The Augustan Reprint Society

John DrydenHis Majesties Declaration Defended(1681)

With an Introduction byGodfrey Davies

Publication Number 23(Series IV, No. 4)

Los AngelesWilliam Andrews Clark Memorial LibraryUniversity of California1950

GENERAL EDITORSH. Richard Archer, Clark Memorial LibraryRichard C. Boys, University Of MichiganEdward Niles Hooker, University Of California, Los AngelesH. T. Swedenberg, Jr. , University Of California, Los Angeles

ASSISTANT EDITORSW. Earl Britton, University of MichiganJohn Loftis, University of California, Los Angeles

ADVISORY EDITORSEmmett L. Avery, State College of WashingtonBenjamin Boyce, University of NebraskaLouis I. Bredvold, University of MichiganCleanth Brooks, Yale UniversityJames L. Clifford, Columbia UniversityArthur Friedman, University of ChicagoSamuel H. Monk, University of MinnesotaErnest Mossner, University of TexasJames Sutherland, Queen Mary College, London

INTRODUCTION

Wherever English literature is studied, John Dryden is recognized as theauthor of some of the greatest political satires in the language. Untilrecently the fact has been overlooked that before he wrote the first ofthese satires, _Absalom and Achitophel_, he had entered the politicalarena with the prose tract here reproduced. The proof that theHistoriographer Royal contributed to the anti-Whig propaganda of thespring of 1681 depends partly on contemporary or near-contemporarystatements but principally on internal evidence. An article by ProfessorRoswell G. Ham (_The Review of English Studies_, XI (1935), 284-98; HughMacdonald, _John Dryden, A Bibliography_, p. 167) demonstrated Dryden'sauthorship so satisfactorily that it is unnecessary to set forth herethe arguments that established this thesis. The time when Dryden wascomposing his defence of the royal _Declaration_ is approximately fixedfrom the reference to it on June 22, 1681, in _The Observator_, whichhad noted the Whig pamphlet Dryden was answering under the date of May26. 

The bitter controversy into which Dryden thrust himself was theculmination of eleven years' political strife. In 1670, by the secretTreaty of Dover, Charles II and Louis XIV agreed that the English kingshould declare himself a Roman Catholic, and receive from his brother ofFrance the equivalent of 80, 000 pounds sterling and, in case of aProtestant rebellion, 6000 French soldiers. In addition, the two kingswere pledged to undertake a war for the partition of the UnitedProvinces. In the words of the late Lord Acton this treaty is "the solidsubstance of the phantom which is called the Popish Plot. " (_Lectures onModern History_ (1930), p. 211) The attempt to carry out the second partof the treaty was made in 1672, when England and France attacked theUnited Provinces which made a successful defence, aided by a coalitionincluding the Emperor, Elector of Brandenburg, and King of Spain. Theunpopularity of the war compelled Charles II to make peace in 1674. Meanwhile the King had taken a step to put into operation the first partof the Treaty of Dover by issuing a Declaration of Indulgence relievingCatholics and Dissenters alike from the penal laws. He was forced, however, to withdraw it and to give his assent to the Test Act whichexcluded from all public offices those unwilling to take the sacramentsaccording to the rites of the Church of England. Henceforth Charles IIabandoned all hope of restoring Catholicism, though his brother andheir, James, Duke of York, already a convert, remained resolute tosecure at least toleration for his co-religionists. But many Englishmencontinued to suspect the royal policy. 

Roman Catholicism was feared and hated by many Englishmen for twodistinct reasons. The first was based on bigotry, nourished by memoriesof the Marian persecution, the papal bull dethroning Elizabeth, GuyFawkes' Plot, and by apprehensions that a Catholic could not be a loyalsubject so long as he recognized the temporal power of the Pope. Thesecond was political and assumed that Catholicism was the naturalsupport of absolutism. As Shaftesbury, the leader of the opposition, stated, popery and slavery went hand in hand. Such fears were deepenedas the general purport of the Treaty of Dover became known. 

Into this atmosphere charged with suspicion was interjected the PopishPlot, said by Titus Oates and his fellow perjurers to be designed tomurder Charles II and place James on the throne. From September 1678, when Oates began his series of revelations until the end of March 1681, when the King dissolved at Oxford the third Parliament elected under theProtestant furore excited by the Plot, Shaftesbury and his followers hadthe upper hand. The King was obliged to propose concessions to thepopular will and to offer to agree to limitations on the authority of apopish successor. But Shaftesbury was bent on passing the ExclusionBill, which excluded James from the throne and substituted the King'sillegitimate son, Monmouth. Here he made a fatal blunder because healienated churchmen who believed in the divine right of kings, all whosesense of decency was outraged by the prospect of a bastard's elevationto the throne, and the supporters of William of Orange, husband ofMary, the elder daughter of James, and the great opponent of Louis XIV. Also, when it became obvious that the King would not agree to a changein the succession, many feared another civil war with all its attendantdangers of a second military domination. Moreover, the lies of Oates andhis imitators were becoming discredited. 

Though a reaction against the Whigs was beginning, propaganda was neededto disabuse the public of two anxieties--that there was still a dangerthat Roman Catholicism might be restored and that the three dissolutionsmight foreshadow a return to unparliamentary government such as CharlesI had established from 1629 to 1640, also after three dissolutions. Theroyal party was at first on the defensive. Their propaganda began with aproclamation issued on April 8 and ordered to be read in all churches. In the proclamation the King posed as the champion of law and orderagainst a disloyal faction trying to overthrow the constitution. It wasread in churches on April 17 and, according to Luttrell's _BriefHistorical Relation_ (I, 77), "in many places was not very pleasing, butafforded matter of sport to some persons. " Among several replies was oneentitled _A Letter from a Person of Quality to his Friend_. Clearlythere was need to answer this pamphlet and to state more fully the caseagainst the Whigs. This task was undertaken by two of the greatestwriters of English prose--George Savile, then Earl, later Marquis ofHalifax, and John Dryden. Halifax, in the tract lately identified as hisby Hugh Macdonald (Cambridge, 1940), _Observations upon a lateLibel_--though he might scarify an individual opponent like Shaftesburyor pour ridicule upon a sentence from _A Letter_, set himself the taskof answering the Whig case as a whole. The text he dilated upon was:"there seemeth to be no other Rule allowed by one sort of Men, than thatthey cannot Err, and the King cannot be in the Right. " With superb ironyand wit he demonstrated how inconsistent such an attitude was with theconstitution of that day. 

Dryden's tract, _His Majesties Declaration Defended_ is, like the onehe is answering, in the form of a letter to a friend who has asked thewriter's opinion of the _Declaration_ and the answer to it. "I shallobey you the more willingly, " Dryden responds, "because I know you are alover of the Peace and Quietness of your Country; which the Author ofthis seditious Pamphlet, is endeavouring to disturb. " He writes to showthe "goodness and equity" of the Prince, because once they areunderstood, the faction will lose its power and the well-meaning butmisled crowd will be no longer deceived by "the specious names ofReligion and Liberty. " After these introductory paragraphs Dryden beganto reply to the pamphlet point by point. His method is to quote or, morestrictly, partly to quote and partly to paraphrase, a sentence and thenrefute its argument. In so doing he is following the method of theauthor of _A Letter_. Accordingly, to understand and judge the fairnessof Dryden's refutation, it is well first to read _His MajestiesDeclaration_, then _A Letter_, and finally Dryden. The first has notbeen reprinted in full but a substantial extract may be found inEchard's _History of England_ (III, 624-6) and in Arthur Bryant's _TheLetters of Charles II_ (pp. 319-22), the second is available in a notuncommon folio, _State Tracts: being a Collection of several Treatises. . . Privately printed in the Reign of K. Charles II_ (1689), and thethird is here reproduced for the first time. After the perusal of thesethree tracts, the student may well turn to _Absalom and Achitophel_, andfind instruction in comparing the prose and the verse. He may reach theconclusion that while both were written to win converts to the royalcause, the first was designed to weaken the Whig party and the second totake advantage of a tide that had turned to ruin the Whig leaders. (Fora fuller discussion of the relationship of Dryden's tract and his poemsee the writer's article, "The Conclusion of Dryden's Absalom andAchitophel" in the _Huntington Library Quarterly_, X (1946-7), 69-82. )In addition to its historical interest Dryden's tract is a fine specimenof his masculine, vigorous style so well suited to controversialwriting. 

I desire to thank Mr. James M. Osborn, Yale University, for helpfulsuggestions in the preparation of this introduction. 

This facsimile has been made from the copy in the William Andrews ClarkMemorial Library. 

