● DIALOGUE between a Divine of the Church of England, and a Captain of Horse, concerning Dr. Sherlock's late Pamphlet, Entitled, The Case of Allegiante due to Sovereign Powers stated, etc.  divine. 
— 'TIS your opinion then, that it had been better that the Doctor had never set Pen to Paper upon the Subject.  Capt. 
Much better, doubtless, with a ●●spect to his own Credit, and the Reputation of the Cause 〈◊〉 has at length espoused.  Diu. 
Thus far I agree with you, that unless he could have ●●tified his own doing upon Principles more honourable to 〈◊〉 Methods and Instruments of the late Revolution, he ●●ght to have kept his Thoughts within his own Breast, 〈◊〉 more Reasons than one. I think he should not, at this 〈◊〉 of the day, have published a Book, which, whatever 〈◊〉 Design of it was, can have no better Effect, than to ren●●r all those who (if I may so say) lent an early Assistance to providence in its first Motions towards the thorough Settlement 〈◊〉 talks of, to be no better than a Company of— One ●●rd in your Ear.  Capt. 
True, however we have an Act of Grace, which, 〈◊〉 I remember, pardons us all to the Sixteenth of May last.  Diu. 
Right; and if we had not then a thorough Settle●●nt, the Doctor may chance to come in for a Snack yet, 〈◊〉 the score of his Congratulatory Visit, etc.  Capt. 
No, the Doctor tells ye, pag. 17. If the generality 〈◊〉 the Nation submit to such a Prince (i. e. a Prince, accord●●● to his supposition, wanting a Legal Right,) and place 〈◊〉 on the Throne, and put the whole Power of the Kingdom 〈◊〉 his hands; though it may be, we cannot yet think the Providence of God has settled him in the Throne, while the disposited Prince has also such a formidable Power, as makes the 〈◊〉 very doubtful; yet if we think fit to continue in the kingdom, under the Government and Power of the new Prince, 〈◊〉 are several Duties, which we ought to pay him. And 〈◊〉 he proceeds to enumerate all the Duties that can fall ●●thin the compass of any Charge that can be made against himself upon the account of any thing he did antecedent to what he calls a thorough Settlement.  Diu. 
So that the Doctor, I find, is very careful to save one.  Capt. 
But not to hang up the rest I hope.  Diu. 
No, no, he leaves 'em to the King's Mercy under a mild Government.  Capt. 
But who will he have then to be the true Objects of his Prince's Bounty, I would fain know; for it seems to me, that according to the Doctor's Notions, there are but a very few.  Diu. 
Why, the fewer the better cheer, Man. He'll meet with the less opposition whenever he shall think fit to stand Candidate for any farther Preferment; for all Mankind will agree, that those that do the most that can be expected from them according to the strictest Principles of Loyalty and Obedience, Pag. 16. are preferable in that Point to all others.  Capt. 
Ay, and doubtless they are.  Diu. 
Well, and for a plain Direction to Subjects in all the Revolutions of Government, he lays down this, The most (says he) that can be expected from them, according to the strictest Principles of Loyalty and Obedience, is to have no hand in such Revolutions, or to oppose them as far as they can, and not to be hasty and forward in their Compliances; but when such a Revolution is made, and they cannot help it, they must reverence and obey their new Prince, as invested with God's Authority. Ibid.  Capt. 
I am not like to be a Colonel then, during this Reign; for when King James had such a formidable Power as made the event doubtful, I taking the King of Great Britain to be my lawful King, 'tis well known that I assisted him all that I could at the Boyn.  Diu. 
And as to Swearing and Praying, and all that,— 'tis as well known that I did what became me as early as the most forward of them all, and therefore, Woe is me, I am utterly excluded, according to the Doctor, from all hopes of a Bishopric.  Capt. 
Don't despond, my Friend, however; for I presume an honest Man may yet be allowed to tell the Doctor to his face, That our King, and his Royal Consort Q. Marry, have a Right, a true and indisputable Right, not only to what they possess at present, but to what they claim, and is forcibly detained from them by the Rebels.  Diu. 
