or the Church, have prosper­ed. Hitherto the Lord hath helped us.

The Fanatick Party carried on their de­signes more openly than the Papists, insomuch that they thought to bear down all before them, by the numbers and strength of their Party. The Pulpits and Presses do not onely sound Alarms, but cry Victoria. Their Peaceable designe had divided the Bishopricks between Presbyterian, Independent, and Ana­baptist. They promise the true Protestant Peacemakers more favour than they had from their Conforming Brethren, because they joy­ned in a Complaint of Persecution. Mr. Ba­xter, in his Book of Obedience and Patience, p. 265. tells us, That Persecutors are not im­mortal, but must die as well as others; and they have not alway the choice of their [Succes­sors]. He had intimated what one such man as Felton could do; and that some great men might be dealt with as Cardinal Beton was.

The King must be delivered from evil Counsellors, and the House purged of Pensio­ners. Petitions are procured from the City, [Page 161]and thanks given the Petitioners for their care, &c. Appeals are made to them and the peo­ple; who are encouraged to joyn Tumults with their Petitions. Mr. Hunt, p. 30. of his Preface, says, So strong is the tye of duty on him ( i. e. the King) from his Office, to pre­vent publick calamities, as no respect whatsoe­ver, no not of the right Line, can discharge; nor will he himself ever think, if duly addres­sed, that it can. And p. 34. At this time, if ever, the applications of an active prudence are required from all honest men.

If any loyal persons make their Addresses, and publish their dislike of such Seditious Pe­titioners, they are branded as Abhorrers; as if the Votes for No more Addresses to the King in 1648. were still in force. The law­fulness of Resistance is publickly printed, and even to this day defended by several Wri­ters.

Page 22. of Mr. Hunt, The Nation (says he) begins to be impatient, by the delays of publick Justice against the Popish Plot: That the dissolution of Parliaments gives us cause to fear that the King hath no more business for Parliaments, p. 27. That the number of the Addressers may be reduced to the Dukes Pen­sioners: That the Addresses were obtained by application; and the designe was to make Voi­tes for discontinuance of Parliaments, and for a [Page 162]Popish Successor. And p. 12. That such as plead for the established Government, are a hired sort of Scaramouchy Zanies, Merry Andrews, and Jack Puddings: That the Succession to the Crown is the Peoples Right. And to this end Doleman or Parsons the Jesuit's Tract of Suc­cession is reprinted, and recommended to the People. And p. 172. the King is told, if he will follow the counsel of that excellent Bill, he may live long and see good days: as if he were in danger if it pass'd not; and so he expres­seth, p. 171. If this Bill do not pass, they will take him for a wicked King too ( viz. as they took his Father) and will say he hath no law­ful Issue to succeed him, for his own sins; and many other remarks of wickedness will they make on him. And as to the Duke, he adds, p. 193. Let him attempt the Crown notwith­standing an Act of Parliament for his Exclusion, he is all that while but attempting to make us miserable. If he be not excluded, he doth it certainly: and we will not entail a War upon the Nation, though for the sake and interest of the glorious Family of the Stuarts. And to effect this, he tells the People, That the Ori­ginal and Rise of Government is in the People; and that as they gave, so they may take it away as they see occasion: That Government is the perfect creature of men in society, made by pact and consent, and not otherwise; most cer­tainly [Page 163]not otherwise; and therefore most cer­tainly ordainable by the whole Community, for the safety and preservation of the whole.

The active men of the Fanatick Party had with great industry and cost got in many Members to serve in Parliament, of whom they had a very great confidence that they would promote their designes. Those men that had been actually in Arms against the Royal Martyr, are now esteemed the Patriots of their Country; and such as acted loyally, are branded, fined, and imprisoned.

The Earl of Sh. who had caused the Exche­quer to be shut up, broken the Triple League, and advised a Delenda Carthago, being now discontented by reason of a Pique between his Royal Highness and himself, is made the Head of the Faction; and either he or the Duke must fall; and no consideration is had, whether the King and Kingdom fall with the Duke or not. Certain it is, that by the intended As­sociation (whereof I shall here give you a Copy) it was intended to reduce the Go­vernment to a Commonwealth.