_Godfrey Davies__The Huntington Library_

His Majesties

DECLARATION

DEFENDED:

In a _LETTER_ to a Friend. 

BEING AN

_ANSWER_

TO A

_Seditious Pamphlet_, CALLED

_A LETTER from a Person of Qualityto his Friend_:

CONCERNING

The Kings late Declaration touching the Reasonswhich moved him to Dissolve

THE TWO LAST

_PARLIAMENTS_

AT

_WESTMINSTER_ and _OXFORD_. 

_LONDON:_Printed for _T. Davies, 1681_. 

THEKings DeclarationDEFENDED. 

Sir, Since you are pleas'd to require my Opinion of the Kings Declaration, and the Answer to it, which you write me word was sent you lately, Ishall obey you the more willingly, because I know you are a lover of thePeace and Quietness of your Country; which the Author of this seditiousPamphlet, is endeavouring to disturb. Be pleas'd to understand then, that before the Declaration was yet published, and while it was only thecommon news, that such an one there was intended, to justifie theDissolution of the two last Parliaments; it was generally agreed by theheads of the discontented Party, that this Declaration must be answer'd, and that with all the ingredients of malice which the ablest amongstthem could squeeze into it. Accordingly, upon the first appearance of itin Print, five several Pens of their _Cabal_ were set to work; and theproduct of each having been examin'd, a certain person of Qualityappears to have carried the majority of Votes, and to be chosen like anew _Matthias_, to succeed in the place of their deceas'd _Judas_. 

He seems to be a man cut out to carry on vigorously the designs of thePhanatique Party, which are manifestly in this Paper, to hinder theKing, from making any good impression on his Subjects, by giving themall possible satisfaction. 

And the reason of this undertaking is manifest, for if once the goodnessand equity of the Prince comes to be truly understood by the People, theAuthority of the Faction is extinguish'd; and the well meaning crowd whoare misled, will no longer gape after the specious names of Religion andLiberty; much like the folly of the _Jews_, expecting a _Messiah_ stillto come, whose History has been written sixteen hundred years ago. 

Thus much in general: I will now confider the Cavils of my Authoragainst the Declaration. 

He tells us, in the first place, _That the Declaration seems to him as aforerunner of another Parliament to be speedily call'd:_ And indeed toany man in his right sences, it can seem no other; for 'tis the businessof its three last Paragraphs to inform the People, that noirregularities in Parliament can make the King out of love with them:but that he looks upon them as the best means for healing the distempersof the publick, and for preservation of the Monarchy. 

Now if this seems clearly to be the Kings intention, I would ask whatneed there was of the late Petition from the City, for anotherParliament; unless they had rather seem to extort it from his Majesty, than to have it pass for his own gracious action? The truth is, therewere many of the Loyal Party absent at that Common Council: and thewhole strength of the other Faction was united; for it is the commonfailing of honest men to trust too much in the goodness of their cause;and to manage it too negligently. But there is a necessity incumbent onsuch as oppose the establish'd Government, to make up with diligence, what they want in the justice of their undertaking. This was the trueand only reason why the majority of Votes was for the Petition: but ifthe business had not been carried by this surprise, My Lord Mayor mighthave only been troubled to have carried the Addresses of _Southwark_, &c. Of another nature: without his offering them with one hand, and theCity Petition with the other; like the Childrens play of, This Millgrinds Pepper and Spice; that Mill grinds Ratts and Mice. 

In the next place he informs us, _That if has been long the practice ofthe Popish and Arbitrary Party, that the King should call, frequent, short, and useless Parliaments, tell the Gentry, grown weary of thegreat expences of Elections, should sit at home, and trouble themselvesno more but leave the People expos'd to the practices of them, and oftheir Party; who if they carry one House of Commons for their turn, willmake us Slaves and Papists by a Law_. 

_Popish_ and _Arbitrary_, are words that sound high amongst themultitude; and all men are branded by those names, who are not forsetting up Fanaticism and a Common-wealth. To call short and uselessParliaments, can be no intention of the Government; because from suchmeans the great end of Settlement cannot be expected. But no Physiciancan command his Physick to perform the effects for which he hasprescrib'd it: yet if it fail the first or second time, he will not inprudence lay aside his Art, and despair of his Patient: but reiteratehis Medicines till he effect the cure. For, the King, as he declareshimself, is not willing to have too hard an Opinion of theRepresentatives of the Commons, but hopes that time may open their eyes, and that their next meeting may perfect the Settlement of Church andState. With what impudence can our Author say, _That an House of Commonscan possibly be so pack'd, as to make us Slaves and Papists by a Law?_for my part I should as soon suspect they would make themselvesArbitrary, which God forbid that any Englishman in his right sencesshould believe. But this supposition of our Author, is to lay a mostscandalous imputation upon the Gentry of _England_; besides, what ittacitly insinuates, that the House of Peers and his Majesty, (withoutwhom it could not pass into a Law, ) would suffer it. Yet without suchArtifices, as I said before, the Fanatique cause could not possiblysubsist: fear of Popery and Arbitrary power must be kept up; or the St. _Georges_ of their side, would have no Dragon to encounter; yet theywill never persuade a reasonable man, that a King, who in his youngeryears, when he had all the Temptations of power to pursue such a Design, yet attempted it not, should now, in the maturity of his Judgment, andwhen he sees the manifest aversion of his Subjects to admit of such achange, undertake a work of so much difficulty, destructive to theMonarchy, and ruinous to Himself, if it succeeded not; and if itsucceeded, not capable of making him so truly Great as he is by Lawalready. If we add to this, his Majesties natural love to Peace andQuiet, which increases in every man with his years, this ridiculoussupposition will vanish of itself; which is sufficiently exploded bydaily experiments to the contrary. For let the Reign of any of our Kingsbe impartially examin'd, and there will be found in none of them so manyexamples of Moderation, and keeping close to the Government by Law, asin his. And instead of swelling the Regal power to a greater height, weshall here find many gracious priviledges accorded to the Subjects, without any one advancement of Prerogative. 

The next thing material in the Letter, _is the questioning the legalityof the Declaration; which the Author sayes by the new style of_ hisMajesty in Council, _is order'd to be read in all Churches and Chappelsthroughout_ England, _And which no doubt the blind obedience of ourClergy, will see carefully perform'd; yet if it be true, that there isno Seal, nor Order of Council, but only the Clerks hand to it, they maybe call'd in question as publishers of false news, and invectivesagainst a third Estate of the Kingdom_. 

Since he writes this only upon a supposition, it will be time enough toanswer it, when the supposition is made manifest in all its parts: Inthe meantime, let him give me leave to suppose too, that in case it betrue that there be no Seal, yet since it is no Proclamation, but only abare Declaration of his Majesty, to inform and satisfie his Subjects, ofthe reasons which induc'd him to dissolve the two last Parliaments, aSeal in this case, is not of absolute necessity: for the King speaks nothere as commanding any thing, but the Printing, publishing and reading. And 'tis not denyed the meanest Englishman, to vindicate himself inPrint, when he has any aspersion cast upon him. This is manifestly thecase, that the Enemies of the Government, had endeavour'd to insinuateinto the People such Principles, as this Answerer now publishes: andtherefore his Majesty, who is always tender to preserve the affectionsof his Subjects, desir'd to lay before them the necessary reasons, whichinduc'd him to so unpleasant a thing, as the parting with two successiveParliaments. And if the Clergy obey him in so just a Design, is this tobe nam'd a blind Obedience! But I wonder why our Author is so eager forthe calling them to account as Accessaries to an Invective against athird Estate of the Kingdom, while he himself is guilty in almost everysentence of his discourse of aspersing the King, even in his own Person, with all the Virulency and Gall imaginable. It appears plainly that anHouse of Commons, is that _Leviathan_ which he Adores: that is hisSovereign in effect, and a third Estate is not only greater than theother two, but than him who is presiding over the three. 

But, though our Author cannot get his own Seditious Pamphlet to be readin Churches and in Chappels, I dare secure you, he introduces it intoConventicles, and Coffee-houses of his Faction: besides, his sending itin Post Letters, to infect the Populace of every County. 'Tis enough, that this Declaration is evidently the Kings, and the only trueexception, which our Answerer has to it, is that he would deny hisMajesty the power of clearing his intentions to the People: and findshimself aggriev'd, that his King should satisfie them in spight ofhimself and of his party. 

