Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	call_v	king_n	richard_n	2,785	5	8.6376	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A34208	Concubinage and poligamy disprov'd, or, The divine institution of marriage betwixt one man, and one woman only, asserted in answer to a book, writ by John Butler, B.D. for which he was presented as follows : We the grand jury, sworn to enquire for the body of the city of London, on Wednesday, the first day of December, 1697, present one John Butler, for writing and publishing a wicked pamphlet : wherein he maintains concubinage to be lawful, and which may prove very destructive to divers families, if not timely suppress'd.		1698 (1698)	Wing C5714; ESTC R1558	49,472	113

that numerous Family afterward And because our Author reckons this one of the happiest Instances that can be to advance Concubinage I shall trespass upon the Reader 's Patience a little to demonstrate the contrary In the first place our Author asserts falsly that this Concubinage was advised by the Parliament whereas it is plain that if she was his Concubine at all it was when a private Man For Buchanan says he married her after Queen Eupham's Death so that then she was no Concubine In the next place he falsly belies the Family of the Stuarts in saying that this Concubinage gave Birth to them for both Cambden and Buchanan derive their Original from Bancho Thane of Loqhuaber of the Blood-Royal of Scotland who being murder'd by Mackbeth the Tyrant about the Year of our Lord 1050. his Son Fleanchus fled into North-Wales where he married the Daughter of Griffith Lewellin Prince of the Country and by her had a Son call'd Walter who being a Valiant Man and Favourite to King Malcolm III. that kill'd Mackbeth he was for defeating the Galloway Rebels and killing their General created Lord Steward of Scotland whence the Family took Sirname and Robert whom we now treat of being Son to another Walter Stuart by King Robert Bruce's Daughter was the first of 'em who enjoy'd the Crown So that Mr. Butler wrongs the Royal Family both as to the Honour of their Original which was Lawful and not Spurious and also as to their Antiquity by 320 Years for so long had they been call'd by the Name of Stuart before they came to the Crown But then as to the Effects of this Concubinage they were the most direful that almost any History gives an Account of For John the Eldest Son by Elizabeth Moor who when he came to the Crown was call'd Robert the III. because of the Hatred the Scots had to the Name of John on the Account of John Baliol who betray'd their Liberty to our Edward I. and the ill Fate of King John of France and King John of England This Robert I say had nothing of the Spirit of Government so that he was tyranniz'd over by his Brother Robert the second Son of Elizabeth Moor who starved his eldest ●on Prince David to Death in the Castle of Falkland and forc'd the younger call'd James afterwards James the I. of Scotland to flee the Kingdom and he was taken by the English as bound to France Alexander the youngest of Elizabeth Moor's Sons was a bloody cruel Man and besides other Inhumane Acts burnt the famous Cathedral of Elgin the finest in all Scotland because he could not find the Bishop of Murray whom he design'd to have murder'd And his Son Alexander was as barbarous as the Father and Plunder'd and Murder'd his Neighbours The Misfortune of Prince James afflicted his Father King Robert so sensibly that he refused to be comforted and starv'd himself to Death After which his Brother the Inhumane Robert Reign'd under the Title of Governour and not only kept his Nephew James from the Crown during his Life but left the Government to his own Son Murdo who also kept it in his own Hands till being disoblig'd by the Rebellious Temper of his own Sons he summoned a Parliament and by their Advice call'd home King James I. from England who after his Return made a terrible Havock among the other Princes of the Blood cut off Murdo Stuart Duke of Albany and his two Sons and banished others of the Name Upon which James Duke Murdo's youngest Son surpriz'd and kill'd the King's Uncle and fled into Ireland The Historian observes that all this Disorder and Discord in the Royal Family was fomented by Walter Earl of Athol eldest Son to King Robert Stuart by Queen Euphaim his Lawful Wife his Design being to have all the Posterity of Elizabeth Moor the Concubine extinguish'd that so the Crown might devolve upon himself which he thought might be easily effected if he could but have got King James the I. taken off which he likewise compassed having procured him to be murther'd in his Bed Chamber as he lodg'd in the Dominicans Cloyster near Perth on a Journey Upon which the Nobility assembling from all parts of the Kingdom they pursued the Murderers with so much Vigor that all the Conspirators were put to Death in 40 Days And Walter Earl of Athol who was the Author of the Conspiracy and Robert Graham who actually murder'd the King were put to death in such a cruel manner that the Reader will not think his time lost to peruse the Account of it as follows Walter 's Execution took up three Days on the first he was put into a Cart to which there was an Engine fastned that hoisted him up by Ropes and Pullies and let him down again to the Ground which rack'd and loosened all his Joints and put him to incredible Pain then he was set on a Pillory with a Red-hot Iron Crown on his Head and