CERTAIN CERTIFICATES Received from AMERICA, On behalf of SAMƲEL JENNINGS, Tending to clear him from Scandals, Caſt on him by George Keith, and others of his Oppoſers.

Made publick by Iohn Pennington.

London Printed, and Sold by T. Sowle, near the Meeting-Houſe in White-Hart-Court in Gracious-Street and at the Crooked-Billet in Holywell-Land near Shoreditch, 1695.

HAVING read Geo. Keith's Book, Entituled. A further Diſcovery, &c. pretended to be in Anſwer to S. J's. Book, called The State of the Caſe, and obſerving with what heat he flings his proofleſs Accuſations againſt the ſaid S. J. whom he might know to be remote, and out of the reach of his Charge (being on his Voyage to America) I thought it would not be unacceptable to the moderate and impartial, as well as a Duty to the injured, if I preſented him with ſuch Certificates, as the ſaid S. J. received, after the publication of his Book, not long before his leaving us, and had depoſited with a Friend in London, to be diſperſed, as Service might be ſeen in the Spreading thereof; having notice in an Advertiſement printed in G. K's. late anſwer to T. E. that he deſigned an anſwer to his Book.

I ſhall ſay little to the Book it ſelf, it chiefly relating to matters of Fact, tranſacted in another part of the World, of which I am no Eye-and Ear-witneſs; nor is it ſo proper to be debated, but between perſons privy to thoſe ſeveral actions. But in as much as it is probable, that by reaſon of the diſtance of place, and unſafenes of the Seas, G. K's anſwer may not reach thither in a long while, and the return from thence muſt needs be yet longer, I offer theſe in the mean-while, adviſing all that would not condemn a Man unheard, to ſuſpend their Judgment in the reſt, till the accuſed can have an opportunity to defend himſelf.

Yet two or three Obſervations (among the many that Book affords to an Obſervant Eye) I am not willing wholly to paſs by, that, as ex pede Herculem, by this little the Reader may have a taſte of the reſt.

Firſt, As to the Stile and Language thereof, I freely Submit it to the Conſiderate, who hath read both Books, to judge which of the two, G. K. or his Opponent, hath ſhewed himſelf moſt Maſter of his own Spirit, it being a true Maxim delivered by the Apoſtle James, that if any Man among you ſeem to be Religious, and bridleth not his Tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's Religion is vain, Chap. 1. Ver. 26. Yet let me add, that while he magnifies his own Patience, ſaying, God hath endued him with a good meaſure of patience, and what he hath born with much Patience, p. 25. in the next line he Juſtifieth his calling Friends Blood-thirſty hounds, and in the ſame page theſe words, Cut me in Collops, Fry me, Eat me; the Reader may give a gueſs, what will paſs for Patience with him.

Secondly, The aboveſaid inſtance leads me to take notice of his Language to Friends in Penſilvania, what artifices he uſeth to palliate it, and how he beſpeaks his own Praiſe, in the ſlight, vain-glorious acknowledgment he makes.

The Miniſtring Friends, at their Meeting held at Philadelpha the 24, 4th Month, 1693. relating his calling Friends in their Religious Meetings Hypocrites, Snakes, Vipers, Blood-thirſty Hounds, Impudent Raſcals, and the like; bidding them Cut him in Collops, Fry him, and Eat him, and ſaying his Back had long Itched to be Whipt. And that at the ſame juncture, he ſaid, he was like our Lord and Saviour Jeſus Chriſt, Comparing himſelf to a Dove and a Lamb, (State of the Caſe, p. 23.) This Charge he doth not deny, but applauds his own Patience, as hinted already.

