A REPLY To the Second PART of the CHARACTER OF A POPISH SUCCESSOR. By Roger L' Estrange.  
LONDON, Printed for joanna Brome at the Sign of the Gun in S. Paul's Churchyard. 1681.   

A Reply to the Second Part of the Character of a Popish Successor.  
WHoever duly considers the Bent, and the Spirit of the Two Characters here in question, will easily Discern that the Exclusion of the Duke of York, is the Least part of the Authors, either Hope, or Pretention. For there are but Two ways to bring it about, viz. An Act of Parliament, or a Rebellion. As to the Former, the King hath over and over Declared himself against it; and most Expressly in his Late Declaration, (Apr. 8. 1681. P. 7.) in These words, (speaking of a Total Exclusion) [A Point, that in our own Royal judgement, so nearly concerned us, both in Honour, justice, and Conscience, that we could never consent to it.] Now with what face shall any Subject Presume to Importune his Sovereign; or how can he Expect, by a Pamphlet, to Gain upon him, to the Violation of all these Duties? And yet we see the Point pursued, though no way in the world to be Effected but by a Sedition: which, by the method taken, a body would suspect to be the Business too; for the Dint of the Discourse strikes altogether that way. 'Tis the Popish Successor I must Confess that makes the Report; and the Wind drives the Smoke in the face of the Duke; but 'tis the King all this while that receives the Shot. As for Example: He takes ye the Treachery of a Wolf, the Fierceness of a Tiger, the Ingratitude of a Pardoned Traitor; and here's, in short, the Composition of his Character of a Popish Successor; with Slavery and Damnation at his Heels. This Frightful Figure puts the People naturally upon That Question, Act. 16. 30. What must we do to be saved? Why truly (says the Character) the King has lost himself Strangely with sticking to his Brother. [His Peoples Knees are almost as Stubborn, as their Petitions and Prayers have been Ineffectual. (And I am afraid there are too many, who in Detestation of that One gangrened Branch of Royalty, can scarce forbear (how Vndutifully soever) to Murmur, and Revile, even at that Imperial Root that Cherishes it. Pa. 10. Part 1.] Insomuch that [in Studying to Prevent Tyranny, they grow jealous of Monarchy, etc. And so far from Supplying the Real and most Pressing Necessities of his Majesty, that they are rather well pleased, and Triumph, in his Greatest Wants: and that perhaps; when his Glory, nay possibly when his nearest Safety calls for their Assistance. P. 11.]  
The Writer of the Character has told the People a Heavy Tale here, but what if their Knees will not bend? what if there be Murmurings and Revile; and not one farthing of money to be gotten? Are we ever the nearer the Disinheriting of a Popish Successor, for all this? No; But if the King will not yield, the Character will show you a Trick for that too. The Lords Anointed? [I would ask (says he) what this LORDS ANOINTED Is? And who 'tis is our Native Sovereign? When instead of being Free Subjects, Pope and Tyranny shall rule over us, and we are made Slaves and Papists? P. 20.] And then below: [What's a Passive Obedience, to a King of England? Alas! That Bugbear, Passive Obedience, is a Notion crept into the World, and most Zealously, and perhaps as Ignorantly Defended [King's were made for the People, and not the People for the King P. 21.] And yet once again. [If now at last Popery must, and shall come in; (as by Law it cannot) and consequently must be restored by Arbitrary Power: If a new Monarchy, than a new Conquest; and if a Conquest, Heaven forbid we should be Subdued like less than Englishmen; or be Debarred the Common Right of All Nations, which is, to Resist, and Repel any Invader, if we can P. 21.] Now to run it short (he might even as well have told us in plain Terms; Look to yourselves my Masters; Here's a Popish Successor coming on that will send you all to the Devil. Ye have the whole Nation on your side, Never trouble your heads about the King. What's a KING? What is this LORDS ANOINTED? Is he not Our Servant? May not we Resist him if he Invade us? Passive Obedience is a Bugbear and does not concern us here in England, Wherefore let us Maintain our Rights, or fall like Englishmen. If This be not a Sedition, Contrived Chalked out, and Justified. I do not know what Is.  
To this Character of a Popish Successor, etc. I wrote a Reply, Entitled, The Character of a Papist in Masquerade; to which the Author of the First Character has now put out a rejoinder, which he calls, The Character of a Popish Successor Complete: In Defence of the First Part; against Two Answers, One Written by M. L'Estrange, called The Papist in Masquerade, etc. And Another, by an unknown hand.  
Upon a Through Examination of this Piece, I find it to be only a Pompous, Wordy Thing, and wholly made up of Shifts, and Suppositions; without so much as one Argument. either Offered, or Answered, upon the Stress of the Question: so that I shall; both for the Readers ease, and my own, pass over the Ramble of his Discourse, and keep myself as close as I can to the Subject in hand.  
It is the main Scope of his Design, first, to show the People a Popish Successor, in Imagination, as Black and Hideous as the Devil and Malice can Paint him. 2. to set forth the Absolute Necessity of Barring, and Precluding such a Successor, upon pain of Bondage, and Damnation. And 3. Since the King will not be wrought upon, against his Brother; To teach his Subjects a way of doing it by themselves; by Absolving them in this Particular Case from the Common Ties of Christianity, Prudence, and Allegiance.  
To These Three General Heads, I opposed Certain Previous Considerations, which he takes very little notice of in his Reflections upon my Papers, though the whole sum of this Controversy does most undeniably depend upon the Resolving of those Points. But of this hereafter. As to the rest, I followed my Parallel, betwixt the Barefaced jesuits, and the Disguised; betwixt the Proceedings of One and Forty, and of Eighty One, as a necessary Precaution, that under the Pretence of Abolishing the NAME of Popery, we might not Establish the DOCTRINE of it.  
In the first Page of the Preface, it is observed upon L'estranges' Character, that [the sole Drift of his Book was not in the least to Expose Popery any further, then to make the Fanatical and jesuitical Principles agree, etc.]  
Well! and what can expose Popory further than to prove it Fanaticism; and to Range the Papists with the Smiters of their Fellow-servants, (Matth. 24. 49.) and according to that Dreadful Sentence, (Matth. 24. 51.) to appoint jesuits their Portion with the Hypocrites?  
Take his Opinion (says the Character) abstracted from that Design, and his whole Book has no other aim, but to make All our Dangers of Popery, and a Popish Successor; and all the whole Plot against the King, Religion, and Government (to use his own Phrase, P. 69.) but a Painted Lion upon a Wall; and the Opposers of those Dangers a real Bed of Vipers.  
Is L'Estrange then so great a Friend to the fanatics, that he Acquits the Pap●sts, in making them Both Criminals alike? Or how will it hang together, that under the Notion only of Two sorts of jesuits, and Both equally Dangerous, the One shall be but a Painted Lion, and the Other a Real Bed of Vipers? Now over and above this Contradiction employed how many Impious, Impudent, False, and Non-sensicall Fellows should I have been, if I had dealt but half so disingenuously with the Character-maker as he has done with me. Take notice first, how he has Imposed upon me in misapplying the Citation, for my Words are these, P. 69. It were no Ill Emblem of the Original of our Late Troubles, to fancy a man in a fright, and Leaping from a Painted Lion upon a W●ll, into a Bed of Vipers. From hence does he infer my disbelief of the Plot, and pronounces upon me, as one that makes it his business to turn All the Dangers of Popery, and a Popish Successor into a mere mockery: when yet my Reply upon his first Character, speaks the clear contrary [So far am I from undertaking to dispute the danger of a Popish Successor, that I'll compound the matter with him beforehand, and take all his suppositions of Difficulties and Hazards for Granted:] And then again in the same Page [I am as much against the Principles and Practices of the Church of Rome (wherein the Church of England hath departed from that Communion) as any man living that keeps himself within the compass of Christian Charity, Humanity, and Good Manners: and so far I shall heartily join with the Compiler of the Character, by a Previous Concession of the Inconveniences (as I have said already) that may arrive by reason of that Religion. Is this fair dealing or no? But you shall see now how he Rivets it.  
You must allow him (says he) this Great Fundamental; that all the Sticklers against Popery, and a Popish Successor are fanatics, and that all fanatics hate both the King and Kingly Government, and are Tooth and Nail downright Republicans. Upon this Basis his whol● Fabric stands, Ibid.  
The Author has put a thing in my Head now, I should not ●ave thought of, and truly I could find in my heart to give him his ask. For I would Distinguish betwixt the Litigious Humour of Stickling against Popery, as the fanatics do, and the Modest judicious way of opposing it, after the manner of the Church of England: a Stickler, in this case, being only a Waspish kind of Common Barreter in Religion. But however, he must be a Stickler against the Communion of the English Church, as well as against that of the Church of Rome, to be a Fanatic in my opinion: In which case, his Zeal, on the One hand, does not at all Excuse his Schism on the Other. And to Gratify him yet further, in his other Point; let him name what sort of Dissenters he pleases, and let me try if I cannot show him Anti-Monarchical Principles; and Positions Destructive both of Church and State, in the Avowed Writings of the most Eminent of the Party.  
