but such as will naturally arise from the plain and certain evidence of facts, alleged and vouched by the former, but never disproved, nor so much as contradicted, by the latter.

"No man," says Mr. Lesley,' "was, or could be, an higherassertor of passive obedience, than Dr. King had been all his life-time. Even at the beginning of the revolution, he told a person of honor, from whose mouth I had it, "that if the prince of Orange came over for the crown, he prayed God might blast his designs." In a letter to a person of undoubted credit, in the year 1686, he said, "the principle of non-resist ance, was a steady principle of loyalty; that it was intolerable for the members of any state, to flee to foreign succors, on pretence that their own governors had made laws against reason, conscience and justice; yet this is one of the principal arguments, in the book above-mentioned, for justifying the revo lution." "What I have above-written," adds Lesley, "I have from the person to whom he wrote it, and if he desires it, his letter shall be produced," But it does not appear that he ever did desire it.

By such feigned assurances of loyalty, which he had often given to king James, after his arrival in Ireland, "that king had once so good an opinion of him, that he had him fre quently in private, and trusted him in his affairs; until at last, he found he was holding correspondence with his enemies in England, and in the north of Ireland, and he, thereupon, imprisoned him. But his old friend, chief justice Herbert, was so far mistaken in him, that he vouched fot him at the counciltable, with so much zeal as to say, that he was a loyal man (to king James) as any that sat at the board; which did retrieve the doctor from some inconveniencies, and continued him for some time longer in king James's good opinion."

fusing to swear allegiance to king William), and therefore I distinguish between the principles and the person. However, it is some mortification to me, when I see an avowed non-juror contribute more to the confounding of popery, than could ever be done by an hundred thousand such introductions."-Swift's Works, Dubl. edit. vol. vi. p. 118-19.

CHAP. II.

The same subject continued in general.

SUCH is Lesley's uncontroverted account of Dr. King, as a subject and a man. His judgment of him, as author of the book in question, is partly as follows.

"I can't say," proceeds he, "that I have examined into every single matter of fact, which this author relates; I could not have the opportunity; but I am sure I have looked into. the most material, and by these you will easily judge of his sincerity in the rest. But this I can say, that there is not one I have enquired into, but I have found it false in the whole, or in part; aggravated or misrepresented, so as to alter the whole face of the story, and give it perfectly another air and turn; insomuch, that though many things he says are true, yet he has hardly spoken a true word, that is, told it truly and nakedly, without a warp." Mr. Lesley adds this particular caution, for those who peruse that book," that where Dr. King seems most exact, and sets his quotations in the mar gin, that the reader might suspect nothing, there he is to suspect most, and stand upon his guard.”

These are heavy accusations, of which, and several others, Mr. Lesley has exhibited many convincing proofs; and more shall be added in the sequel, from undeniable authority. His grace's continued silence under them for more than thirty years. that he survived the publication of this answer, is the more wonderful, on account of his solemn attestation of the sacred name of God, in the conclusion of his book, "that he had not misrepresented or aggravated any thing therein, in prejudice to any body, or out of favor or affection to a party; or insisted on such particulars as might seem to serve no other purpose, but to make his adversaries odious."

Wrote and published his Answer in England in 1692.

It was, probably, from a conviction that this charge against himself was just, that his grace in the year 1709, wrote to Dr. Swift on a similar occasion, with respect to a pamphlet he had then published against the dişsenters, in the following words: "I wish some facts had been well considered, before vouched; if any one matter in it prove false, what do you think will come of the paper? In short, it will not be in the power of man to hinder it from a warm entertainment."-Swift's Lct.

CHAP. III.

Particular facts, related in archbishop King's book proved false, concerning popish judges and juries.

BUT to come now to the test of this solemn attestation; I mean his relation of particular facts. Dr. King tells us,r that no sooner had the papists of Ireland got judges and juries, that would believe them, but they began a trade of swearing and ripping up, what they pretended their protestant neighbors had said of king James, whilst duke of York, in the time of the popish plot; and that of these protestants, many were found guilty, and excessively fined; and some of them imprisoned for their fines, not being able to satisfy the king, who seized both their body and estates."

The doctor likewise informs us, "that these popish judges and juries connived at a wicked contrivance, which was discovered to the very bottom, in the county of Meath, to carry on this trade of swearing against all the protestant gentlemen in the country."

But unfortunately for Dr. King's credit, as an historian, that eminent and zealous protestant nobleman, Henry, earl of Clarendon, lord lieutenant of Ireland in 1685, has left us a very different account of the behavior of these popish judges 2 Ib. p. 76.

1 State of the Protesianis, &c. p. 75,

"All the Irish protestants," says Mr. Lesley, "speak exceeding good things of lord Clarendon. They never parted with any chief governor with so much regret; and, as I have been told, none courted him mote than Dr. King, who was admitted one of his chaplains.”—Answ. p. 132.

His lordship himself suspected that he was recalled from the govern ment of Ireland, on account of his religion. "If," says he, “my being a protestant be the cause of my ill usage, I am so far from being troubled, that I look upon it as a great honor to be found worthy to suffer for my religion."-State Let. vol. ii. p. 158.

Harris informs us, "that he was so much depended upon by the protes tants of Ireland, that after the prince of Orange's arrival in England, they made all their applications to him, through his lordship.”—Life of king William, f. 187.

That the Roman catholics of Ireland did not think him partial in their favor, appears from one of his excellency's letters from Waterford, September 12th, 1686, wherein he says, "lord Tyrone came to see him there, and had continued with him all the time of his being there; but that not one of the other Roman catholic gentlemen had been with him. And that

and juries, on that occasion. He tells us, "that when these popish judges went to the assizes in the county of Down and Londonderry, where many considerable persons were to be tried for words formerly spoken against king James,3 they took as much pains as it was possible, to quiet the minds of the people, wherever they went; and that they took care to have all the juries mingled half English half Irish." And particularly with respect to the county of Meath, where Dr. King tells us they principally connived at this wicked trade of swearing, his lordship adds, "that judge Daly* (one of these popish judges) did, at the assizes of that county, enlarge much on the unconscionableness of indicting men upon words spoken so many years before; that he told the jury, that most of those then charged before him in court, could give a good account of themselves, and were well known in the countries were they had lived, and that thereupon the juries, the major part of whom were Irish, acquitted them; that Mr. justice Nugent (another popish judge) "made the same declaration at Drogheda, where several persons were tried for words, upon bills found at the former assizes; and that they were all acquitted, except one man, who was found guilty and fined five pounds."

But who would suspect this impartial writer to have known, while he was committing these falsehoods to the press, that lord Clarendon had, by king James's express command, published a proclamation, so early as July 1686, (the popish judges were made only in April preceding,) "forbidding all prosecution of that kind; and ordering, that no person should

one of the Roman catholic inhabitants of that city (though there were there some pretty considerable merchants) had taken notice of him." State Let. vol. i. p. 402.

* Lord Clarendon, in a letter to lord Sunderland, has the following passage: "It is thought fit I should recommend men to some towns (where it is doubted the election may not be good) for mayors, and sheriffs, and Common-council-men: in such cases I advise with those who are best acquainted in these towns; particularly with justice Daly, and others of the king's council of that persuasion; and the lists of names those men give me, are always equal, half English half Irish; which, they say, is the best way to unite, and make them live friendly together."—State_Lett, vul, i P. 819.

be accountable for any words spoken against his majesty, at any time before his accession;" which proclamation his excellency immediately sent off to the judges, then on their circuits. Yet these known facts, Dr. King has disingenuously suppressed; for no body, I think, will have the hardiness to pretead, that he, who was one of his lordship's chaplains, and busy enquirer into all the transactions of that time, could possibly be ignorant of a matter so notorious as this proclamation must have then been in every part of Ireland.

CHAP. IV.

The execution of captain Ashton.

THE hanging of one captain Ashton for murder, is another of Dr. King's instances of the cruelty and injustice of these popish judges and juries. "The papists," says he, "might kill whom they pleased, without fear of the law, because they had popish judges and juries on their side; but if any killed or hurt them, they were sure to suffer." And then he complains, that Ashton was hanged for killing a pa pist; who, he says, "abused his wife in the street." What the nature of the abuse was, or whether it was by words or ac

State of the Protest. p.47.

There is a passage in lord Clarendon's letters, which demonstrates a very different disposition in these popish judges towards protestants, from what Dr. King has imputed to them. "Upon a full hearing," says his lordship," at the council-board, there was a complaint of the commissioners of the revenue proved against a justice of peace, who had discountenanced a collector of the excise in the execution of his office. When the board came to deliberate what to do, this," adds his lordship, "is remarkable, that several of our new Roman catholic counsellors, though the jus tice was an Englishman, and a protestant, were for putting off the business, and particularly the three new (popish) judges said the gentleman would be more careful for the future." State Lett. vol. i. p. 292.-His excellency also takes notice of the singular modesty of these popish judges, when they were made privy counsellors; and says, "they were almost out of countenance on that occasion; that they thought it would bring envy upon them, when it was not needful; they being, every way, as well qualified to do the king all possible service, without the burden of that honor."-16, 231.