ENGLAND'S CONCERN IN THE CASE OF His R. H.  
LONDON, Printed for H. R. in the Year 1680.   

ENGLAND'S CONCERN IN THE Case of His R. H.  
HAving seen and read all the Pamphlets for, and against the Power of Parliaments in the Right of Succession, I cannot but conclude both Sides mistaken in the Main, and to have, wilfully or ignorantly, pastover, or wrong stated, the Chief part of the Question; which was, not what the Parliament, meaning King, Lords, and Commons, could do, by virtue of their Might or Power; but, What in Justice, or Prudence, they ought to do in the Case of His R. H?  
In the first Notion, no man in his wits can dispute, that the stronger joining against the weaker, have not power to do what they please: But this being a Right of Nature, to which both Parties are equally entitled, and both, upon entering into Society, have renounced or changed for an Artificial Right or Power, that of the Magistrate, or Community, cannot fall within the limits of the Question; because it can never be made use of, without running into a State of War, putting an end to all Society, and, with Ishmael, having one's hand against every man, and every man's hand against him. And therefore in the second Notion this Controversy is to be taken, viz. What in Justice, by the Laws in being; or, since the Instance is extraordinary, What in Prudence, in Reason, the Parliament may do? For, this being the Supreme Judicature, must not want a sufficient Authority in any Case that can possibly happen.  
We must then inquire, Whether some Actions of the D. have been obnoxious and censurable? and, if found so, What is their proper or condign Punishment? In order to which, 'tis to be premised, That nothing in its own nature is or can be Penal, or censurable in foro humano, but a Transgression of some positive Institution of the Commonwealth, or a Deviation from the Dictates of Right Reason. Now the Crime objected, but never yet proved, nor confessed, is the D's going over from the Protestant to the Romish Church. This is the Trojan Horse, that ruins our City; for in its Belly is hid a mysterious Consequence, viz. That his doing so, gave encouragement, and was the occasion of the late discovered Popish Plot. The first part of this Accusation is a breach of the Laws of England; the latter, of those of Reason, and all Nations; and therefore punishable after the most severe manner. But before Sentence, or Execution, 'tis to be observed. That not only our own, but the Laws of all Countries, require not only the Criminal's Conviction, but that his Sufferings be commensurate to his Offence. This last must be known by the stated Measures, the Rules of the Society and Country; the former is built upon the same Foundation, and necessarily supposes a Legal Process, and sufficient Evidence. Both are wanting in this of the D. he having never been summoned to appear, nor Witness produced to prove him guilty: For, who can say he has changed his Religion, or that, if he be now a Papist, he has not been so ever since he came to the use of Reason, since he was forced to fly, to avoid the Effects of the late Rebellion? If that be so, who are most in the fault, those who occasioned this Evil, or he that suffered himself, before his years enabled him to understand better, and to choose, to be persuaded that was not the truest Religion, that authorised such Impieties as Christianity forbids? If this be his Case, he is not liable to the Pains of Treason, pronounced against the Perverters and Perverted to the Romish Communion. But, to wave Disputes, allowing it were otherwise, yet the Statute of General Pardon enacted in the year 1673 has so acquitted him from all guilt, that on this Foot he now stands rectus in curia, innocent before any Earthly Tribunal.  
But as to the Consequence, That his being reconciled to Rome has given occasion and Encouragement to the Plot, I can only say, That he cannot in reason be blamed on that account, if it be not proved he intended and designed that horrid Contrivance. 'Tis the End and Intention that justifies, or condemns any Action; and neither Father nor Mother are to be censured, that a Monster happens to be the Issue of a Marriagebed. This being accidental (for so it must be granted, till the contrary be made out) can no more be imputed to his R. H. without madness or folly, than it can to God, without Blasphemy or Irreligion, That by his making Man he is the Author and Cause of Sin, and all the Evils under Heaven.  
I am unwilling to mention what I have seen in Print, to wit, That the D. of York's being a Papist has given birth and life to the Plor; because this is so, inartificial and illogical an Inference or Conclusion, that I am persuaded the Authors will be ashamed of the Ignorance or Malice it betrays: An Assertion that has neither Sense, nor Wit, nor more force than the Old Wives Story, The Cat washed her Face a Sunday, therefore it reigned a Monday; or any other such impertinent or senseless Saying. Indeed, if this could be made appear, I think it a Crime of so foul a nature, that nothing less than Death, not Disinherison, could satisfy the Justice of the Nation. But from this the D. is acquitted by Mr. Oates; and Mr. Bedloe, even in his last words, clears him from having any knowledge of the Design against the King's Life; in which, and in the bringing in Religion by the Sword, (of which his R. H. is not accused) the Treason or Conspiracy doth consist. And being freed by these two, by whom else has he been accused? By Mr. Dangerfield. As to this, tell me what you think, when you reflect, that he gave in his Depositions to the late Lord Mayor, and to the King and Council, the first and seventh of November, 1679. and upon Oath declared, so often, he had nothing of further Discovery or Additions. What credit will you then give his late new Accusation before the House of Commons, of the D. Lord Privy-Seal, Earl of Peterborough, and Lady Powis? Whatever the Infamy of his Person, and the former Actions of his Life would signify, this alone, in my opinion, would invalidate his Testimony, in all matters, with Men of Honour or of Conscience. So that upon the whole matter, from what does hitherto appear, the printed Narratives and Letters to and from Popes and Cardinals, etc. I am not afraid to avow, That excluding the D. his Right of Succession, is contrary to the Laws of God, and of this Kingdom (expressed in Magna Charta, and agreeable to those that give every man his due, Liberty of Person, and Descent of Inheritance, and all the Advantages of Birthright; Blessings every Freeman has in common with the Prince: and if the greater be thus outed; how shall the less be secured?) and to the Rules of Reason, which forbidden the doing any Action that in its consequence will be a greater Evil, than that from which we intended to be freed. The two first parts of this Assertion are very plain, because Religion or Christianity altars not the Political Constitutions of any Society, and because Popery in England hinders no man from being Heir to Real or Personal Estates; the third therefore is to be made evident, to wit, That Prudence and Reason tell us the D. ought not to be barred of Succession. I say then. This Act is not only unjustifiabie at present, but in future and consequence, as what will bring upon the whole Nation irreparable Mischiefs. Where there are more hazards of an ill, than a good Event, the Action is in prudence to be avoided. In great and momentous Instances new Experiments are not to be tried; nor indeed in any Case, or Distemper, where the Remedy is like to prove more fatal than the Disease. Now to give or allow so boundless, arbitrary, and despotic a Power, as that of putting by the next Heir, or punishing ex post facto, either in the King alone, (who is obliged under the Obligations of Oaths and Interest to govern by the stated Measures of Law) or in him, when advising with both Houses, (whose Power is so far from being  or independent, that it is only communicated, or derivative from the Prince, as Streams from the Fountain, and therefore can add or give him nothing new) is to subject and enslave ourselves and our Posterities. For, if every one be a Papist, whom Faction or Malice, Presumption or slight Circumstances, and no positive Proofs, have made so; and if the right Heir on this account, or for being really a Papist, may be despoiled of his Right by Parliament, since there can be greater Crimes or Evils than Popery, which we all acknowledge consistent with Salvation, what can secure all future Princes, even the King at any time in being, from being laid aside and dethroned. To endeavour so absolute a Subversion of our Government, if it be not Treason, is to design, if it be pursued, that which cannot but happen, Anarchy and Confusion, and all the Calamities of an unnatural Civil War.  
