FirIt, What moji o[ them had takm the Oaths t,? the ufurtxTr__ . Secondly, wh?t it ?ould c? the nation ? great ?'hir?y, ?at t? Kin ann his imds ?re u- t,8,1 to ? g ? cliff=eric reli 'on rom ?hat ?a? e. All wNch ?ivolous gc?s he fully anf?ered in a �e? words. Yo the firfl, viz. That moil of the Kins's friend, 13ad taken the oaths to the ujitrper : He anfwered, I .?thrant it i but betaup th? had done a wicked unjuit ing, muff tbe?/ther?fbre continue in it ? Wretched bldeed muff tbei} eafe be, ?vben their al?ology becomes their aggravation t Here was an abfolufion from oaths, flap. dafl? at once, for the young ?hdents to carry home they hare next an occalion for perjury. ?gaintl As to the fecond of theta, viz. That it ?vould the nationa great deal of bloodfl?ed to refl?ethe King: this objeaion, fiid he, is of jufi as much weight, if a ?er?n who bad broke a Limb jhou!d cbufe to be to)me pain tn the ]}tting of it.. To the third, That the 1ling and his jrriends evere $[?ted to be of a different religion from what voas ?en" erally Fofqfi'd here, he anfwered roundly thus: $upt?fimg it to bejb,yet is there no more weight in it than in an ? the reft; or it could not be denied ,y,f . that he had a jttfi hercalgary right to_ be our King: No?v jullice is of a divine eternal. nature, and cannot with he difper?d ?u?_a any account ? to do injuttice un- der preterze of religion, b to obey God's laws ? ?ng .?3od's lawS: We muff not, ?fiid he. do injultice to PrelD"oe the &fi church, or the ?}efi religion in the tn .?-ufii?e, ?d de? u?n it ?us:
�
