A BRIEF REPLY TO THE HISTORY OF Standing Armies In ENGLAND. With some Account of the Authors.  
LONDON: Printed in the Year 1698.   

THE PREFACE.  
IN all Ages of the World, and under the Best of Governments, there were always some Persons to be found, who either for Envy at the Prosperity of some; Ambition, Popular Vanity, or Private Ends, took Occasion to appear as Malcontents, and set themselves to Explose and Censure the Actions of Their Governors: History is so full of Instances of this Nature, that 'twould be an affront to the Gentlemen I am dealing with, to suppose them ignorant of 'em.  
In Our Age, where Nicknames are so much in fashion, we have called them Murmurers, Grumbletonians and the like, of whom one of our Poets has said not improperly.  
And should King Jesus Reign, they'd Murmur too.  
'Twould not ha' been foreign to the Purpose, as an Answer to the History of Standing Armies, to have Entertained the World with a History of these Dissenters to Government, the Murmurers of the World; who always look with sour Faces upon the Magistrates, and cry out of so much as the little Fingers of their Superiors. But we have not room for it here; nor to descend too far into the General Character of them; but 'tis necessary to observe, that these sort of People have one inseparable Adjunct, as an Essential and Chief Prop both of their Nature and Design; They always Cry Woe, woe, and fright themselves and the World with sad Tidings. Religion, or Liberty, or both, are infallibly the Ensigns of their Order. And I wonder we have not Ribbons in their Hats, with No Popery, No Slavery, or No Standing Armies, No Lords of the Treasury, etc.  
If the Bottom of this Case was to be Examined, and the Authors dealt with in their own way, Preferment always lists them on the t'other side: And tho' I do not say these Gentlemen who write so strenuously for Liberty, would do so; yet they have told us plainly who did, Viz. The Lord Strafford, and Noy, and I could name them some more. King Charles' the First, say they, began the Custom of making an Opposition to himself in the House of Commons, the Road to Preferment; and how came it about? Truly, because he found they were Mercenary, and made a Noise that their Mouths might be stopped; this has been too much a Method since, no doubt.  

" For Parliament-Men to rail at the Court,  
" And get a Preferment immediately for't.   
But how comes it to pass, because private Ends lie so generally at the bottom of such Clamour, that we never found them proof against the Offer?  
And here I could give innumerable Instances of great Ones, on the other hand, who as soon as ever the Court-Favour has failed them, and they found themselves not Rewarded according to their Merit, turned Popular, Champions for the People's Liberties, and Railers at the Court. I do not say, I mean by this, the Lords S— D— Mr. H— Mr. H— or any body else in particular; but whoever the Coat fits, let them wear it.  
This Evil Spirit of Discontent is now at Work under the best Reign, and the mildest Government that ever England knew; particularly so, in suffering the Affairs of the Government to be thus disputed in Print, by, not an Author or Single Person, but a whole Club of Mistaken Politicians, who in any Reign but this would have been used as they deserved.  
Had such a Cabal of the best Men in the Nation attempted the like in Queen Eliabeth's Reign, who we must all acknowledge was a true English Queen, and Governed the Nation with a Matchless Prudence, they would have been very severely bandled; but full Liberty is given them now to say almost any thing; and truly they take the Extent of it, even to Indecency and Ill Manners. For they Treat the King himself with Jeers and Banter, and make Ridiculous Encomiums on him, to expose His Mijesty to very Scurrilous Reflections.  
This is so mean a Way of Writing, that I shall not descend to Returns in kind, but shall use them like Gentlemen, whether they behave themselves so or no, and leave that to themselves.   

A BRIEF REPLY TO THE History of Standing Armies.  
THE Outcry against an Army in England is carried on with so high a hand, that nothing can be said to it with any hope of Effect on the Complainants. They go on with their own Arguments, never thinking any thing that is or can be said to them, worth while to take notice of: For it seems to be more their Design to render the Government suspected, than to argue fairly whether it be really true or not, That an Army must be our ruin.  
I have considered their former Books according to their Desire, and to which they refer in this, and the several Answers to them; some of which seem to me to carry a great Weight with them; but to them are of so small a Consequence, that they do not think them worth a notice.  
They have now given the World what they call a History of Standing Armies, in which they have been guilty of some Mistakes, some Omissions, and some Contradictions; and tho' the Historical part might very well have been omitted, as being nothing at all to the purpose; yet 'tis very proper to tell them,  
First, 'Tis a Mistake that the Spaniards did any thing to purpose in the Seventeen Provinces with 9000 Men, which they call a Standing Army; and if they please to review Strada and Bentivoglio, their own Author, they will find that the Duke D' Alva and Don Lewis de Requescens had very great Armies at the Bittle near Groningen, against Count Lodowick of Nassau, and at the Sieges of Harlem and Mons; the Duke D' Alva brought Fourteen thousand Men with him at first; raised Twenty-four thousand more at another time against the Siege of Mons; and when the Count D'Egmont presented the Petition against the Foreign Forces, they alleged the Spaniards had Thirty thousand Men in Pay, besides the Troops of the Country.  
As to other Armies, I wonder the Authors did not instance the small Forces with which the Spaniards conquered the Mighty Empires of Mexico and Peru; in all which Work, I never yet read that they had above 800 Horse and 5750 Foot.  
Armies, as well as every thing else, are great or small in proportion; and 4000 Archers in Cheshire raised by Richard the Second, though they only made way to their Master's Ruin, were really a more formidable Force than Twenty thousand men in Arms can be now.  
The Authors (for I am informed their Name is Legion) have carried on their History to Queen Mary, and there break off, and tell us, the Standing Forces were then 1200 men, in Queen Elizabeth's Reign 3500; where, by the way, 'tis to be noted, they grant, that it has all along been allowed to have a Standing Force in England for above 140 Years past; for we are not now arguing the Quantity, but the Thing, A Standing Army: And they have often in former Papers asserted, That any Standing Forces are destructive of our Constitution, and inconsistent with the English Liberty; and yet our Constitution consisted very well in Queen Elizabeth's time.— Nor have these Gentlemen given their Quotations faithfully; for they have been told, and are not ignorant, That, First, whereas Queen Mary had but 1200 men, she shamefully lost Calais to the French, for want of Strength to relieve it. Indeed if she had raised the Militia, they might ha' kept the French from coming on to take Dover, but if she had had 10000 men in Pay, Calais, which had been ours for some Ages before, had been ours still; and if it had, the Loss of Dunkirk had not been so much to our disadvantage. Then, as to Queen Elizabeth, they omit that she always had a very good Army in the Low-Countries, which to her was a Nursery of Soldiers: And in the time of her apprehension of an Invasion, I would ask how many she transported hither for her own Defence; for the Armies she prepared, at Tilbury Camp 44000, and 20000 at Plymouth, were not all Militia, but Soldiers disciplined and trained in the Wars in Ireland and Holland.  
What the Authors say Queen Elizabeth did, and with what Glory she reigned, and how she left us when she died, is all true, and much more; and what her Revenue was, and what Taxes she had, for aught we know may be so: But I hope these Gentlemen will excuse me for saying they very much misrepresent the Cise, when they would tell us what Revenues she had; as if those Revenues performed all the Great Things she did: They ought to have told us also what Taxes she had, and how she took from the Spaniard above 60 Millions of Pieces of Eight at several times, at the West Indies. at Cadiz, and at Sea; which together with what Subsidies, Customs of Towns, and Interests the Dutch paid her, were Infinite: And with this she did all those great things, and with this she always kept an Army on foot, and left them so after the Peace; by the same token that King James let 3000 of them starve and desert for want of Subsistence, on the Dutch refusing to pay the Garrisons of the Brill, Ramekins, and Flushing.  
I shall not enter into the History of King James the First, King Charles' the First, or his Sons; the Historical part does not argue either way in this Case, as I understand the Point: The Question before us is not so much what has been, or has not been, but what is now needful to be done; and I wish these Gentlemen would admit a calm Argument; in which Case I offer to prove, First, That 'tis absolutely necessary to have some Standing Force; and then, That with Consent of Parliament 'tis not Illegal.  
I remember one Reply to the former Argument entered into the Historical part of the matter, and underlook to prove, That every Government in England had for many Years maintained some Standing Force; and 'tis too true to be denied.  