Against this, there is but one Objection, That in the notion of a Parliament a King is implied, and nothing can be supposed to consent to his own Ruin. This, I confess, is true in nature, in Thest, but not in the fact in Hypothesi: for, what has been once done, may be again: Tumults and Factions, Cunning and Address, may make a Prince quit his Crown to save his Life; and yet none ever lost the first, but soon after did the second: nay, every Flower or Jewel he parts with, is a step or advance to his Grave: And the Considerer of the Weighty Considerations leaves in this Objection no Force, by mentioning the Seconds of the Edward's and Richards deposed by Parliamentary Authority; he might have added to his Catalogue the late Royal martyred CHARLES. While this Book, in many Passages treasonable, is publicly sold before the Doors of Parliament, who can lay aside fatal Apprehensions; especially when Two Houses of Commons have successively prepared a Bill disposing of the Crown contrary to the King's express Commands; and former Precedents? And because I will not run to far back, and that Queen Elizabeth is renowned for one of the best of our Princes, I will instance what in some great Points happened in her Reign, concerning the Commons intermeddling in the Ecclesiastical and the Crown Affairs, their Right and her Prerogative.  
In the Twenty third year of her Reign, when the House of Commons first ordered to have a Time of Prayer and Humiliation appointed, in the Temple, on Sunday-fort'night after, the Queen hindered it, and sent a Message to the House by Mr. Vice-Chamberlain, declaring, That her Highness had great admiration of the rashness of this House, in committing such an apparent Contempt of her express Command, as to put in execution such an Innovation, without her privity, and pleasure first known. And thereupon Mr. Vice-Chamberlain moved the House to make humble Submission to her Majesty, acknowledging the said Offence and Contempt, craving a Remission of the same, with a full purpose to forbear the committing of the like hereafter. And by the consent of the whole House, Mr. Vice-Chamberlain carried their Submission to her Majesty.  
Likewise in the Twenty eighth year of her Reign, the Queen said, She was sorry the Commons meddled with Choosing and Returning Knights of the Shire for Norfolk, a thing impertinent for the House to deal withal, and only belonging to the Office and Charge of the Lord Chancellor, from whom the Writs issue, and are returned.  
In the Thirty ninth year of her Reign, the Commons, by their Speaker, complaining of Monopolies; the Queen made answer, by the the Lord Keeper, That she hoped her dutiful and loving Subjects would not take away her Prerogative, which is the chiefest Flower in her Garland, and the principal and head Pearl in her Crown and Diadem; but that they will rather leave that to her disposition.  
In the Thirty fifth year of her Reign, Mr. Peter Wentworth and Sir Henry Bromley delivered a Petition to the Lord Keeper, desiring the Lords of the Upper House to be Suppliants with them of the Lower House, unto her Majesty, for Entailing the Succession of the Crown, whereof they had a Bill ready drawn. Her Majesty was highly displeased herewith, as contrary to her former straight Command, and charged the Council to draw the Parties before them. Sir Thomas Henage sent for them, and commanded them to forbear the Parliament, and not to go out of their several Lodgings: After, they were called before the Lord Treasurer, the Lord Buckhurst, and Sir Thomas Henage; Mr. Wentworth was committed by them to the Tower; Sir Henry Bromley, and other Members of the House of Commons, to whom he imparted the Matter, were sent to the Fleet.  
And in the same Parliament, when Mr. Morriee, Attorney of the Court of Wards, moved against the hard Courses of the Bishops, Ordinarles, and other Ecclesiastical Judges, in their Courts, and spoke against Subscriptions and Oaths, offering a Bill to be read against Imprisonment for refusal of Oaths; the same afternoon Sir Edward Coke, than Speaker, was sent for to Court, where the Queen herself gave him a Message to the House, declaring, It being wholly in her power to call, to determine, to assent or descent to any thing done in Parliament; That the calling of this was only that the Majesty of God might be more Religiously observed, by compelling, by some sharp Laws, such as neglect that Service; and that the Safety of her Majesty's Person, and the Realm, might be provided for: It was not meant they should meddle with Matters of State, or Causes Ecclesiastical; and she wondered that any could be of so high commandment, to attempt a thing so expressly contrary to that which she had commanded; wherefore with this she was highly offended: And because the Words spoken by my Lord Keeper are not now perhaps well remembered, or some be now here that were not then present; her Majesty's present Charge, and express Command, is, That no Bill touching the said Matter of State, or Reformation in Causes Ecclesiastical, be exhibited: And upon my Allegiance (saith the Speaker) I am charged, if any such Bill be exhibited, not to read it. I have been credibly informed, That the Queen sent a Messenger, or Sergeant at Arms, into the House of Commons, and took out Mr. Morrice, and committed him to Prison. Within few days after, I find Mr. Wroth moved in the House, That they might be humble Suitors to her Majesty, that she would be pleased to set at liberty those Members of the House that were restrained; which was accordingly done: And answer was sent them by her Privy-Council, That her Majesty had committed them for Causes best known to herself; and to press her Highness with this Suit, would but hinder them whose good they sought: That the House must not call the Queen to an account for what she doth of her Royal Authority: That the Causes for which they are restrained, may be high and dangerous: That her Majesty liketh no such Questions, neither doth it become the House to search into Matters of that nature.  
