mmm
LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
PRINCETON, N. J.
Purchased by the
Mary Cheves Dulles Fund
w. .. .
sec , -rht^
^
A
VINDICATIQ^.FPa.5
Of a Book, intituled, ( , ^ct £•> 1029
A Brief Account of many-^^^^^^^:^
the Profecutions of the People
called Qu AKERS, ^^c.
Presented to the
Members of both Houfesof
Parliament:
In ANSWER
To a late Examination thereof, fo far as the
Clergy of the Diocefe of Canterbury
are concerned in it.
With an APPENDIX,
Demonftrating, that 7'ithes are an Opprejfion to
the Hujha7idma7i, a Burden too heavy tor Hii/t
to bear, and undoeth many.
T^ruly 'je bear IV'itnefs that )e allozv the Leeds cf your
Fathers. Luke xi. 48.
L O N D 0 N:
Printed and Sold by T. Sowle Rayltox and
Luke Hinde, at the Bible in George 2\ird^
Lombard-Jlrcet-, 1742.
A
(iii)
T
The Contents.
HE Introduftion, contahwig brief Remarks
on the Examiner's Perjormance, pag. 3, 4.
SECT. I.
Tloe Examiner's Introdu^iion^ and his pretended
Examijiation of the Quakers Scruples of Co?iJci--
ehce confidered.
Remarks on the Examiner's Virulence, pag. 7.
The Quakers Yearly and other Meetings [hewn to
(id' Chriftian ^W inoffenfive. pag. 10, 11.
T^he hxc)\^t2iZon of \Ji\\Qo\x\%Qbfer'uation, that a
free Confideration of the State of Religion is
ejfential to a free ProfeJJion of it. pag. 1 1.
A Remark of the fame Archdeacon refpcEiing the
Rules of PraBice in the Ecclefiaftical Courts.
pag. 12.
T'he Quakers Principle againf Bearing Arms and
Fighting defended, pag. 13 to i8.
T*he Examiner's oficious Intermedling with Affairs
of Go-vernment reprehended, pag. 18, 19.
T^he GoJpel-DoBrine of Minifters Maintenance,
pag. 20 to 23.
Tithes provd to be fuperflltlousyr^w the Charters
^V&'/r Donations, pag. 23 to 26.
T'he Pretence of the Clergies Property /;/ T'ithes
confuted^ and the ivholc Crop fe^^cn ro be the
pcr/onal
<iv)
ferfonal Property of the Occupier of the Land.
' pag. 26 to 37.
"ihe Quakers Addrefl to King James Jkewn to he
jufi and reafonahle^ ^ivith a Copy of that Addrefe.
pag, 38 to 42.^
^heir late Application to Parliament defended,
pag. 43 to 46.
Minijlers Maintenance no Inheritance, pag. 49.
'^he Clergies Exemption from Labour not Scrip-
'• tural pag. 52, 53c
The Quakers Reafins for Refufmg to pay Church--
Rates, pag. 54 to 56.
^h^ir fervlng the Ofice of Church-warden, how
'i far fuftif able. ^ pag. Sl^S"^-^
^A Confutation of the Examiner's Cavil about the
Tax on Coals,- pag. 60j 61.
The Quakers Church-Government perf&Iy co7i-
ftftent ivith the AUegia?ice of faithful Subje^Sy
pag. 62, 63.
SECT. II.
The Examiner's Fretence of the Infuffciency of the
A^s oj- J &c?> of King William III. to fecnre
' the Property of the Clergy, /hewn to be ground-
le/Sy and the Opprefjion oj taking more rigorous
Methods demonf rated.
The Examiner's fery Zeal reprehended, pag. 65.
A coolingLeffon of BiJJjOp^'AYm^ propojcd to his
Confideration. pag. 66.
The'E'^'SiXXimtr'smiJiaken Notion ofConfcie7tce.i^. 67
The Quakers Practice cf Submiliion to the Law,
' ibid.
A material Differ ence between the Sentiments of
the Quakers and of the Clergy before the Revc»
lution
, lution refpedihig Liberty ofConfcience. pag. jt.
^he Examiner's Cka7ge of contemning the Courts of
yuftice a?ijicered, pag. 73, 74.
^^ke- Payment ^"Tithes ?2o Condition of the Tolera-
tion, pag. 77.
A fubtil Dijlinciion of the Examiner 7^/ /;/ a clear
Light, pag. 79 to 82.
The Difference between a jufl Debt, and a Clergy^
mans Claim, pag. 83.
^he Examiner's ObjeBiom againfl the Method of
. Recovering Tithes by Jufiices fVar rants confi^
dered, pag. 84 to 90.
The Proceedings of the King's Courts in granting
Prohibitions defended from the Examiner's iin--
juft Refculions. pag. 90.
Remarks on the Non- Appearance of the Spiritual
Courts ii;hen cited onjuch Occafwns. pag. 9 i.
• ^;z 6//c/ Ecclefiaftical Conn:itutionyirZ'/^J/;zg- their
Appearance in fuch Cajes. pag. 92, 93.
The Method of Recove?'y by Jujlices Warrants far^
ther defended, pag. 94 to 103.
A. Paffage from the Examination on Behalf of the
Clergy of the Diocefc ^Carlifle replied to, pag.
104 to 107.
The Supprcfjion ij/^Confcience, under the Name of
Obftinacy, by Penal La\us, an old Engine of
Ecclefiaftick T)'r^;7;n'. png. 109, no.
The Impertinence cfthe Examiner's Rrfcolions re-
. jpecluig the Quoiutions from the Anf\\xi- to the
Country Parfcn's Plea. pag. 113, 114.
Tl,e Examiner's /rm/?.7; Di/linclion beturen Me-
moirs and Records remarked, png. 1 15.
The Qjjakers Reccrds not concealed, pag. 1 16.
The
(vi)
?/!^ Examiner*^ pretended Injiances of Ambiguity
in the Brief Account Jldeijon to be fallacious.
pag. ii6 to ii8.
His Dijingenuity i?i fonning a Charge oj defigned
Deception from an innocent Error of the Prefs.
pag. 1 19, 120.
Several other of his Fallacies detected . pag. 12 j
to 130.
SECT. III.
Jhe Examiner'i Enquiry into the particular Cafes
confderedy
Ti'he Few?iefs of the Cafes d f ujiification of the
general ConduSi of the Clergy in this DioceJL
. pag. 131-
^he Compilers of the Brief Account acquitted of the
Charge of traducing the Dead. pag. 132.
Case I. 7he CfbjeBions to it anfuoered^ and
the Truth of it confirmed by Certificates and other
Proofs, pag. 133/^(9 144.
Case II. Tl'he Examiner'^ Fallacy in denying
ivhat was 7iot afiirmed^ and the Mi/lake of his
Obfervation about the Subpaena detected, pag.
145 to 148.
Case III. The Vicar'^ Account fully anfucered
by John Pay, arid the Truth of the Cafe vindi^
cated from the Cavils of the Examiner, pag.
149 to 156.
Case IV. The Examiner^ ObjcBions to this
Cafe Jl:}ewn to be weak and infufiicient^ pag.
Case V. The Truth of it confirm' d by the
Profecutor'i Sen^ a7id by the Records of the Ex-
chequer, and the Examiner^ Objeciions obviated,
pag. 159 to 166. C A s ^
(vii ;
Case VI. l^'he Truth of it cleared, and thi
Examiner'^ Difingemiity dcmo7iflrated. pag.
i66 to 169.
Case VII. Is verified by the Profccutor'i own
Account^ and the Examiner'i Obje^icns are
fidly anjhsoered by John Woodland the Perjm
frojecuted, pag. 169 to 180.
A Suni77iary of the preceding Cafes, pag. 182,^
183.
The CONCLUSION.
The Defeats of the Examination pointed out. pag;
186, 187.
The Exfrejjiofts in the Preface ajid Appendix/^ the
Brief Account refcued from the Examiner'i
abufive Mimickry by a pertinent Application.
pag. 187 to 190.
Some obJervatio7is of William Dell, in Relation ti
Church-Power. pag. 191, 192,
Seme Remarks of Archbifhop Tillotfon cojicerning
had Mens Averfion to a Difcovery of their
Anions, pag. 193, 194.
An APPENDIX,
Demonfirating this Propofition, viz.
That Tithes are an Oppreffion to the Hufband-
man, a Burden too heavy for him to bear, and
undoeth many. pag. 195 to the End,
ERRATA.
Pag- 13-
Pag. 28.
Pag. S°-
Pag. 73-
Pag. 85.
Pag. 87.
Pag. 162.
Ult.
13-
23-
17-
32-
19.
4-
for Profejtons read Profejjion.
Read wherefore.
after o/"read the Clergy of.
for condemning read contemning.
iovfevere ):c2.Ajeverer.
for ar? read zV.
Read Wj&«i Ifi^'
( 3 ;
VINDICATION
Of a B O O Ki intituled,
A Brief Account of many of
the Prolecutions of the Teople called
Q U A K E R S, l^r.
So far as the CLERGY of the Diocefe of
CANTERBURT 2.Tt concerned in it.
The Introduction.
WE have now before us the Eleventh
Pamphlet, which the Advocates^
pretendedly for^ really againft the
Clergy, have publifh'd on the pre-
fent Controverjy'. 'Tis intituled, An Ex ami n at i on ^
&c. Jo far as the Clergy of the Diocefe of Canter-
bury are cojicerned in it. The Brief Account
of Pro/ecutions, by the Feisincfs of the Cafes in
fo many Years, within that Diocefe, did fbffici-
ently jullify the gcjicral ConJutf of the Clergy
there, which therefore did not fland in need o(
A this
(4;
this Author's Defence^ whofe Method of ^2\\\^^
im^ particular Adls of Oppreffion, under the
Umbrage of a Defence of the Clergy in general^
cafts an unmerited Imputation on the Chara6lers
of many of thofe whofe Cauje he would feem to
advocate.
The Examiners grand Defign appears to be,
that of irritating the Government againft the Qua-
kers : This, with thinking Men, is a manifeft
Symptom of a diftreffed Caufe, and an Indication,
that, while the Advocates of the Clergy have the
Vanity to proclaim their own Writings * ima?2^
jwerable^ ther ielves don't tliink fo : For, the
Power of the M.a^ijirate is a Weight which the
Clergy do nor i: ilially throw into the Scale, till
they fee that TpxUTh is turning its Balance a-
gainft t) ■ m.
But :.he Venom of the Author carries with
V: ITS own y^ntidote^ and the Malice of his Pur-'
pcie is rMayed by the Weaknejl of his Peafonlng^
founded in Abfurdities, while he attempts to
reprefent a Principle of Peace as defl;ru6live to
Society, and thofe Perfons as dangerous to Go-
'ver?iment, who are with-held by Principle from
refifting it; and treats the fakers as injurious to
the Minijiers of the Gofpel, for no other Reafon
than a cloje Adherence to its Precepts refpecSing
their Maintenance,
A particular Enquiry into the Nature and
'tendency of his Dijccurje, is the Subjedt of the
following Sedlions^
SECT.
ExaminatWh p.'ig. 22.
( s)
SECT. 1.
72?^ Examiner's Introdudlion, aud bis pretended
Examination of the Q^ a k e r s Scruples of
Ccnfcience, conjidered,
^ I ^H E firft Sentence of his Introduction inti-
X mates, that " the Hardfliips the fakers
*' complain of, arife from their own Behaviour."
Had he confider'd that Behaviour in its proper
Light, viz, as arifing from Confcienc& directed by
Scripture-Precepts^ a due Regard to the Obligation
of thofe Precepts might have reflrain'd him
from juftifying Hardfliips inflicted for obeying
them : Hardihips, which arofe, not from their
own Behaviour, but that of their Profecutors,
whom, the ^/^z/^tv'i Refufal of their Claims, did
not lay under any Necejity of chufing the moft
fevere and rigorous Methods for recovering them.
He mentions, pag. 2, the fakers '' Petition
" to the Legiikture," the Subftance of which is
more fully expreffed in their printed Cafe, in
thefe Words, viz. That " notwithftanding the
*' /umma?y Method provided , there have been
*' profecuted in the Exchequer, Ecclejiajlical and
*' other Courts, for Demands recoverable by the
" faid Ads, above Eleven Hundred of the Pco-
*' pic called Qiiakers, of whom, near Three
*' Hundred were committed to Prifon, and fe-
^' veral of them died Prifoners.
A 2 '' Thcfc
(6)
*' Thefe Profecutions, though frequently com«*
*' menced for trivial Sums, from fdur Penc^ to
" jive Shilli?tgSy and great Part of them for Sums
*' not exceeding forty Shilli?igs, have been at-
*' tended v^ath fuch heavy Cofts, and rigorous
*' Executions, that about Eight Hundred Pounds
" have been taken from Ten of them, where the
" original Demand did not amount to fifteen
" Founder
Concerning the Authors of fiich ruinous and
deftrudlive Profecutions, 'tis, we think, very
juftly obferv'd, in the Preface to the Brief Ac-
cou72t^ " That Men profeffing Chriftianity^ and
*' fome of 'em to be Miniflers of the Gojpel of
" Peace, fhould, by unneceffary and cxpenfive
*^ Law-fuits^ facrifice their own Quiet and Inte-
*' reft to the Oppreffion and Ruin of their Neigh-
^^ bours, has been Matter of Surprize to generous
*^ Minds!* Vain and empty are Men's Pretences
to Chriftianityy fo long as their ABions tranfgrefs
the Rules of common Uuinarnty,
The "Examiner is pleas'd to call our confcienti-
pus Scruple againft the Payme72t of Tithes^ &c. a
'' (pecious Pretence of Confcience," but produces
neither Scripture nor Reafon to fhew that it is
not a religious Reality : But 'tis obfervable, that
the Injii^ers of Hardjhips for Confciejice may
not admit even her beft grounded Scruples to be
real, left, by fo doing, they fhould remove the
only fpecious Pretence for their own reafonlefs
Severities.
*' It will not, fays the Examiner, pag. 3, be
"- thought foreign to the Examination of the
*' Brief Account ■ — - to confider previoufy^
:' and
•' and enquire into the Foundation of fuch of
'* their Scruples, whereby the Safety of the Na-
" tion, or Property of the Clergy of the Church
** of E?2gIanJ in general, may bcaffeded."
Whatever the Exami?ier may think, it will
neverthelefs be thought by others, that an En-
quiry into the ^/^^t'r5 Scruple, refpeding £<r^r;W
of Ar7ns and Fighting, is altogether foreign to an
Examination of the Brief Account^ reipcdting
Profecutions for Tithes, and that fuch a Scruple
hath no manner of Relation to that Account -y but
is infifled on by him, with a Defign of incenfing
the Government againft xh^ ^akers^ by mifrepre-
fenting their Principles tus *' inconfiftcnt with the
*' Good of Society,*'' '' tending to the Subver-
*' fion of Government, -f" and '' letting in a
*' Deluge of Mifery and Defolation; || " their
Perjbns, as unworthy '' of the Benefit of the
** Laws,**" or of ** Favour in common with
'' the Reft of their Fellow Subjedis ; f f " and
" their Con/ciences, fuch, as " can claim no In-
" dulgence from the Government. |||| " Such
virulent Expreffions, diffufed up and down his
Pamphlet, prove nothing, but that the Author's
Heat has the Afcendant of his Reajbn^ and will
probably be regarded by confiderate Readers^ as
an injurious RcfeBion on their yudgment^ by fup-
pofing them capable of accepting Railing for
Reafon^ and Clamour for Confutation,
His blending together the Safety of the Nati-
on, and the Property of the Clergy, may he con-
fl-rued
Examination, pag. 3. i* Ibid. () pag. 7,
** pag. 4' tt pag. 8. BII pag. 9.
ftriicd to the Clergies DIfadvantage ; for fuch i
Con?iexion of the general Safety with the parti*
ciiiar hitereji of a iingle Branch of the Commu-
nity, naturally conveys a Siiggejlmi of Danger
from that Part^ whenever they fappofe that
particular Interefi affefted: A Suggejiion^ for
which the Loyal Sons of the Clergy^ who found
the?. Allegiance to the Government on Obliga-
tions of Chriftian Duty, fuperior to the narrow
Views of Self-Inter ejl, are as little obliged to the
Prudence of their pretended Advocate, as the
§»jakers are to his Charity, in cenfuring their
Scruples of Confcience as " void of common Ho-
•' nefty,^'"' while himfelf is fo void oi common Mo-
defiy, as to call, 2i plain Account of evident Fafts,
" mere Surmifeonly -, f and to confront the inofl
open and 7nanifeji truths with a confident Imputa-
tion of '^ downright Falfhood.|j'*
The ^takers Writings fully demonftrate, that
thofe Principles of theirs, which this Author tra-
duces, have a real Foundation both in Scripture
and Reafon: And whatever Principles are fo
.founded, do mod efFeftually contribute to the
-Support and Eftabhfliment of Civil Government,
and to the Security of every Man's Right and
Property.
The Examifier proceeds, pag. 3, 4. " If any
'' particular Part of the Community {hall, in
'' either of thefe Cafes, fet to themfeh^s a differ-
" ent Rule of ading from that which is the Ge-
[' ncral Law, they arrogate thereby to them-
" felves
* P^g. 3- t Ibid. II Ibid.
(9)
*' felves a feparatc Legiilature, they fet them^
" felves up as an Independent State, whilft at
" the lame time they claim and enjoy the Bene-
*' fit of all other Laws in common with the reft
" of theSubjeds." To the fame purport he alfa
cites, pag. 7, 8, a Paragraph f vom the Exa/mnafio?/,
&c. in Behalf of the Clergy of theDiocefe of Lonl
do?2, viz. '' That the ^/a,\:ers are known to be a
•' People, who have a Sort of national Govern-
" mrnt within thcmfelves. They have their
'' ftiited Meetings within particular Diftridls in
'' the Country : And in London a Yearly Meet-
*' ing of Deputies or Reprefentatives from all
*' Parts of the Kingdom, to treat of the general
*' Concerns of the Body; and a Committee of
*' particular Perfons, refiding in or nt2iX London^
'' to maintain a conftant Correfpondence with
'' their Brethren all over the Kingdom.'* Upon
which he thus exclaims, pag. 8. *^ How dan-
'' gerous may this Union be, where their Con-
'' fcience fets different Rules from the publick
'' Weal ! When they take upon themfelves to
'' diie(!l in Matters contrary to the Laws of the
*' Land, and to exhort their Followers to ft and
'' f^iithfiil in their ancient and ChrijUan 'Te(}imony
'' againft what thofe Laws command : Whilft
*' they are thus affeniblcd without the King's
" Writ, promulge and put in Ure their ConfH-
'' tutions, without his Licenfe or Affent, and in
'' Contempt of his Supremacy ! "
Here's a vehement Outcry of Danp;er : Bat
from whence? From the publick Meetings of
an harmlefs and inoffenfivc People, affembled
for no other End than the Pradice cf///r^ and
7: n defiled
t *o)
mdefiled Religwiy viz. To vifit the Fatheflefs and
Widows in their Affliction, and to keep themfehes
unfpottedfrom the World. James i. xxvii. ^ The
Caufe aflign'd by the Examiner himfelf is per-
feftly innocent, viz. that they '' exhort their
<' Followers to fia^id faithful in their ancient ana
'' Chrijtian Tejlimony;' he adds, '' againft what
*' thofe Laws command," but they fay, '' agamft
" what Chrift's Gofpel forbids/' His Precepts
are their Rule of Afting in Religion ; from
which they are not to be mov d by this Exami-
ner*s teaching for Dodfrines the Conunandments ^ oj
Men, The ObjeBion of the ^takers making
Laws to themfehes, is but an Old Calumny long
fince confuted: '' As we are not, (fays a* Writer
« of their Perfwafion) a People whofe Principle
" \%to make Laws^without the Leave of our Siipe-
" riors', fo it never was, nor is our Pradtice. We
<« are a Religious and Chriftian Society, and a$
" fuch, we have our Meetings in the Name
*' of Jefus Chrift, whofe Prefence is in the midft
« of us, as we in Humility wait upon the Lord.
" And as all Societies have fome Laws or Orders
«« for the Government thereof, fo have we ; but
«f we do not affume to our lelves a Power to
<^ make them. That which we do, is, as
" George Whitehead fays, ** '' To fee thofe put
*' in Practice, which Chrift our Head and Law-
" giver hath taught us, and revealed to his Ser-
« vants, and that agreeable to the Holy Scrip-
tures
* Richard Claridgs in his Melius Liquirendujn.
Printed Anno 1706. pag. 128. ** Truth znd Innccency
vindicated, pag. 41. 42.
( II )
^^ tures of Truth, and no ways injurious to the
^' outward Government 5 but for the prcmotino-
*' of Truth and Righteoufnefs in the Earth, and
*' as Fellow-helpcis in Chrift, provoking one
*' another to Love and good Works/' A Liber-
ty of alfembling together for fuch righteous and
rehgious Purpoies, is, we thinks naturally includ-
ed in the Toleration, for the free Exercife of our
Religion, granted by the Government : For, as
the prefent Archdeacon of Z/;7r6>Z^ judiciolifly ob-
ferves, '* * A free Confideration of the State of
*' Religion is effential to a free Profefiion of it,
^' infomuch as in the feveral Treaties between
*' the Refonnjfts and the Princes in Gerrnayiy^
*' the Netherlands, Bohemia^ France and Sco:-
** Ia?id, the Right to cbnfider of the Intereft of
'' the Religion profeffed^ was underftood as an
'' Incident to the Liberty or Allowance of that
'' Profeffion."
If the ^mkers meeting together for fuch Re-
ligious and Chriftian Purpofes, be what the £.v-
mniner means by " fetting themfelves up as an
*' Independent State," 'tis incumbent upon him
to juftify that Refledicn, by demonllrating, that
the Chrijlian Religion is a State dependent c?i
Hiimaii Laws; which when he (hall have un-
dertaken, the World may judge of his Perfor-
mance*
Who they are that " arrogate to themfelves
*' a feparate Legiflature, exercife an affumed
'' Power of Jurifdidion prohibited by the King 3
B " Laws,
^ See a Letter to Dr. Liflc, ProIocutGr to the lotirf
irlmife of Cojivoiaiion. Pag. 42; 43.
( 12)
" Laws, and promulge Conilitutions without hk
** Licenfe, or Affent, and in Contempt of his
** Supremacy/* the fakers know, and have
been very great Sufferers by. Let the Examiner
reconfider this Matter, and we doubt not but he
will meet nearer Home with Perfons to whom
thofe Imputations more properly belong. The
Letter, by us laft cited, will inform him,
" * That the Rules of Proceeding in Ecckfiafti-
** cal Courts, are nothing more or lefs, than the
*' Sophiftications of the Canon-Law reduced into
*' Pradlice." And that, '' the Rules of Pradice
" for Ecckjiajlical Courts were Intended
" FOR Instruments to inslave Mankind."
That fo wicked an Intention has not been per-
fectly accomplifhed, is owing, not to the Favour
of Ecclefiaflicks, but o theReftiaints imposed on
them by the Laws of the Land, and the Inter-
pofition of the Secular Magiitrate.
The Examiner, pag. 4, tells us, that " the
** Pretence of Confcience in Matters of meer civil
*' Right is vain," but what he means by ineer ci^
vil Right is not well explained; nor is that
Term properly applied to the Points in Debate
'twixt him and us, which relate only to Matters
of Religion, and Obedience to Chrifl's Precepts,
and to the Dodlrines of his Gofpel -, which Pre-
cepts and Dodlrines are the Foundation of our
Principles by him oppofed. He obferves, that
*' the Gofpel-Liberty does not exempt us from
" the Obligation to Human Laws," and might
as juftly have obferved, that Human Laws do tiot
exempt
* LeiUr, Pag. 20. 21.
( 13 ;
exempt us from the Obligat'ioit of Obedience to
Chrijfs Precepts ; Precepts, wliich never advance
any thing inconfiftent w^ith '^ any particular
■ ' Duty w^e owe the Publick, or any particular
*' Branch of private Property/* Whoever there-
fore, under the fpecious Pretence of either of
thefe, fhall urge the Pradice of what thofe Pre-
cepts forbid, muft have entertain'd erroneous No-
tions concerning both. For Chrift's Precepts al-
ways " tend to the publick Good,'' and the
clofeft Adherence to them is the firmefl: Bond of
Community.
The fakers, fays the Examiner^ pag. 5,
" openly teach and avow, " That it is not law^
*' ful for Chriftians to refift Evil, or to War or
*' Fight /;/ ajiy Caje^ And does not Chrift hhn-
felf teach the very fame Do6lrine, Mat. v. 38.
to the End of the Chapter ? The ^takers think
it impoffible to reconcile the Precepts laid down
by Chrift with the Practice of Wars 3 and for
that Reafon they refufe to bear Arms or fight.
This their Obedience to Chrift's Precept they
think very confiftent with their '' being faithful,
'' andbearingtrue Allegiance to the King: They
^' declare that they are his loyal and obedient
" Subjects i" and their Principle oi not hearing
Arms, is an effedual Security of their peaceable
Demeanour toward his '' Perfon and Govern^
" ment."
But x\\(tExamn2er, while he plainly cojifeffes the
Chri/hanity of this Dodrine, by acknowledging,
that " if all the World was Chriftian, and that
'' all Chriftians followed the Rules of their Pro-
'' feffionSj Wars would then ceafe," neverthelcis
B 2, impeaches^
( ^4 )
impeaches the fame Do6lrine as injurious to th^ '
f' publick Safety," and " letting in a Deluge of
*^' Mifery and Defolation.^' Had he really be-
iiev'd what Chrift hath declared of himfelf, that
All Pqwer in Heaven aiid in Earth is given uji-
to hinty Mat. xxviii. i8, he would never have faid,
that '^ diftind: States and Kingdoms CANNOT be
*' fupported againft the Encroachments and In-
" vafions of others, but by War, and repelling
^' Force by Force." An Expreffion, moil: un-
warrantably limiting the Almighty Power to the
tJfe of Means which Chrift hath forbidden. An
Ohedie?tce to Chrift, and a Dependejice on his
Power y never lead Men into fuch Abfurdities.
As then the ^mkers firmly believe, that Wars
are prohibited by Chrift : So they alfo believe
the Supreme Power and Sovereignty of the Al-
mighty ; and that, as the Scriptures declare, the
moji High rukih in the Kingdom of Men, arid give th
it to nvhomjbever fo ivilL Danie], iv. 25. That
Power and Might are his^ a?id he changeth the.
^imes and the Seafonsy he removeth Ki7ig$ and fef^
eth up Kings, Dan. ii. 2. And that, T'he Powers
* thatbe^areordai7iedofGod: Whofoever there-
fore refifleth the Power ^ refifleth the Ordinance of
God. iRom. xiii. This their Cbriftian Principle^
v/hich forbids their Pefijlance of any Government,
effeftually fecures their Allegiance to that under
which they live : While the contrary Principle,
which admits the Ufe of Arms, and allows Men
to refift a Government they diflike, renders the
Affu ranee
U- ■ I « ) 'I I I a. I - ■■,! ■ n_jll»i 11 ,
'^ a,i \i7ch! i^ov(Tn/f The ciifting Povsrers.
( M)
Affurance of their Fidelity to any other, as fre-^
cariousy as their own Approbatio?i of its Con-
dud.
But feeing this falfe Alarm of Danger to th«
Government from a Principle of Peace, is founded
in a pretended Defence of the Clergy, permit us
to query, Whether an Exemption of the ^lakers
from Military Services, which they believe tin^
lawful, be not as realbnable as an Exemption of
the Clergy from the fame Services, which they
hold lawful ? Is not the Chrijiian Principle of the
former as good a Security to Government as the
Human Policy of the latter ? It has been obferved
by a * Writer, who had been formerly of their
own Order, that *' They (the Clergy) are ex-
'' empted from Military Services, both by the
f Pope's Canon-Law, and the Laws of the
*' Land, but ^d Script urd, by v/hat Scripture
*' are they exempted more than other Perfons ?
f^ Piety is indeed pretended by them, but the
" real Defign feem.s to have had its Rife from
•' Policy, tho' covered with the Cloak of Reli-
•' gion. And that which was their Policy at
•^ firft, in procefs of Time became their Privi-
*' lege, and now they claim it as a Right apper-
f* taining to their Order ; whereby they fhelter
t* themfelves from thofe dangerous Storms,
** which many of them are not wanting to ftir up
*' others to run into. Erafmus made the Ob-
" fervation in his Time, in a Dialogue between
*' Georgiui
•^ R. Claridge^ in his Melius L.^uirendHm. pag;
124. 125,
cc
( i6)
*^ Georgms and Livinus. * Z//. There are fome
** Divines^ faith he, that blow up the Coals, and
*' found an Alarm to thefe Tumults. Geo. I
*^ would fet thefe Men in the Front of the Bat-
*' tie. LL But they take Care of their own
" Safety.
" As for our Parts, (viz. the fakers) in that
we decline all Wars and Fighting with carnal
Weapons, we are not adted by any worldly
" Policy, but moved by true Piety towards God,
" and fincere Love to our Neighbour ; not to
*^ eafe or fave our Bodies from Danger, but to
" keep our Confciences void of Offence both to-
" wards God and towards Men. For feeing
" Chrift hath commanded us to love our Ene-
" mies, we believe it is our Duty to do nothing
*^ that is inconfiftent therewith.''
But fays the Examiner, pag. 6. ^' The Laws
of Nature, and of Self-Defence flill remain ;
^^ nor do weceafe to be Men by becoming Chrif-
*' tians." The Quakers fay nothing againft the
Lawiof Nature^TiOv of Self-Defence^io far as they
are confiftent with the Obfervation of Chrift 's
Precepts ; which, they believe, Wars and Fights
ing are not : Nor do they proceed fj^om the pure
Nature of Man, but from his Corruptions and
Depravities: Whetice^ fays the Apoftle, cotnelVars
C7id Fightings among you ? Come they not hetice^
even of your Lufts? James iv. i. Chrifiia-
nity
■^ Li. Non defunc Theologi qui frigidam fuf-
fundant, & ad hos Tumukus ClafTicum cananc.
Geo. Iflos ego Statuerim in prima acie. Li. At illi
fibi cavenc poll Principia. Erafmi Coll. ;percontandi
reiuccm.
cc
(i7)
nity IS a State of the mofi ferjeB Humanity. Its
Precepts of ^W/Tg- E?iej7iies, and of render ijig to m
Man Evil for Evily are adapted to reftore Human
Nature to its highejl Ferfe5lion ; and by forbidding
the EfFedls of Mem Lujis and inordinate Affec-
tions, would remove the Caufes which produce
them, and which are alfo forbidden. Abfurd
and weak therefore is the Examiners Remark of
" ccafing to be Men, by becoming Chriftians,"
by which, from the Advancement of Human Na-
ture to its highejl PerfeBion^ he would infer its
Annihilation,
The Cafe of the Magiflrate's exerting his
Power for the Punifhment of Evil-Doers, is not
parallel to that of Wars and F/ghti?ig', the
Gofpel of Chrift, which enjoins Subjedtion to the
One, having foi bidden the other.
" According to them, (viz. the ^lakers) fays
" the Examiner, pag. 6, 7. Should an Enemy, a
*^ Pretender to the King's Crown and Dignity,
" invade his Realms, his faithful Subjedls, who
" would facrifice their Lives and Fortunes in De-
" fence of his Royal Perfon and Family, and
" therein of our Religion, Laws and Liberties,
*' muft either bafely defert his Service, or forfeit
" their Title to Chriftianity." This is either a
weak Miftake, or a wilful Mifreprefentation :
For, the ^Lakers d^o not infer the '' Forfeiture of
*' Men s Title to Chrijiianity,'" from 3.ny particu-
lar Acf of Di (obedience : Nor are they fo uncha-
ritable as not to make reafonable Allowances for
the Diverfity of Men's Underftandings. To
themfelves indeed, who are fully perfuadcd that
ChriiVs Precepts abfolutely forbid all Wars and
FJght-
C i8 )
Fighting, the Practice of them would be uii^
doubtedly finful: But they pafs no Cenfure upon
other Men, who may have been taught to accept
thofe Precepts in a more limited Conflrudlion, and
may think the Prohibitions therein iefs extenfive :
Thofe who are fo perfuaded, and aft accordingly,
the fakers ]udgQ not; for could they themfeives
be of like Sentim.ents, that fFars are lawful^ they
ftiould efleem, what the Examiner mentions, to
be a very juftifiable Caufe of them, viz, '' In
*' Defence of the King's Pvoyal Perfon and Fa*
*' mily, and therein of our Laws and Liber-
*^ ties." We leave out the Word Religioji^ which
we fuppofe the £;(:^;;^/;2^r inferted thro' Forgetful-
ncfs of what he had told us a little before, pag. 5^
^tz, that " Chrift's Religion is not to be propa*
*' gated by the Sword." We may here put the
'Examiner in Mind of an Obfervation which has
been made, and of the Truth of which we would
not have him be an Injiance^ viz. That fome
Perfons, who have made a loud Profeffion of
*' facrificing their Lives and Fortunes," have been
more deficient in their Loyalty than Men of kjs
Talk.
The Exami?2er's Reflexions on the Behaviour
of the AfTembly of Pen/ilvaniay in their Legiflative
Capacity, are beneath our Notice. The Author
of the Sermon, he refers to, might have found
Matter more conducive to the Propagation of the
Go/pel in foreign Parts, than a partial Mifreprefen-*
tation of the Proceedings of that j^Jjembhy who,
we doubt not, are capable of jullifying their own
Conduct, 2.^ faithful SubjcBs to the King, and as
prudent and Chrijiian Conjervators of the Peace of
that
c 15 ;
that Province. A Condud for whicli tney are
accountable to the Governrrient here, who,
we prefume, did never give Licenfe or AfTent fof
officious Priefts to anticipate their Determinati-
ons, nor to intermeddle in Affairs fubje(5l only
to their Cognizance. The Government of that
Province is founded on PrincipleJ^ of the molt
univerfal Humanity and Benevolence. The free
Enjoyment of Liberty arid Propertj^ without re-
fpedt of Perfons or Parties, has made it a popu-
lous and flourifhing Colony, happy in the Enjoy-
ment of Peace, without the Burden of ScldierSy
and of Religion, free from the Impofitions of
Priejls : Neither of theje had any Share in the
Settlement of this Province, nor in the Eftabiifh-
ment of its prefent Happinefs. Attempts have
been made for introducing both : Should thofe
Attempts prevail, the Decknfion of the Province^
in all probability, will take its Date from the
Time of their SucceJL
The Exivnuier, pag. 8, endeavours to afiign d
Reafon for his mifreprefcnting the ^inkers, vi'Z»
** To (hew, in how unfavourable a Light they
" {land, when put in Competition with the
'^ Clergy of the Church of England, \Vho teach
" no fuch Dodrines, none, which may provd
^'^ deflrudive to the State, or injurious to their
*^ Neighbour." But, if he will give others the
Liberty hii*nfelf takes of drawing Con fequences,
they will probably conclude, that the Docfrine
of the Lawfulnefs of Wars 7nay prove, and hath
proved, " deftru6live to the State -,'' and that
the DoBrine of Tithes may prove, and hath pro-
ved, '' injurious to their Neighbour/' by unc-
C qualljr
I 20 /
qually transferring the whole Profit of the Labouf
of the induftrious Hulbandman, into the Hands
of thofe who neither plow nor fow.
He tells us, pag. 9, that " The ^takers have
" endeavoured to put the Property of the Clergy
" upon a different Footing, as to the Right there-
" of, from their own; and from the reft of the
" Subjefts of Eiiglandy In fo doing they have
endeavoured to ftate the Cafe aright; for the'
pretended Property of the Clergy to Tithes, is a
Property fcarce to be paralleFd. A pretended
Property in the Perfonal Property of others, with-
out either Gift^ PurchaJe^CompaB^ ContrciB^ or
Co72jent of the Owners. And yet the Examiner
will not admit it to be 2, forced Contribution : But
if an Injunction under Penalties upon Men, oblig-
ing them to pay or fet out to the Ufe of other
Perfons a Part of their Property, be 72ot 2i forced
Contribution^ the Examiner ^ we fuppofe will find
it difficuli to define what is. If, as he fays,
*« They (the ^takers) infift that a forced Contri-
*« bution for the Maintenance of the Clergy is
*' contrary to the Law of God ;" 'tis becaufe
Chrift hath ordained the Maintenance of his Mi-
nifters to be free^ not conftraified -, and becaufe
they think, that Vv hich is contrary to Chrijl's Or-
dinance^ isalfo contrary to the Law of God : And
they alfo think, that if a Tax be *' given byPar-
*' liament" to pay for that which Chrift ordained
to be free, " it may at any time be taken away"
by the fame Authority, with far more Juftice
than it was at firft impofed.
llie Examijieris miftaken, pag. 10, in calling
tithes " a feparate and diftinil Property from,.
' '' that
(21 )
*' that of the ^laker;' and in faying," " The
^' Clergy afk not what is theij^s, but only de-
" mand what is their own." For the whole
Crop is the Property of the ^laker, or Occupier
of the Land, no Part of which, without his own
Aoiy can become another Man*s -, nor was any
other Man ever the Proprietor of it. A Tenth
Part of it, when diftinguifli'd by the Proprietors
own Adl of fetting it forth, and of marking it as
a Deodand^ or Gift of his to God and Holy Churchy
the Parfon by Law may claim and take away ;
but he may not legally take away any Part of
the whole Crop not fo feparated. The ^uiker
therefore, who fets out no Tithe, in taking his
whole Crop to himfelf, takes nothing but his
own : He " takes not from the Clergy'* what is
theirs^ but only refufes to give them what is his^
The Examiners Inftancing " a Debtor's paying
*' his Creditor, a Tenant his Landlord, the
'' Buyer to him who fells," is foreign to the
Purpofe ; for certainly, tho' the '' giving fome-
" thing out of our own Stock!' to others, as an
Equivalent by Contradl for what we have re^
ceivcd out of theirs, may be ajiijl Debt ; yet an
Obligation of " giving fomething out oi our own
*' Stock!' to thofe from whom we never received
any thing out of their s^ may be an unreajbnable
Impofition,
'' It is, fays the Examiner^ needlcfs to enter in-
*' to an Enquiry, hov/ far the Minifters of the
*>' Gofpel have a Right to a Maintenance by the
*' Divine Law." But could he from that Law
prove their Right to Tithes, he would fcarce
wftve fuch an Enquiry : For the Foundation ot
C ^ ^he
(22)
the fakers Scruple is, that they are firmly per^'
fuaded, that by the Divine Law, the Minifters
of the Golpel have no Right to any other Main-
tenance than a free Supply of their Neceffities
from thofe only who receive them as fuch ; and
that they are forbidden by the divine Law to
accept Maintenance from thofe who do not ac-
cept them and their Miniftry. 'Tis indeed ex-
prefly declared by the Apoftle, that the Lord hath
crdaifiedy that thofe who preach the Go/pel^ Jhould
live of the Go/pel, i Cor. ix. 14. Which Decla-
ration refers not to human Laws, but to Chriji's
Ordinance: And what Chrift hath ordained, ap-
pears by his own Precepts. Mat. x. i. Freely ye
have received^ freely give. Vtrk 10. T^he Workman
is worthy of his Meat. Verfe 14. Whofoever Jhall
not receive you^ nor hear your Words ; when ye
depart out of that Houje or City^ Jhake off the
Dull of your Feet. And Lukex. 7. The Labourer
is worthy oj his Hire. Verfe 8. Eat fuch things
as are fet before you. By which Precepts 'tis
evident that Chrift's Minifters were to receive
only a free Maintenance, and that from thofe
only who willingly received and heard them :
All Gompulfion of Pay is therefore inconfiftent
with the Nature of that Miniftry, and of that
Maintenance, w:hich the Lord hath ordained.
Bwt tht Exami?2er^ pag. 11, infinuates, that
the "Text * is only applicable to thofe who *' can
** heal the Sick, cleanfe the Lepers^ raife the
*^ Dead, cafi out Devils,'' for the Minifters menti-
oned in that Text were endued with fuch Pow-
ers,
\. — \ . . ■■ . .]i"\
^ Mac X. 8. Freely yi have rsceived^ freely give.
r 23;
v'' VA^'^A ^^^^T^f'°n makes agalnft himfelf :
ForifMnnflers, who had fo extenfive a Power
of doing Good, were under an Obligation to m;f
fr^e/y, certainly thofc who have lefs Povvef of
doing Good, can have no Rigk to compel Main
tenance :_ Tho' 'tis probable, %he E...Zr^:;
be of Opinion, that Force is moji nccefTary for the
Support of thofe who have leajl Merit
He tells us, pag. 1 1, - That this Mainte-
" Anw' °^' r ^^^'""/^arce delervean
Anfwer and refers to « Pka in behalf of the
Quakers hy Jojeph Ollive, pag. 49. butfilently
pafles over the Arguments advanced by that
£n .0 "^^ ; ^^ finds more eafy to lontemn
than to conjute ■ and therefore fays, they « fcarce
deferve what he can't give. He queries.
Does Renouncing the Errors of that Religion
any ways aftefl the legal Right to an Eftate ?"
Not confidenng, that his pretended Title to
Tithes has its Foundation in thofe very Errors he
talks of renouncing. The £rw^ znd Super/ii.
tton oi th^t Religion were the Source of their
Original ponatiom : And the Continuance of the
Claim of them to this Day fhews, that the Er~
rors of that Religion are not yet perfeaiv re-
EftatesfromPop.fhAnceftors," has no man-
ner of Relation to the Religion of their An-
P .°? P I ^^\C'^="V°f" Tithes, deriVd from
Fopifi Pnefts has a direct Relation to fome of
tir fT' °^ that Religion, .v.^. the
Doftrines of Purgatory, and of the Sacerdotal
Poii-er of Remitting the Sins both of tiie Living
and
( 24)
and the Dead : On the Belief of thefe Antichrif*
tian Dodtrines, many of the Donors of Tithes
originally granted them. This appears by feveral
Charters of thofe Donations cited by Selden in
his Hiftory of Tithes : MthehdfKin^ of the JVefi'
Saxons gives them '' for the Cure of his Soul, and
*' the Pojierity of his Kingdo?n and People :'^"
Another Donor gives them " for the Salvation
" of his own Soul and of his Family :*^" And a
third confirms them " for the Ranfoni of the Sins
^' of himjelf of his JVife^ a7id of his Heirs : -f'' A.
fourth ratines a Grant of them " for the Love of
*' Gody and the Health of his own Soul^ and the
" Soul of his Wife^ and of his Predecefors: ^^^^Y*
A fifth grants both great and fmall Tithes *' that
" Mafs may he faid thrice a Week, for his Soul,
^' and the Soul of his Wife, and for the Souls of
*' his Father, his Mother, and his Ancefiors :*" A
fxth gives them "-^fpecially for the Soul of Sd^nus
*' c/'Effefla, and for the Salvation of Robert,
** his Lord, Son of the faid 'i'^nu^, who gave him
*' the Land, and for the Salvation of Gonnox his
" Wife-, and for the Salvation of himfelf, and his
«« Wife-, and of William the Son ofGtrtMS,
" her
^ Pro mese remedio animas, & regni-pofteritate &
populi. -pag. 208.
^^ Pro falute animas fuae & fuorum. pag. 313.
-f- Pro redemptione delid;oruni meorum & uxoris
me?E& heredum meorum. ibid.
tt Pi'o amore Dei & falutas animce meas ct uxoris
et AntecefTorum mcoriim. fag. 315.
