THE GREAT CASE PUT HOME In some modest Queries, Humbly Proposed and Tendered to Consideration, By a true Lover of the Protestant Religion And English Loyalty.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Eccles. 11.2. 
Set thy heart aright, and constantly endure, and make not haste in time of trouble.  
6. Believe in the Lord, and he will help thee; order thy way aright, and trust in him.  
7. Ye that fear the Lord, wait for his mercy, and go not aside lest ye fall.  
Printed Anno Dom. 1681.   

TO THE READER.  
READER,  
I know, That what I am now going upon is a Subject be set with many and great Prejudices; and such peradventure are the Heats and Animosities of some, that calm Reason will hardly find admittance. However, upon this Crisis, (being not sure, whether ever there may be an opportunity again) in the silence of others more Able, I have adventured to express my honest thoughts (such, I am sure, they are in my Intendment) whatever Censure they may undergo from Biased persons, who Govern themselves by Interest or Humour, by Fears and Jealousies, in those Things, wherein the Concerns of the Government and Nation require the weightiest Consideration, and the clearest Eviction of Reason and Argument.  
Upon this account, I have thought fit to set forth this small Tract by way of Queries: it being a thing, would not so much become my Meanness, to be Positive. Only the Two first Things, which I take for granted, I suppose no honest Englishman or true Protestant will deny me. As to the things debated, I have so set them down by Cross Questions, as they say Pro and Con, with that Evenness and Impartiality, that neither side can justly complain of me: and yet with that due Submission & Deference, that I leave the Decision of them, where I ought, at the feet of my Superiors. They are such Questions too, mostly of that comprehensiveness, that they will take-in the whole State, and may be both Enlarged in Themselves, and Extended also to all the minutest particularities of the Case. I could have brought many more; but These being the Principal and most Material, the Resolution and Issue of these will overrule all Others of the like kind.  
I must not leave this without a sincere Protestation, that I have not put Pen to Paper upon any sinister End or Design; but, with an upright Conscience towards God and towards Men, I have, according to my weakness, discharged my mind, in an humble sense rf that Duty and Regard, I own to all my Governors, (of whom the KING is supreme,) and out of a hearty desire of my Country's Weal.  
Farewell.   

THE GREAT CASE PUT HOME.  
THe CASE of his R. H. being such as will be made an Eternal Obstruction to His Majesty's Affairs, and such as never will by Declamation and Harangue, but by cool Debate and sober Reason be determined; I do in all humility propose that there are some things in the Case, that must be granted, others that may be debated.  
The Things to be Granted are these two,  
I. That the D. of Y. hath by proximity of Blood an undoubted Natural Right to inherit and succeed, if the King (whom God long preserve) should die without Issue; this being an Hereditary, not an Elective Kingdom.  
A Quaery arising from hence is; 
 How far Positive Laws, made or to be made, do or may, regulate, limit and modify, or null and make void a Natural Right, such as Succession in an Hereditary Kingdom is a Main one?  
II. That true Christian Religion, at least the Protestant Religion, as it hath here been professed in England, doth not pretend to preclude, debar or hinder the Right of Government, or so much as allow Subjects upon the account of Religion to intermeddle; but presseth Obedience to all lawful Governors, whatever the Persons be.  
The Quaery from hence will be, 
 How far Religion in any Nation, at least how far the Protestant Religion in This, being so interwoven with the Government as it is, may, in case of a Persecution to arise from a Successor, be concerned in providing aforehand for its own security?  
The Things, which may fall under Debate, are such as these.  
I. Whether an Heir of the Crown may not, whilst a Subject, by some Misdemeanour forfeit that Right, which Nature hath placed in him, to the Laws of the Country? and whether the D. of Y. hath not so done, particularly by having (as it is strongly presumed he hath) reconciled himself to the Church of Rome?  
To this I ask; Whether the Heir of the Crown his being a Papist (if really such) at any Rate, do in Law cause a Forfeiture of his Right? and then, Whether a Presumtive Crime (be it what it will) can by Law take away the Right of any Subject's Estate? and Whether it be not hard measure for a Prince to be denied the common right of every Subject, when impleaded as a Criminal? which is, that Sentence do not pass upon him, much less be put in Execution against him, till he be Cited and summoned to appear and answer for himself, or be otherwise Convicted by due course of Law?  
II. Whether the very Constitution of the English Laws, as they now stand, do not in the Intent and Purport of them, exclude a Popish Successor, as One, who 'tis presumed neither Will nor Can execute them? seeing they do not allow a Papist to be so much as a Justice of Peace, a Churchwarden, or a Constable?  
To this I make these Demands,  
Whether there be not a vast difference betwixt an Inferior Magistrate, whose Place is a mere Trust, and a Sovereign invested into his Office by Right of Birth? Whether a Distrust of Him, being still but matter of Presumption, aught to extinguish such a Right? and Whosher that very Distrust too may not be satisfied by Limitations and Concessions agreed upon with the Person concerned in the Succession? and Whether the Word, Honour and Oath of such a Person, ought not among Christians to be locked upon as sufficient grounds of Belief and Assurance? as it is usual in other Countries; where different Religions are professed; it being a thing hardly practicable to; lay any other Ties upon a Sovereign, or to find out any Expedient of another nature, that may be consistent with Majesty.  