The next Paragraph is wholly spent, in giving us to understand, that aKing, of _England_ is no other thing than a Duke of _Venice_; take theParallell all along: and you will find it true by only changing of thenames. A Duke of _Venice_ can do no wrong; in Senate he can make no illLaws; in Council no ill Orders, in the Treasury can dispose of noMoney, but wisely, and for the interest of the Government, and accordingto such proportions as are every way requisite: if otherwise allOfficers are answerable, &c. Which is in effect, to say he can neitherdo wrong nor right, nor indeed any thing, _quatenus_ a King. This putsme in mind of _Sancho Panca_ in his Government of the Island of_Barataria_, when he was dispos'd to eat or drink, his Physitian stoodup for the People, and snatch'd the dish from him in their right, because he was a publick person, and therefore the Nation must be Judgesto a dram and scruple what was necessary for the sustenance of the Headof the Body politique. Oh, but there is a wicked thing call'd theMilitia in their way, and they shew'd they had a moneths mind to it, atthe first breaking out of the Popish Plot. If they could once persuadehis Majesty, to part graciously with that trifle, and with his power ofmaking War and Peace; and farther, to resign all Offices of Trust, to bedispos'd by their nomination, their Argument would be an hundred timesmore clear: for then it would be evident to all the World, that he coulddo nothing. But if they can work him to part with none of these, thenthey must content themselves to carry on their new Design beyond Seas:either of ingaging the _French_ King to fall upon _Flanders_, orencouraging the States General to lay aside, or privately to cut off thePrince of _Orange_, or getting a War declared against _England_ and_France_ conjoyntly: for by that means, either the King can be but aweak Enemy, and as they will manage matters, he shall be kept so bare ofMoney, that Twelve _Holland_ Ships shall block up the River, or he shallbe forced to cast himself upon a House of Commons, and to take Moneyupon their Terms, which will sure be as easie, as those of an Usurer toan Heir in want. These are part of the projects now afoot: and how Loyaland conscionable they are, let all indifferent persons judge. 

In the close of this Paragraph, he falls upon the King for appealing tothe People against their own Representatives. But I would ask him in thefirst place, if an Appeal be to be made, to whom can the King Appeal, but to his People? And if he must justifie his own proceedings to theirwhole Body, how can he do it but by blaming their Representatives? Ibelieve every honest man is sorry, that any such Divisions have beenbetwixt the King and his House of Commons. But since there have been, how could the King complain more modestly, or in terms more expressingGrief, than Indignation? or what way is left him to obviate the causesof such complaints for the future, but this gentle admonishment for whatis past?

'Tis easily agreed, he says, (and here I joyn issue with him) _Thatthere were never more occasions for a Parliament, than were at theopening of the last, which was held at_ Westminster. But where hemaliciously adds, _never were our Liberties and Properties more indanger, nor the Protestant Religion more expos'd to an utter extirpationboth at home and abroad_, he shuffles together Truth and Falshood: forfrom the greatness of _France_, the danger of the Protestant Religion isevident; But that our Liberty, Religion, and Property were in dangerfrom the Government, let him produce the instances of it, that they maybe answer'd; what dangers there were and are from the AntimonarchicalParty, is not my present business to enquire. As for the growing terrourof the _French_ Monarchy, the greater it is, the more need of supply toprovide against it. 

_The Ministers tell us in the Declaration, That they asked of thatParliament the supporting the Alliances they had made for thePreservation of the general peace in Christendom, and had desir'd theiradvice and assistance for the preservation of_ Tangier: _had recommendedto them, the farther examination of the Plot; and that his Majesty hadoffer'd to concurr in any Remedies for the security of the ProtestantReligion, which might consist with the preserving the Succession of theCrown, in its due and legal course of descent, but to all this they metwith most unsuitable returns. _

Now mark what the Gentleman infers, _That the Ministers well knew, thattheir demands of Money for the ends abovesaid, were not to be complyedwith, till his Majesty were pleas'd to change the hands and Councils bywhich his Affairs were managed_. --that is, nothing must be given but tosuch men in whom they could confide, as if neither the King, nor thosewhom he employed were fit any longer to be Trusted. But the supreampower, and the management of all things, must be wholly in their Party, as it was in _Watt Tyler_, and _Jack Cade_ of famous memory, when theyhad got a King into their possession: for this Party, will never thinkhis Majesty their own, till they have him as safe, as they had hisFather. But if they could compass their Designs, of bringing the sameGentlemen into play once more, who some years since were at the Helm;let me ask them, when the Affairs of the Nation were worse manag'd? whogave the rise to the present greatness of the _French_? or who counsel'dthe dissolution of the Tripple League? 'Tis a miracle to me that thePeople should think them good Patriots, only because they are out ofhumour with the Court, and in disgrace. I suppose they are far otherprinciples, than those of Anger and Revenge, which constitute an honestStatesman. But let men be what they will before, if they once espousetheir Party, let them be touch'd with that Philosophers stone, and theyare turn'd into Gold immediately. Nay, that will do more for them, thanwas ever pretended to by Chymistry; for it will raise up the shape of aworthy Patriot, from the ashes of a Knave. 'Tis a pretty juggle to tellthe King they assist him with Money, when indeed they design only togive it to themselves; that is, to their own Instruments, which is nomore, than to shift it from one hand into another. It will be a favourat the long run, if they condescend to acquaint the King, how theyintend to lay out his Treasure. But our Author very roundly tells hisMajesty, _That at present they will give him no supplyes, because theywould be employ'd, to the destruction of his Person, and of theProtestant Religion, and the inslaving the whole Nation_, to which Iwill only add, that of all these matters next and immediately under God, he and his Party, constitute themselves the supream Judges. 

_The Duke of_ York, _the Queen, and the two French Dutchesses are thegreat support and protectors of the Popish interest in these Kingdoms_. 

How comes it to pass that our Author shuffles the two French Dutchessestogether? of which the one is an _Italian_, the other a _French_ Woman, and an _English_ Dutchess? Is he grown so purblind, that he cannotdistinguish Friends from Foes? Has he so soon forgotten the memory ofpast benefits, that he will not consider one of them as her, to whom alltheir applications were so lately made? Is she so quickly become an oldacquaintance, that none of the politick assignations at her Lodgings areremembred? After this, who will trust the gratitude of a Common-wealth?or who will blame the Conduct of a silly Court, for being over-reach'dby the whole _French_ Council, when the able part of the Nation, thedesigning heads, the gray wisdom, and the Beaux Garcons, are all foil'dby a single _French_ Woman, at their own Weapon, dissimulation? for theother _French_ Dutchess, since I perceive our Author is unacquaintedwith her Character, I will give it him; she is one who loves her ease tothat degree, that no advantages of Fortune can bribe her into business. Let her but have wherewithall to make Merry adays, and to play at Cardsanights, and I dare answer for her, that she will take as little care todisturb their business, as she takes in the management of her own. Butif you will say that she only affects idleness, and is a grand Intriguerin her heart, I will only Answer, that I should shew you just suchanother as I have describ'd her Grace, amongst the heads of your ownParty: indeed I do not say it is a Woman, but 'tis one who loves aWoman. 

As for the Dutchess of _M. _ either she is a very sincere lover ofdownright idleness, or she has cousen'd all parts of Christendom, whereshe has wandred for these last Ten years. I hope our solid Author willpardon me this digression; but now we have had our dance, let us to ourserious business. 

_While these, and their Creatures are at the Helm, what can we expectfor the security of the Protestant Religion, or what opposition to theambitious designs of_ France?

I suppose more reasonably on the other side, that no such persons are atthe Helm, and that what he has assum'd is but precarious. But I retortupon him, that if some of his Party were the Ministers, the ProtestantReligion would receive but very cold assistance from them, who have noneat all themselves. And for the growth of the _French_ Monarchy, I havealready told you, to whose Counsels we are beholden for it. 

_He goes on; you will tell me that the supplyes so given may beappropriated, to these particular ends of supporting our Alliances, andthe relief of_ Tangier: _And it may be so limited by Act of Parliament, that it cannot be diverted to other uses. But he answers that Objectionby a Story of_ Monsieur de Sully's _telling of_ H. 4th _of_ France: _letthe States raise the Money, and tye it as they please; when they aredissolved, you may dispose of it as you please_. 

