HAving applyed my self here particularly to the removing of National Prejudices, I doubt not, but it has been expect­ed, I should speak something to a late Tract, Entituled, Lawful Prejudices, &c. And I acknowledge, the Title seems to call me to that Work.

I confess, I have heard much of Lawful Prejudices against the Union, but never saw the Attempt made, till this Out-of-Season-Piece, to say no more of it, shew'd it self in the World.

I forbear Replying to it at large, Not on Account of the Ar­gument, nor of the Performance; In both which, 'tis my Opinion, the Author has acted so much below his Ordinary, that, to me, it is One of the Unaccountablest Things in that Part of Nature, how a Man so capable, and that is so deservedly Admir'd in all other Cases, could form such a Piece of Indigesture, I ask his Pardon, if I am wrong, as this Piece seems to be.

Whether it was, a New Scene he was to Act, which he was unacquainted with, having ever, till now, Acted with Wisdom, Charity and Justice, and when driven by, Heaven knows, what Influence out of his Element, like a Traveller out of his Knowledge, he made all his Steps equally irregular, or from what other Confusion of Thoughts it might proceed, I will not determine.

I decline all Advantages this gives me, and very seriously pro­fess, I should entirely have declin'd entring the Lists at all with this Paper, had not the Indecency on the whole Body of Dissenters in Eng­land, obliged me to Justify and Defend them against what, I confess, I never expected to find them charg'd with, especially by the Person whom common Fame reports to be the Author of this Paper.

[Page 2] In my Undertaking this, which I think is a Debt I am bound to pay to Truth and Innocence, I shall endeavour, not only, to keep the Rules of Decency and good Manners, but shall take Care, not to break in up­on that Respect, which I always profess'd to the very Reverend Author, both in his Person and Character, and which I shall still retain, not­withstanding this Unhappy Excursion.

This will prevent me saying any thing, which I am not forc't to, in the necessary pursuit of Truth, and the just Vindication of an Injur'd People: But, in that, I hope, he himself will pardon me, the same Plainness which I desire to use with all the World, and which an Honest Impartiality obliges me to.

I shall say little to the Matter of the National Oath, Solemn Cove­nant, or Sinfulness of the Union here, I had given my Opinion on that Head before, without the least Prospect of this Gentlemans present At­tempt, and I see no Reason, from any thing he has advanc'd, to alter a Word in it.

I think still the National Covenant's not at all concern'd here, nor the Bishops in the Parliament at all establisht by the Union: Uniting with England, as already Constituted, is neither Constituting nor Approving their Authority, since a Protest against their Civil Authority clears you of the last, and you have nothing of Concern in the first. But this is not my present Business.

Nor shall I enter upon the Argument he brings against the Church of England, tho I own them maletreated and wrong'd also, particularly in the Matters of the Sacramental Test.

I am no more for Bishops, Sacramental Tests, or any sort of sinful Compliances, than he that is remotest from them: But every Blame should be plac'd where it justly falls.

But I come to that which has extorted this Sheet from me, and a­gainst my Inclination, driven me to the Necessity of Debate, with a Gentleman I sincerely value, and whom I acknowledge my self to be no match for. But tho my Respect for the Author is the utmost Re­straint upon me; yet I cannot but be astonished to see a Man of his In­tegrity, and very Reverend Character fall so hard, and I must say, so unhandsomly upon a People, whom once the Church of Scotland was not ashamed to call Brethren, and who never have deserv'd this Treatment from Scotland, much less Now; and this is the Cause of my engaging in the present Dispute.

[Page 3] And with all imaginable Respect to my Reverend Antagonist, I must be allow'd to say, here he has not done them Justice; nay, has grosly in­jur'd, wrong'd, and ill-treated them: Neither, which is worst of all, is the Fact he charges them with, True.

It has been but the last Lords day, when in this City a Reverend En­glish dissenting Minister preached in the Church of the Grayfriers, where I was a Witness, that the Ministry of the Kirk of Scotland, esteem'd the English Presbyterians as Orthodox, since they committed to him not only the Pulpit for preaching, but the Administration of Ordinances, admitting him to baptize in the same Pulpit he had preach'd in.

Now 'tis very strange to me, what can be meant by saying, We cannot trust the Presbyterian Dissenters; How, Gentlemen, can you trust them in Sacreds, and not in Civils; admit them to the Function and Right of the Sacred Office, and not veoture them, or join with them in defence of that Office.

If they incline to Episcopacy, will you come so near the brink of A­postacy to Prelatick Principles as to receive such into the Ministerial Bro­therhood.

Really, if you can unite with them thus, you may unite with them any how, and any where, and to say, you cannot trust them, is very hard, indeed 'tis very hard.

In the next place, can you not trust the Presbyterian Dissenters: This is beyond all the rest, since it singles out those Dissenters, who it may be said, you can only trust, or those who are nearest in Judgment to the Kirk here. And I must therefore take the liberty to say, it is a Bill of Exclu­sion against the whole Body of Dissenters in England directly.