In 39 Eliz. the Commons were told, Their Privilege was Yea and No: And that her Majesty's pleasure was, That if the Speaker perceived any idle Heads, which would not stick to hazard their own Estates, but meddle with reforming the Church, and transforming the Commonweal, by exhibiting Bills to that purpose, the Speaker should not receive them, till they were viewed and considered by those, who are fit to consider of such things, and can better judge of them. And at the end of this Parliament the Queen rejected Forty eight Bills, which had passed both Houses. All these Passages are expressly to be found in the Records and Registries of the Council-Table, and are quoted by Sir Robert Filmer, in his Free holder's Grand Inquest, p. 77, etc. and by Mr. Howel, sometimes Clerk of the Council, in his Philanglus, p. 57, etc. and several others.  
By which it appears, That this grand Privilege of Parliament, Liberty of Speech, which at present makes so great a Noise in the World, was not, in this good Queen's Reign, half so considerable as People now would fain persuade us. It was of no great antiquity in her days, but a Favour first begged in King Henry the Eighth's Reign, by Sir Thomas Moor, than Speaker of the House of Commons, who prayed the King, in the behalf of the House, That if in Communication and Reasoning any man should speak more largely than of duty he ought to do, that all such Offences should be pardoned, and this to be entered upon Record: which was accordingly granted by the King. And the same Favour was allowed by Queen Elizabeth, in the beginning of her Reign, to Thomas Gargrave, than Speaker: since whose time this Privilege was always humbly desired by the Speakers, for themselves, and the whole House of Commons, and favourably granted by their Sovereign. Yet this Privilege extended only to rash, unadvised, ignorant, or negligent Escapes, and Slips in Speech, which People are subject to let fall in the heat of their Debates; not to wilful Reflections, much less to treasonable Speeches, against the King and Government: as sufficiently appears, not only by the aforesaid Proceed in Queen Elizabeth's time, but also by the Transactions of her Father's Reign, where we find, that Richard Strood and his Complices were not thought sufficiently protected by this Privilege for their free Speech in the House, unless their Pardon were expressly confirmed by the King in Parliament: to which purpose there is a printed Statute enacted in King Henry the Eighth's time. And in Queen Mary's days, Plowden was Fined in the King's Bench, for Words spoken by him in Parliament against the Queen's Dignity. See Filmer ubi supra. & Mr. Fowlis Hist. of the Plots & Conspiracies of the Pretended Saints, in it.  
This was well known to our British Solomon King James, who finding the House of Commons encroaching too far upon the Prerogative, sent the ensuing Letter from Newmarket, to Sir Thomas Richardson their Speaker. Mr. Speaker, We have heard, to our grief, That our distance from the Parliament, caused by our indisposition of Health, hath emboldened some fiery and popular Spirits of the Lower House to debate Matters above their Capacity, to our Dishonour, and breach of Prerogative Royal. These are therefore to command you to make known to them, That none hereafter shall presume to meddle with any thing concerning our Government, or Matters of State; with our Son's Match with the Daughter of Spain, nor to touch the Honour of that King, or any other our Friends or Confederates, nor with any Man's Particulars, which have their due Motion in our ordinary Courts of Justice. And whereas they have sent a Message to Sir Edwin Sandis, to know the Reasons of his late Restraint; you shall resolve them, It was not for any Misdemeanour of his in Parliament: But to put them out of doubt of any Question hereafter of that nature, We think ourselves very free and able to punish any Man's Misdemeanours in Parliament, as well sitting there, as after; which we mean not to spare hereafter, upon any Occasion of any Mans. And if they have touched any Point, which We have here forbidden, in any Petition of theirs, which is to be sent to Us, tell them, (except they reform it) We will not deign the Hearing or Answering. Newmarket, Decemb. 3. 1621. Sanderson's History of King James, pag. 510.  
And likewise, in the same Parliament, when the House of Commons much insisted upon their Privileges, calling them their ancient and undoubted Inheritance, this wise Prince, in a second Letter to the Speaker, plainly and truly told them, That most Privileges of Parliament grew from Precedents. which shows rather a Toleration, than an Inheritance; therefore he could not allow of the Style, calling it their ancient and undoubted Right and Inheritance; but could rather have wished that they had said, their Privileges were derived from the Grace and Permission of his Ancestors and him. And thereupon he concludes, He cannot with patience endure his Subjects to use such Antimonarchical Words concerning their Liberties, except they had subjoined, That they were granted unto them by the Grace and Favour of his Predecessors: Yet he promiseth to be careful of whatsoever Privileges they enjoyed by long Custom, and uncontrolled and lawful Precedents, Sanderson's Hist. p. 519. & 520.  
Now, add to this, That if the King should be drawn to consent to the Bill of Exclusion, after his several Declarations to the contrary, he cannot but be concluded under a Constraint, which alone makes the Act void in itself; it being absolutely necessary, that the Commons, Lords, and the Kings Consent should be free from all Restraint and Terror: and we know, that Acts of Parliament in 15 Edw. 3. and 10 Ric 2. were repealed, merely because the King's Consent was forced.— Moreover, if we seriously did consider the mighty Advantages of an Hereditary Monarchy beyond an Elective, we should find it reasonable, that though the Laws had not, yet the King should, endeavour to make ours such; much less ought he to alter that most happy Constitution, by excluding his Brother. For, let Men say what they please, the same Power that can put by One, may All; and so change the Best of Government for the Worst, or None at all.  