All this is to confirm his first unalterable principle, that the Kingmust be sure to finger nothing; but be us'd as Fishers do theirCormorant, have his mouth left open, to swallow the prey for them, buthis throat gagg'd that nothing may go down. Let them bring this to pass, and afterwards they will not need to take away his Prerogative of makingWar: He must do that at his own peril, and be sent to fight his Enemieswith his hands bound behind him. But what if he thinks not their Partyfit to be intrusted, least they should employ it against his Person? whythen, as he told you _they will give him nothing_. Now whose will be thefault in common reason, if the Allyances be not supported, and _Tangier_not relieved? If they will give him nothing, before they bring him to anecessity of taking it upon their terms, asmuch as in them lyes theydissolve the Government: and the Interest of the Nation abroad must beleft in the Suds, till they have destroy'd the Monarchy at home. Butsince God, and the Laws have put the disposing of the Treasury into hisMajesties hands, it may satisfie any reasonable _Englishman_, that thesame Laws have provided for the mispending of the Treasury, by callingthe publick Officers into question for it before the Parliament. For Godbe thanked we have a House of Commons, who will be sure, never to forgoethe least tittle of their Priviledges, and not be so meal-mouth'd as theStates of _France_, of whom neither Monsieur _Sully_, nor any of hisSuccessors, have never had any cause of apprehension. But since thewisdom of our Ancestors have thought this Provision sufficient for oursecurity, What has his present Majesty deserv'd from his Subjects, thathe should be made a Minor at no less than fifty years of age? or thathis House of Commons should Fetter him beyond any of his Predecessors?_where the Interest goes, you will say, there goes the power_. But themost ingenious of your Authors, I mean _Plato Redivivus, _ broaches nosuch principle as that you should force this Prerogative from the King, by undue courses. The best use which can be made of all, is rather tosupport the Monarchy, than to have it fall upon your Heads. If indeedthere were any reasonable fear of an Arbitrary Government, the adverseParty had somewhat to alledge in their defence of not supplying it; butit is not only evident, that the Kings temper is wholly averse from anysuch Design, but also demonstrable, that if all his Council, were suchas this man most falsely suggests them to be, yet the notion of anabsolute power in the Prince is wholly impracticable, not only in thisAge, but for ought any wise man can foresee, at any time hereafter. 'Tisplain, that the King has reduc'd himself already to live more like aprivate Gentleman than a Prince; and since he can content himself inthat condition, 'tis as plain, that the supplies which he demands areonly for the service of the publick, and not for his own maintenance. Monsieur _de Sully_ might give what Council he thought convenient for_Henry_ the Fourth, who was then designing that Arbitrary power, whichhis Successors have since compass'd, to the ruine of the Subjectsliberty in _France_; but I appeal to the Consciences of those men, whoare most averse to the present Government, if they think our King wouldput his Peace and Quiet at this time of day, upon so desperate an issue. What the necessities, which they are driving him into, may make him partwith on the other hand, I know not. But how can they answer it to ourPosterity, that for private Picques, self Interest, and causelessjealousies, they would destroy the foundation of so excellent aGovernment, which is the admiration and envy of all _Europe_?

_The rest of my Authors Paragraph, is only laying more load upon theMinisters, and telling us, that if a sum of Money sufficient for thoseends were given, while they were Managers of Affairs, it would be onlyto set them free from any apprehensions of account to any futureParliament_. But this Argument having only the imaginary fear of anArbitrary power for its foundation, is already answer'd, he adds in theclose of it, _That the Prince has a cheap bargain, who gives Paper-Lawsin exchange of Money and Power. Bargains, he tells us, there have alwaysbeen, and always will be, betwixt Prince and People, because it is inthe Constitution of our Goverment, and the chief dependance of our Kingsis in the love and liberality of their People_. 

Our present King, I acknowledge has often found it so; though no thanksI suppose to this Gentleman and his Party. But though he cry down Paperand Parchment at this Rate, they are the best Evidence he can have forhis Estate, and his friends the Lawyers will advise him to speak withless contempt of those Commodities. If Laws avail the Subject nothing, our Ancestors have made many a bad Bargain for us. Yet I can instance tohim one Paper, namely, that of the _Habeas Corpus_ bill; for which theHouse of Commons would have been content to have given a Million of good_English_ money, and which they had Gratis from his Majesty. 'Tis true, they boast they got it by a Trick; but if the Clerk of the Parliamenthad been bidden to forget it, their Trick of telling Noses might havefail'd them. Therefore let us do right on all sides: The Nation isoblig'd both to the House of Commons for asking it, and more especiallyto his Majesty, for granting it so freely. 

_But what can we think of his next Axiome, that it was never known thatLaws signified any thing to a People, who had not the sole guard oftheir own Prince, Government and Laws?_

Here all our Fore-fathers are Arraign'd at once for trusting theExecutive power of the Laws in their Princes hands. And yet you see theGovernment has made a shift to shuffle on for so many hundred yearstogether, under this miserable oppression; and no man so wise in so manyages to find out, that _Magna Charta_ was to no purpose, while there wasa King. I confess in Countreys, where the Monarck governs absolutely, and the Law is either his Will, or depending on it, this noble maximmight take place; But since we are neither _Turks_, _Russians_, nor_Frenchmen_, to affirm that in our Countrey, in a Monarchy of sotemperate and wholsom a Constitution, Laws are of no validity, becausethey are not in the disposition of the People, plainly infers that noGovernment but that of a Common-wealth can preserve our Liberties andPriviledges: for though the Title of a Prince be allow'd to continue, yet if the People must have the sole guard and Government of him and ofthe Laws, 'tis but facing an whole hand of Trumps, with an insignificantKing of another sute. And which is worst of all, if this be true, therecan be no Rebellion, for then the People is the supream power. And ifthe Representatives of the Commons shall Jarr with the other twoEstates, and with the King, it would be no Rebellion to adhere to them inthat War: to which I know that every Republican who reads this, must ofnecessity Answer, _No more it would not_. Then farewell the Good Act ofParliament, which makes it Treason to Levy Arms against the present King, upon any pretences whatsoever. For if this be a Right of Nature, andconsequently never to be Resign'd, there never has been, nor ever can beany pact betwixt King and People, and Mr. _Hobbs_ would tell us, _That weare still in a state of War_. 

_The next thing our Author would establish, is, That there is nothing inNature or in Story so ridiculous, as the management of the Ministers, inthe Examination of the Popish Plot. Which being prov'd by_ Coleman's_and others Letters, and by both Houses by declaring the King's Life tobe in danger_, &c. _Yet they have persuaded the King to believe nothingof this danger; but to apprehend the Plot to be extreamly improv'd, ifnot wholly contriv'd by the Presbyterians. And to think it more hisconcernment to have an end of all; then to have it search'd to thebottom: and that this was the true reason, why four Parliaments, duringthe Examination of the Plot have been dissolv'd:_

Reasonable People will conclude, that his Majesty and his Ministers haveproceeded, not ridiculously, but with all that caution which becamethem. For in the first heat and vehemence of the Plot, the Avenues of_White-Hall_ were more strictly Guarded: His Majesty abstaining fromPlaces of publick Entertainment, and the Ministers taking all necessaryCare in Council, both to discover Conspiracies and to prevent them. So, that simply considered, the Popish Plot has nothing to do with theDissolution of Four Parliaments. But the Use which has been made of it bythe House of Commons to Dis-inherit the Duke, to deny the KingSupplies, and to make some Votes, which the King declares to beillegal, are the real and plain occasions of dissolving thoseParliaments. 'Tis only affirm'd, but never will be prov'd by thisAuthor, that the King or his Ministers have ever been desirous to stiflethe Plot, and not to have it search'd into the bottom. For to what endhas his Majesty so often offer'd the Popish Lords to be brought to theirTrial, but that their innocence or guilt, and consequently, that of thewhole party might be made manifest? Or why, after the execution of theLord _Stafford_, did the House of Commons stop at the other Lords, andnot proceed to try them in their turns? Did his Majesty stifle the Plotwhen he offered them, or did they refuse to sound the depth of it, whenthey would not touch upon them? If it were for want of Witnesses, whichis all that can be said, the case is deplorable on the part of theaccused; who can neither be bail'd, because impeach'd in Parliament, noradmitted to be tryed, for fear they should be acquitted for want ofevidence. I do not doubt but his Majesty, after having done what in himlies for the utmost discovery of the Plot, both by frequentProclamations of Indemnity, and Reward, to such as would come in, anddiscover more, and by several others too long to repeat, is desirous(for what good man is not?) that his care and trouble might be over. ButI am much deceiv'd, if the Antimonarchical Party be of the sameopinion; or that they desire the Plot should be either whollydiscover'd, or fully ended. For 'tis evidently their Interest to keep iton foot, as long as possibly they can; and to give it hot water, asoften as 'tis dying; for while they are in possession of this Jewel, they make themselves masters of the people. For this very reason I haveoften said, even from the beginning of the Discovery, that thePresbyterians would never let it go out of their hands, but manage it tothe last inch upon a Save-all. And that if ever they had tryed one Lord, they would value themselves upon that Conquest, as long as ever it wouldlast with the Populace: but whatever came on't, be sure to leave a NestEgg in the _Tower_: And since I doubt not, but what so mean a Judge as Iam could so easily discover, could not possibly escape the vigilancy ofthose who are at the Helm; I am apt to think, that his Majesty saw atleast as great a danger arising to him from the discontented spirits ofthe popular Faction, as from the Papists. For is it not plain, that eversince the beginning of the Plot, they have been lopping off from theCrown whatever part of the Prerogative they could reach? and incroachinginto Soveraignty and Arbitrary Power themselves, while they seem'd tofear it from the King? How then could his Majesty be blam'd, if he wereforc'd to dissolve those Parliaments, which instead of giving himrelief, made their Advantages upon his Distresses; and while theypretended a care of his Person on the one hand, were plucking at hisScepter with the other?