For the term Blood-thirſty Hounds, he alledgeth (but without a proof) that what he was accuſed of tended to deſtroy his Natu • al Life; then flies to the Hebrew word Nebal, in Latin Nebulo, and tranſlated in the Engliſh Bible, vile Perſon, to excuſe the Epithet of Impudent Raſcal (the word Snakes, and Vipers he toucheth not upon); and from Friends telling him (as he ſaith) he deſerved to be puniſhed, he feeling great boldneſs and Courage given him uttered ſome ſuch words, as Cut me in Collops, Fry me, Eat me. Thus much in p. 25. of his Further Diſcovery. Now, Friendly Reader, where was the Dove-like, Lamb-like Nature in all this, thinkeſt thou? But he deems ſuch an imputation injurious, and that G. F's. ſaying to the rude multitude, that Beat him on his Head, Arms and Shoulders, Strike again, here are my Hands, my Head and my Cheeks; bears a proportion to his Caſe, as p. 28. That to turn the Cheek to the Smiter, as we are Counſeled Luke, 6.29. is Lamb-like, I confeſs; but what is this to a Man that is not ſmitten? but at moſt told, he deſreves to be puniſhed (and for that we have but his word in his own Caſe) that ſhall retort, Cut me in Collops, Fry me, Eat me. This is not a meek, quiet, yielding to a ſuffering already inflicted (as in the inſtance of G. F.) but a daring, provoking to it, and that by Unſavoury expreſſions, which reliſh of a different tincture. Nor doth he more ſuccesfully come off, when p. 47. he denies not, but he might ſay, by way of probability They ſhould hear ere long, he were either Whipt, or Impriſoned; And in the next page, owns he ſaid in a publick Meeting, on a Firſt day, that his Back Itched for their Whip, aſſigning as the reaſon, their interrupting him in his Chriſtian Teſtimony, and moſt extraordinarily, threatning him with their Magiſtratical Power (but that depends upon his ſingle ſay ſo, and wants proof). For theſe paſſages manifeſt an incenſing, provoking temper which (though covered over with the Specious pretences of Godly Zeal) like to what Lawrence the Martyr ſaid to the Tyrant, that cauſed to Roaſt him on a Grid-iron, Oh groſs Compariſon of the perſecuting Heathen Emperour, to our Chriſtian abuſed Friends in Penſilvania: Have they not been more perſecuted by his Tongue and Pen, than he by their Laws and Proceedings? to G. F. as above noted; and to E. Burrough, who ſaid and writ in lines to his perſecutors (but when and where did they ſay) our Backs are ready for your Blows: Yet do G. K's. words declare themſelves to proceed from a bitter Root. Now, one reaſon he gives, why he ſaid, his Back Itched for their Whip, was their interrupting him in his (ſo called) Chriſtian Teſtimony: Did Lawrence do thus, or G. F. or E. B. either? Let him bring the precedent, when and where; When they were in their Perſecutors Hands, or expoſed for their Chriſtian Teſtimony, they in a Chriſtian Spirit bore it, and that Chearfully: But when did they becauſe interrupted in their Chriſtian Teſtimony, tell the Magiſtrates, they were not only ready (i. e. they were given up to the ſuffering, and that without reluctancy) but craved it, and their Backs Itched for it; for there is a difference between a bowed mind to the will of God, that is prepared (made ready) Patiently and Meekly to Suffer what evil Men may be permitted to do, and the ſeeking it, the coveting it, and having an Itch to tempt and provoke them to it; perhaps through a deſire of Popularity and to encreaſe a Party. Nor will the ſucceeding inſtance of what Chriſt ſaid to Judas, help him, though it may ſhew the Fond conceit and High value he hath of his own doings, in the very Compariſon. The Lord Jeſus did not approve of the Traytour's Act, neither did he ſeek the Suffering, when he ſaid to Judas, What thou doſt, do quickly; but on the contrary, warned againſt the doing it, and prayed the Father that the Cup might paſs, Mat. 26. v. 24, and 39. Yet foreknowing the Bleſſed benefit and effect, it would have towards Mankind in general, for our ſakes he both embraced it, and preſſed the doing it quickly, for he was Straitened till it was accompliſhed, Luke, 12.50. But G. K. can aſſign no good, that his paſſionate and daring carriage to thoſe Friends, could produce, or was propoſed thereby.