Besides, His Majesty cannot but find it his own Interest to stick to the D. when he reflects, that there is in all things, especially in State-Affairs, a Balance necessary, by an equal Libration to keep things in a right Order, and prevent Confusion and Ruin. Where Men are, there will be Ambition; this creates Parties and Factions; these must be kept divided, and asunder; by their Jars and Disagreement, and by so poising them, that the less, like the smaller Fry of Fishes, be not swallowed by the greater, the safety of the Prince and State is preserved. If the Prince be once prevailed upon to join with the One, to the suppression of the Other, he has resigned his Power, and exposed himself to the Mercy of the Conqueror. This he likewise does, if he gives way to several little Factions to embody into one of greater strength than the rest, though assisted with that of his own Particular: For here we must suppose three strong Parties, one of the Prince, and two of the People. To keep this Balance in the best posture, and to secure the Peace of the Commonwealth, by the Kings reigning void of Fear or Jealousy on the score of Factions, or his Successor, 'tis necessary in polity to find or make the next Heir the Object of the People's hatred, and keep the Factions from combining; because, however they may chance to be weary of the King, either through the inconstancy of their Humours, studious of Change and Variety, though for the worse, or through the ill Conduct of Ministers, or the Misfortunes of Public Affairs; when they find a Person whom they hate like to succeed, they will be for continuance of the old; or else, being jealous of one another, will not attempt his removal. This then being so great an advantage, prudent Kings cannot be supposed to neglect it, by suffering the immediate Heir to be run down, and thereby giving way to the People to dethrone the present Possessor, and set up the next in course after. To this Wisdom in Henry the Third, gained by his own and Father's Misfortunes, we own our present Constitution of Parliament. This King perceiving the Lord's Power (in whom, with himself, the Supreme Legislative Right then consisted) grown formidable, the Commons being their Livery-men and Dependants, erected these into a Lower House, to counterpoise the weight of the other, that he joining with either, as Occasion of State required, might balance the other, and so keep things in an equal and steady Libration. And if his Successors had been as solicitous to maintain, as he was to institute, this good Order and Polity, the Eternity of this Commonwealth would not at this day have been a Question. And as this was our Home-Interest, and that of holding the Scales even between France and Spain our Foreign; so it plainly appears, that not to exclude the Duke, is not only his Majesty's particular Interest, but also that of the Three Kingdoms. Not to insist, that the Parliament is not completely the People's Representative, but granting it is, they cannot be supposed to enjoy a greater Power than those they represent; who, because such, are the greater, and therefore must be concluded, explicitly or implicitly, to limit the Commissions of these their trusties; and that Consinement, Reason will tell us, must be within the Bounds of our ancient Rights and Privileges; consequently, these are not to be invaded, without the consent of every individual Person, or at least of the major part, truly polled and computed. The present Electors, not making a sixth part of the Nation, cannot in reason bind the rest, contrary to their Interest; much less can the Majority of those, chosen by them, oblige the others to conform to whatever they enact, when they find the Statutes more prejudicial than advantageous; the End of Government being the Good of the Community, i. e. of the major part, not of any artificial or fictitious Majority of a Quorum, as in the House of Commons, of 512 to reckon 40 the greater Number.  
Now if such an Act should be obtained, the Consequence, if the D. survive the King, (whose Life God long continue) must needs be War and Misery, Folly and Repentance. Our Histories are full of Tragical Events upon such Occasions: One of them wrought so great a Depopulation, that in sixty miles riding, between York and Durham, for nine years together, there was neither Ground tilled, nor House left standing. Harold justling young Edgar Atheling out of the Throne, produced a Civil War, and the Norman Conquest. I wish excluding the D. may not enslave us to the French Dominion, which may be of greater evil, than the cutting of as many of our own People's Throats as died in the Yorkist and Lancastrian Quarrel, upwards of 200000 of the Commons, besides several Kings and Princes, and Nobles without number. The Duke cannot be supposed to want Sticklers both at home, and from abroad; few will believe the Act lawful in its own nature, nor the King's Consent free, or themselves not bound by Oath to his Assistance: Scotland and Ireland will rejoice at another Civil War in England, in hopes to free themselves from the Inconveniences of being Provinces. Those who have least to lose, are the usual Gainers by Rebellion. There are sown between these Nations Seeds of Discontent, and there will not be wanting those who will improve them. I have heard from knowing Persons, there are no less than Fifty thousand Irish Soldiers now living, that have been trained up in the French, and other Foreign Service; and I believe there cannot be fewer of the Scottish People. These all, with many of our own Countrymen, will quickly credit the Lawyers, that tell us, No Act, no Crime, no Attainder of Treason, can bar the next of Blood from being King in the instant of time his Predccessor does not so much die, as transmit his Life, his Breath, or his Soul, by a State-Metempsychosis, into the Nostrils, the Body of his Successor. Edward the Fourth, Henry the Seventh, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, and King James, enjoyed the Crown, though all excluded by Acts of Parliament, if they ought to have the name, that were the Effects of Force, Strong hand, and an usurping Tyrannic Power. These Statutes were by all Judges of England accounted void in themselves, and therefore never had the honour of Repeals, nor were they brought into Plea by Sir Walter Raleigh, one of the greatest Wits of that Age, though he urged a very trivial one, The King's not being Crowned; a Ceremony of Pomp and State, not of Use or Necessity, as appears not only in that it could be of no use to him, but that several Kings have exercised a full Regal Authority, enacted Laws, etc. before their Coronations. And since this Inauguration is but a Formality, let it be well weighed, That unless the Monarchy be made purely Elective, and that part of the Common Law, and the several Statutes that have declared it Hereditary, be repealed in express Words, and the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy changed, and the Successor mentioned by Name, the Act against the Duke falls to the ground of itself, in the moment in which he happens to outlive the King; for thereby becoming our lawful Sovereign, none can fight against, or oppose his Right to the Crown, without Perjury and Rebellion; we having sworn to defend, against all Pretenders whatsoever, Foreign or Domestic, the King's Majesty, his Heirs and Successors, and all Rights, Privileges, and Preeminences to them belonging, and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm. And is not the Descent of the Crown upon the next of Blood one of these Rights, etc. acknowledged by the Common Law, and in the Statutes 1 M. Eliz. & Jac. The Maxim in our Laws, The King never dies, confirming as much. And was not the Duke then, at the taking of these Oaths, the next Heir? And what Power on Earth can absolve from the Obligation of Promissory Oaths, without the Parties own Consent to whom the Promise is made? Let us not rail against the Pope, for deposing Princes, and absolving Subjects from their Allegiance, and yet allow the Parliament the same Authority.  
The Bill against the Duke is not only of an extraordinary, but of two natures; one expresses a present Punishment, Exile, which, as a Subject, did the Crime deserve it, none will deny may be inflicted; the other refers to the future, and is at present no Punishment, nor can be hereafter; for if he outlive his Brother, his being King in that moment puts upon him a new Person, a Politic Capacity, over which, not before in being, no former Authority could have power, nor any after, because himself is become Supreme, and, as such, by our own, and the Laws of God, subject to no Earthly Tribunal. Bracton, and all our old honest Lawyers, tell us with one consent, The King can do no wrong, i. e. can be accountable to his Subjects for none of his Actions. Nemo quidem de factis ejus praesumat disputare, multo minus contra factum ejus ire— Locus erit supplicationi, quod factum suum corrigat & emendet; quod quidem si non fecerit, sufficit ei ad poenam, quod dominum Deum expectet ultorem.  