Then they descend to examine the Reign of King James the First, and of K. Charles the First; and tho' they grant they had no Armies, yet they reckon up all the Tyrannies and Oppressions they were guilty of; how they Enslaved the Nation, Bussooned the Parliament, Oppressed the Subjects, Levied Taxes; but all without a Standing Army: Nay, when King Charles the First affronted the House of Commons, he was fain, as these Authors themselves say, to Rifle the Taverns, Gaming-houses, and Brothel-houses, to pick out 3 or 400 Men; which if true, tho' I do not fee it deserves any credit; yet 'tis plain he could have no Army, no, not so much as any Guards. Now if all this can be done by a King without an Army, why then the having an Army can do no more; the Mischief does not lie in an Army, but in the Tyrant.  
The Authors conclude of King Charles the First having No Army to support him, his Tyranny was precarious, and at last his ruin. And may we not say so of his Son, who had a great Army, and as Mercenary as any English Army ever was? And yet tho' he had an Army to support him, his Tyranny was precarious, and at last his ruin: So that Tyranny is a Weed that never throve in England; it always poisoned the Planter; and an Army, or no Army, it is all one.  
This is only touched at, to let the World know, that these Gentlemen have not been faithful Historians; for that they have not fairly stated the Case, but left out such things as are really true, because against their purpose; which is not a fair way of Arguing.  
But if the Case must be debated, I think 'tis very proper to reduce it to Two Heads: 
First, Whether a Standing Army, in time of Peace, may not be Lawful?  
Secondly, Whether it be not Expedient?   
As to the first Question, it has really been proved in a small Discourse formerly published, entitled, An Argument, showing that a Standing Army is not inconsistent, etc. which these Gentlemen never thought fit to Answer, and now do tacitly acknowledge to be true, but say 'tis nevertheless dangerous: However, if it may be Legal then, it cannot be true that 'tis destructive of our Liberty and Constitution; for that can never be destructive of our Constitution which can be Legal; That were to make a thing Lawful and Unlawful at the same time.  
A Standing Army, with Consent of Parliament, is a Legal Army; and if the Legislative Power erect an Army, 'tis as much a Qualification to the Army, as a Charter is to a Corporation; for what else do these Gentlemen call an Establishment? that cannot be Illegal which is done by Parliament. The Titles of a Bankrupt House of Lords, a Pensioner House of Commons, a flattering Clergy, and a prostituted Ministry, are virulent Phrases, and savour both of Passion and Ill Manners. We have them not now, nor am I convinced we ever had, nor hope we ever shall.  
And yet if they were so, they are the Parliament of England; and what they do, is the Act of the whole Kingdom, and cannot be Illegal.  
I shall not spend time to prove what the Authors own, and cannot deny. I therefore lay down the first Head as proved before, and granted by our Adversaries;  
That a Standing Army in time of Peace with Consent of Parliament, is not inconsistent with a Free Government, and is a Legal Army.  
The Second main Argument is, Whether it be necessary for all things that are lawful, are not expedient. Whether there be so much need of an Army, as that we should run the hazards that we are told we shall be exposed to, from them.  
That we have very great Reason to be always in a Posture fit to maintain the Peace purchased now with so much Blood and Treasure, I believe no Body will dispute. Whether with or without an Army, I don't yet debate. That an Army was the procuring Cause of this Peace, I hope it will be allowed me; and that had we not appeared in a very powerful Figure, the Terms had not been so good, and Lewis the 14th would not have parted with so many Vast Countries, Impregnable Fortifications, and Sovereign Titles; our Army in Conjunction with our Allies have under God's Providence obtained this. Now, whether it be proper to let go this Lion upon Parole, and tying the French King by his Honour only, which he has not formerly valued at much in such Cases; Disband our Forces, and rely upon the League? This is the direct Question.  
If the King of France were so much to be depended upon, the Spaniard and the Emperor need not have strained so hard for the strong Towns of Brisac, Friburg, Philipsburgh, Mons, Aeth, Luxemburgh, and Charleroy, which are very chargeable to keep, and no real Profit to them; and the King of France would readily have given up Franche-Compte, Burgundy, and vast Territories of Land instead of them, with large Revenues and Advantages; but these are given as Pledges of the Peace, and are maintained by the Confederates at a vast Charge, that they might have a sufficient Strength to oblige the French King to perform the Stipulation of the League.  