This is evidently a Plot to retrieve the Good Old Cause: and to second this, the Bill against the Succession (of which I have also given you a Copy) is violently prosecuted.

Now let any considering man judge whereto these violent proceedings tended; when the King's necessary Guards be thought a grie­vance, and the executing the penal Laws on Dissenters be made a grievance of the Sub­jects, an encouragement to Popery, and dange­rous to the Peace of the Kingdom: when the King may not raise moneys on his own Reve­nues, and his People will give him none; nay, they shall be accounted Enemies to the Peace of the Nation, that assist him: when his Cu­stoms shall be taken from him, and the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy dispensed with; the Bill for excluding the lawful Successor re­solutely insisted on, and a War threatned by some, if it did not pass: when the D. of M. must be restored to his Offices, and all that should oppose the Bill of Exclusion, shall be dealt with as Betrayers of the King, the Pro­testant Religion, and the Kingdom of England, and Pensioners of France; and it must be ta­ken as a favour, that the D. of Y. was onely to be excluded, and another would perswade him to destroy himself, and another threat­neth in print, that rather than not exclude him, they would exclude the whole glorious Family of the Stuarts: when seditious Peti­tions were counted part of the Liberty of the People, and no Addresses to the King by the Loyal Party to be tolerated; and public [...] [Page 176]thanks given to a seditious Party of the City, for their manifest Loyalty to the King, their care, charge, and vigilancy for the preservation of his Majesties person and the Protestant Reli­gion; and the King's Prerogative to call or dismiss his Great Council questioned; and they who infused fears and groundless jealou­sies of the Kings ruling by an Arbitrary power, did in an arbitrary manner fine and imprison divers loyal Subjects: And when it was pub­lished, That if the King should die a violent death, they would avenge it on the Papists: when the chief Ministers of State, the Bishops, the Lord Mayor, and Magistrates, and all that were eminent for their Loyalty, were already condemned, as being Popishly affected, and the Clergie branded as Projectors for the Church of Rome.

Hereupon (a Discovery being made by one of the Conspirators) the Kings Majesty issu­eth his Declaration, 27 of July 1683. to in­form his Subjects of a Plot contrived by per­sons of several Perswasions, to make a general Insurrection in this Kingdom and Scotland. And that while this Designe was forming, some Villains were carrying on that horrid and exe­crable Plot of Assassinating his Majesties person, and his dearest Brother. And a Massacre was to follow; wherein they principally designed for slaughter the Officers of State, the present Lord [Page 177]Mayor and Sheriffs of London, and others that had been most eminent for Loyalty. Upon which Discovery, James Duke of Monmouth, the Lord Melvin, Sir Jo. Cockrane, Sir Thomas Armstrong, Robert Ferguson, Richard Goode­nough, Francis Goodenough, Richard Rumbold, William Rumbold, Richard Nelthorp, Nathaniel Wade, William Tompson, James Burton, Joseph Elby, Samuel Gibbs, Francis Charleton, Joseph Tyley, Casteers and Lobb two Nonconformist-preachers, Edward Norton, John Row, John Ayloff, and John Atherton, fled from Justice, Ford Lord Grey made his escape, Arthur Earl of Essex killed himself in the Tower: Wil­liam Lord Russel, Thomas Walcot, William Hone, and John Rous, were on their Tryals convicted and executed. And it is observa­ble, that each of them confessed enough to clear the Justice of the Nation. The most that they could plead for themselves, was, that their Crime could amount onely to misprision of Treason.

Algernoon Sidney (another of the Conspi­rators) was tryed, condemned, and execu­ted afterward; who professed to die for the Old Cause wherein he had been engaged from his youth. And indeed, he was so far engaged, that being named for one of the Royal Mar­tyr's Judges, he often appeared at his Tryal. And Manus haec inimica Tyrannis, was his Motto.