When he has Handy-dandyed the Character, and L'Estrange, Just as Puncinello plays his Puppets, and given which of them the better on't he pleases; he sets up a Great Fundamental for me; and runs away with it for a matter of a Page and a half, call Heaven and Earth to give Evidence to the truth of a Plot, which no Mortal denies; and winds up at last in the Definition of a Fanatic of these Times.  
He that values the Safety of himself and his Posterity; he that thinks he has an Estate, and Liberty worth Preserving; a Country worth Saving; a Religion worth defending; and indeed a God worth Serving, it a FANATIC. Pref. P. 3.  
I shall Appeal to the World now, which is the True Fanatic, His, or Mine.  
He that places the safety of Himself and his Posterity in breaking the Laws, both of God and man; He that makes his Liberty a Cloak for Maliciousness; He that Cries, Give the King no Money, when his Country is ready to be Swallowed up; and Triumphs in his Majesties Greatest Wants. (Char. Part. 1. Pa. 11.) when his Glory, nay his NEAREST SAFETY Calls for Assistance; He that Contends for Schism to the Overthrow of Religion, and calls Murdering of Kings, and Subverting of Governments, [doing God good service] He is a Fanatic.  
He Proceeds in his Preface, to the Invalidating of my Parallel, betwixt Forty One and Eighty; and upon my saying, that the very Sound of Popery did the business against the Last King, as well without a Ground, as with it; [What's all this (says he) but to tell us, because a Bugbear Frighted us once, therefore a Real Fiend must not Fright us now? Because a Judas once Kissed and Betrayed, and a Joab Embraced and stabbed, therefore no man must ever Kiss and Embrace without a Treacherous and Murderous Intention?  
And what's all this; (say I) but to tell us, on the Other side, that though the Bugbear of Forty One proved a Real Friend to us, we are yet to take the same Fiend again, in Eighty One for a Bugbear? And so for judas and joab, If the Same judas, kisses again, and with the Same Words in his Mouth too, why may we not suspect the Same Intentions? And likewise if the Same joab Embraces again, and the Old Poniard be found about him still, (the Deposing Maxims of Forty One, which is the very Case) Have we not Reason then to believe that he has Murder in his Heart? And Hear him once again now.  
Because a Knot of Achitophel's once Pretended Grievances where none was, to accomplish their own Wicked Purposes, therefore no Subject shall, or may Petition or Vote, though in a Legal, Parliamentary way, for the Redress of the Greatest Grievance in Nature, and that in the Plainest and most Imminent Exigence of a Nation, etc. Pref. Pag. 3.  
My Answer must be still the same; that the very same achitophel's, Pretending the very same Grievances, and Proceeding by the very same Met●ods have probably the very same Wicked Designs and Purposes. And now to that which follows; Bear me Wittness Good People, that I meddle with neither Votes, nor Petitions, but only with Seditious Libels that carry the name of Petitions: as who should say [Take notice, (my Countrymen) the King is wholly carried away by jesuitical Councils, May it Please your Majesty to Call a Parliament. His Majesty will never suffer this Plot to be searched to the Bottom; A Speedy Parliament we Beseech ye Sir. The King Employs none but Popish and Disaffected Officers, Let us have a Parliament we Beseech your Majesty, to sit, till All our Grievances are Redressed.] D'ye Call this, Addressing, or Libelling? Or how come these Scandals to wear the name of Petitions?  
He has another Touch at my Parallel in the next Page [The Design (he says) of that Age, being to Reduce us to Slavery, and this to Free us from it] This is more said than he is able to make out; for how does he know that the men of Forty One Designed us to Slavery; and that the same men in Eighty One are Designing to Free us from it? Does not Popery and Arbitrary Power, from the same Lips signify just the same thing now that it did then? And why may not a man Conclude, that the Same Persons, with the same Pretences have still the Same End●?  
Th' Grievance of the Nation (he says) is a Popish Successor; and That Grievance once Removed by a Bill of Exclusion, we Countermine All the Arts, and Subtleties of Rome. The King shall have Money, and the Entire Affections of All, or most of the Commonalty of England, which have, or can be Alienated, or Estranged, by his Unhappy and too Vigorous Defence of a Successor, so universally Odious.  
This Clause is to Possess the People, that the Excluding of a Popish Successor would do the whole Business. It is a Great Blessing to the Party that men of this Kidney are never to be put out of Countenance; for the Author would Blush else at a Suggestion that every man that can read, is able to Contradict. Here's the Subject of a Popish Successor Started, and the Prerogative of a Protestant King, in Possession, Invaded, by every Pamphleter that Presumes to handle this Question; for there are Popish Forts, Popish Castles, Popish Militia's, Popish Guards, Popish Courtiers, Popish Councillors, Popish judges, Popish juries, Popish Bishops, and in fine, Popish Torys, and Tantivys, as well as Popish Successors. And All these Popish Circumstances must be either Removed, or secured, to the good liking of the Faction; or else the Diverting of the Succession (according to the Ordinary language of the Press) is as good as nothing. And then to Crown the Contumely, That Prince is Charged with Affecting an Arbitrary Power whole almost Fatal Concessions already have but barely left him Power enough to keep the Crown on his Head. But what's the meaning now, of Cramping, and Imposing upon the Civil Power, what's that to Religion and the Plot? The Solution is this: The Faction, Designing upon both Church and State, finds it Expedient to Attaque both together; to the end that the Project upon the score of Religion may hold out till they have Gained their Ends upon the Monarchy.  
His next Intimation of the Kings having lost the Affections of the People; for asserting the Rights of his Brother, (though according to Honour, justice and Conscience as his Majesty himself Declares) This Intimation (I say) is so far from the Report of a Truth, (as appears by the almost Unanimous Addresses of the Nation to the Contrary, that it is clearly an Artifice to Render his Majesty low in the Opinion of his People.  
He Passes now to a Reflection upon Times and Times, wherein to my thinking, the Reason lies strong and Directly against him. [The Miseries of the Late Civil Wars) (he says) are too lively in the People's Memories, for them ever to be wrought up again into the same Frenzy.] Now I fancy on the other hand, that the Comig off so Cheap, and with so much Profit and Advantage for one Rebellion, is a great Encouragement for the same Persons to venture upon another. I am the larger upon the Preface, because it is somewhat better Coloured then the Text.  
Though the Deluded Multitude (says he, Ibid.) were then put out of love with Kings, they found too soon, by Woeful Experience, that the Protectorate was ten times worse, and whatever Prejudice they had conceived against the Old Unhappy King, yet the Grievous Oppressions, Taxes, and standing Arms, under Cromwell, quickly opened their Eyes, and to their own Sad Cost, Assured them, they had not mended, but Marred their Condition by Rebelling. Ibid.  
I would he had Explained himself whether it was TOO SOON in the People's opinion, or in his own. And then he speaks again as if the Rebellion had been only the setting up of the Protector; for he takes no notice of any Grievous Oppressions, Taxes and standing Arms till the Protectorate of Cromwell; And all the Interval, (betwixt Driving the King from London, and the setting up of that Mock-Royolet) under the Blessed Administration of the Lords and Commons, was only a Certain kind of method peculiar to the Godly for the asserting of the Protestant Religion, and the Liberty of the Subject, against the Fears of Arbitrary Power, and Popery. I come now to the Conclusion of his Preface.  
I will confess (says he) This present Age has Derived one thing from Forty one, and Forty two; and that is, a Curse they l●ft behind 'em: The Curse of the Sheperds' boy in the Fable; Our Crying out so often formerly, Help Master, Help; the Wolf●s in the Sheepfold; when he was not there, has made us Disbelieved at last now he is there; and like him too, be left most Helpless when we most want it]  
The Author may be pleased to take notice; that our Business does not lie with the Wolf in the Fable, but with the Wolf in the Gospel; the Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: and that the very Wolves that Worryed the Flock under the Last King, are now again Grinding their Teeth at 'em under This. And so much for his Preface; We shall now proceed to his Text.  
Upon my Arguing, that if Christian Princes, under Articles of Treaty, and Agreement, keep Touch even with Infidels, much more will Christians keep Touch with one another. [What Relation (says he) P. 1.) can Christian Princes keeping Touch with Infidels have to a Popish Successors Tyranny, and Injustice over his own Subjects?] And again P. 2. The Fidelity between Prince and Prince, holds no Proportion or Affinity with that betwixt Prince and People. A King for Breach of Faith with his People, Esteems himself only accountable to God; but for Breach of Faith with Foreign Princes, whether Christians or Infidels, he is accountable to man, and may draw down a just War upon his Head for such a Violation, etc.  
If I had not more Respect to the Rules of Good Manner's, then to the force of his Reasoning I should, upon such an occasion as this, treat him as Coarsely as he does me upon all occasions. The Question is not what a Popish Prince will do upon Interest, but what upon Conscience, and Religion, In which Case, the Morality is the Same to another Prince and to a Subject; so that our Author is quite beside the Cushion, [But what (says he) if his Priests shall persuade him that he ought not to keep his Faith? And what, say I, if his Conscience shall tell him he will be damned if he does not? Is not the Why and the Wherefore here as broad as it is long?  