III. Whether (without any consideration of Law) the bare Foresight of great Inconveniencies or public Mischiefs, which may possibly or probably, nay must necessarily, and certainly will befall a People upon the succession of the Right Heir into the Government, be not a warrantable reason for his Exclusion, to lay Him aside as if he were not, and to set up Another in His stead?  
Let another like Question be put;  
If a Christian Prince coming rightfully to the Throne, and having for some time quietly sat therein, should afterward Apostatise from his Religion, and persecute the Professors of it: Whether such an one may by Scripture or Law be expelled and turned out of his Possession? and, Whether the Case of Exclusion and Expulsion be not much-what the same? and, Whether the Humour of some amongst Us may not be too like that of the Israelites, when for fear of Oppression they Revolted from the Successor to an Usurper?  
iv Whether the Examples of our Forefathers, who have upon slighter occasions made several Breaches and Interruptions in the Succession, are not a good Warrant for Us at this time, who lie under such dismal and dreadful apprehensions, to do the like? and Whether this will not be a legal Exclusion, which is fortified and confirmed by so many Precedents, since the Laws themselves are overruled and determined by Custom and Practice?  
To which may be rejoined;  
Whether it were in the power of our Forefathers, or be now in Ours by any Law (for Id possumus, quod Jure possumus) to alter that form or frame of Government, to which we are Born and Sworn Subjects, and of which the Succession is a main essential Point? and by consequence, Whether it was not in them Illegal to lay aside at any time the rightful Successor? and Whether our following their Example in doing things Unlawful, can justify the Illegality of our actings? Further, though the Body of the Nation might be excused in their submission to such as were only de facto Kings, and were not the jure so; yet Whether Those, who abetted and assisted such Persons to get into the Throne, and deserted and opposed the Lawful Heirs, were not highly Guilty; as in the case of King Stephen and Maud the Empress? And lastly, However Practice may regulate the Law in things Indifferent, and in matters of smaller Alloy; yet Whether an unlawful Practice be not in itself a plain downright violation of Law?  
V Whether, upon the whole, the Exclusion of the D. together with the Union of the Protestants, be not the most effectual, if not the only Means of securing our Religion, and keeping out Popery? and consequently in our Case, there being (as We say) no other Expedient, Whether absolute invincible Necessity, which knows no Law, does not enforce us by any means to preserve ourselves?  
To this may be returned;  
If the King, beside his Brotherly Affection, could be satisfied in Law and Conscience (seeing that an Hereditary Kingdom is Feodum non alienabile, as the Civilians term it) to comply with, and to give his consent to the Excluding Bill; yet, Whether the Exclusion of the D. will not probably draw as ill Consequents after it, and involve the Nation in as great Hazards, as the Admission of him would possibly do? and, Whether the Uniting of Protestants (if it be only into Immunities, and not into methods of Worship) be not in effect to establish and legalize Schism in all its divisions; and by providing a secure shelter for Romish Priests and Emissaries among our Sects (where no Test shall reach them) it will not prove a very likely Means, in time, of betraying us to Popery? most of those Sects in these late licentious Times, having been Influenced and Principled by that Party, who have made the greatest Advantages to their own Hopes from our Divisions: which by such a Comprehension, will be so far from being United to Us, or among Themselves, that they will be Established apart and severally by Law, and pass in short time for the most considerable part of the National Religion? And as to Necessity, the last Refuge; Whether, let our Circumstances be what they will, there can be any necessity laid upon any man to Sin, to do Evil? and though Self-preservation be the great principle of Nature, whether it ought to be endeavoured by unlawful indirect means; since our Saviour tells us, that He that will save his life, in that manner, shall lose it? and Whether the Apostles Rule in all dubious and hazardous Cases, be not best and safest for Christians to follow, Not to do evil, that good may come thereof?  
The Sum of All is this;  
That this Case of Succession, though it seem directly to cast an evil Aspect upon Religion and the Protestant Cause amongst us, yet really and ultimately it resolves itself into a Civil Grievance, as that which may touch Life, Liberty, Property, etc. by bringing in Arbitrary Power along with it, which Superstition is too apt to do. Wherefore in were to be Wished, That some of the most Learned in both Faculties of Law and Divinity might be consulted with, and required to give their Judgement. For if Henry the Eighth, who was not overcurious to govern himself by other men's Opinion and Advice, did think fit to propose the Divorce of the Queen, who had been his Brother's Wife, to several Universities, etc. and not to determine the matter without such a Consultation: How much more will it become the Wisdom of a Nation to use the like leisurely and tender Care in so Weighty a matter as the disabling the Inheritance of the Crown may prove?  
May a merciful God, whose immediate Interposal alone can heal our Distempers, and rescue us from those Dangers, we are too forward to bring upon ourselves, direct and prosper the Public Counsels, and may he ever preserve our Gracious Sovereign, whose Life will be our best Security: and may We, as becomes Loyal and dutiful Subjects, endeavour to make his Life Comfortable (that it may be Long) by supplying proportionable Aids to our Necessities at Home, and by giving suitable Encouragements to our Alliances abroad: which as it will be for His Majesty's Honour, so will it be no less for Our own present Security.  
FINIS.