The Earl of Shaftsbury had been indicted of High-Treason, 24 Novemb. 1681. for en­deavouring to depose and put to death the King, and levy war within the Kingdom: he having declared, That in a short time the Parliament was to sit at Oxford, and that he had inspected the Elections, and was satisfied that the Parlia­ment would insist on three matters (viz.) The Bill of Exclusion against the Duke of York, The abolishing the Act of Parliament of the 35 of Queen Elizabeth, and a new Bill for u­niting Protestant Dissenters; which he was confident the King would not consent to: and if so, that he and other Lords had provided strength to compel him, under the command of Captain Wilkinson and John Booth: he de­clared the King to be a man of no faith, and there was no trust in him: That he deserved to be deposed as well as King Richard the second. And the said Earl further declared, That [...] would not desist till he brought this Kingdom [...] a Commonwealth, as Holland was: That the King was a man of an unfaithful heart, not f [...] to rule and govern, being false, unjust, and crue [...] to his people; and if he would not be governed they would depose him. Though the Witnesse [...] swore positively to the particulars, yet there was such a Jury provided, as brought in an Ignoramus, Sir Sam. Bernardiston being their Foreman; who hath since been found guilty of Misdemeanors of a high nature.

During the late seditious Stirs and Tumults, none was more active than one Stephen Col­ledge, (a Joyner of London) a pragmatical person, that pleased himself with the title of The Protestant Joyner; he had been busie for a long time, sowing Sedition, and talking Treason so openly, that his Friends advised him to forbear, lest he came to the Gallows. He made it his business to serve some dissen­ting Lords, boasting of his acquaintance with the Earl of Shaftsbury, Lords Gray, Howard, Clare, Huntington, Pagit, Lovelace, &c. He had fitted his Raree Show, and scandalous Songs and Pictures reflecting on the Royal Fa­mily. The sole pretence for his treasonable actions, was his zeal against Papists, who (he said) had feigned seventeen or eighteen Sham­plots against the Protestants: he affirmed that London was to be seized by the Papists, and that they had a designe against the Par­liament at Oxford; and therefore he, with some others whom he had perswaded, came well armed thither. Divers Ribbons were provided as a mark of distinction, bearing this Motto: NO POPERY, NO SLAVERY; one of which he gave to Turbervil, and it was proved, as the Lord Chief Justice said at the close of the Tryal, whom he called Pa­pists: The King was a Papist, the Bishops and the Church of England were Papists.

He was indicted for High-Treason, the 17 and 18 of August 1681, it being proved that he said, That nothing of good was to be expected from the King: That he minded nothing but beastliness, and the destruction of the people: That he endeavoured to establish Arbitrary Government and Popery, Dugdale, Smith, and Turbervil, who had been Witnesses a­gainst the Lord Stafford, were of the Evi­dence against him; though there were e­nough, if these had been laid aside, to have proved him guilty.

Mr. Masters testified against him, p. 31. That he said, The Parliament in 1640. was as good a Parliament as ever was chosen. To which Mr. Masters answered, I wonder how you have the impudence to justifie their procee­dings that raised the Rebellion against the King, and cut off his head. To which Colledge re­plied, They did nothing but what they had just cause for; and the Parliament at Westminster was of their Opinion, p. 31. And being deman­ded what he had to say against this testimony; he answers, That Mr. Masters had said nothing material, and that it was but a jocose discourse, p. 39. To which Mr. Justice Jones replied, Do you make mirth of the blackest Tragedy that ever was, that horrid Rebellion, and the murther of the late King? Colledge answered, I never justified that Parliament in [Page 181]any thing that they did contrary to Law.

One Mr. Jennings, who was another Wit­ness, testified, that on the bleeding of Col­ledge's Nose, he said, It was the first bloud that he lost in the Cause, but it will not be long ere more be lost. He saw him sell the Rib­bons with NO POPERY, NO SLAVERY, to a Parliament-man as he supposed, who tyed it on his Sword, &c. p. 32.

It is observed in the Tryal, that there was not one Papist that gave evidence against him; and that they were such of whom Col­ledge had formerly given a good Character; though now the case was altered. The Jury were so well satisfied with the Evidence, that they quickly agreed, and brought him in guilty: and so he was condemned and exe­cuted at Oxford, on Wednesday 31 of August 1681.

Captain Tho. Walcot was indicted for High-Treason at the Old-Baily, July 12, &c. 1683. for endeavouring to move and stir up War and Rebellion against the King, to deprive the King of his Crown, and to put him to death; for which he conspired with divers other Traytors, and had several meetings and consults to those ends, and provided Blunderbusses, Carbines, and Pistols, &c. Which being proved by Col. Rumsey, Mr. Keeling, Mr. Bourne, Mr. West, and Captain Richardson, he was found guilty, sentenced, and executed.

Then was William Hone arraigned on the like Indictment; the Evidence against him were Mr. Keeling, Mr. West, Sir Nicholas Butler, and Capt. Richardson: upon whose testimonies he was found guilty, and execu­ted also.

July 13. the Lord Russel was tryed for en­deavouring to raise a Rebellion, to seize and de­stroy the Kings Guards, to deprive the King, and put him to death. The Attorney-General urged, That the Duke of Monmouth, the Lord Gray, Sir Tho. Armstrong, Mr. Ferguson, and this Lord, with the Earl of Essex then dead, were of a Council for a general Rising; to which end they received several Messages from the Earl of Shaftsbury, who being disap­pointed by Mr. Trenchard, who had promised to raise a thousand Foot and two or three hun­dred Horse, he and Ferguson left the Kingdom. The Witnesses were Col. Rumsey, Mr. Shep­herd, and the Lord Howard, on whose evi­dence he was found guilty, and sentenced to die; and accordingly he was beheaded in Lincolns-Inne-Fields, July 21. 1683.

The next was the Tryal of Mr. Rous, a­gainst whom Mr. Leigh, Mr. Lee, Mr. Corbin, Mr. Richardson, gave such evidence, that he was presently found guilty, and received sen­tence to die; and was executed according­ly.

Captain Blague being indicted for conspi­ring to seize the Tower of London, received his Tryal, but was acquitted.

Algernon Sidney was tryed at the Kings-Bench-Bar, on the 7th, 21th, and 27th of November 1683. His Indictment was almost the same as the former, onely there was ad­ded to it, his sending of Aaron Smith into Scotland to excite and stir up the Subjects to a Rebellion there; and his being the Author of a traiterous Libel, containing, among o­ther seditious discourses, these words (viz.) The power originally in the People of England is delegated unto the Parliament: He (the most serene Lord Charles the Second now King of England meaning) is subject unto the Law of God, as he is a man; to the People that makes him a King, inasmuch as he is a King: the Law sets a measure unto that Subjection, and the Parliament judges of particular cases thereupon arising. He must be content to sub­mit his interest to theirs, since he is no more than any one of them in any other respect, than that he is by the consent of all, raised above any o­ther. If he doth not like this condition, he may renounce the Crown: but if he receive it upon that condition (as all Magistrates do the pow­er they receive) and swear to perform it, he must expect that the performance will be exacted, or revenge taken by those that he hath betrayed.

And in other places these traiterous Sen­tences are contained: viz. We may therefore change or take away Kings without breaking any Yoke, or that is made a Yoke which is not one: the injury is therefore in making and imposing, and there can be none in breaking it, &c. In p. 23, 24, 25, & 26. many other things were read at the Tryal, out of that Libel; parti­cularly p. 26. where speaking of a King, he says, When the matter is brought to that, that he must not reign, or the People over whom he would reign must perish, it is easily decided. As if the Question had been asked in the time of Nero or Domitian, whether they should be left at liberty to destroy the best part of the world, as they endeavoured to do, or it should be rescu­ed by their destruction! And as for the Peo­ples being Judges in their own case, it is plain they ought to be the onely Judges, because it is their own, and onely concerns themselves. The Attorney-General ( p. 13.) says, The whole Book is an Argument for the People to rise in Arms and vindicate their Wrongs. He (i. e. Sidney) lays it down, That the King hath no authority to dissolve the Parliament: but 'tis apparent the King hath dissolved many; there­fore he hath broken his Trust, and invaded our Rights. And concludes, We may therefore shake off the Yoke: for 'tis not a Yoke we sub­mitted to, but a Yoke by Tyranny (that is the meaning of it) imposed on us.

The Witnesses who swore to the Indict­ment were Mr. West, Col. Rumsey, Mr. Kee­ling, the Lord Howard, Sir Andrew Foster, Mr. Atterbury, Sir Philip Lloyd, Mr. Shep­herd, Mr. Cary, and Mr. Cooke: upon whose evidence the Jury found him guilty of High-Treason; and accordingly sentence was pro­nounced against him, and he was executed on Tower-hill, Decemb. 7. 1683.

I shall adde onely a few Remarks on the dying Speeches and Confession of these men: and first of Col. Sidney. He had no other Apology for himself, but that he had been engaged from his youth in that Old Cause; for which he prayed, in these words: Defend thine own Cause, and defend these that defend it: stir up such as are faint, direct those that are willing, confirm those that waver; give wis­dom and integrity unto all—Grant that I may die glorifying thee for all thy mercies, and that at the last thou hast permitted me to be singled out as a Witness of thy Truth, and even by the confession of my Opposers, for that Old Cause in which I was from my youth engaged, and for which thou hast often and wonderfully declared thy self. Now the Old Cause wherein Col. Sidney was engaged, was the destruction of the Church, and the Royal Martyr, to set up a Commonwealth; in which he acted as a Colo­nel, [Page 186]and one of the Judges of the Royal Mar­tyr: yet he calls these Treasons Gods Truth. In what Religion this Gentleman died, God onely knows: for he made no profession at all, whether Presbyterian, Independent, Ana­baptist, or Quaker; but a Protestant at large, as any of those Factions term themselves.

As to the Lord Russel, he was also unhap­pily engaged in the same OLD CAƲSE from his youth, as may appear by the follow­ing Relation. Mr. Johnson, the Author of the Life of Julian, confirmed him in his riper years in those opinions which *This Lewis was a stickling Pres­byterian, that had gotten the Seque­stration of Totnam-high-cross from Mr. Wimpew a loyal Minister of the Church of England. To this Lewis many Noblemen and Gentlemen sent their Sons for Education: among whom was the late Lord Russel. And to divert his Scholars, he composed a Farce, wherein the young Gentle­men were to be Actors. The Farce had all the Formalities of a High Court of Justice; President, Sollici­tor, Witnesses, &c. The Criminal was an old Shock Water-Dog, which he called Charles Stuart. This Dog was arraigned, tryed, condemned, and executed by cutting off his head. By which action he instilled the Principles of Ring-killing into his Scholars; as if the murdering of a King, were no more than the cutting off a Dogs neck. Mr. Lewis and Dr. Manton had educated him. For Mr. Johnson having written that Traiterous Book, to defend the mischie­vous Doctrine of Resistance, this unhappy man could not be extricated from that snare, to his death. And it was long before his acquaintance with [Page 187]this Seditious Author, that Dr. Manton, a great Abettor of the first War, and a Favourite of Cromwel, had instilled the same Principles into him. For in his Comment on St. James 4.1. he proposeth this Question: Whether Religion may be defended by Arms? To which he answers; That sometime the outward exer­cise of Religion and Worship may be established and secured by Laws; and among other Pri­viledges and Rights, the liberty of pure Wor­ship may be one; which being invaded by Vio­lence, may be defended by Arms. —The Estates of a Kingdom may maintain their Religion a­gainst the tyranny and malice of the Prince.

This Doctor had the greatest influence on the Education of that Noble Gentleman, be­ing a Chaplain to the Family, and Preacher at Covent-garden for many years. It is also very observable what this Gentleman says in his Paper delivered to the Sheriffs, where he blessed God that he fell by the Ax, and not by the fiery tryal; as if it were safer to die as a Traytor than a Martyr. —But he says, What­ever apprehensions I had of Popery, and OF MY OWN SEVERE and heavy share I was like to have under it when it should pre­vail.

The Lord Russel in all probability had some regard to the loss of those Lands which de­scended from his Ancestors, but had been in [Page 188]the days of Henry the Eighth alienated from the Church, and which by the return of Po­pery, might be taken from his Family. And he being perswaded, as he expresseth it in that Speech— I did believe, and do still, that Pope­ry is breaking in upon the Nation; and that those who advance it, will stop at nothing to carry on their designe; he on the other side would stop at nothing to keep it out. This most likely made him so zealous for the Bill of Exclusion; and unhappily engaged him (the Bill being it self excluded) in this other desperate Attempt: for, as Solomon observed, It is a snare to a man to devour that which is holy. And indeed there is no other means so likely to bring in Popery, as the impotent and unlawful outcrys and endeavours of Fanatical persons pretending to keep it out. Religion is for the most part made a Cloak and Pretence to serve Interest.