The Characterizer (says he) tells us P. 3▪ That in a Bigoted Prince, his Morals shall be Slaves to his Zeal. And then [I am ashamed that any men that pretend to write sense, should endeavour to Persuade us that a Popish Bigot, and a man of Courage, and Wisdom in a Successor, should not go further towards the Establishing of Popery, than a Coward, and a Fool.]  
I will allow that he that is Daring enough to Attempt any thing, and Subtle enough, to play his Game to the most Advantage, is much more Capable, than a man less Bold, and Crafty, of bringing his Ends to Pass. But what is this Fearlessness, and Cunning, to True Courage, and Wisdom, that Govern all our Actions according to the Measures of Right Reason, and justice? So that the Author gets nothing upon this Point, unless he can make out Temerity, and Breach of Faith to be Virtues. But the Great Danger I find is in a Bigoted Papist, and either our Popish Successor is That, or That Danger does not fall into this Case.  
Had we an Heir Apparent (says the Character, Ibid) of no more Religion than a Julian, or a Nero, and yet at the same time were Completely Master of the Moral Virtues, possibly he might steer, etc. Now would I fain have the Author of the Character, and his Deputy to lay their Heads together upon this Text. We might do well enough (he says) with a julian, a Nero, etc. and why not well enough then, as he himself has stated the matter? P. 13. in his Reply upon L'Estrange, [If his Royal Highness (says L'Estrange) would have played the Hypocrite as the Characterizer charges it upon him, he would have Rendered himself a Protestant to the Eye of the World, though a Papist in his heart; That being the only means to have Gained him his Point. But Behold now with what Indignation the Character-maker Reflects upon such a Supposition.  
I wonder (says he) to what Readers these Authors write, that at this time of day, they would make us believe that his Squeamishness against the Test, and the Oath of Supremacy, made our Conscientious Heir quit his Honourable Employmentn! As we better remember, 'Twas not so much the Test, as the Test-makers, that Disgusted him. His natural Antipathy to Parliaments, his Continual Little thoughts of that Great Council, (and less of them he will have if ever he comes to the Crown) with his Disdain, that such Insolent Earth and Ashes should dare to give Laws to his Divinity. So that in short, his Pride, not his Conscience got the Ascendent; and whatever Advantages he might have gained by-keeping his Employments, and swallowing the Oaths, yet such is his Perverse, and Stubborn Haughtiness, that he would rather cry, Sink Interest; Perish Succession; and even Popedom itself, rather than Truckle to what I Scorn.  
The Reader will take notice here, of the shifting of the Scene, and that the Business is no longer the POPISH Successor, the BIGOTED Successor: but the PERVERSE, the STUBBORN, the HAUGHTY Successor: The Successor of no Religion at all. So that he has Changed his Battery, from the Opinion and Profession of the Successor, to the temperament of his Humour: and the same Bolt strikes a Perverse KING to the Heart, as well as a Perverse SUCCESSOR. Nay, the Character lays violent Hands upon itself in this Paragraph, and cuts the very throat of its own Arguments. What's become now of all his Expanded Rhetoric, and his Embroidered Allegories? One hasty word has laid this mighty piece of Ostentation level with the ground: And the Character-man has discharged the Successor, of the most dangerous point, out of his own Mouth. Why here's no Popery in the Case, it seems. [Perish Popedom itself (says he) rather then Truckle to what I Scorn] His Spite (as we are told) was not at the Test, but the Test-maker, and 'tis the Character-maker Probably too that has the Spite at him. And who knows but the Test-maker, and This Character-maker may be somewhat akin too?  
Now for the Duke's Antipathy to Parliaments, I never heard this charged upon him, but by those that had an Antipathy for Kings; And all this is only Fleshing of a Faction upon the Duke, to prepare them for further Attempts upon his Majesty himself.  
After this Gross and Palpable Contradiction of himself; First in casting the whole weight of his Argument, and of our Danger upon the Religion, and Bigottery of the Duke. And then in declaring him to be of no Religion at all; and so far from Bigoted to the Church of Rome, that he would Sacrifice even the Popedom itself to his humour; (which shows that he writes his Gall, not his opinion) The Reader will not be surprised, I suppose, at the boldness of any Calumny, after so Malicious, and so Shameless an Imposture. This is to prepare the Reader for another piece of Confidence and Invention in the Story of one R●hux, P. 3. Wherein, if it were possible, he has outdone himself.  
Take notice that this Relation was first exposed to the World, (at least I never heard of it before) in the Second Letter about the Black Box, under the Title of [A Letter to a Person of Honour, etc.] The Character calls him Rohux; the Letter Monsieur Rohan: the one being only an Improvement of the other, and the Original came into the world with the Black Box, unless possibly the Hint might be taken from the Story of Marsilly, the Person that Negotiated the Triple Alliance, who having been in England went away again about his Business; was taken afterwards by a Party of French out of one of the Cantons of Switzerland, carried to Paris, and there broken upon the Wheel. This Account of Marsilly agreeing with that of Rohux in all the Circumstances of an Agency in England, his Seizure, and his Execution. Now though this Narration carries in the very face of it the most Manifest Marks of Falsehood, in Respect, not only of the Incoherence and Incredibility of the Parts of it; but in regard also of the (almost) Impossibility of the Particulars coming to light, which are therein Suggested; I shall yet, over and above, Recommend to the Peruser of these Papers, the Disagreements betwixt the Character, and the Letter, which will abundantly Evince the whole matter to be only a Scandalous Contrivance.  
This same Rohux (says the Character, P. 3.) was Commissioned as an Agent into England, to Implore his Majesty's Mediation to the French King in favour of the Hugonots of France, and applied himself to his Royal Highness to Facilitate his Access.  
Now the Letter says, that Monsieur Rohan (as he is there called, came into England to treat with the King concerning an Alliance betwixt his Majesty, and Foreign Protestants, merely for the Preservation of their Religion, and that having acquainted the Duke of York with his Errand, etc.  
we'll first observe the Differences, as we go; and afterward, set forth what moved the Author of the Character to change his Tale. The One makes Rohan's business to be a General Proposal of an Alliance; the Other only a Bare and Particular Intercession for the Hugonots of France. The one only makes the Duke acquainted with the Proposal; the other Addresses Expressly to the Duke for his Recommendation.  
Now says the Character again. [This Royal Heir, or Masquerader, (or by what other Title Disguised or distinguished) with a seeming Cordial Friendship Embraces the Poor Hugonots Cause; and day after day Receives his Addresses with many Solemn but Airy Promises of Speedy Assistance; but in the mean time, Disgusted, and Galled to the Soul, at so Audacious and Impious a Petition, as the Protestant Preservation; and Abhorring so Detestable an Employment; (Nay, 〈◊〉 very Name of the Heretics Defender) instead of his Promised Aid, he, on the contrary, most cunningly laid the Platform of a Revenge, as exquisite as so Heinous a Petition deserved. Immediately ●e goes to the French Ambassador, and tells him how one of the French Subjects had very Arrogantly and Scandalously Calumniated his Great Master, with Opprobrious names of Tyranny, Oppression, and Breach of Faith; into which very language he himself before had Exasperated him, on Purpose to make his Ruin Secure, which the Bare accusation of a suit in behalf of his Religion would not alone have Effected. The Ambassador, (as bound in Duty, for the vindication of his King's Honour) desires a further Testimony of the Offence and Offender: which the Royal Informer effectually gives him, by appointing another Conference with Rohux; Where Privately he Plants this Kingly Representative as an Honourable Eavesdropper to overhear a Repetition of the whole Discourse, and Confirm his Belief from his own Ears. This Conference P. 4.) Contrived and Managed as heart would wish, the Ambassador Posts over this Rohuxs' Treachery to France, whilst he, Poor unsuspecting Innocence, Continues his Daily Prayers to his Great Advocate. But finding in time so many Dilatory Demurs, He luckily at last Discovers he is Betrayed: Upon which, Dreading the French King, not daring to Return to France, He steals away into Switzerland for his Protection; but the French King being advertized of his Motions, gets him Trepanned by an Ambuscado in the night, and being by Surprise forced out from thence into France he is broken upon the Wheel.  
Now hear the Letter. Mounsieur Rohan having acquainted the Duke of York with his Errand, after he had in a Private Conference or two transacted with the King about it, this Royal Prince, out of his wanted kindness to Protestants, and the Reformed Religion, caused Ruvigni (Lieger Ambassador from France at this Court) to stand behind the Hangings at St. James, while he made this Innocent Gentleman discourse over the whole busness. Upon which, Mr. Ruvigny being obliged to acquaint his Master with it, M. Rohan, who, (upon some Information that the Duke had betrayed him) had withdrawn hence to Switzerland, was there seized by a Party of French-Horse, and brought to the Bastile, whence, after some time of Imprisonment, he was carried to the Place of Execution and broken on the Wheel.  
Here's nothing in this Letter, of the Seeming Friendship mentioned in the Character; the Promises of Assistance; the Plot of Revenge, the Trepanning of Rohux into Outrages against his Master, nor of the Duke's Lewd Contemplations upon the whole matter, which 'tis Impossible for him to give an account of too, and fitter, in short, for a Stage then a History. So that all these Aggravations are only the Old Story Corrected and Amended, with Additions, for the Credit of his Character. And what's his Authority now for this Diabolical Report, but that Infamous Composition of Forgery and Scandal, the Letter about the Black Box? Wherein, after all these Vile Imputations upon his Royal Highness, the Duke comes off yet better in't then the King.  