* Ut MifTa proanima mea, et uxoris mere, et pro
animabus patris ct rnatris mere, ec a ntcceiTor urn me-
orum, rer in unaquaquc Septimani cclebretiir, _/). 332,
( 25 ;
'^ her Father ; nnd jor the Soul of his own Father,
*' and of his Mother, and of his Brother, and of
" all his Friends and AnceftorsJ^'\'' Kiug Ste^
fhen made a Grant of Tithes '' for the Soul of
*-' Ki7JgY{'E,^RY hisUncle, and for the Flea Ith of
'' his own Soul, and of ^leen Maud his Wife,
" ^Wo/' EusTACHius his Son, and his other
'' Children,'^''''
The Preamble of another Grant of the fame
King Stephen is as follows, " || Forafmuch as we
'' know
^f Pr^scipuc pro anima Sceni de EJfeJsd, et pro
Saluce Domini mei Roberti filii prnsdidi S(sni qui
mihi banc terram dedit, et pro falute Gonnor uxoris
fujE, et pro ialute mea et uxoris rnese, & Willielmi
filii Gerei patris fui, et pro anima patris mei et ma-
tris mes, et fratris mei, & omnium Amicorum et
Anieceflbrum meorum. fag. ^^6.
f "^ Pro anima Regis Henrici Avunculi mei, et
pro filute animns mejE, et Matildis Reginas Uxoris
meas, & Etiftacbii filii mei, & aliorum pueroruni
meorum. fag. 336.
IJ Qaoniam, divina miferlcordia providente, cog-'
novinvjs elTe difpolitum, et longe lateque pr?edicante
Ecclefia, Ibnat omnium Auribus divulgatum, Quod
Eleemofynarum l.irgitione pofTunt abfolvi vincula.
peccAtorum, et adquiri coelcftium pr?emia gaudio-
rum : Ego Stepbanus DH gratia Anglorum Rex,
partem habere volenscum illis, qui foelici commercio
coclcitia pro tcrrenis commutant, Dei amore com-
pun6lus, & pro Salute animai mcas et patris mei, ma-
trifque mese, & omnium parentum meorum, & An-
tcccirorum meorum Regum, Williehni fcilicet Regis-
Avi mei, et Willielmi Regi.s Avunculi mei, et Henrici
Regis Avunculi mei, et Rotberti ALdct, et confilio H:^--
ronum meorum, conccdo Deo et Ecclcfia^ fixniv
Petri, &c. pag. 346.
( 26 )
«* knoWj that by the Providence of divine Mer-
^' cy 'tis ordained ; and by the Preaching of the
** Church far and near, 'tis proclaimed in the
** Ears of all Men, that by the giving of Alms,
" the Bonds of Sins may be abfolved, and the
*' Rev^ards of Heavenly Joys obtained : I 5/^-
*' phen by the Grace of God King of England,
*' defirous to partake with thofe who by an hap-^
" py Commerce exchange heavenly Things for
** earthly, fmitten with the Love of God, and
•^ for the Salvation of my own Soul, and the
*' Souls of my Father, and of my Mother,
•* and of all my Progenitors, and of the Kings
*' mine Anceftors, to wity Of King William
" my Grandfather, of King William my Un-
** cle, and of King Henry my Uncle, and of
" Rotbert Malet ; with the Advice of my Ba-
*^ rons, do grant to God and the Church of St
** Peter,'' &c. Alfo King Henry the 3d. granted
certain Tithes to the Monks oi Bafingwere * for
the Salvation of the Soul of his Father King
John,
Should any Man doubt the Truth of what the
Examiner fays, viz, that " the prefent Clergy
^' of the Church of England are reform'd from
" the Errors and Superftition of their Prede-
** ceffors,*' he would need abetter Argument to
convince him, than their Infifting on a Mainte^
nance founded on feme of the groffeft of thofe
Errors, and the Darkeft of that Superjiition, they
profefs to have renounced.
But
* Pro falute Animse Domini Johannis Regis patris
noftri. fag, 444.
( ^7 )
But the Examiner, pag. 12, thinks it not
'' material to enquire into the Motives of thofe
II who firft" granted Tithes. *« Doubtlefs, fays
he, it was the Convicftion of their own Con-
'' fciences." Doubtlefs, fay we, it was the
avaricious Fraud and Guile of Popifi Priefts and
Monks, which blinded their Con fciences ; frft
by teaching thtm A?itichri(iia?i DoBrines, for
the Sake of unrighteous Gain to themfclves ; and
the?i with Pretence of Devotion, fandlifying
the Fruits of their own DelufidUs, ilnder the
Name of Dues to God, and Holy Church-, as
if the Gifts of deluded Ignorance and Superfli-
tion had been cts acceptable to God and his
Church, as to thofe who mifcaU'd themfelve^
his Minifters.
'' ItfufRceth, fayS the Examner, that they
'' had a Power to give, and the Law regards not
'' fo much the Motives of the Giver, as the
*' Right and Power he has of giving.'* But has
anfwer'd himfcif by producing a Citation from
Antho7iy Pear/on, fhewing, that the Giver had
nt) fuch Right or Power of giving from the Pof-
terity of other Men what never Was his own ;
becaufe '' the Tithe is not paid by Reafon of the
" Land, but of the Incteafe," atid '' the In-
^' creafe comes not by the Land, which defcends
" from the Anceflor, but by the great Charge^
" Induftry, and Labour of the Hufbandman/*
This he would gainfay, but knowi nothow^
and therefore talks of Socage Tenure, while he is
urging the Payment of TitheS from thofe who
hold by no fuch Tenure, *^ The Aid of the
\' Land;' as he calls it, is purchafed by the Reht
D the
( 28 )
the Occupier pays, and is therefore as properly his
own, as his Seed and Labour.
He urges, pag. 13, that, "it would not be
" confiftent with the Juftice of the Legiflature
" to take away what had been voluntarily given,
" unlefs the Caufe had ceafcd for which it was
" given/' We have already fliewn that Tithes
were x'^'Ccitx fraudulently obtained than voluntarily
given. The Caule of their Donations plainly ap-
pears to have been, the procuring of MaJJes or
Prayers to be faid for the Souls of Perfons de-
ceafed. The Caufe of them, viz. the faying
fuch MaJJes or Prayers is now ceafed ; whefore it
will follow from the Examiners own Premifes,
that the Caufe being ceafed for which Tithes
were given, the taking them away might be very
confiftent with the Juftice of the Legijlature,
The Examiner obferves, that " the Eftablifli-
*^ ment of the Church cannot continue without
" a legal Provifion for its Minifters." How ne-
ceffary foever a legal Provifion may be for the le-
gal Minifters of a Church legally eftabliflied ; yet
neither that Provifion, nor that Eftablifliment, are
any peculiar Marks of the Church of Chrift,
which certainly had its original Eftabliftiment on
another Foiuidation, i Cor. iii. 10, 11, 12. Ephef.
ii. 20. " A legal Provifion for Minifters" being
no where enjoyned by any Precept of the Gofpel,
feems to have its Rife from human Policy ; for,
by virtue of fuch a Provifion, the Generality of
thofe w^hom the People weakly accept as their
Guides in Religion, become fubfervient to the Pur-
pofcs of them, in whofe Power the Difpofal of that
legal Provifion is : A Means^ by which Men
may
r 29 ;
may be converted to any Religion except that of
pure and primitive Chriilianity, wliich was whol-
ly unacquainted with fuch Motives, and which
made a wonderful and furprizing Progrefs in the
World, while its Minifters had no other legal
Provijion than that of Bonds^ lmpriJo?i7?ie}its, and
Death, Wherefore a legal Frovifion for its Mi-
nifters is not abfolutely necefiary to fupport the
Church of Chrill: 3 however conducive it may be
to the Eflablifliment of fuch a Forin of Religion
as the civil Magiftrate fliall think fit to appoint :
The Chriftianity of which Form will be as in-
difputable as the Infallibility of his Judgment.
The ^inkers are known to be firm Friends
*' to the Conftitution/* and dcfire not *' to pro-
*' cure any Alteration in the prefent Eftablifh-
" ment," wherefore they contemn the Exami?iers
uncharitable Innuendos in that Refpedt. The mu-
tual Securitv of the Church and State in each
other they envy not ; tho* perhaps fome of them
may think, that even in Point of that Security^
the Church is rather on the furer Side. However,
they are fully perfuaded, that a Rejlri^lion of the
Clergy from unnccejjary Severities, can never have
any Tendency either to '' undermine the One,
*' or weaken the other."
" Tithe, (fays the Examiner ipag. 14,) is am
" Eftate in it felf , feparate and difiinft from the
*' Land,'* which is equally true of the whole
Produce, as of the Tenth, or any other Part of
it. And thclnftances he produces pag. 15, to
prove the Tithes a Jeparate Ejlate^ do equally
prove the nzhok Crop to he fo ; viz, the ferfonal
EJiate of the Occupier of the Land. And where,
P 2 by
( 30 )
by the Land^Owner's occupying his own Land^
there is an Unity of Poffeflion, tho' the Land bp
^n EJiale of Inheritance, yet the Crop is not (q,
\)\it merely fprfonal : For which Reafon the Owr
ner cannot grant zn EJlate of Inheritance of that
wherein himfelf has 07ily a per/onal Pvoperty :
For, as the Examiner well obferves, " No Pcrr
** fon can grant to another a greater Right than
f' himfelf has." Wherefore that Part of the
£A:^;;7///^/sDefcription of Tithes, which fay^,
that jt ''is by Law an Inheritance collateral
'' to the Eftat^ of the Land," is not good: He
fcems to have borrowed it from Bohuns Law of
Tithes, pag. 4, who fays, that, " In fome
*' of our Law Books, Tithes arp briefly defined
''to be an Ecclefiaftical Inheritance, or Pro-
" perty in the Church, collateral to the Eftate
" of the Lands thereof." This, the Examiner
might h^ve obferv'd, is plainly reftrided to
Church-Lands. He might alfo have diftinguilht
between the Definitions in fome Law-Booh and
the Law it felf. Befides, the fam.e AntUr in the
next Words fays, that Tithe is in " other Law-
Eooks " more fully" defined to be " a certain
*' Part of the Fruit or lawful Increafe of the
*' Earth, Beafls, or Mens Labours, which in
^' moft PUces, and of mofl Things, is the
'' Tenth Part, which by the Law hath been
'' given to the Miniftersof the Gofpel in Rccom-
'' pence of thejr attending their Office." This
Definition fhews the lithe to be a Fart of the
perfonal Property or EJiate of the Occupier of
fhe Land ; and as fuch 'tis eflecmed in the Eye
Sf the Lawj which permits no Man to fever or
( 31 )
fet it out but the Proprietor of the Whole : Nor
is it properly call'd 'Tithe, till fo Separated and fet
out by the Proprietor's own Ad: : By which Ad:
he transfers his Property therein to another Per-
fon, who being fo become the Proprietor of it,
may then lawfully take away what before he
might not. This the Examiner himfelf is fo fcn-
fible of, that he acknowledges pag. 17, that
" the Proprietor of the Tithe has indeed no dif-
'* tindt Property in it, until it is fet out :" And
yet but a few Lines after, flatly contradifts him-
felf, when fpeaking of the Tithe not fet out, he
fays, '' the Property thereof is dirtind, and the
*' Eftate therein feparate from the ^iaker'%
•" own;" unlefs he intends it of his Eilate as
Land-Owner, ' not as Occupier, But, fays the
Exa?}ji?ier, '* Altho' it be carried away by him
" without being fet out, yet an Adion lies againft
^' him for ivith-hrAiing, withdraivijigjiibjlradling
*' his Tithe." By which Words, no more feems
intended, than that he did not fet them out as
the Law direds ; but refufcd to transfer his Pro-
perty to another, tho' by Law enjoined (o to do.
If the Examiner can fee no more Juftice in
" carrying away" a Man's own Corn '' from his
" own Ground," than in *' taking away the
*' Corn from off his Neighbours Ground;" all
we have to infer from thence is, that his Notions
of Jiijlice, and of Property, are equally erroneous.
The whole Crop then being confidercd, as it
is, the Occupier's own Property, the Weakncfs of
^he Exami?iers Query, pag. 15, '' How then
** docs the ^laker fupport his Right to the
[[ Tithe ?" plaiqly app$:ais : For ihx fame Rigl:t
which
(32)
which he hath in the whole of his Crop, he hath
in every Part of it. A perfonal Right to the
Fruits of his own Labour, the Produce of the
Land he rents, ploughs and fows, at his own fole
Expellee. Nor can he diftinguilli any Part of his
Crop, which was not produced by the fame
Means as every other Part of it ; and therefore his
Coji/dence is fupported by the divine Right of
Reafon and Equity, in taking to himfelf that
which is his own, and never was any other
Man's. He neither *' claims it by Defcent from
" his Anceftors ;" nor " by Devife or Gift/'
nor *' byPurchafe of the Land;'* but he claims
it as his own, by the Purchafe of his own Ex-
pence and Labour, to the Fruits of which he
hath a Right by natural Juflice, and the Laws
both of God and Man. As to "Tithe, he ha^
nothing to do with it : Ke utithtvtakes^ nov pays
any : He feparatcs no Part of his Crop for that
Ufe ; without which Ad: of Separation^ Tithe is
not.
The Law indeed dire6ls fuch a Separation of
a tenth Part, as due to God and holy Church. This
Injun6lion of paying Tithes as an A6t of religi-
ous Worfoip, the ^laker obferves not, being fully
perfuaded in his Confcience, that the Payment of
them is prohibited by the Gofpel of Chrift : He
looks upon them as a Jewijlo Rite abrogated by
the Gofpel', and thinks th^t Human Laws can-
not incorporate into the Chrijiian Religion any
Rite fo abrogated. Wherefore this, and other
'Examiners of the Brief Account, appear to him
to have defigned an Impofitlon on their Readers,
by mifreprefenting his Kcrwlk.oi Confcience as
-refpo^ling
( 33 )
rcfpecfling " Matter of meer civil Right," while
that Scruple has an immediate Relatio?i to Mat-
ters of Religious Worfliip, and which nearly
aifed: his Obedience to the Ckrijitaii Religion.
The 'Examiner feems to admit, pag. i6, that
*^ the Law of Tithes was Jewifiy' but is mi-
Aaken in faying '' there is no Type, no Myfte-
*' ry in them," for the Tithes are expreily called
an Hed'vc-Offerifig^ Numb, xviii. 24. and confe-
quently were a Type^ as all the Heave-Ofjerings
were, of Chrift crucified ; for as thofe Offerings
were heaved or lifted up to the Lord, fo Chriil
was heaved or lifted up, in offering himfelf a
Sacrifice for Sin upon the Crofs. So that the Ex-
aminer'^ f^iying, that *' the wifefl Nations bor-
*' row'd their Laws from others,'* proves nothing
in relation to Tithes^ nor to the bringing thofe
Types appertaining to the Jeucijh Religion into the
Chrijlian Church,
The Examiner'^ Tale, pag. 18, from MaU
thew Paris, of *^ People where their Pariili
'^ Priefts were married, thinking themielves pro-
'* hiblted to pay them Tithes; and not know-
*' ing how elfe to be difcharged, rather chofe to
*' burn them than keep them to their own Ui&y'^*
is an Inftance which might excite Compaffion m
any reafonable Man, not a Prieft, toward his Fel-
low-Creatures, under the Power of fuch grofs
Darknefs and Delufion ; and might raife a juft
Deteliation of the wicked Craft of thofe Romi/Jj
Frie/is, who had inftilled into them fuch llavifli
,ar\d fuperftitious Notions of Property. We quef-
tion not, but that the Examiner is capable of
giving better Proof of hi.? own reject ing /><.;/>.7/yf//-
tLority
r 34 )
thorit)\ than his Revival and feemlng Approbati-
on of fuch Notions.
He queries, pag. i8. " If they (the '^mkers)
*' cannot be convinced that the Clergy have a
*' Divme Right to a Maintenance, will it fol-
** low from thence that they have none ? " Ta
this we anfwer, that Chrijfs Mittijlers have a di ^
vine Right to fuch Mai?itena?ice as he hath or
dained them, viz. A Supply of their Neceffities
by the free Bounty and Benevolence of thofe who
receive them: To fuch a Maintenance all Chrift's
Minifters have a diviiie Right by Virtue of his
Ordinance : Thofe who have not that Right are
not his Minifters. A divine Call to his Service^
and a divine Right to the Maintenance he has or-
dained, arc infeparable : Thole who have the for^
mer^ are always content with the latter. Intm-
ders into His Service may be known by their Dif-
fidence of ///i Pay, and their unfcriptiiral "Talk
of " Common-LaWy' ** Rrefcription^' " Imme-
" morial Ufage," " Conveying of Property by
** Defcent or Succeffion ; '* all which have no
manner of Relation to Chrift's Minifters as fuch,
nor to any Thing by him ordained refpefting
their Maintenance.
He tells us, pag. 19, ** that the Clergy found
" their Claim to Tithes, as they are now due^
" upon the Laws of the Land, cannot be call'd
" dropping their Pretence of a divine Right!' And
yet certainly their laying a New Foundation for
their Claim, is an Indication that they think the
old One infufficient to fupport it : Accordingly,
the Examiner himfelf calls their Pretence of a di-
vine Right J " a dead Letter to thofe who oppofe
•*it:"
( 35 ;
'' it :'"' This may be true of a ^Mere empfy Pre^
tence to divine Right where it is not -, but 'where
divi?ie Right xQdWj is, divine Power is fufficient to
llipport it '' without the Aid of Human Laws."
Could the Clergy lliew their Claim to Tithes to be
Chriftian^ they would need no Recourfe '' to the
" Courts of Juftice" to recover them from us, who
ground our confcientious Scruple of Paying them
upon our Belief of their being AntichriJUan: The
Examiner attempts not to remove our Scruple
either by Scripture or Reajhii : But without min-
cing the Matter recurs to downright Force, and
fays, " No Action can be founded in a Court of
*' Juftice upon a Text of Scripture only." This
was not the Apoftolical Method of convi?ici?ig
Gainfayers,
His faying that " the Laws of the Land are
'' the only Rule, by which Property is go*
^' verned,"affe(5ls not us, nor our Scruple, founded
on the DoBrine of Chrijiianity : He has not yet
told us, that '* the Laws of the Land are the
^' only Rule" by which that Do^trifie is to be
meafured. In this Cafe of Tithes, where the
Laizs of the L a/i d 2ind the Do6trine of Chrift ap-
pear to us to difagree, we apprehend, that no
ConftruSiion of the Sages of the Law can diflblve
our Obligation of Obedience to Chrift's Pre-
cept.
But the Examiner foars yet a Pitch hl2;her,
when, pag. 20, in Favour of the Clergies con-
ceited Property in Tithes, he ftrikes at the very
Foundation of Protejiantipn^ by attempting to rt-
prefent the '' Liberty oi every individual Per fori'
to judge for himfelf " of the Truth and Propiie-
*' tv
( 36;
*' ty of the Interpretation of Scripture," as dan-
gerous to Property in general : A hold Attempt,
and unwarrantable, had it not been in a Defence
of the Clergies Interefl. The Examiner, howe-
ver frequently miftaken, has in this Point hit up-
on a notable Expedient : For, it muft be acknow-
ledged, that the moft efFedual Method of fecur-
ing the Claim, even of a Frotcflant Clergy, to
Tithes, would be the reftoring to them the Pow-
ers, they formerly difclaimed, of keeping the
Keys of Scripture in their own PoiTeffion, and
making their Senje of it the general Standard for
all the reft of Mankind to judge by.
" The Clergies Right to Tithe (fays the Exa-
" miner, pag. 20.) is as ancient, as the Monarchy,
" and coeval with our Conftitution. It had its
" Commencement from the Voluntary Gift of
" the Owners of the Lands, confirmed by feve-
" ral Kings in the General Councils of the
*' Realm : Which Laws were collected together
«' by Edicard the Confeflbr before the Con-
^' queft." But had he confidered the Dates of
many of the Charters of Donations of Tithes
granted by Land Owners, (recited by Selden in
his HiftGry oflHihes) he would have found that
they were made long fince the Conqueft : Confe-
quently a Right, which " had its Commence-
'' ment from any of thofe Donations, could not
" be as ancient as the Monarchy,'* nor '' coeval
*' with our Conftitution," nor comprehended in
*^ St. Edward's LcWYsJ' He cites, pag. 21, '' the
*' Coro/iation Oath'' as '* alter'd upon the Revolu-
^^ tion," containing a Promife to '' preferve unto
« ' the Bifliops and Clergy of this Realm, and to
'' the
( 37 )
" the Churches committed to their Charge, all
*' fuch Rights and Privileges as by Law do and
*' fliall appertain to them or any of them." But
what he can from thence infer to his Purpofe,
we fee not, unlefs he v»dll abfurdly conclude,
That the Laws relating to thofe Rights and Pri-
vikges arc thereby become zmalterable. Nor
ought that Oath to be conftrued in a Senfe ex-
tending to oblige the Kings or Queens of this
Realm to any Degree of Perfecution or unchrlf-
tian Severity : 'Tis obfcrved, that when King
William III. took the Coronation Oath of Scot-
land, at the Repeating a Claufe therein, relating
to Hereticks, he declared, that *' he did not
*' mean by thofe Words, that he was under any
'' Obligation to become a Perfecutor. "^^ " Nor
is it reafonable to fuppofe that the Exercife of un^
necejj'ary Severities can properly be called a Right
or Privilege of the Clergy.
I may here (fays the Exajniner^ pag. 21, 22.)
take Notice of '' the Date of their firft Letter
" of Exhortation from the general AlTembly (at
" leaft that we meet with) againft Payment of
*' Tithes, which is very remarkable, and to
^' which the others refer. The Yearly-Meeting
*' oi ^takers in 1687, which had agreed upon,
" and prefented a flattering Addrefs to the late
" King James^ complimenting him upon that
*' which had caufed a Terror to the Nation in
*' General, his exercifing a difpenfing Power
E 2 '' with
^ Seethe iitb and laft Colleaion of Papers (Vol. I.)
rclatwg to the prefent Jun^lure of Affairs hetiveen. Eng-
land a}2' Scotland: Printed h Richard Janeway^
^/nio i6Sa.
*<
( 38 )
^^ wifeh the Laws of Land ; thought it a proper
'^^ Time for theni like wife to exercife that Power
*' thty had flattered in their Prince. Tis then
" the Brethren are exhorted and admoniilied to
'^ bear their Teftimony againft the Antichriftian
'' Payments (as they ftile them) of Tithes." Had he
feen the Letter he mentions, he could not reafon-
ably have thought, that the Exhortation therein
had any peculiar Relation to that Time: The
Words of it are, " And, dear Friends, we do far-
*' ther in the Love of God, and his bleffed Truth,
and Teftimony of Chrift Jefus, recommend it
to your tender and Chrifiian Care^ that Friends
** in their feveral Counties do iincerely keep to
*' their Ancient and Chriftian Teftimony againft
** that oldzr\A great Oppreflion of Tithes, for
" which many faithful Friends have deeply fuf-:
*' fered, (fome to Death in Goals) and feveral ftill
*' fuffer." This Exhortation exprefly refers to
their ancient Teftimony ; and confequently was
nothing then new or unufual. Their Addrefs to
King yaines was nol flattering^ but a reafonable
Acknowledgment of his Favour, by which (as
the Addrefs itfelf fets forth) " above Twelve
'^ Hundred Prifoners were releafed from their
*' fevere Lnprifonments, and many others from
*' Spoil and Ruin in their Eftate? and Properties.'*
For the King% '' commiferating their afflidled
Condition," his *' exprefling an Averfion to
all Force upon Confcience, and granting all his
Diffenting Subjeds an ample Liberty to wor-
ftiip God in the Way they are perfuaded is
moft. agreeable to his Will," they exprefs their
humble, Chriftian, and thankful Acknowledg-
'' ment5e'-
<c
f 39 ;
f' ments/* And what could they do lefs? Could
any Icfs than this be expedled from Perfons under
their Circumftances ? They had for above twen-
ty Years undergone a Variety of Sufferings, by
excejjive Fines exorbitantly levied^ tedious Impri-
lonmeyits^ and Banijhments on Pain of Death, for
wordiipping God according to their Confciences,
under a Government, which, tho* called Protef-
taut, had put in Prad:ice the ^ivorfl of Popery^ viz.
Pet'lecution jor the Sake of Confcience a?jd Reli^
gioiu Who, under the like * Circumftances
would
* /// the Tear 16 So was printed and pre fen ted to
King Ch:ulfs II. and the Lords and Commons in Par^
liamoit ajjembhd^ The Gile of the People called ^a-
kers^ flaufci in Relation ro their late and prefent Sutler-
ings. At the End of which is a General Abridgment
of their Sufferings from 1660 to 1680, viz.
I. T^bere have died of our Friends in Pri-
fon, and Pnfoners^ for the Exercije of
their Faith and Confcience tn Mat-
ters Spiritual •, fo?ne of whom have
been beaten and bruifed, being knocked
down at their peaceable Meetings,
and died of their JVounds.
> 243
II. Arid there remain now in Prifon in ")
the fever al Goals in England and
Wales, whofuffer alfo for the Tefti-
viony of a good Confcience ; inanv
of which are prof ecu ted by Writs of J>
Excv^mmunicato capiendo, and
have been diverfe of them clofely cor-
fin'd upon that Account for fever al
T'cars,
276
HI. And
( 40 ;
would not have accepted a prefent Deliverance
from fuch a State of Afflidlion as a Favour, re-
quiring a grateful Acknowledgment ? It was juft-
ly obferved by the Perfon who prefented their
Addrefs, that " As their Sufferings would have
*' moved Stones to Compajjion^ fo they ithould be
" harder, if they were not moved to Gratitude.'*
They exprefTed a juft Senfe of the prefent Fa-
vours they had received from that King^ but they
were fo far from " complimenting him upon
" his Exerclfing a difpenfing Power with thq
" Laws of the Land," that in the very fame Ad-
drefs.
III. And there have faff ered Imprifon- "^
ment for meeting and rejiifmg jor
Confcience fake to [wear \ fome
of whom have had the Sentence
of aYxtmMXViXfpaft uponthem \ \ 9437
and diverfa of them had their
Goods and Chattels dijlrain'd^
and taken from them, j
IV. ^he Number of our Friends Ex- *>
communicated for not conforming ^ 624
to the puhlick Worjhip, j
V. And there have been fentenced for !>
Banijhment for meeting together i* 198
to worfbip God, j
10778
During all that Time of terrible Perfecution, the then
Clergy of the Church of England zvere in pcrfeot Tran-
quillity^ and at Eafe : Nor do we find ^ that they in Con-
vocation did ever remon/lrate to the Government the leajl
Dijfatisfa^ion with thofe Proceedings,
r4i )
drefs, they fay, " we hope the good EfFeds
" thereof, f'viz, Liberty of Confcience) for the
*' Peace, Trade, and Profperity of the Kingdom,
" will produce fuch a Concurrence from the Par-
*' liament as may fccure it to our Pofterity in
*' After-Times." They were fo far from ^^//^r-
t?ig a dijpeiifmg Power, that they expreffed no
Hope of Security but in a Legal 0?2e. We have
placed the * ^-i/^rf/i it felf in the Margin, which
the Reader will find fo far from being 2l fatter^
ing Addrefs, that *tis really worthy of Imitation
for the Chrifiian Simplicity and Linocence of its
Expreflion.
The
* To King James 11, over
Rv.gland^ &C.
^'he humhle arid grateful Ackftcwledgments of his
peaceable SubjeBs^ called Q^u a k e r s, in
this Kingdom,
From their njual Yearly-Meeting in London, the
Nineteenth Day of the Third Month, vulgarly
called M-^y, 1687.
" \ Ar ^ cannot but blefs and praife the Name of
<c y Y Aimighcy Gori, who hath the Hearts of
" Princes in liis Hand, that he hath inclined the
" King to hear the Cries of his Suffering SubjeCls
'' for Confcicnce-Sake -, and we rejoice, that inftead
<' of troubling him with Complaints of our Suffer-
'' ings he hath given us \o eminent Occafion to
<« prtrlcnt him with our Thanks. And fince it hath
" pleafed the King, out of his grea^ Compafllon,
'' thu3 to commiferatc our afHictcd Cundition, which
^' hath
( 42 )
The £>:'^;;2/;;<?r, pag, 22, farther faySj '^ Thej*
" have ftill continued to prefs it {viz, their Tel-
" timony againft Tithes) upon the Confciences
" of their Followers, contrary to the very Terms
" of the Toleration." Bat let him confider, that
the ^laker^ prefs that Teftimony upon the Con-
fciences of None, but who already profefs them-
felves
*' hath fo particularly pppetartd by his gracious Pro-
*' clamacion and Warrants lalt Year, (whereby above
*' Twelve Hundred Prijoners were releafed from their
*' fevere Imprifonmenr?, ^nd many others from Spoil
«' and Ruin in their Eftates and Properties^ and his
*' Princely Speech in Council, and Chriftian D-icla-
*< ration for Liberty of Confcience^ in which he doth
" not only exprefs his A^verflon to all Force upon
" Confcience, and grant all his dijjenting Subjecfs an
*' ample Liberty to worfhip God in the Way they
*' are perfuaded is moft agreeable to his Will, but
*' gives them bis Kingly fFord, the fame fhall conti-
<« nue during his Reign •, we do (as our Friends of
*' this City have already done) render the King our
*' humble, Chriftian, and thankful Acknov/kdg-
*' ments, not only in Behalf of ourfelves, but with
«' Refpedl to our Friends throughout Ejjo^land and
*' JVales •, and pray God with all our Hearts, to
" blefs and preferve nee^ O King^ and thofe under
" Thee in io good a U^ork: And as we can aiiure the
« King it is well accepted in the Counties from
*' whence we came, fo we hope the good Effedls
«' thereof, for the Peace, Trade, and Profperity of
*^* the Kingdom, will produce fuch a Concurrence
*' from the Parliament, as may fecure it to our Pof-
»* terity in after Times: And v/hile vvelive, it lliall
*' be our Endeavour fthro' God's Grace) to demtaa
*' ourfelves, as in Confcience to God, and Duty to
«' the King, we are obliged, his peaceable, loving,
*' and faithful Subjects.
fclves convinced in Confcience that Ti'tbes ara
Antichrifiian-, and that *tis every Man's Duty to
acft according to the Convi5liom of his Confcience,
elpecially, when he behevcs thofe Convidions
grounded on the Gofpel of Chrlft. Wherein the
fakers preffing fuch an Obedience is contrary to
the Terms of the Adl of Toleration, . made for
the Eafe of fcrupulous Confciences, they cannot
perceive. If invidious Adverfaries will conftrud:
their Chrijlian ^eftimony againft what they believe
Antichrijlian^ into '' a fixt Refolution hot to give
*' way to the Law,''' they thereby infmuate an
Oppofition between the Law and Chrifi6i7iii,y^
which the ^lakers could wifli never were* Their
Exhortations in this Cafe are to excite Oheclience to
the Gojpel ', the Meafure of which Obedience they
take not from human Laws : They conlider the
Abrogation of Tithes as a DoSirine oi Chriftiani-
U\ and are of Opinion, that neither its Agreea-
blenejs^ nor its Oppoiition, to the Law of the
Land, can make it either more or lefs \o.
An Anjwerto the Pcx^formance of a late. Wri-
ter, whom he calls *' accurate and judicious,*'
has been attempted, whether '' vainly" or not^
is determinable by the Judgment of thofe, who
impartially read both Slde^ y not by the Vanity of
a Perfon w'ho publijTits to the World the *SV^
Conceit of his own JVifclomy by proclaiming, what
he approves. Unanswerable.
Tht fakers *' Application to Parliament was, '|
lor retraining their Profecutors from ruinous and
dejlru^ive Proceedings, '^ Their Petition went
'' no farther." It was not, as the Examiner
abufivelv favG of it, '' to obtain an eaiier Methoct
F '' c^
( 44 )
" of being compelled to pay," but that they
might not be expofed to Ruin, for confcienlioufly
refufing to pay. This was their Jole and Ji?2gle
View in that Applicatioo. They readily acknow-
ledge what the Examiner ^ pag. 23, fays of them,
viz. that " They declare them (Tithes) to be a
" Jewijh Burden, and think it no Objection,
" that they have ultimate Fiews, viz, diftant
" Hopes of laying them down at their Journeys
*^ End," but they deny what he from thence
unjuftly atempts to infer, pag, 24, viz. " that
" their Application tended" any farther than
*' only to their obtaining a prefent Relief," and
that '^ their Hopes could only be, that by an
** Alteration of the Law in their Favour, they
*' might avoid paying." For they did then, and
ftill do think, that the eajieji Method the Law has
granted to the Clergy for recovering their Claims,
is really the moft effeftual for that purpofe. They
did not therefore feek " to confine the Clergy to
*' an inefifeftual Remedy," but to the moft ef-
y^^z/^/ one for recovering their Claim, and only
inejf'eStual for the purpoje of ruining their Neigh-
bours. What the ^takers afferted in their Firft
Vindication oi the Brief Account^ in anfwer to
the Clergy of the Diocefe of London, pag. 128,
is certainly true, '' that they had not ihe leaft
*^ View of an entire Exemption from the Payment
*' of Tithes in their late SoUicitation." Nevcr-
thelefs, they do not think, that even fuch an
entire Exemption would be either unreafonable or
unchrijiian. For they confider '\lithes as a Relick
of that grofs Ignorance and Superftition, under
which
( 45 )
which the ufurped Authority and ^ Anttchrijlian
Craft of the Popes and their Adherents had en-
thralled the Nation : They confider them as given
to fuch fuperftitious Ufes and Services of the
Romifi Church, as arc juftly rejeded by all true
Prote/icmts. And, they apprehend, that if our
P rot eft ant Reformers^ when they renounced thofe
fuperftitious Services^ had alfo renounced the Pay
annexed to the Performance of them, their Re-
formation had been more compleat. The ulti^
mate Views of the fakers in refufing to pay
Tithes, are to keep their Co?iJcie?ices void of Of-
fence toward God, and to promote, what in
them lies, a more perfedl State oi Reformat io?i:
It is however very apparent, that the Clergy are
fo fenfible of the Precarioufnefs of their Right,
if once the People fhould be brought to fee thro*
the Mift which Art firft raifcd, ufurped Power
increafed, and the intimidating Cries of the
Church, the Clergy, the Rights oj the Clergy, and
other fuch like fearing Epithets, have ferved
to continue ; that the leaft Attempt to difpute it
meets with no lefs Oppofition, than if what they
dread to be the ultimate Views of the ^takers
was really at hand, the total Abolition of Tithes,
But their late Application to the Legiflature. had
it fucceeded, would neither have exempted them
from paying, nor have left the Clergy without an
effedtual Remedy for recovering them.
F 2 *' Wherefore
* As fortht Pope, faith Archhijhop Cranmer, Ire-
ftije him^ as Chri/l^s En€7?iy and ylnticbrijl^ v.nth all his
falfe Dotlruie. Fox's A6ls and Monuments, VoL 2-
pa^. 670., Edit. 1 64 1,
( 46)
'^ Wherefore otherwife, (fays the 'Examiner,
'' pag. 24,) are they defirous of declining the
'c 5^^;^^^^^^ Judicature, where the Magiftrate has
full Power to execute Juftice and to maintairi
" Truth?" What the ^takers complained of
was, Frojecutions carried on in thofe Courts for
Claims more eafily recoverable : And that fuch
Profecutions, tho' unneceffary, had been attended
with fuch heavy Cofts and rigorous Executions'
that about Eight Hundred Pounds had beentakeii
from Ten of them, v^here the Original Demand
did not amount to Fifteen Pounds.
Whether Juftice and "Truth could influence the
ProfecutGrs in the Choice of fuch Severities, let
Men of Reafon judge: The Profecutors for
Church Claims being indulged with a fummary
Method for recovering them, a Privilege not
common to '« the reft of the SubjeSs;' feem to
us inexcufable in their Choice of fuch rigorous
Methods, as nothing but Necejity can induce
other Men to ufe. The fakers' do not *^ fet
'' themfelves in Oppofition to the Law, nor fct
" it at Defiance in Matters of Right and Pro-
'' perty." But in Matters of Religion, fuch as
they efteem this Point of Tithes to be, they Iky as
th^ Examiner ^^g, 25, juilly cites them,' ''{hat
'' tiicy chrifiianly fubmit to the Penalties of the
'' Law, that they may keep their Confciences
'' conformable to the Precepts of the Gofpel "
and therefore, ^4hey may not avoid the Tnconve-
" niencics by an hypocritical Compliance.''
The Exa^nincr tells us, that ''it is a Maxim
|)oth m the Law and Reafon, (tho' we think
'' ne Will find it in neither) that he who ilifers
„ thrp'
(47 )
f ^ thro' his own Fault cannot be injured 3-' but
this appears to us to be only a Maxim with
Perfecutors, invented to jufti'fy the Rigour, of
exerciling the utmoft Severities in their Power,
even for the m oil trivial- Offences: Not confi-
dering, that in the Execution of Penal Laws
againil religious Scruples, 'tis a certain Maxim,
that, fummum Jus eft fumma i?2Juria, there can
be no greater Injury than the utmoji Extent of
Law.
His next Suggefkion is, that our " Scruples are
*' meerly a Pretence ," but how does he attempt
to prove it? Firft by telling us, that *'theGof-
*'-pel gives no Rule for Inheritances :" If that be
true, and if it be alfo true, which we think un-
deniable, that the Gojpel doth give a Rule for
Minijlers Maintenance, it neceiTarily will follow,
that Miniflers Maintenance is not an Inherit a?ice ;
and confequently, that the Clergies Claim to
tithes as an Inheritance for their Maintenance be-
ing but a ?]2eer Pretence, the ^{akcrs Scruple a-
gainfl paying them, may be juft and well ground-
ed.
His next Remark is, that " a confcientious
*' Refufal mufl: necellarily imply the Demand to
'' beuniuft." Such 2i Demand wt have already
proved that of Tithes to be, (pag. 29, foregoing) by
iliewing that the whole Crop and every Part of it
is the perlbnal F roper t'j of the Occupier of the
Land: Seeing then tliat the Z)t7/j^,W of Tithes is
un]ufi, our Refufal to pay them maybe 'xconjci-
cntious Refufal. Whetlier there be any Perfons in
England, *' who would force their Neighbours
f* to fhare tlieir Eilates with them," and who
they
r48)
they are, we willingly fubmit to the Judgment of
all, except Clergy Men^ and Tithe-farmers^ with-
out drawing any odious Comparijons. If there be
any here who pradife and plead for fuch a wild
Notion^ there is this conliderable Difference be-
tween the Anabaptifls of Munjier and them, that
the Former exercifed a Force againjl Law^ but
the Latter a Force by Law. The Former un-^
doubtedly proceeded upon a Principle of Pride
and Covet oujhefs ; but jChould thofe Vices be objeft-
ed to the Latter, they have the Law to produce
in their Dijcharge, The Former attempted an
illegal Invalion of other Mens Properties^ which is
certainly wicked and unjuft : The Latter pradtife
a legal Invafion of tbem^ which will appear to be
always righteous and equals when the Examiner
(hall have clearly prov'd that hiimari Laws 7iever
were nor are otherwife. What therefore Jofeph
Ollive^ whom he brokenly cites, pag. 27, 28,
*^ means by a legal Invaf on of another Mans Pro-
perty^' will not be fo " difficult to explain" as
he imagines : 'Tis the Profecution by Law of an
unrighteous Claim : Such as we have before fhewn
( pag. 23, ) the Claim of Tithes in this Nation
originally was : The Law alters not the Nature of
Things, nor can it, by favouring an unrighteous
Claim, make that Claim become righteous. The
fakers Oppojition to fuch a Claim hath its Foun-
dation in Scripture, Confcience and Equity : The
Exami?iers Aflertion (pag. 29,) that " there are
" proper Judges in the Laws of the Land to di-
" xt(kCo?ifcience,'' weprefume, the C/^t^;/ them-
felves will not abide by, any firther than they
find thofe Direoiions agreeable to their Intereft.
He
(•49)
He is for '* retraining the Judgment of Confci-
" ence to Matters of a Spiritual Nature :" But
even that Rejlraiiit^ the Juflice of which he has
not demonftrated, will not affed us in this Cafe
of Mimftcrs Maintenance^ unlefs he can fhew,
that ouF Obedience to ^n Ordi?ia?2ce of Chrift is
not of a Spiritual Nature, His Query, pag. 28,
" May the ^laker with a good Confcience keep
*^ the Tithes to his own Uje, and fuffer the Cler-
*' gy to be taxed for them ?'* has no Propriety in
it ; fincc 'tis certain that the ^takers had no hand
in the hyipofition of thatT'/:?^.
" I have endeavoured, (fays the Examiner
" pag. 29) to convince them of this Miftake,
'^ tho* poiTibly it may be fighting againft what is
" invincible^ that is their Obflinacy." His De-
fpair of convincing us, which he would feem to
attribute to the Strength of our Obftinacy, might
with much more Reafon arife from a confci^
cufjiejs of the Weahiefs of his own Arguments ;
which, we fuppofe, we have fufiiciently made ap-
pear, by Ihewing, that the whole Crop, and every
Part of it, is the perfonal Property of the Occu-
pier of the Land ; and that tithes in this Nation
were no other than avaricious and infolent Impofi-
tions of the Fope and his Clergy upon the People,
fupcrftioufly deluded by a feigned Pretence of
their being due to Gc^^:/ and Holy Church, Upon
this Popi/h Foundation the early Statutes for en-
forcing Tithes were grounded. And 'tis judici-
ouily obferved by the before mentioned Jcfeph
Ollive^ '' * How the Frotejiant Minijlry became
^^'poffeffed
" "■ ■ - ■■■■.■ ■■■' ■■■■, . ,.. <a
* ^^c his ?Ua VI hchalf of the Q_n!:er3 ;j^, 49.
( sO
'« pofleffed of Tithes we cannot tell, there ap
*' pearing no Conveyance to them of that pre-
*' tended Right which the Popijh Clergy once
*' had, except, that Tithes being a profitable
** Morfel, tho' indeed a Rdick of the Romifi
" Church, the Proteftants (whofe Reformation
*' in that, as well as in feveral other Points, was
" very imperfed) were not willing to forgo
" them, tho' they had not any pofitive Right to
" them, either by the Law or the Gofpel, or by
*' any Conveyance from thofe to whom they
*^ were given by fuperftitious Donors, for fuper-
*' ftitious Ufes, not performed by ProteJlarJs.
«« So that the Parfon's pretended Inference of the
" Quaker\ polTeffing a Property he can fhew no
^' Title to, effedtually reverts upon himfelf, whoj
*« having no folid Title to the Tithe he poiielTeSj
*' has yet the AfTurance to call in queftion the
^' Property of other Men in the Produce of their
*' own Seed, their own Land, and their own
"' Labour."
The Examiner^ (pag. 29, 30.) fays, *' Whiift
*^ thus the Property , of the eftablifhed Church
** {lands, at leaft upon an equal footing with the
*' Reft of the Subjeds, it may be hoped they will
" be entitled to equal Favour and Protedion^
** And as they no ways envy or interrupt the
" ^lakers in the Benefit of the Toleration, in ferv-
** ing God in their own way, they may reafona-
" bly exped thatthe ^takers, will in Return, tole-
*' rate them in theEnjoyment of their own Eftates.*'
What he calls the Property of the Clergy, [viz,
their Claim to Tithes) ftands not upon an
•^ equal/' but upon a ** fuperior footing with the
'' reit
^' reft of the Subjeds," they liavhig peculiar
Laws for recovering them, with more Eafe, and
lefs Charge, than other Subjedls can recover their
juft Debts s wherefore, their Hope of *' equal
" Favour and Proteftion" With others, cannot be
a juft Ground for their murmuring under the
Enjoyment oi greater Favour and Protedion,
Tho* the ^takers may have a very favourable
Opinion of the good Nature, and peaceable Dif-
polition of many of the prefent Clergy, and may
be pleafed to fee that fo fewof theni, their Num^
bers confidered, have been contern*d in the Pro-
fecutions complain'd of ; yet they cannot look
upon the toleration as granted by the Clergy, nor
think that they are obliged to any Return to them
for a Favbur received from others. But, a§ to
fuch of the Clergy, who notwithftanding t\\t
more Chriftian Examples of a numerous Brother-
hood, ftill perfevere in their Choice of exerci^
cifmg the utmoft Rigour in their Power^ they
do, as far as in then! lies, exprefs their Envy at,
and Readinefs to interrupt the fakers in, the
Benefit of the Toleration, and do Ihfficiently de-
tnonftrate, that, were their Power unlimited,
'tis altogether uncertain where their JVHl v/ouid
ftop.