Now he that says, The Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy reach no further than to the King in being, says not amiss, if he takes the King in his Public Capacity; for, in that he never dies. But if he means no more than the Person of the now reigning Monarch, he cancels with his Death the Obligation of those Oaths, and makes Rebellion against the Successor no Crime against Conscience, though it may be otherwise against Prudence. This is to elude the Oath, and rob it of the energy designed. For, 'tis plain by the Words Heirs and Successors, that the Takers Obligation continues during their own Lives, let the Persons of never so many Princes be altered; and as certain, that in an Hereditary Monarchy the Duty is owing to the next of Blood: And, that a Parliament, or any Power, may dispense or absolve from the Obligations especially of Promissory Oaths, between Party and Party, without mutual consent, is a Doctrine inconsistent with the nature of Promises (where the Promiser gives the other a Right, and makes himself his Debtor), with the Rules of Christianity, of Humane Society, and all Governments. 'Tis no less dangerous to assert, That Promissory Oaths, or Oaths de futuro, are not Obligatory. Such a Principle cancels all the Duties and Bonds of Obedience between Prince and Subject; of which therefore not only the Divines, and my Lords the Bishops, but the State, is to be very tender and careful. Upon this Foundation, 'tis evident, that if the Duke outlives his Brother, and the Monarchy of England, as it is, be Hereditary, and Coronation but Formality, we become upon the death of the one, the Subjects of the other: And though there may be some that will not think of this Truth, or notwithstanding will not mind it; yet I am assured, all that are truly Christians, and all that are of the Church of England, and wise, will lay it to heart; for Christianity, teaches, be the Prince of any, or no Religion, we must be obedient, and submit ourselves, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. In the late Times of Usurpation they were so sensible of this, that they made the People Covenant against the King, and renounce their former by after Oaths; yet they durst not depend on that Artifice, without the assistance of an Army. Thus than we see the Duke cannot want a Party in England, whose Strength must overpower any other, when to it is united that of Scotland and Ireland. And here let none be mistaken, as if Scotland were governed or influenced by Presbyterian Domine's; the Nobility there do wholly sway, and hate refined Presbytery, and a Plebeian Commonwealth. Neither will the Scots be more forward to assist the Duke, than the Irish; in hopes they may thereby find an opportunity to extirpate the English, and regain their ancient Possessions, free themselves from any Dependence, or at least change their present from that of England to France, which on many scores seems to be the true Interest of that Kingdom, politicly considered, either as Popish or Protestant, without respect to Religion. 'Tis a ready Inlet to France, who will not be wanting to assist the Duke in this Quarrel; the only way he can hope, by gaining England on his side, to win the Universal Dominion. Now to resist the Duke, an Army must be maintained; the General of that Army may turn Papist, or Tyrant, or both; and either way we may be enslaved: by the Duke, if he gains the Victory; or, if he loses it, by our own General. Thus we may, by shunning one Rock, split upon another. The Romans designing to free themselves from the seeming Tyranny of Julius Caesar, (who studied by Clemency and Obligations upon every body to secure himself, as must needs be his R. H's Interest, as it is his Temper and Inclination) made way for the real and perpetual one, in the Persons of Augustus, Tiberius, and their Successors. And the Grecians repining against their lawful Emperors, and deeming their just and wholesome Commands tyrannical and oppressive, were so refractory, and so obstinate, that, through spite to their Sovereign, they would contribute nothing towards the necessary Defence of the Empire, when invaded by the Turk, until at last, through the just Judgement of the Almighty, (a fitting Punishment for their Folly) they became a Prey to that Tyrant, and to this day continue the veriest Slaves in Nature.  
And, I pray, why must we run all this hazard to secure Religion? If that be the thing, it may certainly be done by binding up the hands of a Popish Successor by such Laws as will make it Felony or Treason for a Papist to appear at Court, or bear any Office, and put it out of the Prince's power to pardon such Offences or Offenders. For my own part, I see no cause to apprehend a Popish Successor, especially the Duke, would or could alter our Laws or Religion. To attempt it, would be, for a Crown of Flowers, to forfeit one of Gold and Jewels. Has he ever offered to persuade any of his Children, or his Servants, to change their Opinions? And why should we think a Man who has never broken his Word or Promise, and ever professed nothing more than a Liberty of Conscience, so restrained as might be consistent with Public Peace, should, with his Fortune, altar his Judgement, contrary to Prudence, and contrary to his Interest? King's are not now adays Priestridden; and the King of England cannot be supposed to destroy his Subjects at their desires, more than the Monarches of France and Germany, and other Princes of that Religion, where Non-Papists, or Protestants, live under the Protection of Laws, and enjoy their Liberties, and their Fortunes. Besides, to offer by force to reduce all to the Church of Rome, would be Folly and Madness. Neither the Constitution of England, nor Christianity, will admit of propagating Religion by the Sword. The next King, not to mention that his Subjects in the Three Kingdoms will be above Two hundred Protestants for One Papist, will not have the Fourth part of the present King's Revenue; which being insufficient for the necessary Expenses of the Crown, will necessitate him to have recourse to, and compliance with his People in Parliament.  
But now consider the Issue: If it please God, after this Bill passed, in some short time to take the King to himself, the Princess of Orange, perhaps in compliment to her Father, and to prevent a War, may refuse; and her Husband cannot come to the Throne, if she decline it, others being before him. What then? the next after cannot come in; must the Duke then? No, that's against Law. Here will then be no King; consequently, Anarchy and Confusion. But if the Princess do assume the Crown, and after that the Duke have a Son, and he bred up in the Protestant Religion, what will then follow? Still a War. The Princess will be unwilling to resign, and yet the other is most certainly King. But if this young Prince should, during his Father's Life, or his Sisters, be kept out; he, or his Issue after, contending with that of the Princess, will entail a War upon the Nations. So that upon the whole, if the Duke outlive the King, I see nothing but Misery and Desolation like to ensue upon his Disinherison. And therefore I say, 'tis fit to wave the Act wholly, or endeavour, by proving him guilty of the Plot by sufficient Testimonies, to take away his Life. For, if we cannot be safe if he succeed, I am sure we cannot, if he outlive our present Sovereign: a Bill of Attainder will be of no force; the best Lawyers will tell you, the Descent of the Crown washes that Slain away. A Project of Divorce whispered between the King and Queen, will not be sufficient Security: for, if that should take, which is not probable, because Christianity forbids it; yet it's possible the King may have no Issue by a new Consort; or, if he have, that the most will look on them but as Illegitimate: and so, as a questionable Divorce once brought us from the Church of Rome, in Henry the Eighth's days, another may return us thither, during, or soon after the Reign of CHARLES the Second.  