After his Utmost Effort upon this Romantic Masterpiece of Defamation, he lets himself down for a while into a vein of Quirk and Cavil, and then takes wing again (P. 8.) into another fit of Rapture and Imagination.  
Were there a Country (says he) where Commissions of Peace, day after day, and Time out of mind, have been taken away for daring but to lift a hand against a Son of Rome; Nay, at the same time; when all other Recusants have been Prosecuted, and that with Encouragement, and Reward: And all by a Royal Heirs Pretection and Interest, etc.  
This way of Trifling might do well enough in a Chimney Corner with a Once upon a time there was a Country, etc. but Majesty is not to be played with at this Idle Rate. The Plain English of it is this; [Look to yourselves Good People; the King is Popishly affected; he will not let any man touch a Papist, but the poor Protestant Dissenters all this while; they go to pot; &c,] and then he thinks to bring it off by casting it upon the Interest or Power of the Duke with his Majesty. The very affirming of it is a Scandal; for how does he know whether it be so or no? Or what if it were so? Is it not the King's Act, whoever advises him to't? Or can any man say that the King does an ill thing (however influenced) without reflecting upon his Majesty's Honour and Justice? Beside the Evident untruth of the matter of Fact, the Laws being vigorously Executed against the Papists; and the Recusants, on the other side Indulged, till they so far abused the King's mercy by daily affronts, that it was not safe to forbear them any longer.  
His Ninth Page is stuffed with Reflections upon the Government, and first, upon the Bench for the Sentence upon Harris for Publishing the Appeal; a Libel that excites Rebellion, and supports itself in the Encouragement of it, upon this Position, that He that has the worst Title makes the best King.  
And again in the same Page [had the Papists Execrable Blow succeeded, the Blood of Majesty might in all Probability have found the same Inquisition as the firing of London. What is this but to Imply an Imputation upon the House of Commons, that had the Examination of the whole matter before them; and likewise upon his Majesty himself, his Ministers, and Courts of Justice; as if they had not done their parts toward the Discovery of it in their Respective Stations?  
And yet once again (Ibid) Has not our Late Design against both King, Religion, and Government, in Contradiction of the unanimous Vote of the whole Nation in Parliament, being Confidently Retorted upon the Presbyterians? And that too without the least Proof or shadow for't? And then how easily might the Papal Policy have made a Popish Murder, a Fanatic Stab?  
They do ill Certainly that turn the Popish Plot upon the Presbyterians; and little better sure, that turn the Plots of the Scottish Presbyterians, and their Fellow-Covenanters in England, upon the Papists: And for the Popish Policy of making a Popish murder a Fanatic Stab; that's only a shift they learned of the True Protestant Papists, that turned a Fanatic murder into a Popish Stab. I proceed now to Page 11.  
Now in my apprehension (says the Author) never did any man so forget himself as Mr. L'Estrange has done here: He believes here, that that unchristian Impression, as the Allowance of Perjury, is only the Tenet of some profligate wretches wholly lost in Brutality and Blindness. But at the latter end of his Book, (P. 83.) he downright contradicts that Belief, and says, Pope Pius Quintus absolved the Subjects of Queen Elizabeth from all their Oaths of Allegiance to her for ever. So that now belike it was not only the Maxim of the abovesaid profligate wretches, but even of the Great Successor of Peter, etc.  
Now in my Apprehension, the Author is every jot as much out of the way as L'Estrange; for the Same Person may be a Pope, and a Profligate wretch into the bargain; even by the Concession of Baronius himself, and the best of their own Writers.  
In the twelfth Page I am Corrected again; Mr. L'Estrange (he says) forgets himself, a little further in this Point; and says in the same 83. Page, [That the Romish jesuit holds, that Dominion is founded in Grace, and upon that Principle, Deposes Protestant Princes, etc. then adds, that the Pope may deprive a King of his Royal Dignities for Heresy, Schism, etc.  
Now by the Authors leave Those Two Words THAN ADDS, refer to another Paragraph. My business being only to show Certain Instances wherein the very worst Positions of the Romish jesuits are Matched, if not Outdone, by the Covenanting jesuits; and as much the Tenets of Profligate Wretches on the One side as on the Other.  
He takes me to task again (P. 13.) for saying [That in the Case of a Popish King, who is either kept out, or Driven from the Exercise of his Right by the tumultuary Licence of the Rabble, an Oath of Abjuration, in Case of any fair opportunity for him to Assert his Claim with his Sword in his hand, will be so far from Engaging any man against him, that yielded contrary to his Conscience, to Swallow it, for the saving of his Stake, that he will find no Firmer Friends to his Cause, or Interest, than those men that are stimulated both by Honour and Revenge to the Execution of their Duties.] And upon this Clause, (he says) 'tis plain, that by those Abjuring-Oath-Swallowing Friends, I can mean no other but the Church of England Protestants. And afterward, (P. 14.) once again for laying so wretched, so Despicable and so cowardly a Condescension at their Doors, as the Abjuration of Gods anointed, and their Native Sovereign, to save a Stake, a Cow, a Farm or a Cottage. Ay, But that Abjuration is but a Copy of their Countenance he tells ye. Fie Mr. L'Estrange, this is worse and worse! What? the Members of the Church of England's Communion of Notoriously break a Gospel Precept, as to come to a So help me God, with a Lie in their Mouths, and a Reserve in their hearts; to play the Hypocrite, and that too, even with Oaths; and to do so Impious an Ill that Good may come of it?  
What a Stir is here about nothing? My Reasoning lies thus: If it comes to a Push, the Enemies of the Successor will undoubtedly have recourse to their old Practice of Imposing an Oath of Abjuration, for the securing of themselves in their Usurped Possessions: And if any (say I) shall be so weak, or so wicked, as to take it, It will only serve for a Spur to their Revenge, so soon as they shall meet with a fair opportunity to Break it, without any obligation upon them at all to the contrary. So that I do not say, either that it is Lawful to take such an Oath, or that any Church of England-men will Submit to do it; but that whoever shall be so far Prevailed upon, will find himself both bound in Conscience to break it, and Pricked in point of Honour to Avenge himself upon the Imposers of it.  
I would here desire the Reader to wash his Eyes; for the Author is about to show him [one of the most notorious falsehoods averred that ever looked Light i'th' face.] (P. 15.) And this is it. L'Estrange says in the Case of Harry the Great, [The People of France, though Roman Catholics, would not submit to the Dispossessing of a Protestant Successor.] Now says the Character; [The Roman Catholic People of France were so far from admitting this Protestant Successor to the Throne, that 'tis Recorded, they shut their very Gates against him; and so little acknowledged him their King, that the Pope, and the States of France were for setting up no less than Three Competitors against him, etc.  
'Tis very true; the jesuited, and the Rebellious Papists of the League did shut their Gates upon him, as our jesuited Covenanters shut the Gates of Hull, and other places here in England against our Sovereign. But still there was a Party of Honourable, and Loyal Roman Catholics that joined with the Protestants in his Defence, and Support; And if the Author of the Character had not been very much to seek aswell in the Civility as in the History of France, he would never have called that a Point-Blank Falsehood, which has the Best Authority of France to Vouch it for an Unquestionable Truth. And then so many of his Roman Catholick-Subjects adhering to him, notwithstanding the Pope's Declaring against him, makes it a clearer Case that his Holynesses Deposing of an Heretical Prince does not Absolve all Papists from their Allegiance to him. In one word; It was upon that Revolution, with the Papists in France, as it was not long since with the Protestants in England. Those that were Factious, and Seditious, took up Arms against their Prince; and those that were Honest and Loyal, Assisted him.  
He goes on with a Flourish upon the Instance of Sigismond King of Sweden, [In whom (says he) Neither Magnanimity, justice, All the Cardinal virtues that adorned him, nor all the Promising Perfections and Accomplishments of Nature, strengthened with all the Bonds of Protestations, Oaths, or Sacraments, could hold the Headstrong Violence of his Religion.] P. 16.)  
Here is first an Argument drawn from a Particnlar to an Universality; as if, because this Prince broke his Faith; no Popish Prince ever did, or will keep it. Would either the Author of this Character now, or his Deputy take it well to be paid in his own Coin, or by his own Measure? Here's an Opposer, in truth, of his Royal Highness' rather then of a Popish Successor; who to get the fairer blow at his Person has Discharged the Point of Religion. This Opposer (I say) of the Duke of York has let fall many Dangerous words (as is already proved) in his two Characters, against his Majesty's Person, Authority, and the very Frame of the English Monarchy; Does it follow therefore, that All the Adversaries of his Royal Highness are Enemies to the King and Government.  
In the next Page, upon my saying that Expedients had been offered for the Obviating of Difficulties, and for securing the Protestant Religion. [If the Parliament at Oxford (says he P. 17.) were not damnably mistaken, or very Lewdly forgetful, they have declared Nemine Contradicente) that neither they, nor their Predecessors have ever heard or seen one Syllable or such a Frame of Expedients offered them.]  
