their kind, that ever were offered in the face of the sun, against the most glaring lights of truth, and against a continuation of public facts, known to all Europe, for twenty years together. I shall therefore impartially examine the merits and conduct of the presbyterians, upon those two great events; and the pretensions to favour, which they challenge upon them.

Soon after the reformation in the church in England, under Edward the Sixth, upon queen Mary's succeeding to the crown (who restored popery) many protestants fled out of England, to escape the persecution raised against the church, as her brother had left it established. Some of these exiles went to Geneva; which city had received the doctrine of Calvin, and rejected the government of bishops, with many other refinements. These English exiles readily embraced the Geneva system; and having added farther improvements of their own, upon queen Mary's death returned to England; where they preached up their own opinions, inveighing bitterly against episcopacy, and all rites and ceremonies, however innocent and ancient in the church: building upon this foundation, to run as far as possible from popery, even in the most minute and indifferent circumstances. This faction, under the name of puritan, became very turbulent during the whole reign of queen Elizabeth, and were always discouraged by that wise queen, as well as by her two successors. However, their numbers, as well as their insolence and perverseness, so far increased, that soon after the death of king James the First, many instances of their petulancy and scurrility are to be seen in their pamphlets, written for some years after (which was a trade they began in the days of queen Elizabeth), par

ticularly with great rancour against the bishops, the habits, and the ceremonies: such were those scurrilous libels under the title of Martin Marprelate, and several others. And although the earl of Clarendon tells us, until the year 1640 (as I remember) the kingdom was in a state of perfect peace and happiness, without the least appearance of thought or design toward making any alterations in religion or government; yet I have found, by often rummaging for old books in Little Britain and Duck-lane, a great number of pamphlets printed from the year 1550 to 1640, full of as bold and impious railing expressions against the lawful power of the crown, and the order of bishops, as ever were uttered during the rebellion, or the whole subsequent tyranny of that fanatic anarchy. However, I find it manifest that puritanism did not erect itself into a new, separate species of religion, till some time after the rebellion began: for, in the latter times of king James the First, and the former part of his son, there were several puritan bishops, and many puritan private clergymen; while people went, as their inclinations led them, to hear preachers of each party in the parish churches; for the puritan clergy had received episcopal orders, as well as the rest. But soon after the rebellion broke out, the term puritan gradually dropped, and that of presbyterian succeeded; which sect was in two or three years established in all its forms, by what they called an ordinance of the lords and commons, without consulting the king, who was then at war against his rebels. And from this period the church continued under persecution, until monarchy was restored in the year 1660.

In a year or two after, we began to hear of a new party risen, and growing in the parliament

as well as the army, under the name of independent: it spread indeed somewhat more in the latter, but not equal with the presbyterians, either in weight or number, until the very time the king was murdered.

- When the king, who was then a prisoner in the isle of Wight, had made his last concessions for a peace to the commissioners of the parliament, who attended him there; upon their return to London they reported his majesty's answer to the house whereupon a number of moderate members, who, as Ludlow says, had secured their own terms with that prince, managed with so much art, as to obtain a majority, in a thin house, for passing a vote that the king's concessions were a ground for future settlement. But the great officers of the army, joining with the discontented members, came to a resolution of excluding all those who had consented to that vote; which they executed in a military way. Ireton told Fairfax the general, a rigid presbyterian, of this resolution; who, thereupon, issued his orders for drawing out the army the next morning, and placing guards in Westminster-hall, the court of requests, and the lobby; who, in obedience to the general, in conjunction with those members who opposed the vote, would let no member enter the house, except those of their own party. Upon which, the question for bringing the king to justice was immediately put, and carried without opposition that I can find. Then an order was made for his trial; the time and place appointed; the judges named, of whom Fairfax himself was one; although, by the advice or threats of his wife, he declined sitting among them. However, by fresh orders under his own hand, which I have seen in print, he appointed guards

to attend the judges at the trial, and to keep the city in quiet; as he did likewise to prevent any opposition from the people, upon the day of exe

cution.

From what I have already deduced, it appears manifest that the differences between these two sects, Presbyterian and Independent, did not then amount to half so much as what there is between a whig and tory at present among us. The design of utterly extirpating monarchy and episcopacy, was equally the same in both; evidently the consequence of the very same principles, upon which the presbyterians alone began, continued, and would have ended in the same events; if, toward the conclusion, they had not been bearded by that new party with whom they could not agree about dividing the spoil. However, they held a good share of civil and military employments during the whole time of the usurpation; and their names, actions, and preferments, are frequent in the accounts of those times. For I make no doubt, that all the prudent Presbyterians complied in proper seasons, falling in with the stream; and thereby got that share in employments, which many of them held to the restoration; and perhaps too many of them after. In the same manner, we find our wisest tories in both kingdoms, upon the change of hands and measures at the queen's death, have endeavoured for several years, by due compliances, to recover the time they had lost by a temporary obstinacy; wherein they have well succeeded, according to their degrees of merit; of whose names I could here make honourable mention, if I did not fear it might offend their modesty. As to what is alleged, that some of the Presbyterians declared openly against the king's murder, I allow it to be

true. But from what motives? No other can possibly be assigned, than perfect spite, rage, and envy, to find themselves wormed out of all power by a new infant spawn of independents, sprung from their own bowels. It is true, the differences in religious tenets between them are very few and trifling; the chief quarrel, as far as I remember, relating to congregational and national assemblies. But whatever interest or power thinks fit to interfere, it little imports what principles the opposite parties think fit to charge upon each other: for we see at this day, that the tories are more hated by the whole set of zealous whigs than the very papists themselves; and in effect as much unqualified for the smallest office: although both these parties assert themselves to be of the same religion, in all its branches of doctrine and discipline; and profess the same loyalty, to the same Protestant king and his heirs.

If the reader would know what became of this independent party, upon whom all the mischief is charged by their Presbyterian brethren, he may please to observe, that during the whole usurpation, they contended by degrees with their parent sect, and as I have already said, shared in employments, and gradually, after the restoration, mingled with the mass of Presbyterians; lying ever since undistinguished in the herd of dissenters.

The Presbyterian merit is of as little weight, when they allege themselves instrumental toward the king's restoration. The kingdom grew tired with those ridiculous models of government: first, by a house of lords and commons without a king; then, without bishops; afterward by a rump* and

This name was given to that part of the house of commons