What need you be so earnest tho? Let me beg of you, Noble Captain, to moderate your Zeal for the King's Honour and Service a little at present, that you may the better attend to the Doctor, who says again, That many of those who have writ in defence of the new Oath, have supposed this, that a Legal Right is necessary to make Allegiance due, and therefore have endeavoured to justify the Legal Right of K. William and Q. Mary. Pag. 1.  Capt. 
Well, but what Effect had those Endeavours towards his late Conversion?  Diu. 
None at all, it seems; for in the same breath he tells us, That How well soever such Disputes may be intended, they are certainly needless in this Cause, and serve only to confound it, by carrying Men into such dark Labyrinths of Law and History, etc. as very few know how to find their way out of again, Ibid. & Pag. 2.  Capt. 
He's an admirable Advocate the while, to betray his Cause thus at the first dash, by telling the World in effect, that we have neither Law nor Precedent to support it.  Diu. 
Nay, if the Doctor does not play Booty, I don't understand him; for let but the foundation-Claim of Legal Right be once removed, and our glorious Superstructure must infallibly come to the ground; for what any one wrongfully possesses (be it a Crown or a Cottage) most Men will think aught to be restored to the right Owner. And what if none of those many Writers he talks of, have been so happy in their Endeavours to justify the Legal Right of K. W. and Q. M. as a body might wish, does it become him to declare so to all the World? And over and above, to lay an Embargo, as it were, upon all future Attempts of that kind? We have known how fruitless, for a long time, the Endeavours of some Men to prove the Original Contract, were rendered by the contrary Endeavours of others, till Time, that brings all things to light, has made it as plain and legible as now it appears. Now I myself (I speak it without Vanity) dare undertake to produce Law and History enough in half an hour, not only to justify his Majesty's late doings, which some Men seem to take so much pleasure in censuring, but to free all the honest Loyal Party from that Reproach they have laboured under from the beginning of the late Troubles to this day, upon the score of their Duty to their King and Country.  Capt. 
Explain yourself a little however, that I may know what King you mean, and who those are which in your esteem are the honest Loyal Party.  Diu. 
That is such an odd Question now, when the Doctor tell's us, Pag. 14. (how consistently with himself it matters not) that we can have but one King at a time; but to humour you for once, by King I mean a Lawful King; or if you had rather have it in Latin, a King de jure, which I take our King to be; and by honest Loyal Party, I mean those who have in all times, even in the worst of times, strictly adhered to such their Lawful King, in opposition to all the injurious Claims and Pretences of Oliver, the Rump, Monmouth, and the like.  Capt. 
I understand you now. But 'tis hard to say what the Doctor would be at; for after he had led us out of the dark Labyrinths of Law, etc. and put us under the conduct of Providence, and Pag. 17. taught us to follow Her step by step, in such sort as to proportion our Duties of Allegiance to all her Events, and to take for the Object of those Duties any Powers whatever (though destitute of all Legal Right) so settled (no matter by what means) as may agree with his Definition of thorough settled Powers, Pag. 9 After all this, I say, the Doctor (having probably found more Difficulties in Providence, than that one which he mentions, Pag. 32.) brings us back again into the dark Labyrinths of Law.— I hope he means us no harm.  Diu. 
No, no, we ought to judge charitably.  Capt. 
However, let us walk warily the while.  Diu. 
Ay, where are we now?  Capt. 
Why the Doctor says, Pag. 54. that what Prince we must obey, and to what particular Prince we must pay our Allegiance, the Law of God does not tell us, but this we must learn from the Laws of the Land; And so he proceeds, Ibid. to state the Question, whether the Subjects of England (when such a Case happens) must pay their Allegiance to a King de jure, who is dispossessed of his Throne; or to the King de facto, who is possessed of it without a Legal Right?  Diu. 
But to whose Determination will he submit that Point?  Capt. 
He tells you in effect by a pair of other Questions, Ibid. Is it not (says he) most reasonable to think that to be the sense of the Law, which learned Judges and Lawyers have agreed is the sense of it? And again, Is it not reasonable to take that to be the sense of the Law, which has been the sense of Westminster-Hall, and is like to be so again, if we think fit to try it.  Diu. 