The Gentleman, under favour, forgets himself, if he means that there never were any such Expedients offered; for this Project of Accommodation was Agitated, and Modified, even in the late Long Parliament. And Expedients have been likewise since Proposed, unto which his Majesty refers himself in his late Declaration, in these words [But contrary to our OFFERS and Expectation we saw that NO EXPEDIENTS would be ENTERTAINED, but that of a Total Exclusion, etc.] P. 6.  
Toward the bottom of the Seventeenth Page, the Character makes an Invidious Descant upon the hopes the Papists had of a Toleration; but not one Syllable of the Persons that started those hopes, nor upon what Interest, and Consideration the Design was set affoot. Now he knows very little of our Affairs, who does not understand that none were so forward and so Importune for the Gaining of the Duke's Assistance toward such an Indulgence, as those very People that are now so Clamorous against his Royal Highness for it. Not that any such Disposition was wrought by his Interest, but they Laboured it however, under that Plausible Pretext; that Provided the Dissenters might be eased on the one side, they would do their best also and Content themselves that the Papists might be eased on the other.  
The Nineteenth Page, smells of the Romance: Second Ajax, Ulysses, Palladium; Troynovant; Tullia, etc. as if the Author were speaking to us by his Deputy: And then toward the bottom of the Page, Enter the True Author again; who (P. 21.) guides his Deputy's hand while he writes these words. [The Author of the Character is a Person so far from laying his hand on his heart, and owing any Benefit to Royal Pardons, or Acts or Oblivion, that I must say this Truth for him, january 48. was passed before he was born.] I would he had taken in the other two Figures (16.) to have told us what Century he speaks of. There was a Gentleman of my acquaintance in the late times, that would needs make himself the Author of Killing no Murder; and had like to have been hanged for his pains, though he never wrote Syllable on't; But if Mr. Deputy has so great a kindness for his Principal, as to take the Character upon him, the Miller's man that was Trussed for his Master, was told I remember, that he could never do his Master better Service.  
The Remainder of his Discourse is almost wholly Foreign to the matter in Question, Insisting Principally upon two Points; the Danger, and the Inconvenience of a Popish Successor; wherein I have declared myself in my first Character (P. 3.) that [I take All his Suppositions of Difficultyes and Hazards in the Case for Granted.] not that I think them so great as he Represents them; but yet admitting them so to be, that very Concession will not do his Business. The second Point is, Whether the Parliament of England, may by the Laws of England Exclude the next heir of the Blood from the Succession of the Crown? upon thi● Question I have thus delivered myself in my Case Put (P. 9) [Some are of opinion For it; others Against it; but the Legality or Illegality of such an Act, is a Point that I am not willing to meddle with either one way or other. For whether the Thing may Lawfully be done or not; there may be Danger yet and Inconvenience in the Putting of the Question.] And so likewise in my first Character (P. 53.) [As to that way which is matter of Parliamentary Cognizance I reckon it my Duty to Acquiesce in the Legal Issue of their Debates; as an Authority to which I have ever paid a Duty and Veneration.] So that it would be utterly superfluous to spend Time, and Words, upon an Argument wherein I can for Quietness and for brevity sake allow him his ask, and preserve the main of the Cause still untouched. But for such Passages as fall in by the by; and properly within the Compass of my Design, I shall take such notice of them as I find Pertinent to my Purpose.  
In the 24th. Page, he makes his Gloss upon that Clause in the Oath of Allegiance where we swear to be faithful to the King's Lawful Heirs and Successors. [There's nothing in that Oath (says he) that binds them to the Person but to the Thing; to no Particular man, any further than he is Heir and Successor; Lawfully so; and no man truly is either Heir or Successor, till he Inherits, and Succeeds.  
Now if this Clause binds us not to the Person, but to the Thing; We swear Fidelity Previously to the Right, which takes place before the Succession.  
In the Lowest Line of this Page, he Lodges the Absolute Power of the Law in the Three Estates in Parliament. And P. 25. Expounds this Position, under the notion of the Higher Powers of England; King Lords and Commons; which is a Flat denial of the King's Sovereign Power. And since he is pleased to set up a new form of Government, He should do well to furnish us with a New Oath of Supremacy too: That instead of Declaring the King's Highness to be the only Supreme Governor of this Realm; We may Swear Faith and True Allegiance to King, Lords and Commons, and to their Highness' Lawful Heirs and Successors. This Coordinate Imagination was the Main Pillar of the Late Rebellion.  
See what Work he makes now upon these following words in my (First Character. P. 60.) With Reverence to the Utility and Constitution of good and wholesome Laws, it is not presently to Cite a Statute, or say there's a Frecedent, for those Laws, that are Repugnant to the Light of Nature and Common Right, are Nullities in themselves.  
Now (says he.) Here's one of the boldest Master-strokes of the Pen that ever came in Print. This Point once gained, All the Protestant Laws since the Reformation, and the whole Fabric of the Present Government, are Totally Subverted. 'Tis but a Popish Successor believing and maintaining that all the Protestant Laws ever since Harry the Eight's Perversion, are against the Light of Nature, and Consequently, Nullityes in themselves.  
His Logic, I perceive, is all of a piece: If one Popish Prince be a Tyrant, or a Faith-breaker, All MU be so. If one Statute BE found against Common Right, therefore All MAY BE so. And then, what fear, (I say) of a Popish Successors Damning All Protestant Laws, when 'tis a Known Rule that the Judges are the only interpreters of the Law? But These Possible Nullityes will find better Quarter perhaps from Walker, then from L' Estrange; and therefore I shall refer Mr. Deputy to the History of Independency, Pag. 116. 117. Printed at London 1648. The Authority of the judges is judicative; whose Office is (upon Cases brought before them) to determine whether an Act be Binding or no: (For Acts of Parliament against Common Right, Repugnant, or Impossible, are Void: Coke 8. fol. 118. Dr. and Student. L. 1. C. 6.) and to expound the Meaning, and Signification of the Words of such Act.] Mr. Walker was a man of Law, and Abilities; and far from a stickler, either for Prerogative, or Popery: Nay, even a Borderer upon Coordination itself. But yet he brings himself off, with a Distinction, from the point which our Author swallows Whole. It is most certain (says the Other, Pag. 116.) that when the Three Estates in Parliament have passed any Act, Their Power Determins, as to that Act; and then, the Authority of the judges Begins. And whereas the Character (Pag. 25.) calls King, Lords, and Commons, the Higher Powers of England, without any more ado; Mr. Walker qualifyes it, (Pag. 117.) [Though this Kingdom (says he) has always been Ruled by King, Lords, and Commons; yet by the King Architectonicè, and the other Two Organicè; the King as the Architect, the Lords and Commons as his Instruments; Each in his proper Sphere of Activity, without interfering: And till This again come in use, look for no Peace.] This was the Principle of 41. and 42. brought off as well as the matter would bear.  
From hence he proceeds upon the agitation of the Question of Disinheriting; which (as I have said before) is nothing at all to my business; nor of any moment in the least to the deciding of this Controversy, till all other Rubs and Difficulties that lie in the way to't shall be first cleared: and especially that undeniable Impediment of the King's Refusal; which must be allowed on all hands (whether the thing may be Lawfully done, or not) to be an Obstacle not to be Disputed, or Opposed.  
The Character-maker, (Pag. 26.) finding himself pinched, upon the Doctrine of Passive Obedience, according to the Practice and Precept of the Primitive Times, and the very Text of Holy Writ itself; brings himself at last to this Notable Resolution of parting with his Religion rather than his Argument.  
The Correspondence (says he, P. 26.) between Ours and the Primitive Christians Case is here so incoherently balanced, [by L' Estrange,] that never were Arguments more Fantastical. The Primitive Christians preached Obedience to Nero; Yes, and they had forfeited their Christianity, if they had done otherwise. But what was that Nero? An Absolute Monarch: And what those Primitive Bishops? Not such as Ours; they were not a part of the Legislative Power of the Nation, as Our Prelates are. If Nero invented Racks, Tortures, and Gibbets, for Persecuting or murdering the poor Christians; he did it by his own uncontrollable Authority; nor were those Primitive Bishops called to make Laws, and therefore had not the Lawful power of the least Vote in moderating of Nero's Cruelty, or in redress of the Christians Torments.  