The Examiner Is miftaken In faying (pag. 30;)
that the ^^/^^ rj with-hold l^ithes from the Clergy
" only becaufe they are of a different Perfuafioh
" from them:" For, if Mini fters, in every thing
elfe of their own Ferfuaf.on, fliould lay claim to
Tithes, their Confiiincci wciild oblige them Xo
refufethe Payment v/ithout Refpedl oi PerfonS;
and what they believe 710 Mir/ijiers Rights they
G muft
( 52 ;
mufl equally with-hold from all Mimjlers without
Wrong to any.
" The Law, kys the Examiner, excludes the
" Clergy from the common Ways of Mainte*
" nance by Trades, or other Occupations, that
*' they may attend their Duty, and has allotted
*' them their Subfiflence; yet the ^^^'^r with-
*' holds it, and as far as his difpenfmg Power
*' extends, decrees they muil work or ftarve."
Would the Examiner's Sincerity obtrude this upon
his Readers as a Decree of the Quakers ? Was it
not an Apojlolick Decree made by the early Pallors
of the primitive Church, and plainly recorded in
holy Scripture ? Did not Paul^ Sihanus^ and
TimotheuSy when prefent with the Church at ^heJ^
jalonica, decree, xhdX If afiywould not work, nei-
ther fbould he eat, 2 Thefs. iii. lo? Did they not
enforce this Decree by their own Example, that
other Pajlors might obferve the fame ? Neither
did we, fay they, eat any Maris Bread for Nought,
but wrought with Labour and TCravel Night and
Day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you.
Not becaufe we have not Power, but to make cur
Jehes a7i Enfample unto you to follow us, Verf 8, 9,
Did not the Apoftle Paul propofe his own Prac-
tice of his Hands having minijiredtohis NeceJJities,
as a Precedent to be imitated by the Paftors of the
Church at Ephejiis, Ads xx. 28, 7,^} Did not he
propofe the fame Exam.ple to the Church at Co-
rinth ; we labour working with our own Hands,
I Cor. iv, 12 ? Was not this one of his Ways
which be in Chrijl, which he taught every where in
every Church, and wliich he fejit Ti?notheus his
beloved Son and jaithful in the Lord to bri?ig them
into
( 53 )
'into Remembrance of ^ Verfe 17? Were not thefe
Diredions given to the Teachers of the Churches
in general ? Were not thofe who pradlifed them
moft afliduous in attending their minifterial Du-
ty ? Does not the Examiners urging that *' the
*' Law excludes the Clergy from" what the Pre-
cepts and examples of the Apoflles enjoy n^ neceffa-
rily admit a difpenfmg Power in the Law, fupe-
rior to the Authority of their Injundions ? This,
we think, naturally refults in making the ChriJlU
an Religion it felf fubfervient to human Laws, and
is, in the fulleft and mofl exprels|Manner, Ateach^
tng for Doctrines the Commandments of Mm.
Mark vii. 7.
" Upon what Foundation (adds the Examiner
*' pag. 30, 3 I.) they can lay, they confcicntiouf-
*' ly refufe to pay the Lay-Impropriator his Due,
*' is not eafy to imagine." But to us, the Claim
to Tithes in this Nation, however diverfified in
its Appearances, has but one and the fame Root
and Foundation, viz, the grofejt Errors of the
Ro7nif}:> Religion , and to us it doth not yet appear
that the Law by tramfej-ring^ this Claim can alter
the Nature of it j nor that it can tranfmute drojjj
Error into pure Orthodoxy, grofs Ignorance into
Golpel Light, deluded Superjiition into Chrifiian
Knowledge, or Romijl:> Bo?idage into Protefiant Li-
berty, Our Refufel therefore to pay Tithes, even
to the Lay-Impropriator, arifes not from *^ An-
*' tipathy to the Name of 7/Vfoj," but from a
Protefiant and Chrijfian Antipathy to the Na-
ture of Tithes as Popijh and Antichriftian : And
which we have gone fo far beyond the Exami-
ners Expedtation, as to give '' a Reafon for."
Gz We
( 54 )
We fliall fay no more in this Place of the ^itk
of the Lay-lmpropriators to Tithe ^ only we may
juftly obferve, that if they have a good One^
feme of the Clergy in their Writings have moft
grievoufly abufed them.
But the £x^;7^m^r, pag. 31, fays, " in thefe
^^ {viz, the Eftates of Impropriators) they will
^' find a farther Inftance that the Tithes are a fe-
^^ parate and diftindl Eftate from the Land : For
^' when thofe Corporations, to which they had
^' been appropriated, were diffolved, they did
^' not fall to the Owners of the Land, but fuch
^' of them as had not been furrendered, having
" before been alienated from the parochial Cler-
^' gyj were grante^i to the Crown, having no
^^ legal Proprietor, and from the Crown the pre-
'' fent PoiTeffors derive their Title." From all
which it will by no means follow, that if upon
the Diflblution of thofe Corporations there had
been no freih Grant of the Tithes, they would
not have fallen to the Occupiers of the Land
by the natural Right they have to the Fruits of
their own Expence and Labour.
The £;^^w/;7^r's next Obfervation is, pag. 32,
thus, " Altho' in the Preface to tht Brief ^c-
"' eount they refer to feveral Texts and Autho-
«' rities to fliew, that their Scraples appear not
*' to be ill grounded, yet none of them, as I can
^' fee, are any ways applicable to their Refufal
■^^ oi Chiirch'lSi^tes '. And yet thefe like wife are
** inferted as the Occafions of Suffering for Con-
'^.^ fcience fake."
The Reafon for inferting them, ^uiz, Profecu-
flons for Church-Rate^^ in the Britf Account is ob-
vious,
• ( ss)
vlous, they J>eing for Demands recoverable by the
ftimmary Method provided, and nevcrthelefs pro-
fecutedforby Procefles in the Ecckfiajiical Courts^
tending to Excommunication and hnprijonment.
We confcientioufly refufe the Payment of them
not ^S2iptihlick I'ax, but as a pvivztc Eccle/iajiical
hnpofition for fuperjlitious Ujh, and Purpojes.
They are for repairing and fupporting Buildings
pretended to be made holy by the BiJJ:op's Confe-
cration, a Piece of Superjfition^ v^arrantable nei-
ther by Precept nor Example in the New-Tejla^
ment. They are for buying, mending and wafli^
ing, ^i the Prieft's Surplice, which, we think,
a fuperftitious Garment not us*d in the primitive
Chriflian Church, nor worn by any of the Apo-
ftles. They are for buying Bells and Bell-Ropes^
and Organs-, the Jingle of which Inflruments we
efteem Juperjiitious, and no where enjoyned by
the Gojpel as requifite to Chrijiian Worphip, They
are for buying Books to pray by : A Pradtice we
find no Foundation for in holy Writ, They are
for the paying for the Dinners oi Priejis and
Churchicardens at Viftations 5 Entertainments in
nothing refembling the Feajis of Charity^ and
breakings of Bread from Houfe to Houfc, prac-
jifed by the Apoflks. They are for Fees to Re^
gijlers. Apparitors, and the like Attendants on
fuch an Ecclefiajiical "Jiirijdi^lion as the Do<a:rine
of the Gofpel gives not an Authority to exercife.
All thcfe and other unfcriptural Impofitions we
are concerned in Point of Confcience and Chrijli^
anity to bear our Teftimony againll, and to refufe
the Payment of thofe Rates which are made for
i)\tJ'uperJiitious Purpofcs of upholding them. We
prefumo
prefume thefe Reafons may fuffice to juftify us irt
refafing to pay Church-Rates ^ at leaft till the Ex^
amhier ihall produce better Arguments in their
Favour, than that " they are made by the Con-
^' fentof the major Part of theVeftry affem-
bled J*' which Majority often confifts of fome
of the moft bigotted^Lndi jiiperjiitious Heads m the
Pariih : And till he fliall produce a more forci-
ble Precedent than that of a Gentile Centurion's
building a JewifJo Synagogue.
But the Examiner has a Flirt at om Sincerity ^
whK:h he thus exprefles, pag. 32, 33, " And if
" the Sincerity of fome who refufe, may appear
" by their Suffering, we hope the Sincerity of
*' others is no lefs evident from their voluntary
'' Compliance ; whilft many of them ferve the
^'' Office of Churchwardens, and upon their Af-
'' firmation declare that they will faithfully per-
^' form it/' The Examiner is as politive in re-
lating this as if he knew it to be true : But it
iiiight have been morefatisfaftory to us, had he
named a few of thofe man)\ that we might have
enquired upon what Inducements they accepted
that Office, and what they undertook to do
therein.
The Office it felf, in its primitive Inftitution^
(before Superftition lingered the Keys of the
Poor's Box) appears, Acl^s vi. 2. to have been that
of ferviitg Tables,^ or the daily Minijiration of
Relief and Provifion to the Widows and Poor of
the Church. For this Bulinefs, by Direftion of
the
^ * S'tdKo/eiv TpatTe^tt/f, hence they were called cT/Axoyaxs
(57)
theApoftles, were appointed in the Church at
Jeru/a/emy /even Me?i of honeji Report^ full of the
holy Ghofi andWifdom. Men fo -f- quah'fied might
be depended on as faithful Stewards of the
Church's Stock, and to make an equal Diflribu-
tion unto every Man according as he had Need.
But we have not the leaft Intimation of their ap-^
plying any Part of that Stock to fuch Ufes for
which Church-Rates have been fince levied. The
Degeneracy and Superftition of after Ages, gra-
dually introduced thofe Ufes, and burden'd the
Church with a coftly Pomp and Pageantry in it's
firft Purity unknown. Faithful Deacons, jull cf
the holy Ghoji a?idJVi/do?n^ were then no longer ap-
pointed, but Churchwardens were fubftitutcd ;
who are thus defcribed, viz, *' Churchwardens
*' be Officers yearly chofen by the Confent of the
" Minifter and Parishioners, according to the
" Cuftom of every feveral Place, to look to the
" Churchy Church-yard^ and fuch l^hiyjgs ash cIoti^
" to both^ and to ohferve the Behaviour of their
'^ Parijhioners for fuch Faults as appertain to the
" Juri/diuiion and Cenjurc of the Court Ecclcfi-
" ajlicai:'^ Thus was the Primitive Office^
Deacons as it were lofl in that of Churchwardens,
whole chief Concern, inflead of feeding the
Poor, became that oi feeding the Offcersof Ecde-
fiajlical Courts with Prefentments, and of furnifh^-
ing
■f "Does not the Scarcity of fncb Men among them f she ^
chlige the Members of the "Exiim'm^fs Church to feck ^'of
them amoi?g the Quake»s ?
■^ M\nihi:u^s -Guide into lhf-7^f;^uej\
( 58)
ing the Apoftate Church of Rome with fucll
Church-Ornaments^ Crucifixes^ Images^ VeJlmentSj,
Bells, T^oys and T'rinkets for Worfhip, as were
never enjoyned either by Precept or Example in
holy Writ.
But fince the Reformation, the Churchwardens
are again reftored to their Bufinefs of ferving Ta-
bles, the Office of the primitive Deacons^ and
are conflituted Overfeers of the Poor by Statute-
Law. 43. Eliz. C. 2.
The "fakers objeft not againft the Office of
Churchwardens, fo far as it is enjoyned either
by Scripture, or by Statute-Law : But, like true
ProteJlantSy they dcfire to be free from all In^.
junftions of Popijh Canons and Conftitutions.
"Tis the Cuftom of fome Parishes to chufe tw6
Churchwardens, of whom One is generally em-
ploy'd in the Affairs relating to their Church and
Worfhip 5 and the other in Matters relating t6
the Poor. In fuch Pariflies, the ^aker, at th^
Requeft of his Neighbours may have officiated as
Churchwarden for the Poor ; but that " many of
** them upon their Affirmation declare that they
" will faithfully perform that Office" in general,
without any Exception or Limitation, is incum-
bent upon the Examiner to prove. Till then his
Query, '' Do they expedt to be repaid what they
** expend upon the Church Account ?" may be
improperly put to them, who may probably have
expended nothing but upon the Poors Account^
and which, we are informed, has been repaid out
of the Poor's Rate j and if (o, a fakers ferving
the Office of Churchwarden may have nothing
to do with the Payment of Church-Rates.
He
( 59 )
He may have fhewn his Juftice in accepting
and difcharging the Chriliian and ProteJia?it Part
of that Office, and his Sincerity in avoiding the
(iiperjlitious Part of it. And were it not that the
Members of the Examiner'^ own Church do ad*
mit of fuch a Diftindtion in a ^aker\ ferving
that Office, how would the £x^;;?/;2(?r acquit them
of Infiiicerity in chufing, or the Ecclefiafiical
Court in admitting to that Office, aPerfon whom
they know to be principled againft upholding
their Church and Worfhip ? It were perfed:ly ab*
furd to (uppofe that they chufe him with any fuch
View. If the EcclefiajVical Court in fuch a Cafe,
being ntiihtv Matrimonial nor T'ejiamentary^{h'^\\
adminifter any Oath or Affirmation ex Officio^ we
apprehend that they do therein tranfgrefs the Sta-
tute of 13 Car. II. Cap. 12, and abufe the Kings
Subjefts by an illegal and unwarantable Impofiti-
on : And in cafe they fhall profecute any Man for
refufing to take fuch Oath or Affirmation, the
Law of the Land will proredl him by prohibiting
their Proceedings. The Examiner^ in this Affair
of ferving Churchwarden, appears neither to un-
deriland the fakers Principle, nor what is con-
fiftent with it.
As little to the Purpofe is the Examiners next
Paragraph, on which he feems to lay no fmall
Srrcls, '^' Let them, fays he, obferve the Beha-
viour of their London Teachers, and fee, if
they can find any of them, who rather than to
ule a dilferent, and more expenfive Fuel, have
not chofen to pay the Tax upon Coals, which
was expreflvlaid for the tinilhing St. Pauh^ re-
pairing oi f^VeJlmin/ler Abbey, and building the
H - fifty
( 6o;
«' fifty New Churches. Will they fay, that per*
*' haps the Men live not up to their Profeffion,
*' but may ad againfl their Confcience through
*' the Terrors of Ruin and Imprifonment ? No,
" the Aft is voluntary.'*
What Adt ? The Aft of buying Coals and
paying for them : The Tax upon Coals is not laid
nor levied upon the particular Perfons v^ho ufe
them for Fuel, nor has the Payment of that Tax
any Relation to a particular Perfon's Choice of
that or any other Firing, w^hether more or lefs
cxpenfive. But, admitting that a ^aker was
immediately concerned in the Payment of that
Tax, v^^e fee nothing in his fo doing but what is
very confiftent with his Profeffion and his Con-
fcience : For he is obliged both by Profeffion and
Confcience to obferve the Gofpel Precept of ren-
dring to Caefar the T^hhigs that are Casfar's \
wherefore Chrijiian Obedience enjoyns his Con-
formity to a Tax immediately payable to the Go-
vernment, in which Payment his Duty is dif-
charged. But to what Ufes the Money fo paid
fhall be applied, 'tis incumbent upon the Con^
jcicjice of the Government^ not of the ^laker^ to
dire^. The Payment of fuch a Tax is not a
parallel Cafe to that of paying Tithes ; which are
not a Tax payable to the Government^ nor are the
Conjciences of the SiibjcBs difcharged by the Go-
vernmejit from their immediate Concern in the
Ufes to which they are applied : So that a reli-
gious and truly Chrijiian Scruple may reft upon
the Confcience of the ^iaker refpedling the Pay-
ment of his Tithes 3 v/hile yet in the other Cafe
the Weight of that Scruple may be jufily re-
moved
( 6i )
movtdLhythcGofpellnjunBion oi paying l*ribufe to
Caefar. For, as the Precepts of Chrift have a ge-
neral Tendency to exalt the juft Power and law-
ful Authority of the Civil Maglftratc ; fo the
very Tenour, and Purpofe of the Goipel was, to
fet Mankind at Liberty from the Vaffalage of Sin,
to free their Confciences from the ufurped Power
and flavilh Impofitions of Priefts^ and to tranflate
them from that Bondage under which they were
held, into the glorious Liberty of the Sons of God,
The ultimate Views of the ^dakers^ which the
Pjxamincr, pag. 34. wifhes at fo " great a Di-
" fiance," are directed only to the Completion
of this happy Eftate of Gojpel Liberty : A Liberty
perfectly confident '* with the general Good of
the Comnmnityf how inconfiftent foever fome
Perfons may think it with what perhaps they
value more, viz, their own private \viX.zx^{^,
The Examiner aflerts " that they (the ^ua^
*^ kers) have IHU many more Scruples incon-
" fiftent with the general Good of the Commu-
'^ nity, of which they are Members, for
" w^hich their tender Confciences will Jiill vv^ant
*' Relief i" but is fo little concerned for fupport-
ing the Truth of that Affertion, that he men-
tions not what thofe Scruples are.
He proceeds thus, ^' And they were never found
*' wanting to themfelves, in any Way to obtain
" their Ends, altho' it were by fupporting the
*' Violence and Rapine of a Protecflor, or flatter-
*' ing the difpenfing Power of an Arbitrary
*' Prince." Slanderous Accufations prove nothing
but the Malice of the Accufer ; which being void
of Reajon vents it fclf in Railijig, Tlie peaceable
H 2 and
( 62 )
and inoffcnfivc Demeanour of the fakers under
every Mutation of Government fince they were a
People, is fufficiently knov^n to fecure their Cha-
rafter, in the Opinion of judicious Perfons,
from the Imputation of any fuch Calumny : And
indeed a Charge of their " fupporting Violence
*' and Rapine" is too improbable to meet with
Acceptance, till it is better fupported, than by
the empty and unreafonable Clamour of thofe,
from whofe Violence and Rapine every Body
knows, they have been very great Sufferers.
We have, as we apprehend, in the foregoing
Part of this Secftion, fufficier.tly demonftrated,
that the fakers exercife no Government but fuch
as is agreeable to the Holy Scriptures^ and per-
feftly confiftent with the Duty and Allegiance
of faithful Subjedls to the Government under
which they dwell. Nothing therefore can be
more frivolous, than the Examiners Objecftion,
that ** they have a Government within a Govern-
*' ment" becaufe the Government of thcmfelves
by Scripture and Reajhn^ renders Men the very
beft of Subjeds to any Government. He adds,
*' their Records are private," which imports no
more, than that they are fuch as every private
Manilas a Right to keep. " And, fays he^ the
" Extent of their Decrees unknown ;" Words
which evidently imply his own Ignorance of
them, and that he juftly deferyes Rebuke for
jpeakingEvil of thofe "Thifigs which he knows not,
* We have alfoihewn that they affume no Power
of making Laws^ but that they only prefs Obedience
to thofe which Chriji himfelf hath made : That
they do not " enforce on the Confciences of their
*^' FoIIov/ers"
C 63 ;
*' Followers" any Thing, but what thofe he calls
their Followers are firft convinced in their own
Confciences to be juft and Righteous : That they
injure no Man in his juft Property, but think
themfelves, in their own Application of their own
Property to religious Ufes, obliged to adl no-
thing which they are perfuadcd in Confcience
the Gofpel of Chrift forbids. If at any Time, as
in the C^Je of Titkes, human Laws feem to them
to enjoyn what Cb'ift's Gofpel forbids, they do
not " defy the Power of the Law," but hum-
bly and patiently fubmit to fufFer its Penalties
as becomcth Chriftian Men in fuch Cafes to do :
The Levity, Reproach and Scorn, which the Ex-
aminer treats them with on this Occafion, they
cheerfully receive, as the necellary OjUcomitanU
of Chriftian Obedience^ which has ever met with
the like Ufage, from pcrver/e Di/putings of Men
of cori'upt Minds, and deft it ute of the Trufh^ fup^
fofing that Gain is Godlinefs^ I Tim, vi. 5.
SECT.
( 64;
SECT. II.
The ExAMiNER*s Pretence of the Infuficiency of
the Ads of y &ci of K. W. III. to fecure the
Property of the Clergy J}:ew7t to be grou7idlejs ;
and the Opprejfion of taking more rigorous Me-^
thods demonjirated,
WE have in the foregoing Sedion fhewn,
that what the Examiner calls the Cler-
gies Property in Tithes, has its Foun-
dation in the groffefl Error and Superftition of
the Romijh Religion : And that the Donations of
them were for JJfes and Services of that Religion
juftly reje6ted by Protefiants : Whence it feems
natural to infer, that the fame Protejiant Prin-
ciple, had it been clofely adhered to, would
have alfo rejefted the Pay annexed to thofe Ser-
vices. Both the one and the other appear to the
fakers equally popifJo and fuperjlitioiis, and for
that Reafon they are obliged in Confcience equal-
ly to refufe them.
They apprehend that fo Proteftant a Scruple
cannot juftly entitle them to any hard Ulage
from a Protejiant Clergy, who ought to confi-
der that all Men are not alike capable of under-
ftandlng the Power of the Laws of the Land,
nor that the Force of their Operation in Religious
Matters is fuch, as can tranfmute popip Super-
Jtition into protejiant Property : A Point, which,
however
r 65 )
however clear to the Clergy, may feeih myflerious
to thofe who have not the Opportunity of view-
ing It in the fame Light they do. ^ven they
themfelves have tliought meet to vary their Claim
to Tithes occafionally : They claimed them for
""T^T'^rT ""'^'T' ^'Sh'' ^"'i due to God
and Holy Church, by Virtue of their ori^bal
Donatiomxo popijh Predecejors, and this Claim
tney confhntly affcrted as long as they found
Men capable of entertaining fo grofs a Decen
noD : But hnce the Light of Gofpel Liberty and'
Freedom of Confaence. granted by the Ad of
loleration, the Coritmjance of which is the Glorv
of our prefent Eflabliihment, perceiving fo dark
and fuperftifous a Claim no longer fufoeptible
they have Reccurfe to a Pretence of Propertv -
but how weak the Examiner's Arguments for
fopporting tliat Pretence are, we have before en
deavoured to fhew All his Attempts on that
Head do not in the leaft affect our Confcientious
Teftimony aga.nft Tithes as founded on popUh
Supc-Jlitwn : Had he cleared up that Point by
fliewing then; Original to be either Proteftant or
Lhrilhan, his Performance might have been
worthy our Attention : But, inflead of that to
take for granted his own miftaken Notion's of
Property, and to treat us, as he does, (nag , r
36) as Rebels Thieves and Robbers, for not Vub-
Icnbing to them, is not only irrational, but
ftrongly favours of a bitter, turbulent and nerfe
cuting Difpofition, really fcandalous to the Cauie
he elpoulcs. But, let him know, that the 9ua.
/YTiConlcience continues calm and ferene nei
ther diAurbed at the Noife of his Thunder, nor
intimiJatcJ
( 66 )
intimidated with the Flaflies of his Fury. To allay
the feverijh Heat of his Temper, we recommend
to him a cooling Leffon of Bi(hop mihns, who
favs * " Moderation doth fuppole a Matter ot
* Right and Juftice, and then befides the
- better the Caufe is, the lefs Need is there of any
« immoderate rigorous Courfe in tne Afferting
« of it: Wefhall hereby rather prejudice than
« promote it, by inducing a Sofpicion that tis
« not fo much Truth or Juftice, as foniethmg
«« elfe that drives us on : And then befides,
«« where would this Principle end? If one Man
«« may be fevere and rigorous becaufe he is in the
*« Right why then another, who doth but
<' think himfelf fo, will be fo too : And accor-
'« ding to this, what would become of Peace
« and Society? Such bluftering, boifterous Tcm-
«' pers, as are all for the great VJivtv Euphrates,
♦' which runs with a Torrent and a mighty
«« Noife and refufe the ftill Waters of Sbiloab,
" which run foftly and gently, as the Prophet
«' fpeaks, T/a. viii. 6. Such are no Friends to
« Peace, becaufe 'tis the Latter which is the
« River' whofe Streams muil make glad the City
« o/Go^, Pfal. xlvi. 4." .
The ^«a/^fr does not, as tht Examtnerin^i-
nuates, pag. 35> " &' '^P ^^^^'l.T"^, Ct
«' tence of Confcience to another s Eftate ; but
only afferts his own rightful Property in his ov/n
Eftate, the Property of peaceably enjoying the
Fruits'of his own Expence and Labour, to which
r\r%
<c
* Sermons preached on fiveral Occafions pag. 423,
424, Edit. 1682.
( ^7 )
no other Man either is or ever was juAly cntitledl*
His teftifying againfl: the unjuft impofitions of*
PopiJJi Superftition upon his Eftate is perfed^ily
conliftent with the jujlejt Notmis of Right and
Property, Pie is therefore wholly unconcerned
in the Examiners extravagant Talk about '' the
*' Crown, the Nobility, the Clergy, the Eftates,
*' and Property of the Subjed:s of England iA-^
'' ling a Sacrifice to the Pretence of Confcience j'*
which he is pleafed to call an Idol: However^
fome Perfons, who have read the Hiftory o^
thofe Times, think themfelves fufficiently war-
ranted from thence to believe, that the Counfels
of a Set of Men, who were never fufpedted of
idolizing Confcience, had no fmall Influence in oc*
cafioning the national C;damities he mentions.
The Confcience of the ^iaker^ which enjoins
his Obedience to the Precepts of tiie Gofpel, doth
no lefs en'joyn his peaceable Siibmiffion to the Law
of the Land, the Execution of which he never
oppofes ; wherefore, with rcfped to him, whofe
Principle *tis humbly to fubmit, the Lav/ is al-
ways capable '' of fupporting itfeif," without
X^^ Sanation o{ '* inflidlin 2: Penalties*' or exerciA
ing any Severity. This the Clergy and theif
Agents cannot be ignorant of, who frequently
come into the ^takers Grounds, and carry awaj^
his Corn, which, in Submltlion to the Law fa-
vouring them in a Claim he thinks uniuil, hepci-
tiently fuffers without Oppofition 5 for he both
profeflcs and pracftifes the Duty of Chriltian Sub-
milhon to the Power of the Law in its utmoft
Extent, even in Cafes where his Confcience is not
fatisiicd of the Equity of its Injundions. So that
1 the
r 68 )
the moH favourable and ea^ Law, Is as efFedual
a Remedy for the Recovery of a Claim from him,
who never oppofes any, as the moft rigid and
(evere.
The Examiner acknowledges (pag. 37,) that
" Punilhments fhould in common Cafes be ade-
*' quate to the Offence," but as he admits not
our Refufal of Tithes, fo neither do we ad-
mit the Clergies Demand of them from us, to
be a common Caje. For *tis a Demand of Pay for
nothing done, which certainly is a very uncom^
mon Cafe ; and moft effectually expofes the Weak-
nefs, if not Wickednefs, of the Examiners Way of
Arguing, who under Pretence of '' the Fre-
*' quency of the Crime, and the Stubbornnefs of
<' the Offender," plainly aims at an '' increaf-.
*^ ing the Severity" of the Law", in Proportion
to the Injuftice of the Demand refufed 5 and
would, by Terrors prevent, '' in many Cafes"
the Refufal of a Claim, which '' if confidered
*' in each Cafe fingly," has neither Reafon nor
Equity to fupport it.
The Examiners next Attempt is to reprefent
the Sluakers as guilty of " the higheft Offence in
*' Civil Cafes, viz. that of Contempt of the
*^ Authority of the Court, as it flops the Courfc
*' of Juftice, and defies the Power of the Magif-
'*' trate : And this, fays he, is in all Cafes ftill
*' the fame, whether the Matter in Conteft be
" great or fmall, whether the Suit might in the
*' Event prove juft or unjuft ; and he who fuf-
fers upon this Account can blame neither his
Adverfary nor the Law, but his own Obftinacy
only^" . . . .
« And
( 69 )
" And yet when the fakers are told, that the
" greateft Part of their pretended Sufferings arofe
*' from Attachments for Contempt of his Majef-
** ty's Authority in his feveral Courts of Judica-
"" ture ; that they cannot be faid to be brought on
" them by the Clergy, when they are occafion'd
" by their own Perverfenefs in carrying on an Op-
'' pofition to the Law of their Country. They
" reply, How came they under the Cognizance of
" the Courts of Judicature'? Were they not
" brought thither at the Suit of the Clergy ? The
" Original Caiife oj their Suffer itigs did not arife
*' f^om the Courts, but from the Clergy, who imuld
" now lay the Blame of their Doings upon the Courts.
'' 'T'is a ft ale Artifice of the Clergy to call the Af
** finance of the fecular Mag^flrate into their Ser^
** vice, and afterwards to exprefs their Gratitude
^* by transferring the Odium of the Profcution^
*' from themfehes^ upon thofe whom they emplof^
** therein^
This Reply ftates the Matter aright, and lays
the Blame of the fakers Sufferings at the Door
of the proper Authors of them, viz. the Frofe^
cutors ; for in all Profecutions of this Kind, every
Step of the Proceeding againft the Dejendajit is
carried on, and every Order of the Court againft
him is made, at the Motion and Requeft of the
Plaintiff or his Council ; to whom therefore the
whole Severity of the Proceeding is juftly impu-
table. If the Examiner can fee no Difference
between a jufi Imputation oj Severity to malicious
Profecutors, and " arraigning the Juftice of the^
'' is^ation f between blaming the Promoters of
unnecefjary Law-Suits, and " libelling the Go-
I 2 '* vernmcnt f
( 1o )
*f vernmcnt ;'* hctwccnjpeaking Truth of the Cler^
^;;, and " refled:ing on the Courts of Jaflice^" 'tis
becaufe Malice and Anger have perverted his
yudg?ne?it, and rendered him for the prefent inca-
pable oi jedate and calm KeaJoniJig.
The Examiner $ Query, '' Do not they enjoy
*' the Benefit of the Toleration in its full Ex-
*' tent?" We anfv^er by Counterqueries: Does
not he envy them the Benefit of the Toleration in
that Extent they do enjoy it ? Do not fuch Pro-
fecutors among the Clergy as he pleads for, prefer
the fevere Ldws of thofe Governments under
which no T'okration was granted, before the
milder and eafier Laws made by that Govern-
inent which granted the toleration ? Do they
not by fuch Preference plainly declare, that the
Severity of tkofe former Governments is more fui-
table to their Difpofition than the Lenity of the
prefent ? Does not their Choice of the fevereft
Laws in Being (liew, that their Will to per je cute
knows no Reftraint but their want of Power 1
V/ere '' Sanguinary Laws merely upon Account
*' of religious Opinions'* now in Force, thofe
Perfons certainly indicate the ftrongeft Inclina-
tions to ufe them, who are chufing to profecutc
by thofe Laws in Being which neareft refemble
their Severity : And were the Writ de Haretico
comburendo yet unrepealed, no Perfons would
more probably have Recourfe thereto, than thofe
who now fixquently fue out the Writ de F^xcom-
muricato capiendo, which is its own Sifter, and as
juftly merits to die the Jame Death, and to be bu-
ried in xh^fame Grave. The Examine?'^ Talk
of " neceiTary Coercion in civil Caufes" reaches
not
( 7r )
not the prefent Cafe ; for the ^iaker'% Refufal to
pay Tithes arifes purely from his " religious Per-
'' juafion' of their being forbidden by the Doc-
trine of Chriftianity.
*' But, (fays the Examiner^ pag. 39.) it is a
'' ftale Artifice of the ^lakers^ to throw Reflec-
'' tions upon the Reformed Clergy, from what
'* was the Effed: of the Pride and Cruelty of the
'' C\miQ.]\oiRonier
We refled: not upon the Reforjned Clergy : We
complain only of thofe among them who are yet
fo ujtreJGrjnedzs to bring forth Fruit in fome de-
gree fimilar to that which '' was the EfFedl of
'' the Pride and Cruelty of the Church of Rome-;*
and which we cannot apprehend to be the EfFed
of the Hu?nility and Clemency of the Church of
England. The compleat Reformation of the
Clergy would put an end to our Complaint re-
fpeding them. The ^lakers are behind no Men
in a '' fteady Adherence to our excellent Confti*
'' tuticn/' nor in a juft Senfe of Duty and Gra-
titude to God, and the Government, for the
*' Happinefs they enjoy under the prefent Efta-
'' blifhment," and for the Eafe, Tranquillity and
Toleration of the feveral Prote/iant Churches in
England. The Exafniners Affertion, pag. 39,
that '' tht^iakers bafely deferting the Caufe of
*' Religion and Liberty, would have faciificed
'[ the Nation to a Popijl Power," is equally
falfe and 7?:alicious, The ^takers at all times ct
ponfed and pleaded for '' the Cauie of rveiigioii
*' and Liberty;" for this Caufe they have luf-
fered much, and had fome Clergymen thfir Will,
might flill fuffer much more. A matericil Dif-
ference
r 72 )
ferencc *twixt them and the Clergy before the
Revolution, refpefting that Caufe, was, that the
fakers, under every Government, declared them-
felves for a general Liberty of Confcience ; the
Clergy for their own. The ^takers had for many
Years undergone, from a Government called Pro-
teftant, fuch a grievous Perfecution for the Caufe
of Religion, as (excepting Laws immediately
Sanguinary) had never been known under any
Government in this Nation, either Popifi or Pro-
tejlant. The Clergy in thofe Days fat ferene and
eafy, undifturbed at the " Popi/h Power' of
Perfecution then exercifed againft their Fellow
Protejlants, The Examiner now charges the
^iakers with " deferting the Caufe of Religion",
for no other Reafon, than accepting from a Po-
pip Prince fome prefent Relief from the Suffer-
ings fuflained for their Religion under a Protef^
tant Government, and a ProteJla?tt Clergy. He
reprefents them as " deferting the Caufe of Li-
berty'* for no other Reafon, than their Accep-
tance of Liberty, when a PopiP Prince had fet
open the Doors of thofe Prifons and Dungeons
which Protejlants had lock'd them up in. But
the Examiner to blacken the ^mkcrs, fpares not
to advance the mofl apparent Abfurdities: With
him, to accept Relief from Sufferings for Religion,^
is, to defert the Caufe of Religion : to come out of
Frifon, is, to defert the Caufe of Liberty ; to accept
Lihcrty of Confcience, is^ the way to lofeit -, and an
humhle Reprefentation oi iinneceffary Profecutions
and Grievances, is " an abufing of the tlergy/'
The fakers neverthclefs humbly apprehend,
uiat fuch a Reprefentation may be very confift-
er.t
( 73 )
ent with the Liberty " intended them by the
** Toleration j" the Defign of which, no doubt,
was, that the PopiJJj Po^^ver of Perfecution might
never be re-aflumed by Proteftajits : And the In^'
tent of the Government fince the Toleration^ in
granting more eafy Laws for the Clergies reco-
vering their Claims, no doubt, was, and is, that
all unneceffary Recourfe to former Severities
might ceafe, and that ill difpofed Perfons, fome
of whom may mix themfelves even with the
pureft of Societies, might not by Atls of OppreJ^
Jion detradt from that General CharaBer of Mo^
deration, which is the brighteft Ornament of a
Proteftant Clergy^ and the Honour of our Prefent
happy Eftablifliment.
We return to the Examifiers Charge againft
the ^takers of condemning the Courts of Juftice:
Upon which he obferves, pag. 40. That altho'
fo many Inftances *' are given in the Brief Ac-
" count of Imprifonments, fo great Complaints
" made of Injury and Oppreffion from Proceed-
** ings caird ruinous and deftrudlive, together
*' with a long Lift of fuch Imprifonments annex-
" ed, yet no mention is made that any fingle In-
** ftance was for Contempt, when moft of them
*^ will appear to have been fo." We have alrea-
dy fhewn that the whole Severity of the Proceed-
ing and its Confequences are imputable only to
the Profecutor ^ and that the Court iiiucs its De-
crees, even for Contem.pt, at the Profecutor's Mo-
tion and Requeft. To his Query, " Had tl^
" Clergy a Right to bring them into thele
"' Courts of Judicature? We anhvcr, that they
had no other Right than what proceeded frorn
thcii
( 74 )
their own Refufal of an eafier Method, and theii*
Choice of a more fevere •, which Choice difco-
vers a perfecuting Inclination. But, fays he^
<-' Undoubtedly they had a Right by the known
*' Laws of the Land." And, fay we, Undoubtedly
Perfecutors in all times and Places generally had
that Right, v:\i\c\i if admitted to excufe then* Ac-
tions, will juflify all the Perfecutions that have
been againft the Chriftian Religion, and con-
demn all that have fuffered for itsCauie, as Con-
temners of the Laws of the Land. On this An-
gle Pretence of Contempt of the Laws the Hinge
of Perfecution turns : Had not the Teftimonies
of all the Martyrs and Confeffors for Chriftia-.
nity been reduc d to this Point, the wicked De-.
figns of their Adverfarles could not have accom-
pliQied their Deftrudiion. They all fuffered as
Contemners of the Laws. To which Charge of
Contempt they only objecSted the Obligations of
their Confciences and the Dilates of the Chrif-
tian Religion; they faid, as the Examiner, pag*
41, reprefents the ^aker faying, '' We con-^
'* fcientioufly refufe." This Confcience of Well-
doing, however the Exami?ier may call it '' a
'' Cloak too fliort to cover them," (viz. from
the Fury of Perfecutors, and the Malice of evil-
minded Men,) was, neverthelefs, to them a Robe
cf Righteoufnefs, wherein they were accepted of
bod, and approved of his Servants. That the
^takers fcruple not the appearing and anfwering
in a Court of Juftice, is plain, in that they do fre*
quently appear and anfwer there : Neverthelefs,
in fome particular Cafes of pure Confcience and
Religion, where they have nothing of Law to
plead,
( 75 ;
plead, they may with Prudence and Innocence
avoid an Expence and Charge, (which perhaps
they are * not able to defray,) by their ftanding
ftill, and fubmirting their Perlbns or Eftates, or
both, to whatfoever the Lawfliall determine, cvtiv
to the incurring more early its Penalties which'
they know in the IfTue of the Caufe to be unavoi-'
dable, and which the Prefervation of the Peiice of
their Co?j/ciences mud (uhjcOith^m to: A Condud:,
which, in a Caufe of Religion and Confcience,
feems juftifiable by the Texc, Matf. v. 40. i^'
a?iy Man will Jiie thee at the Law and take a war
thy Coat, let him have thy Cloak aljo : And yet in:'
all fuch Cafes, whatfoever they fufter by Imprifon-^'
ment, or otherwife, is altogether owing to the
Intention of the Profecutor, or to his fevere
Choice of the Suit which occafioncd it; for the
Law in thcfe Cafes is only the Inftrument of his
Rigour, who might have recovered his Claim by
a more eafy Method.
Where the Moderation of later Laws has beeri
defigned by the Government to fuperfedc the
Rigour of former^ does not all unneceffary Re-
courfe to the Old Severities indicate 2. D/JIike of
the Lenity of the prefent Government, and a
Co?itemptuous Opi?iio?i of the Wifdom of its Ad-
miniftration ?
The Examiners Objedion, pag. 42, that '' he
*' (the ^laker) pays to the Militia, tho' he pre-
'' tends Confcience againft it," we have already
K fhewn
* // having fome times happened^ thai ClergyDien have
profe^:uted PVtdows and others foverv poor^ 4ba4 tl ''juguU
bavf been Charity to have relieved their NeieJJi*ies,
( 76;
fhewn the Weaknefs of, and that the Precepts
of the Gofpel which oblige the ^aker not to
fight, do at the fame time equally oblige him to
pay Tribute to the Magiftrate. His pretence,
that " many of them do the fame in Church-
«* Rates, and even in the fame Cafe of Tithes/'
we have fometimes known to be an Artifice falfely
invented to induce others to comply, upon a filly
and groundlefs Suppofition, that the fakers fol-
low one another as blindly as fome Men do their
Triefts. Thefe artful CoUufions of the Exami-
ner we contemn. But 'tis no wonder that he at-
tempts to impofe upon us ; who takes the Liber-
ty to pervert Texts of Scripture, and to reprefent
the * Advice of our Saviour himfelf, as tending
to the Support of Eqclefiaftical Encroachments,
and Romijh Superftltion.
" They own (fays the Examiner, pag. 42, 43,)
*' they refufe to pay, but the Methods are too fe-
«' vere, whereby they are forced to comply, and
*' therefore defire a more eafy Way of recover-
*' ing Tithes, ^d' If this eafy Way could be
found, do they promife to comply with it ? No.
<« . The whole Foundation of their Defence
*' is, that all the Laws, which have been made,
*' are, and which can be made, will be unjuft,
*' and contrary to the Laws of God, and Dic-
«* tates of their Confcience : They would have
*' the Advantage of the Law in all other Cafes,
" but would not be fubjed: to it in this. They
*' would enjoy the full Benefit of the Toleration,
" but will not comply with the Terms on which
Mat, v. 26.
" it was granted." Thus would his Sophiftry
form a Pretence that the Payment of Tithes is
the Terms or Condition of the Toleration, which,
tho'a meer FicSion, fliews his Will to be, that eve-
ry Man's Liberty of Confcience fliould be farmed
of the Clergy, and that none (hould enjoy any
without firft paying them. But this certainly
was not the Intent of the A5I^ of Toleration^
which tho' it doth not exempt Men from paying
Tithes, yet it grants the Benefit of the Tolera-
tion as fully to thofe who do not pay Tithes as to
thofe who do. And the full Benefit of that Adl
was thereby defigned to be enjoyed by the ^a^
kers^ tho' 'twas well known that they had, for
more than forty Years before the paffing of it,
conftantly refufed to pay Tithes. The fakers
who chriftianly fubmit to all Laws, and oppofe
not the Execution of any, how grievous foever
they may appear, ought not to be deprived of any
Advantage of the Law : For a dutiful SubmiC-
fion to the Law gives them a juft and reafpnable
Title to its Protedion.
The Examiners pretence that the ^lakcrs Ap-
plication was to have '^ the Property of the Cler-
" gy taken from them" is not jufl ; for that Ap^*
plication was only to reflrain the Clergy and others
from the Exercife qf unnecejfary S.everities m re-
covering what they mif-call their Property,
To the Exattiiner's^ Qil^ry, ** Was there ever
^* fuch an Application by any Seft in any Place
" or Age made to a Legiflature ?'* It may be
fufficient to obferve, that the Application was not
more unufual, than the Nature of the Severities
which occafion^d it was extraordinary; The r,;;?-
K 2 7ucej[arj
( 78 )
'iimtecejfary Choice of which Severities the Examr-*
fier has not yet reconciled to Common Chriflianity^
i2X lefs to the merciful and peaceable CharaBer of
itsMinifters. The Cafes of Injolvent Debtors and
their Creditors^ of Landlords and their I'enantSr^
and of ^radefmen and thoje who owe them Money,
are not parallel to tliat of the Clergy and the ^^-
kers 5 for in thofe Cafes a juft Debt has been con-
tracted for a reafonable and valuable Confidera-
tion : But the Clergies Claim upon the 9^akers
has neither Contrad nor Equivalent, nor any rea-
ibnable Confideration^ to fupport it , but entirely
depends on the Force and Power of Law, with-
out the neceflary Concomitants and fubftantiaj
Reafons of focial Right and Equity, on which
in thofv^ other Cafes the Law itfelf is founded:
Wherefore the Examiner^ pag. 43, 44, 45, 46, ex-
patiates on thofe Points to very little Purpofe: For
if it would be a juft Refleftion on the Chara£}er$
of thole whofe Debts are intrinfically juft and
equitable, to chufe the ^-vereft Methods of reco-
vering them ; how much n^^re juft a Reflection is
it on the Charafters of Clergymen, for a Claim
Vvhich has no Shadow of Juftice, but what it de-
rives from the Law, and for the eafy Recovery of
which they are peculiarly indulged by the Legif-
lature, to have recourfe to thofe Meafures which
in Claims intrinfically juft, other Men, alike pri-
vileged, would think it a Reproach to ufe.