After this, the Pamphleteer gives us a long Bead-roll of _Dangerfield's_Plot, Captain _Ely_, young _Tongue_, _Fitz-Gerard_ and Mr. _Ray_, railsat some, and commends others as far as his skill in Hyperbole will carryhim. Which all put together, amounts to no more than only this, that hewhom they called Rogue before, when he comes into their party, pays hisGarnish, and is adopted into the name of an honest man. Thus _Ray_ wasno Villain, when he accus'd Colonel _Sackvile_, before the House ofCommons; but when he failed of the reward of godliness at their hands, and from a Wig became a tearing Tory in new Cloaths, our Author puts himupon the File of Rogues, with this brand, _Than whom a more notoriousand known Villian lives not_. 

The next thing be falls upon, is the Succession: which the Kingdeclares, _He will have preserved in its due descent_. Now our Authordespairing, it seems, that an Exclusion should pass by Bill, urges, _That the Right of Nature and Nations will impower Subjects to deliver aProtestant Kingdom from a Popish King_. The Law of Nations, is soundoubtedly, against him, that I am sure he dares not stick to thatPlea: but will be forc'd to reply, that the Civil Law was made in favourof Monarchy: why then did he appeal to it? And for the Law of Nature, Iknow not what it has to do with Protestants or Papists, except he canprove that the English Nation is naturally Protestant; and then I wouldenquire of him what Countrymen our Fore-fathers were? But if he means bythe Law of Nature, self-preservation and defence; even that neither willlook but a squint upon Religion; for a man of any Religion, and a man ofno Religion, are equally bound to preserve their lives. But I answerpositively to what he would be at; that the Law of self-preservationimpowers not a Subject to rise in Arms against his Soveraign, of anotherReligion, upon supposition of what he may do in his prejudice hereafter:for, since it is impossible that a moral certainty should be made out ofa future contingency, and consequently, that the Soveraign may notextend his Power to the prejudice of any mans Liberty or Religion: Theprobability (which is the worst that they can put it) is not enough toabsolve a Subject who rises in Arms, from Rebellion, _in foroConscientiae_. We read of a divine Command to obey Superior Powers: andthe Duke will lawfully be such, no Bill of Exclusion having past againsthim in his Brother's life: Besides this, we have the Examples ofPrimitive Christians, even under Heathen Emperors, always suffering, yetnever taking up Arms, during ten Persecutions. But we have no Text, noPrimitive Example encouraging us to rebel against a Christian Prince, tho of a different Perswasion. And to say there were then no ChristianPrinces when the New Testament was written, will avail our Authorlittle; for the Argument is a _Fortiori_: if it be unlawful to rebelagainst a Heathen Emperor, then much more against a Christian King. TheCorollary is this, and every unbiassed sober man will subscribe to it, that since we cannot pry into the secret Decrees of God, for theknowledge of future Events, we ought to rely upon his Providence, forthe Succession; without either plunging our present King intonecessities, for what may never happen; or refusing our obedience to onehereafter, who in the course of nature may succeed him. One, who if hehad the will, could never have the power to settle Popery in _England_, or to bring in Arbitrary Government. 

_But the Monarchy will not be destroyed, and the Protestant Religionwill be preserved, if we may have a Protestant Successor_. 

If his party had thought, that this had been a true Expedient, I amconfident it had been mentioned in the last Parliament at _Westminster_. But there, _altum silentium_ not one word of it. Was it because theMachine was not then in readiness to move! and that the Exclusion mustfirst pass? or more truly was it ever intended to be urged? I am notashamed to say, that I particularly honour the Duke of _Monmouth_: butwhether his nomination to succeed, would, at the bottom be pleasing tothe Heads of his Cabal, I somewhat doubt. To keep him fast to them bysome remote hopes of it, may be no ill Policy. To have him in areadiness to head an Army, in case it should please God the King shoulddie before the Duke, is the design; and then perhaps he has reason toexpect more from a Chance Game, than from the real desires of his partyto exalt him to a Throne. But 'tis neither to be imagined, that a Princeof his Spirit, after the gaining of a Crown, would be managed by thosewho helped him to it, let his ingagements and promises be never sostrong before, neither that he would be confin'd in the narrow compassof a Curtail'd Mungril Monarchy, half Common-wealth. Conquerors are noteasily to be curbed. And it is yet harder to conceive, that hispretended Friends, even design him so much as that. At present, 'tistrue, their mutual necessities keep them fast together; and all theseveral Fanatick Books fall in, to enlarge the common stream: Butsuppose the business compassed, as they design'd it, how many, and howcontradicting Interests are there to be satisfied! Every Sect of HighShooes would then be uppermost; and not one of them endure thetoleration of another. And amongst them all, what will become of thosefine Speculative Wits, who drew the Plan of this new Government, and whooverthrew the old? For their comfort, the Saints will then account themAtheists, and discard them. Or they will plead each of them theirparticular Merits, till they quarrel about the Dividend. And, theProtestant Successor himself, if he be not wholly governed by theprevailing party, will first be declared no Protestant; and next, noSuccessor. This is dealing sincerely with him, which _Plato Redivivus_does not: for all the bustle he makes concerning the Duke of _M. _proceeds from a Commonwealth Principle: he is afraid at the bottom tohave him at the Head of the party, lest he should turn the absoluteRepublick, now designing, into an arbitrary Monarchy. 

The next thing he exposes, is the project communicated at _Oxford_, by aworthy Gentleman since deceased. But since he avowed himself, that itwas but a rough draught, our Author might have paid more respect to hismemory, than to endeavour to render it ridiculous. But let us see how hemends the matter in his own which follows. 

_If the Duke were only banished, during life, and the Administration putinto the hands of Protestants, that would establish an unnatural War ofExpediency, against an avowed Right and Title. But on the other handexclude the Duke, and all other Popish Successors, and put down allthose Guards are now so illegally kept up, and banish the Papists, wherecan be the danger of a War, in a Nation unanimous_?

I will not be unreasonable with him; I will expect English no where fromthe barrenness of his Country: but if he can make sense of his_Unnatural War of Expediency_, I will forgive him two false Grammars, and three Barbarisms, in every Period of his Pamphlet; and yet leave himenow of each to expose his ignorance, whensoever I design it. But hisExpedient it self is very solid, if you mark it. _Exclude the Duke, takeaway the Guards_, and consequently, all manner of defence from the KingsPerson; _Banish every Mothers Son of the Papists, whether guilty or notguilty in particular of the Plot_. And when Papists are to be banished, I warrant you all Protestants in Masquerade must go for company; andwhen none but a pack of Sectaries and Commonwealths-men are left in_England_, where indeed will be the danger of a War, in a Nationunanimous? After this, why does not some resenting Friend of _Marvel_'s, put up a Petition to the Soveraigns of his party, that his Pension offour hundred pounds _per annum_, may be transferred to some one amongstthem, who will not so notoriously betray their cause by dullness andinsufficiency? As for the illegal Guards, let the Law help them; or letthem be disbanded; for I do not think they have need of any Champion. 

The next twenty Lines are only an illustration upon his Expedient: forhe is so fond of his darling Notion, that he huggs it to death, as theApe did her young one. He gives us his Bill of Tautology once more; forhe threatens, that they would not rest at the Exclusion; but the Papistsmust again be banish'd, and the Dukes Creatures put out of Office bothCivil and Military. Now the Dukes Creatures, I hope, are Papists, orlittle better; so that this is all the same: as if he had been conningover this ingenious Epigram;

 There was a man who with great labour, and much pain; Did break his neck, and break his neck, and break his neck again. 

At the last, to shew his hand is not out in the whole Paragraph, whenthe Duke is excluded, his Creatures put out of Office, the Papistsbanished twice over; and the Church of _England_-men delivered to Satan, yet still he says the Duke is the great Minister of State; and the KingsExcellent Qualities give his Brother still opportunities to ruine us andour Religion. Even excluded, and without Friends and Faction he can doall this; and the King is endued with most excellent Qualities to sufferit. 