And here I would have it remembered, That the Nature of Parliaments requires their intermeddling only with what the King shall propound or approve: He calls them to advise and deliberate as Counsellors, not to impose upon him in any Particular. Let therefore the Spirit of Moderation govern and direct their Counsels, put an end to the Plot, by trying the Accused. It has lost England in its Trade already Six Millions, as has been lately computed by knowing Persons; increased our Jealousies and Fears at home, made us a Scorn and Reproach abroad, and exposed us to be a Prey to the Designs of Foreigners. Let not the Ambition, Malice, or Revenge of any of our Fellow-Subjects prevail to the enslaving ourselves and our Posterities. If the Power of the Commons grow exorbitant, the Lords are with the King to counterpoise it, to prevent the otherwise not avoidable Ruin of the Commonwealth. To the Lords than this Address is humbly submitted, praying they would betimes consider all the fatal Consequences of the Bill of Exclusion. The love of Truth and Justice, Courage, and the practice of those Virtues in this great Affair, are the only Preservatives of England's present Peace and future Happiness. Faelix quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum. Remember what's past, and then I shall not need to add more than this,—. Verbum sapienti. As for others, guided or misled by Ignorance, Malice, or Interest, I can only say, with the Poet,  
Quid cum illis agas, qui neque jus, neque bonum atque aequum sciunt? Melius, pejus, prosit, obsit; nihil vident, nisi quod lubet.  
And therefore I leave them to Time for a better Temper, to the Conduct of their own Reason, and God's Providence, for the Cure of their Folly, and for a better Understanding.  
Since I finished this Discourse, the following Letter came to my hands; and believing it as advantageous to the Public, as it is Ingenious, I have resolved to add it, that those who might repent the Charge of the former, may be recompensed by the latter.  
SIR.  
I am grieved at my very Soul, and infinitely ashamed, to find by your last, that any make the Supposition of the D's being a Papist, and consequently unfit to Govern, the pretence of running so high against the Monarchy; and, that so many are drawn into this violent Course and Faction, upon the surmise of his being, if once offended, irreconcilable.  
I shall, in few words, return you my Opinion on these two Points. I cannot indeed but look on both as mere Artifices of ambitious Men, who, missing a share in the present Constitution, contrive another Government, I wish I had not too much cause to say, It will at last end in a Commonwealth: For, if nothing were in their Heads, but securing the Established Religion, they would not oppose Popery alone, but Presbytery, equally with the other destructive of That, for which they do not only open a gap, but for the Opinions of all other Sectaries. And we cannot hear but observe, with astonishment, and with Resolutions, which have put us upon Preparations, of sticking by our Sovereign, against all manner of insolent and rebellious Practices whatsoever, That the Commons have not brought any one Man into trouble, besides Papists, but Men of known Loyalty, and of the Church of England; Addressing, by repeated Instances, in favour of H. who ought, in our opinion, to have been executed for Treason, if guilty of no other Crime than his saying he could be backed with Sixty thousand Men, to stand by him for printing that Seditious Libel, The Appeal.  
How is Popery more dangerous than Presbytery, either in Principles or Practice? Suppose the first is for the King killing and Deposing Doctrine, of which all her Professors are ashamed, and therefore disown it as a general Tenet, allowing it only a probable Opinion of some private Divines: And where have Princes felt the Effects of it, as they have in Germany, from the Anabaptists; in France, from the Hugonots; in the Netherlands, from the Geuses; in Geneva, Scotland, and England, from the Presbyterians? For shame let's give the Devil his due, and not make him blacker than he is.  
'Twas the Presbyterians of Scotland that made War against, and banished their lawful Queen M. and began the Rebellion in 37. against King Charles the First. 'Twas these in England, and not the Papists, who fought in his defence, that cut off this Princes Head.  
But what if the Papists say, An Heretic King may be excommunicate and deposed, and that every one is so, that is not of the Church of Rome? Does not the Presbyterian say the same in other words? And is not the dogmatical Classis, or Synod, the sole Arbitrator, and as Imperious and Infallible as St. Peter's Chair, That Dominion is founded in Grace? and, That an Idolatrous King may be cut off? and, That a King is but the People's Officer or Trustee; and if he fails in his Duty, of which they alone are to be Judges, they may resume their Grant, and spurn him beside the Throne? Put one anent the other, the Hare's Head against the Goose Giblets, and Devil a Barrel better Herring will you find among all. The Case is so plain, I need not instance Authors, especially in a private Epistle: But let me see whether Knox or Buchanan's Disciples, or any of your English Presbyter Followers, can purge themselves, and their Writings, from these pernicious Principles. Did not all the Popish Plotters lately executed, not only aver their own Innocence, but deny the King-killing Doctrine? Was not the contrary plain here with us, in the several Rise of the Whigs? And did not the Murderers of the Archbishop of St. Andrews, as well as those just now bypast, maintain the lawfulness of their Proceed, and choose to die, asserting the King was justly excommunicate, and that it was doing God service to kill him, rather than take their Pardon, and disown those damnable Tenets, and Doctrines of Devils? What a stir, all over your Nation, has the Murder of a single Justice of Peace, Sir E. B. G. made? and even that, by the Papists, is not so very clear, but that some doubt whether they were really the Authors: But granting they were, those that suffered for the Crime denied it, with horrid Execrations, and Asseverations of their Innocence; and yet allowing them guilty, that is much, very much, less than the barbarous Assassination of a Protestant, the Metropolitan of Scotland; the wicked Instruments of which, the Presbyterians, were so far from disowing it, that they impudently gloried in that inhuman Act, as a meritorious piece of Zeal and Devotion. And is it not a smaller Gild or Evil, with the Papists, to design the kill of a King, than, with the Presbyterians, to have actually murdered one of the best that ever swayed a Sceptre; and, with those Antichristian Zealots of this Kingdom, of the same Herd, to avow they would likewise gladly sacrifice our present Sovereign? And yet what Prints or Pulpits have since inveighed against such Hellish Proceed? Was not this, together with a formed Rebellion of many thousands in the Field, hushed and passed over in very few days, without noise, wonder, or abhorrence? the Memory and Reproach of the other being still in the Mouths of all, and freshest in theirs, who were Partisans, or of the same Principles with those of our Villainy. Away, away, Man, for shame; let it not be said, that the Presbyterians are not e'en as black as the Papists: Suppress both, or neither: 'Tis best policy to set them anent each other, for a Balance. If I did not hear, from all hands, the Insolence of the Presbyterians; and with trouble read many of the Printed Votes, and the Ballads on the Bishops, for voting against the D's Exclusion, I should believe, that your present Fears and Disorders in England did proceed from apprehensions of Popery; but by many Arguments I am convinced, That the D's private Opinion is but made the Stolen to wreak their Malice against the Kingly Government; and that Passion, more than Reason, does influence your Countrymen.  