The Examiner queries, pag, 45. " Has not
f the Complainant in all Cafes the Choice of his
*^ Aftion?'* Suppofmg that he hath ^ yet the
having a Choice will not juftify him in making an
??/ One-y nor will it make his evil Choice a Sign
of
r 79 ;
«f a good Difpofition. His Choice of unneceflary
Severities may neverthekfs be an Argument of his
malicious Intention ; and it would be ** a grofs
*' Abfurdity" topropofe fuch a Choice as an In-
ftance of Clemency and of a Chriflian Temper.
" When weconfider, (fays the Examiner ^^^z.^^.
" 46.) the Nature of the Clergies Property, tiieir
*' Fortunes, and the Circumftunces they aie under
'* in regard tothofe theyh«.ve to deal wih; there
" will be but litde Reafon to imagine that they
" would i.ivolve tbcmfclves in tedious and expt:n-
" five Suics ONLY to hurt their Neighbour."
Here he denies not that one Defign of thofe Suits
is to *' hurt their Neighbour :." but he denies
that to be the only Dcfgn of them. What elfe
then have the Clergy in view in carryiiiir on thofe
Suits ? Not their own immediate Profit in the
particular Caufes fo fued for : For in that Re-
fped: the Examiner tells us pag. 47, that his {vix.
the Clergyman's) ^ Income is generally too
^' fmall for a Provlfion for his Family, fre-
*' quently
■* The Exanr^icr has .'^pag. 47,; a Marginal I^oie,
recitiv.o^ the Number of Poor Livings augvie}2led hy the
Royal Bounty •, izhich Livings m^gbt for ought 'we know^
have been as poorly fupplicd. But he thence takes Occa-
fion to refle5i on ^' the Ingenu'U and good Mafivers'^ of
Robert B-Arclay, in calling the Clergy Greedy Dogs,
'which can never have enough: W'-ords by that Author ci-
ted from Ifa. Ivf. II. and by him applied to fuch as
" preach for Hire and Divine for Money" and look for
their Gain from their S^uarter^ and prepare War againfi
fuch as pit not into their Mouths, iVlic. '1 iii. 5. 11.
Which Texts are not applicable to the Clergy, unlefs 'they
hear fmilar Fruits to thofe of the Perfons therein de-
fcribid.
<c
( 80 )
«^ quently for his own Subfiftencc, and allowing
*^ them but a common Degree of underftanding,
*' he can never imagine that he can be Gainer by
" a Tedious and Expenfive Suit/* and fhews,
that even in Cafes of Recovering • ' treble Da-
mages with Cofts/* yet " confidering thofe
Charges which attend a Suit, beyond what the
*^ Courts can give, he will find himfelf no Gai-
*' ner," and that " in many Inftances he may
" have fupported his Right at the Expence of his
*' Maintenance," and again, pag. 48, " his
** whole Demand may be more than fwallowed
** up by the Charges of a Suit." So that he ad-
mits thofe Suits to be " hurtful to their Neigh*
" hours" and of no immediate Profit to them-
felves. But, he lets us know, that fuch a Profe-
cution, tho' immediately detrimental, may, in its
Remoter Confequences, be very beneficial to the
Clergyman's Income, by its keeping other Men in
Awe, and preventing their Difputing his Claims;
for fpeaking of fuch a Suit, he ^ys, '' If neglected,
" this may draw a Refufal from others, to theLofs
** of the chief Part of his Subfiftence ; Where it
" depends on Cuftom it may dellroy his Title,
*' whilft the wrong Doer endeavours to poflefs
*' the ParilTiioners with a Notion, that he is in-
** troducing New Cujioms to their Prejudice, and
*' denies the Title to what is demanded." The
Examiner may pleafe to inform us what he means
by New Cujioms, becaufe we think that Expref-
Ron has a Contiadidion in its Terms, and that
what is New is not a Cujiom, But to enquire a
little into this Affair ; What has the Clergyman
to fear? Is there any Danger of his fariihioners
cniei;;-'
(Si)
entertaining a wrong Notion in this Cafe ? Do
not they know what is their Cuftom ; and whe*-
ther a Claim upon them be a New One, or fuch
as they have been usM to pay ? 'Tis pofiible, that
an Avaricious Prieft, (for fuch there have been,
and may be again,) may for his ov^^n Intereft at-
tempt the introducing Novelties to their Preju-
dice ', and to fecure himfelf againft their Refu-
lal may fue a confcientious Man with a Defign
NOT ONLY to hurt him, but also to terrify
others, and to make them fee and tremble at the
ruinous Confequences of difputing his Pleafure,
and of Non-Submiffion to his arbitrary Claim.
He well knows, that the vifible Effeds of Sequef-
tration and Imprifonment are apt to make greater
Impreffionson the Minds of his Parifliioners, than
any other Arguments he can ufe -, and that Fear
may induce them to comply with what their Rea^
Jon would refufe. By fuch Means as thefe, Novel
Impojitiom enforced and continued by Terrors,
have gradually been improved into eflablifhed
CuftomSj and Payments fo eflablifhed have in
procefs of Time been called by the Impofers their
Prope?'f)\ Thus have expenfive Suits againfl fome
been carried on with a Defign of terrifying others
to a Compliance with fuch Claims, as the Clergy
have occafionally been difpofed to introduce.
Thus has the Examiner cfFeftually verified the
Obiervation made in the Preface to the Brief Ac-
county viz, *' that fome profefling to be Minif-
'' ters of the Gofpel of Peace, have by unnecef-
*' fiiry and expenfive Law Suits facrificed their
*' own Quiet and Interefl to the OppreiTion and
^* Ruin of their Neighbours ^ but with this Sal-
( 82 )
'vOy that 'tis not only to hurt their Neighbours
that they facrifice their prefent Peace and Intereft;
but that tis also to induce CompHance with fuch
New Claims as they may judge for their future
Advantage to eftablifh. Thus has he alfo con-
firmed the Truth of a ^ Remark formerly made
'viz. that '* perfccuting Clergymen, by lefTening
" their Charafter, may augment their Mainte-
" tenance ;" and has fhewn that what he calls a
fmart Refledlion, pag. 46. and would impute to
Malice^ has a very juft " Meaning in it/'
Hence it appears, that by the Exa?nincrs Pre-
tence on Behalf of the Clergyman (pag. 49,) that
" Neceffity forced him," he intends, not the
Necejjity of Recoticring an iijual Claim, but of ef--
tablijhiyig an unufual One. And that when he
fays, (pag. 49, 50,) " that the other Remedies
" were not, or at leaft were not believed by him
** to be effeBual^' he does not mean, that he did
not believe them effectual to recover his known
Demands ; but that he believed them 7tot effec-
tual to imprefs the Terrors neceiSary for enforcing
fuch New Claims as he might think proper to
introduce; the Introdudtion of v/hich, he wrong-
fully calls, '' fupporting his Right and maintain-
*' ing his Property."
The Exaffiiner obferves (pag. 48, 49,) that a
" Landlord's Tenant is of his own approving,*'
and that " the Merchant or Tradefman" has
the Choice or Refuf J of *' thole they truft/'
" But thofe, fays he, fj cm v/hom the Clergies
*' Income, even their Subfiflence ariks, are not
'' of
* Remarks on ihc Defence o^ Londi,n, pag. 22.
( h )
^^ of their own choofing The Landlord'^
^' Leafe, and the Tradefman's Books may afcer-
*' tain their Demands; whilft the Incumbent
*' may have an unfetled Account with every In-
*' habitant in his Pari{h." But, whence doe^
that Uncertainty and that Unfetlednefs arife ? Is
it not from the peculiar Nature of his Claim?'
Had that the ufual Juftice which other Men's
Claims have, it would be capable of being afcer-
tain'd and fetled by the ufual Methods. But the
Clergyman^ Claim upon the fakers is parallel
to that of a Landlord cWiming Rent from a Per-
fon who never was his Tenant, or of a Tradel^
man demanding a Debt from a Perfon he never
had any Dealing with^ In fuch Cafe the Law
will not admit either Landlord or Tradefman to
recover any Thing. And yet, when in a Cafe
exaftly parallel, the Law not only indulges the
Clergyman with a Power of recovering a Clairr^
from a Perfon who never had any Dealings with
him, nor ever received any Thing from him,
but alfo puts into his Hands an eafy Method of
recovering that Claim ; he complains that he i$
'' under hard Circumftances," for no other
Caufe, than that upon his wilfully rejecting that
ealy Method, and preferring the Exercife of un-
neceffary and ruinous Severities before It, *' he is
'' ftiled a Perfecutor." An Appellation, under
which he feemsvery uneaf;/, and to which, we,
who defire the Peace and Quiet of all Men,
could wiih, the Malignity of his Choice had
never entitled him.
The next Thing which the Exa?niner, (P^g'
50) undertakes, is the anfwering a Queition pio-
JL pofed
r 84)
pofed in our Remarks on a Defence for the Dio--
cele of St. Davids, pag. 50, *viz, " Whether
*' the Tithes demandable by Law, either by the
v Clergy, or others, be not better fecured to
*' them, by one^ uniform^ Jhort^ eajy and certain
*' Method of Recovery, than by having recourfc
" to Variety cf Proiecutions, tedious and expen--
" five to themfelves, and others, * dijhonourahly
*' jevere^ and in the End oftentimes inefFeftual ?"
To this thQ Examiner fays, *^ Ifhall readily
'' anfwer
^ ne Words diflionourably fevere, thd' manifejlly re-
latir.g only to the tedious and expenfive Profecucions iafl
before mentioned, the Examiner by a falfe Conftru5fion
applies to the Laws which are not at all mentioned, ^his
palpable MifconJiru5fion fee?ns one of his favourite Wit-
ticifms •, he is fo fond of it, as to repeat it frequently y for
Jnfia-ice, p)ag. 51, be pretends to query, whether '^ the
*' Laws of the Reahn do deferve to he JliVd diflionour-
*' ably fevere .^' pag, 6^, «' Methods which the Qua-
*' kers without any Colour of Reafon flile difhonoura-
*' ably fevere." pag. 66^ " Who dare flile the Laws
** of the Land, and the Courts of J uft ice di/lionourably
** ievcre." p.^g. 70, '' and yet he calls thofe Laws dii-
*' honourably fevere." pag. 133, " flile thofe Laws
•' they difohey diilionourably fevere'* and elfewhere.
With Repetitions of fo filly a Perverfion would he itnpofe
upon his Readers, who, we doubt not, will remark
his Folly in making 710 Diflin^ion between vexatious
Profecutions, and the Laws themfelves \ between litigious
Profecutors, and the Courts of Juflice ; between un-
necefjcry Suits, and the Statutes of the Realm •, the
Former of which 7?iay be juftly and deferve dly cenjured
without any Imputation on the Latter. But the Ex-
aminer probably thinks to atone for difregardwg the moft
obvious Diftin^ions, perverting the plain Senfe of other
Mens Words, and 7ieglct'Hng the Truth of his own, by a
fingle meritorious A5t of abtftng the Quakers.
( 85 )
*' anfwer in the Affirmative, if fuch a Method
" was or could be found." S'lch a Method, we
fay, the Claimers of Tithes from ^takers already
have 5 and that the A6i^ of 7 & 8 K. ^. 3. do
prefcribe fuch a Method. If other Men have not
*^ the Benefit of fuch a Method" for recovering
their Debts, the peculiarity of the Favour rei, !ers
thofe who have the lefs excufable in rejecting It.
The Examhier denies that thofe Ads do prefcribe
any fuch Methody and pretends to prove the
Method by them prefcribed to be ineffcdlual.
We are next to confider his pretended Proofs of
their Infutiiciency.
He pretends, pag. 51, "that thefe Adls of
King TFillia?n III. were not by the Legiflature
thought eifcdtual, will appear from the Title
of the Bill, which was brought in, and which
the fakers fo ftrenuoufly foUicited, ^ciz, A
Bill to enlarge^ amende and render iiiore effec-
tualy the Laws now in being, for the more
eafy Recovery of Tithes, Church-Rates, and
Oblations, and other Ecclefmftical Dues from
the People called Siuakcrs,'"^ and queries, " If
thefe Laws were already effedtual, what Amend-
ment could they want." Though he cannot
be ignorant that the Defign and Foundation of
that Bill for rendring thofe Laws more ejj'eBtial^
was not from any Defed: in the Laws themfelves,
but from the Profecutors taking more rigorous
Methods. For thofe Laws being thought in
themfelves effedlual, the Reftridtion of the Pro-
fecutors from fevere Courfes was intended to
make them more effcBual. This he in a manner
acknovvdedges to have been the Cafe, when he
L z. fiivs
( 86)
•fays pag. 52, *^^ But as the Refledllons upon the
"^^ Clergy have been made chiefly for their not
" having confined themfelves, for the Recovery
<' of their Dues, to the J&of 7 & 8 of K.^. IIL
*' and the Inftances in the Brief Account relate
f' only to thofe Ads, I fhall confine my En-
*' quiry to them.'- We are next to obferve whe-
ther in his Purfuit of this Enquiry he proceeds
rationally, or not. '' By one Method, fays he,
V I prefume they mean one fingle Method of
*^ Recovery s and with what Propriety can it be
*' fo call'd, when there are different Rules laid
^^ down in each A61, the One has Regard tp all
■ ^ Detainers of Tithes, &c. in general, the
*^ Other to the ^.akers only." His Prefump-
tion herein is certainly right : We do mean, by
me Method, o?ie ^;?^/<? Method, 'viz, the Method
of Recovery by Juftices Warrant, the 07ie and
mly Method of Recovery prefcribed by thofe
Ads, or either of them. In cafe of an AppH-
cation to the Juftices for Recovery of a Claim,
'tis left to their Difcretion to determine whether
of thofe Ads they will proceed by, for tho* the
Latter relates peculiarly to ihe ^lakers^ yet the
Former of them comprehends Ridkers as well as
others : And the Value and Species of the De-
mand will eafily dired the Juftices in their
Choice, The DireBion of the Juftices Choice
in this Cafe afieds no Body but themlelves; what
then has the Profecutor to do with it ? Are not
thofe Ads equally effedual for the Recovery of
his Claim, whether the Juftices ground their
Warrant upon one, or both, or either of them ?
2f he isdifpcfcd io recover his Claim by thofe
Ads
( 87 )
Ads, what Reafon can induce him to ftart ima-
ginary Difficulties, which, were they real^
could not obftrud: that Recovery, unlefs objedted
by other Perfons. Such moderate Perfons of the
Clergy, as have frequently recovt.^^d their Claims
in the Method prefcribed by thofc Ads, can
aflure the Examiner, that the Juftices have not
been under any Difiiculty of forming their Judg-
ments in this Cafe, nor have their Decifions been
clog'd with any fuch Doubts. Wherefore the
Pretence of them is to be regarded only as an
artificial Amufement, invented by thofe whofe
Difpofitions incline them to evade any Appli-
cation to the Jufcices, and v;^ho, to excufe thei^
Recourie to more rigorous Methods, form ima-
ginary Objedions, which others who have made
fuch Applications never met with. The Ads
are fufficiently plain, and the Power of the Juf-
tices, more limited by the former KQi, are evident-
ly enlarged by the Latter as to ^takers, in com-
prehending all Tithes and Church-Rates, not
exceeding iq/. in Value, without any Limita-
tion of Time. If any Perfons therefore haw
imagin'd that '' the Complaint mufl: in both be
^' made within two Years after the Tithe be-
" came due," or have *' thought themfelves re-
*' {trained by the one from proceeding on the
** other," their Negligence or Non-attention to
the plain Senfe of the latter Ad muft have been
the Caufe of their Ignorance in that Cafe. The
Examiner may be right in obferving, that *' the
*' Firfl Ad -was defign'd for their (the Clergies)
" Benefit," but is miftaken in faying, *' the Lat-
J' ter from the feveral Imperfedions and Omifli-
" ons
r 88 )
*^ ons apparently was not." For the latter Ad,
fo far as it refpeds the Recovery of the Clergies
Claims, and the enlarging the Power of the
Juftices, was purely and originally dc dgn^d for
the Benefit of the Clergy, an^ was obtained at
their fpecial Inftance and Requeft : Nor would
the Bifhops confent to the pafling that Ad for
the fakers Affirmation, without an Additional
Claufe for the Recovery of Tithes, &:c. which
accordingly was inferted by their exprefs Di-
redion ; and it would be a Refleftion on the
Judgment of thofe Prelates, to admit any fuch
Imperfe5iions and Omijfiom therein to the Preju-
dice of the Clergy, as the Exarnijier groundlefly
fuggefts. But what can the Examiner mean by-
faying (pag. 53) that *' It is rather a Wonder,
** confidering the Obftinacy of their Adverfaries,
*' that under thefe Difficulties they (the Clergy)
*' fliould venture to proceed at all upon the Af-
*' firmation Aft/* We cannot apprehend that
the Clergy run any Rifque, or can incur any
Danger by fo venturing ; for if in fuch an Ap-
plication they fucceed, they recover their Claim :
If they fucceed not, they lofe nothing : An Ap-
plication therefore cannot hurt them. But there
feems juft Reafon to doubt, that fuch of them as
chufe feverer Courfes, refrain from any fuch Ap-
plication for fear of fucceeding therein, and
thereby excluding themfelves from the Exer-
cife of that Rigour and Severity which is more
agreeable to a perfecuting Difpofition. We pre-
fume, that, the Premifes duly confidered, the
Reader will grant us, that, notwithllanding any
Thino; the Examiner has advanced, the Method
"^ of
( 89)
x>fKtcovtry hy Jujlices Warrants may be very
properly called one fmgle Method of Recovery.
The Examiner proceeds (pag. 54) " Neither
« can it be faid to be an wiiform Method, as well
*' for the Reafons before mentioned, as that the
" Quaker is at Liberty to objed: to the Title, and
" thereby force the Clergyman to proceed at
*' Law, unlefs he will give it up.'* What he
calls " the Reafons before mentioned,'* wo
have before iliewn to be no Reajbns : And as to
the ^takers being at Liberty to objedl, that £/-
berty cannot affed: the Method prefcribed, unlefs
he aftually doth objed:, which in Cafes of this
Nature he is feldom, if ever, known to do.
'' And indeed, fays the Examiner, unlefe
^' there was an uniform Rule for the Payment of
*' Tithes, which is not to be found, confider-
*' ing the various Cuftoms, Compofitions, and
*' Prefcriptions, no other uniform Method can
*' be prefcrib'd to recover them, but under
*' the Authority of the Courts of Judicature."
Here he fliould have confider'd that the Unifor-^
7nity of the Method of Recovery is not at all af-
feded by the Multiformity of the Rule he pre-
tends to claim by : For whether his Claim ap-
pears to arife from Cuftom, Compofition, or
Prefcription, 'tis alike recoverable by one and the
jame unijorm Method of a Juftices Warrant,
which renders his Application to the Courts of
Judicature unnecefiary.
The Inftance he cites from the Preface to the
Brief Account^ pag. 10, of the Qv.akers fome-
times " difpnting his Adverfary's Right to what
^ he claims" in order to obtain a Prohibitioa
from
( 90)
from a Profecution in the Ecckjtajlical Court, thd-
** Confequence of which may be Excommuni-i
^^ cation and Imprifonment . for Life," affords
not the leaft Colour for a Pretence that he will'
difpute his Adverfaries 'T'itk upon an Application
to the Juftices, which is not attended with any
Appearance of fuch Danger. Nor docs their
forbearing to " difpute the Title before the Jul^
*^ tices'' arife from any fuch Caufe as he infinuates,
but from their Love of Peace, and their dutiful
SubmiiTion to the Law.
The Examiner is pleafsd, pag. ^^^ to call a
Reflection on the " Courts of Juflice" equally
unmerited on their Part, and unwarrantable on
his ; where he fays '^ When a Suit is brought in
*' an Ecclefiajlical Court, they may upon a bare
*' Suggeftion, tho' falfe, obtain a Prohibition."
Again, " upon telling an Untruth only they may
** obtain a Prohibition." Thus he reprefents
the King's Courts as regardlefs of Truth, and
granting Prohibitions on bare Suggcftions of
Fahhood. This Reflecftion feems to be a Symp-
tom of fome Remainder of that old Eccleji.ajlical
Spirit y which in former Days, before the Refor-
mation from Poper)\ was accuftomed to Jpeak
evil of Dignities y and to calumniate even the
Powers ordaified of God, upon every Attempt to
retrench the afliimed Jurifdidtion of the Church,.
To juftify the Condud of thofe Courts againft
the Obloquy and Reproach of the Examiner ^ we
{hall lay before the Reader the true State of their
Proceedings in fuch Cafes. The King's Courts
are fo far from granting a Prohibition '' upon a
•* bare Suggeftion, tho falfe," that they do not
grant
( 9x ;
grant a Prohibition upon a bare Suggeftion, the*
perfedlly true and well grounded : The Procee-
dings in this Cafe are very dehberate. A Motion
being made for a Prohibition upon jufl and well
grounded Suggeftions, a Rule of Court is granted,
affigning a reafonable Time for the Spiritual
Court to appear and fhew Caufe why a Writ of
Prohibition fhould not be ma.de out: If they
appear only, and defire farther Time for (hew-
ing Caufe, 'tis ufually admitted : But if the £^-
r/^A7/?/W Court, con fcious of their own Irregu-
larity, and of the Validity of the Suggeftions,
will not appear, a Prohibition is m.ade out to
quafli the Proceedings which themfelvcs \vo;:ld
not appear to defend. Certainly, the Exammer
muft either be very ignorant of the Methods ufed
by the King's Courts in this Affair, or elfe he
muft have wilfully mifreprefented them, in pre-
tending that a Prohibition may be obtained
*' upon a bare Suggeftion, tho' falfe." The Ex-
aminer may do well to confider whether his own
Words, pag. 38, do not in this Cafe retort a juft:
P,.epr-oof upon himfelf, ^'oix, " As to the Reflec-
^' tions contained in this compendious Invedlive^
^•' fo far as they relate to the Courts of Judica-
*' ture, they rather deferve Correftion from the
*' Magiftrate than from a private Pen 3 whilft
** thofe, who arraign the Juftice of the Nation,
^* cannot but bring an Odium on thcmfelves."
It has heen obferved, that when Rules of the
Kings Courts to appear and (hew Caufe have
been ferved on the Spiritual Courts, they very kl-
dom do appear; whether that Negledl arifes f:oin
a ConU:ioufncf5 of the B:idaefs of their Caufe or
M iio.w
( 92 ;
from a Scruple of tranfgreffing old Canons and
Conftitutions of the Church, we pretend not to
determine. We have ktn feme fuch, Popifh
indeed they are, yet republiihed fince the Refor-
mation, and dedicated to Archbifhop Sheldon^
in the Reign of King Charles II. In one of
which is thus written, viz. * " Whereas it
" frequently happens that Archbifhops, Bifhops,
*' and other inferior Prelates, are called by the
" King's Letters into the Secular Courts, there
*' to anfwer concerning Things which are
*' known to belong merely to their own Offices,
*' and the Ecclefiajiical Court concerning
*' Caufes merely Spiritual, for Inftance, concerning
" Tithes and Oblations, the Bounds of Parifhes
and the like, which can in no wife appertain
to the Secular Jurifdiftion We do by
Authority of this prefent Council decree, that
" Archbifliops, Bifhops, and other Prelates, be-
*' ing cited in fuch kind of Spiritual Matters,
" may
> I ' '" ' . ■"■'" ' ■"' ■ .,.. I II ^
* Cum fepe conringat Archiepifcopos, Epifcopos,
et alios pr^elatos inferiores per Literas Domini Regis
ad Saeculare Judicium evocari, ut ibi refpondeant ib-
per his quas mere ad ipforum OfHcia & forum Eccle-
fiafticum pertinere nofcuntur— de Caufis mere
Spirirualibus, ur puta, de Decimisj & Oblationibus,
Limitibus parochiarum & fimilibus, quje non pof-
func ad S^cu)are forum aJiquatenus pertinere
Scatuimus Au6loritate prsefentis Concilii, quod Ar-
chiepifcopi, Epifcopi, & c^teri pra^lati non veniant
pro hujufmodi Spirirualibus evocati, cum judicandi
Chriftos Domini nulla ^\t Laicis attributa poteftas,
apud quos NecefTitas manet obfequendi. — See the
Conftitution o/"Boniface ArchUfbop of Canterbury, An-
no 1260, intitukdy -flFterna^ Sandtio Voluntatis, tsfr.
<c
cc
r 93 )
" may not appear, feeing there is no Power of
" judging the Anointed of the Lord committed
" unto Laymen, whofe incumbent Duty 'lis to
<c obey."
Here we may alfo obferve that Tithes arc
reckoned among Caufes purely Spiritual, in whidi
the Temporal Courts ought not to intermeddle;
and as fuch, we apprehend, the Ecclejiajiical
Courts to this Day affume the Cognizance of
them. Our prefent Clergy feem divided in their
Sentiments concerning them ; fome, as Matters
Spiritual, and of Ecclefiaftical Right, merely ap-
pertaining to their minillerial Fundion, ftill apply
to the Spiritual Courts for the Recovery of them
by Church Cenfure and Excommunications ;
whilft others fae for them in the King's Courts, as
Matters of legal Property and of I'emporal Right ;
tho* the A6ls, by which they fuc, recognize them
as due to God and Holy Church.* Thus they feem
bewildred in the Ambiguity of their Claim, and
know not whereto fix it: The Tranfmutation
of Matters purely Spiritual into mere Temporal
Right and Property, being, even by thcmfelves,
not perfedly underflood.
The next Thing objed:ed to by the Examiner^
pag. 55, is our faying, that " the Title is not in
"■ Difpute, unlefs a Party concerned call it in
" Queflion." This he calls, '' a mere Quibble,"
tho' himlelf in the fame Paragraph fubfcribes to
the Truth of it, faying, *' the Title is not indeed
" judicially difputed, unlefs a Party call it in
" Queflion." Now 'tis certain that no other
than a Judicial Difpute can prevent the Jufticcs
M 2 Determination
■^ By which was originally meant the Church of Rome.
(94)
Petermination ; wherefore all the Exammer^s
Talk of the Title being in Difpute, and his
urging that in Excufe of the Clergyman's Non-
aprlicc.ricn to the Juftices, amounts to juft No-
t^^y g. The ^lakers difputing his Right to
f^ t:.es in general can be no Reafon for his Non-
spplication to recover them by a Method which
nothing but a particular Judicial Difpute can
prevent. A private Difpute is no Difpute in
Cafes wherein only a puhlick judicial Dilpwte can
operate. The Examiner'^ Pretence, pag. 56,
that, '' the Clearnefs or Difficulty that attends
" this Title, muft be confider'd before the
'' Method of Proceeding is refolv'd on \ for it is
" afterwaids too late," is but 2. vs\z^i Evafion \
for nothing but the Recovery of his Claim by
the Juftices can preclude him from having Re-
courfe to other Meafures. If then the Clergy-
man be not confcious of the Injuftice of his Claim,
he can have ao Reafon to confider it as attended
with any Difficulty, until fuch Difficulty be ju-
dicially objedred : And where 'tis not fo objeftcd,
nothing but his own Choice of more rigorous
and expenfive Courfes can prevent his Recovering
his legal Claim by the eafier Method provided.
The Examiners next Pretence, pag. 56, is,
that '' The Remedy at Law, if it be more ex-
*' penfive, is frequently more eafy to the Clcrgy-
** man than the other, he may- tranfad: the
*^ Whole without ftirring from home." This
indeed fhews, that the Parfon, if fo difpofed,
may both ruin his Neighbour, and prejudice his
own Family, by a tedious and expenfive Law-
Suit, without going out of Doors: But 'tis far
from
C 95 ;
from fliewing either the Juftice or Charity of Iq.
facrificing them to his Indolence. But all thi^
feems to us purely evafive, and we apprehend'
that he may, ifhepleafes, tranfad the whole
Affair before the Juftices without ftirring from
Home: He may employ '' another^* Perfon
" to eafe himfelf," which Perfon needs be no
Lawyer, nor any other than his Servant in this
Affair, whofe Time and Trouble may be more
than recompenfed by what the Jufliccs can
allow. His Pretence, that by one of thofe
Afts ( " if diflinft) the Juftices can allow him
" nothing" is a Conflrud:ion, we prefume, they
never made. But fuppofing the Parfon himfelf
fhould in fuch a Cafe take a fhort Journey,
for 'tis feldom a long One to the next Juftices,
what Reafon has he to exped; a '' Recompence.
*' for his own Trouble andLofs of Time," whofe
w'hole Trouble and Time the Law hath already
paid him for by a fetled Maintenance from his
Parifliioners, to whofe Benefit and Inftrudlioa
his Time and Trouble is fuppofed to be wholly
due. So that the Lofs, if any, muft be theirs,
not his, which yet perhaps they will hardly
perceive to be any, unlefs he fl:iall chufe to go to
the Juflices in Sermon-time. The Haidfliip he
talks of in the Cafe of two Maid-Servants cited
into the Ecckfiajiical Court, was never by us
term'd ruinous and dejlruBive from the Length
of their Journey thither, (which yet was much
longer than is common for that of a Clergyman
to the next Juflices) but from the Nature of
the Proceeding, which, had they not appeared,
tended to their Excommunicatiori, and Ijnprijbii'
(96;
tnent, Things which have too often proved rui^
nous and dejtru5live.
From what hath been faid, we prefumc, it
will fufficiently appear, that the Method of Re-
covery by Juftices Warrant is one^ uniform^ Jhort
and eafy Method.
The Exafniners next Objeflion is, pag. ^jy
that it "is not certain." But wherein doth his
Pretence of its Uncertainty confift? He affigns
two Points, viz. ifl. '' That the Diftrid of the
*' Juftices is too narrow j"and 2d,that ''their Pow-
*' er is too fhort :'* But we think he makes good
neither of them ; for, with Regard to the " DiC-
** tridl of the Juftices" he fays, " the firft Aft
" direds that the Juftice of the Divifion, where
" the Tithes fliall g;ow due, fhall fummon the
*' Party complained of" Tho* the Words of the
Aft do not fo reftrid: it, but extend to the Juf-
tices of the County ; the Words of it are " two
" or more of his Majefty's Juftices of Peace
" viritbin that County ^ Ridings City^ 'Town Cor^
*' porate or Divifion^ where the fame fliall be-
*' come due.'* So that he mifreprefents the Dif-
trift of the Juftices as much narrower than it
really is. He fuppofes, pag, 58, a Poffibility of
the ^^akers removing, '' if, fays he, the ^laker
'' remove his EfFecls before Judgment, the Ad:s
*' do not extend to it: Thus, if there were no
" other Method the Clergyman jnufl be defeat-
" ed." This is like the reft of the Examiner %
Reafoning, v/ho can draw ^idlihct e ^lolibet^
what he pleafes out of what he lifts, and from a
mere FoJjibiUty can infer an ahfolute NcceJJity : But,
V/en in cafe of the ^^akers Removal^ there is no
fuch
r 97 ) .
fuch Danger as he fuggefts, ' for tlie ^aker,
wherever he dwells, is ftill within the Reach of
the latter Adl, which limits not the Power of the
Juflices to the Place where the Tithe became due
and confequently the Clergy are in no Danger of
being defrauded by any fuch Means. The Ex-
ami?ier however fupplics his Defed: of Proof by a
boundlefs Affertion, that " there are innumcra-
*' ble other Ways of defrauding the Cle g-,
" whilft confined to thefe Ads :" This Aiicr*
tion, extending infinitely beyond the utmoft
Reach of Piwof, he leaves to its own Strenrth
and Sufficiency, without producii:g fo much'as
one fingle Inflance in its Favour. Bat he gives
us a Reafon for that OmilTion, viz, ** not out
*' of Apprehenfion of teaching the S>ujUt what
*' he does not know, but left others who have as
" little, or as extenfive a Confcience, fliould
** thereby have as much Knowledge." This
difcovers his Apprehenfion that Confcience in
general, as well as of the fakers in particular,
would fcruple his Pay ; which certanily is no
Recommendation of its Equity -, but fliews, that
even with Re^->ec^t to his own Hearers, he dares
not commend \(\^ Maintenance^ as the Apoflles did
their Miniftry, ^ to every Ma?is Cojifciencc in the
Sight of God-y and indeed he hath fufficient Rea-
fon to reflrain him from fo doing, fince by his
pleading for l^ithes, the Fruits of Popijh Craft
and Superflition, he is effedlually prohibited
from faying with them, that he hath rerioujiccd
the hidden Things oj DiJlomjJy^ not ijcalking in
Craftinc/s,
* 2 Cor. iv. 2.
(98)
Craftinefs^ nor handlmg the Word of God deceiU
fully. No Wonder that he defpairs of convinc-
ing the ^inkers of the Juftice of a Claim, which,
as himfelf believes, the Confcience even of his
ov^n Hearers uncompell'd v^ould alfo dictate to
them the Refufal of. Th^ Exami7iers Intereft
may well inftrudt him to be cautious of commu-
nicating to his Hearers the Knowledge of avoid-
ing Payments which their Confciences perfuade
them to be unjuft -, for in fuch a Cafe he feems
fenfible that their Ignorance is his beft Security.
We now come to the other Point of his Ob-
jeftion, 'viz, that " the Power of the Juftices is
" too Ihort," which he thus expreffes, pag. i5;'8,
viz. '' but the greateft Uncertainty arifes from
" their Defed: of Power, in compelling \}cit ^la-^
" ker to anfwer upon his Affirmation ; or to
<* fummon and oblige unwilling Witneffes to ap-
*' pear/* Upon this Point the Examiner lays
no fmallStrefs: *' This Objedion, Jays he, can-
" not toooften beinfiftedon, till it receive an
" Anfwer," But this Objection hath been al-
ready anfwered, and therefore ought not in
Reafon to be infifted on again until that Anfv/er
be replied to. 'Twas infifted on long ago by the
Clergy of the Diocefe of London^ in certain Obfer-
vations by them publifhed in a Paper call'd the
Weekly Mifcellany oi March 17th 1737. And an
Anjwer thereto was publifhed in the Whitehall
Evenifig Poji oi xh^ ift oi April 1738. Part
of which Anfwer we fliall thence tranfcribe,
n)iz, " the Words of the A61, {viz. that it ihall
" and may be lawful to and for the two next Juf*
" tices of the Peace ^^ to convene before them
the
( 99 ;
'^ the ^laker or ^takers negleding or refufing
*' to pay or compound for the Same 3 and ex-
*' amine upon Oath, which Oath the Juftices
^^ are hereby impov/ered to adminiller, or la
" fuch Manner as by this Ad: is provided, the
'' Truth and juftice of the faid Complaint, and
*' to afcertain and ftate what is due and payable
" by fuch ^laker or ^takers to the Party or
** Parties complaining,") are io plain and full
as to evince the Miftake of the Clergy in affcrt-
ing, that they have no Right to tHe Oath or
Affirmation of the Party before the Jullices;
but, fays the ObJ'erver, " he, the Re marker^
'' fliouid have added to make his Argument
*' good, that they are likewife required fo to do,
'^ which the Adt does not fay, and the Juftices
*' may not think.'* Nor is it reafbnable they
fhould : The Acf fuppofes the Juftices capable
bf difcerning what Evidence is fufficient to deter-
mine their own Judgment : If the 'Quaker ap-
pears, they are the proper Judges whether it be
neceflary fo to examine him or not. But here
the Oh/crver ftarts a Difficulty, '' If the ^lakcr
'' will not appear or will not anfwer," but partly
folves it himfelf by acknowledging, that '' in-
*' deed, in Cafes where the Vicar can make
*' Proof of the Number and ^lantity of the
^' Things taken away, the Juftices may eftimate
' ' the Value and proceed to Dlllrefs, notwilH-
*' ftanding fuch Non-appearance and Contempt
" on the Part of the i^z/j/^rr." . Wliat he here
fays of Things taken awa\\ is true of 7'Lingi not,
taken a^ei:a)\ viz, the Farmer's vifible Stock of
Things titheable. The ^lantity of his Fruit,
^i and
( Jo*^ )
and the Number of his Pigs, Geefe, &c, may be
known, computed, and proved by Witneffes, and
the Tithe of what is fo proved, or the Value of it,
the Juftices may grant the Vicar : Or, in cafe of
the fakers Non-appearance, they may take the
Vicars Complaint pro co?ifeJfoy and proceed.
What reafonable Man would defire more than to
ajk and have ? Or in cafe of Difpute, to prove his
Claim and recover it ? Is not this the ufual
Method of afcertaining the Tithe ? And can any
Way be more plain and eafy for the Vicar ? But
the Obfervery to make jQhew of a Myftery, where
none is, proceeds upon a Suppolition of the Far-
mer's having robb'd the Vicar , and concealed or
taken away his fmall tithes ; a Thing fcarce prac-
ticable in any confiderable Quantity : For how
can he conceal the Tithe, without concealing
alfo the Things titheable ? which are generally
of too publick a Nature to efcape the Notice of
other People. Is not the Recovery of his hjown
Claim by a fhort and eafy Method, far more
agreeable to the CharaEler of a peaceable and
good Natur'd Clergyman, than the facrificing,
upon a bare Surmije of imaginary Concealments^
his own and his Neighbour's Quiet by a vexa-
tious Law-Suit, for the Recovery of he btows
not what ? This, we apprehend, is the true
State of the Ca/e y and th^it the Hard/hip is not
on the Vicar, who is peculiarly favoured with an
ea/y Method for Recovery of his known Claim ;
but on the poor ^aker or Farmery who ftands
expofed and liable to unnceffary and ruinous Pro-
fecutions at the Will of an angry and contentious
Prieft, not only for real Claims, which, were
he
( loi )
he fo difpofed, he might recover without them,
but alfo upon meer Surmife and Conjedure."
This (hews, that though the Juftices have
not exprefs Power by the A^ to " compel the
*' ^aker to anlwer," nor to '' commit him if he
*' refufes," ytt thu Defe^ oi Pw^r cannot pro-
'' ducc ** a Defea: of Juftice," bccaufe it is
abundantly fupplied by the Power they have, in
Default of Appearance, to proceed to hear and
determine the " Clergyman's Claim upon the
*^ Proofs, Evidences and Teflimonies produced.*'
The ^mkers Noyi-appearance is therefore at his
own Peril, and the Hazard of the Juftices grant-
ing againft him whatfoever the Clergyman fhall
claim i which Claim may as probably be more,
as lefs, than his legal Demand. If the ^aker
appears, and objeds to the Claim, he muft either
fubjefl: himfelf to the Examination of the Ju(^
tices, or defend himfelf by producing Witncfles
to contradidt it; otherwise the Caufc will go
againft him, and the Silence of himfelf, and the
Abfence of his Witnefles, will naturally be con-
ftrued to his Difadvantage. Befides, where the
Law empowers the Juftices by Warrant to fum-
mon or convene Perfons before them, it feems
alfo naturally to imply a Power of enforcing
Obedience to that Warrant ; fo that tho' the £a-
^/^/V^^r fayspag. 6i. that '' there is not the leaft
*' Degree of Power of Compulfion given them by
'^ the Acf^^ yet, 'tis not improbable, that the very
Nature of the A5i may fo ncceffarily infcrr fome
Degree of fuch a Power, as to make any exprefs
Mention of it unnecellary.
( 102 )
But fuppofing the Juftices had an undoubted
Power of committing the ^aker to Prifon for
Non- Appearance ; of what Advantage could
that be to the Clergyman ? Such a Commitment
muft neceflarily obftruft the Recovery of his
Claims nor could it anfwer any other Purpofe
than that of oppreffing his Neighbour without
any Advantage to himielf/ Certainly, he that
fhould facrince the Recovery of his known Claim
to the Exercife of fuch unneceffary Rigour to-
ward his Neighbour, would not only merit the
Lofs he fuftains thereby, but muft juftly incur the
Imputation of being dijhojiour ably fever e.
The Exa?mner^ pag, 62, ftumbles upon plain
Ground, and ftates a Doubt in a Cafe moft evi-
dent. " It may, [ays he, ftill be a Doubt whe-
*' ther if the Sum demanded be under 40^. the
** Juftices can proceed againft the Quaker upon
*' the Affirmation A6t." He m.ay, if he pleafes,
indulge his Humour of Cavilling, where he has
nothing material to fay, by doubting whether a
Sum under 40 i. be under 10/. for the Affirma-
tion Aft manifeftly includes every Sum that is fo,
and confequently by refohing his Doubt in the
Affirmative, (hews the ' Weaknefs of the Cavil he
would raife about it. ' "
The 'Examiner denies not, that the Clergyman
may recover before the Juftices whatever he can
prove to be his Due, but the Grievance he com-
plains of is, pag. 59, that in cafe of a Difpute
*^ he can have no more than he is able to prove,"
And he may be in Danger of lofing he knows not
what, nor can know v^dthout a Power *' ofcom--
^' pelling WitneiTes;" fcr^ fay$ he^, pag. 63,
'^ - ■ ' ' * '' the
( 103 )
f« the Quantity and Value of them, efpecially
^' Vicarial Tithes, none can be prefiimed to
^' know, but thofe who are moft convcrfant with
** the Detainers, or are imploycd by them in
^' their Affairs." This pretended Ignorance of
the Quantity and Value of Vicarial Tithes can no
more affedt the Tithe of the ^mkers than of
others of the Parifhioners : What therefore the
Examiner fays, that *' unlefs the Clergy will
*' lofe their Property, they muft neceffarily have
f' Recourfe to the Courts of Ju ft ice for Relief,"
would, if true, make it equally neceffary for the
Clergyman to be perpetually at Law with every
Inhabitant of his Parifh, (for the Examiner fup-
pofes, pag. 49, that he may have an unfetlcd Ac-
count with every one of them) and to cite all Per-
fons employed in their Aff'airs into the * Exche^
quer^ that he may know the Extent of his Claim,
'Tis evident, that his Pretence of Neceflity is not
real, becaufe he doth find Means, without Re-
courfe to the Courts of Juftice, generally to fix
his Claicn, and to receive it from the reft of his
Pariftiioners ; and he might, no doubt, with as
much Eafe fix his Claim upon the ^laker^ and
recover it by Warrant from the Jufticcs ; for the
Examiner cannot reafonably fuppofc, that the
Juftices will be fo unfavourable to the Clergy-
man, as to refufe to grant him from \\\z j^ia-^
her as much as he ufually receives from other?
in the like Circumftances . If "Union of Prin-
" ciplc"
> ■■ I ■» . ..11. •— ._«
* Wh-re to fix a Claim of a fcwShiliirgsbemayprr'
ha;^s pa blmjelf and bis Neighbour to the Expc}ice of an
hundred Pounds*
( 1^4 )
'" clple*' and being '* of the fame Perfiiafion/*
(which the Examiner fuppofes of fo great
Weight in the Cafe of Witnefles) have any In-
fluence, it muft neceffarily be in the Clergy-
man's Favour, with Regard to the Juftices, who
cannot be otherwife than of his Church. Where-
fore the Examiners Pretence of a ^' Dcfedl of
" Power in the Juftices'* to grant what the
Clergyman would not apply to them to obtain,
appearc ;o be no other than a meer Artifice, to
cover hi3 Recourfe to Methods of more Severity,
from the ieferved Imputation of Malice and 111-
Will, by aicribing to Neceffity, that which real-
ly was the EfFed; of deliberate Choice and
Defign.
The Examiner^ ^2Lg, 64, amufes his Reader
with a Pretence that " they (the fakers) are
^' very ready, where they imagine that there is
'* the leaft Defedl either in Power, or Form, to
" fly to thofe Courts of Juftice from which they
*' would exclude the Clergy." Of this he produces
what he calls a notorious Inflance, taken from a late
Examination publiflied on Behalf of the Clergy of
the Diocefe oi Carlijle : That the Reader may
have a right Underftanding of this pretended In-
ilance, we iliall tranfcribe the Paflage it felf from
the faid Examination^ and an Anfwer thereto
made In a late Vindication printed in 174 1.