this Motto The King of all Traytors which was reckon'd the Accomplishment of what had been foretold him by Witches whom he had Consulted to know whether he should come to the Crown or not viz. That he should be crown'd in a great Concourse of People The second Day he was bound upon a Hurdle and dragg'd at a Horses Tail through Edinburgh On the third he was bound to a Plank ript up alive and had his Bowels first and afterwards his Heart thrown into the Fire his Head was fixed on a Pole and his Quarters distributed into the chief Towns of the Kingdom Robert Graham his Kinsman was carried through the City in a Cart with his Hand nail'd to a Gallows the Executioner in the mean time running burning Irons into all the fleshy Parts of his Body and then he was quarter'd as the former says Buchanan All this was the effect of that Concubinage which Mr. Butler tells us was so happy so that instead of Concubinages preventing the Ruine of Royal Families I have his own Instance upon him to prove that it well nigh endanger'd the Ruin of our own Royal Family which is the most antient in the Western World or perhaps for what 's known in the whole Universe And so far is our Author's Assertion from being true that all Histories Sacred and Prophane abound with Instances of Families and Nations being ruin'd by Concubinage and other sorts of Whoredom For the Proof of which I must again refer the Reader to that Book call'd God's Judgments upon Whoring where the Instances are none of 'em taken from Romances as those in the Book call'd God's Revenge against Adultery and Murder but from approved Histories and may be of very good use to be read by the Youth of this Debauch'd Age. His Proposal of Concubinage as a Remedy against Whoredome and Adultery is wholly ridiculous and contrary to the Experience of all Eyes The Jews were as guilty of those Crimes as any People in the World notwithstanding their Use of Concubines Nay David

be true You must also know that the Imperial Laws condemn Poligamy Lib. 9. Tit. 9. Leg. 18. Eum qui habet duas Uxores comitatur Infamia i. e. He is counted infamous that hath two Wives Dioclesian made a Law likewise against having of two Wives Cod. Lib. 5. Tit. 5. Leg. 2 And the Christian Emperors Theodosius Arcadius and Honorius would not suffer the Jews that lived in the Roman Empire to have many Wives as may be seen by their Laws Cod. de judaei Leg. So unjustly have you appealed to the Practice of the Antient Christians either Magistrates or Ministers as Patrons of Concubinage You know likewise that St. Hierome condemns Lamech as the first Qui unam costam distraxit in duas who made two Ribs of one Nor can it be unknown to you that Clergy-men committing Adultery were for ever removed from their Ministery Distinct 81. C. 11 12. That the Ancyran Synod imposed Seven Years Pennance upon the Adulterer and that the Council of Neocaesarea Decreed that if a Minister's Wife fell into Adultery he should dismiss her or else leave his Ministry and by the Eliberine Council he was denied for ever the Communion of the Church if he did not dismiss her and that it was likewise Decreed that the Adulterer should not be suffer'd to Marry with the Adultress yet you own that you had just Cause to suspect your Wife and can prove several suspicious Tokens of h●r Vnfaithfulness p. 18. and yet never offer'd to put her away And she accuses you of committing Adultery with her Maid before she left you and yet you took your Maid into her Bed without any Application either to Church or State notwithstanding the depending Controversies betwixt you and your Wife These are suspicious Tokens of an Inordinate Love for which had you but made use of the first and second Remedies prescribed by the Heathens viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Abstinence and Time you had been in no danger of the third Remedy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Halter though it had been better you should have had a Mill-stone hang'd about your Neck and been thrown into the middle of the Sea than to have given such Offence as you have done to the Church of God Nor can you be ignorant neither that many satisfying Answers have been given to your Arguments from the Polygamy of the Patriarchs and Jews As 1. That if there had been any Relaxation of the Law of Monogamy instituted by God in Paradice it would have been by a written Law and Express Scripture 2. That if this had been allowed for Procreation it had been most Necessary to be granted unto Adam in the beginning of the World and to Noah in reviving and re-peopling the World And 3. That Polygamy or marrying of many Wives rendered Solomon unfit for Procreation as is evident by his small Posterity And 4. That the Law of Monogamy being revived by Christ and his Apostles and brought back to the first Institution was to take place not for the Time past but for the Time to come as all other positive Laws of Natione do So that though Polygamy might be then tolerated as an Infirmily for a time in those which were newly converted yet it cannot be so now I shall add that if the first institution of Marriage between one Man an● one Woman at a time be once broken there 's no other Limitation to be found in the Scriptures whence it follows that if more be allowed then one a Man may have as many as he pleases So that it will be hard to bring it to a Medium Some perhaps will plead for King Charles II's Number as a Standard and others it