He had done well though to have told us, whether by his Learned Judges—  Capt. 
Take heed how you step— there's a what d'ye call't, a Trap or a Pitfal, or something like it, just before ye. Lend me your hand,  Diu. 
Thanks good Captain— Now I see my way. But as I was saying, the Doctor had done well to have told us, whether by his Learned Judges he would have us to understand Judges de facto or de jure? For who knows but by his Learned Judges who have agreed, etc. he may mean Bradshaw and his Companions, and by his Learned Lawyers that Cook who pleaded in quality of Solicitor before the High Court of Justice, so called, and Prideaux and the rest of that Tribe of Mercenaries to the Usurpers of those times many of whom (it cannot be denied) were sufficiently Learned.  Capt. 
But I think they had no Honesty to spare, 
For 'tis well known that Glynn and M— d  
To make good Subject's Traitors, strained hard.  
Hudib. in MS.   Diu. 
The Doctor you see has not made Honesty a necessary Qualification to Authorize the judgements or determinations of his Judges and Lawyers: But if he had, 'tis all one to him, for according to his Notions those Sparks were very honest Fellows; they acted by Commissions from the then Powers who, according to his account of the matter, were through settled Powers, and the Ordinance of God, to whom all Allegiance was due, and which ought not to be resisted. Now though the Doctor would not be thought a friend to the Usurpations of the Rump Parliament, the Late Protector, or Committee of Safety, etc. but in his Preface, and in some other parts of his Book, seems to cast them all off, yet to the Objection pag. 45, 46. that upon his Principles we might submit and swear to a Rump Parliament, or to another Protector, or to a Committee of Safety, etc. and that his Principles arraign all the Opposers of those Usurpations as the Resisters of God's Ordinance, etc. He gives such an Answer you'll see as effectually acknowledges them all to have been God's Ordinance, which ought to have been complied with and not resisted, his Answer is, that it is a great prejudice, but no Argument; for if these Principles be true, (says he) and according to these Principles they (the Loyal Nobility, Gentry, and Clergy) might have complied with those Usurpations; that they did not, is no confutation of them. It is plain, I think, by this that the Doctor himself found that he could not support his Argument upon any other Principles than would justify those Powers, and Arraign the honest Loyal Nobility, Gentry, and Clergy, etc. as resisting God's Ordinance by their Opposition to those Usurped Powers, and their attempts to restore their King to his Throne.  Capt. 
Well, But he can't expect to top upon many the Judgements and Opinions of the Judges and Lawyers of those times, for an Authentic Sense of Westminster-Hall.  Diu. 
Where will he be then? for if he means public Judgements or Opinions of any who either have sat, or do fit as Judges in any of the Courts at Westminster by K. W's. Commission, or any Opinions of Lawyers delivered at any of the Bars of those Courts before them, in favour of his Doctrine in this Point, he should have cited one Case at least; since most People, I presume, are Strangers to any such Judgement given in Westminster-Hall during this Reign, and do think that if the Doctor at any time since the New Oath was appointed to be taken, could have found his way from the Temple to Westminster-Hall, whither he is so ready now to direct others, some of the Learned there might have told him another Story. And if he means by his has been agreed, etc. and has been the sense of Westminster-Hall some Judgement or Sentence given in Westminster-Hall, antecedent to the Usurpations upon King Charles I. and II. in favour of Submission and Obedience to any Powers de facto, not having Legal Right, 'tis probable such Judgement was extant in Print before the Trial of the Regicides, who might then have offered it in their own defence, and if that they did not was owing to their Ignorance of the Law, it may however be reasonably supposed that some of the many Honourable Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer, Learned in the Law, before whom they were tried, would have found it out, and accordingly have directed the Jury to have acquitted them from the crime of High Treason, of which they were Indicted; for doubtless if Powers no otherwise settled than according to his account of a thorough Settlement, page 9 have God's Authority, are his Ordinance, etc. then those by whose Commission the Regicides acted, being such settled Powers, had God's Authority too, were his Ordinance, etc. aught to have been submitted to and obeyed, and consequently the Actings of those Regicides, etc. were warrantable and Legal, though their Masters were Usurpers, for want of a Legal Right to Govern, what can he say to it?  Capt. 
No more, I think, than what in effect he said before pag. 46. That this is a great Prejudice, but no Argument, for if his Principles be true and according to his Principles, those who sat as Judges in the High Court of Justice, and their Assistants at the Trial of King Charles I. did no more than became them to do, and so ought to have been acquitted; that they were not is no confutation of his Principles: For if Learned Judges, and Lawyers have agreed, etc. And if it has been the Sense of Westminster-Hall, etc. And if that be the Sense of the Law, and is like to be so again if we think fit to try it; that it was not sufficiently urged or insisted upon in their favour, and that they were not acquitted does not prove that it might not have been so urged and insisted upon in their favour, or that they ought not to have been acquitted. Now though, I am certain the Law condemns all Usurpations whatever upon the Regal Office, yet I will not deny but it has been the constant Sense of Westminster-Hall, under every Usurpation, that all the duties of Allegiance ought to be paid to the Usurper, but not eo nomine, not as Usurper I hope, no those who at any time, by Commissions from Usurpers, have sat as Judges in Westminster-Hall, knew well enough that to admit in the least the Legal Right of their Masters to be disputed, would be to admit their own Authority to fit and determine Causes there to be questioned, and therefore even that same High Court of Justice would have told the Doctor if he had demurred to their Authority, or (which would have been the same thing) to the Legal Right of their Employers, as they told the Blessed Martyr King Charles I. Sir, I must interrupt you; you may not be permitted: you speak of Law and Reason; it is fit there should be Law and Reason, and there is both against you. Dr. nalson's Journal, pag. 44.  Diu. 
The Doctor himself says indeed pag. 44. That it seems to him to be unfit to dispute the Right of Princes; a thing which no Government (he says) can permit to be a Question among their Subjects.  Capt. 
But they might permit it, a body would think, i● (as the Doctor would persuade us) nothing depended upo● it. But the mischief of it is, that all who take upon them to Govern, etc. know that all their claims of Allegiance, or of any duty of Allegiance from the People, do depend upon their Legal Right to Govern them, etc. But what d'y ' say to his Divinity.  Diu. 
Why, I think all the Texts of Scripture that he brings to maintain his Doctrine, will stand him in no more stead than Bishop Overals Convocation-Book, till he has proved tha● every Act done, by force of any Natural Powers which Go● Almighty has given to any one, has God's Approbation merely because by restraining those Powers he could have hindered its execution. And I think the Fellow had received better Instructions than the Dr. would have given him, who being asked who made him? gave this answer, God made me a Man, my Father made me a Tailor, and the Devil made me a Thief.  Capt. 
A fair Distribution! The Man made a Conscience, it seems, of giving the Devil his due.  Diu. 
As every one ought, I think, instead of making the good God the Author of the worst Villainies, committed by the instigation of the Devil, as the Rebels in the late times did, and as many now adays are too apt to do; but then as to what the Doctor says, is like to be the Sense of Westminster-Hall again, if we think fit to try it. I know not, I confess, what may be the Sense of Westminster-Hall in Case his Principles should universally obtain; but the present Sense of Westminster-Hall I believe is against him in some things; he may try his own Cause when he pleases.  Capt. 
Ay, and We'll try ours when we see our own time. But I cannot imagine, I confess, to what end he quotes Dan. 4. 17. For the most High ruleth in the Kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men, page 11. Not having first proved what as you say he ought to have proved.  Diu. 
That you must know was to anticipate an Objection which the Doctor foresaw would arise upon another Text of Scripture which he brings in pag. 35. viz. Hosea 8. 4. They have set up Kings, but not by me; They have made Princes but I knew it not: But you'll pardon me, Captain, that I must take my leave of you a little abruptly, I see a worthy Gentleman there that I must have a word with.  Capt. 
Farewell then.  Divine. 
Adieu.   

LONDON: Printed and are to be sold by Randall Tailor near Stationers-Hall, 1690.