1 st, Because they are the only Dissenters in England, you really ought to depend upon, the rest will join with you in Interest, will assist and receive mutual Assistance, and be your Friends; but they will never own your Kirk, nor submit to your Discipline.

2 ly, Who of the Dissenters will you owne, if not the Presbyterians, the Independents you may approve in Doctrine, but you cannot joyn with them in Church-Government, nor they with you, the Anabaptists you disowne as Sectaries, and the Quakers as Hereticks, and 'tis the Complaint here, that the Union will open the Door to all those, and let them in to the Kirk of Scotland, who then can trust, if not the Presbyterians.—It cannot therefore be any Breach of my Chari­ty, to say it is a publick disowning the whole Body of Dissenters in England, as Persons that cannot be trusted.

[Page 4] In the next place, I would beg this Gentleman, and all the sincere Lovers of the Reform'd Churches in this Island, to Reflect, how Fatal to their General Interest, how Destructive to the Preservation of them, in either their separate or conjunct Concerns, how directly tending to their intire Subversion, and how plain an opening the Door to their Confusion, must any Design of raising Jealousies and Misunderstand­ings between us be.

What is it, Gentlemen, makes the High Church in England, and the Prelatists here, against the Union, but the Apprehension of an entire In­corporation of Interests and Affection, Hands and Hearts, between the Kirk of Scotland and the Dissenters in England? If that Union is not the Effect of the other, both Parties are undone, and 'tis the only way to render the Union Dangerous: To commence a Distrust between us, therefore, is the only Effectual Step to Disappoint the Nations of the Benefit of the Union, continue us all in Jealousies and Confusions, and encourage the Enemies of our Peace, to Crush and Insult us all.

This must needs move any Considering Man, and fill him with Con­cern, that we should thus be doing that very Work our selves, which all the Powers of Hell, Jacobitism and Dividers, can never do without us.

It is not for me to enter upon the Character of the Dissenters in Eng­land, or of their vigorous Defence of themselves, both in their Religious Principles, and Civil Libertys, to the Honour of that great Body, both as Christians, and as English Men—. They need it not, these things are too well known, even to this Reverend Person himself, and to all Scotland, to need any Repetition.

And how either Passion, or want of Charity should so far prevail on this Person at other times so free from the first, and so known for the last, I am perfectly at a loss about.

The first thing he charges on the Presbyterians in England, is, That their Divines, of which he names only Mr. Baxter, Mr. How, and Dr. Bates offered to submit to Episcopacy, and on this Submission which was but by a few, and those are all dead, he ventures to say, That all, or most of them declare for a moderate Episcopacy. And then adds up­on the whole Body that they cannot be trusted. To clear up this Slander.

[Page 5] First, I must beg this Gentleman to Examine what this Episcopacy was, and to what reduc't to which they offer'd to submit; and whe­ther he himself is not as much a Bishop as any English Prelate would then have been, Abating the Title of Lord, which is a Civil, not an Ec­clesiastical Dignity.

2. Then I desire him to Examine whether the Bishops themselves did not reject their Proposal for that Reason, that it reduc't them all to Presbyters and parish Priests.

3. Whether some of the greatest Divines in the Church of England, have not Insulted the Dissenters on that head, That their pretended Sub­mission was a Plot against Episcopacy it self, that they only acknow­ledged an abrupt and imperfect Superintendency, and that too with intolerable Limitations.

4. Next, Whether all those very Gentlemen who, he says, did sub­mit, did not at last reject Episcopacy, refuse a Complyance, particularly on account of Re-ordination, and the Oath of Induction, and lose their Livings on that Article.

5. Whether, had they Complyed in his Terms, it reflects on the whole Body; and how he can Qualifie himself to say, that some people give the Presbyterians in England that Character, without acknowledging it was an Injury to them; since nothing can be more unjust, than to Charge a Body of Men for the Errors of a few.

6. Whether the Presbyterians in England are as far from sinfull Complyances, or Leaning towards Episcopacy Now, as the Presby­terians in Scotland, of whom 'tis yet a Question, whether an Equality are not Episcopally Inclin'd? And whether it would not be as just to Charge the whole Kirk with it, as to Charge the whole Body of Presbyterians in England, because of the sinful Complyance of a few?

This I cannot but regrate as a hard and Uncharitable Treatment of the Dissenters, who have so Vigorously and with such Success, Opposed the Encroachments of the Church, and stood their Ground to the last.

But this is not all, a worse Charge follows, and in Terms which I am sorry to say, are neither consistent with Charity or Justice; and it grieves me to be forc'd in the just Defence of the Absent and In­jured People called Dissenters, to Charge any man, much less this Gentleman with want of Truth. His Charge is,

[Page 6] ‘"That the Dissenters did so far Countenance and Favour the Dis­pensing Power, by the Tenor of their Addresses, that instead of silently Receiving the Benefits of the Indulgence, they set up for Advocats to support it, and that to rescue themselves from the Severity of one Law, they gave a [...]ow to all Laws, &c. pag. 9.’