In Queen Mary's days, when the Pope sol­licited the Queen for a restoration of Church­lands and Dignities, it was first proposed to the Cabinet-Council; where the Lord of Bed­ford being present, and knowing himself greatly concerned, fell into a great passion; and breaking his Chaplet of Beads from his girdle, flung them into the fire, swearing deeply, That he valued his sweet Abbey of Woo­harn more than any fatherly Counsel or Com­mands [Page 189]that could come from Rome. Where­upon the Queen considering of what temper others of the Nobility might be, was discou­raged from prosecuting that designe.

This Lord delivered a Paper to the She­riffs, wherein he acknowledgeth that when he was at a meeting at Mr. Shepherd 's, there was some discourse about the feasableness of seizing the King's Guards: and several times by acci­dent in general discourse elsewhere (saith he) I have heard it mentioned as a thing easie to be done; particularly at my Lord Shaftsbury 's; but never consented to it as fit to be done. That the Duke of Monmouth told him he was glad that he was come to Town; for my Lord Shafts­bury and some hot men would undo them all, if great care were not taken. That being at Mr. Shepherd 's with a Company that met there, there were things said by some with more heat than judgment. And it is by some inferred (saith he) that I was acquainted with these heats and ill designes, and did not discover them: but this is but misprision of Treason. He says, Nothing was sworn against him but some discourse about making some Stirs; and this is not levying War against the King, which is Treason, and not the consulting and discour­sing about it, which was all that was witnessed a­gainst me: and the designe of seizing the Guards, was construed a designe of killing the King; and in that I was cast.

Captain Walcot in his last Speech said, I do neither blame the Judges nor Jury, nor the Kings Council: I onely blame some men that in reality and truth were deeper concerned than I, that came as Witnesses against me. He con­fesseth that he was invited by Col. Romsey to some meetings where some things were discoursed of in order to asserting their Liberties and Pro­perties, which they looked on to be invaded and violated: That Mr. West often discoursed with him concerning lopping off the two Sparks, meaning the King and the Duke; and proposed it might be done at a Play, saying, that then they would die in their Calling: That he bought Arms to that end, and said they had fifty em­ployed to that end: That he told them the kil­ling the King would carry such a blemish and stain with it, as would descend to Posterity; and that he having eight Children, he was loath they should be blemished with it: That by the Law of the Land he ought to die, for being in those meetings where a War was debated. Be­ing asked by Dr. Cartwright whether the death of the King was proposed while he was there; he answered, It was so, and that he and those Lords who were like to suffer, were under general apprehensions of Popery and Slavery co­ming in. And he confessed to the Doctor, He was guilty enough to have his life taken a­way; adding, The same measure we mete to a­nother, [Page 191]that measure God will mete to us. So that on this mans Confession, if there were no other, (considering the circumstances wherein he was, being a person formerly en­gaged in the Rebellion, a man of Estate and Parts) nothing can be more evident than both parts of the Plot (viz.) to raise a Re­bellion, and to murther the King and his Royal Brother.

Which was farther confessed by Mr. Hone, who told Dr. Cartwright that he was guilty of the Crime according to the Law of the Land, and to the Law of God; that he was to meet the King and Duke of York, but did not know at that time when or where, nor what was his bu­siness; and afterward, that he told Mr. Kee­ling he was for killing the King, and saving the Duke of York; for which being asked a rea­son, he answered, As to that, I think this, That the Duke of York did openly profess himself to be a Roman Catholick, and I did say I had ra­ther dispose of the King than the Duke of York. And being asked again by the Doctor, Had you rather a Papist should reign over us, as you take him to be, than the King? he replied, I do not know what to say to that.