Having found my man, methinks I can scarce afford to be serious with himany longer; but to treat him as he deserves, like an ill Bouffoon. 

_He defends the sharpess of the Addresses of which his Majestycomplains_: but I suppose it would be better for him, and me, to let ourPrincipals engage, and to stand by ourselves. I confess, I have heardsome members of that House, wish, that all Proceedings had been carriedwith less vehemence. But my Author goes further on the other hand; _Heaffirms, that many wise and good men thought they had gone too far, inassuring, nay, in mentioning of money before our safety was fullyprovided for_. So you see he is still for laying his hand upon thepenny. In the mean time I have him in a Praemunire for arraigning theHouse of Commons; for he has tacitely confessed, that the wise and goodmen were the fewer; because the House carryed it for mentioning money intheir Address. But it seems they went too far, in speaking of a Supply, before they had consulted this Gentleman, how far the safety of theNation would admit it. I find plainly by his temper, that if matters hadcome to an accommodation, and a bargain had been a bargain, the Knightsof the Shire must have been the Protestant Knights no longer. 

_As for Arbitrary Power of taking men into custody, for matters that hadno relation to Privileges of Parliament, he says they have erred withtheir Fathers. _ If he confess that they have erred, let it be with alltheir Generation, still they have erred: and an error of the firstdigestion, is seldom mended in the second. But I find him modest in thispoint; and knowing too well they are not a Court of Judicature, he doesnot defend them from Arbitrary Proceedings, but only excuses, andpalliates the matter, by saying, that it concern'd the Rights of thePeople, in suppressing their Petitions to the Fountain of Justice. So, when it makes for him, he can allow the King to be the _Fountain ofJustice_, but at other times he is only a _Cistern of the People. _ Buthe knows sufficiently, however he dissembles it, that there were sometaken into custody, to whom that crime was not objected. Yet since in amanner he yields up the Cause, I will not press him too far, where he isso manifestly weak. Tho I must tell him by the way, that he is as justlyto be proceeded against for calling the Kings Proclamation illegal, which concerned the matter of Petitioning, as some of those, who hadpronounced against them by the House of Commons, that terrible sentence, of _Take him, _ Topham. 

_The strange illegal Votes declaring several eminent persons to beEnemies to the King and Kingdom, are not so strange, he says, but veryjustifiable_. I hope he does not mean, that illegal Votes are now notstrange in the House of Commons: But observe the reason which he gives:for the House of Commons had before address'd for their removal fromabout the King. It was his business to have prov'd, that an Address ofthe House of Commons, without Process, order of Law, hearing anyDefence, or offering any proof against them is sufficient ground toremove any person from the King: But instead of this he only proves, that former Addresses have been made, _Which no body can deny_. When hehas throughly settled this important point, that Addresses havecertainly been made, instead of an Argument to back it, he only thinks, that one may affirm by Law, _That the King ought to have no person abouthim, who has the misfortune of such a Vote_. But this is too ridiculousto require an Answer. They who will have a thing done, and give noreason for it, assume to themselves a manifest Arbitrary Power. Now thisPower cannot be in the Representatives, if it be not in the People: or ifit be in them, the People is absolute. But since he wholly thinks it, let him injoy the privilege of every Free Born Subject, to have the Bellclinck to him what he imagines. 

Well; all this while he has been in pain about laying his Egg: at thelast we shall have him cackle. 

_If the House of Commons declare they have just Reasons to fear, thatsuch a person puts the King upon Arbitrary Councils, or betrays His andthe Nations Interest, in such a Case, Order and Process of Law is notnecessary to remove him; but the Opinion and Advice of the Nation isenough; because bare removing neither fines him, nor deprives him ofLife, Liberty, or Offices, wherein State Affairs are not concern'd. _

Hitherto, he has only prov'd, according to his usual Logick, that bareremoving, is but bare removing, and that to deprive a man of a PublickOffice is not so much as it would be to hang him: all that possibly canbe infer'd from this Argument, is only that a Vote may do a less wrong, but not a greater. Let us see how be proceeds. 

_If he be not remov'd upon such Address, you allow him time to act hisVillany; and the Nation runs the hazard_. 

I answer, if the House have just Reasons on their side, 'tis butequitable they should declare them; for an Address in this Case is anAppeal to the King against such a man: and no Appeal is supposed to bewithout the Causes which induc'd it. But when they ask a Removal, andgive no reason for it; they make themselves Judges of the Matter, andconsequently they appeal not, but command. If they please to give theirReasons, they justifie their Complaint; for then their Address is almostin the nature of an Impeachment; and in that Case they may procure ahearing when they please. But barely to declare, that they suspect anyman, without charging him with particular Articles, is almost toconfess, they can find none against him. To suppose a man has time toact his Villanies, must suppose him first to be a Villain: and if theysuspect him to be such, nothing more easie than to name his Crimes, andto take from him all opportunities of future mischief. But at this rateof bare addressing, any one who has a publick profitable Employmentmight be remov'd; for upon the private Picque of a Member he may have aparty rais'd for an Address against him. And if his Majesty can nosooner reward the Services of any one who is not of their party, butthey can vote him out of his Employment; it must at last follow, thatnone but their own party must be employ'd, and then a Vote of the Houseof Commons, is in effect the Government. Neither can that be call'd theAdvice and Opinion of the whole Nation, by my Author's favour, wherethe other two Estates, and the Soveraign are not consenting. 

_'Tis no matter_, says this Gentleman; _there are some things soreasonable, that they are above any written Law: and will in despite ofany Power on Earth have their effect, whereof this is one_. 

I love a man who deals plainly; he explicitly owns this is not Law, andyet it is reasonable; and will have its effect as if it were. See then, in the first place the written Law is laid aside: that sence is thrownopen to admit reason in a larger denomination. Now that reason which isnot Law, must be either Enthusiasm, or the head-strong will of a wholeNation combin'd: because in despite of any Earthly Power it will haveits effect; so that, which way soever our Author takes it, he must meanFanaticism, or Rebellion: Law grounded on reason is resolv'd into theAbsolute Power of the People; and this is _Ratio ultima Reipublicae_. 

Furthermore; _The King is a publick Person: in his private capacity_, as we are told, _he can only eat and drink; and perform some other actsof nature which shall be nameless. But his actings without himself, _says my grave Author, _are only as a King. In his politick capacity heought not to marry, love, hate, make war, or peace, but as a King; andagreeable to the People, and their Interest he governs. _

In plain terms then, as he is a man he has nothing left to do: for theActions which are mention'd, are those only of an Animal, or which arecommon to Man and Beast. And as he is a King he has as little Business, for there he is at the disposing of the People: and the only use thatcan be made of such a Monarch, is for an Innkeeper to let upon aSign-Post to draw custom. But these Letters of Instruction how he shouldbehave himself in his Kingly Office, cannot but call to mind how he wasschool'd and tutor'd, when the Covenanters made just such another Princeof him in _Scotland_. When the terrible fasting day was come, if he weresick in bed, no remedy, he must up and to Kirk; and that without amouthful of Bread to stay his Stomach; for he fasted then in hisPolitick Capacity. When he was seated, no looking aside from Mr. _John_;not a whisper to any man, but was a disrespect to the Divine Ordinance. After the first Thunderer had spent his Lungs, no Retirement, the firstis reinforc'd by a second and a third: all chosen Vessels, dieted forPreaching, and the best breath'd of the whole Country. When the Sun wentdown, then up went the Candles, and the fourth arises to carry on thework of the night, when that of the day was at an end. 

'Tis true what he says, that our greatest Princes have often hearkenedto the Addresses of their People, and have remov'd some persons fromthem; but it was when they found those Addresses reasonable themselves. But they who consult the manner of Addresses in former times, will findthem to have been manag'd in the House of Commons, with all the calmnessand circumspection imaginable. The Crimes were first maturely weigh'd, and the whole matter throughly winnow'd in Debates. After which, if theythought it necessary for the publick wellfare, that such a person shouldbe remov'd, they dutifully acquainted the King with their opinion, whichwas often favourably heard; and their desires granted. But now the Caseis quite otherwise; Either no Debate, or a very slight one precedesAddresses of that nature. But a man is run down with violent Harangues;and 'tis thought sufficient, if any member rises up, and offers that hewill make out the Accusation afterwards: when things are carried in thisheady manner, I suppose 'tis no sign of a Great Prince, to have any ofhis Servants forc'd from him. But such Addresses will insensibly growinto Presidents: you see our Author is nibbling at one already. And weknow a House of Commons is always forgiving the Crescent in their Arms. If they gain a point, they never recede from it, they make sure work ofevery concession from the Crown, and immediately put it into theChristmass Box: from whence there is no Redemption. 