The Paflage in the faid Examination is thus,
" In the Year 17 19, or 1720, the Farmer of
■' the Redory Impropriate of Hilm-Cultrumy
^' having at a great Expence got Warrants, tSc.
'' fetled by Council at London, proceeded againfl
^' a Number of ^takers living in that Parifli,
** before
( I05 )
•^ before two Juftices ; nineteen of them appeal-
" ed from the Judgments given by the Juftices
•' to the Quarter-Seffions, where the Judgments
" being confirmed, one John Saul, (as was gene-
" rally underftood, at the joynt Expence of the
*' whole Number) brought his Action againfl
^^ the Church-wardens, for levying the Sums
*^ directed, by Order of SefTions to be levied.
*' This Adlion was tried at Carlijle at the next
** Affize, before Mr. Juftice Frice^ but a Matter
" in Law ftarted by the Plaintiff's Council, was
" referved and flated by Council -, which being
*' argued in May 1722, and determined in Fa-
*' vour of the Defendants, the reft of the S^uakers
*' fubmitted. The Year following, they paid
*' their Tithes without being fummoned before
*' the Juftices, and though they have not fince
*' done that, they and the 9jjakers in general,
'' have, without giving much Trouble, fubmit-
" ted to the Judgments of two Juftices."
The Anfwer thereto was as follows,
'' This Proceeding, if true, feems very extraor-
dinary : The getting Warrants fetled by Coun-
cil at London, ftiews the Cafes to have been fo in-
tricate, that the particular Juftices applied to
knew not how to proceed, and confcquently that
there might be reafonable Caufe of appealing to
the ^im'terScfJiom, The Judgnie:its being
there confirmed, were fubmitted to by the ^///z-
kers, except that 077e Man out of Nineteen^ whofe
Cafe was attended with a dubious Matter in Law,
difputed it with the Church-wardens : This Ad:
of o?ie of them, the Exami7ier would impute to
all the reft, and therefore fays, '' at the joynt
*' Expencs
( ro6 )
" Expence of the whole Number/' but knctw^
ing that this might need a Sako, he adds, *' as
" was generally underftood." Again, he pre-
tends, " that John Saul brought his Adion
** againft the Church-wardens for levying the
" Sums direfted by Order of Seffions to be le-
" vied." Though 'tis not probable that the Ac-
tion was for any more than the fingle Sum levied
upon himfelf. Again, the Exammer fays, " that
*' the Caufe being determined in Favour of the
*' Defendant, the reft of the .^^/^^^tj fubmitted,'*
though it doth not appear that the reft of the
fakers had any concern in the Affair, but had
quietly fubmitted to the levying the Sums direc-
ted by Order of Seffions, before johii Sauh parti-
cular Conteft with the Church-wardens was be-
gun. But the Examine}^ under a mere feigned
Pretence of the reft of the ^takers fubmitting up-
on the IlTue of this Suit, ulhers in a downright
Falihood in Fad:, viz. " that the Year folio w-
" ing they paid their Tithes without being fum-
*' moned before the Jiiftices.'* This is pofitively
denied by them, and the AfTertor is put upon the
Proof of it. He adds, " and tho' they have not
*' fmce done that, they, and the fakers in ge-
«* neralhave, without giving much Trouble, fub-
*^ mitted, in moftlnftances, to the Judgments of
*' two Juftices." And, no doubt, but they
would have done fo in every Inftance, had the
Judgment of the two Juftices been legal and mo-
derate ; for 'tis not eafy to conceive that the %^<
ferj could have any Intereft in the chargeable Me--
thod of appealing to the Quarter-Seffions, if they
had not been opprcffed;* So that the Exa?mnerh
'^ notorious
( io7 )
*' notorious Inftance" amounts to no more ihafi
this, that in the Cafes of mnetee?i ^lakers bein^
opprcffed by a Judgment of the Juftices, eightce%
of them quietly fubmitted, and only one attempt-
ed to obtain Relief. So that xhtExarnijiey, evea
upon the Inilance himfclf produces, prove? the
peaceable Difpofition of the Ridkers, by oo lefs
odds, than of eighteen to one, againft his Affcr^
tion of their being '^ ready to fly to the Courts
*' of Juftice." We apprehend what hath been
faid fufficient to fliew the Weaknefs of the Exami^
7ier\ Objedions to the Method provided by thofc
Ads, and to juftify our calling it, ojie, uniform^
Jhort, eajy, and certain Method of Recovery!
The Examine?''s Imagination, pag. 65, that hig •
'' pointing out the Defedls" of that Method,
*' may poffibly encourage others to give an Op-
*' pofition to it," is but a groundlefs Surmife,
arifing from Sclf-Conceit, and an Incapacity of
difcerning his own Weaknefs ; which lie fartlier
difcovers, when only from a defired Reftridioii
of the Clergy from unneceflary Severities toward
the Sluakers, he unreafonably infers a Danger,
pag. 65, that '' the Power of fecuring their Pro-
'' perty is to be taken away, and their legal Elia-^
'' blifliment at an end." And pag. 66, that the
'' Eftablilhment of the Church of England" it-
felf is in Danger to be '' deftrov'd 3" as if the'
very Being both of Church and Clergy had its
Dependence on the Power of exercifing Rigour,
r.nd could not fubfift without it. This ^Pou^er he
makes neceffary to the Clergies " defending
'' themfelves," a Term under which he would
palliate the fevereft Profecution for Confciencc,
O when
when oppofing their Pay ; upon which he has
the Affurance to place the Security of the Nation
in general, when fpeaking of the Clergy he fays,
*' that by defending themfelves, they only guard
*' the Out- Works which fecure the Rights of the
*^ Crown, the Honours of the Nobility, and the
*^ Liberties of the Subjeft/' Thus does he re-
prefent the Safety of the King, Lords and Com-
mons, as dependent upon the Clergies Intereft.
His Weaknefs in making this Reprefentation
may have its Service, in ihewing, not how things
are, but how the Ambition of afpiring and per-
fccuting Clergymen could wifli they were : But
let the Examiner furmife what he lifts, other Men
may neverthelefs think, that 'tis not poffible for
the moft univerfal Exercife of Clemency^ Modera-
tion, and good Nature in the Clergy toward the
^akersy in the Recovery of their Claims, to be
in any wife prejudicial to the Security of the Efta-
blifhment either in Church or State.
His Talk, pag, 67, of the fakers " affuming
** a Charafter fuperior to the Law, and contemn-
*^ ing the Authority of the Courts of Juftice,'*
is fully replied to in pag. 69, 70, 71, fore-
going. The Expence and Charge occafioned
by unneceffary Law Suits, ought of Right to fall
on the Perfon who unnccefTarily brought thofe
Suits, and who, " had he been defirous ofob-
*' taining his Demand without a Suit,'* was in
the Poffeffion of a Method of fo doing.
Th^ Examiner, pag. 68, mentions " the Pu-
*^ nifhment Invaders of Property undergo," and
that *^ in Cafes relating to the Crown Revenue,
*' the Laws have been forced to add feverer Pu-
" nilhments
( 109 )
<« niflimcnts than treble Damages." But this dotk
not in the leaft afFedt the ^akerSy who neither
invade any Man's Property, nor lefTen the
Crown's Revenue. In the Cafe of Tithes they
efteem themfelves the Perfons whofe Property is
invaded ; wherefore " the making ruinoas Sei-
" zures upon them for treble Damages," only
for retaining their own Property, may rcafona-
bly z^^tivjhocking.
Inpag. 69, the Examiner C2iW\h2X OUT " cen*
«' furing the Pradlice of profecuting one for an
" Example to others, as common, though un-
** chriftian and inhuman." but takes no NoticQ
of the real Caufe of thofe Profecutions upon which
that Cenfure is grounded. We arc not ignorant,
that the MofaickLaw obliged Thieves to reftore
fourfold, and that penal Statutes have been made
for the Terror of Evil-Doers. But this is alto*
gethcr foreign to the Parpofe. Let the Exami^
ner keep clofe to the Point, and it will be incum^
bent upon him to (hew, that the Praftice of in-.
fiiain/Penalties upon Men for the Exercife of
their Confclence in Matters relating to the Chrif-
tian Religion, is " confiftcnt with the Charac^
*' ter of a Clergyman, a Chriftian, and an En.
'^ srlifhmanr Without this he does nothing but
evade the Point in Controverfy. For, the ^ua^
kers arc perfuaded in Confclence that the P^;v
ment of fithes is forbidden by the ChnJltmiReh^
mn : The Writer of the Exminafion on Behalf
of the Diocefc oi London was for making them.
in this Cafe, an Example to others iox objltnap
^Molding them. Whereupon m their /W^-
(^10 ;
tatkn, they obferved, * that '' 2ifalfe Notion of
*^ juilice in making Men Examples to others for
'* their Objlmacy about Religion, has been a
*' great Engine of Ecclefiafikal Tyranny in all
V Ages : An infallible Trap to catch the poor
" Saints in j for when 720 Cri??je could be laid tQ
their Charge, Innocence itfelf has been made
One, under the Imputation of Obstinacy,
This call Daniel to the Lyons s and the nree
Children into the Fiery Furnace :, this put
t\it Primitive Chrijlidns to Death: '' I have
ufed (fays Pliny in his Letter to Trajan the
Emperor; this Method with fuch as have been
brought before me as CnKi^TiA^^ : IJirfi de-
*' manded of them whether they were Chriftians ?
f^ Vpon Confejion, I repeated the fame ^leftion,
^' threatening Punifhment, and if they perjijied I
" commanded them to be executed : For I did not
*' at all doubt, but that, whatever their Profe/Jion
^■' was, their Stubbornnefs a?id inflexible Obstinacy
*^ ought to bepunified. This he did to make them
.*' an Example to others. This Imputation of
•^ Obstinacy kd our Protefant Martyrs to the
•' Stake. And 'tis ujider this Imputation ofO^^
'' stinacy, that Ecclcfiaflical Cenfures and Ex^
" commumcattons are, even to this Day, fome-
'' times denounced againft Men not guilty of
l^ the Breach of one Gofpel Precept." '
The Examiner'^ great Defeft is, that he doth
not fl^ew the Chrifiianity of paying Tithes, nor
their Unffieicy with the DoBriue of the Gofpel-,
but,
•^ Vindicaiion againjt the Chrgy of London, pia,
'I5, 14. ' ^ "^ ' -r i.
C(
( III )
but, for any thing he has advanced to the contra-
ry, the ^inkers Refujal of paying them may be
^cdtaiy Chriflian : And if fo, all the Examiner'^
Obfervations about Penal Statutes, and Pimijh^
mcnts infiided in Cafes of hi'-cafwn of Property
defrauding the Crown, and other Hke OJjenceSy
whenftript of the Supple?nejital Aid oi fcanda-
lous Infinuations, and abufive Reflections upon
the ^takers, will be " found" either " to have
" no Meaning," or fuch as is altogether foreiga
to the Matter in Controverfy.
He miftakes in faying, " This (the Clergies)
" Property (viz. in Tithes) is in its own Nature
^' at leafl equal to the reft of the Subjeds :" be-
caufe their Foundation is different. The Proper-
ty of the reft of the Subjeds is founded on Equi-
ty j that of the Clergy only on Laiv : Had not
the Law fwerv'd from its Office in guarding other
Men's Property^ the Clergy would never have
had a pretence to any in Tithes.
Tht Examiner got^ on, pag. 70,71, 72, in
fuch a manner as if the whole Maintenance of
the Clergy depended upon the Exercife of Severi-
ty toward the ^takers 3 for the defircd Reftridion
had Relation to them only. In Regard to the
Tithes recoverable from their own Hearers, and all
others, except tht ^takers, there was no Attempt
made to alter any thing : Both the Old Founda^
tiojis, and the Additiorial Fences, which fecure
their Tithes to them, were to have remained un-
touched ; and as to the ^inkers, the Exercife of
Old Severities was made altogether nccdlcfs by
the peculiar Favour of a concife and eafy Me-
thod of Recovery ; And yet tiiC Examiner has
the
(112;
the weak Afliirancc to talk, as if the Laws
*^ which had flood the Teft of Ages were going
*^ to be taken away," the Clergy, " by a Ge-
*' neral Outlawry, to be put out of the King's
*^ Proteftion," and as if *' their all was at
" Stake" A terrible Outcry! But for what? For
the Power of oppreffing thofe from whom they
may recover their Claims with Eafe : A Power,
which they pretend a Neceffity of retaining, for
the fake of making the confcientious With-hol-
der of Tithes '' an Example to others," that
they, feeing the ^aker ruined by fuch a Profecu-
tion, may be terrified from contefling the Cler-
gies Demands : But neither this Examiner^ nor
any other Writer on the Clergies Part, hath yet
fliewn us what we afk*d for in the Beginning of
the prefent Controverfy, viz, * *' Where is the
** Chrijiianity^ or even Humanity, of facrificing a
*^ Man, his Eftate, or Liberty, with fuch a dread-
" ful Defign ?" The fakers Requefl to the Le-
giflature was in effeft, that they might be fecured
from the Power of being fo facrificed. The
Clergy exerted themfelves with a remarkable Ve-
hemence and Zeal to oppofe that Requefl 5 but
though 'tis generally known, with what an un-
common Concern they laboured to retain the
Power of OpprefTing, yet the Examiner feems
uneafy, that " for this only they are filled Ad-
*' vocates for OpprefRon ." But who can help
it!
The
•^ Vindkaiicn in Anfwsr to tks Londqn Ckrgy\
:ir. 14. ■
( 113 )
The Examhier^ pag, 73, obferves, that ^^One,
** who whilft the Bill was depending, efpoufed
" their Caufe, who tho' he declares he has no
" Acquaintance among them (let thole who can
*' believe it) mentions 1 153 Profecutions without
*' the leaft Imputation upon any but the Clergy,
'' and thereupon breaks out into a Rant, '* J/je
*' utmoji Force of Lnagi nation cannot paint an
<« J^CU 7nore terrible to our Fears^ than wfut
" the Cruelty of the Clergy daily Jets before out*
" EyesJ' For this he cites the Anfwer to the
Country Parfons Plea, pag. 80, but what is this
to the ^takers ? The Examiner himlelf ac-
knowledges, that '' They did not lay the Whole
*' to the Charge of the Clergy." The Imputa-
tion then is none of theirs. The Writer of that
Anfwer, who calls himfelf a Member of the
Houfe of Commons, was probably of the Ex-
aminers own Church, and the ^takers (who
certainly know that they had as little Acquain-
tance with him as he declares he had among
them)are in no wife anfwerable either for his /;//-
putatiofis or his Sarcafms, At the Latter of thefe
the Exami?ier feems to imitate him, when he
calls him " this Wretch, whofe Weaknefs artd
" Scurrility had rehdred him beneath Notice, who
^' like an Infec!^ had ftruck his Sting againft,
*' what it could not wound, and died." Thus
the Examiner flings a dead Man 5 a Thing
which perhaps no Infcd would do. The Ex-
fjniners Infmuation, as to the Caufe of his
Death, feems Uncharitable, and may probably be
unjufl: Let the Ex^Wwcr, if living, but confider,
what a Qnantity of Poyfon Limfelf has emitted
intt.
( "4 ;
againft the fakers in feveral Pages of his Pam«
phlet ; and his own being yet alive may ferve for
a Confutation of his Remark, and may effedually
convince him, that a fmitlefs Dilcharge of Venom
does not always iffue in prefent Death. How-
ever we Cannot but obferve, that the Exa?mncr
on this Occafion expreffes as much Uneafinefs as
if the Sting of anlnfeft had really wounded him.
But, be that as it will, *twas the Clergies own
Condud: which at that Time brought upon them
the Imputation of all thofe Profecutions which
no^ Body elfe appear'd to defend. This Impu-
tation had flill remained on them, had not the
Juftice of the ^lakers taken off a great Part of
the Blame they had laid themfelves under ; for,
by publiiliing the Brief Account, they placed
each particular Profccution at the Door of its
own Author, and difcharged the Clergy from
every Fad: which did not in the ftridleft Senfe
entirely belong to them. Had the Examiner
been a generous Adverfary, he muft have ac-
knowledged the candid and ingenuous Dealing
of the ^inkers in this Refpedt ; but he appears
both ungenerous and unjuft, in afcribing to the
^akersthQ,farcafiickExipvtGiom of a Perfon, pro-
bably a Member of his own Church, in which
they had not the leaft Concern. Their produ-
cing Quotations from that Writer, and their
Approbation of his Reafoning in what they fo
produced, doth not make them Refponfible
cither for his Language or Sentiments in any-
other Part of his Writing. Nor does the Ex-
a?ni7ters Anger at an Exprefwn of that Author
which we did not cite, in the leaft tend to de-
monftr;ite
( 115 ;
monflirate the Weaknefs of his Reafoning in
what we did cite. Such evafivc Subterfuges only
difcover a Deficiency of Matter for a folid Reply.
His Cavils, pag. 74, at the Brhj Account, arc
fcarce worth regarding. The Matters of Fac!! in
that Account are fo clear and plain, that the
moft fubril and evafive Attempts to confute it
have hitherto prov'd ineffedlual : And the pre-
fent Exam'neroi only feven Cafes therein appears
fo diffident of his Succefs, as that he dares not
fubmit his Scrutiny of tliem to the Perufers of
it, without previouily attempting to byafs their
Judgments with no lefs than eighty eight Pages of
perverfe and abufive Mifreprefentations.
He bulies himfelf, pag. 75, in making a filly
Diftindlion betwixt Memoirs and Records, which
are but t\vo Names for o?ie Thing \ and expofes
his Weaknefs (pag 76) by talking of the '' legil^
" lati-ve Power'' of keeping Memorandums,
The Credit of our P^ecords is with us undoubt-
ed, and the Comparifon the Clergy have hitherto
made of them with thofe of the Courts of Law,
have generally tended to confirm the Truth of
them. The E.v.^;;;///6r's faying, that '' tJiefe Re-
" cords are kept v/ith the greateft Privacy, not
*' permitted to be feen by any but the F/vVWx,
*' and by few of thofe," is not true, becaufe not
one of the Friends is excluded from feeing them,
nor do we know that any Perfon, upon reafon-
able Application, and juil: Caufe aiTigncd, was
ever denied the Liberty of infpecting them :
So tliat the Examiner ^ Notion of their " Con-
'' cealmenf' being hut imaginary, his " -S"//^/-
'' ivW/' of their '' Faljhoodr" \\\\i\\>^2. iiom thence,
P ^ 'is
( 1^6 )
IS grotmdlefs. Whatever tht Examiner is *' in-
'^ clir/d to think," who feldom fails to think
amifs of the ^laken^ they have nothing to fear
from the Infpeftion of their Records by the
Members of Parlianient, or any Body elfe, be-
caufe the Evidence of T'riith they carry, is fo
plain and nndifguifed, that they cannot fail of
being leafl JiiJpeBed by thofe who moji infpeB
them.
The Truth of the Brief Account has reduced
the Exanwiers of it to the hard Neceffity of raif-
ing feigned Pretences of Falfhood from fuch tri-
vial Miftakes, as the tranfcribing and printing
a Variety of Papers a-re more or lefs unavoid-
ably incident to. Another miferable Shift they
have been reduced to is, that of Applying fuch a
Miftake in fome particular Fad:, to a Multitude
of other Fads, entirely diftindl and independent,
and which have no Manner of Relation thereto.
The Recourfe to fuch Methods of Defence is an
^ifured Symptom of a diftrefled Caufe. But in
Defence of their drawing gejieral Conchifiom from
-particular Eremijes^ this Examiner fays, pag. 77,
*' If a Wltnefs be proved falfe in one Part of his*
** Evidence, tho* poffibly he may not be deted:-
*' ed in other Parts, would the Perfons produ-
*' cing him be allowed to infifl:^ that what he
'' depofes, are diflind and independent Fafts,
'' and his Miftake (for by that Term they might
*^ be apt to paUiate his Falfliood) is not appli-
" cable to all the Reft? Undoubtedly they
" would not.'* This undoubted Refolution of
his is drawn from a falfe State of the Cafe:
For the Vacls in the Brief Account are not only
dijilna
dipn^ from, and independent of, one another,
but the Narrative of each Fa<5l was received from
a diftind: and feparate Perfon : And certainly
the Miftake of one Perfon in his Relation of
one particular Fadl, cannot with any Colour
of Reafon or Juftice, be prefumed to detrad^
from the Credit of other Perfons in their fe-
veral and diftind: Relations of other diftindl
and feparate Fads, fuch as thofe in the BrieJ
Account are.
The Examiner proceeds, and fays, JNay tar-
*' ther, if it fl^iall appear that thofc, who pro-
" duce the Evidence, have been tampering with,
" and preparing it, either to conceal Part of the
" Truth, or by Ambiguous Words to dilguife
" it the'proving this will bring a Dlfcredit upon
*' any other Evidence which they may bring to
** fupport fuch feparate and diftind Fads.'''
We fhall endeavour to demonftrate, that he
has not provM any fuch Matter as he fuggefts,
and that the Inftances he produces are miutti-
cient for fuch a Purpofe. . u . r
The firft Inftance he produces is that ot^a
Clergyman^s having been charg'd with - prole-
« cutin- a ^laker at Law for a Mattor reco-
" vSk by the 7th and 8th of King Wilham
- III. and it is proved that the Perfon they name
*' was not profecuted at all." ^ ,. t a
The Infufficiency and Fallacy of this Inftance
we have demonftratcd in our VindkaUon written
in Anfwer to ^h^Exammation in Defence of the
Clergy of the Diocele of YorK See the faid
Vindication iiom pag. 139 to peg. 15c.
P2 «^^
(iiB)
His next Pretence is of " too many Inftances
<^ where the Profecution was begun before thofe
*' ^3fs were in being."
To this the Reader will find an Anfwer in
pag. 465 and 47, of the aforefaid Vindication.
And in pag. 56, ^y^ of the fame ; where the In-
fufficiency of thofe two Inftances, which he de-
ceitfully calls too many^ is fully fliewn.
We now come to an Inftance of his own pro-
ducing, pag. 78, where he fays, ''So like wife in
*' tampering with and preparing their Evidence 9
** to mention an Inftance among many, when
*' A?7ios Bickkam is faid to have been profecuted
" in the Ecclefiafiical Court, at the Suit of "^ohn
*' Sisjain Clerk ; and this is brought as an In-
*' ftance of a Profecution there for a Matter re-
^' coverable by the aforefaid Statutes, if upon
*^ Examination it (hall appear that Swain w^as
*"' only a Parifti-Clerk, and fued there for his
'' Wages as fuch, and that he had no Remedy
" by either of thofe Statutes. Is not here a grofs
*' Prevarication, by the Ambiguity of the Word
*' Ckrk^ joined with the Falfity, that it was
^' for Dues recoverable by thofe ylBs ? As this
*' Evidence has been thus prepared and inftruft-
*' ed by them, what Credit can be given to it,
'' when applied to different and diftind: Fads ?"
Upon this Inftance the Exafjtiner notably ex-
erts himfelf, and difplays his Reading by quoting
Grot ins, to fliev/ that '' Words are to be made
" Uie of according to the Senfe in which they
'' m.ay be underftood by thofe to whom they
*^' are fpoken,'' Puffendorff^ to define *' the Sig-
" nification of the Word. Knave >" zxid, JJbcratcs^
to
( 1^9 )
to fliow " that to ule ambiguous Sayings in Ju-
'' dicial Contentions is fcandaloufly balb, and a
^' very high Degree of Wickednefs."
But what will the Reader think of this Ex-
{imlner, if it Ihall appear that all this Charge of
Prevarication, Ambiguity, and Wickednefs, has
no other Foundatioii than an Error of the Preft,
in omitting the Word Parip ; and that the Ex-
aminer in all Probability could not avoid feeing
it to be fo. For Proof of this, we refer to a Col-
leBion of Inflances relating to Parifh-Clerks taken
by himfelf from the Brief Accoimt, and inferted
in his ExarfWiation, pag. 85, where he cites
twehe feveral Cafes containing the Profecutions
of twenty one Perfons for Clerk'sAVages. ^n all
which Cafes himfelf admits the PariHi-Clerk to
be plainly defcrib'd as fuch. The Inllance of
Amos Bickham by him produced is the thirteenth
Cafe of the fame Nature. With what Colour of
Reafon can the Examiner fuppofe, and with
what Face can he aflert, that tlie Compilers of
the Brief Account had a Defign of impofing Pa-
rifi'Clerks upon their Readers for Parjbns, by
the Ambieuity of the Word Ckrk, when he
plainly fees^ that 'tis left ambiguous only in one
Cafe of Thirteen, in etery one of which they
had an equal Opportunity of fo leaving it ?
This we think a clear and rcafonable Proof,
that the leaving it fo in that one Inllance was ac-
ciilental, and not defigned. But the Strength of
Prejudice againft the %^A'^r^, has betrnv'd the
Examiner into a moft apparent A(It of injulllce,
in charging the ^mkers as guilty of grojs Pre-
'varicittion, from the Printer's Omiffion of a
Jmgle
( ^20 )
fi^gk Word mom Inftance, in Defiance of twelve
plain and undeniable Proofs of their Innocence
wliich hinfifelf had collecfted. He (hould have
confidered what the learned * Author^ by himfelf
laft cited, fays, viz. f '' Nothing is either
*' honeft or decent, which is not both fpoken and
" done with Juftice :" But 'tis the Unhappinefs
of thofe who entertain Prejudices againft others
about Religion, " || by confidering only the wrong
*^ Side of Things, to fortify their Prejudices to
** fuch a Degree, that the plaineft and moft con-
** vincing Truths fliall not be able to have any
*' Accefs to them,, or make any Impreffion upon
*^ them."
The Examiner is pleafed to fill his next two
or three Pages, viz, from pag. 79 to 82, in re-
citing and reflefting upon fuch Pafiages as fuit his
Purpofe of a Controverfy with Thomas Philips^
Vicar oi Langharne^ who profecuted Daniel PFiU
Hams for Tithes. The marginal Note on that
Cafe in the Brief Account, pag. 179, begins thus,
*' The Vicars Demand on Daniel Williams
*' was about is. 6d. and his Son, not a ^aker^
^ tendred the Vicar five Shillings before any
*' Profeaition began, bidding him take his Due
•* for his Father's Tithe ; but tJie Vicar refufed
^l it, and replied, Daniel muftjiiffer'* The Ex^
aminer
'^- "• • •
^ liberates in /jfjPanathenais.
1^ \iyoij.ivov j^ v^ATTifiivov' See a Coil e El ion of Itocraces'j
Orations and Epijlles^ with the Liilm Verfion of Hiero-
nymus Wolfius, fnnted at QtntvsL^ i^5i> p^ig- 53^-
(j Archhijhop Tillotfons Sermons in Octavo, Vol 5,
Dag^^ 122, Edit, 1700.
C 121 )
aminer has only recited fo much of the Vicar'S
Anfwer to this Paffage, and of our Reply, as
mi<^ht ferve his Defigii of mifreprefenting it ;
wh'erefore we muft fupply his Defefts. Tlic Vi-
car in his Examination of this Cafe plainly ac-
knowledged the Tender made, and did not deny
the mentwned Reply, but denied that the Perfon
who made the Tender ws Daniel fVtlliam s Son
In anfwer to this he was told, that " Darnel
" Williamsi Son might fend the Money tendred
" either by his Wife or fome other Perion ; and
" 'tis well'known, that in fuch Cafes, a Man is
" ufually and in common Acceptation faid to do
" a Thing, which he employs another to do tor
" him " This appears to have been the real
State of the Cafe, nor did i\xt Vicar ever deny
that the Perfon who made the Tender was fent
bv Daniel Williams i Son : But as to the Words
(Daniel muft Juffer) the Vicar \^^ h.s Dejcnce
pa- 8, fnvs, " I do declare, that I never ufed
« die Words they charge me with, to any 1 er-
« fon whatfoever." But what induced him to
make this negative Declaration ? He tc Is us in
Ae Page next foregoing, where he calls thofe
Word°'' a very unkind Reply, and fuch an One.
« A>w Zv, as, i think indeed, I was not capable
"of making to any One." Upon which in
the Remarh upon his Z).y^«a', pag. 21, tisthus
obferved " This Plea is very extraordinary. Th.
«' Man who^<??/w//v«Wf'DANiFi<//#r, pleads,
" that 'his tender Dlfpofuion was lucapaole ot
" an Exprefflon fo unkind as- Danie-l iWijt Juf-
" fcr • As if it were more unkind to fay the
« Thing than to do it : Suppofe it were ^^'^'^"^
( 122 )
'^ which we doubt not, whetlier he ever faid,
*' Daniel muH Jiiffer^ will not his own Adtions
*' determine the Point againft him, when 'tis
'' apparent to every Body, that he forthwith pro-
*' ceeded to make Daniel Jujj'er ? Does the
" Unkindnefs of faying Daniel ;;///// faff^r^
'' bear any Proportion to that of adually making
'' him fuffer fifteen Months Imprifonment, and
*' the Sequeftration of his Eil:ate both real and
>' perfonal?" The Matter ftands at prefent
thus 3 The Vicar denies that he ever us'd thofe
Words, Daniel miifi Jiiffcr, to any Perfon
whatfoever. We are credibly infoi'med that the
Perfon whom Daniel Williams^ Son fent to tender
the Money to the Vicar, and to whom he exprels'd
thofe Words, is yet living, and ready, if requir-
ed, to make Oath of his ufmg that Exprellion.
But as we efteem the prefent Examiner but an
officious Intermedler in this Affair, v/e iliall con-
cern our felves no farther therein, till the Ficar
himfelffhall declare his Defire to have it reaf-
fum'd. In the mean Time, we fliall only ob-
ferve, that the Cafe it felf, (abflrad: from that
Expreffion) was exceedingly grievous and op-
preffive, and worthy the Cognizance of thofe to
whom it was prefented.
The Examiners Obfervation, pag. 79, 80,
that, " the Word fuffer is rather a cant Word of
" the ^lakers^ when applied to the Payment oi
" a juft Debt, and not likely to have been ufed
'' by the Vicar •/' is not juft : For the Sluakers
never apply that JFord to the Payment of a juft
Debt, but to Profecutions forunjuftand unchrlfiiaii
Demands. And that Word which they ufe Jeri-
oiifiy
( 123 )
ouJJy, might very probably be fcoffingly retorted
Upon them by the Vicar.
The Examiner'^ next Pretence is, that '^ the
" Specifications of Caufes, Perfons, Places, and
*' Times, in the Brief Account^ are inlufficient
'' to fiipport the Credibility of our Cafe prcfcilted
'' to the Parliament."
The Ileprefentation made in that Cafe was^
'' That there had been profecuted in the Ex-
'' chequer, Ecclefiajlicnl, and other Courts, for De-
" mands recove^'able by the. faid yf^j, (viz o^.
'' the 7th and 8th of K. /r. III.) above Eleven
^' Hundred of that People, of whom near three
^' Hundred were committed to Prifon^ and
" feveral of them died Prifoners.
'' Thefe Prosecutions, tho' frequently com-
'' mcnced for trivial Sums, from four Pence to
'' five Shillings, and great Part of them for Sums
" 'not exceediiig forty Shiliiiigs, have been a^'-
*' tended with^fuch he'avy Cofts, aiid rigoro«JS
'' Executions, that about eight hundred Pounds
"' have been taken from Ten of them, where
'• the original Demand did not amount to fiftd'h
'' Poundsi'
The Clergy oppofed this Rcprefentatlon as
'"■ a Thing fcarce credible, a hare Surmife ot the
'' ^/akerl, and requiring a Specification of Facts
*' to fupport it."
The Specifications exhibited in the Bnef A'-
ccwit do, we think, eftedually llippoit it in
■ every Particular, by iliev/ing^
I. Thaf I 180 Prrfons have been profecuted.
II. That 302 of them were comuiittcd to Pri-
• fon.
Q_ III. llKit
( 124 )
IIL That 9 of them died PrifonersJ
IV. That the Sums fued for were frequently
from four Fence to jive ShiUi?igs : That in * one
Cafe, a poor Widow and her Son were impri-
foned eleven Months on a Verdift for one Penny
for Tithe- Wool. And that in -f another Cafe
two Perfons were excommunicated and fcnt to
Goal for a Demand of but one Farthing each, for
a Church-Rate.
V. That a great Part of thofe Profecutions
Were for Sums not exceeding Jh^ty Shillings,
VI. That heavy Cofts and rigorous Execution^
have attended thofe Profecutions, of which there
are a great many Inftances ; in fome of which
the Proportion of the Sums levied to the Original
Demand is greater than that of eight hundred
Pounds for Demands of Fifteen,
The Specifcatio7is therefore are {o far from
being defeBive^ that they demonftrate the Griev-
ance complained of to be really greater than 'twas
reprefented.
But the Exajniner objects, pag. 83, that the
Tide-page of the Brief Account^ calls them all
Profecutions for Demands " recoverable by thofe
" Ads." Tho' the Word all is not in the
Title-page : And the Preface to that Account
fuppofes an OhjeBion^ " that in fome of the Cafes
" the Yearly Demand was not recoverable by
*' thofe Aars :" An Objedlion of fo little Weight,
that a Clergyman, peaceably inclined, may, as
diverfe of them have done, eafily get over it, by
dividing his Claim into Parts feparately fo reco-
verable :
■ ■ ■ " 'I ' ' ' * I ■
5 Briej Account ^a^, 22, f Ihid, pag, 38.
( l^i )
verable : Yet to anticipate fuch an Objeftion, 'tis
alfo obferv'd, that " Care has been taken to dif-
*' tinguifli thofe Cafes by fpecifying the particu-
*' lar ^ms :'* A Diftind:ion, which Ihews the Mit-
take of the Examiners faying, '' they have fpe-r
*' cified them, as Demands recoverable by thofe
" Ads." 'Tis farther obferved, that " fuch
'^ Cafes being but few, the Surplufage of ouc
'' Number will more than admit of their De-
^' dudtion.'* A Surplufage fo large, as to give
the Clergy Room to exercife both that and other
fuch Evafions as the Support of their Caufe diipofes
them to afe, without any diminifhing the Num-
ber of Profecutiona which our Cafe at firft repre-
fented.
'' But, (fays the Examiner, pag. 85,) thefe are
" not the only Dedu6lions, unlets they will fur-
*' mife, that Demands not comprehended in
" either of the A^s^ and for which the Juftices
*' can give no Remedy, were recoverable there-
" by : Of this Kind are PariQi Clerks Dues, of
*' which not a few Inftances are given to fwell
*' up the Brief Accou7ity But in this he is mif-
taken, iox \\\^ Brief Account wtt^}^^^, no fwelling
u p, the Number being fufficient tho* thefe Inftances
alfo had not been mentioned. We have a better
Reafon than that for mentioning them, vix, to
evince the fuperlative Iniquity of the Ecckfiajlical
Courts, in worrying the King's Subjects, not
only for Demands recoverable by thofe ABs^ but
even for Claims fo illegal as not to be recover-
able by any * Statute or Law of the Realm what-
0^2 foever.
* '\ho' perhaps feme old Popilh Canons 7na^j favour
fuch Clviiair,
( 126 )
foevcr. The Exami?2cr appears to have exerclfecl
his utmofl: Induftry, in collecting all the Inllances
he could meet with in the Brief Account of this
Kindi and alfo a Parcel oi others, whereni, as
he fays, " the Brief Account fets forth the Profe-
^' cution without telling what the Demand was
*' for, or for what the Suit was brought,'* This
Objedtion we have already anfvvered in our Re^-
marks on the Defence of the Diocefe of Lichfield
and Coventry j which Anfweris as follows.
" I. 'Tis to be confidered that the Acl of the 7th
^' and 8th of King TVilliam the 3d, for Recovery
^' of Tithe from Quaker s^ limits no Time, fo. that
" the Tithe, within the limited Value, for any
" Number of Years, may be recovered thereby.
" IL That any Sum, or Sums whatfoever, not
^^ exceeding 10/. are recoverable thereby upon
^' one Application to the Juftices.
*' III. That all manner of Tithe whatfoever,
^' vjhoi& Annual Value does not exceed 10/. may
" be recovered thereby.
\^ IV. That 'tis in the Option of the Claimant
^' to recover his Demand annually, if he thinks
'/ fit.
*' V. That it very rarely happens that the
*^ Tithe of one Kind, in one Year, from one
f' Pei'fon, amounts to fo much as 10/.
" VI. That if it (liould happen to amount to
** more than that Sum, the Claimant^ were he
^^ fo difpofed, might, by parting his Demand,
^' ^afily make each Part recoverable by that
'' Aa. '
" From thcie Premifcs duly confidered, It
^: will pkiinly appear, that it was in tlie Pov/t^r
^'■of
;' ^27 )
" of the Clergy, or other Claimants, in every
" Inftance ot Prolecution for Tithe, where the
" Title was not in qucflion, to have recovered
" their Claim by Juiliccs Warrants, had they
'' been defnous to ufethat Method. Wherefore
*' we were under no manner of Obligation to
'' mention, either icbdf Tithes, or of ivhcit Fa^
'* ///t' they were, iji a Collection of Cafes,
'' wherein all the Demands for Tithes, of what
'' Kind or Value foever, might have been reco-
*^ verable by the faid ylc?^ at the Option of the
" Profecutors.'*
Seeing then all Profecutions of fakers for
Tithes had a Right to be inferted in our Account,
we are under no Obligations to allow the Ex-
aminer the Liberty of dedudting any of them,
Ncverthelefs, fliould we fo far condefcend to his
Weaknefs, as to indulge him in the Dedudioti
of all thofe Cafes which his fertile Fancy has
enumerated ; there will flill remain in t|ie Brief
Account a Number of Profecutioi>-s fufficient to
verify our Cafe prefcnted to the Members of both
Houlis of Parliament, to whofe Confideration it
was hun,ibly Submitted. Who they are that have
a '* great Contempt for the Perfgns, and Under-
*' ftanding of other i\[en is too vifible," by their
attempting to impofe upon them the Popifh Su-
perllition of Tithes, under a feigned Notion of
Diz'ine Right \ and when at length that Fidtion
was generally fccn through, to delude them a-
frelli with a fpcious Pretence of F rote ft ant Fro-
p€k't\\
The J^xamincr farther objects, pag. S6,
'^ They complain, that the ProfccutiorjS were
'' feverc
( t28 )
<^ fevere, attended w:th cxccffive Cofts and Char-
*« ges, the Proceedings ruinous and deftrudive,
*' that they were Grievances that required Re-
*' drefs, and apply this to the Cafes in general/'
*Tis certain that the Profecutions in general were
of one and the fame Nature, and that all of
them had a Tendency to produce the fame rui-
nous Confequences of Sequeftrations or Imprifon-
ments, as too many of them did. If the ruinous
Effeds of fome of them were prevented, by the
Profecutor's afterward declining to proceed, or
by any other Means ^ the Nature of the Profe-
cution it felf was not altered by thofe Means of
preventing the End it evidently tended to : The
Profecutor's defifting from the unneceffary Mea-
fures by him taken, ihews, that his more fedate
and deliberate Judgment did difapprove of the
Rafhnefs and Severity of his own Choice.
The Pretence of a '' Defed: of Power in the
*' Juftices" v/e have before fhewn to be only
** furmifed" by the Examiner^ to palliate the
Profecutor's determined Rejedion of that Method ;
and the Pretence of " difgovering and afcertain-
*' ing the Quantity and Value of the Demand"
lias been frequently advanced for no other End,
than to cover a malicious Profecution in the £x-
ehequer^ or Eccleftaftical C-omts^ under the fpe-
cious Veil of a feigned Neceffity ; while there
has not been ajiy Colour of '' Pretence that the
*^ ^lahr' refufed to fubmit to the Examination
of the Juftices, " before the Suit was brought/'
Seeing then the Legijlature in this Cafe, ^by
indulging the Clergy with a more eafy Method
of recovering their Claim, hr.s rendred their
Recourfe
( 129 ;
Recourfe to feverer Methods unneceffary, the
Choice of thofe Methods is juftly to be con-
demned as Vyichrijiimu 'Tis a known Maxim in
Law, that Cejjante ratkne Legis, ccjjat Lex ;
now, the Reafon of thofe Laws in this Cafe is
cealed, wherefore a Reftridion from the Ufe of
them in this Cafe is juft.
The Examiners QH?^y> P^g 87, " Can they
'' fhew any Law which 7nay not be abujed on one
'* Side or the other," does not afFedl the Reibicr.
tion in this Cafe propofed ; which is not con-
cerning a Point wherein the Law may be abiifedy
but wherein the La%i> cannot be recurr'd to with-
out Abufe. And in fuch Cafes, an unavoidable
Abiife of a Thing is a vaUd Objedion againft the
Ufe of it.
Wherefore it may be very confiftent with the
Juftice of the Legtjlature to reftrain Men fronii
the Exercife even of a Power otherwife legal, in
Cafes wherein it can't be exercised without Op-
preffion.
'Tis their own needlefs Recourfe to feverer
Methods, which is indeed " moft injurious to
*' the Charafter of the Clergy j" and the Ex--
am'uier is injurious to the ^mkers, in attributing;
to their juji Cenfure^ that which was the real
Confequence of the Clergie's U7ijufi Choice, A
Choice by which we charitably iiippofed them
to *' facrifice their own Quiet," not apprehend-
ing them to be of fuch a Difpofition, as to pur-*
file '' the Oppreffion and Ruin of their Neigh-
" hours" without fome Uneafinefs.
If, as the Examiner fays, pag. 83, ^^ the
*' fakers venturing to defccnd to Particulars, and
'' to
( ^3^ )
*' to hy before the Publick''. their Bnef Alcouni
of Profecutions, " has greatly conduced to vindicate
'' the Charaders of the Clergy 5" we envy them
not the Advantages receiv'd therefrom. Tho'
we think, that had that Account, in its own plain
and undifguifed Relation of Fads, been of real
Service to the Clergy, the Abundance of Jlf
Craft and Jtudicd Fallacies, which the feveral
Examiiiers of it have exercifed to pervert it, might
have been fpared.
The Examiners Irony, that " the Meekneft
" of our Spirit has appeared from our general
" Writings," we apprehend, we have given no
juil Occafion for in this Controverfy. We have
endeavoured to difcharge our felves towards the
Clergy therein, by expreliing "Truths to them
unacceptable, in a Manner not juitly oitenfive.
The Exa7niner however might have forborn to
mention Meehicfs of spirit in a Performance
which abundantly difcovers his own Want of it.
We have hitherto endeavoured to cleat- the
^takers Chrijiian Scruple of Confcience from the
grofs Abujes of the Examiner^ the Acls of the
7 & 8 of K. W. III. from his Charge of Lifuffici-
ency, and the Brief Account, with the Befhices oi
it, from his Mijreprefentations. We are next to
confider his Examination of thofe few particular
Cafes, which he has thought fo lo?ig a Preamble
oi general Calumny and Dijguije necefliry to inr
troduce.
SECT,
( 131 ;
SECT. III.
^e ExiLMiNER's Enquiry into the Particular
Cases cmfidered,
•^T^HE Exajniner is pleased pag. 89, 90, to
J^ make a nice Calculation of the Number
of Pariflies in the Diocefes of Canterbury and of
Roche/ier^ and in the Deanry of Shorebam, a pe-
culiar Subjcd: to the Archbifliop of Canterbury ;
which Calculation ifiues in this, that " the Pro-
^' fecutionsby the Clergy were all in the Court
^' of Exchequer^ and out of 220 Incumbents^
*' as the Number is computed to be in the Dio-
"' cefe of Canterbury^ four only have fued there
'^ within forty Years, and Ojie in the Deanry of
'^ Shorehcmy
This verifies what we before obferved in our
lotrodudion, that '' th^ Brief Account of Pro-
*' fecutions, by the Fewnefs of the Cafes in fo
'' many Years witiiin that Dioeefe, did fuffici-
'' ently juftify the ^c-;;^rj/ C^/^^^f^"? of the Clergy
*-' there:" By v;\\u:\\ general Conduct they feem to
ilicv-/ their general t)ifapprobation of fuch Pro-
fecutions ; which therefore, had not the £x-
amincr undertook to juftify them, oiight to have
been regarded as the Af only of the j^articular
Perfons wlx) io fued.