The Author begins now, to speak English. First, he slips in the difference of the Case betwixt an Absolute, and a Limited Monarch. 'Tis true; the One Acts according to his Pleasure; the Other is so far bounded by Rules, and Laws, that it is a Violation of Honour, and Conscience, in Ordinary Cases, to pass those Limits. But what is all this to the Subjects Obedience? For 'tis as much Rebellion, in Them, to take up Arms, contrary to Law, against a Limited Monarch that plays the Tyrant; as against an Absolute Prince that Governs by his Own Will: For the Duty of the Subject is the same to the One, as to the Other; unless there be some clear and explicit Provision, or Stipulation in the Government, to the Contrary. And his Other Shift, upon the Difference betwixt Their Bishops and Ours, looks as if Mr. Deputy had written that out of his own Mother-wit, without consulting his Oracle: For how should that Diversity of the Case operate upon the point of Passive Obedience, to make it more or less a Duty? He has but one way in the world, that I can see, to support his Argument; and that must be by destroying his Cause: For if there be no more than this in't that the Primitive Bishops had no Votes in Parliament, which our Prelates have, his Meaning is, that when they come once to Vote in Parliament, they Act no longer in the condition of Subjects; which is a further Explanation of himself upon a Coordinate State: Only I think he had as good have kept himself under the Blind of a Legislative Power, without Translating it into the Power of MAKING LAWS; For though the Two Houses may be properly said to Make, or to Prepare Bills; yet the making of Laws is the Sole Privilege of the Supreme Magistrate. If by what he says of the Power (or Right rather) of moderating Votes, he intends only Offices of Mediation, or Council; so far, 'tis well enough: but if he stays there, 'twill never do his business; for there must be Resolution also, and Action, as well as debate, and Advice; and that's the thing he does more than intimate he would be at, in the remaining part of this Paragraph.  
We are not (says he pag. 30) to wait Gods further Pleasure, and Providences to come, with so entire a Resignation, till we neglect a Lawful Preservation, when approaching Ruin Threatens us.  
The Question (with the Author's favour) is not the neglecting of Lawful means, but whether the Expedient here under Consideration be Lawful, or not: And the Writer of the Character is so candid, as in the next Clause to come within a very little of agreeing with L' Estrange, in the Negative. [However (says he) that the Author's Opinion may not appear so strangely Enormous, nor his Passion so wholly destructive to Government, and so opposite to Christianity as his Answer would render it, let us make a little Explanation of the Character, etc.] But he does yet, in the same Page, declare himself, that Passive Obedience may be laid aside, under the Tyranny of a Popish Succession; That is to say, It is Lawful for Protestant Subjects to Resist a Popish Prince, in the Actual Possession of his Authority, and Government: For so he expounds himself (P. 27.) upon the word Successor. No man (says he) truly is either Heir, or Successor, till he Inherits, and Succeeds.  
And then he palliates the matter over again (pag. 31.) whatsoever Passive Obedience (says he) is due to our Native Prince we have none due to a Foreign Invader; and 'tis a plain case, that the Pope's Supremacy entering into England is an Invading, and Usurping Regality.  
How the Opinion of a Prince shall discharge Subjects of their Obedience to Laws, I cannot imagine; Or by what Right one sort of People under the same Government shall pretend to Overrule another in such a Case. Or I would fain know, whether upon the same Ground they may not alter the Form of the Government as well as destroy the Lawful Successor. Or, in one word, is not the Government already overthrown, and all the Laws, ipso facto, dissolved in this very Position? Those Laws that have made us the Envy of the Christian world, and the Glory and Bulwark of the Reformation. And again; if the People may be Judges in This Case, they may, upon the same pretence, be Judges in any Other; and as well exterminate a Prince for any other Reason, as for his Religion. 'Tis but for Mr. Deputy to tell the People, that the King himself is not fit to Govern; and what has his Majesty to expect, but to march after his Brother? Grant but this Point, that the Multitude (who are, in effect, Hands without Heads) shall overrule the Laws; where are we then, but in a state of Horror and Confusion, and Effectually in the Possession of One Hell upon Earth as the Earnest of Another; without any Religion at all, and every one's Knife at the throat of his Brother? But am I a Subject to the King's Religion or his Title? Or where shall I find the Rules, and Bounds of my Civil Duty? In the Law? Or, in the Character? The Law makes my Allegiance, Absolute; the Character makes it Conditional: The Law binds me to be True to his Majesty, his Lawful Heirs and Successors, without any regard to This, or That Religion; the Character discharges me in case any of them should happen to be Papists.— [Magno judice se quisque tuetur.] King, Lords, and Commons are of One Opinion, and Mr. Deputy, of Another. The Law obliges me, upon pain of Life and Estate; and the Gospel upon pain of Damnation: But than comes the Author of the Character, with the Serpent's Dispensation in his Mouth, and supersedes all. Hath God said ye shall not eat of every Tree of the Garden? And the Woman said unto the Serpent, We may eat of the Fruit of the Trees of the Garden; but of the Tree which is in the midst of the Garden, God hath said, ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye Touch it, lest ye Dy. And the Serpent said unto the Woman, ye shall not surely Die; for God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, Then Your Eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as Gods, knowing Good and Evil. Gen. 3.] There's no great Disproportion either in the Appetite, or Temptation. There's the Voice of God in both cases, on the One hand, and the Voice of the Serpent on the Other.  
[I cannot find (he says) by this Text, By Me Kings reign, etc. But that By Me Subjects possess their Lawful Inheritance, might Claim the same Right. P. 32.]  
The Question is not, the Kings Dispossessing Subjects of their Lawful Inheritance, but the Subjects Disspossessing a Prince of his Lawful Birthright; And by his Argument, Popish Subjects may be Dispossessed as well as a Popish Successor, and Fanatical Subjects too as well as Popish; If a point of Occasional or Preventional Prudence shall overrule a Positive Law: And according to his Descant, By me Kings are DEPOSED (that a House of Commons may Reign) is as good Divinity as By me King REIGN, though the One is a matter of Divine Institution, for the Comfort of mankind in General, and the other only a Divine permission for the Punishment of some Particular Princes or People. And see now how Extravagant an Instance he has brought in for his support.  
Nor can I perceive (says he Ibid.) that there lies so much Stress in Gods giving the Government of the Earth, Man, and Beast, unto whom it seemed meet unto him, as to Nebuchadnezzer in the Text, but that a MENE, MENE, TEKEL, VPHARZIN, written by the Almighty's own hand against his Impious Heir, the Sacrilegious, Idolatrous Belshazzar was as much the word of God, and had as much Divine Institution in it as By me Kings reign.  
His Application here, is not only Rude, and Impertinent, to the Highest Degree; but the Argument flies directly in the face of him; unless he can show such another Handwriting upon the Wall, against his R. Highness, as is here produced against Balshazzar: Beside that the Intervening of an Almighty Power in the Case, does as good as tell us that the Disinheriting of Princes is a privilege Reserved, by God, Peculiarly to Himself.  
He proceeds (P 33.) to Invalidate (as he pretends) the Chief Argument of all my Discourse, and the Fundamental Design of my whole Pamphlet, viz. The Un-alterable Right of Succession.] And advances, Confounding Extraordinary, with Common Cases.  
Now so far am I from laying the Stress of my Discourse upon that Text, that I have Industriously Declined the Question, as the last Article to be handled in this Controversy. And then he spoils the Cause with the very eagerness of defending it, by drawing Conclusions from God's Unaccountable Actings, upon Immediate Revelation, or Direction, to the Practices of men that are under certain Common, and Indispensable Rules and Methods of Obedience and Government [So Timely a Care (says he p. 34.) did the Great Founder of Empires, the Divine Omnipotence take, to show that the Dispensations of Majesty, for his People's good, and his own Glory, were to be preferred before the Sovereignty of Birth, that Blinder Gift of Chance.]  
This does only prove that God Reserves to himself a Freedom of Dispensing with his own Laws, but not the least shadow of any such Power Delegated to the People, to Dispense with God's Laws; and let any man Consider, whether is the more Competent Provision for the Glory of God, and the Good of his People, that men should be Tied up, though (with some Inconvenience) under God's Appointment, to the Orders of Government, where the Public Peace is preserved, and the Harmony of Humane Society maintained, or to leave the Multitude the Judges of those matters which only belong to the Supreme Magistrate, and at liberty to change Governments and Governors as often as they please, which must Inevitably run into Consequences of Blood and Confusion. And if this be not the thing he would be at, what's the meaning of his recommending the Precedent of the Late King of Portugal to the English, as a Practicable Example.  
Have we not had (says he, Ibid.) a Late King of Portugal Depofed, as Delirious, and Frantic, and Consequently rendered by Law Uncapable of Reigning; and All this done by HIS OWN SUBJECTS, and those of HIS OWN Religion, without the least Reflection of Treason or Rebellion, or the Aspersion of lifting a hand against the Lords Anointed.] As who should say, what a stir is here made about the Duke of York? As if it were such a matter to Exclude a Popish Successor. I'll show ye a way to get quit of the King himself though a Protestant, and in the Legal Exercise of his Authority. But than you'll say there must be Delirium, or Frenzy in the case? Just so much as was found in the Late King will be enough to do the Business. Do but possess the People once that the King is a Papist, and that single Charge of Popery Includes all Inabilityes. For (says our Author Ibid.) There must go so strong a dose of Folly and Madness, or indeed both together to make up the Composition of a Popish Heir to the Protestant Crown of England; Especially an heir that can be so Fond of the Gewgaws, Baubles and Trumpery of Romish Superstition, as to Hazard Three Crowns for them— So that if in Truth he but fairly stood the Test of an Old Statute we have already, the Begging of his Reversion would be so Fesible, that it would be Cross we won, and Pile he lost (P. 35.] Here's a short way of Putting the King as well as the Duke out of Capacity to Govern. First; say that he is a Papist, and then, Beg the Possession of the Crown, as well as the Reversion, for so being.  