For, I pray consider; Is not Faith the Gift of God? Can any Man believe what he pleases? And who knows whether the D. was ever of the Church of England? Did not the late Rebellion force him to fly into a Popish Country, in his Youth? And is it not next to impossible to remove Prepossessions, especially considering the Unity, Antiquity, and Universality of that Church, wherein all the English Orthodox Divines allow Salvation? Can any Man change his Complexion, altar the figure of his Face, the stature of his Body, the colour of his Hair, or of his Skin? Is not the Jaundice a Disease in the Eye, that needs the help of Physic? And is not Error, or Weakness in the Understanding, a Distemper also that requires the Assistance of a Physician? And what Remedy can be proper, but gentle Arguments, and the persuasive Arts of Discourse, and sober Reasonings? Persecution makes some Men, those of great Souls, obstinate; and others, of little, Hypocrites. But what Law enacts, That an Opinion, in the disputable Parts of Religion, aught to deprive a Man of his Right to Inherit? Would any of your fanatics (I am sure none of our Whigs would) hold, their tongues, if treated so severely▪ Equality of Justice is that alone which upholds a State, and makes a Kingdom happy.  
And why must there be all this stir about the D. when 'tis more than probable he may not survive his Brother, for whose long Life, I am persuaded he, as well as all honest Subjects, does hearty pray: But if he should, pray, why, if a Papist, must he, more than the French King, or other Popish Princes, destroy his Subjects? To do so, would be against his Interest, if a Turk, or an Atheist.  
The Case would not then be, what it was in Queen Mary's days: Those Laws, by which Men suffered, (and yet in her Six years there were not Three hundred, and few of them too purely for Religion) are abrogated; the Body of the People were then more Papists, than now Protestant's; and no new Laws can be made, without a Parliament, out of which, as well as out of all Offices, R. C. are excluded, by Oaths and Penalties, not in the Prince's Power to remit or forgive: So that, upon the whole, there is, indeed, on this account, no real danger of any Innovation in Religion; and therefore we may well look on this, but as a Pretence to undermine Monarchy itself.  
But lest this single String should fail, they have cunningly found out another for their Bow, The Inexorableness of the D's temper, if once offended: A groundless and malicious Scandal; an Opinion that being generally spread abroad, has already begot many great Evils, and, if continued, will, in all probability, run us into infinite Calamities and Disorders, not to be equalled, but by the Malice of the Contrivers: For, his being thus misrepresented, must needs add to the People's obstinacy in opposing, and his violence in asserting, his Right to the Crown: and therefore I wonder why you suffer yourselves to be imposed upon, and your Understandings subjected to that Slavery which is certainly designed against your Persons, by the Ambitious, without prying into the Grounds, and considering the Consequences of that Calumny. I am sure, did his Enemies allow but half the time for Consideration, as they do for Passion, they would find his R. H. is much less fwayed with an inordinate desire of Revenge, than they are with a false and misguided Zeal; or, which is more, that he is as void of that spiteful Humour, as they that charge him with it, are of Candour and Integrity. The knowledge of this Truth I own to my observation of his Temper, Principles, and Practice, in the many Varieties of his Fortune: But I am now more bold to affirm it, since his coming into Scotland; because, three days after I had showed him your Letters, he publicly declared in Council, That tho' the Malice of his Adversaries might possibly deprive him of a Crown, together with the Affections of the People; yet it would never of the Royal Virtue of Clemency: which whether he derives more from the Blood of his Father, or the Example of his Brother, is an undecided Question; as it likewise is, whether the one merited more by laying down his Life for his People's Liberty, than the other by pardoning so many thousands, who had forfeited theirs to his Justice: That he was not ignorant, how Machiavil's Advice, of Eortiter calumniare & aliquid adhaerebit, was daily put in practice by his Adversaries; nothing being so usual with them, as to traduce his most blameless Actions, calling Justice, Cruelty; Bounty, Prodigality; Resolution, Obstinacy; Valour, Rashness; and, in fine, any thing that is Great or Glorious, Base and D●●generous: Yet he hoped Truth would at last prevail against his and its own Enemies, and make it as impossible for them to spread their Calumnies to his disadvantage, as for him to leave any to severity, or punishment, that had first left their Crimes: That he always looked upon Revenge as the Result of a cankered and impotent Mind, inhumantly rejoicing in the Calamities of the Oppressed, and as insatiable in Cruelty, as the memory of received Injuries is commonly indelible; than which, nothing was more contrary to his Nature, having, besides the Commands of Christianity been taught from his Infancy, That so poor and mean a Passion ought never to influence a Prince, who is obliged by Honour to end his Wrath, as soon as his Enemies do their Malice; and, having no Rivals to contend with, is then to be accounted most victorious, when he triumphs over himself, by conquering his Passions: That he challenged any that knew him, to give one Instance, wherein he had swerved from this Maxim, or exercised any Rigour against any Offender, that had truly and sincerely repent: That it was true, he could not forget the French Proverb, Qui se fait un brebis, le Loup le mange, i. e. The Wolf devours him that makes himself a Sheep; and therefore would not, by an over-easiness of Nature, yield tamely to his own Ruin, and suffer himself to be made a Prey to the Ambition and Insolence of others; but was resolved to temper the Methods of gaining and enjoying his just Rights, with a mixture of Severity and Mildness, proportionable to the opposition he should meet with: And lastly, That he could distinguish, very well between those whom Ignorance, or Imprudence, carried insensibly beyond the bounds of Duty, and those who knowingly, and advisedly, ran not only into Extremes themselves, but likewise, by Lies, and false Suggestions, hindered many to return from, and drove others to, wicked and malicious Practices; and, consequently, he hoped, none would wonder if These should feel the smart of his Justice, as the Other might be sure, upon disclaiming their Errors, to be received into Mercy; being persuaded, that punishing such Men could no more be termed Revenge, than executing the Laws against Traitors, and Disturbers of the Public Quiet, could reasonably be accounted Cruelty: But lest, upon this score, he should be thought to reserve a Latitude to himself of wreaking his Anger against any, at pleasure, he was willing to give all the Assurances they themselves could expect, and would move his Brother to agree to an Act of Parliament for that purpose; that he would freely forgive, and bury in eternal Oblivion, whatever is past, that so either all may be throughly reconciled, or such as are guilty of that Implacability which they attribute to him, differenced from the rest, and left without excuse, to the terror of their own evil Consciences, and his just Resentments.  
I cannot imagine what further can reasonably be expected from an injured Prince, and am confident, whoever after continues dissatisfied, is as great an Enemy to Reason, as he is to his R. H. and in stead of taking away, seeks to perpetuate your Differences. Nor do I see why any, before him, should be credited in an Affair of this Importance; since all acknowledge him to be of a frank and generous Nature, free from all Dissimulation, and the little Politic Fetches and Evasions which serve other men's turn to break their Promises: Whereas the Ringleaders of his Adversaries are versed in all the Arts and Wiles of forming Parties and Factions, and consequently, cannot be thought to stick at forging any Lie, or Aspersion, beneficial to the End they propose. But, allowing an equal probability of truth in his Denial, and their Charge; yet to err of his side, is not less safe, and I am sure much more honest and honourable.  
'Tis indeed the usual Cheat of aspiring Men, by specious Pretences first to engage the unwary in their Conspiracies, and, when either Fear or Honesty opens their Eyes, then to make them believe, they are so far advanced, that they cannot with safety retire; and that the State or Person they provoked, will admit of no other Atonement than that of their Lives and Fortunes. This Device (to omit ancienter Times) in Philip the Second Reign, filled the Belgic Plains with the Blood of his Spanish and Flemish Subjects; brought France, successively, under several Kings, almost to a total destruction; deprived our late Sovereign of his Life, and Crown, which I am confident was not by the major part first intended, in 1640; and had like to have kept his present Majesty in perpetual Exile, had not Providence wrought Miracles in his favour, and, in spite of all the Artifices of his Rebellious Subjects, restored him to his Throne, without Blood or Violence: among which, I cannot but remember that devilish Pamphler, entitled, A Letter from Bruxelles, etc. mentioned in Baker's Chronicle, published after his Majesty's Declaration from Breda, insinuating; That notwithstanding his Promises, if they suffered his Return, he would with all imaginable Cruelty revenge the Death of his Father, and not forget it to the third Generation of those concerned in that horrid Murder. This put the People into a great Consternation; yet his unparallelled Clemency, and his so often pressing his Parliament to pass the Act of Oblivion, sufficiently proved the Malice of that Invention. But I hope this Cheat is now so well known, that it will gain no Credit with considering Persons: I only wish some care were taken to undeceive the weak and unthinking, that Peace and Unity, which seem to have parted from you with his R. H. might with him be once more restored, and the happy Union of both Kingdoms be made perpetual, by suffering no rent or gap in the Royal Line; which all of our Nation, (and we hear those of Ireland will not be less forward) are not only obliged, but have vowed to maintain, with the hazard of their Lives and Fortunes: a Necessity we hope you will never put upon us, as well for your own sakes, as for the Peace and Quiet of this Kingdom, wherein he has not the least Concern, who is, and always will be,  
Your most humble and most obedient Servant, etc.  
POSTSCRIPT.  
JUst now I hear of a new Project set on foot, to give the King 600000 l. of which he may dispose one at pleasure, on condition he will consent to the Bill of Exclusion; and that, in return, he shall have Power, by Act of Parliament, in case he have no Issue by his Queen, to settle, by Will, the Crown upon any of his Natural Children. To manage this Design, a new Set of Ministers is contrived: A great Lord, whose Son most, if not wholly, influences the House of Commons, is to be made a Duke; another Earl, to be Treasurer; Sir W. J. is to be L. C. J. Col. T. to be a Secretary of State, etc. I am very sorry to perceive the Differences between the King and his Subjects, are fomented by Persons of the same Humour with those in 1640. who, meeting at Sir Robert Long's, undertaken, if his then Majesty would do so and so, he should govern the Parliament to all Intents and Purposes: The King consenting to every, excepting one, their desired Preferments, was refused, crying out, One and all, having before bound themselves accordingly. One of the then leading Men has in this Parliament a Son, whose Power and Ambition falls very little short, if at all, of his Fathers; and if you have a mind to discover Hercules his Proportion by that of his Foot, compare the Remonstrance, and the late Address, and, without naming, you will find the near Relation of the Authors. For shame, let not such Proceed be nicknamed, doing your Country Service. I remember to have heard, that in the short Parliament, before that of (40.) when some more zealous, than wise, Members spoke too extravagantly, a sober Gentleman, and no Courtier, stood up, and said, he was for more moderate Counsels, lest their present heat and exorbitance should put that King, and his Successors, for ever out of conceit with Parliaments, who depended upon his Pleasure. I wish the whole Kingdom, as well as their Prince, may have no reason to grow weary of, and dislike the settled Constitution of Commons in Parliament, choosing rather to have, as formerly, the whole Power in the King, and his Great Council of Lords and Barons. Extremes are near one another; and many, by grasping at too much, have lost the little they enjoyed: This is as foolish, as with the Dog, in the Apologue, to lose the Substance for the Shadow: And since Prudence tells us, A long provoked and incensed Clemency turns into the greatest Cruelty, you ought to bridle your Passions and Ambition, lest you too late repent your Madness and your Folly. This Consideration has carried me beyond the usual length of a Post script, wherein I designed to have said little more, than that I understand, the D. writes this night to the King his Brother, That if he can be secure his Parliament will agree with him upon quitting his Interest, that he should not longer struggle for him, who would not only hazard his uncertain hopes of a Crown, but would with joy expose his Life, to do his Majesty service; whose long Reign, and Happiness, notwithstanding all the Forgeries of his Enemies, he as hearty wishes, as any other the most Loyal Subject in his Dominions.  
Consider the Greatness of this Generosity, and let not Malice for ever prevail, to the defamation of Innocence, and the disturbance, if not the ruin, of these Nations.  
FINIS.