Answers to the Reasons given against the Bill for Erecting COURTS of CONSCIENCE within the Weekly Bills of Mortality.  
TO the first. The Bill only intends to take away Trials by Jury where the Cause is under 40 s. which will be a very great ease to the Subject, and save the Plaintiff and Defendant above twice the Debt in Arrests, putting in special Bail, and Attorneys and other Fees in proceeding in the Inferior Courts. And the matter if under 40 s. damages for Words or Blows where the Plaintiff and Defendant are of the poorest sort of People that pay no Taxes or Duties to the King, Church, or Poor, and therefore can expect no greater Damages, may with much ease be decided by three honest Gentlemen of the Neighbourhood, and thereby the Parties fairly reconciled, to follow their Lawful Callings, and consequently be preserved from falling to the Charge of the Parish.  
To the Second. The Parliament in passing this Act, doth not prejudice the Law in its Fundamentals, but only puts a Check to the Exorbitancies and Exactions of many persons in Inferior Courts, who aim only at Arrests, and the bringing the Poor and Ignorant People into their Clutches; and are much startled at this Act, fearing the Poor will thereby be relieved against their Rapine and Violence.  
To the Third. This Bill doth not intend to take away the Trial of Causes in any Court Baron where the proceedings are originally by Summons and Distringas under 40 s. wherein the Defendant is at liberty either to appear or comply with the Plaintiff by the return of the Summons: nor is the power Vested only in Shopkeepers, (although in London they are mostly such) for therein the Reasoner is much mistaken, by aiming to disparage the intended Judges not named, and thereby concludes that the Parliament can find out no Judges but Shopkeepers, within this intentionally to be reform Jurisdiction.  
To the Fourth. No Justices of Assizes ever ride in this small charitable Circuit; and it's easily demonstrated that the Parliament may, if they please, find hundreds of honest and able Gentlemen to reconcile such Petty Differences, and save the mispending 5 l. to recover sometimes 40, 20, 10, or 5 s. and such like petty sums, with the Defence of the Suit, which are the accustomed Fees for Plaintiff and Defendant in any such Suit.  
To the Fifth. The fifth Reason bears little sense to presume that the Parliament will appoint Indigent Persons to be Judges in the Coure of Conscience; neither will the Parliament appoint Tally-men, Brokers, or such like Persons, to be Judges or Commissioners, who lend such minute sums at great and costly Exactions, which hath been a fit bait for Inseriour Arresting Jurisdictions; nor can it be believed, that the Judges of the Court of Conscience will fight or scold with their poorest Neighbours.  
Note. That the Reasoner observes that the Act for the Courts of Conscience designs the preventing of the expense of great sums in petty Suits; and then speaks of the ease and quickness in the recovery in such Courts, and of a Summons or Notice to the Defendant, where the Defendant may tender the money due, and the Plaintiff cannot recover Costs after such Tender, which is true, but never mentioneth the Exactions and Extortions occasioned by Arrests, in Inferior Courts, which are the great oppression and grievance now under Consideration.  
To the Sixth. The sixth Reason tells us, That the Common Law was always extreme Careful to presesve the Kings Peace, which is hoped, will be always 〈◊〉. And the Court of Conscience 〈◊〉 Diseretion and Integrity will reconcile more petty Contracts and Quarrels amongst the Poor, than ever the Cruelty of Inferior Arresting Courts have done or will do, by ruining both parties in such Suits.  
It is agreed, that Juries are of the Neighbourhood, and may be challenged, or have an Attaint brought against them, or the Party grieved may have a new Trial, in which Cases (Challenge only excepted) the remedy is worse than the disease; for the Jurors in Inferior Courts are such mean persons, that if an Attaint should be brought against them, and they like to be found guilty, it's doubted, few of them would stand the Test; and the consequence of the Charges to bring an Attaint, or procure a new Trial, when the thing in demand is under 40 s. or 20 s. is obvious to every person or unlearned Solicitor, that will scorn to squeeze his Client's Pocket to such little purpose. And as to two of the King's Menial Servants contesting for 40 s. they may proceed in the old Court, called the Marshals Court, which was instituted only for his Majesty's Servants, and will continue its Jurisdiction.  
It is further answered, That matters of 40 s. and under, which will be most relieved in this intended wholesome Court of Conscience, cannot be difficult, nor any of the matters in the foregoing Clause, unless the Parliament had put in weaker Judges, than those that make Irrational Objections: and it is plainly evident, that he or they which give the Reasons against the Courts of Conscience, declare so much of his or their interest in oppressing the Poor by vexatious Suits, that every indifferent person will conclude, the Reasons answer themselves; and the subsequent Objections against this intended healing Court, must certainly flow from white-Chappel or Southwark, where some persons there concerned, may much dread a Court of Conscience, until they know what it means, and receive the fruit and comfort by the experience thereof.  
Thus far I have in kindness followed the Reasoner, or else I might have only given him this ensuing Account: For I must conclude, that he writ his Reasons, (if such they be) before he saw the Bill.  
For that Clamour, about Encouraging of Subjects to break the King's Peace, is wholly causeless: For the Bill that is humbly proposed for the Courts of Conscience, craves Relief only in Matters of Small Detts under 40 s. And leaves the business of Trespasses to the Wisdom of the High Court of Parliament, Whether to be in the Act or not.  
That exception of Enticing people to forswear themselves, is as groundless as Envious: For the Bill makes provision against such danger, by leaving of it to the Integrity and Discretion of the Commissioners.  
For his last Charge, That the said Bill is contrary to Law and Magna Charta, and that it will Revive Antiquated Controversies, which the Law hath Buried in Oblivion, would never have been Expressed much less in Print) but by one that is so miserable a Pauper in Reason, Conscience and Experience, as to dare to Declaim against so jood a Work, that was managed by City Law above fourscore years: And afterwards by two Parliaments in King James' Reign Establisied and made a Statute Law, with so hearty a Concurrence, that they were pleased to charge the Contemners of it, as Enemies to the Gody meaning of the said Act, as may more at large appear in the Act of the third of King James.  
And therefore further to trace his Trivial and Biased Cavils ', were to fill under the same Gild of Ignorance and Presumption with the Reasoner, by too far discussing what hath been Enacted and Commended by the Supreme Authority.