Now I do not know what vast Securities these Gentlemen may flatter themselves with; but to me it seems one of the most ridiculous things in the World to be wholly Disarmed at such a time, when all the Nations in the World have Forces in Pay.  
I am willing to give the Gentlemen of the Club all the Latitude in Argument they can desire, and therefore I'll grant that the French King has surrendered all the Towns and Countries he was to surrender, though he really has not. That King James is neither in Power nor Person at all formidable, nor indeed worth mentioning in the Case. That the King of Spain is not Dead, nor like to be so. That these are not, nor ever were Arguments for a Standing Force, at least not singly considered.  
But notwithstanding all this, I cannot but say that some competent Standing Force is absolutely necessary to preserve that Peace which has cost the Nation so dear; and it would seem a most unaccountable Weakness to run the hazard of it, and expose us to the uncertainty of it: We say, Temptation makes a Thief. There is nothing in the World will be so likely to make the Peace precarious, and allure the French to break it, as to find us Naked and Defenceless.  
If it be true, that an Army may be dangerous at Home, 'tis as true, that having no Army must be fatal Abroad: The danger of an Army is uncertain, and may be none; the damage of the contrary is infallible. 'Tis not saying we have formerly Conquered France, and therefore ought not to be so frighted with Apprehensrons of it now all the French Fools they say are Dead. France now, without Reflection upon England, is much too strong a Match for any single Nation in Europe, and the only means to keep her within bounds, is by Confederacies, and Leagues Offensive; how these can be maintained without Quota's of Forces ready to unite, is a Mystery too dark for my Understanding. Indeed the King may say to his Confederates, Truly my Subjects won't trust me with any Soldiers, and therefore I must pay my proportion in Money. But other Countries may refuse to keep up Forces as well as we, and so a League would be to small purpose indeed. These things have been offered before now, and in better Terms, and the Gentlemen with whom we argue have thought sit to forget to speak to them.  
But now we are Bantered about a Fleet and a Militia, and these are the Equivalents with which all the pretences of a Standing Army are to be Answered. Indeed a Fleet well ordered is a good thing; and a Militia well regulated, That Black Swan, that unheardof thing, if ever it could be had would be a good thing too. But pray, Gentlemen, give some people leave to understand things in the World as well as you: Suppose this Fleet and this Militia to be all that you can pretend, what would this be to a War in Flanders? 'Tis the carrying the War into Flanders, that is our great Interest; the Barrier of Strong Towns there is our best Security against France in the World: Now suppose the French King should with 80000 men fall into those Countries like a Tempest, as he did in 1672, without declaring War, would our Militia go over with the King to help our Confederates? Or could our Fleet relieve Charleroy? Would raising an Army, though it could be done in forty days, as you say King Charles did, be quick enough? 'Tis strange these things are not worth while to consider: Why does the French King keep up an Army? 'Tis not for fear, but to increase his Glory; and for that very reason it would be preposterous for us to be naked.  
England has always gone hand in hand with the Times; and Armed or not Armed, as her Neighbours did, and must always do so: in the Days when we kept no Forces at home, our Neighbous kept none abroad, and then there was no need of it, we were as well provided as they; but now they are all strong in Men, and shall we be naked! that is certainly to be exposed?  
'Tis Argued, an Army may soon be raised; King Charles the Second raised an Army in Forty Days, and the present King very speedily. I would but desire these Gentlemen to Examine, how it fared with both those Armies? I saw them both and they were composed of as jolly, brave, young Fellows as ever were seen; but being raw, and not used to hardship, the first Army lay, and rotten in Flanders, with Agues and Fluxes, the very first Campaign; and the last did the like at Dundalk; and so 'twill always far with any Army of English Men, till they have been abroad, and inur'd to the Service. I appeal to any Man, who knows the Nature of our Men; they are the worst raw Men in the World, and the best when once got over it.  