may be will be satisfied with no fewer than Solomon and so our Nobility and Gentry if your Project take place should have Kennels of Concubines as now they have of Hounds And what Inconveniences this might occasion you may know by your own Incontinence those Poor Women must loose their Youth and Teeming time without any hopes of having Nature satisfied For being another Mans Property no body else must meddle with them and so they must either burn and languish or commit Whoredom nay perhaps bestiality Their own Stallion for Husband he is not must speedily be either enfeebled or neglect some or all of them as we find in Ahasuerus who did not call for his Beautiful and Beloved Esther in Thirty Days together And the rest of his Concubines were never brought to him except he delighted in any of them and call'd her by Name yet they were shut up and kept close by the Keeper of the Women So that here was a Great Number of Females rendred useless for Propagation besides the Tentations they were exposed to of being base with Eunuchs and their own nearest Relations Now Sir pray consider whether these and the other Reasons that you will meet with in this Book be not much more solid against Concubinage than any that you have advanc'd for it And if your Conscience be convinced be not ashamed to Retract what you have so unadvisedly writ upon this Head St. Augustine who was much a Learneder Divine and better Man than you can pretend to be did not think it unbecoming him to Recant his Errors and to take shame to himself for his Youthful Lusts but Yours can scarcely pass under that denomination who went into your Maids Bed after having Lived Forty Years with a Wife Your Loose Book hath done a World of Mischief in the Nation and therefore it concerns you as you would have the pardon of God and his Church for the same to make your Confession and Recantation as publick as your Crime Which that you may do is the worst that the Author of this Book wishes you Concubinage Disproved c. HAD a Pamphlet of this Nature been writ by an avowed Debauchee or a Play-house Beau it had been no matter of Surprize But to have any thing Printed in Defence of Concubinage by a Batchelor of Divinity and a Minister of the Church of England may Justly astonish us Such a thing might be accounted Natural in a Priest of the Church of Rome the Mother of Harlots and of the Abominations of the Earth but for a Minister of the Reformed Church to do so gross a thing is altogether unsufferable Time was when the Reverend Mr. Johnson was degraded by those that called themselves the Church of England because he maintained the Doctrine of Self-defence against Tyrants or others which is the Instinct of pure Nature There 's much more reason for the Governours of the Church to shew themselves as zealous now in censuring Mr. Butler for writing in defence of Concubinage which is one of the Effects of depraved Nature And this I think they are the more concern'd to do because in his Title-Page he endeavours to make way for his Doctrine by the Authority of his Character It is certain this Author can find nothing either in

lest when he preach'd to others he himself should be a Cast-away but it seems Mr. Butler chose rather to make provision for the Flesh to fullsil the Lusts thereof If he could not have his Wife he would have his Maid and is not satisfied to break the Commandments himself but teaches others also to do so and therefore deserves to be called the Least in the Kingdom of Heaven according to our Saviour's threatning Matth. 5. 19. and I doubt not but he knows what is meant thereby viz. That he shall be accounted unworthy to be reckoned among the Saints here or hereafter if he don't break off from his sins by Repentance Our Saviour Matth. 5. 28. tells us That they who Look on a Woman so as to Lust after her are guilty of Adultery And the Apostle Peter tells us of those that have Eyes full of Adultery 2 Pet. 2. 14. Which demonstrate clearly enough that Incontinency the Fountain whence Lustful Looks proceed is sinful in it self Indeed the Natural Appetite of Generation and multiplying our Species according to the Command of God is not sinful in it self so long as it is contain'd within due bounds but when once it breaks over that then it becomes Incontinence and by consequence sinful The Original Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated Incontinent denotes such qui nec in bono nec in malo sibi constant they can keep no bounds but will either be over-much Righteous or over-much Wicked So that it 's plain Incontinence which Mr. Butler will have to be no sin implies the Height of Passion But it seems he thought himself concern'd in point of Reputation to maintain that Incontinence was no sin because he owns himself to be guilty of it page 9. Yet if he had but adverted to the saying of the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 9. which he quotes in the same place viz They who cannot contain let them marry for it is better to marry than to burn he might easily have perceiv'd that Incontinence and burning are Synonymous Terms for there burning is oppos'd to Continency the Holy Ghost telling us plainly that they who cannot contain must burn if they do not marry and therefore provides Marriage as a proper Remedy against Incontinency which if it were not a Distemper why should there be any Remedy provided against it Here also I think fit to take notice of our Author 's distorted Notion of Fornication whereof he says page 8. A man may be guilty by Excess of Carnal Vsage with his own Wife That this Notion of Fornication is very gross and absurd will appear from this one thing that if a Man may be guilty of Fornication with his own Wife then he may divorce her when he pleases for his own Crime for our Saviour allows a man to put away his Wife in case of Fornication without any Exception whether it be with her Husband or any other man Matth. 