R Wc
( ^32 )
We are told, that " of thefe five Clergymen,
<^ Jour h2id been dead many Years before the
*' Publication of the jBr/^^tT02/;2if." And what
of that ? Are the Fads lefs true becaufe thofe
who did them were mortal ? Certainly not.
What elfe would the Ekamhier infer from their
Death ? That " they are all cruelly charged/'
A Cruelty which never exifted but in his own
Imagination -, for, we can affure him, that the
Compilers of the Brief Accoimt knew not, but
that they were all alive at the Time of its Publi-
cation. But what's the Charge he talks of ? Only
this, that " * Since the ASs made in the 7th
^' and 8 th Years of the Reign of King tVillia?n
*' the 3d, for the more eajy Recovery oj Tithe s^
*' Church-Rates, &c, thofe that have made the
" former expenfive Ways of Proceeding their
*' Choice, feem to be left without Excufe, and
" to ad upon other, lefs juftifiable^Aff?/'/^'^^, than
*^ the mere Recovery of their pretended Diies^
Which is but a general and natural Inference
drawn from the very Nature of the Fads them-
felves. Wherefore, the " Veracity of the Charge,"
as he calls it, is fo neceflarily conneded with the
Truth oi \ht FaBs, that it cannot be avoided
without difproving them : Which whether the
Examiner has done or not, we are next to con-
fider.
CASE
Preface to ibe Brief Account, /^f. 5,
( 133 )
CASE I.
BRIEF Account, pag. 6i, 62. [A] 1698.
" John Love the Younger ol Cautcriury
*' was profecuted in the Exchequer for Tithes, at
" the Suit of Humphry Brailsjord, Parfoii of
'* the Parifli called All-Saiiits in Canterbury,
To which this Note [ A ] is fubjoined.
" "John Lcnje was a pdr)r Man, and had a
" Wife and four Children ; the^ Demand for
^' Tithe was 2/. 125. od. for about five Years,
" (tho'hisRentwasbut 5/. pery^w;^;;7.) He was
" committed to Canterbury Goal on the 27th of
'' the Month called February 1698-9, and con-
*' tinned Prifoner about fourteen Months, after
'' which the Parfon released him.'*
This is the Cafe : What has the Exa?niner to
objeftto it? He produces pag. 92, what he calls
the Anf^ver of the Reverend Mr. James Hen-
ftridge the prejbit Incumbent, who owns, that
•* John Love was there confined in Goal for not
*' paying of Tithe," but adds, '' The Demand
'' of which was very fhort of the Rent of the
'' Houfe he lived in, it being ^/i^^p rented at
*' 8 /. per Annum" This always is not well fup-
ported by the Incumbcnf s. {r^eciUing, that *'he
'' now receives 16 Shillings per 'Annum" which
is fcarce a valid Proof of what the preient Rent
is, much lefs of what the Rer.t always was :
Doubtlefs the Incumbent at that Time, who in
his Exchcquer^bill fixes '' the Rent at 5/. a
Case I. R2 " "^^ -
f ^34)
«c Year/' had as good Means of being rightly
informed what yohn Loves Rent then was, as the
prefent Incumbent can be fuppos'd to have above
forty Years after. If the Houfe and its Rept
have been improved fince that Time, fuch Im-
provement was without doubt at the Charge of
the Owner of the Houfe, not of the Parfon, who
perhaps will fcarce give a folid Reafon for the
advancing hj§ Pay upon other Men's Improve-
ments, which caufe no Addition to his Pains in
the Difcharge of his Office.
The Incumbent farther lays, that Lc^ye was
•' reputed at that Time worth at leaft a Thou-
*^ fand Pounds y but by whom he was fo * re-
C A s E I. puted
^ Hi was not fo reputed by thoje who hefi knew him,
as appears k) ihefoll9Wing Certificates^ viz.
Tb^e Certificate of Rhpda Love,
" I was the fecond Wife of John Love of Canter-
*« hur'j ; I married with him in the Year 17 13, before
*' which he was in a poor low Cii*cum{lance, and
*' gave me an Account that he was not worth 30/.
*' more than would pay his Debts. P had fome
«' Money, of which by the Biefling of God on our
«' Endeavours we made an Improvement, fo that my
*' faid Hufband died worth more than ever he v/as
*' worth before, tho' not fo much as the Author of a
«' fcandalizingBook, called. An E^caminaticn of the
*' Brief Account of vtany of the Profecmons oj the
*' People called Q}^2iktv%^ 'i^c. hath with an ill Intent
*' falfiy fet forth.
Canter uury the 2 iR- of ^
the 4Ch Month 1 742. ^^^^^^ -^^"^^•
( IJ5 )
puted is not faid. His having '' left his Wife
*' and Children in very good Circumftances/'
Case I. proves
ne Certificate of Elizabeth Sharpey,
" I am one of the Daughters of John Love of
*' Canterbury i^tct;\.kd I My Tather was always re-
«' puted an honell juft Man, in his Dealings
" and Payment of his Debts, bi;C thought it his
" Duty to refufe paying of 1 uhes, on which Ac-
'^ count he was imprifoned by one Humphry Brailsford
" a Priefl, but as I was but young cannot remember
*' much about it, except that he was then but in
<* mean Cirumffances, and I have too much Caufe to
** believe his faid Imprifonment on that Account
*' was a great Detriment to his Family and Circum-
*' fiances, for I never knew of any Gifts or Prcfents
'' made to fupporc him or his Family whilH in
'' Prifon, ('asfome have falfly, and (1 believe) with
" an evil View reported,) nor out of Prifon neither.**
Folkfton the 2 2d of 1- e
.1 u Ti/r .5^0 liLizABETH Sharpey.
the 4th Month 1742.
7he Perfi?fts under-nameS, do alfo declare^
*^ That the faid John Love of Canterbury, formerly
*' called John L«?i;^ the Younger, was an honeil juft
*' Man, and induftrious to maintain his Family,
*' tho'of mean, low, and for the mod Part rather
'•' poor, as tohis Circumflances in the World, than
'' orlicrwife ; they all know or have heard of his
*' being imprifoned for refufing to p.iy Tithes, but
f- know nothing of his having any Gifts cr Prefcnts
'• more
( >36 )
proves not that he was any other than a poor
Man * Twenty three Years before. What the
C A s E I. Inctanbent
'' more or Icfs fas hath been reported and printed)
'« whilft he was a Prifoner, or at any other Time.
John Adams Servant to the faid John Love
from 1685 to 1688.
John "Newman his Apprentice from 1688 to 1695.
John Atterton his Apprentice from 1703 to 17 10.
PVllliam Screen his Apprentice from 1710 to 1 718.
'Hhe Account of Henry Sims of Canterbury
concerning John Love.
<« I was born at or near this City, of Parents
« called ^akers^ and have known the faid John
*' Love from my Youth, and as I advanced in Years
«' became intimate with him, and by Experience
*« know he was an honeft, fober, induftrious, and
«« religious Man, tho' hard put to it to get a Live-
«« lihood for his Family, fa Wife and four Children)
<« till in his latter Years. He thought it his Duty to
*' rcfufe paying of Tithes as not agreeable to this
<« Gofp-1 pifpenfation, on which Account I remem-
«c ber he was imprifoned, which vvas an Hindrance
<* to him in providing for his Family during that
«« Time fo well as otherwife he could have done,
'^ tho' he induflrioufly did what he could towards
«« it, by making and felling of Pattens, a Trade he
«« then ufed, in the Prifon to them that would buy
«« them. He was alvv^ays, before he married a fecond
^« Wife in the Year 1713, of low Circumftances in
" the
mm
^ hovtdied not till the Tsar 1721, which was 2g
Ye&rs afur this Prcfccution and Im^rifonment.
( 137 )
Incumbent urges of '*' his being fupported by
" the Friends" during that Confinenie:if, \^ould
have been, if true, an Indication of his Poverty;
for 'tis not the Method of the Friends to fupport
any who are rich and able to fupport themfelvcs :
Case I. Nor
— — ■ »ii — —»—^—^— ——«»———■«——■— .—^—^■—^ifc^^^^^,^
*' the World, and I well remember that atccr he was
*' married to her, he told me among other Things
*< to this Effed: ; that his Circumitances, before he
*' married the faid Wife, were fo low, that he
** thought he had but little more th.an enough to pay
*' his Debts, and therefore h^d a Purpofe to fell all
*' he had and pay th^m, and truft to Providence and
" his own future Endeavours for a Livelihood for
*' himfelf and Family.
" Though I have from my Youth been acquainted
*' with the Affairs of the Community of the People
" called ^takers ^ yet I don't remember, that Johi
*' Love was at any Time afilfted by them, or any
*« other People, either by Prefents or Gifts -, buc
** fuppofing he had been fo aififted (if Need had fo
<' required) it tends to fhew the plainer, that he was
<» then but a poor Man, as mentioned in the Brief
" Account.
" As to what is farther faid cf John Love*^ " B?-
« haviour being Wild," and of his "Ranting and
«' making a Noife in the Streets" : If they who fo
<' reprefent him had fully known him, and not been
" prejudic'd on Account of his Refufing to pay
<' Tiches, and his believing it his Duty to admonifh
«' People in publick Places to refrain from Evilf
*' and chtife Good ^ I believe, they would have given
*' him a quite contrary Charader^ as his Neighbours
«' (fo far as I have heard) generally did.
' " Flad the Examine}' in this Caie been defirous of
«' fearching out the real Truth, he might have en-
f« quired of Perfons probably more Imj)ar/ial , for
( 138)
Nor do they fupport poof^ Prifoners with rick
Prefents : Thofe who can fuppofe that, and that
*' his Confinement in Goal was advantagious to
'^ him," may, ifthey pleafe, with equal reafon,
feppofe, that his Profecutor fent him thither on
purpofe to enrich him. But to what a low Ebb
muft their Caufe be reduced, who bring only
fuch vain Fancies to oppoft plain FaBs.
If John Love, by any Condudb peculiar to
himfelf, did afterwai-d offend the Government,
the Relation of that is not imputable to us, nor
does it any way concern the prefent Cafe : Where-
fore, we are not obliged to follow our Oppofers
into Excurfions foreign to the purpofe, and per-
haps infifted on by them only with a View of
withdrawing the Reader's Attention from the
Point in hand, and diverting him from taking
Notice of the real Defefts of their Anjwers.
Case I. The
«' as the Antichriftian and Popifh Impoficion of Tithes
*' is the Darling of the Priefls, how could he expedl
*' that they^ on whoai he depends for Information,
'« would give a true Account of thofe who fuffer
<« under them for refufing their Afliflance to uphold
(C
u."
Canterbury the 6rh of tt o
the 5th Month 1742. Henry Sims.
^he foregoing Certificates and Tcftimonies fully fhew^
ihaU be prefenl Incuiv.btnt has leen 7mfinfornC d in the
Account he gives of John Love •, and that when be refls
the Credit of his 'Narrative on his being ^^ informed by
«« icve-ral Perfons here," he ii mifiaken in adding^
** tliat know ii to be fo."
( 139 )
The Examinerntxt produces, pag. 93, ''7?<?
" Account^ which the Reverend Mi\ Lewis of
"Margate, likewije gives,'" who fiiys, *' That'
" he knew Mr. Braihfoi'd^' and that *' he was
" a quiet and peaceable Man, and not of a Tern-
*' per either to feek, or defire to be aveng'd of
*' his Adverfaries ; " that " he was well beloved
'^ and refped:ed, and had a general good Cha-
" radier for his Kindnefs and Charity to the
*' Poor and Diftreffed.'*
We are fo far from an Inclination to detradt
any Thing from his juft Charafter, that we have
given an hijlance of his good Temper, Kindnefs^
and Charity, in flicwing that he releafed poor
yohn Love after fourteen Months Imprifonment :
For we thought it equal and rcafonable, that the
Account of his Severity, in imprifoning hove^
fhould be alleviated, by relating alfo the Evidence
he gave afterward of his Repe?ita?ice of that Seve-
rity by dlfcharging him, and which we never
doubted to be the Ef'e5i of a quiet and peaceable
Temper.
The fame Perfon alfo fiys, **' I likewife re-
*^ member Jolm Love, and have often feen, and
*' heard him, in the Streets of Canterbury ranting
" and making a Noife." This looks like the
Conflrudlion of a prejudiced Perfon ; for, other
Perfons, who have heard John Love m the
Streets preaching Repentance to the People^
think that Conltruftion of his fo doing neither
jull: nor charitable.
Pie farther fiys, pag. 94, *' As to the Profe-
*' cution of fohn Love by Mr. Brailford, it
•^ was fo early as 1698, fo focn after the A (ft,
Ca^te I. S '' that
( I40 )
" that I have thought that he knew nothing of
*' it, but left it to the Diredion of his Attorney.
*' This I think probable, by his releafing Love
" after about 14 Months Imprifonment." But
we think that Love^ fourteen Months Imprifon-
ment, in the fame City where the Profecutor
dwelt, could not probably be without his Know-
ledge of it from the Beginning ; and that Time
and better Thoughts had mollified his Severity,
and difpofed him to exercife a Chrijiian Spirit of
Forgivenefs.
The Examiner in the third Place produces,
pag. 94, 95, what he calls " the Account from
*' the Records of the Exchequer'' Which Account,
in every particular Circumftance of it, doth fo
exadtly agree with our Caje and the Note
thereupon, that while he admits the One to be
true, he cannot avoid the Force of the Other :
Neverthelefs, he fliuffles egregiouily, but in vain.
*' It does not appear (Jays he, pag. 95,) that
" any Anfwer was put in to the Bill, fo that the
*' Imprifonment of Love arofe from an Attach-
" ment for his Contempt in not anfwering to
" the Bill." Thus he draws a pofitive Conclu-
fion from doubtful Premifes, and refolveswhat
was, from what doth not appear to have been.
However, his ill-drawn Inference, if admitted,
can be of no Service to his Caufe ; for Love was
neverthelefs the Parfon*s Prifoner, and as fuch
afterward by him releafed.
As little to his Purpofe is the Examiner's Pre-
tence, that *' the Sum for which this Suit was
*' brought, was certainly ?20t recoverable by the
" lirft Ac) of the 7t]i and 8th of King William
^ Case' L ' " the
( 141 )
^« the third," feeing it was certainly recoverable
by the latter of thofe A5ls -, tho' he pretends to
doubt even of that, and queries, ''Is the Tithe
" of the Rent of a Iloufe, a great or a fmall
*' Tithe ? I have not, fays he, met with it fpeci-
*' fied among either." This Objection, that
the Demand was not really for Tithe, if admit-
ted would iliew the greater Injuftice in the Par-
fon's Suit, which was exprefly for '' five Years
" and a Quarter's Tithe," and would aggravate
the Injury of Loves. Imprifonment by the Falf-
hood of the Prieft's Demand.
But the Exammer abides not by this, but
what in one Paragraph he attempts to^evade as
" not comprehended within that A5t^' in the
very next Paragraph he fuppofes to be compre-
hended therein: His Words are, pag. 96,
'' But fuppofing it included in that Acl, as the
'' Tuft ices could give no Cofts, Was it reafonable
'« he fliould have been at the Expence of one
'^ Years Dues to recover the Others ?" Plis Affer-
tion that '' the Juftices could give no Cofts,"
we take to be falfe, contrary both to the Reafoa
of the A51, and to their general Praftice there-
upon ; wherefore his Suggeftion of Expence m
this Cafe is groundlefs. Befides, it muft be an
odd Piece of Thrift, that, to avoid the Expence of
a Tuftice's Warrant, would have Recourfe to a
Suit perhaps an hundred Times more chargeable
m\\iz Exchequer. T is farther pretended, that
*' he (the Profecutor) might without Reflection,
<' leave it to his Attorney to proceed, as he
- thought fit." But, we prefume, that his
employing an Attorney in this Cafe, ftiews his
Case I S2 Inclination
( 142 )
Inclinatloii not to proceed before the Juflices,
which might have been ,done without making
ufe of any Attorney. So that the Examiners In-
ftance of the " Country ^.aker^ alking Advice*'
in order to his juft Defence, is in no wife paral-
lel to that of employing an Attorney in an unne-
ceffary Profecution.
" There is, {jays the Examiner, pag. ()yj
*' this further Reafon for this Method of proceed-
*^ ing, That Mr. Bj^ailsford could not afcertain
*^ the Value of his Demand without a Bill of
*^ Difcovery." This is diredlly contrary to the
jiccoufit from the Records of the Exchequer produ-
ced by himfeh"*, which (liews that the Profecu-
tor not only knew the * Value of his Demand,
but particularly fpecified it in the Bill^ viz, " for
" 2 /. 12 i. for five Years and a Quarter Tithe,
*' at 2 s. in the Pound, on a Rent of 5 /. a
*' Year." Could he Hand in need of the Aid of
that Bill, for" the Difcovery, of what he already
perfectly knew, and had particularly fpecified
therein.
The Original Caufe of Loves fourteen Months
Imprifonment was the Profecutor*s Choice of this
Method of Suit ; and if he was imprifoned for
Contempt, in the Courfe of Proceeding, his
Commitment mull have been at the Inftance of
the Profecutor, or thofe he employed therein 3 but
Case I. the
-Y- Jhs well blown nfiial Pra5ilce or Cuftom of rating
'Tubes in that City is at 2 s. in the Pound Rent % fo
that the Vdite of his Bmand was certain^ and the Rent
"ivas as eajj to he known hy the JJfejments or Rates for ihs
Poor,
( 143 )
the Examiner here thinks proper again to />/ . .
his old unjull: RefcB:o?i on the Courts of Juflr.
and endeavours to transfer upon them the Odium
of that Severity which is properly imputable only
to the Profecutor : The hiiquity of which Prac-
tice we have largely fliewn in pag. 73, 74, fore-
going.
*' The only Imputation, adds the Examiner,
*' that remains on Mr. Brailsford is, that lie af-
*' terwards, without any ^Satisfjd:ion either for his
*' Dues or Charges, confented to his Difcharge.
** This, y^jj Zv, carries no Cruelty with it." Nor
was it intended to convey any Imputation of that
Kind : What we faid of Love\ Difcharge, was
purely inferted for the fake of Truth and Juftice,
as we have already obferved : But who told the
Examiner^ that the Par Jon difcharged Love^
*' without any Satisfaction either for his Dues or
Charges ?" Our Note does not fay fo. We do
indeed believe, that Lo'-ce never confented' to pay
him any things but whether by any other Means
he received either his Demand or Charges, we
are not able to determine : And we are jealous
that the Examiner in this Point has afferted more
than he knows to be true.
The Examiner clofes his Remarks on this Cafe
thus, ^' It will not be material to take any fur-
*' ther Notice of his (Loves) other Vv^ild Beha-
" viour, either of inililting the Archbiil:iop in
*' the Church, or of Libelling the Government,
'' or of the Punifliment he underwent ; but only
*' to obfcrve, that they proceeded froni the fame
*' Motions of the Spirit of Eathufiafm, from the
Case L '' fame
( 144 J
^^ fame mif-guided Confcience, as the Injuring
*' Mr. Brathford in his Property."
It was certainly not material to the prefent
Cafe, to take any Notice at all of Love^ Con-
duft' in Points which had no Relation to that
Cafe J and which the Examiner has no Inclination
to reprefent in the moft charitable Manner. His
Obfervation imports, that Loves libelling the Go-
vernment proceeded from the fame Motives with
his Refiifal to pay Tithes. This Remark,^ fo far
as it conveys a Refledion on the fakers in Ge-
neral, is very unjuft; for the Spirit of Chrift, by
whofe Guidance they profefs to be led, hath by
Gojpel Precept enjoyned the Refufal pf Tithes,
but hath forbidden thellbeUingthe Government:
Wherefore thofe things do not proceed from the
fame Motive. The Examiner might have for-
born thisill-natur'd Remark, had he regarded the
Advice given by himfelf, pag. 45. viz. " Let
" the Objeftors confider, whether this uncharita-
«' ble Suggeftion may not with equal Reafon from
« the fame Way of arguing return upon them-
*^ felves," for we are ready, when he fhall defire
it, to produce fome Inftances, plainly proving,
that a notorious DiJhffeBion to the prefent Go-
vernment, and a Jiery Zeal for the Payment of
Tithes, have fome times coincided in One and the
fame Perfon, led (as we have Reafon to believe)
in both, " by a mifguided Confcience" and " the
<^ Motions of a Spirit," equally averfe to Protef-^
tant Liberty, and tenacious of Fopijh Ufurpa-
tions.
Case I. CASE
CASE II.
Brief Account, fag. 62, 1698, " Elizabeth
*' Baker of Beakburn, Widow, was profecuted
'^ in the Exchequer for Tithes at the Suit of
*' Humphry Brmlsford Parfon in Canterbury^
To this the Exa?niner 2in(v/tvs, pag. 98. " The
" Records of the Exchequer have been dihgently
" fearch^d, during the Reigns of King M^i /Ham
" and Queen An?2e, and it does not appear that
*' any Bill was filed by Humphry Brai/sford,
" Clerk, againft Elizabeth Baker, for Tithes due
'' to him, as Parfon of any Parilli in Canterbii^
" ryy In which Anfwer he fubftitutes different
Terms from thofe in the Cafe, and feems to deny
what is not therein affirmed ; for the Cafe nei-
ther fays, that " any Bill was filed,'' nor that the
Profecution was " for Tithes due to him, as
** Parfon of any PariHi in Canterbury^ Does he
expecS Readers fo weak as to accept his indired^
Negation of another thing, for a Difproof of
what we lay ? Does not, in this Cafe, his own
unjuft Obfervation upon the fakers, pag. 86,
retort with Juftice upon himfclf, that " the great
*' Contempt he has for the Perfons and Under-
" landings of other Men is too vifible ?
Pie proceeds, pag. 99, *' A ftri(5t Enquiry
" has alfo been made amongft feveral of Mr.
" Brailsford^ Acquaintance and others, who
<' lived in the Neighbourhood , and no Informa-
«' tion can be had, no Perfon, as far as they can
Case II. " find.
( 146 ;
" find, rememberSj or has heard of any Profecu-*
'* cioii brought in any Court by Mr, Brailsford
*' agiUiH Elizabeth Baker'* This, no doubt,
will carry as much Force, as it ought to do, with
thofc who can think, that a Parjony w^hen he
profecutes a Widow, is obliged to inform his
Neighbours and Acquaintance of his fo doing*
Had the Exami/iers> x^im in his Enquiry been
purely for Information, he might more probably
have met with it from the Neighbours of Eliza-^
beth Baker y of whom he does not appear to have
enquired at all. The Examiner may talk oiNcga^
five Evidence y while he produces no Evidence at all,
of any thing but his V/itneffes Ignorance, which
does not in any wife afFe6t the Truth of the
Faft 5 and therefore amounts not to a direSl Nega--
tivCy which ever implies fome Contradidtion to
the Matter in Queflion.
*^ If, /ays the Examiner, a ^nhpdsna alone be
" fufficient Proof of a Profecution, it mull have
*^ come into the Poffcffion of the Defendant, and
*' may be fliewn." But his Obfervation herein
is not juft, as plainly appears by the Teftimony
of a Clergyman of his own producing, pag. io8.
whom he calls, T^he R.everend Mr, Charles Buck,
^on ^Charles Buck, Vicar c'/Cranbrook, whofays,
*' Among fome old Papers I have found two
*^ original Subpoenas ^ which fliew that yeremiah
*' Vine^ Richard Price^ George Courtbopy and
*^ George Colvill^v^^i^ fued in November ^ the fifth
*^ of Queen Anne's Reign, 1706, by my Father
^^ Charles Buck, thtnYlcsiV oiCranb?'ooL'' This
clearly proves, that the original Subpcsjias, which
in that Cafe certainly had been ferved upon the
Case II, Defendants,
( H7 )
Defendants did neverthelefs remain in the PofleA
fion of the Plaintiff; which diredly contradid3
the Examhiers Affertion, '' that it muft have
'' come into the Poffefiion of the Defendant.''
Wherefore, the Defendanfs not being able to fhev/
the Su/^pa^?ia, is no reafonable Ground to prefume
that the Profccution was not. If the Profeciitor
did drop his Suit without either a Bill Jiled, or
any Anjwer given^ the Profecution was the lefs
Expenfive ; and had the Examiner been jufl, he
might have obferv'd, that we did not infifl: up-
on any pecuHar Expence or Severity in this
Cafe.
That the ^takers did feek Redreft of the Grie-
vances complained of without fuch a particular
Specification of Suits, is certain : 'Twas the Cler-
gies Artifice to protraft Time, which probably in-
duced them to require '' a Specification of Fadls."
The Brief Account was publillied by the ^lakers
with a fingle View of dcmonllrating the Juf-
tice of their General Complaint, in condefccnfio.i
to the Clergies Requirings : If any Inconvenica-
cies to the CharaBer of fomc particular Perfon^.
have been the Confequence of that Publication,
they are juftly to be imputed not to the ^laker;
who applied for Redrefs without that Method,
but to the Importunity of the Clergy, \\ho, as X
were, extorted it.
The Compilers of that Account cannot rcafon-
ably be fuppofed to have had any particular
Knowledge of the Perfons named therein, nor
w^hether diey were lining or dcnd ; wherefore
they are not chargeable, either with '' calling
'' Cenfure on, or V.ifturbir.g tlic Allies of the
■ Case II. T " L>ad;'
( I4S )
<^ Dead/' The Principle they were governed by
directed them to make a jiiji 2ir\di faithful Collec-
tion of Fa5ts they found recorded : Of the Truth
of which Fafts, could they have entertained any
Doubt or Scruple, the Methods the Clergy have
fmce exercifed to confute them, would have effec-
tually removed it.
In the Cafe now before us there is no peculiar
Severity afcribed to the Profecutor; and in the
foregoing Cafe, the Account we gave of his re-
leafing Love out of Prifon, appears to be the only
Warrant the Examiner has for faying, that " In
*' the Inftance before given, he pitied even the
Obftinacy of the Perfon who had injured him,
and difcharged him with the Lofs of
his Debt and Charges : And is gone to his
*' Grave in Peace." Surely the Examiner does
not do us Juftice, in complaining that we " un-
*' juftly afperfe" a Man, by giving that Account
from whicli himfelf has inferr'd fo fine a Charac-
ter concerning him. But this is not the fingle In-
ilance of the Examiners pulling down with One
Hand, what he builds up with the Other.
CASE III.
cc
<c
<c
<<
Brief Account^ pag. 62. 1698. ^^ Stephen
GiRDLER wasprofecuted in the Exchequer^ for
a Demand of Eight Pounds for fmall Tithes,
at the Suit of ^oiiaihan Maud Parfon of 'Ten-
terdeny
Case III. [In
( 149 )
In Anfwer to this the Examiner fays, that
'' "the Account given by the Reverend Mr^
'' D'Langlie the prejent Vicar o/'Tenterden is,
" zs follows,
" Jonathan Maud, Vicar of Tenterden, lued
^ Stephen Girdler for Vicarial Tithes in the Ex-
" chequer, who was one of the People called ^a-^
" kers, a Felmongcr. John Pay, one of the
" fame Denomination, and a Tanner, who now
" lives in the fame Houfe which Girdler lived
'' in, remembers the Profecution, and obferves,
*' that Mr. Maud v/as a friendly, neighbourly
" Man, and averfe to doing a hard thing to any
*' Body ', but that he was forced to ufe this Re^
" medy forgetting his Tithes of G/V^/^r, as not
" knowing, as he believes, of an eafier Way.
'' The fame Charader of Mr. Maud is confirmed
« by the Ancient Inhabitants of the PariH^i who
" knew and remember him."
'' John Pays Landlord pays the Tithes, about
*' 195. a Year, and he pays fo much more
'' Rent." , ^ ,
Upon the foregoing Account, we obferve that
the prefent Vicar confirms the Truth of our
Cafe in every Particular, except that of the Falue
ot the Demand. For the Afcertaining of which,
we have enquired of John Pay, the Perfon to
whom the Vicar refers, and of whom, the Exa-
miner pag. 104, fays, " He has more Hoiiefty
" than to conceal or dlfguile the Truth. 1 nis
John Pay affures us, that the Cafe is right, and
that the Demand for Tithe was about Eight
Pounds, as the faid Cafe reUtes. 'Tis alio to be
Case III. T z oblcivcd,
( '50)
obfetved, that this was the Sum demanded before
ihe Suit in the Exchequer began, and would, hadl
Stephen Girdler paid it, have prevented that Suit.
The faid Jchn Pay alfo declared, fince th,e Exa*
ptination was publifh'd, that the prefent Vicar
had held no Conference with him about this Afr
fair, and confequently did not write of his own
Knowledge, but by hear-fay : That he is miftaken
in averting that Joh?! Pay '* obferves, that Mrl
f Maud was a friendly, neighbourly Man, and
f ' averfe to doing a hard thing to any Body," for
the faid Joh?i Pay doth not believe that he ever
faid fo ; becaufe he had no fuch favourable Sen-
timents concerning his Temper.
John Pay farther fays, that he never made any
Agreement with his Landlord concerning the
Payment of Tithes, nor did he ever know what
his La?idlord ^Tiys, 'till he faw the Sum of ig s.
mentioned in the Examination. That he knows
not that he pays any more Rent on that Account,
but that his Landlord afliires him, he can have
the fame Rent of another Perfon, without pay-,
ing the Tithe for him,
Cass IIL ' The
. j^n Account fince received in a Letter written by John
Pay hlmfelf, dated the 22 J. of the fourth Month, 1742,
|J, as follows^ in his ozvn Words.
^^ There is lately come into my Hands, a Book,
,*< intituled. An Examination of a Book latel-^ -printed oy
^'^ the Quakers, and h^ them dijh-ibpJed to the Mem-
*« hers of both Houfes of Parliament, inliuJed, A Brief
«' Account, (^c, and particularly fo far as the Clergy
\' of the Diccefe of Canterbury are concerned in it.
' * . '' In
( iSi )
The Examiner next produces what he calb
'« I'he Account from the Records oj the Exchequer ^^
which confirms the Reality of the Profecutionj
but the Bill does, as fuch Bills frequently do,
fugged a Claim very exorbitant, and beyond
the Truth: This is fo palpable, that our Op-
pofers the mfelves are conftrained to acknowledge,
jthat '' * the mere Allegations cither of Bilh in
Case III. " ^
,rf.'
«' In pag. loi of the faid Book, where the faid Au-
" thor mentioneth the Profccution or6'/f/'toi G'lrdhr
*' in the Exchequer by Jonathan Maud \ and to my
*' Surprife, I find iny Name mentioned m the fiid
*' Book, and as the Author faith, he had the Ac-
*' count from my Neighbour TJoeophilus ULangUey
<' prefent V^icar o^ Tenterdeh. t r j i
" And in examining his faid Account, I find he
«' hath done fo much Injuftlce^ and unfdr Dealing,
*' that I think I am bound in Duty to my deceafed
« Friend, my Neighbour, and my felf, to put the
*' thing in a true Light, wherein my Neighbour hath
<« fo grofly mift it. / ^. ^, r- t -
" Firfl, he takes Notice of Stephen Girdler a Fel-
«* mono;er, which he was a Tanner, and the Son of
" a Tanner, his Father and he lived and died in the
« faid Houfe where I now live, and in a Houle
" near in this Neighbourhood, I believe I niay ven-
*« ture to lay, he and his Father drove the 1 rade of
« Tannin- near one hundred Years •, fo that I think
«' if he (the Vicar) had put himfelf to a very little
«' Trouble, he might have been rightly intormed in
" '^'' ^^^"S- <c whea
Examination en Behalf of the Diocefe of York.
>ag. 102.
«* a Court oi Equity, or Libels in. thj Spiritual
^y Court, arc not Evidence as to thejuji legal A-
V mount of the particular Charges jpecijiedin themy
And yet do they continue to produce as Evidence
what they own is not fo. Thus this Examiner y
pag, 103. in the prefent Cafe, fays, " He (the
Case IIL '' Profecutor)
'' When this Suit was commenced I was then Ste-
*' phen Girdler's Apprentice, or his Journeyman, for
*' I have lived in this Houfe more than fifty Years :
*' I do remember feveral Paffages of the laid Suit.
" Maud fued Girdler : I never underftood that his
*' Demand on Girdler was more^than about Eight
" Pounds, for fmall Tithes, but for how many Years
<« Arrears I cannot tell ; but he brought his Bill
*' againft him for Tithes in Kind ; to which Girdler
«' put in his Anfwer, but it was objeded againft, and
*' he was obliged to put in his fecond Anfwer, where-
*« in he fet forth the Modus, which as I be informed,
*« is for Marlh-Land iid. per Acre, Town-Land
*« 6 d. per Acre, and the reft of the Parifh 4 d. per
<' Acre. Whether my Land be in that Part call'd
" Town-Land, I know not.
*« And on Girdler''^ putting in his fecond Anfwer,
*' the Suit went forward, until! there came out a
*' Writ of Enquiry, or CommilTioners ordered by
<*' the Court, to fit at Tenterden, where each Party
^^ was to make good their Claim : Girdler hearing
«' of a Lawyer v^hofe Name was Spiller, living near
*' Battle in SuJJex, that had managed a Suit againft a
«' former Vicar and had caft him, and prov'd it a
*' ModuSy went to this Man, who told him, he might
*V make himfelf eafy, he would undertake it, and did
«' believe, he (Girdler) would hear very little more
«' about it •, and in a few Days after Maud fent him
'' Word, that the Commifilon was put off, which
«i was the end of the Suit, whici^ is all that I can re-
member
( 153 )
^^ Profecutor) is charged with fuJng for a De-
" mand recoverable by the Ads of the 7th and
" 8th of King fVilliam III. when by his Bill he
" demands 30 /." which Dema7id exceeds the
Truth as much as 30 /. exceeds 8/. which we
have already prov'd the original Demand to
have been. The Examiner^ pag. 104. que-
ries, " under what Authority have they aflcrted,
" that the Demand was for 8 /. to bring it under
" Case III. " Value?
<• member of it •, which I ilippofe Maud found he
«' fhould be cad, and fo dropt it in this manner.
" As I underltood after theCommiffion came out
" and was put off, the Landlord, unknovv-n to Gu-d-
*' ler^ agreed with Maud^ and paid him about Eight
*' Pounds,, though he pleaded he had been at a
«- o-reat Charge in the Suit, which was never repaid
" him again by my Uncle Girdlcr.
" But there did arife a Difpute between Girdlerand
<' his Landlord about Repairs and other things, and
*' the Landlord propofed for fo much Rent to put aa
^' end to all future Difputes, he would find all Re^
" pairs and pay all Taxes, except Glafs Windows^
*' and mending the Highways, and this Agreement
<' hath continued ever fince, fo that I have made no
*' Acrreement for Tithes, nor I do not know what
*« the Landlord hath. Once I was fpeaking to the
*' Landlord on this Subjed, and his Anfwer was
^' l\\?ii if he paid his whole Rent to the Par fori, he might
*' do 'Zid-'at he fJeafc'd ivith his c^n, and as for the Par -
" fon's Demand it was his Due and it fhould he paid hy
*^ fomehody, and if I had a Mind to pa^ it I mighty ku
" he ivcidd abate ncthit:g in the Rent.
'« Farther my Neighbour D'Lan^lie fpeaking of
«' me, fays, *' John* Pay chferves that Mr. Maud
*< was afriendU neighbour I j Man^ and averfc to doing
<* a hardthinito cn.y body '■, hut that he was forced to
(154)
*f Value ? Was it from their Records V* We an-
fwer. It was from an Account received from the
Perfon of whom that Demand was made : And
'tis confirm'd by the Teftimony of John Pay, an
Evidence, who, the Examiner acknowledges, i^
Case III. " tender
«* uje this Remedy for getting his Tithes t?/Girdler, as
*' not knowings as he believes^ of an eafier Way."
" As I mentioned before, that my Station in the
*' World, when this Suit was commenced, was no
*' other than an Apprentice or a Journeyman, fo
*« that I had no Opportunity to know what Sort of a
<' Man he was, as to his Views in this Suit, or any
" of his Condudt : He was a Stranger to me.
" And for my Neighbour to make me fpeak and
•« believe what he hath mentioned as above^ I can-
*' not account for ; for I do afTure the World, that
<* I never had any fuch Thoughts come into my
«' Mind, and much more that I fhould fpeak or be-
« lieve them : Which I muft leave to his Confide-
*' ration.
" Whether Maud did know of an eafier way or
<« not to get what he called his Dues, I know not ;
«' but am inclining to think, he might believe that
«« he had a fair Opportunity to make a bold Stroke
*' againft the Modus, But I leave this Subjed on
*' dropping this Hint.
«^ Thefe Remarks I think fufficient to difcover
«' the Truth of the faid Cafe, wherein my Neigh-
*' bour hath fo very much mifreprefented it, being
«« fo eafy led away by Reports fo ill grounded.
«' As I am a Man averfe to Controverfies, I ne-
*t ver love to enter on thofc Subjeds, and fhould be
«« glad to fee Subjects of this Nature at an End, who
«' am a well-v/ifher to all Men."
Tenterden z;2 Kent, fZ^(? 2 2d. ^ p
vj the fourth Month, 1742. J^^*" ^""^^
( ^55 )
*' tender of his own Reputation, and will not by
" Fallliood fupport the pretended Veracity of the
'' Compilers of the Brief Account r The Vali-
dity of his Teftimony is farther warranted by the
Examiner, who tells us, that '' A Friend oi
'' their own Denomination lived in the Place^
'' nay, in the very Houfe from whence the Com-
*' plaint arofe ; had they enquired of him, he has
'' more Honefty than to conceal, or difguife the
'' Truth." Upon Enquiry of him we find that
he dwelt with Stephen Girdler, his near Relation^
at the time of this Profccution, remembers it well,
^md that the Demand was as our Account relates'
For, tho' John Pay be ** fo honeft, as not to
'' conceal or difguife the Truth," yet the Exa-
miner, or thofe who pretend to relate what he
fays, {Examination ^^g. loi, 102,) have been
(as we have already iliewn) fo di[}:oncJ}, as to
'* conceal or difguife" his Tcflimony.
The Examiner clofeshis Remarks' in this Cafe
\Vith a kind of Fawning Sneer upon "John Pay in
the following Words, ^iz. '' His Confcicncc
*' does not oblige him to injure another in his
' Property, he pays honeflly for what he enjoys,
*' he hires the V/hole, whilft his Landlord payiJ
*' for the Tithes." But if we will believe John
Pay himfelf, he declares, that he never made any
Agreement with his Landlord to pay the Tithes,
nor had he ever any Concern therein ; but after
the former Vicar Maud profccuted his Uncle
Stephen Girdler, the i-:x\AStepljen^ Landbrd with-
out his Confent took the Tithe for the future up-
on himfclf. That he hath voluntarily continued
to do fo from that Time to this, without any EA-
Gasf. ilL U e.^e^ment
( ^56)
gagement from his Tenants, or any manner of
Obligation on them to repay him : So that
'John Pay in this Cafe pays no Tithes, nor does
he contract with his Landlord to pay them ; but
the Landlord of his own accord takes the Burden
upon himfelf, that he may keep an old and ap-
proved Tenant of his Eftate fecure from any
Profecution of the Parfon : By which Adt the
Landlord fhews a remarkable Refped:, not only to
his Tenant, but alfo to the prefent Vicar ^ who in-
jftead of gratefully acknowledging fuch Genero-
fity, attempts to detrad: from the Merit of it by
unwarrantably afferting, that John Fay " pays
*' fo much more Rent/' which, we have before
(hewn, to be untrue. Thus the Examiners Flat*
tery and pretended Juflice to John Fay appears to
convey an injurious Infinuation of a Compliance^
he declares he is not guilty of. John Fay on this
Occafion has more Reafon, than the Examiner
had pag. 71, to cry out, T^imeo Danaos !
Having cleared this Cafe from the cauflefs Ca-
vils, and the Character of John Fay from the
flattering Deceptions, of the Examiner, we pro-
ceed to
CASE IV.
cc
Brief Account, pag. 63, 1698. " Natha-
NAEL Owen the Elder, was profecuted in the
^' Exchequer for Tithes at the Suit of Hugh Oweii
[^ Vdiiionoi Sevenoakr^
Hqw
Case IV.
( ^57 )
How does the Examiner confute this? He
produces T^he Anjhsjer\ (for fo he calls it) oj the
Reverend Mr, Hugh Owen -, who tells us, that
" Mr. Hugh Owen the Clergyman (who profe-
*' cuted Nathanael Owen of Sevenoak) was his
" own Father/* But as to the Matter in Hand,
he fays, " All that I know is, that he gave my
" Father a great deal of Trouble, for he never
'^ v^ould pay any Tithes, unlefs compell'd by the
" Juftices of the Peace." But though he knowfi
nothing of this Profecution, yet, it feems, he has
heard from Sir Charles Famahy a broken Story
of another Profecution many Years before, which
*' Mr. Lambard^ who is above 70 Years old,
" and is now a Juftlce in his Parifh, tells him, he
^^ can juft remember, it was before the Revolu-
*' tion, and he thinks the Profecution was in
*' DoBors Com??ions, and that upon the Statute of
'^ 32. Henry VIII. after Sentence definitively gi-
*' ven, he was fent to Prifon by the Juftices for
'' his Obftinate Refufal of Payment." All this
Remembrance, and all thefe Thoughts, are but
imperfed Accounts of fomewhat partly forgotten :
We do find, that Nathanael O wen ^ before the Re-
volution^ not only fuffered feveral Years Imprifon-
ment for Tithes, but for a Demand of 16 /. had
his Goodi taken by Sequejlration to the Value of
140 /. But what have this Profecution, and this
Imprifonment, or any other, which were before
the Re-volution, to do v/ith the Profecution men-,
tioned in the Brief ylecou^jt, which was ten Years
after the Revolution, and which doth not appear
to have been attended with any Imprifonment p
Certainly, his being profecuted before the Revo^
Case IV, U 2, htion^
{ V58 ;
htion, can have no Tendency to prove, that jis
was not profccuted again after the Revolution^
But the Examiner^ to puzzle a plain Cafe, con-
founds things evidently diftind; ; and brings an
imperfed: Account of a Fact done before the Revo-
lution, to difprove a different Fa6l done ten Years
after the Revolution. And altho' he knov^s the
Pro&cution by us mentioned bears date in 1698,
yet he has the Affurance to fay, pag. 107, '' He
*^ (the Clergyman) has been accufed of negleft-
*' ing a Remedy eafy, and fecure, before that
" Remedy was in being or even thought of -, of
*' chofing the feverer Method, when no other
* : could be chofen." This he fays, tho' 'tis moft
certain that the eafier Method was provided in
Year 1696. He adds, " But after it v/as pro-
*' vided, he took that Method Vv^hich they would
*^' prefcribe." Which, if true, was probably af-
ter this Profecution commenced, and when the
Charge of carrying it on induced him to put a
flop to it, and have Recourfe to a more moderate
Way of Proceeding. This we are the more ready
to think, from the Examiner's faying, that " no
" Bill appear? to have been filed,'' for the Pro-
fecution was certainly commenced, a Subpcena
ferv^sd, and an Appearance entred thereto. So
that to the Examiners Queries, " Were the Re~
' ' cords of this Tranfad:ion entred from Memoirs
"' when and as it happened? And is the Account
^' faithfully extracted from thence?'' We an-
fvver, Te$ ; and that all he has advanced doth not
a whit diminiih either the Credit of the Record^
or of tlioie who extrafted the Account therefrom.
Case IV. CASE
( 'S9)
C A S E V.
Brief Jccount. pag. 63. 1706. '' Jeremiah
*' Vine, George Courthop, Richard Price
*' and John Colvil, were profecuted in the
'' Exchequer at the Salt of Charles Buck^ Vicar
'^ Qi Craiibrooky
To which this Note isfuhjoind.
" The Vicar died during the Profecution, and
" by his Death the Suit ceafed."
The Truth of this C^i^ is confirmed both by the
" Anjhjcer of his Son^' whom the Examiner calls,
'• the Pveverend Mr. Charles Buck;' who fays,'
pag. 108. '' I have found two original Sub-^
" pcenas, which fhew, that Jeremiah Vine, Rich-
'' ard Price, George Courthop and George Colvil^
'' were fucd in November the fifth of Queen
" A?me''s Reign 1706, by my Father Charles
'' Buck, Yic:M' of Cranbrook;* and, by the Ac-
count from the Records of the Exchequer, which
fays, pag. no. *' In Michaelmas Term 5" Annce^
*' Charles Buck, Vicar of Cranbrook, exhibited
'' his Bill in the Exchequer againft George Coiir-
*' thop, John Colvil, Jeremiah Vine, and Richard
'■ P/Vr^e', for minute and Vicarial Tithes." The
Truth of the Note fabjoined is alfo confirmed by
the faid Charles Buck, who fays, that *' his Fa-
'' ther died about the i ^th of Frruary following
'^ inteftate," and that, " as nea: i.s hecanremem-
Case V, '[ ber,
( i6o;
" ber, the Arrears of Tithes due from the four
" fakers aforefaid came to about 20 /. which
*' was all loft by his Mother's not Renewing the
'' Suit."
That the Profecutor in this Cafe was not igno-
rant of the eafier Method of Recovery, is appa-
rent by what his Son relates of his '' caufmg fe-
" vcral of his Pariiliioners, that were indebted to
" him for Tithes, to be fummoned to appear be-
" fore the Juftices at their Sitting, which was
'' in 1696."
That the Profecutor's Demand^was recoverable
by the ealier Method is apparent, not only from
what his Son obferves, that " the Arrears from
'- the four fakers came to about 20 //' but
from the Account from the Records of the Exche-
quer^ where the Demand, though more thanjuft,
is but
5 /. from Courthop for three Years.
5 /. from Cohil for five Years,
20 /. from Vi7ie for ten Years.
20 /. from Pierce for ten Years.
So that none of the Sums demanded did exceed
40 s, per Annum, the Sum recoverable by the
former of thofe Ad:s, much lefs did it exceed 10 /.
per Annum, the Sum recoverable by the latter of
them. And yet thofe Sums mentioned, in that
Account, far exceed the Sums acknowledged in
the fevcral Anfwers of the Defendants, pag. 1 1 1.
nor did this Suit refped any thing due before the
Commencement of thofe Ads. Wherefore, the
Profecntor's Son's fuppofing, pag. 109, that
'^ Vines Arrear was (probably) more than 20
Xase Y. " " Years^"
'* Years," and pag. no, that '' the whole
'' Debt of (Cohil) Father and Son conjunfily,
" muil be for no lefs than 38 Years,*' is but
mere conjedure, and has no Foundation from the
Bill exhibited in the prefent Cafe.
Wc are next to confider the Examiners Objec-
tions upon this Cafe 5 who, pag. 1 12, fays, ''To
*' thefe four Profecutions the Anfwer is obvious
'' that the Vicar's Right was denied, andapar-
'' ticular Modus fet up in every Cafe, and is there-
'' by an exprefs Exception to the Power of the
'' Juftices by both the Statutes." But we think,
that ** an exprefs Exception to the Power of the
*' Jufllces," cannot be, in a Cafe wherein no
Application was ever made to the Juflices, and
that 'tis impoflible, without any Recourfe to the
Juftices, to know, that the ^takers would have
made any Exception to their Power in Cafe of
fuch Application.
^ His next Cavil is upon John Cokil's fayino- In
his Anfwer, '' that the Land occupied by him
" and the Houfe in the Occupation of his Mother
*' Sujhnna Cokil, always paid together 41.
" 4 d, in full for Vicarial Tithes, as a Modus
*' or Cuftom." Which Words always paid mui^
in common Reafon there refer to fuch preced-
ing Times wherein Payments had been cuftoma-
rily made: But the Examiner from thence would
infer, that John Cokih '' Father did pay," or
elfe that the '' Son's Anfwer is untrue." Nei-
ther of which are neceffarily confequent from
the Premifes. For Payments might, for ought
the Examiner knows, have been made lor
both or either of them without tlieir Confent ;
Cask V. and'
( i52 ;
and 'tis not fair in him to draw pofitive Conclu-^
lions from uncertain Conjectures of a Perfon who
fets him an Example of more Modefty in faying,
" I think lam not 7niftaken^ vhen I fay nothing
" was paid by, or for both, or either of them/'
So that the Pretence of any Arrears due from
either of them before the A6ts took place, being
founded on mere Suppofition, nothing can rea-
fonably be inferred from it. But 'tis reafonable
to infer from what the Examiner fays, that
" Mr. Buck foon after the Adts were paffed, fum-
*' moned feveral of his Parifhioners before the
" Juflice," that he could not poffibly be igno-
rant of thofe Adls lo Years after when he com-
menced this Profecution, nor at any time within
that Interval.
The Examifiery (pag. 113) urges " the Un-
" reafonablenefs of bringing an Accufation for
" what was done fo long ago -, efpecially after
"' the Death of Parties, whereby many Incidents
" either neceflary, or proper for their Defence,
'' are unknown, or forgotten." In this he ex-
preffes himfelf not very cautioufly, in affirming
what he does not know, viz. that " the Incf-
" dents unknown or forgotten are many," it being,
as we apprehend, impoffible for him to know
whether they are ?nan)\few, or ?io?2e at all
The like Objection, more prudently exprefs'd,
we find to have been made in the early Part of
this Controverfy in the Examination on Behalf of
tht pioceje oi London, pag. 78. Tho Anjwer to
which, publifhed in our Viiidication in 1737^
pag- 97^, 9S3 we fliall tranfcribe, being as loT-
lows, viz.
Case V, «' Thi5>
r i63 ;
" This feems calculated to amufc the Readef*
" and to millead him to think, that the prefent
'' Account of their Sufferings is the only Ac«
'' count of them which the ^iakers, have pub-
'' Hflied within thefc forty Years paft, and that
'' they had tarried fo long, that the Dillance
" of Time might fecure their Account fromln-
'' fpedlion.
" But the Fallacy of this will appear by con«
" fideringj
"I. That the Defign of the ^inkers, and
*' what was expeftcd from them, was, t9 fpe-
" clfy the Profecutions complained of, and their
" Number, fince the paffing the aforefaid Aofi, .
" II. That to do this, 'twas neceffary to gc^
'' back to the Time when thofe, Profecutions
" began, which was foon after the Acits com-
" menced.
'' III. That before the Year I710, the.^^^-
' ^ kers had printed, piiblifhed, and prefented id
*' the Parliament, feveral Accounts of their Juf^
*' fering Gajes^ while the Fads were frcfli in
" Memory, the Perfons concerned Living, and
" the Circumfiances eafy to have been enquired
*' into. Thefe were Part of the Cafes agaia
*' lately exhibited : 'Tis not therefqre reafon-
*' able in the Clergy to urge the Di /lance of
'"^ T/;>^f, as an Excufe of their Inability 71010 to
*' anfwer thofe Fads, which, being before
*' publiilied at the Time they were done, they
'' either would not, or could not then under-
*' take the Confutation Qf. If the Clergy had
^' the?i thought their Honour and Ckara6ier io
*^ nearly concern' J/ why had they not vlndi-
" C^.SE V, X „ catei
( i64 )
*« cated both at that Time, by livi7ig EvUe?tces,
<* rather than have referred it to be now done by
*^ far-fetcht Enquiries^ half -forgot CircumfianceSy
*' and falfe end fcandalom Injinuatiom ? unlefs
*' perhaps the prefent Clergy may think them-
" felves better qualified to defend the Deceafed
" by the latter Methods, than themfelves, when
*^ living, were to have done it by the former,
" IV. That as to the ^takers, the Cafs may
*' be all faid to be recent and new, and the Fads
^'undoubted; having not been intrufted to the
*' Uncertainty of Memory and ConjeBure^ but
*^ written in Order of Time, when and as they
*' were tranfafted."
'Tis farther obfervable, that the Specifications
of the Profecutors Names at this Time, was not
of the fakers, mere Option, but proceeded from
the prefling Importunity of the Advocates for the
Clergy 5 wherefore the greater is their Difinge-
nuity, in reprefenting thefe Cafh as Accufations
brought by the ^takers to blemifh the Cha-
ra6ier of particular Perfons, whofe Names they
know had not been now mentioned, but at their
Requeft, who infifted upon " fuch Specification
*' ofFaftsas might give an Opportunity to en-
*^ quire in the feveral Diocefes into the Truth
*' of them, and into the Circumftances of
'^ thofe Suits and Imprifonments which were
*' made the Subjed Matter of Complaint."
The Brief Account therefore is not an Acoufa^
tton^ but a Specification^ to give the Clergy the
Opportunity they defired of Enquiry into the
Truth of the Fads. In which Specification, had
not the ^takers gone back beyond " the Expira-
Case V. ^ <« tion
" i
! ( »65 )
j
j '^ tion of fix Years from the Time of the Tranf-
I " adion," the Clergy would probably have
I charged them with a defigned Limitation of
their Enquiries. But fince it has otherwife hap-
pened, that the fakers have liberally fupplied
them with Materials for a perfed: Enquiry ;,«
and that they have hitherto purfued their En-
quiries with uncommon Induftry and Applica-
tion, and have publiflied what Informations they
could get, under the moft plaufible Appearance
which the Artifice of their Advocates, (fome of
'em of no mean AbiUties) could invent : If^
after all it (hall appear, that they have laboured
in vain, and fallen fliort of their Purpofe, their
ill Succefs can be afcrib'd to nothing but the
Badnefs of the Caufe they have efpoufed.
The Examiners Objed:ion to the Defendants
in this Cafe not paying the Tithe demanded to the
Vicar s Widow after his Deceafe, is fcarce worth
Notice : For, feeing they cfleemed the Demand
it felf unjuft and unchrifi:ian, his Death could
not alter the Nature of it: Nor could they rea-
fonably fuppofe his Adminijlratrix juftly intituled
to receive what they never efteemed a jull Debt.
Confcience, guided by Gojpel-Precept^ never errs
from ftrid; Juftice, which never requires what
that forbids, viz, the Payment of Tithes. If
the Examiner would be truly informed who they •
are that opprcfs the Widow and the Fatherlefe,
let him turn to the Brief Account, pag. 22,
where he will find, that *' the JVidow Henderfon
*' and her Son were imprifoned eleven Months;
*' for one Penny Tithe of Wooir Pag. 28, 29,
That, '' fane Splatt aged 70 ^ais, was im-
Case V. X2 '' priiWd
C£
( i66 )
f^ prifon'd above two Years for Tithe worth 14^/'
Pag. 99, That " Elizabeth Hughes Widow,
^^ having fix Fatherlefe Children, was impri-
*^ fon'd about 16 Months for fmall Tithes, pre-
^- tended to be due from her Mother deceafed/'
Pag. 144, That *^ Jane Robin/on Widow, was
V imprifon'd nine Months for y, 4^. Tithe of
*^ Apples kndiBees:' Pag. 147, That " Hannah
V" Wakefield^ and Agnes Couplandy lay in Appleby
*' Goal eleven Months on a Writ de ExcommU"
f' nicato Capie^ido for Mortuaries." And pag.
136, That ^'' Anne Greeny a poor Widow, was
imprifon^d almoft two Years for fmall Tithes
" and a Mortuary." Let him alfo confider who
were the Authors of thofe Imprifonments ; and
with what Degree of Sincerity that Per/on afts,
who while he is advocating the Caufe of fuch
Oppreflbrs, can pretend a Concern for the Fa^
therlejs and the Widow,
CASE VL
Brief Account y pag. 64, " Amos Bickham, of
" the Ifle of Tha?iefy was profecutcd in the Ec-
'' clejtaftical Court at the Suit of John Swain
V Clerk."
To which this Note [ F ] isjiibjeifid,
'' Bickham was fued for a Demand of ys per
"' Annum for one Farm, and is. td. for another.
*^ He conilantly attending their Courts, prevented
Cas2 VL - *' ExcommunicatiQa
( i67 )
«' Excommunication for Contempt in not ap*<
•* pearing : And his Advcrfary at lad making
** Default in his own Appearance, the Suit was
" difmifs'd."
In Anfwer to this, the Examiner produces
what he calls '' The Account from the Reve-
" rend Mr. Richard Leightonhouje^'' wherein we
are told, that *' Afnos Bickham, the ^aker^ was
" Tenant of two Farms, And that, *' Ty&tf
" Pari/h Clerks Wages for the great Farm (ac^
** cordi?jg to ancient Cujlofn) is gs, per Annum ;
" for the lefer Farm is, 6dy and that Bickham
" ufed thefe two Farms near 30 Years, and
" never paid any." But the Account doth not
fhew the Right of any Demand at all from
Bickham in this Cafe : But if ancient Cufloni
weigh any thing, we are informed from Bifhop
Stillingfeefs Ecclefiaftical Cafes, pag, 131, 132,
t^at *' There were of old feveral Clerks belonging
" to the Church, and they were all niaintained
'•' by the Minijler at his o^n Charger The £x-
aminer^ when he writes again, may be pleas'd to
inform us, by what Law, Authority, or Right,
the Parilli Clerk, who *' of eld was maintained
*^ by the Miniilcr at his own Charge,*' does now
a-days claim Wages from the Parifhioners ? And
what Authority the Ecclefajiical Court had to
intermeddle in this Affair ?
We are told, that upon the Churchwardens
Prefentment, *' The ^aker and Pariih-Clerk
'' both appeared at Court next Court Day." And
that *' a3 they rode home together, the ^iakcr
'' told the Pariili-CIcik it was in his
Case VL '.' Power
( '68 )
*^ * Power to put down his School, and he
^'. would certainly do it. Upon this Threatning
'^ the Parifh-Clerk appeared no more at Court,
" and fo this Suit ended/' But if we credit the
Account from the Ecclefiajiical Court, it did not
end there, but was " continued four Court
'^ Days," probably, to have catcht Bickham in
Default of Appearing : 'Tis indeed faid, that
•' it does not appear that Bickbam himfelf at-
'^ tended thofe Courts j" but had he not ap-
peared either by himfelf or his BroBor^- the Court
would probably have taken an Advantage againft
him.
But tho' the Examiner has no fubftantial
Matter againft the Truth of this Cafe, yet an
accidental Slip of the Prefs has given him an
Occafion to exult, as if he had difcovered a pro-
faind Plot againft the Clergy : *' I muft, fays he,
'' here leave it to the Reader, whether he did
'' not by the Charge underftand that Amos Bick-
" bam was fued by Jobn Swain y a Clergyman,
*' in the Ecclejiajiical Court for a Demand re-
" coverable by the ABs of y and 8 of King
'' William the 3d."
To this we have already fufficiently replied in
pug. 119, 120. foregoing, by iliewing that the £x-
i:viiner\ Objedion has no other Foundation than
11 n Error of the Prefs^ in omitting the Word
P,ariP?y and that himfelf in all probability could
Case VI. not
^ It [e.enis hnprrjhahle that Bickham could have it in
':v Fozvcr to put do'wn a ScbcoU fupporled by a Salary^,
:i\reaf(the Examiner hhnlelf tcils us) one Half ivas
■'^dby /k Vicar,
C i69)
not avoid feeing it to be {o. If the Reader wil
be pleafed to turn to thofe Pages, he will fee the
Exami?2ers Difingenuity on this Occafion, and
how Httle Reafon he has to pretend, that " this
*' was done defignedly." His Objedlion alfo, that
" Parifh-Clerk's Wages" are not " recoverable
" by the faid A5Is^'' is replied to in pag. 125.
foregoing. By what is before faid in the Pages
referr'd to, 'twill appear, that no Body has
" tamper'd with the Evidence" in this Cafe:
That there was no " Fault either in the Compi-
" lers of xhQ Brief Account, or in thofe who
*' made up the Record^ or in the original
" Memoirs from whence it v/as entred:"' But
purely and only an accidental Omiffibn pf/ihfe
Printer in leaving out the Word Parijh, which
if the Reader be pleased to infert befbre the Word
Clerk^ the Examiners C^^77 will be removed,
and the Credit of the Brief Account in this Cafe
nothing afFedled thereby.
CASE vir.
tc
Brief Accoimt, pag. 65, 1734. " John-
Woodland of Mcrjl:a?n wasprofecuted in the
Exchequer at the Suit of Henry Archer Vicar
'' oiMerf]:amr
To this Cafe, we have the Account given hy
Dr. Hefiry Archer himfelf, who objecfls nothing
to the Truth of it, ex'cept, that he is ReBor^ not
Viciir, of Merfl:am,
The Dollars Demand on TVoodland was by
his own Account, pag. 119, "two Guineas a
Case VII. ' '* Y<^ar,"
( I70 )
*' Year," a Sum doubtlefe recoverable by the
Ads.
That the Do5tor knew it to be fo, appears by
the Account himfelf gives of his *' Appllcatioa
*' to the Juftices at the End of two Years ;
** who, he Jays, readily granted him a Warranty
** and were fo civil to him to let it go through
;* his Hands to the Officer."
The Do^07- farther fays, that he " gave the
*' Warrant to the Officer," and 'tis certain he
might have oblig'd the Officer to execute it : But
t\it DoBor is not very explicit in affigning the
Reafons which induced him to drop that War-
rant, and never after to apply to the Juftices^
who " were fo civil to him." Could their
Civility rcafonably induce the DoBor to avoid
their Decifion for the future ; and even to rejecfl:
the Ufe of what they had granted him ? We
fuppofe not. But fmce the DoBor declares,
pag. 120, that " he never intended to deal
*' hardly by Woodlajid^' we are very fofry that
he was mifled by ill Advice " to employ an At-^
*^ torney to call him to an Account in the Exche-
*^ quer" and that he was fo far miftaken, as to
think that it " might have been in a fliort Way^
" and at a fmall Expence."
Since Woodla7id's putting in an Anfwerj which
is above fix Years ago, the Z)^^(?r has " had no
*^ Inclination to go on," having fmce perceiv'd,
that the For?ns of Law are not porty nor the
Expence of it eajy.
He affigns alfo another Reafon for his Pro-
ceeding no farther^ which we here tranfcribe in
his own Words,
Case VII. ^^ For,
( 171 }
^' For, fays he\ no fingle Clergyman Is a
" Match for an interefted and contentious ^^-
" ker^ who, tho' he talks loud of Perfecution,
*^ yet in many Cafes feels nothing at all. For,
** if I am rightly informed, if he bie an inte-
*' refted Man amongfl them, whenever he has a
*' Demand made upon him for Tithes in a legal
'' Way, he has no more to do than to tranfmjt
" his Cafe, reprefented in his own Way, to the
*' Friends in London, who immediately under-
" take the Management ofit^ they have their
*' Agents, and a common Fund ready, fo that
*' the Profecuted is at no Charge/'
The Credit of this depends upon the Veracity
of the DoBors Informer, who himfelf feems not
rightly informed in the Affair. However, fmce
this Information has difpofed the DoBor to Peace^
the good Effedl of it may atone for its Mif-
takes. That Brotherly Love fubfifts between
Friends in London and Friends in the Country-^
is certainly true ; for, 'tis the Nature of their
Cbrijlian Teftimony to unite them, and make
them ready to affift and ferve one another in the
faithful Obfervance of it : But as to the Methods
of their mutual Affiftance, and how far it ex-
tends, the Dolors Prudence will hardly expeiit
a particular Account from us at prefent.
li PP^codIa7id Aidi \.iA\ the Dotlor ''once with
** great Unconcerned nefs, that he knew little of
'' the Matter ; for the ^ivbok Affair was in the
" Hands of Frie/ids at London^ who managed
" fuch Affairs for them /' it fhews indeed that
Woodla?id could trull his Friends Vvith his
Bufinefs, and that he cpald, in this Caje of
Case VII. Y Co^Jcienc^
( 172 )
Confcience^ calmly, and with " great Unconcern-
*' ednefs," fubmit himfelf p whatfoever the Iffue
of the Suit might be : Yet, it doth not fhew,
nor has the DoBor any juft ** Reafon" from
thence " to think," that "the Profecuted is at
" no Charge," nor that his '' Obftinacy (a
^' * Nick Name for Conjcience) is thus back'd
«' and fupported." This ftill relies upon the
fole Credit of the DoBors Informer.
" Thus, fays the DoBor, the Matter refts at
*' prefent." And thus, if the DoBor pleafes, it
ever may reft. If, as he fays, he has *' no Plea-
*' fure in the Thought of being entangled in
<* Law," 'tis to be hoped he will not entangle
himfelf therein by reviving this Suit, the Be-
ginning of which appears to have been unnecef-
fary. For, tho' the Dodtor mentions " Injuries
•' he Yearly receives from this Man ;" yet it
doth not appear, even by the Do5tors> own Ac-
count, thatever/rW//^;^^ did any Thing to pre-
vent the Dodlor either from taking his great
tithes in Kind, as ulual, or from recovering his
(mall Tithes by Warrant from the Juftices.
Wherefore we muft conclude that all the Incon-
veniencies the DoBor has incurred in this Cafe
are owing purely to his Declenfion of the more
eafy Methods, and having Recourfe to an Ex^
chequer Profecution.
Seeing then that the DoBor profeffes, pag.
122, to " have always treated him (Wood-
^' land) with great Temper j" and " to have no
" Enmity
* So the Dodlor bi?jzfelf explains itypcig. 122, ** Coa-
<< fcience ^r Obftinacy?*
(^73)
" Enmity towards him :" Tis hoped he will
for the future fhun the Rock he has once fplit
againft, and purfuant to the Hint given in the
Country Parfons Pka^ hke a " wije Clergyman
" for his own Sake/' and hke a " good Clergy-^
" w^;/ in Compaflion to his Neighbour the ^^-
" ker^ take the eafy and cheap Method pre-
*' fcrib'd by the A^s of the 7th & 8th of King
" William for the Recovery of his Dues."
The Doctor lets us know, that Woodland is an
old Tenant of his, and '' has for many Years
" rented of him Part of his Glebe:' Whence
we prefume, that the 'Dodior^ by his due Pay-
ment of his Rent, has found him to be jufi and
honejl : And that the T)o6tor will be more mer^
ciful toward a Man whorn he knows to be jujl^
than to profecute him with Rigour for being
conjclentious,
'' The Account (pag. 122) from the Records
" in the Exchequer' ihews, both by the Docfors
Billy and Woodland!^ Anfwer, that the Matters
fued for, were only certain Species of fmall
TUthes^ which might have been recovered by the
eafier Method provided.
We are next to confider the Remarks of the
'Examiner \x^on this Cafe, who fays, pag. 123,
" The Motives of Dr. Archer'^ bringing this
" Suit in the Exchequer, appear from his own
*' Account free from thofe odious Refledlions
" contained in the general Charge." The
Motives of the Do6lor, in this Cafe, we have
already fliewn to have been /// Advice and M//-
iake, through which he was led into a Suit,
Case YII^ Y 2 wherein
wherein he hath, from better Advice, and
founder Judgment, forborn to proceed.
The Examiner goes on, " The Do5ior was
" collated to this Reftory the 8th of Odtober
*^ 1726, fo that he had for 8 Years together
'^ been deprived of many of his Dues' before he
*' to6k this Method, and as his Bill has no Re-
*^ tKofpedl for the firft four Years, thofe may be
*' entiiely loft.*' This v^^ think contradifted by
the Do^or himfelf, who fays, pag. 118,"'' Soon
''' after I came to this jRf^^ry, which had before
^^ been leafed out, I was obliged to take my
" Titheis in Kind r * And, pag. 1 19, " I received
*' the Tithes of Hay and Corn which were fet
** out, and fome Wool and Lambs ^ but of nei-
" ther, I believe, to the full.'* The D^^^^r
plainly acknowledges the Receipt of thofe Tithes
(tho* perhaps not to the full) which the Ex-
iiminer^ in Defiance of his Affertion, fuppofes
** may be entirely loft.** ^'
The Examine'r pretends, that " his (the Doc--
*' /(9r*y firft attempting to obtain them by the
*^ Juftices Warrant, fhews it was not his Choice ;*'
but, we thihk, that the Dodlor in preventing^
the Service of a Warrant which the Juftices had
granted him, and which he had given to the
Officer, did clearly fhew that it was his Choice
not to make Ufe of it.
Whether the Do5ior\ faying " I was advifed
*' to employ an Attorney I" be a fufficient Warrant
for the jEAw;//;;^r to fay, " He was forced into a
" Law-Suit,'* probably the Reader may queftion.
Nor perhaps will he be able to difcern how
*' the ^takers having denied the Doctors Right
"""^ Case VII. ■ .-^ '• • - " tq
( ?75 )
«t to a Part of thofe Tithes/' in j^jifwer to a Bill
in the Exchequer^ can prove, that they would
not have been recoverable in Cafe of a Prior
Application to the Jiiftices,
■ The Ex^w/Wr endeavours, pag. 124, to fix
an undeferved Imputation upon Johti Woodland^
by reprefenting him as having " at firft paid his
^' great Tithes," and his Tithes of Wool and
" Lanibs^ fo far as they could be difcovered," and
*^ confcientioufly reflifing to pay only what he
" could conceal 5" and again, " The Payment
*' of great Tithes, ^wi^oiWool and Lambs^ were
" voluntary," and thence would infer, that " he
*' adted upon different Principles of Confcience."
In all which he attempts an Impofition upon his
Reader*s Judgment, and to miflead him into an
Opinion of Woodlands having voluntarily paid
what the Do6lor or his Agents took away from
him without his Confent,*
Case VIL The
'^ See the follovA'rig Anfwer given to this by John
Woodland himfelf^ viz.
*« In Anfwer to what is faid of me in the Cafe In
*' a Book intituled. An Examination of the Brief Ac-
< ^ count of the Profecutions of inan-j of the People called
<- Quakers, fc?^. I believe, Henry Archer the Rec-
*' tor was not under a Neceffity of taking his fmall
*« Tithes in kind, for had he been content to have
*« taken them, as they were wont to be paid to the
<• late LefTee of the Tithes, Henry Eve ^ lam well
'^ affured the other Parilhioncrs would have paid
<« him freely, but being not concent with the Cuf-
*' torn that had been ufcd, as long or longer than I
<^ can remember^ he generally for the moft Pare
- ' '•• demr.nds
( 176 )
The Examiner repeats what, he fays, ^' The
«^ Do^or intimates, that the Defendant is at no
*' Charge, but is fupported therein out of the
^J common Stock/* to which he adds his owa
Case VII, Explication,
«' demands a great deal more, of fome double, of
«' others treble what they did ufe to pay for fmall
*^ Tithes, at which they grudge very much, and
*« fpeak of it as a great Hardjfhip and Impoficion.
<« The Reafon of my refufmg to pay him was not on
*' Account of this Increafe in his Demand, but my
** being confcientioufly perfuaded that Tithes ought
*« not to be paid now in this Gofpel-Day to any
« being or pretending to be Chrift's Minifters. And
*« what is faid of my paying great Tithes, and o^
«' PFool and Lambs voluntarily, is falfe, for they were
*« all taken from me by Force againft my Will by the
« faid Henvj Archer or his Order.
*' It is true, zs Henry Archer {siys '■^ the Ferfonwho
<« had a Leafe of the Living hefore he eame^ always
«' took his Tithes Jrom me by Force,'' becaufe I could
«' not in Confcience pay Tithes voluntarily : But then
«' by what Force was it ? Not by perplexing £'A:^y&d'-
<^ quer Suits, but by diftraining by Juftices War-
«' rants, and it is to be obferved, that the Diftrefles
«c he fo made on me, were for the Whole both great
*' and fmall Tithes, which he rated on me,^,and Jmy
*' Father before me, according to the Corn and other
«' Produce he faw we yearly had: Whereas the faid
«« Henry Archer hath not only againfl: my Will (and
«' fo not by me voluntarily paid) taken, (as he ac-
*' knov;ledgesJ the great Tithes of my Corn, with
" the fmall Tithes of my Hay^ WooU and Lambs^
^^ but hath alfo profecutcd me in the Exchequer for
<^« yet other fmall Tithes, as of Hemp, Flax, Milk^
\^ Calvcsy E^Sy Honevy and I remember not what all
«
( ^11 )
Explication, i)iz. *' perhaps his calling it a com-
** mon Fund may admit of a Cavil in the An--
" J^ver^ as it feems to imply fomething v/hich
brings in an Income appropriated to that pur-
Case VII. ^« pofe J
" befides, for which together he charges me fas he
" faithj at Two Guineas a Year ; which, before he
" came to the Living, did not ufe to be demanded
«« otherwife than by its being included among the reft,
«' under the general Term of/?W/ Tz'/te: And more-
" over let it be obferved, that the moft t^ p^hath
" been charged for great and fmall Tithes together on
" the fame Lands that I now ufe in any one Year,
" from the Year 1712 to the Year 1726, was but
*' "jLys. 6d. and moll of the other Years within that
«' Time but 5/. odd Money, and 4/. odd Money per
*' Year ; and fince that Time Henry Archer hath
«' taken the Tithes (or others for himj from me him-
<« felf both great and fmall, except that for which he
*' charges and ferved me as above. So tlrat the faid
** Henry Archer might, if he had been fo minded,
«' have as eafily gotten not only the fmall Tithes,
'' but the great Tithes alio, as his PredecefTor did,
<« by Juftices Warrants, it being far within the Reach
«' of the Ads of the 7th and 8th pf King lVillia7n the
*' Third, notwithftanding the E>;aminer labours fo
*« hard to fhew the contrary.
" As to the one Acre of Glebe Land I hire of the
^* faid Henry Archer^ I think rational a/id unpreju-
" diced Men will readily fee and acknowledge the
" Ditference between paying Rent for that which I
'■^ have a valuable Confideration, and paying of
" Ttihei^ for which I have no valuable Confideration,
«' and cannot pay for the Renfons above."
T.he f<iregoing ^x\{^tx of John Woodland, is a full
Confutation of the Examiner's unmerited and umud Re-
fii^wn en his Character. ' ' .
«* pofe ; but whether they have a Fund, or the
«' Expence be born out of the Contributions
** made for Charities, or Sufferings left to the
*' Difcretion of the Friends in the Application of
** it, it makes no Difference."
This Intimation^ and thefe Suggejlions, may,
for ought appears to the contrary, be but ground-
lefs Imagiiiatiom : And yet the Examiner has the
Affurance to tell the ^lakers, pag. 125, " It
*^ will be expedled that they fliould explain, aiid
*^ juftify, if they can, their thus fupporting and
*' maintaining Suits againft the Clergy." An
Expectation altogether vain and irrational. Does
he expedt that they fliould explain his Fidiions^
2Sid. juftify that which, for ought he knows, ne-
ver was ? But what does he mean by fupporting
and maintaining Suits againfi the Clergy ? Where
does he meet with fuch Suits ? The Records of
the Exchequer may furnlfli him with a Multitude
of Suits againfi the ^takers > but we have not
yet met with any of theirs againft the Clergy ■>
"Tis abfurd in him to expedt, that the fakers
fliould {hew how far they are innocently con-
cerned in maintaining Suits which never were.
But fuppofing this unwarrantable Surmife of a
common Fund for the Purpofe of mutual Affiftance
in a Chriftian Caufe had been real : Where's the
Crime of it ? Had not the Primitive Chriftians a
common Fund, Afts iv. 34? Did not they affift
the profecuted Brethren out of that common Fund^
Phil. iv. 14, 15, 16? And had not their Adver-
faries as much Reafon as Dr. Archer to objedl,
that " their Obftinacy {for they alfo caWd Con-
•* fcience hy that Name) was thus back'd and
Case VII. *' fupported r ';
*^" fupported ? '* Doubtlefs they had," And ye£
unprejudiced Charity induced many others ig
look upon the lame thing as an Evidence of Chrif-
tian Affedtion, and to cry oiit. Behold! how they
love one another !
But to be very free and open with the Do^ior
in this Cafe, (for the Examiner don't deferve it) Vv^e
do believe that JVoodUmd, " the Frofecuted^ has
" been at fome Charge," and has had no Affiil-
ance, nor any Reafon to expe(fV. AiTiilance, out of
any Common Fund or Contribution whatfoever;
we ahb beUeve, that tliQ Do^or, the Projecutor, has
been at fome Expence ; which may fuffice to fa-
tisfy the i5x^.7;/;^^r,. that not only our '' Friend,"
buttheD^^^^rhimfelf " has really fuftered:" And
we fuppbfe, that if the ^/^^ry '' Whether fuch
" theirSuffering was for ConfcienceSake ? '* fliall
be equally propofed to them both, our Friend \n\\\
anfwer it better than the . Do5lor,
The Exa?ni?ier is r leafed, pag. 125, to form a
Rule of Confcience, and father it upon us : " The
*' Rule of Confciencc, fays he, in this Matter
" laid down by them is, that a /t'r/t'^ Mainte-
" nance of Miniflers is contrary to the Gofpel ."
But in this he is not right : For, we don't fay-
that " a /t'//r.3' Maintenance of Miniflers is con-
'' trary to the Gofpel." What wc fay is, that
a forced Maintenance of Miniilers is contrary to
the Gofpel. Wherefore his faying, that Woodland
ri rigid ^laker come of a Family '' of fuch, did
*' not fcruple to hire the RecStor's Glebe, and his
"' Conlcience permitted him to pay Rpnt for
'' it," contains nothing inconfiftent with our
■Ruie, unlefs he can ihew fome Power of Com-
Ca.se VII. Z puUion
( i8o )
pulfion in the Affair. The Reftor's Title to th(*
Glebe is out of the Queftion, for Woodland pays
Rent for it in Confideration of his own Occu-
pation of the Land, not of the Reftor's Title to
it. He pays Rent for the Glebe, becaufe in his
Occupation of the Glebe he receives a valuable
Confideration for that Rent. But, he refufes
to pay Tithes, becaufe he receives from the
Redtor no valuable Confideration for them 5 and
becaufe he efteems them forbidden by the Gof-
pel of Chrift : Nor can he in Conjcience agree to
pay what is fo forbidden. His Conjcience is not at
Liberty by any private Contrail to diffolve an 0^-
ligation arifing from Scripture Precept. But in
the Cafe of hiring Land, which the Scripture
does not forbid, his Confcience is free, and he is
at Liberty to make a ContraB, which Contraft
he is in Confcience obliged to perform.
The Examiner y we conceive, miftakes in fay-
ing, that " an Obligation arifing from Contra<fl
*' has its binding Force from the Law," becaufe
iuch an Obligation would be equally binding up-
on the Confcience, if there was no Law. Tho'
then a Man's own Agreement may oblige him in
Confcience to do what is not forbidden by the
Golpel of Chrift ; yet, what is forbidden by the
Gofpel remains " unlawful in Confcience,'^* and
BO Agreement of his can make it otherwife.
We have now confidered the Exami7iation of
the Seven Cafes, which the Exa?niner calls " an
*' hiconfiderable Number in fo large a Diftridt in
" the Space of forty Years.** An Obfcrvation,
which, had he been wife, might have reftrain^d
him from confidering them. But the Severity of
Case VII. thofe
thofe who made thofe Methods their Choice is
confiderable, and merits Rejlraint, by a Removal
of that Choice which they abufed. But, fays
the Examiner^ " The Parties complaining might,
•* and ought to have prevented it by a voluntary
** Compliance ;" which is not true, unlefs it
could be their Duty to do what they believe the
Go/pel has forbidden.
Soon after the iirft Examination of the Brief
Accou7it was publiflied, in Behalf of the Clergy
of the Diocefe of London, the Fallacy and InjuC-
tice of their Calculations and Remarks, the Eva-
lion and Difingenuity of their Anfwers and Reflec-
tions, and the Falfhood and Inconiiftency of the
Intelligencies by them publilhed, were fo fully
made appear, that 'twas thought by many, the
Prz^^(^;7C^ of the Clergy would have induced them
to forbear any farther Enquiry.
But they thought meet to proceed, and have
fince publiflied feveral other Examinations, the
Writers of which {ut 7nidi mutuo fcabiimt) nota-
bly applaud one another : The impartial Rea-
der will beft judge how far their Performances
deferve it.
The Brief Account is a Specification of true
Fafts; nor have the feveral Examiners hitherto
dilcovered any Faljloood therein. They have in-
deed difcovered a few Errors either of the Tran-
fcripts or the Prefs, (much fewer than ordinarily
are in a Compofure of this Nature) and have dij-
ingenuoiijiy dwelt upon th«m. They have ftoop'd
fo low, as from a fingle Miftake of the Prefs in
one Cafe, to afperfe all the reft with a General
Imputation of Faljko^d^ when yet 'tis apparent
Case VII. Z 4 from
f 182 )
from the Nature of thofe Cafes, that they are al-
together diftind and independent of one another,
and a Miftake in any one of them pannot poffibly
afFeft any other of them, being Accounts of .
diiierent FaBs received from as many diftindt
and differerit Relators.
In thtforegohjg SeBions we have endeavoured
to thevv the Weaknefs of the Examiner s> general
Reafoning 5 and in this, the Infufficiency of hjs
Objedions to the Particular Cafes, by which it
appears, that in
CASE I. The Imprifonment pf John
'Love, and the Value of the Demand, are undenia-
ble, nor is there the leaft Pretence that the Profe-
cutor did at all apply to the Juftices for the Reco-
very of his Claim, though very fmall, being not
^^hovQ 10 s. per Anmmby his own Bill in the
Exchequer.
CASE II. Is neither difproved, nor di-
xeftly denied j but evaded by a Denial of another
Thing than what we afferted.
CASE III. Is fully confirmed, both as to
the Certainty of the Profecution, and the Value
of the Demand, by a Perfon, who, the £a:^;///-
ner himfelf aeknowledges, will neither " conceal
" nor difguife the Truth.''
CASE IV. Is rather confirmed, than dit I
proved, by the Examiner, in lliewing us, that the j
iame Clergyman did profecute the fume %i?&r
many Years before,
CAS E
( xSs )
C A S E V. Is exprelly confirmed by the
f rofecutor's own Son, and the utmofl Demand,
even in the Exchequer Bill it felf, was lefs than
40 s. per Annum from any one of the Perfons
profecuted.
CASE VI. The Profecutlon appears to
have been for a Parifli Clerk's Wages, in which,
if not recoverable by the Afts, the Iniquity of the
Ecckfiajlical Court is aggravated, in worrying the
King's faithful Subjects for Claims recoverable by
no Law or Statute of the Land.
CASE VII. The Profecution was only
for fmall Tithes, as appears by the Exchequer
Bill 5 and when the Profecutor applied to the
Juflices for Part of thofe Tithes, they readily
granted their Warrant, which he was prevailed
upon to lay afide, and afterward had Recourfe to
the Exchequer : A Method he has fince with
good Reafon declined to proceed in.
** I doubt not, fays the Examiner, pag. 131
*' but many of them (the fakers) have a bet-
*' ter Senfe of Juftice, and common Honelly,
" than the Principles which have been laid
'' down, and v/hich I have examined, are con-
'' fiftent with." But he has not ihewn wherein
thofe Principles are inconfiftent either with yuf--
tlce or IloneJi)\ The ^lakers efteem the Prin-
ciples he oppofes. to be founded on iht Freceptsoi
Chrift,and the Docirine of Ills Gofpe!, w'lO ne-
ver enjoy ned any thing inconfiftcnt wich Julice
and
C 184 )
and Uojiejly, Let him demonftrate the Juftice of
his Claim to Tithes, by proving it confiftent with
Chrifi's Precepts.
He adds, '' They have the Freedom of Jerv-
'' ing God in their own Way'* A Bleffing for
^vhich they are thankful to God and the Govern-
ment : But the Examiner will fcarce perfuade
them to think, that the Compulfion of Tithes
from them, to m.aintain thofe who are hired to
j^r^e God in another Way^ is any Part of that
Freedom.
He proceeds, " But their Duty toward their
'* Neighbour muft be governed by the Laws of
* ^ the Land." Does the Examifier think that our
^ liriftian Duty toward our Neighbour is as alter-
irle and repealable as an Adt of Parliament?
Does he intend to fuperfede all Obligation to Scrip-
t-re Precept in this Point ? There are certainly
J?. v"ariety of Rules in the New 'Teftament refpeft-
iik; our Duty toward our Neighbour, 'Tis poffi-
ble the Laws of the Land may at fome times in-
terfere with or contradict the Precepts of the Gof-
p. 1 in this Cafe : What muft we do then ? The
'Examiner in fuch a Cafe, (and fuch a Cafe we
ir; ke that of Tithes to be) muft either admit an
Exception to his General Rule, or exalt the Au-
thority of Human Ordinances above that of the
Divine Precepts.
llis Inftance of thofe of the Epifiopal Commu-
iVvoii ill Scotland paying Tithes, is not parallel to
i/.vit of the Ridkers in England-, iinlefs he can
llijw, that they have the like Scruple of Confci-
c..ci as the S^uakers, However, the forced
Pvlainte^iance
Maintenance of Minifters by Law is no more
Evangelical in E72gland^ than 'tis in Scotland^ or
any other Country.
The Conclufion.
WE have in the foregoing Sedlions tra-^
ced the Kxamiiicy^ Performance Step
by Step, and have endeavoured to
fliew.
That the Frinciples of the ^lahrs^ which
he oppofes, are founded on the Precepts of
Chrift and the Dodrine of the Gofpel ; do moft
effedlually eftablifli the publick Security j and
are injurious to no Man's Property.
That their Flea of Conjcience^ againfl the
Payment of Tithes, is both Chrijtia?i and Pm^
tejiant.
That the Clergies legal Claim to Tithes
doth not neceffarily infer a rightful Property in
them.
That the over-ruling a " Plea of Confci-
*' ence" by mere Force of La'^v has been the Prac-
tice of all Perfecutors for Religion.
That the original Donations of Tithes \n
this Nation proceeded from the Grofs Supcr-^
flition and falfe Dodrines of Uic Church of
Rome.
T It A >'•
( i86)
That the Superftitious Ufes and Services foi^
^vhich they were £iven, are juftly fejefied by all
v-m Prote'jlanis. , • . ti -n
T HAT the Delufion and Craft, which Romtp
Fc^iPi-afticksexcrcifedto deceive the People into
th&fc Donations, fprung from their Covetoufnefs,
and their Breach of " the Command of God jn
t-l-.c Decalogue;' Nihherpalt thou covet any thing
thatisth neighbours. Deut. v. 21. .
T K At the Examiner has not reconciled the
forced Maintenance of Miniflsrs by Tithes, with
" the Precepts of Chrift." Freely ye have re-
ceived, freely give. Mat. x. 8- Eat Juch thmp
as are let before you. Luke x. 8.
Neither hath lie recdiiciled the Clergies Ex-
emption from Labour, with " the Praftice of the
" Apoftles " who ivrought ivtth Labour and tra-
vel Night and Day that they might not be charge^
able to any. 0. TheiT. iii. 3.8. ^
Neither hath he lliewed, that tne firft
« Principles of natural Juftice" intitle one Mart
to the Fruit of other Men's Labours, without any
valuable Confideration received.
Neither has he proved, that « the moft
" ancient Laws of the Land" are always the moft
righteous. , ,
Nor that Superjlition, " derived aown to us
«' through fucceffive Ages," doth become true
" Religion;" Nor, that the " confirming and en-
« forcing by the Legiflature upon our early Rf^-
" formation from Poperf the Popifi Pay which
had been given for Popifi Ufes and Services, was
any Part of that Reformation.
■^ Neither
f i87 )
Neither has he flicwn, that the " Nature of
'' Gofpel Liberty requires the Confirmation
'^ and enforcing of any fuch Pay :" Nor hai
he fliev/n, that the No^jelty and Singularity of the
^takers in refufing to pay Tithes proceed from
any other Caufe than that of Obedience to Gofpel-
P/ra^/^ being too much out of Fafliion, which
neverthelefs may be their Duty.
None of all thefe things has the Examiner
done, and yet the doing any Ojie of them would
have been of more Service to the Caufe he ef-
poufes, than any thing he has done. But 'tis hard
to kick againjl the Pricks, Acfls ix. 5.
" The Profccutions, Excommunications, At-
'' tachments. Writs of Rebellion, Imprifonments,
^' Sequeftrations, and Seizure of Goods," which
fome of the Clergy have procured againft the
^takers, are *' convincing Proofs," that the
Spirit of Perfecution is not utterly extinct ; and
that the Property of the Subjed is not fufficiently
guarded from the deflrudtive Purpofcs of thofe,
who, in Contempt of the moderate Laws of the
the prefent Government, are needleily reviving
old Severities, and abufing the Name of the
Clergy by defending Pradlices which reproach
their Chc»rad:er.
And this Ufage the ^mkers meet wuth, not
only from the Clergy ; but, becaufe they can't
think the Superftition of Tithes removed by tranf-
ferring them, they are in like Manner treated by
the Lay-Impropriator ; and likewife by fome
Churchwardens for their Rates. Thus by unne-
(^effary Profecutions, Men of Contentious Difyo-
A '<i fitions,
( ^B8 )
fitions ftill continue to vex the confcientious, and
to opprefs the Fatherlefs and the Widow.
Suits of this Nature being plain Indications of
more Rigour than the Clergy concerned in them
are willing to own, they have attempted to lay
the Odium of their Proceedings upon the Courts
of Juftice ; and to cover their own Severity by
monourably imputing it to the Procejfes ^vxd. De-
crees which their unneceffary Recourfs to thoie
Courts obliged them to iii'ue.
But the whole of the Proceedings being purely
the Effea of their own Choice, they fcem to be
left without Excufe: While ivild Notions of
tranfmuting Popiflo Superjiition into Proteftant
Property miflead them to accufe thofe of Pride
and Covetoufiiejs, whom Purity and Confcience
oWige toteftify againft fuch dangerous Miftakes.
Proceedings of this Kind, whereby confcien-
tious Perfons fuffer in their Civil Rights and Pro-
perty only for withftanding Ecf/e/?^/^^/ Impo-
fitions, do nearly referable Perfecutions : And
thofe Perfons feem to be no good Friends to Li-
berty of CoJifcience and the Tokration, who by
preferring former Severities to the Moderation of
later Laws, exprefs their contemptuous Elf eem of
the Juftice md Lenity of the Prefent Adminiflra-
That the Power of the Law Ihouldbe abnfed
to opprefs a Meek, ^ict, and Peaceable Peofi!e,h
to be lamented: And that fuch OpprelTion fliould
be pleaded for as neceflary to the Support and
Maintenance of Chrillian Miniflers, has been and
is Matter of Surprize .to generous Minds.
C 189 )
The BrieJ Account, prefcntedto tjie Confidera-
tlon of the Members of both HoufesofVA-B.LiK-
MENT is a Colledion of Inftances of luch Op-
preffions, fpecifying both the Suits and Caufes of
them which Suits, whether brought by Clergymen^
Lay-Tmpropriators, Iklx-Fanms, or Ckirch-
■wardens, come alike within the Reafons affigned
for the ^takers confcientious Scruple, and the
Claims were ahke recoverable by the Adts of 7
and 8 of King William III. Such Parts of that
Account as the Clergy hitherto have taken Notice
of wc apprehend, have undergone an Exami-
nation neither to its Difcredit, nor to their Hon-
And tis obfervable, that a Multitude of Inftan-
ces in that Account, are Inftances of the Opprcf-
fion and Injuftice of the Profecutor : And what
will doubtlefs appear Ihocking to moft Readers,
they have frequently, not only purpofely omitted
an eafier Method of recovering their Claim, but
alfo expended Ten, Twenty or Thirty Pounds,
or more, to purchafe the dear-bought Satisfadiion
of diftrefling and imprifoning their Neighbours j
and that not for;«y? Dues, but for Claims, which
have neither Contraft, Equivalent, nor any rea-
fonable Confidejation to fupport them, but are
jiiere Pretences of Jbmewhat due for notktng
Ttieir Example, if followed by others, would
not only be ruinous to private Families, but
would nearly affedt the Publick Good, would Dc
deftrudtive of all Trade and Commerce, and tend
to the Subverfion of Property. Should the Law
favour the Fanner, the rradejman, ihzMercham,
A a 3 IB
( iQo ;
in making Claims upon Men for nothing, either
done, or dehvered, there muft be an utter Stag-
nation of Commerce : AH Induftry would be in
vain y as indeed that of the poor Farmer too
often is, who when he hath laboured hard all
the Year, and been at great Expence, is fome-
timcs obliged to furrender to the Prieft the
whole Projfit of his Crop, while his Family
fares hard, and his juft Debts are unpaid. This,
though very hard, muft be fubmitted to, for fear
of fomewhat harder, 'viz, the Expence of a
Law-Suity and the Danger of a Goal : Terri-
ble Trials, which yet have been pafs'd through,
v/ith Patience and Peace of Mind, by thofe whofe
Confciences, rightly informed, have been con-
cerned in Sincerity and Truth to teftify againft
the yet remaining Relicks of Popery and Super-
ftition.
That a Juftices Warrant is an infufRcient
F^emedy, appears to be no more than an empty
Pretence or thofe who never try'd it.
If thatPerfon, who in Cafes of religious Scru-
ples of Confcience, chufes to profecute Men with
the utmoft Severity in his Power, is not to be
charged with Cruelty, " we know not wlio is,
Nor do we think that there can be a more
manifeft Breach of that great Rule of Morality
enjoin'd by Chrift himfelf, Whatever ye would
that Men Jl:Qiild do unto you^ do ye ei.:en Jo to them,
than fuch a Profecution.
The Brief Accotmf is a plain Narrative of Fadls
taken from credible Memoirs of thofe who were
Eye and Ear-Witneffcs of thofe Fadls. The Per-
fons Names therein attend their Adions, which.
■ ' ■ if
r '91 )
if good and virtuous, intitle thofe who did them
to defervcd Commendation : But if the Acftioii
related be Blame-worthy, the Blame arifcs from
the Dred done, not from the Relation of it
which may be as juft and true as if the Fad were
better. Plain Truth offends not him that doth
Truth : He feeks no Corners, but comcth to the
Light, and delights in Sun-fliine. But, " There
'' is, (fiys ArchbiOiop Tillotfon) a twofold Difco-
'' very of their Adions which bad men are afraid
" of. They are afraid they fliould be difcovered
" to themfelves, bccaufe that creates Trouble
'' and Uneafmefs to them -, and they are afraid
'' they fliould be difcovered to others bccaufe
" that caufeth Shame."*
How the ^inkers, folliciting for Relief from
unneceffary Profccutions, can tend to '' diflrefs
*' the Adminiftration," the Examiner has not
cxplain'd : His f conneding the '' Security of the
'' State" with "■ the Property of the Clergy/'
fhew
^ Sermons in O^lavoJ'oL 13, pa^. ^65, Edit, 1703.
t 7 he Policy off he Clergy in thus attempting:; to min-
gle IntercfU and Po-xcrs ^vith the Civil Ma"\]haii\ is
zve/l defcrihedhy William Dtll, zvho, :;; the Vreface to a
a Sermon of his intituled^ Right Reformation, 'preached
before the Houfe of Commons, ^ov. 25, 1646. fa\s
'' And here 1 would defire you to take Notice oiW^
Working of the Myflery of Iniquity from the Head
tQ the very little Tors of the Man of Sin : At frjl
you know the Pope intcrefled himfelf in the Empe-
'' rour and Povjers of tJic JVorld^ t^lor his own yld-
«' z-anta^e and Support, no doubr, rachcr than ior
*' their^) after, the Prelates iacccfiivfly faid 10 worldly
'' K-ngs
( 192 )
%c\v that the Clergy are as much obllg'd w him
in the End of his Book, for placing their Duty
tnd Submiffion to the Government in an advan-
tagious View, as they were in the Begimhig of it.
The Lift of Imprifonments annexed to tlie
"Brief Account {hews the extream Severity of the
Profecutors ; and the Magnanimity and Patience
(t)f the Sufferers, who preferred Peace of Con-
icience
«=' Kings, Lendus your Power ^ and ^e will lend 'jou
*' curT: Let our Spiritual Pozver deal in Temporal
<' ThingSy and your Temporal Power fiall deal in Spi-
*-' niUdX things: And ftill \.\it Clergy-Power {^\\\c\i
^' call'd it felf Spiritual) fo linkt it fclf with ths Tern'
*t praU that the Power that was not of God, might be
** upheld by the Power that was of God, and having
'^ got this Advantage, they cried Dejlroy one, Defiroy
«' toihy andfo the Prelates were wont to fay, NoBi-
^' fiop^ No King. And tlieir SaccefTors in the King-
«' dom of Antichrift ftill cry. No Minijler, No Ma-
cc giflrate-, and fo ftill mingle Interefls and Powers
't with the civil Magiflrate ; that under the Man-
« flratey the Power of God, they might cunningly
•' fhrowd that Power that is not of God. And thus
*« they, ftill under the Name of the Magiflrate, feek
«^t themfelves, and the drawing of that Power that is
«c only his/^vom him to themfelves, to whom it doth
« pot belong : Being in the mean Time really againft
*' Magiftracy, farther than it is ferviceable to their
j=< own Ends. Whereas, we reckon Magiftracy^ not
'^ lefs Magijlracy., no lefs the Ordinance of God,
'^ though we fuffer under it, and by it.
*« This Clergy-Antichriftian Power, wherever it Is,
<« will ftill fit upon the Power of the Nation ; the
^^ Power of Jnticbrijl fo dominecrino- over the Powers
<• of the IVorld, that none but inc Power of Cbrifi
^' can caft it oftV
( 193 )
fcieticc to all worldly Confiderations : For iithicit
ChrilHan Behaviour, they are treated by the Ex'-
aminer^ in like Manner as Confelfors and Mar-
tyrs for the Truth in all Ages were, by thofe who
caufed them to Ibffer,
*^ Injuring the Lrotng^' as the Inflidors of
thofe Imprifonments did -, and '' qjptrfng thd
" Dead,'' as the Rxanihicr docs thofc who died
in the Faith under fuch Imprifonments, arc by
his own Confeflion, " Pradices difagrccablc to
'' Human Society,'" and '' tar from the Nature
" of true Religion 3" nor is it eaiy to reconcile
fuch Pradices with Chriflian Charity,
That Men of perfecuting Difpofitions exprefs
greatVneafinefs2X\^^ Brief Account, is no other
than might reafonably be expedted ; bccaulc it
carries a fevere Reproof to fuch Tempers, and
jiffccfts fuch Men's Reputation. '^ Now " Repu-
" tation, ((ays Archbilliop Tillotjon) is a tender
" Part, which few Men can endure to have
'' touched, tho' never fo juftly ; and therefore no
«' Wonder if bad Men be impatient of that Truth
'^ which lays them open to the World, and do
" by all Means endeavour to fupprefs and con-
'* ccal it from themfelves and others.''^ For
'' f Truth (fays be) carries great Evidence
'' along with it, and is very convincing, and
'' where Men will not yield to it, and fuffcr
" themfelves to be convinc'd by it, it gives them
^' a great deal of Diilurbance : Gravis niah^
'' Conlcientice lux ej}, fays Seneca, Light J s -very
^' troubleldme to a bad Confcience^ for it fliev»s
•^ *' Men
^ VqL i3,jp(Jg' 370- t ^^'•'^^- ^^^' 3^^' ^^^'
( 194 ;
^ Men their Deformities whether they will' or
«« no ; and when Men's Vices are difcovered to
^' them, theymufl either refolve to perlift in
*^ them, or to break them off, and either of thefe
*' is very grievous." Hence it is, that Every one
that doth Evil hateth the Light, neither cometh
to the Light, k/i his Deeds Jlmild be reproved^
John iii, 20,
A N
( 195)
A N
APPENDIX.
TH O* the Force and Power of 1'rutb
have fo far prevail'd upon the Clergy^ as
to lay afide, for the prefent, their old
Pretence of a Drcine Right to 'Tithes ; a Pretence
no longer fufceptible, than while Darknejs covcr'^d
the Earth, andgrojs Darknefs the People :
Yet, by declining to renounce a Plea^ which
they are unable to maintain, they difcover a Dif-
pofition, when Opportunity lliall offer^ to re-
alTunie it.
They are now pleasM to reft the Weight of
their Caufe upon another Bajis, equally infutfi-
cient to fapport it, '•oiz. A Pretence of Property^
o-rounded on the Laivs of the Land :
But they feem not duly to confider, that the
Laws themfelves, in this Cafe of Tithes, are
o-rounded on a millakcn Suppofition of their
being antecedently due by Di^jine Right : Upoii
which it hath been juflly obferved, that
B b *' A certain
( I9& )
^« ** A certain Order of Men once cry'd up
<^ the Divine Right of Tithes, and enlarged
" upon the Sin of Sacrilege, in with-holding
" what was due to God and holy Church. This
" induced the eafy Superftition of our Anceftors
«' to make Laws enforcing the Payment of them
" on Suppofition of their being fo due.
^' We now fee, that the fallacious Plea of
" Divi?2e Rights on which thofe Laws were
*' founded, is laid aiide ; and the Laws are ur-
*' ged as the Ground of that Claim to which they
*^ gave their Sanation upon another Foundation^
*' Thus was Superftition induced to grant a
*' Law to inforce the fuppofed Commands of the
*' Gofpel, and when upon clofer Confideration
" no fuch Commands appear, the Law alone is
*' argued as fufficient to fupport that Claim,
*' which, if the Gcjpel does not give a Right to^
f ^ has none at alL"
That the Reader may have the clearer Idea of
the oppreflive Nature of this pretended Property
in Tithes, we have thought fit to annex, by way
of Appendix to this Viiidicatioji^ the following
Pages, tranfcribed from a Book, intituled, T^he
Hu{bandman*s
■^ See the Vindication %n Jnfwcr to the Churchmen
vf Hereford, ^ag, 34.
( 197 )
Hufbandman's Plea againft Tithes, publifhed In
the Year -f- 1647, wherein
This PROPOSITION,
T^hat Tithes are an Oppreflion to the Hufband-
man, a Burden too heavy for him to bear
and undoeth viany\ is clearly proved.
^' Now for the clearing of this Propofition^
*' concerning the Oppreflion of Tithes, we mull
^^ firft underfland what is meant by Increase,
" Whether it be meant of the clear Gain that
^' comes unto the Huibandman, his Stock and
^^ Labour being deduced out of his Crop of
*' Corn ; as the Tradefman, by the Statute of
" 2 Edw, VI. is to dedud his Stock and Charge,
'^ and then to pay but the Tenth of his clear
" Gain : Or, as all Perfons called Spiritual^ as
" Bifhops, Parfons, and the Hke, were appointed
*' by a Statute made in the 26th of Hen. VIII.
^^ to pay Tenths or Tithes to the King.
*^ They by that Statute were appointed to pay
" but the Tenth of their clear Gain or Income
*^ by Tithes, or other Profits of Rents that they
*' received for their Land, all their Charges are
" to be deduded, even the Stewards, BaylifFs,
B b 2 '' and
t 'this IV as before the Name Quaker ivas biozt-n ;
andjhews that more early Proteftants laboured under a
Ssnfi of the Romilh Opprejfon of Tithes,
( ^98 )
^' and Receivers of their Rents, their Wages and
^^ Fees fliall be deducted by that Statute.
*^ And there is as good Reafon that the
^^ HufDandman's Stock and Charges fhould be
^' deducted out of his Crop of Corn, for the
*' Prefervation of his Stock for his continual
*^ Maintenance ; and for the Hufbandman to
*^ pay but the Tenth of his clear Gain, if he
*' have any : The OpprelTion would not be fo
*^ great as it is, if the clear Gain or Increafe be
*^ enough to maintain the Hufbandman com-
^' fortably without diininifhing of his Stock.
" If Increase be not thus taken for the
*' Hufbandman, as for the Tradefman, and
" Bifiiops, and Parfons, before named in the
*^ aforefaid Statute of 26 Hen. VIII. and 2 Edw.
*^ VI. then there is not an equal Diftribution of
*' Jnftice to the Hufbandman in this Law of
" Tithes, as to the Tradefman, and Others^
^^ before-mentioned.
*^ But, under the Pretence of Increafe^ there
*' is taken from the Hufbandman the Tenth of
*' his Stogk and Year's Labour every Year, by
'^ taking the Tenth of his Crop (in which his
'' Stock and Year's Labour lies) under the fpe-
" cious Name of Tithes or Tenth of Increafe,
*' as if his Crop of Corn were all Increafe or
^^ clear Gain,
€C
** If Increase be thus taken, then it Is im-
poftble to be performed by any Hufbandman,
" without
( 199 )
\>' without the great Oppreflion of him, an^
^' the utter undoing of m;iny, as daily Experience
*' fheweth,
" And thus to take the Tenth of the Huf-
^' bandman's Stock, and Year's Labour, is Op-
'' preffion, Cruelty, Tyranny, and a Sin againft
'' the Sixth and Eighth Commandment, it being
*' confidered in feveral Refpeds, yea, againft
*' the Law of Nature, or found natural Reafon ;
*' and in the Breach of the Rules of Reafon,
*' Man is leafl: excufable before God and Man :
" And a Man may as foon make another Uni-
** verfe, as make this Law of Tithes any other
' ' than a Breach of the moral Law of God and
*' Nature.
" Our Parfons it may be think, that the Hus-
*^ bandman may Ipare the Tenth of his Crop as
*' eafily as they may fpare the Tenth of their
*' Tithes, that they receive of the Husbandman,
*' that cofts them nothing but the Carrying in-
** to their Barns ;
*' But herein they arc grofly deceived, or
*' wilfully blinded ; for the Husbandman lays
^* out his Stock and Treafure in Corn, as any
'^ Merchant or Tradefman lays out his Stock or
'' Treafure in any Merchandize or Wares what-
" foever,
*' As for Example -, A Man cannot fct a
*' Crop of Wheat upon one Acre of Ground
*' undiQv forty ShiIIi?igs^ where the Land is worth
'' but
( 200 )
^^ hwt five or /at Shillings per Annum by the Acre :
"' And in thofe Places where the Land is worth
ten^ Shillings, or fixteen Shillings, or twenty
Shillings per Annum by the Acre, a Man can-
not fet a Crop of Wheat under 3/. or 4/. and
in fome Places 5/. upon one Acre of Land that
^' is let at thofe Rates ^
" And the Husbandman waits a Year and ati
"^^ half for the Return of fome of it, and a Year
*' for the Return of the reft of it; and many
*' Years within the Term of 21, the Husband-
" man's Stock fo laid out returns none Increafe,
" but decreafes fometimes after the Rate of 5/.
^^ fometimes 10/. or 12/. in the Hundred,
'' And this we can prove by diverfe Inftances,
" of Men that have loft of their Stocks (laid out
'' in their Crops) after that Rate, and yet no
Fault in the Husbandman, either for vvant of
Skill or Diligence in his Calling : And fome
do fo every Year in one Place or other of this
Kingdom, and yet the Tenth of the Hus-
bandman's Crop is taken from him Yearly,
without any Confideration of his Lofles :
" And the Parfon hath no fooner taken the
Tenth of the Crop, but the Nine Parts of the
Husbandman's decayed Stock is again to the
Parfon like the Bull or Cow that Joi fpeaks
of; Joi^ xxi. 10. The wicked Man s i?////
'' gender eth and fa'ikfh not ; his Cow calve fk and
[' cafleth not her Calf:
'*' Even
<c
ec
( 201 )
'' Even fo doth the Rcmamder of the Hus?
*' bandman*s decayed Stock ; prefently it gender-'
*' eth again, and faileth not to bring forth an-
'* other Increafe to the Parfon the next Year,
" though with as much Lofs to the Husband*
" man as before, and the Minifters and Impro-
" priators, hke the Egyptian Tafk-mafters fpoken
'' oiExod. V. Verf. 6, 7, 8. exadl the full Num-
'' ber and Tale of our Brick, we mca?2, the full
'' Tenth of the Husbandman's Crop, and give
" not fo much as Stubble or Straw toward the
^J making of it ^
" Yea; although that the Husbandman's
'^ Stock be always barren to himfelf, yet it hatli
'' as fruitful a Womb to the Parfon, as is the
*' Wombof a certain Kind of Coneys, of whom
" Plijiy fpeaks in the 8th Book of his Natural
*' Hijlory, which after it be once with Young,
" it conceiveth again upon it, infomuch as at
*' one Time (lie hath fome Leverets fucking of
" her, others in her Belly, and thofe not of the
" fame Forwardnefs ; for fome of them are co-
*' vered with Hair, others naked without any
*' Down, and there be of them that are not
l^ fhapen at all^ but without Form :
*' Even fo, the Husbandman's Stock Is al-
*' ways with Young, breeding, and bringing
*' forth one Kind of Tithe after another -, and
'' always it hath fome Kind of Tithes fuckinc!;
*' upon it : For after the Huibandman's Stock
'' hath brought forth I'ithc-Hav, and Titbc-Con?,
^^ the Uke Tith-^Uayi^ breeding again, tho' not ytt
'' formed
( 202 )
#^ formed ; and the fame nine Parts of May and
<^ Corn hath fome young Ones, not of the fame
<f Forwardnefs, but one after another s
" And Tithe-Calves, that grow of thofe AH-
*« ments that arife of the fame ^line Parts of Ha^J
« and Straw that have been Tithed the fame
«' Year;
« And as foon as the Calves are taken from
" their Dams, then "Tithe-Milk, that arifeth
« from the fame nine Parts of Hay and iS/r^^
« that have been Tithed before :
*^ And Tithe-Piggs, feveral Times in the
*^ Year, arifmg out of the fame ?2ine Parts of
^' Gri^ Tithed before :
*' And likewife "lithe-Eggs and Tithe-Chickens^
«*^ that arife out of the fame nine Parts of C^r;^
«^ that hath been Tithed before :
km
*' Alfo Lamb 2ind ^^o/arifingpattly from the
*« fame ;2/;^^ Parts of Hay Tithed before, for thg
<« 5&^/ are kept in the Winter v^ith the Hai
" that hath been Tithed before :
"^AUwhichT'/z/j^i before-mentioned is as bad^
*^ if not worfe, thanUfe upon Ufe after the Rate
« of lo/. in the Plundred : As if a Man fhould
*' lend another Man loo/. and bind the fame
*^ Man to whom he lends it to give t;he Lender
« lo/. for the Ufe of the loo/. and 20J. for the
«^ Ufe of the lo/. the fame Year,
*^ And
( 203 )
" And thus Tithes cat up and confume the
'' Hufbandman's Stock and Eftate, by taking the
'' Tenth of his Stock imployed in his Crop of
'' Corn, in taking tlic Tenth of the Crop every
'' Year, and Tithing his Stock twice or thrice
" every Year:
" And many of our Minifters and Impropria-
*' tors, when they have gotten away the Huf-
" bandman's Stock, and brought liini to Pover-
" ty and Beggary, then they caft upon him this
*' or the hke Reproach, and fay, /je ac^s an idle
" FcHgw, and unjkilfitl in his Culling 5 when indeed,
*' the Truth is, the Hulbandman, whole Stock
'' they have eat up and coniimied by Tithes, was
" more fkilful in his Calling, than t!ie Miiiifter
*' that eat him up was in his Calling, and for
'' Diligence there is no Comparison : And ma-
'' ny Impropriators have no CalHng at all, hut
" live idly upon the Sweat of other Men's Brows,
*' and eat the Bread of other Men.
'' The OppreiTion of Tithes will better appear
" by this enfuing Demonftration :
*' It is a fure and true Rule amono-fl the Muf-
** bandmen, that underlland the Myllery and
'* Calling of Hulbandry, that the Stock that the
*' Hufbandman mufl bring to Aock a Farm that
" confifts of Tillage, mull be the Fourth Part of
" the Purchafe of the Ljnd, after the Rate of
*' Twenty Years Purchafe, of vvhat yearly Value
'* foever the Farm be :
C c '' A%
( 204 )
*' As for Inftance: In a Farm of lOO /. Rent
'' per Annum, he that will rent that Farm, muft
*' bring a Stock of the Value of five Years Pur-
" chafe, that is 500 /. for with a Icfs Stock he
/' cannot ftock a Farm of the Rent of 100/.
** per Annum.
" And 350/. thereof is laid out in the Crop
^' of Corn every Year in Rent, Seed, Plowing,
*' and other Labour in digging of the Ground,
*' Weeding of the Corn, and cutting of it at
" Harveft, and gathering it together to make it
" ready to be carried into the Barn j and is but
*' fo much Money laid out in Corn, as any Mer-
*^ chant or Tradefman lays out fo much Money
*' in any Merchandife or Wares whatfoever.
" And 80/. thereof is laid out in Horfes,
*' Harnefs, Ploughs, Carts, and other Implements
«' of Hufbandry, and the Ufe of them is employ 'd
" in tilling and preparing of the Land for the
*' Crop of Corn, and they wear out and are con-
*' fumed in their Ufe, and mull be renewed out
*^ of the Increafe of the Crop of Corn if there
*' be any, or elfe the Wearing out of them will
" wear out his Stock in Time.
^' And 40 /. muft be laid out in Cows, Sheep,
*' and other Cattle, and the greateft Profit of
<' them is fpent every Year by the Huftandman,
" whilft that he is preparing and tilling of the
'^ Land for the Crop; and many times the Huf-
" bandman
( 205 )
" bandman loles in a Year (in many Places of
*' this Land) 20 /. and more, by Sheep that die
" of the Rot, and other Caiaalties, yea, as foon
" fometimcs as the Parfon hath taken the Tithe
" of the Wool and the Lamb : And in many
" Places of this Kingdom, where the Land lies
" in common Fields, and cannot be let lie to
*^ gather Heart, by reafon that it muft be con-
*' tinually tilled, the Hulbandman in thofe Pla-
*' ces cannot be without a Flock of Sheep for
" the Fold, to Dung his Ground, and the Flock
^' of Sheep (if as aforefaid dead of the Rot, or
^^ other Cafualties) muft be renewed out of the In-
*^ creafe of the Crop of Corn if there be any; or
" elfe the Hufbandman in thofe Places will foon
" come to Poverty, as many Men in thofe Places
" have done, by the Lofsof their Flock of Sheep,
" their Crop not increaiing enough to buy Sheep
" again, by reafon that the Tenth thereof is
" taken for the Tithes every Year,
• *^ And there muft be 30 /. laid out in Uten-
*' fils or neceflluy Things in the Houfe, which
" wear out many of them in their Ufe, as Linen,
** Bedding, Brafs, Pewter, and all Kind of Coop-
" ers Ware ; and thefe alfo muft be renewed out
" of the hicreajc of the Crop of Corn, if there
\[ be any,
^' And thus the 500 /. Stock is laid out in the
^^ fevejal Sums aforefaid, viz.
C c 2 "la
cc
cc
( 206 ;
^' In the Crop. —
" In Horfe, Harnefs, Ploughs,
" Carts, and other Imple-
" ments of Hufbandry.
'^ In Cows and Sheep. — 40 00 00
5' In Houihold Stuff. — • 30 00 00
Sum Total. 500 00 00
f f T
" And this Rule of laying out a Stock of 500/.
in a Farm that confifts of Tillage, wil} hold in
moft Places in this Kingdom, except in thofe
*' Places where the Land lies in three Parts in
'' Common Fields, there will be fomething lefs
^' laid out in the Crop, and fome Implements of
Hufbandry; but then there muft be more laid,
out in the Flock of Sheep, with the Charge o£
keeping a Shepherd to follow, and fold them,>
to keep the Ground in Heart, and they muft
be upheld by the Crop,'and fo reckoned in it.
'' And if the Crop be well confidered, there is
" not one Year in feven, that the Crop of Corn
'' ('upon ordinary Land that hath been kept in
*' Tillage) is worth any more Money at Harveft,.
" than that Part of his Stock aforefaid laid out m
'' the Crop, if the Hufbandman be but' paid for
'' his Labour, as he pay^ the Day-Labouring-
man for his Labour : If the Crop be worth lo
much, the Hulbandman is glad^ and gives
^' God.
( 207 )
«^ God Thanks that he has blcflcd his Labour fcr
'' v/ell : The Crop is oftner lels worth thaa
*' more.
'' And there is not one Year in Ten, that the
" Crop of Corn of ordinary Land in any Farm
'' is worth fo much more, befides his Stock laid
'^ out in the Crop as aforefaid, as the Tithe
'' thereof comes unto, and yet the Tenth of the
*' Crop is taken from him without any Confidera-.
" tion, whether his Stock have increafcd or de-
** creafed in the Crop.
CC
" If the Crop be worth no more than th©
350/. laid out in it as aforefaid, yet the Par-^
*' fon's Tithe will be worth 35/. for he hath
*' the Tenth of all the Crop, and this 35 h
*' is above the third Part of the Year's Rent of
'' that Farm : Then by this Account the Piif-
" bandman hath taken from him by the Minif.
*' ters or Impropriators, the Sum of 35 /. of his
*' Stock, and his Stock is decayed 35 /. although
** he lias played the good Hulband, and hath had
" t|he BlclTing of God upon his Labour, in an cr-
" dlnary Way of God's Providence on the Fruits
'^^ of the Earth. And thus in few Years the Par-
"foivs Tithe eats out and confumes the Huf-
i5 baadman's Stock.
". And if the Huffcandman's Crop be not
'' worth fo much by 50 /. as the Stock or Charge
^' that he hath laid out in it (as many a Year
*' within the Term of Twenty One it is not) yet
*' the Parfon's Tithes will be worth 30 /. Then by
'' this
( 2os ;
* this Account, the Husbandman has lofl: 50 /.
*-^ bv his Trade of Kufbandry, and he hath taken
"^ from him 30/, more of his decayed Stock,
^^ which being put together makes 80 /. which
^"- is almoil the fifth Part cf his whole Stock, that
^' he has loft by his Crop of Corn in one Year,
^^ befides his Tithe-^Wool ond Lamb, and be-
^^ fides ether Lofies that may fall out the fame
" Year, and befides the wesring out of his Im-
" plements of Hulbandry, that require yearly
l^ renewing.
*^ And if fome few Years prove unfeafonable,
*^ the Husbandman is by this means of Tithing
*' bereaved of the greateft Part of his Stock ;
*' and fo, by this Means, in few Years utterly
** undone.
*^ And this we can prove by diverfe Inftan-
*^ ces of Men that have been thus undone, and
l^ yet no Fault on the Husbandman's Part.
But fuppofe the Husbandman's Crop (after
one fuch Year's Lofs) fhould prove for Ten
Years together as well as can be expefled 5 yet
** the Husbandman fhall never recover that one
" Year's Lofs in that Ten Years, but live in
^' Want and Mifery in that Farm, by Reafon
*^ that the Tenth of his Stock and Labour is
^' taken frcir* him yearly under the Name of
^J. Tithtf.
( 209 )
*' But iuppofe that the Husbandman's Stocl^'
*' with his Labour and diligent Care, fliould in-
'' creafe every Year after the Rate of ten Pounds
" in the Hundred : How ftands it with the Juf-
*' tice of the Moral Law of God, and the Law
*' of Nature, or found Natural Reafon, that ano-
" thcr Man, whether Minifter or Impropriator,
*' fhould carry away every Year, all the Increafe
" of the Husbandman's Stock and Labour, thut
*' he hath laboured for all the Year, and laid out
*' his Stock or Treafure in his Calling, hoping
*' for fome Gain or Increafe ?
*' The Husbandmanby this Means of Tithing
" is in no poffibllity of increafing his Talent or
*' Stock, to lay up any thing for his Wife and
*' Children, as the Order and Duty of Nature
*' requires him. Ge;L xxx. v. 30. ^/ij Jacob
*' Jafd unto Laban, but now 'when jl jail 1 provide
'' for mme own Hotife aljb ? And the ApoiUe
'' faith, I. Tim, v. 8. But if any provide not
^^ for his own, andfpecially for thoje of his own
*' Houfe, he hath denied the Faith, a?:d is wcrje
" than an Infdel. And is not the Means itfelf
*' when provided, taken from them by the Mi-
*' nifters and Impropriators under the Name of
I' Tithes ?
" Nay, although that the HusbandmanV Stock
^* with his Labour do increafe every Year after
" the Rate of Ten Pounds in the Hundred, yet
" by this Means of Tithing, there is not cuily
" Uken from the Husbandman all the Increafe
( 210 }
f^ of his Stock, and Year's Labour, but alia
*^ fome of the Stock it felf. As for Example -,
" If the 350 /. aforefaid laid out in the Crop
*' do increafe 35 /. that is to fay, that the Crop
*' of Corn be worth 35 /. more than the 350 /.
:* aforefaid laid out in the Crop of Corn, which
*' 3 ^ /. is the Increafe of 3 50 /. after the Rate of
*' ten Pounds in the Hundred j then by this Ac-
*' count the Crop of Corn muft be worth 385 A
*^ and the Tenth of 385/. is 38 /. 10 s, which
" the Parfon, (whether Minifter or Impropria-
*' tor) takes for Tithes, for he hath the Tenth of
*^ all the Crop wherein the 350/. Stock and the
*' 35/. Increafe lies. Then by this Account the
*^ Parfon, (whether Minifter or Impropriator)
'^ takes 35/. which is all the Increafe of the
*' 350 /. aforefaid (laid out in the Crop) and 3 /,
*' 10 s. of the Husbandman's Stock laid out in
*^ the Crop of Corn as aforefaid.
*' And fo by this Means of Tithing, the Huf-
*' bandman's 350 /. Stock laid out in the Crop of
" Corn is come to be but 346 /. 10 s, and fo there
y is 3 /. 10 s. loft of the Husbandman's Stock.
^^ O Viperous Brood, Tithes, that eats out the
" Bowels of the Dam. that breeds it, we mean,
*' the Husbandman's Stock, every Time that it
*^ is delivered of Tithes !
*' He that (hall deny this aforegoing Demon-
'* ftration (of Tithing) to be true, muft deny his
*^ own Reafon, and every underftanding Huf-
bandman's
( 211 )
bandman's Experience. And he that doth
think to make Men to believe, againft found
Reafon, and true Experience, mull go feek
out another World of Men to beget fuch a
Kind of Faith in.
*' Is it not worfe than Ufury to take lo/. in
the I go/, not for lending an loo/. of his owa
Money ; but the Parfon (whether Minifter or
Impropriator) in taking of Tithes, takes lo/.
in the loo/. of another Man s Money, and the
* Impropriator gives nothing at all to him that
he takes it of.
" To take Ttv/ Pounds for the Loan of
I go/, (of a Man's own Money) for a Year,-
hath been adjudged excelTive Receiving and
Gaining from another Man, tho' it be for
lending of his own Money ; and therefore
now no Man may take above -j- 8/. for tho
Loan of igg/. for one Year : And yet by this
corrupt Cuftom of Tithing, there is tak-en of
theHulbandman, by the Minifters and Im-
propriators, Ufe upon Ufe, after the Rate of
lo/. in the Hundred, not for lending their
own Money, but of another's (the Halband-
man's) Money.
D d '' Can
* Neither does the Mlr.ijler give an) thing to the
Quakers.
+ This was at that Time the Jnterefl allow* d by Lavj^
which being novj hut five Pounds j or the Hundred ^ inakes
$he Grievance at this D.iy the greater.
( 212 )
** Can any Man live upon a more ungodly
«* Way of Maintenance than this of Tithes ?
« It being worfe than that of Ufe for lending of
^* Money condemned by the Statute Law
*' of this Land. Jer. xxii. 13. Wo unto him
•* that buildeth his Houje by Unrighteoujhefsy and
" his Chambers by Wrong ; that ufeth his Neigh^
<* bour's Service without Wages, and giveth him
*' not for his Work. Or can any Man be in a
*' more flavifh Condition than the Hulbandman
** is in, to pay Ufe upon Ufe after the Rate of
** 10/. in the Hundred for his own Money and
*^ Labour, and weary himfelf for very Vanity ?
*' as the Prophet faid of thofe that were under
•' Oppreffion among the "Jews in his Days,
*' Hab, ii. 13. yea, wear out himfelf and his
^^ Stock to enrich another Man.
^^ Now whether the taking the ^enth of flie
^^ Hulbandman's Stock, and the Tenth of his
*^ Year's Labour, by taking the Tenth of his Crop
*^ under the Name of Tithes, be Oppreffion or
*^' not ; and whether it ftands with the Juftice
" of the Moral Law of God, and the Law of
*' Nature, or found Natural Reafon y and whe-
^' ther it ftands with the Honour of a Chriftian
*' Nation, where Men profefs Chriftianity and
*^ the Power of Qodlinefs, that one Man fhould
^* be a Slave to another, yea devour another like
*' the Beaft in the Field ; and that the Hufband-
*' men fhould continue under the Yoke and
*' Burden of fuch a Law and Cuftom, that it
** fhould be impoffible for them, in an ordinary
*' Way of God's Providence in their Callings, to
1! '^X
( 213 )
*« lay up any thing for Pofterity, or live cont-
** fortably in this prefent Life, we leave to every
*' reafonable Man to judge.
*' That this is true, that the Earth brings
*' forth no more Increafe than is before-men-
" tioned, the Huibandman can tell by Experi-
" ence ; and it is poflible for any rational Man
*' to prove, that lives in any Parifh in this King-
<* dom, if that he take a true Survey or Ac-
" count of every Man's Crop in that Parifli
*' what it is worth at Harveft, and what it
" (lands him in, as of Re?it, Seed, Dunging,
" Liming, Chalking, and M^/r//«^ of the Ground,
" Ploughing, Weeding, and Cutting of the Corn.
*' By this Demonftration the Reader may per-
^* ceive, that the Huibandman doth pay Ufe
«' upon Ufe after the Rate of to/, in the Hun-
<* dred, for all that Part of his Stock that he
*^ lays out in his Crop of Corn and Cattle,
«* which doth amount unto 8/. in the Hundred
<^ (within a Little) for all the Hufbandman's
" Stock of Horfc, Harnefs, Ploughs, Carts, and
" other Implements of Huibandry ; yea for the
«« Bed that he lies upon, and his Brafs Pots and
<' Kettles, yea, tor the Stools and Forms, that
*« he and his Children and Servants fit upon ;
'' for 500/. at 8/. in the 100/. is worth a,oI. per
« Annum, 2.nd.xhzTitbt^Hay, and a;v/ and
" Tithe-Cakrs, Mtlk, Lamb, and Wool. Pigg:s,
^c E^s, and all other Things that the T/r/>^-M.//-
- <r^r; will have to be Tithcable, will be worth 40/.
** %r Annum where they are t^ken in kind in a
- ^ Pdj " ^^-''''
( 214 )
^f FAi-m of idol. per Annum Rent, and that con-
^' fifts of Tillage. And we can inftance in fomc
^^ Men that have paid j[.oL per Annum for T^tthe-
^' Corn, Wool and Laml\ in a Farm of Tillage,
*' not much more^^r Annum than loo/. but in
^- fevv Years it did undo fome of them.
" And thus the Reader may perceive, that
^^ the Hufoandman's Stock raifes and advances
''' the Minifter's and Impropriator's Families,
'' and provides Stocks for their Children, if they
*' vv^ould live but as fparingly, and fare as hard
^' as the Hufbandmen do : And the Hufband
^' man by this Means cannot provide any thing
^' for his own Children : Now 35/. /^r Annum,
^' which is the Value of the Tithe of the Huf-
bandman's Crop of Corn will raife in twenty
one Years 735/. to the Minifter or Impro-
priator, befides the other 'Tithe of Wool and
Lambs, Calves, Milk, Piggs, &c. that may
make it up 800/. or 840/. in 21 Years : And
^' the Hufbandman out of whofe Stock and La-
^' hour thofe Sums of Money aforefaidare raifed,
^' fliall be never the Richer at the 2 1 Years End,
than he was at the Beginning thereof, when
he brought the 500/. Stock to fuch a Farm as
aforefaid ; but if that he have kept his Stock
^' whole at the 2 i Years End, to divide among
his Children, he thinks that he hath fped well
and pkid the good Hufnand.
f<
ft
«c
?c
ft
Ohjecthn, '' But fomc Man, it may be,
f^ wjli pbjca, th^t the Iluib^ndman hath lived
upon
( 215)
*' upon his Stock and brought up his Childreii
'^ with it.
Aji/wer, " The Huibandman and his Wife
" have not hved upon their Stock, and brought
'' up their Children with it ; but the Hufband-
*' man, his Wife and Children, have lived upon
'' their Labour; for the Iluibandman, his Wife
*' and Children earn as much as will keep them
*' as well as they are kept, if they were paid for
*^ their Labour, but as he pays the Day-La-
■"• bourer for his Labour. And thus the Huf-
*' bandman gives away all the Profit of the Ufe
" of his Stock after the Rate of 8/. in the Hun-
^' dred of what Value foever the Stock be, ac-
'' cording to the Greatnefs of his Farm.
'' And the Reader may obferve, that the
" T'lthe-Corn in every Parifh where the Land is
^' arable, doth amount unto the third Part of
'' the Yearly Value of all the Land in the
^* Parilh, although that the Hufbandman's Stock
*^ increafe never a Penny ; becaufe the Tithe is
'' the T^enth of all the Huibandman's Stock laid
" out in the Crop,
'' And the PvCader may obferve that the Tenant
'' that rents the Land doth gather up all the
'' Purchafer's or. Landlord's Money (that he laid
'' out in the Purchaic of the Land) in the Term
'' of 20 Years the Parchafer lliali have all his
'* Money again that lie laid out for the Land,
'' and the Land befide. So the Purchakr doth
'' double his St. :k ^i 20 Years: But th^
'' Tenant
( 2i6 )
^f Tenant who lays out a Stock of the Value of
** the fourth Part of the Purchafe, (hall have
« nothing for the Ufe of his Money : It is as
** good Reafon that the Tenant's Stock (hould
^ incrcafe fomething as the Purchaler's.
**^ We conclude this Demonftration of the
*' Oppreffion of Tithes, with that of Solomotty
<<= Ecclc iv. Verf. i, 2, 3, 4. So I returned^ and
** conjidered all the OppreJ/ions that are done under
** the Su7ty and behold the T^ears of fuch as wer^
•^ oppreffedy and they had no Comforter ; and on
** the Side of their Oppreffors there was * Power,
*''' but they had no Comforter. Wherefore I prai^
** Jed the Dead which are already Dead more than
^^ the Living which are yet alive. Tea, better is
^^ he than both they, which hath not yet been, who
** hath not feen the Evil Work that is done under
** the Sun. Again I conjidered all Travell and
•* every right Work, that for this a Man is envied
** of his Neighbour : This is alfo Vanity and Vexa-
** tion of Spirit. Even fo the Hufbandman's
^^ Labour is envied him ; and others by a States
5^ Policy live on his Labour."
We fubmit the foregoing Demonjiration of the
Hulbandman to the Perufal and Confideration
of the Judicious and Impartial Reader 5 who, if
be (hall judge the ikme to be rational and con-
vincingy
* Thojf Pfrfons whom the Text ftiles Qpprefors
^ad Power or ^;?w on their Side,
( 217 >
vincmg, will, no doubt, join with us In. thiK
Co?iclufion^ viz.
That the Clergy's Modern Pretence to a Pro^
perty in Tithes is as oppojite to right Reafon vind
Jocial Equity y as their Old Claim to them by Di^
vine Right was repugnant to the Precepts c£
Cbrijly and the Doctrine of the G^y^^/,
F I iV^
m't
•^a^^'^.^^^^zs
Date Due
PRINTED IN U. S. A.
BX7676.A2B55
A vindication of a book, intituled, A
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library
1 1012 00039 5188
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11