In justification of the two Votes against lending or advancing Money tothe King, he falls to railing, like a Sophister in the Schools, when hisSyllogisms are at an end. He arraigns the Kings private manner ofliving, without considering that his not being supplied has forc'd himto it. I do not take upon me to defend any former ill management of theTreasury; but, if I am not deceiv'd, the great grievance of the otherparty at present, is, that it is well manag'd. And, that notwithstandingnothing has been given for so many years, yet a competent provision isstill made for all expences of the publick, if not so large as might bewish'd, yet at least as much as is necessary. And I can tell my Authorfor his farther mortification, that at present no money is furnish'd tohis Majesties Occasions, at such unconscionable Usury as he mentions. Ifhe would have the Tables set up again, let the King be put into acondition, and then let eating and drinking flourish, according to thehearty, honest and greasie Hospitality of our Ancestors. He would havethe King have recourse to Parliaments, as the only proper Supply to aKing of _England_, for those things which the Treasury in this low Ebbcannot furnish out: but when he comes to the Conditions, on which thismoney is to be had, they are such, that perhaps forty in the Hundred toa Jew Banquer were not more unreasonable. In the mean time, if aParliament will not give, and others must not lend, there is a certainstory of the Dog in the Manger, which out of good manners I will notapply. 

The Vote for not prosecuting Protestant Dissenters upon the Penal Laws;which at this time is thought to be a Grievance to the Subject, aweakning of the Protestant Religion, and an Incouragement to Popery, isa matter more tenderly to be handled. But if it be true what has beencommonly reported since the Plot, that Priests, Jesuits, and Friars, mingle amongst Anabaptists, Quakers, and other Sectaries, and are theirTeachers, must not they be prosecuted neither? Some men would think, that before such an uniting of Protestants, a winnowing were not muchamiss; for after they were once sent together to the Mill, it would betoo late to divide the Grist. His Majesty is well known to be anindulgent Prince, to the Consciences of his dissenting Subjects: Butwhoever has seen a Paper call'd, I think, _An intended Bill foruniting_, &c. Which lay upon the Table of every Coffee-House, and wasmodelling to pass the House of Commons, may have found things of suchdangerous concernment to the Government, as might seem not so muchintended to unite Dissenters in a Protestant Church, as to draw togetherall the Forces of the several Fanatick Parties, against the Church of_England_. And when they were encouraged by such a Vote, which theyvalue as a Law; (for so high that Coin is now inhaunc'd) perhaps it isnot unreasonable to hold the Rod over them. But for my own part, Iheartily wish, that there may be no occasion for Christians to persecuteeach other. And since my Author speaks with some moderation, candor, andsubmission to his Mother Church, I shall only desire him and thedissenting Party, to make the use they ought, of the King GraciousDisposition to them, in not yet proceeding with all the violence whichthe penal Laws require against them. But this calm of my Author, was toohappy to last long. You find him immediately transported into a stormabout the business of _Fitz-Harris_, which occasion'd the Dissolution ofthe Parliament at _Oxford_: and accusing, according to his sawcy Custom, both his Majesty, and the House of Lords, concerning it. As for theHouse of Lords, they have already vindicated their own right, bythrowing out the Impeachment: and sure the People of _England_ ought toown them as the Assertors of the publick Liberty in so doing; forProcess being before ordered against him at Common Law, and noparticular Crime being laid to his Charge by the House of Commons, ifthey had admitted his Cause to be tryed before the Lordships, this wouldhave grown a President in time, that they must have been forc'd to judgeall those whom the House of Commons would thrust upon them, till at lastthe number of Impeachments would be so increas'd; that the Peers wouldhave no time for any other business of the Publick: and the HighestCourt of Judicature would have been reduc'd to be the Ministers ofRevenge to the Commons. What then would become of our ancient Privilegeto be tryed _per pares_? Which in process of time would be lost to usand our posterity: except a proviso were made on purpose, that thisjudgment might not be drawn into farther President; and that is neverdone, but when there is a manifest necessity of breaking rules, whichhere there was not. Otherwise the Commons may make Spaniels of theLords, throw them a man, and bid them go judge, as we command a Dog tofetch and carry. But neither the Lords Reasons, nor the King firsthaving possession of the Prisoner, signifie any thing with our Author. He will tell you the reason of the Impeachment was to bring out thePopish Plot. If _Fitz-Harris_ really know any thing but what relates tohis own Treason, he chuses a fine time of day to discover it now, when'tis manifestly to save his Neck, that he is forc'd to make himself agreater Villain; and to charge himself with new Crimes to avoid thepunishment of the old. Had he not the benefit of so many Proclamations, to have come in before, if he then knew any thing worth discovery? Andwas not his fortune necessitous enough at all times, to catch at animpunity, which was baited with Rewards to bribe him? 'tis not fornothing that Party has been all along so favourable to him: they areconscious to themselves of some other matters than a Popish Plot. Lethim first be tryed for what he was first accus'd: if he be acquitted, his Party will be satisfied, and their strength increas'd by the knownhonesty of another Evidence: but if he be condemn'd, let us see whattruth will come out of him, when he has _Tyburn_ and another Worldbefore his Eyes. Then, if he confess any thing which makes against theCause, their Excuse is ready; he died a Papist, and had a dispensationfrom the Pope to lie. But if they can bring him silent to the Gallows, all their favour will be, to wish him dispatch'd out of his pain, assoon as possibly he may. And in that Case they have already promis'dthey will be good to his Wife, and provide for her, which would be astrong encouragement, for many a woman, to perswade her Husband todigest the Halter. This remembers me of a certain Spanish Duke, whocommanding a Sea-Port-Town, set an Officer of his, underhand to rob theMerchants. His Grace you may be confident was to have the Booty, and theFellow was assur'd if he were taken to be protected. It fell out, aftersome time, that he was apprehended: His Master, according to Articles, brought him off. The Rogue went again to his vocation, was the secondtime taken, delivered again, and so the third. At last the matter grewso notorious, that the Duke found, it would be both scandalous anddifficult to protect him any longer; But the poor Malefactor sending hisWife to tell him that if he did not save him he must be hanged tomorrow, and that he must confess who set him on: His Master very civillysent him this Message; _Prithee suffer thy self to be hanged this onceto do me a Courtesie, and it shall be the better for thy Wife andChildren. _

'But that which makes amends for all, says our Author, is the Kingsresolution to have frequent Parliaments. Yet this, it seems, is noamends neither: for he says Parliaments are like Terms, if there be Tenin a Year, and all so short to near no Causes, they do no good. '

I say on the other hand, If the Courts will resolve beforehand to haveno Causes brought before them, but one which they know they cannotdispatch; let the Terms be never so long, they make them asinsignificant as a Vacation. 

_The Kings Prerogative, when and where they should be call'd, and howlong they should sit, is but subservient, as our Friend tells us, to thegreat design of Government; and must be accommodated to it, or we areeither denyed or deluded of that Protection and Justice we are born to. _

My Author is the happiest in one faculty, I ever knew. He is stilladvancing some new Position, which without proving, he slurs upon us foran Argument: though he knows, that Doctrines without proofs will edifiebut little. That the Kings Prerogative is subservient, or in order tothe ends of Government is granted him. But what strange kind of Argumentis this, to prove that we are cheated of that Protection to which we areborn. Our Kings have always been indued with the power of callingParliaments, nominating the time, appointing of the Place, andDissolving them when they thought it for the publick good: And thePeople have wisely consulted their own welfare in it. Suppose, forexample, that there be a Jarring between the three Estates, whichrenders their sitting at that time Impracticable; since none of them canpretend to Judge the proceedings of the other two, the Judgment of thewhole must either reside in a Superiour power, or the discord mustterminate in the ruine of them all. For if one of the three incroach toofar, there is so much lost in the Balance of the Estates, and so muchmore Arbitrary power in one; 'Tis as certain in Politiques, as inNature; That where the Sea prevails the Land loses. If no such discordshould arise, my Authors Argument is of no farther use: for where theSoveraign and Parliament agree, there can be no deluding of the People;So, that in short, his quarrel is to the constitution of the Government. 

And we see what nettles him, That the King has learnt from the unhappyexample of his Father, not to perpetuate a Parliament. But he will tellyou, that they desire only a lasting Parliament, which may dispatch allcauses necessary and proper for the publick: And I Answer him, that itlyes in themselves to make it so. But who shall Judge when it shall beproper to put an end to such a Parliament? there is no farther Answerleft him; but only, that the Reason of things is the only Rule: for whenall necessary causes are dispatch'd, then is the proper time ofDissolution. But if you mark it, this Argumentation is still running ina Circle. For the Parliament, that is the House of Commons, wouldconstitute themselves Judges of this reason of things; and of whatcauses were necessary to be dispatch'd. So that my Author had as goodhave laid down this Position bare-fac'd, that a Parliament ought neverto be Dissolved, till an House of Commons would sit no longer. 

