I. SINCE every person that takes the oath of allegiance, declares; that he believes, and is resolved in his Conscience, that neither the Pope nor any other person what­soever can absolve him of that oath: Quae­re, vvhether Conventions and even Parlia­ments are not comprised under those vvords, any other person vvhatsoever.

II. All persons that take it, declare that they detest and abjure as impious and Haereticall this damnable doctrine and position, That Princes, vvhich be excommunicated or de prived by the Pope, may be deposed or murdered by their Subjects or any other person vvhatsoever, Since it is not to be imagined that the Pope vvill excommunicate or deprive any Princes but such as are contrary to his religion and the interests of it. Quaere vvhether it be a doctrine lesse Im­pious, lesse Haereticall, or lesse damnable to vest that povver in the People vvhich is justly denyed to the Pope, that they may deprive or depose any Prince that is of a different Re­ligion from theirs, vvhenever they shall fancy that the inte­rests of their Religion may miscarry in his hands. Or to say the same thing in other vvords.

III. Whether it vvas not a strange confidence in Doctor [Page 2] Burnet in his sermon preach't 23. Decem. before the Prince of Orange, after he had vvith a just indignation, asked, vvhether zeal for Holy Church could vvartant breach of faith? yet in the very same discourse, to magnify the rebel­lion of the People and the desertion of the Army, as the Lords Doing, and one of the vvonders of his Love and Mer­cy: though it vvas a complication of as much treason, per­jury and breach of faith, as ever vvas acted in the vvorld: and Expresly acknovvledged by those that vvere Guilty of it that it vvould be so in any other case but Zeal for their Religion.

IV. Since in all Parliaments as the Interest of the Peo­ple is sufficiently secured by their free Election of their re­presentatives, so the interest of the Crovvn is likevvise secu­red in that all men are disabled to sit or act in either of the Houses till they have qualified themselves by taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy; if the last of these qua­lifications be not observed as vvell as the first in any Con­vention or pretended Parliament that shall be cal'd vvithout the Kings Authority. Quaere, vvhether all their proceedings may not justly be esteemed as partiall, as their very being and Constitution is illegall, by all indifferent persons.

V. Quaere, vvhether allegiance be locall, or that it may cease as soon as a king is out of his Dominions? For, since a subject beyond the seas may commit treason against the King being in England: vvhy the subjects in England may not commit treason against the King vvhen he is beyond the seas, vvill be a hard strain to make the difference. But this hath been solemnly adjudged by all the Judges of England in the Case of Sir H. Vane, vvho vvas Indicted, condemned and executed for High treason committed against King Charles the second at a time vvhen he vvas in France for the same reason that the King is there novv, and had no body then in Commission to act for him or by his authority in England.

VI. If a Kings going out of England (even though there had been no force) vvere a forfeiture of his Crovvn; Quaere vvhether, not only all our Kings in their Expeditions into the holy Land, France, &c. but the Emperour, vvho in Henry the eights time, or the King of Denmark vvho in the Reign of King James the first came into England, only, for ought appeares, to make visits; or for their pleasure; or at best to transact affaires that might have been done by their ministers; vvhether by this they vvere thought to have for­feited their Crovvns by their Subjects or any body els?

VII. Since any force upon the meanest subject makes it impossible for him to barr himself or part vvith any right of his, so long as he continues under that force; Quaere vvhe­ther a King not only overpovverd but imprisoned by a for­raign army can lose or forfeit any thing by using his utmost endeavours to regain his liberty and by continuing in a place of safety till such force is removed?

VIII. Whether that Statute that indemnifies all such as shall fight for a King de facto though he be not a King de Jure, vvhich vvas only intended to quiet mens minds in case of a doubtfull title as often hapned in the intricate pedigree betvveen the Houses of Lancaster and York, can ever be applyed to one that usurps the Crovvn upon a King vvhose title is so clear and so universally acknovvledged.

IX. Since ignorance of the Lavv excuses no man, vvhe­ther all those that shall run into Rebellion, hoping for in­demnity by that Statute, and shall aftervvards come to be executed for it, may not iustly lay their blood at the door of those, vvho have misled them by disguising the lavv vvith such absurd and malicious interpretations.

X. Whether an English or a forreign Army be the fitter instrument to sett up Arbitrary povver in England; or vvhe­ther a Lavvfull King, vvho can have no temptation to it, or an usurper, vvho can never be safe vvithout it, be the like­lier person to enslave the nation.

XI. Whether persons that are to be proceded against in Parliament vvere ever heretofore committed prisoners before the Parliament fate.

XII. This being novv done by the Prince of Orange, vvhether it be not ane evident sign that vvhenever he shall gett any assembly of men together that he shall think fitt to stile a Parliament, he resolves they shall be such as shall fall upon any persons or doe any thing that he shall think fitt to chalk out to them.

XIII. Whether the vvhole Course of his life abroad in the destruction of the liberty of those Provinces vvith vvhose protection he vvas entrusted, Or his many violent and ille­gall actions since his Landing, doe give the more certain vvar­ning to every English man of that oppression and Tyranny they must Ly under during his usurpation.

XIV. If the Prince of Orange find any person honest enough to oppose his unjust dessigns vvhether of destroying or enslaving the People and that he finds no vvay by lavv to remove such persons: Quaere if he vvill not let loose the People upon them as he did upon the De Wittes in Holland and Roman Catholicks in England?

XV. Since the Prince of Orange has shovvn that his oath, though never so solemnly given, is not to be regar­ded; as it appeares by his having svvorn solemnly to the States generall of the United Provinces upon his admission to the office of their Generall, that he never should ask, or tho offered accept of the office of State-Holder, and yet both asked and is in actuall possession of the same: Quaere vvhat security he can give that he vvil not treat England if they make him their master as he has done Holland vvho made him their servant?