But to return to the Point: If 'tis necessary to preserve our Peace, and maintain the Leagues and Confederacies, which are the Bands and Barrs of it; if 'tis necessary to be always ready to prevent an Affront of an Enemy? if 'tis necessary to support the Reputation of our English Power? 'tis necessary then to be, not only in a posture to Defend ourselves at home, but to Defend our Confederates abroad, and to assist them in any sudden Insult from the Enemy; and this can be done neither by a Fleet, nor a Mililitia.  
But to come further: We have been Invaded in England, notwithstanding our Fleet; and that many times. Henry the Seventh Landed with an Army in spite of Richard the Third and his Fleet. The Duke of Monmouth Landed in the West, tho' King James had a very good Fleet: And had not King James' standing Army, tho' that was but Two Thousand Men, there routed them; I appeal to all Men to judge, what could the Militia have done to him? Now I'll suppose the Duke of Monmouth had been a French Man, or any thing, he had time to Land and Invade us, and unlade his Arms, and might have sent his Ships away again, and never have been hindered by our Fleet; and had he been but 5000 Regular Men, he had beat King James out of his Kingdom. Again, his Men were raw, a mere Militia, and you see what came of it, they were Defeated by a quarter of their Number, tho' I must say, they were better than any of our Militia too, by much.  
Again, the Prince of Orange Landed his whole Army quickly, notwithstanding a Fleet, and had leisure enough to have sent away all his Ships again: So that'tis a mistake, to say we cannot be Invaded if we have a Fleet, for we have been Invaded tho' we have had a good Fleet; and Demonstration is beyond Argument. And I would undertake, without Vanity, to Invade England, from any part beyond Sea, without any fear of the Fleet, unless you will have a Fleet able to block up your Neighbour's Ports; and when you hear of any Ships fitting out any where, send and forbid them, as Queen Elizabeth did to Henry the 4th of France.  
Now if I could come safe on Shore, notwithstanding the Fleet, then, if you have no Army to oppose me with, but your Country Militia, I would but ask any understanding Soldier, how many Men he would require to Conquer the whole Nation? Truly, not a great many; for, I dare say, 40000 of the best Militia we have, backed with no disciplined Troops, would not Fight 8000 old Soldiers: The Instance of the Iniskilling Men in Ireland will not bear here; for, on the one hand, they were Men made desperate by the ruin of their Families and Estates, and exasperated to the highest degree, and had no recourse for their Lives but to their Arms; and on the other hand, the Irish were the most despicable scandalous Fellows the World ever saw; Fellows that shut their Eyes when they shot off their Muskets, and tied Strings about their right Hands to know them from their left: These are wretched Instances, and only prove what we knew before, that the Militia are always brave Soldiers when they have to do with Children or Fools; but what could our Militia have done to the P. of O. old Veteran Troops, had they been willing to have opposed him; truly just as much as King James did, run away.  
The Story of making them useful has been much talked of, and a Book was printed to that purpose; it were a good Project, if practicable, but I think the Attempt will never be made by any wise Man, because no such will go upon Impossibilities.  
War is no longer an Accident, but a Trade, and they that will be any thing in it, must serve a long Apprenticeship to it: Human Wit and Industry has raised it to such a Perfection; and it is grown such a piece of Manage, that it requires People to make it their whole Employment; the War is now like the Gospel, Men must be set apart for it; the Gentlemen of the Club may say what they please, and talk fine things at home of the natural Courage of the English, but I must tell them, Courage is now grown less a Qualification of a Soldier than formerly; not but that 'tis necessary too, but Mannagement is the principle Art of War. An Instance of this may be had no farther off than Ireland; what a pitiful piece of Work the Irish made of a War all Men know: now 'tis plain the Irish do not want Courage, for the very same Men, when sent abroad, well Trained, and put under exact Discipline, how have they behaved themselves in Piedmont and Hungary, they are allowed to be as good Troops as any in the Armies.  
And if the state of Things alter, we must alter our Posture too, and what then comes of the History of Standing Armies? Tho' there had never been any in the World, they may be necessary now, and so absolutely necessary, as that we cannot be safe without them.  
We must now examine a little the Danger of a Standing Army at home; in which it will appear, whether the Gentlemen of the Club are in the right, when they turn all the Stream of the Government into one Channel, as if they all drove but one Wh●el, and as if the whole Design of the King and his Ministers were to obtain the despotic Power, and to Govern by an Army.  
