A26982:151
Richard Baxter's penitent confession and his necessary vindication in answer to a book called…
Richard Baxter's penitent confession and his necessary vindication in answer to a book called The second part of the mischiefs of separation, written by an unnamed author with a preface to Mr. Cantianus D. Minimis, in answer to his letter which extorted this publication.
London: printed for Tho. Parkhurst, 1691
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
20. I did and do believe that yet they did but their Duty, in seeking to redress the dangerous Abuses of Ministerial Governors, and bringing the Instruments by Legal trial to Punishment: For what purpose else are they a Judicature? Subjects are all under the Law. And the common Judges are Sworn to do Justice, though the King's Seal should be sent to Prohibit them.
20. I did and do believe that yet they did but their Duty, in seeking to redress the dangerous Abuses of Ministerial Governours, and bringing the Instruments by Legal tryal to Punishment: For what purpose else are they a Judicature? Subjects are all under the Law. And the common Judges are Sworn to do Justice, though the King's Seal should be sent to Prohibit them.
21. I did believe that the King did ill to forsake them, and on pretence of the Tumults to gather an Army in Yorkshire, Nottingham and Shrewsbury, and that whose Commissions soever were first dated, his Armed Collection of Men was first raised: But yet that the beginning was by such degrees of mutual Provocation, that to this day it is hard to say, who began.
22. I had read the King's Letter in Spain to the Pope, promising to venture Crown and Life for the Union of the Christian Churches, including the Roman: which is recorded in Mr. Chesne the King of France his Geographer, and in Prin and Rushworth. And whether it be true or not that the Scots say in a Book called Truths Manifest, that K. Charles ⟨p. 18⟩then in Scotland had possession of their Broad Seal, and put that Seal to a Commission for the Irish Insurrection, I am past doubt that K. Ch. II. granted a Commission to Monk, Manchester and others, to try the Marquis of Antrim's Plea, by which it was proved and determined that he had the K. Ch. I's Commission. Though I believe that the King that caused them to rise, allowed them not to Murder all the Protestants: Put whom else were they to rise against but the Protestants? And must they rise against them and not kill them? And was not the Murderous temper and use of the Irish well known?