Now when he had ſaid, what he thought fit, towards his own Vindication, he goes on in the ſum 48. p. thus; I have (ſaith he) never Juſtified all the words I have ſaid to thoſe my Adverſaries (what words hath he not Juſtified? for theſe even now cited, I have made appear, he hath) but readily have granted, that it's poſſible I have at times exceeded on great provocation. But S. I. &c. have far exce • ded me in hard words, &c. And a few lines after, my great Comfort is, that whatever Human weakneſſes have attended me, as to ſome Circumſtances, which have been greater on their part, my Cauſe—is good, and with a Sincere and Ʋpright Heart, as to the main, I have managed it, and I have peace from my gracious God in ſo doing, as well as a ſence of his Pardoning mercy, wherein I have failed in ſome particular Circumſtances, and this is more than ever any of my Adverſaries, that I know, have acknowledged, who Proud Phariſee-like, do juſtify themſelves. Now conſider, Reader, what is it to Act the Phariſee, if not to Extol himſelf and depretiate others. Sincerity and godly Contrition, would have taught him to think more lowly of himſelf, and leſs aggravatingly concerning others: For his faint acknowledgment of human Weakneſs is but uſhered in to ſet a fair gloſs upon his own conduct in the main, while he would inſinuate how much worſe Men his Adverſaries are, and therein hath imitated the ſtyle of the proud Phariſee, Luke 18.11. in his boaſt, That he was not as other men. But in what follows, ver. 14. he may read his own doom, viz. Every one that exalteth himſelf, ſhall be abaſed, and ſo will G.K. when detected not only of Self-applauſe, but alſo of Self-contradiction. For although he declares he never juſtified all he hath ſaid to his Adverſaries, but grants he hath at times exceeded; Yet (in Cauſleſs Grounds, p. 11.) he ſaith, As I have not acknowledged unto any (nor ſeen juſt cauſe ſo to do) ſo they have not proved me guilty, either in words or deeds, that the truth condemneth, &c. ſo uncertain a ſound doth his Trumpet give, that either what he now ſaith, or hath ſaid before, muſt be falſe, for they are not reconcileable.

Thirdly, His want of Candour cometh alſo under my Conſideration, and that under two Heads.

Firſt, The Friends of Burlington, in Weſt-Jerſey, in their Account, entituled, The preſent Caſe ſtated, relates the orderly proceeding of that Meeting againſt him: He had, it ſeems, charged Friends, That they were met together to cloak Hereſie and Deceit, and that t • ere were more Damnable Hereſies and Doctrines of Devils among the Quakers, than among any Profeſſion of Proteſtants; whereupon they firſt ſent two of their Members, S. J. and G. O. to admoniſh him; and to give him notice of their next Meeting, which followed in courſe Three Months after, at Philadelphia. But he juſtifying his Speeches, and declining his uſual appearance (tho' at home) and having ſet up ſeparate Meetings, and printed againſt Friends; they notwithſtanding (for peace ſake, and to prevent the dilateing of his Schiſm, if poſſihle) generally inclined to Adjourn their Meeting for a Fortnight longer, and gave him notice thereof, the ſame Evening. At the Fortnight's end, finding him not at Home, they forbore drawing any Teſtimony againſt him for two Days longer, and then ſent two of their Members, William Biles and Walter Faucet, to enquire at his Houſe of his return; but he being ſtill abſent, they gave forth their Teſtimony, yet with this Caution, that it ſhould not be publiſhed till he had had an opportunity to hear it read, and ſuch others as he approved of, as may be ſeen at large, State of the Caſe, p. 17, 18, 19. Now what anſwer doth he give to all this? He denies they told him the preciſe day, hour or place of their Meeting; and alledgeth, That called a Fortnight, ſometimes includes fourteen days, ſometimes fifteen or ſixteen days, p. 23. Is not this extreamly idle and ſhifting, ſhewing he was hard put to it for an excuſe? And yet they deferred giving Judgment till ſixteen days were expired, waiting his return two days beyond their time; ſo that had he been at Home within his longeſt Fortnight, he had come before Judgment had been publiſhed againſt him. But he again pretends, They met ſometimes at one place, ſometimes at another; ſometimes at one part of the day, ſometimes at another: And could not he, in a Fortnight's time (and living in the Town, where the Meeting was to be held) inform himſelf, where, and at what time of the day they met? or did the Friends ſent refuſe to tell him? Well, but he hath a third Salvo, Their Paper, ſaith he, doth not ſo much as alledge, that I had any call to come to their Meeting: Why then, ſay I, did they take the pains to give him notice by the Friends they ſent? And yet the Paper doth (to uſe his own terms) implicitely alledge it, if not explicitely, by their delay to paſs Judgment in his abſence. And in p. 29. he ſaith, he went out of Town upon his neceſſary Occaſion, (ſo not on Truth's account) and how nevceſſary that occaſion was, himſelf beſt knows: That it was more indiſpenſible, than the attending the Meeting, he pretends not. Yet as mean and trifling as theſe excuſes are, he thinks they are too ſevere in un-miniſtring and un-chriſtianing him, without coming again and again, at leaſt twice or thrice, not conſidering, that by this time things were too far gone to be very dilatory, a ſeparation was begun (which if he had not begun, yet the continuation, or remaining ſeparate, if he will believe himſelf, Seaſonable Information, p. 16. muſt lye at his own Door) and he had printed againſt them; ſo that the relation between him and them, as Brethren, ceaſed, and they under no ſuch Obligation to him that was become an open Enemy. And although he expoſtulates, Was this like the reſtoring me in a Spirit of meekneſs; yet afterwards, p. 29. ſays, At that time they neither owned our Judicatory, nor we theirs, which as I take to be the trueſt reaſon of his Non-appearance, ſo I cannot but obſerve, that his inſiſting on their coming again and again, that it might be like the reſtoring in a Spirit of Meekneſs, is nothing but Artifice, he deſigning to make them Journies enough, and at laſt deny their Judicatory, which is far enough from ſincerity.