They do indeed Caress the King sometimes with large Encomiums; but on the other hand, they speak it as directly as English can express, They intimate to us, that he designed the Government by an Army, even before he came over; and therefore in his Declaration omited to promise the Disbanding it. I wish these Gentlemen would leave out their Raillery, as a thing that never helps an Argument,— as Mr. Dryden says.  

— For Disputants, when Reasons fail,  
Have one sure Refuge left, and that's to rail.   
However, we shall not treat them in the same manner. I cannot think all those Artifices of the Court, (for a Standing Army) are true, and some of them are plain Forgories. To tell us the Parliament thought, they might have managed their part of the War by Sea. That the word Authority of Parliament was urged to that Article of the Declaration of Right, about Standing Armies, by such as designed so early to play the Game of a Standing Army: That the Kingdom of Ireland was neglected, and London. Derry not Relieved; that a pretence for a greater Army might be framed. These are horrid suggessions, and favour only of ill Nature; and it may be very easy, had I leisure to examine, to prove to those Gentlemen, that the Parliament had as great a Sense of the necessity of Force to reduce Ireland, as the King had, and were as forward to grant Supplies for it. When the King told the House, that 'twas not advisable to attempt it without 20000 Men. If these Gentlemen had asked who advised his Majesty to say so, I could ha' told them, Duke Schomberge himself did it.; a Man who was much a Soldier, and as honest as ever Commanded an Army; a General of the greatest Experience of any of his Age, who no Man could despise without our Reproach to his Judgement; a Man used to Conquering of Kingdoms and Armies; and yet he thought it very unsafe to Fight with that Army at Dundalk. And we were beholding to his Conduct for the saving the whole Nation by that Caution, tho' Thousands lost their Lives by it, and some foolishly reflected on him for want of Courage; which 'twas thought, cost him his Life at the Boyne. King James had 50000 Men in Ireland, furnished with every thing necessary but a General; and can any body say, that to attempt reducing them with less than 20000, was a pretence to get an Army.  
This is straining a Text, a Trade, (without reflection) which our Adversaries are very ready at; but which is more useful for them, in their Socinian Principles, than in their Politics.  
By this, I must beg leave to tell the Gentlemen, it most plainly appears, that they drive at vilifying the present Establishment, rather than at the Liberty they talk so much of.  
The next absurdity I find, is Page 23. Where, tho' they do not affirm, because like cunning Disputants, they won't hamper themselves in Argument, yet they plainly intimate, that all the omissions of our Fleet were designed to produce this Argument from it, that a Fleet is no Security to us. As if his Majesty, or his Ministers, should Order our Fleet to do nothing Considerable, and spend Six or Seven Years, and as many Millions of Money, only to be able to say to the Parliament, that a Fleet is no Security to us. This is such a thing, that I cannot pass over, without desiring these Gentlemen to Examine a little, whether his Majesty has not, on the contrary, more improved our Fleet and Shipping, than any King before him ever did? Whether he has not built more Ships, and by his own Fancy, peculiar in that way, better Ships than any of his Predecessors? Whether the Docks, the Yards, the Stores, the Sailors, and the Ships, are not in the best Condition that ever England knew? Whether the King has not in all his Speeches to the Parliament, and in all the state of the Navy laid before them, put forward, to his utmost, the greatness of the Navy? Whether the Decoration of the Navy and Stores, are not regulated by him, to a degree never before put in practice; and whether, now the war is over, he has not taken care to have the greatest Fleet in the World, and in the best posture for Action? And is all this to let us know that a Fleet is no Security to us? I blush for these Gentlemen, when I think they should thus fly in the Faces of their own Arguments; and abuse the Care his Majesty has taken for that Security, which they ought to look on, with as much satisfaction, as our Enemies do with Concern.  
Besides, I do not remember that ever the King, or any of his Ministers, offered to lessen the value of a good Fleet in any of their Speeches, or Discourses; if so, to what end have they been so careful of it, and why have we a Registering Act to secure Men for it, and a Royal Foundation at Greenwich Hospital to encourage them? why so many Bounties given to the Seamen, and such vast Stores laid in to increase and continue them?  