I hope our Author will not attempt to come off of the Charge, by his putting it with a Somesay in the Front, since he either believes it, or would have it believ'd, or else 'tis not to his purpose; and if he does not believe it, he ought to have quoted it as a Slander.

Note here, he does not say some of the Dissenters, But THE DISSENTERS, which I think is allowed to be a General, and to signifie the Dissenters as a Body of people, so call'd and distin­guisht.

If he means only some of them, it will do him no Service; for some also rejected the Proposal of Addressing, with Contempt.

If he will have the Majority Determine it, those that refused it were Twenty for one, and so 'tis against him; and no body did it.

If he means they did it as THE DISSENTERS, or in Gen­ral, 'tis false in Fact, and he will not pretend to it; & yet this Gentle­man tells us, THE Dissenters did it, and leaves the World to conclude it was the whole Body of Dissenters.

This is very hard and very unkind, and I am sorry I am forc't to Examine so far into it. But to state the Fact fairly will end the whole Dispute.

1. That many of the Dissenters were ignorantly drawn in, to Thank the King for what was the Effect of an illegal Dispensing Power, viz. Granting a Toleration; without considering that there lay hid a Snake in the Grass against their Laws and Civil Liberties, is acknow­ledged.

2. That the Artifices of the Court, their Messengers, Booted A­postles, Engines, and Contrivances, wheedled some well-meaning ignorant People into the Snare, is also not to be hid, which wicked Crew have been detected, and some of them used as they deserv'd, viz. Contemned by all honest men, and particularly by the very people they Deceiv'd.

3. The Repentance of, and Amends made by the People so Deceiv'd, their firm Adherence to Liberty, and their Principles ever since, has been Eminent to the Overthrow of all those that formed that Horrid Delusion upon them, and No man should Reproach a Penitent.

[Page 7] 4. And when all is done, these were but a few, and so few as bear no Proportion worth notice, to the Number of the Honest Dissenters, that to the last Opposed those Illegal Proceedings—, and to say it was THE DISSENTERS, a Term General, and Embracing the the whole as a Body, is most Unsufferably Injurious.

5. As to the General, Viz. Addressing or thanking the King for his Indulgence; Our Author is also mistaken, in his Charging the Dissenters, unless he make it appear that any of those Addresses, Recogniz'd the King's Right of Dispensing with the Laws.

The Liberty of Conscience they thank't him for, 'tis true was their Native Right, and their Right as Christians; it had been withheld from them by an Unjust and Illegal Persecution—. Now tho a man Restores me my Right, which another Invaded, I may thank him for the Fact, tho it was a Debt to Justice, without joining in his reserved Design, because I am obliged in Civility, to him that Deli­vers me from Oppression, tho it be his Duty to do it. Else all Our Addresses to King William, or Her present Majesty may be Censured also—, to say the King did it with an Evil Design is not to the purpose, unless those that gave the Thanks knew that Design, which Thousands at that time were not Convinc't of, and as soon as they were Convinc't, abhorred the Design, and publickly Opposed it.

So far then as any of the Dissenters in their Addresses Own'd the Invasion of the English Laws, and the King's Dispensing Power, so far they are to be Charg'd; but if this Gentleman was to Examine how many he can Charge with that, he would be far from lay­ing it upon the whole Body for so Scandalous a Few.

I might refer him home also, and Enquire whether there was no Addressing here at the same time, and whether some even of the Ministers in Scotland, I care not to Collect Names, did not Address on the same Head, and thank the King for the very same thing—. And 'twould be very hard if I should from thence Charge the Kirk of Scotland with Countenancing the Dispensing Power of King James, but the Justice would be the same, if I should.

Upon these Accounts, I think the Dissenters in England ill-treated, and I am, I confess not a little Surpriz'd that these things being of such recent Memory, should slip the Thoughts of any Man; for certainly, if such Addresses were made here by Ministers themselves, [Page 8] it should have been the last thing any Minister here should have done to reproach the Dissenters in England with, and I make no Doubt this Gentleman will, when he reflects on this, do so much Justice as to acknowledge his Error.

I shall Enter into none of the Arguments brought together, How­ever abruptly against the Union. The Thing is Over, and the Debate useless, and I hope the Effects will soon Convince the Nation of the Benefit: My Design is not an Answer to the Book, but a Vindication of the Dissenters in England, from some of the worst Treatment I ever remember them to have met with, from One of their own Brethren in my Time, and I think with the least Provo­cation.

I Humbly and Sincerely Recommend it to him, to Reflect on the Unkindness and Injustice of it, and to make such amends to the Good Name of his Brethren, as his own Respect to Justice, shall perswade him, is their Due.