Another inſtance, ſuitable to this Head, is, that when he would wind himſelf off from being Author of ALL that Book (what part he was not Author of, he ſaith not) which gave a relation of his own and others Tryals, called, New England's Spirit of Perſecution, &c. he ſeeks to palliate the unproved Accuſations, ſaying, Nor do I find, that the ſaid Book of the Tryal doth charge him either with Drunkenneſs or Horſe-racing, but ſimply (he ſhould have ſaid invidiouſly) as to that, narrates the Proceedings of the Court, how things did paſs there, p. 31. But beſides that this is a ſly, miſchievous way of inſinuating a ſlander, eſpecially from a nameleſs Pamphleteer (whereby the Lives and Converſations of the moſt Innocent may be expoſed to every ſcurrilous, lurking Detractor) I wiſh the Reader to obſerve, that this Anonymous Author doth not narrate Proceedings impartially, as is manifeſt even from hence: For whereas that account ſuggeſts, p. 19. that a Paper was read, ſubſcribed by Mary Budd, wherein ſhe ſaith, That Sarah Biddle ſaith, that William Biddle ſaith, that John Slocum ſaith, that S. J. run a Race, and was Drunk; yet when S. J. appeals to Geo. Keith in open Court, whether J. S. himſelf did not tell him, the matter was not true, (ſee p. 67. of The State of the Caſe, and p. 50. of G. K's Anſwer to it) that tending to clear in part him, whom this Book of the Tryal was deſigned to proſtitute, we find never a tittle of it mentioned there. So that the Author being thus partial, and withal concealing his Name, when by Name he could defame others, manifeſts Malice, not Sincerity and Candour; and that he touched on this Charge, not as driven to it, by its being interwoven with the matter of the Tryal, but with an intent to faſten a Reproach and Slander, leaving out what might tend to the Party's purgation in any wiſe. This greatly diſcredits the whole Undertaking, and beſpeaks Malice.