We are come now to the End of the Character Complete, which is so far from being a Defence of the first Part against L' Estrange's Papist in Masquerade; that first he has not spoken One Syllable to the Point in Question. 2ly In the very Title of Complete, he does as good as Confess that he has no more to say. And 3ly. he has in the 18th. page of his Second Part Blown up the very Foundation of his Former; and Effectually of his whole Pretence, and Design.  
The Scope of his Discourse is briefly this; First, to Render the Duke as Odious and Dangerous to the Nation, as Art and Malice can make him, by Virulent Reflections upon his Person under the Dreadful Character of a Popish Successor. 2ly, To show from the Precedents of former Times, that it is no new thing for the Supreme Power to Divert the Succession. Now as to the Danger of a Popish Successor; so far was I from Disputing it, that for Quiets sake I gave it for Granted (Papist in Masquerade P. 3.) So that he must not call his Character Complete, A Defence against L Estrange, of what L' Estrange did not oppose. And for the Point of the Succession; I have not said one Word whether it may lawfully be done or not; but on the Contrary, Industriously Declined it; (as I have showed already P. 18.) So that his Mighty Defence is only a Beating of the Air, and a Flourish upon two Topiques out of the Limits of the Controversy: The First Point being out of doors upon the admittance of the Danger; and the Second Postponed out of this regard, that it is a king of a Preposterous Question to inquire whether it may be done or not, if the King would agree to it, before we know whether the King will agree to it or no: And this way of Pressing it, will bear yet a worse Construction, his Majesty having already, and over and over Declared that he cannot in Honour, Justice and Conscience Consent to it.  
As to the Title of the Character Complete, it Expounds itself, in the Concession, that he has said all that he has to say. Nor shall I need to Enlarge upon that Stabbing Contradiction of himself, which I have already noted. (P. 10.) Only in one word I shall recommend it the second time to a Remark. That whereas he Grounds all the Dangers, Terrors and Fatalityes of a Popish Successor upon the Duke's Bigottery in the Romish Religion, he Discharges us (P. 13.) of all those Apprehensions, by a Positive Averrment that the Duke is so far from being a Bigot, that it is his Pride, and not his Conscience makes him a Papist; and that he would rather see the Popedom Perish, then lose his Humour. Wherein first, he dissolves his Argument. 2ly, He betrays himself manifestly to Espouse the Interest of a Faction against his Judgement. And 3ly. He Authorises (in so doing) the Disinheriting of a Prince as well for his Complexion as his Religion.  
And this is not all neither. For after the frighting of the Careless and Impious, with the Fears of Slavery; and the Weak, and Scrupulous, with the Dread of Hell and Damnation (in case of a Popish Successor) Representing the Calamity to be wholly Insupportable; and making it a Point of Conscience, upon what terms soever, to Prevent it; he chalks out to the People such a way for the doing of it as shall much more certainly destroy the King himself and the Monarchy than the Successor. He sets forth the Necessity of doing the thing: His Admiration that the King should Refuse it: How he has lost the Hearts of his People by it; and all the way bespattering his R. Highness, though two thirds of the dirt fall upon his Majesty. Resolving all at last into Two or Three Modest Propositions, upon the Foolery of Passive Obedience, the Fundamental Sovereignty of the Multitude, etc. Upon which Positions, If the Duke be thrown out to day, the King is almost sure to follow him to Morrow. His Reply upon my Exceptions to these Positions is in Effect rather a Yielding of the Cause, than a Defence of it: But such a Yielding, as Discovers only an Impotency (though with Great Good will) of Defending it. This is the Substance of his Discourse, and how far it will be found a Defence of his Former Character against the Papist in Masquerade will best appear, upon Comparing the Reasons, and the Arguments on both Parts.  
It is the main Drift of his Pamphlet to Terrify People into a Dread of his R. Highness, and into Undutiful thoughts toward his Majesty by the Dismal Story's he tells of the Danger of a Popish Successor. Now say I on the other side (P. 3.) It would have been Fair Play in the Character-writer if he had Balanced the Dangers; and told us, This is the Danger One way, and that Another. For First; there are many Dreadful Dangers, which we cannot avoid, but by Incurring Greater: As the Leaping of a Garret Window when the Fire has taken the Staircase; which is only a Prudent Election (under a Calamitous Necessity) of the less Evil of the Two. Now the same Action which would have been a Madness, without that Necessity, becomes an Act of Prudence with it, The Great Danger of the Leap being Warranted by the Greater danger of the Fire.  
Secondly, It happens many times, that we have no other choice before us, but either to suffer the Highest Degree of Misery that can befall us in this world, or else to Prostitute our Souls, for the saving of our skins and Fortunes. Now under such an Exigence as this, let the Prospect of things be never so terrible, we are to oppose the Duty of Christians, of Subjects and of Honest men to all Hazards whatsoever, and patiently to Endure whatever we cannot with Conscience, and Honour, either Resist or Decline: According to the Practice of the Primitive Martyrs who witnessed their Profession with their Blood, as Christians, and submitted as Loyal Subjects without Resistance. So that we are not to Govern ourselves by a naked Speculation of the Perils that we are to Encounter; and the means of Avoiding them; without enquiring into the Consistency of those means with the measures of Conscience and Duty.  
And again (P. 51.) [We shall now Counterpose Dangers to Dangers. Here is a Present Opposed to a Future; A Greater to a Less, and a Protestant King to a Papist. The Present Danger is the Probable Effect of these Intoxicating Methods to the People. If Fancy was Poison to the Multitude under the Late King; the same Fancy in a Larger Doses, and with less Corrective to it, will be at left as strong a Poison to the People under this. So that we are in Forty times a Greater Danger of a Sedition at Hand then of a Popish Successor at a Distance. Now what is there in the Future to weigh against the Life of the King, the Safety of the Church, the Law, Government, and the Peace of the Kingdom? There may Possibly be a Popish King; and there may Probably not. And then (P. 3.) I must Distinguish betwixt the Unhappy Circumstance of being under the Allegiance of a Prince of that Persuasion, who is Actually in Possession, and Exercise of his Power; and the Remote Possibility only of that Danger; And a Possibility too of such a Condition, that a Thousand things may Intervene to Prevent it: As the Contingences of Issue, Survivorship, etc.  
As to the Balance of a Greater Danger and a Less (P. 52.) We'll even take the matter as they suppose. A King upon the Throne that's Principled for Arbitrary Government and Popery; but so Clogged and shackled with Popular and Protestant Laws that if he had never so great a mind to't there is not a Subject in his Dominions, that would dare to serve him in his Design. But on the other hand; there's no King at all, No Church, No Law, No Government, No Magna Charta, no Petition of Right, no Property, no Liberty, etc.  
And again (P 52.) Here's a Protestant Prince Exposed for fear of a Popish one. Is the Chimaera of a Future Danger of more value to us then the Conscience of an Incumbent, and Indispensable Duty? Shall we take pet at God Almighty's Providence and not go to Heaven at all, unless we may go our own way? Shall we Level a Shot at the Duke at a distance, if there be no coming at him but through the Heart of our Sovereign?  
Moreover (P. 53.) The Diverting or Disappointing of the Succession must be either by Prevention, or by Exclusion.  
If there be danger from a Popish Successor, during his Expectance within the Kingdom; the Danger is Infinitely Greater if he be Driven out of it. For First, (supposing it the People's Act, (which the Character does manifestly allow of rather then fail) there must be an Illegal, and Popular Violence to accomplish it; and there's the Peace of the Government broken already. Beside that the Authors of that Violence can never be secure, but by following it with More, and Greater. And this comes presently to be a natural Transition from a Murmur against a Successor to a Tumult in the State: In which case, the King has only this Choice before him; either to part with every thing for the ask, or to stand the shock of a Rebellion. Now take it either way, Here's much a Greater Mischief Incurred then that we feared: Beside a Standing Army, Taxes and Oaths, that follow in Course; and a new set of Liberty-Keepers, and Major-generalls' to secure the Peace.  
This is the Scene of things at home; and if we look abroad, we shall undoubtedly see the Successors Interest and Reputation increasing daily, in regard of his Sufferings, his Title, and his Religion (P. 54.)  
Now in Case of a Popish King, who is either kept out, or Driven on't, from the Exercise of his Right by the Tumultuary Licence of the Rabble: whether that King makes any Attempt or no, the Nation must be at the Charge, at least of a Defensive War, and of Impositions to maintain it. And this will be the Inconvenience, even in the Bare Prospect of the State of the Nation, without striking a Blow; But from Scotland at least, if not from Ireland too, they must Expect to be Plied with Continual Alarms, till the Insupportable Expense of Guarding the Borders and Coasts, shall make them as Sick of their New Patriots as ever they were of their Old ones; and force them at last to render themselves, and their Spoil, to the Irresistible Conjunction of as many Powers, as will be then Confederate to their Destruction.  
And then comes in the Popery in Earnest, that was dreaded but in Fancy before. When this new King shall, by the Proper Act and forfeiture of a seduced and unforeseeing people, be delivered from the Fetters of both Honour, and Laws. Who brings in Popery then, but they that Discharged him from those Sacred Bonds, by the folly and Contumacy of their own Inconsiderate Undertake? Compare now the Danger of a Popish King bounded by Protestant Laws, and Ruling over a Protestant People, where he may be as happy as an Imperial Crown, and the Affections of his Subjects can make him. Compare I say, a Popish King under these Gracious and Obliging Circumstances, in the Quiet Adminstration of his Government, with a Prince that is forced to make his way with his Sword for the Recovery of his Own; and is not only Pricked on by the Impulses of justice, and Vengeance, but Animated by the Pope himself, and Provoked by Indignation, to take the Utmost Advantage of that Foolish Forfeiture: the People themselves having Cancelled the Bonds of Authority and Obedience. Let any man Compare these two Cases, and then speak his Opinion. (P. 55.)  
And yet once again. If it be reasonable to Believe (as we are often told, and no Mortal can deny it) that our Religion is an Eyesore to the Church of Rome; and that this Island would make a Considerable Addition to our Victorious Neighbours late Conquests, what way in the world could be propounded, more to the Advantage, both of the Crown of France and the Court of Rome, than the bringing of matters to the Issue here in question? When in the Powerful, and Liberal Assistances to this supposed King, for the Regaining of his Own, the One and the Other are but doing of their own business: This Prince, in the mean while, being led to the One by Inclination, and overborne upon the Other by Necessity (Ibid.)  
I shall leave it now to the Reader to Judge how far the Second Character in Reply upon the Papist in Masquerade, may be admitted as a Defence of the Former. It is the Author's design, in both Parts, by Amplifying, and Rhetoricating upon the Dangers of a Popish Successor, to transport the People into the most Desperate Resolutions of Acting & Suffering all Extremities rather than submit to that Inconvenience. Now (as is already said) the Danger of a Popish Successor is a point that I have given for Granted beforehand; and no part of the matter here in Controversy. Nor is the Danger itself (simply considered) of any Concluding Force, in this Case; for First, a Less Danger comparatively must give way to a Greater. 2ly. Let the Danger be never so Great, if we cannot avoid it with Honour, and Conscience, we must resolve to abide it. 3ly. Here is a Certain, and a Greater Danger Incurred for the Avoidance of an Uncertain and a Less. 4ly, Here is a Disturbance wrought in the Present Government of a Protestant King for fear of a Popish King to come. 5ly. his Majesty having Positively, several times Declared, that he cannot in Conscience, or justice agree to the Disinheriting of his Brother, and that therefore He will never do it; the Exclusion of his R. H. which is here aimed at, can never be compassed but by a Rebellion. 6ly. In making a mockery of that which he calls the Bugbear of Passive Obedience, the very Position that seems to be Levelled at the Duke, Destroys the King. 7ly. Upon a Fair Collation of the Public Danger both ways; that of Expulsion, or Exclusion (over and above the Iniquity) is Evidently much Greater than the Admittance of him; and the Ready way to bring in that Popery, and Arbitrary Power, which they Pretend to fear. Beside that it is Manifestly the Project of the Book, and of the Abettors of it, to Reduce This King to the straits of his Late Majesty, and leave him at Last his Father's Game to Play. Upon the due Balancing of these Cases, the main Question depends; and that which he calls a Defence has not one word of Argument upon any of the Passages above Recited; the whole Discourse being rather a Flourish, than a Debate.  
To say nothing of the Dangerous Consequences that may reasonably and probably arrive upon the Agitation of this Question, by exposing the Life of the Present Prince, to a thousand Difficultyes, and Hazards, in the Contemplation of either Preventing, or Establishing the Successor; Whereas in the Regular Course of Order, and Government, there's no place for those Extraordinary Deliberations. And to me it seems to Imply less Veneration for the Sacred Life of a Prince, than we ought to have; if we can with so much Indifference, think of the Death of our Present Sovereign, and yet at the same time enter into Fribbling and Captious Questions about the Successor Nig●am Illam Diem, & Luctusam expectare, Peccare est contra, & C●●iles omnes, & Naturales Leges. Neque certe Disputationem de Regiâ Successione, contra Regis ipsuis Vol●●tatem, Ipse Rege Vivo, Institutam, unquam viri boni probaverunt.  
It is against the Laws both of Nature and of Nations, to stand Calculating, in the Contemplation of that Black, and Dismal Event. Nor did ever any Good man approve of Entering into a Dispute about the next Successor to a Crown, during the Life, and contrary to the Will, of the Royal Incumbent. This was the Judgement of a French Apologist for Harry the 4th. and not without very great reason too; for men grow weary of the Present King; Intent upon the Successor; Enemies to the Government in Being, as Placing their thoughts and Fortunes wholly upon the Reversion: Insomuch, that they look upon themselves at last as (Effectually) the Subjects of Another jurisdiction; and Contract a False, and pernicious Interest in the removal of their Sovereign. And it is not all neither, that they are Transported by the hopes of Advantage, and Preferment, into These Undutiful Deliberations; but when they are once In▪ and Pinched betwixt the Dread of Revenge from the Injured Successor, on the One hand, and of Legal justice from an Embroiled Government on the Other; there's no Retreating: Nor any other way left them, then to attempt the saving of themselves by a Common Ruin. How miserable now is the Condition of that State, when all these Devils of Avarice, Ambition, D●spair, and jealousy, are let loose upon the Government.  
Now there is none of these Hazards or Difficultyes, upon the Succession of a Prince that comes to the Crown by a Right of Descent, where the Government is quietly Devolved upon him by the Gentle Methods of Providence, without the Irregular, and Tumultuary favour of the People; and without any Eccentrick Motions, or Passions, to the Peril or Detriment of the Public. Nay the very Enquiry was looked upon by Antiquity, as a thing so Impious & Undutiful, that the fifth Council of Toledo Punished the very Question, [who should Succeed to the Crown after the Death of the King?] with Excommunication; and that Decree was Confirmed also by the next following Council. Not but that a man may love the King and the Government, and yet out of a misguided Zeal Oppose the Succession. But there is also a Designing, a Spiteful, and Seditious Mixture even in that Composition; as appears by the Writings and Practices that are Employed in favour of that Interest. First, as to the Designing Part, the Cause is not managed according to the Peaceable Methods of Charity and Religion; but in such a manner, as to Irritate and Inflame the Multitude by Arguments rather of Terror, then of Reason. 2ly, the spite, and Malice of the Humour shows itself manifestly in this; That they are little better than Stark mad upon the striking of them in that Vein, and forget what they Owe to the Heir of the Crown; the Character of an Illustrious Prince; to the Brother of their Sovereign, to the Bravery, the Virtues, and the Services of his Person; to the Honour, the Safety, and Tranquillity of their Country; to the Clemency, Conscience, and justice of a Protestant Prince; to the Dignity of their Profession; and to the Duty of Subjects. They cast off all Respects to Modesty and Good Manners, in their Ribaldry, and Revile; and lay themselves so open in these Intemperate Outages, that they might with a better Grace Expose themselves naked in the Marketplace. He that shall compare this way of Descending, or Propagating Religion, with the Rules and Precepts of the Gospel, will easily satisfy himself of what Spirit they are. Lastly, the Seditious Intent of the Libels that have been Published upon this Subject, is as Clear as the Light; for at the same time, while they are hammering into the People's Heads a dread of the Succession, they are likewise. Practising upon the Honour of the King, and Undermining the Monarchy. For what's the Reason of our Scribblers Insisting so obstinately upon this Particular; but First; as a Point which the People will most probably take fire at. And 2ly, as a thing which they are sure beforehand his Majesty neither can, nor will ever Consent to? And from hence, they take their Rise to a Deliberation how the Business may be done without him: till by foft, and Insensible Degrees, they Screw the Government off the Hinges.  
The First Clamour is against the Successor, for fear of Popery; and against the King himself upon the Rebound, for not going their way to work to Prevent it. Their next Complaint is either for want of, or for Fruitless Parliaments, and nothing can be more Scandalous, or Dangerous, to his Majesty, than these two Calumnies. So soon as they have wrought upon the People to Think ill of the King, their next work is to Dispose them toward the Treating of him ill: And this is done by Provocation, and Persuasion: for it is a Fair step toward the making of a man believe it Lawful to do a thing, if he can but be brought to have a Mind to do it. By Remonstrances, and Appeals, they Compass the Former; and then by Positions, and False Principles Insinuate the Other. It is First the King's Duty, they say, to Call Annual Parliaments. 2ly. To let those Parliaments sit till they have Redressed all Grievances. 3ly. They Infer from hence, that the Common Hall is to Prescribe both the Time, and the Business for these Parliaments. 4ly. That the King is made for the People, and not the People for the King; and therefore what he will not, they may, and must. 2ly, that Passive Obedience is a Bugbear; And Defensive Arms Lawful in the Case of Popery, and Religion. 6ly, It is but Cares or janeways declaring, that the Clapping up of the Protestant joiner is a Levying of War, upon the Commoners of England, and the Business is done. To Conclude, What is the Upshot of all this Libelling Contest, but to set up a Popular Faction, under Colour of Opposing a Popish Successor, and at the Instance of a Pragmatical Club of Mutineers, to put Three Kingdoms again in a Flame, for the Roasting of their Eggs?  
The End.