earnest, if we are desired to take up arms in your defence, our answer shall be, Pray, gentlemen, fight your own battles; we will lie by quietly; conquer your enemies by yourselves, if you can; we will not do your drudgery." This way of reasoning I have heard from several of their, chiefs and abettors, in a hundred conversations; and have read it in twenty pamphlets: and I am confident it will be offered again, if the project should fail to take off the test.
Upon which piece of oratory and reasoning I form the following query: Whether, in case of an invasion from the pretender (which is not quite so probable as from the grand signior) the dissenters can with prudence and safety, offer the same plea; except they shall have made a previous stipulation with the invaders? And whether the full freedom of their religion and trade, their lives, properties, wives, and children, are not, and have not always been reckoned, sufficient motives for repelling invasion; especially in our sectaries, who call themselves the truest protestants, by virtue of their pretended or real fierceness against popery?
Whether omitting or neglecting to celebrate the day of the martyrdom of the blessed king Charles the First, enjoined by act of parliament, can be justly reckoned a particular and distinguishing mark of good affection to the present government?
Whether, in those churches where the said day is observed, it will fully answer the intent of the said act, if the preacher shall commend, excuse, palliate, or extenuate the murder of that royal martyr; and place the guilt of that horrid rebellion, with all its consequences, the following usurpations, the entire de-