But must we not distinguish things? Our Defence is of two sorts, and so must be our Strength. Our Fleet is an undeniable defence and security for us; and we will grant, to oblige them, whether so or no, that both the Fleet and our Militia, which they are so fond of, are as great a Security at home as they can desire; but 'tis plain, and they cannot pretend to deny it, they are neither of them any thing to Fianders; which all the World will own must be the Scene of a War when ever it begins. To say we may assist with Money, is to say nothing; for Men may be wanting as much as Money; and are so too, and have been so this War at an unusual rate.  
These Arguments might be enlarged, even to a Twelve-penny Book, like the Author's, if the Printer desired it; but short as they are, they cannot be rationally confuted.  
The Gentlemen who argue thus against Force, have taken upon them to lay down a Method, how to assist Spain, in case of a War, by bringing Soldiers from Final; not letting us know, if we did not inquire, that those Forces must Sail by Thoulon, and that we must have a great Fleet in the straits for that Service, or they will be prevented; nor not enquiring which Montferrat, way those Troops shall come at Final, while the Duke of Savoy possesses and all the higher part of Italy for the French: If they could argue no better than they can guide a War, if their Logic was not better than their Geography, they would make poor work of their Argument.  
But because they seem to understand such things, I would fain ask these Gentlemen, if a War should break out now in the Empire, between the Papists and the Protestants, which a Man, without the Spirit of Prophecy, may say is very likely; pray which way would these Gentlemen have the King aid the Protestants in the Palatinate, what Service could our Fleet and Militia do in this Case. Why, say our Gentlemen, we may aid them with Mony. So did King James the First, after a most wretched manner, tho' his own Daughter was to lose her Patrimony by it; and the Protestant Interest in Germany, which now is in more hazard than ever it was since Gustavus Adolphus his time, must be supported by the Leagues and Confederacies, which our King must make, and our Forces uphold, or 'tis a great question whether it will be supported at all.  
England is to be considered in several Capacities, though these Gentlemen seem to confine themselves to England; within itself England is, at this time, the Head of two Leagues, both which are essentially necessary to the preservation of our Welfare: One a League of Property, and the other of Religion. One a League against French Slavery, and the other a League against Germane Popery; and we can maintain neither of these without some Strength. I could tell these Gentlemen, That while they would disarm us to protect our Liberties, they strike a fatal Stroke at our Religion, which, I confess, I ought not to expect they should value, because I know their Principles to be both Irreligious and Blasphemous.  
After all that has been said, 'twere not amiss to examine what this Army is we speak of, and how to be maintained; for these Gentlemen argue all along upon a great Army, enough to subject a Kingdom; and to raise it up to a magnitude, they have gone into Ireland and Scotland, and raked into the Settlement of those Kingdoms to muster up a great Army; though after all, their Calculations are wrong, almost a third part. In short, they have reckoned up small and great to make up the number. To which it is conveninient to reply.  
First, What Forces are maintained in Scotland and Ireland, is nothing to the purpose; for both the Parliaments of those Kingdoms have concurred; and found it necessary, though these Gentlemen think otherwise.  
Secondly, If the King does see it proper to have some Forces ready on such Occasions as we have discoursed, but, to ease us of our Jealousies and Fears, keeps them in other Kingdoms, and with consent of those Kingdoms; is not the English Nation so much the more obliged to him for his tenderness of their Safety and Satisfaction?  
Thirdly, Why do not the Gentlemen as well argue against his having the Stad-holdership of Holland, by virtue of which he can, when ever he pleases, command over Ten or Twenty Thousand Men from thence, to enslave us when there is no War abroad. For it seems the Distance of the Army is no safety to us.  
To go on, we have the War at an end, the King has dismissed the foreign Troops, disbanded Ten Regiments at home, besides Horse and Dragroons; most of the Scots abroad, sent Twelve Regiments to Ireland, and broke them there, and reduced the Army to so small a degree, as that much cannot be feared from them, nor fewer can hardly consist with our Safety; and yet these are the Grievances we are to be so terrified at, that nothing but Slavery must be the consequence.  
Neither has any attempt been made to make this Army perpetual, nor has any number been prescribed. But such an Army, so proportioned, so qualified, and such a regulation as the Parliament shall see needful, may be legal, must be necessary, and cannot be dangerous: And to the King and Parliament we may with Satisfaction refer it. The Parliament will consent to no Force, but such as they shall judge safe and necessary; and the King will insist on no other Army than the Parliament consents to; and while they agree to it, why should `we be concerned. For while the King allows the disposal of the Army to the Vote of the Parliament, by which they may be either continued or dismissed, no future danger can appear; unless a Parliament shall part with that Power, which in this Reign is not likely to be desired of them.  

The CONCLUSION.  
I Cannot pass over this Matter without a short Reflection upon the Persons and Designs of the Authors of this, and the like Pamphlets against the Government, and to enter a little into the History of their Practices for some years past.  
His Majesty has found the influence of their more secret Actions, during the War, in their Delaying and Disappointing of Funds and Supplies, which, two Years together, prolonged the War, and had like to have been fatal to the Army in Flanders, who went without Pay longer than any Army in the World (but themselves) would have done; and let his Majesty know, that they would not only Fight for him, but Starve for him, if there was occasion; and which his Majesty took great notice of in his Speeches at the opening of the next Parliament.  
After this, they set up for Malcontents, and always went about Town, complaining of mis-management, ill Officers, State Ministers, and the like: Angry that they were not preferred, and envying all that were; crying out, we must have Peace, and we should be ruined by the War; magnifying the Power of the French, which now they Undervalue so much; and saying, we should be subdued by the Power of France, if we did not save ourselves by a Peace; and the like.  
At last, the King, contrary to their Expectations, and false ` Prophecies, brought the French to Terms safe and honourable; and a Peace has been obtained as good as was not only expected, but desired.  
This was no sooner done, but they strike at the Root; and now for fear of his hurting us, we must disarm the King, and leave him no more Weapons than should be trusted to a Child, or a ` Mad Man: And in order to secure us from a Tyrant, the whole Nation must be disarmed, our Confederates deserted, and all the Leagues and Treaties (made for mutual Defence and Security) be broken, and the King left unable to perform the Postulatas of his own part. In order to this, they appear in Print; and setting up as Champions of the People's Liberty, formed themselves into a Club, and appear openly both in Print, and public Discourses; and being all of them maintainers of the most infamous Heresy of Socinus, they bid defiance to the Son of God on one hand, and to the King and Government on the other.  
And that their Blasphemy might go hand in hand with their Politics, they Published two Socinian Books, and two Books against the Army, almost together.  
Much about the same time, from the same people, came out into the World, two Volumes of Ludlow's Memoires; in all which, the Conduct of the Parliament against the King is exceedingly magnified; the Government of a single Person opposed covertly, under the Person of O. C. but in general, of any single Person whatever; and all the Common-Wealth-Principles advanced and defended.  
And having much Work of this sort to do, and being under some Fears of a restraint, from an Act for Regulating the Press, they endeavoured to ward off that Blow by publishing a Book for the Liberty of the Press, which they managed with such Artifice, that the Bill was not past, and so their Fears vanished.  
This was a Victory they knew how to make use of, and it was immediately followed by a publication of Coll. Sidney's Maxims of Government, writ against Filmer; for which the Author died a Martyr, and of which one of the Publishers had the impudence to say it was the best Book, the Bible excepted, that ever came abroad in the World.  
And now from the same Forge is hammered out the History of the Standing Armies, in which all the Artifice in the World is made use of, to set things in a false light, to raise the Cry of Tyranny and Despotic Government, which has been so long abdicated; to decry state Ministers, ridicule our Settlement, banter the King, and terrify the People.  
And that it might have its due force, to sow Dissension and Disagreement between the King and his People, both these attacks made against the Army were timed to appear just at the opening of the Parliament, and so industriously handed about, that they have been seen in the remotest Countries of England before they were published in London.  
'Tis hoped these Circumstances will a little open the Eyes of the World, and teach us to mark such as sow Divisions among us, and not to meddle with those who are given to Change.  
But to leave the matter to the Parliament, who are proper Judges of the Fact, and have always been very careful both of our Liberty and our Safety.   
FINIS.