My Author goes on scoffingly, _That he has nothing to say for thoseangry men_ (he means of his own Party) _whose particular Designs aredisappointed; only that they might have kept their places; and that hecan find no difference betwixt them who are out, and those who are putin, but that the former could have ruin'd us, and would not: and thesecannot if they would. _

I am willing to let them pass as lightly as he pleases: Angry they are, and they know the Proverb. I hope I may have leave to observetransiently, that none but angry men, that is, such as hold themselvesdisobliged at Court, are the Pillars of his Party. And where are thenthe principles of Vertue, Honour and Religion, which they would persuadethe World, have animated their endeavours for the publick? What werethey before they were thus Angry? or what would they be, could they makeso firm an Interest in Court, that they might venture themselves in thatbottom? This, the whole Party cannot choose but know; for Knaves caneasily smell out one another. My Author, an experienced man, makes butvery little difference, betwixt those who are out, and those who are putin. But the Nation begins to be awake: his party is mouldring away, andas it falls out, in all dishonest Combinations, are suspecting eachother so very fast, that every man is shifting for himself, by aseparate Treaty: and looking out for a Plank in the common Shipwrack, sothat the point is turn'd upon him; those who are out, would have ruin'dus, and cou'd not; and those who are in, are endeavouring to save us ifthey can. 

My Adversary himself, now drawing to a conclusion, seems to be incliningto good opinions: and as dying men, are much given to repentance, sofinding his cause at the last gasp, he unburthens his Conscience anddisclaims the principles of a Common-wealth, both for himself, and forboth Houses of Parliament, which is indeed to be over-officious: for oneof the Houses will not think they have need of such a Compurgator. Buthe wisely fears no change of Government from any, but the Papists. Now Iam of a better heart, for I fear it neither from Papists norPresbyterians. Whether Democracy will agree with Jesuitical principlesin _England_ I am not certain; but I can easily prove to him, that noGovernment but a Common-wealth is accommodated to the Systeme ofChurch-worship invented by _John Calvin_. 

The Declaration concludes, that the King is resolv'd to govern in allthings by the Laws: And here the Author of the Answer, is for friskingout into a fit of Joy, which looks as aukward with his gravity, as everwas King _David_'s dancing before the Ark. This similitude I hope haspleas'd him; if it does not, _Esop_'s Ass stands ready Sadled at thedoor. But a melancholick consideration has already pour'd cold water inhis Porredge, for all promises he says, _are either kept or broken_:well-fare a good old Proverb. I could find in my heart to cap it withanother, _that the old Woman had never look'd for her Daughter in theOven, if she had not been there herself before_. But if the King shouldkeep his word, as all but his Enemies conclude he will, then we shallsee Annual Parliaments sit longer I hope; when they meddle only withtheir proper business. They will lose their time no more, in cutting offthe Succession, altering the course of Nature, and directing theprovidence of God, before they know it. We shall have no uniting ofSects against the Church of _England_, nor of Counties against the nextHeir of the Crown. The King shall then be advis'd by his Parliament, when both Houses concur in their advice. There shall be no more need ofDeclarations about the dissolving of Parliaments, and no more need offactious Fools to answer them; But the People shall be happy, the Kingshall be supply'd the Alliances shall be supported, and my suppos'dAuthor be made a Bishop, and renounce the Covenant. That many of thesethings may happen, is the wish of every loyal Subject, and particularlyof

Sir, _Your most humble Servant_

_The Editors of_ THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY_are pleased to announce that_THE WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY_of The University of California, Los Angeles_

will become the publisher of the Augustan Reprints in May, 1949. Theeditorial policy of the Society will continue unchanged. As in the past, the editors will strive to furnish members inexpensive reprints of rareseventeenth and eighteenth century works. 

All correspondence concerning subscriptions in the United States andCanada should be addressed to the William Andrews Clark MemorialLibrary, 2205 West Adams Blvd. , Los Angeles 7, California. Correspondence concerning editorial matters may be addressed to any ofthe general editors. Membership fee continues $2. 50 per year ($2. 75 inGreat Britain and the continent). British and European subscribersshould address B. H. Blackwell, Broad Street, Oxford, England. 

Publications for the fourth year (1949-1950)

_(At least six items will be printed in the main from the followinglist)_

SERIES IV: MEN, MANNERS, AND CRITICS

John Dryden, _His Majesties Declaration Defended_ (1681)Daniel Defoe (?), _Vindication of the Press_ (1718)_Critical Remarks on Sir Charles Grandison, Clarissa, and Pamela_ (1754)

SERIES V: DRAMA

Thomas Southerne, _Oroonoko_ (1696)Mrs. Centlivre, _The Busie Body_ (1709)Charles Johnson, _Caelia_ (1733)Charles Macklin, _Man of the World_ (1781)

SERIES VI: POETRY AND LANGUAGE

Andre Dacier, _Essay on Lyric Poetry__Poems_ by Thomas Sprat_Poems_ by the Earl of DorsetSamuel Johnson, _Vanity of Human Wishes_ (1749), and one of the 1750 _Rambler_ papers. 

EXTRA SERIES:

Lewis Theobald, _Preface to Shakespeare's Works_ (1733)

A few copies of the early publications of the Society are stillavailable at the original rate. 

GENERAL EDITORS

H. RICHARD ARCHER, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library

R. C. BOYS, University of Michigan

E. N. HOOKER, University of California, Los Angeles

H. T. SWEDENBERG, JR. , University of California, Los Angeles

 * * * * *

To THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY

_William Andrews Clark Memorial Library__2205 West Adams Blvd. , Los Angeles 7, California_

AS MEMBERSHIP FEE I enclose for: The fourth year $ 2. 50 The third and fourth year 5. 00 The second, third and fourth year 7. 50 The first, second, third, and fourth year 10. 00[Add $. 25 for each year if ordering from Great Britain or the continent]

_Name_

_Address_

Make check or money order payable to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OFCALIFORNIA. 

_Note: All income of the Society is devoted to defraying cost ofprinting and mailing. _

PUBLICATIONS OF THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY

First Year (1946-1947)

1. Richard Blackmore's _Essay upon Wit_ (1716), and Addison's_Freeholder_ No. 45 (1716). (I, 1)

2. Samuel Cobb's _Of Poetry_ and _Discourse on Criticism_ (1707). (II, 1)

3. _Letter to A. H. Esq. ; concerning the Stage_ (1698), and RichardWillis' _Occasioned Paper No. IX_ (1698). (III, 1)

4. _Essay on Wit_ (1748), together with Characters by Flecknoe, andJoseph Warton's _Adventurer_ Nos. 127 and 133. (I, 2)

5. Samuel Wesley's _Epistle to a Friend Concerning Poetry_ (1700) and_Essay on Heroic Poetry_ (1693). (II, 2)

6. _Representation of the Impiety and Immorality of the Stage_ (1704)and _Some Thoughts Concerning the Stage_ (1704). (III, 2)

Second Year (1947-1948)

7. John Gay's _The Present State of Wit_ (1711); and a section on Witfrom _The English Theophrastus_ (1702). (I, 3)

8. Rapin's _De Carmine Pastorali_, translated by Creech (1684). (II, 3)

9. T. Hanmer's (?) _Some Remarks on the Tragedy of Hamlet_ (1736). (III, 3)

10. Corbyn Morris' _Essay towards Fixing the True Standards of Wit, etc. _ (1744). (I, 4)

11. Thomas Purney's _Discourse on the Pastoral_ (1717). (II, 4)

12. Essays on the Stage, selected, with an Introduction by Joseph WoodKrutch. (III, 4)

Third Year (1948-1949)

13. Sir John Falstaff (pseud. ), _The Theatre_ (1720). (IV, 1)

14. Edward Moore's _The Gamester_ (1753). (V, 1)

15. John Oldmixon's _Reflections on Dr. Swift's Letter to Harley_(1712); and Arthur Mainwaring's _The British Academy_ (1712). (VI, 1)

16. Nevil Payne's _Fatal Jealousy_ (1673). (V, 2)

17. Nicholas Rowe's _Some Account of the Life of Mr. William Shakespear_(1709). (Extra Series, 1)

18. Aaron Hill's Preface to _The Creation_; and Thomas Brereton'sPreface to _Esther_. (IV, 2)