Fourthly, What G. K. offers for proof, falls ſhort of being ſo, himſelf being judge, cum ſua res agitur. For he excepts againſt S. J's bringing only the Credit of John White, whom he calls a prejudiced Adverſary, p. 4. Again, By whom will he prove them, ſeeing he hath none but his own Party to give proof in the Caſe, which (ſaith he) as it is no Authentick proof among men, &c. p. 31. And in p. 33. For no man ou • ht to be accuſed of a thing, and for a ground of his Accuſation, ſay, he can prove the thing true, and yet give no proof. Alſo in p. 48. he tells S. J. he giving no proof but his bare ſay ſo, the impartial Reader will not believe it. And again in his Poſtſcript, allowing evidences on both ſides, being confeſſedly Parties, to be no proper Witneſſes, adds, Nor did I any farther make uſe of evidences of that ſort, but to make a balance againſt the evidences of their ſide. (But what balance were his Evidences to make, when he had printed ſo many Books againſt them, before they made any defence at all?) And yet that he may caſt an Odium on his Opponent and others, of all the Charges he brings in this Book, he offers no evidence, but his own, who is their Adverſary, and confeſſedly a Party indeed; and when he Cites F. Howghil, p. 33. J. Crook and Geo. Biſhop, p. 30. (to favour his Notion of Baptiſm) and Edw. Burrough, p. 48. he is ſo far from referring to the Page, that he doth not ſo much as give the Title of the Treatiſes, but in general terms, F. H. hath well aſſerted in one of his printed Treatiſes againſt a Romaniſt; I have the printed Teſtimonies of J. C. and G. B. in their Treatiſes concerning Friends Principles; and G. B. hath ſaid and writ in Lines (ſo they were not Lineleſs Writings) to his Perſecutors. Now is this Man fit to reprove another, who though a Scholar, writes thus looſly? And when he is put to prove any matter of Fact, he tells us indeed of Witneſſes, that ſome of them are here in England, and at London, as p. 14. and 36. That an honeſt Perſon of good repute here in Town is ready to witneſs, p. 47. and an honeſt Friend, p. 50. and that to a matter, wherein he charges high. Nay ſo far is he put to it for Evidence, that he brings in William Bradford, p. 40. as an Evidence in his own particular Caſe. Hath not this Man's Envy outrun his Judgment, and drawn Paul's reproof upon him, who ſaid, Thou therefore which teacheſt another, teacheſt thou not thy ſelf, Rom. 2.21. But if he will not ſee himſelf, I hope the Judicious will ſee him.

Fifthly, But that which renders the Man yet more mean and baſe, is that he thus treats (and vaunts over) an abſent Perſon, who upon reading G. K's Advertiſement, wherein he threatned a Reply, wrote a Letter to him, (which a Friend left at his Houſe for him) preſſing G. K. to haſten his, that he might have an opportunity to Rejoin, before he went off the Coaſt. Now ſurely any worthy Antagoniſt, if he had protracted his Work, till the other was too far gone, than to reach him; yet at leaſt would have been ſparing in offering any thing to blemiſh his Reputation, as a Man, or as a Chriſtian, without very full, clear and undeniable Evidence, ſuch as might beſpeak its Credit, and not ſuch, as in his own Caſe, he rejecteth; and alſo, in his Reply, have taken ſome notice of the offer made; if this occaſion, to detract him, had not been rather induſtriouſly embraced, than caſual.

Sixthly, If it be not matter of Flouriſh, and to ſet off a bad Cauſe, why ſhould he inſinuate, that he hath Evidence ſo near as in London, many Witneſſes, p. 14. ſome in London, ready to witneſs, p. 36. An honeſt Perſon of good repute here in Town, p. 47. An honeſt Friend here in Town, p. 50. and produce neither Teſtimonial from them, nor ſo much as name them, that others might be Judges of their Veracity, as well as himſelf? But the way he hath taken to ſlur another, ſlurs himſelf, and renders his own Charge the more ſuſpected? And I may tell him, in his own words, p. 20. If it be enough to make a man guilty by the ſingle Evidence of a prejudiced Adverſary, he hath hit the mark; but if otherwiſe, he only ſheweth his Enmity and Prejudice.

Theſe ſhort Touches, reſpecting G. K's partial way of managing Controverſie, the ungovernedneſs of his Spirit, and his unfair way of treating his Opponent by obtruding as Evidence, what he diſallows from others, (and that at a time, when he could not defend himſelf, by reaſon of his diſtance) as they are matters deducible from his late printed Books, without dependance upon Evidence elſewhere, ſo are they left with the Reader, as Introductory to the following Certificates; my aim herein being to vindi • ate the Traduced, undeceive the Deceived, and lay open the Deceiver, and not to trace him through the ſeveral Parts of his Book, which affords matter enough, but ſhall refer that to the Friends more immediately concerned, to do it, when G. K's Anſwer ſhall come to their Hands; and ſo conclude this Epiſtle, who am