Captain Walcot it seems had said of Rous, that he would die an Atheist: and in truth, such bloudy men are no better; they are of the mind that Colonel Morly and some other [Page 192]Commanders in Cromwel's Army were, who said, They would cast themselves on any Prince, even on the Turk, rather than suffer themselves to be subdued by the King. But this Mr. Rous did confess, That since the Hurly-burlies con­cerning Parliaments going off and coming on, he had been a hearer, and understood too much of some kind of Meetings, and especially of those that call themselves Protestants, who are ten thousand times worse than any others; and pray­ed God to forgive him that he had not been as careful and diligent, and as ready and forward to discover them a great while since. I gave his Majesty (says he) an account to the best of my knowledge, and he seemed to be well pleased, and thankt me for it: but before I had power to put it in writing, the Council thought it fit that I should be committed to Prison. That there was a designe to set up the Duke of Mon­mouth, I will not say, while the King reigns; though some extravagant hot-headed men have taken upon them to discourse these things, but not any worthy man. I know those that have been worthy to be called by that name, have de­clared in my hearing, that in opposition to the Duke of York, if the King be seized, they would stand by the Duke of Monmouth. There are others that were for a Commonwealth, and some few for the Duke of Bucks. He confesseth, that Goodenough told him the King was to be [Page 193]taken off as he came from Windsor; that they wanted a place of meeting in order to it; and the place pitched on was Black-heath, where Rous advised that a Ball of Silver worth thir­ty or forty pound might be thrown up, and the people invited to come and drink a Bowl of Punch: which would have gathered thirty or forty thousand in two or three days time: That this Goodenough spake in base Language con­cerning the Duke of York, calling him Rogue and Dog, and that we will do his work; and that after the Kings decease, the Duke of Mon­mouth having a Vogue with the People, must of necessity succeed. And he confessed that it was just in God, and righteous and just in the King, that he died.

On the 6th of February 1683. in Hillary-Term, John Hambden Esq was tryed at the Kings-Bench-Bar, upon an Indictment of High Misdemeanour, for assembling, meeting, consulting, &c. with divers ill-disposed Sub­jects of the King, to disquiet, molest, and disturb, and, as much as in him lay, to incite, stir up, and procure Sedition within this Kingdom of England; and further, to cause an Insurrection, and to provide Arms and armed men for that purpose. And also, for that he did consult, a­gree and consent that a person should be sent in­to Scotland to invite and incite divers ill-dis­posed [Page 194]people to come into England to consult and advise with him and others here, concerning a [...] and assistance from thence to bring about their designes. He pleaded Not guilty: but upon a full and fair hearing, he was found Guilty and Fined forty thousand pounds. Which Sentence was given the 12th of February, being the last day of the said Term. The Witnesses were, James Duke of Monmouth (but he did not appear) William Lord How­ard, whose evidence is supported by Sir An­drew Foster, Mr. Atterbury, one Sheriff tha [...] lodg'd Aaron Smith at Newcastle, and Be [...] that directed him the way into Scotland The Lord Chief Justice tells the Jury, Th [...] if there were another Witness as positive against the Defendant as my Lord Howard, the mat­ter would amount to no less than High-Trea­son.

The next day (being the 7th of Febru­ary 1683.) Lawrence Braddon and High Speke, Gent. were tryed upon an Informa­tion of High Misdemeanour, Subornation, and spreading False Reports, at the Court o [...] Kings-Bench; for that whereas the Earl of Es­sex on the 10th of July in the thirty fifth year of the King, was committed to the Tower for High-Treasons supposed to be committed; on the 13th did there kill and murther himself, as appear by an Inquest taken in the Tower the 14th day [Page 195]of July in the year aforesaid: They, not being ignorant thereof, but contriving and malici­ously and seditiously intending to bring the Kings Government into hatred, disgrace, and contempt, did conspire and endeavour to make the Kings Subjects to believe that the said Inquisition was unduly taken, and that the said Earl was mur­dered by some person in whose custody he was. And to bring this to effect, they procured false Witnesses to prove it. And to perswade others to the belief of it, they caused to be declared in writing, that the said Braddon would prosecute the matter. This is the sum of the Indict­ment. To which they pleaded Not guilty.