5. 32. So that instead of a man's being guilty of Fornication with his own Wife our Author should have said of Excess in the use of the Marriage-bed for tho Fornication is sometimes us'd in Scripture to denote Uncleanness in general yet according to the common acceptation of the word it denotes Uncleanness betwixt persons that are not married to one another as was usually practised in those Fornices or Vaults under ground at Rome and else where whence the word Fornication was deriv'd Of those Vaults Socrates Lib. 5. cap. 18. gives us a particular account viz. That they were Victualling-houses under ground wherein the Romans prostituted Whores until the Emperor Theodosius order'd them to be pulled down I come next to Mr. Butler's Case as represented by himself page 9 c. Viz. That his Wife denied him the use of her Marriage bed obstinately tho she was often intreated to the contrary for above a Twelvemonth and therefore he went in to his Maid The Necessity he pretends he lay under was this In the first place he had not the Gift of Continency then it was not convenient for him to marry another without a Lawful License from a Lawful Authority because of a Statute-Law in force That in the time of this desertion Popery had the Supream Seat That there were high Commissioners superceeding all other Courts in Power and Acting in favour of Persons Popishly inclin'd and that his Wife having deserted him because of his disinheriting his Eldest Son for turning Papist No sentence could be expected from them according to the Justice of Holy writ because Papists hold Marriage indissolvable as being one of their seven Sacraments without a dispensation from the Pope Thus Mr. Butler States his own Case In the next place I shall give you hi● Wifes State of the Case as represented in her Libel before the Honourable Court of Arches and quoted by himself p. 6. Viz. That about Ten Years since John Butler being unmindful of his Conjugal Vow committed the foul Crime of Adultery with his Servant Maid Mary Tomkins and it being taken Notice of that she was with Child by him he and she went into Holland where they liv'd Incontinently for about two Years and there she brought forth a Bastard call'd Mary to the said John Butler and p. 35. That they return'd to England and Live together in an Incontinent manner at Hammersmith and the said Mary hath had four other base born Children begotten by the said John Butler who hath Lately turn'd his Wife Mary Butler out of Doors and left her destitute of necessaries c. Now any Man may see that there is a vast difference in the Cases as they are Stated by Mr. Butler and his Wife It is also proper to observe here that his Incontinence with Mary Tomkins is not the only Uncleanness which our Author stands charg'd with for page 8. he owns That his said Wife and his two ungracious Sons have fill'd the Countrey with many slanders and suspicious Reports of matters said or done by him above Twenty or Thirty Years since and Answers thus Concerning what kindnesses this Respondent might have shewed to particular Persons more then Ordinary he doth solemnly protest that he never had Carnal Knowledge of any such Woman for whose sake he was aspers'd Having thus laid down their mutual Accusations against one another I shall first make some Remarks upon 'em and then proceed to consider Mr. Butlers defence It 's plain that Mr. Butler owns himself to be Incontinent and I think it will appear that he was so to a scandalous excess from the Matter of Fact as laid down by himself For 1. He says that he was deserted by a Wife whom p. 3. he owns That he did heartily Love which one would think should have been sufficient of it self to have restrain'd his Concupiscence for above one year at least seeing most modest Men do in ordinary Cases think themselves obliged in Decency to stay so long unmarried after the Death of a Wife whom they Loved Much more should an honest Man

Concubinage And that does not at all import any thing of God's allowing of Concubinage more than he does of Adultery and Incest which he hath expresly forbid as I have shew'd already But besides I shall turn his Instance against himself thus That had not Solomon exhausted his Strength by Concubinage he might have left Lawful Issue enough behind him and therefore it was his Concubinage that endanger'd the failure of the Royal Line And thus Saul had four Sons by Ahinoam one Wife when Solomon of a Thousand Wives and Concubines had but one Son His Instance of Alexander King of Scotland is false for he left a Grandchild behind him who was Heiress to his Crown but she dying before Marriage the Competition betwixt the next Heirs happen'd who would never have yielded to the Son of a Concubine And the Parliament of Scotland afterwards found out a better and more honourable Expedient than Mr Butler's viz. that any future Controversie about the Succession should be determin'd by themselves as may be seen in Buchanan's History and it is not very long since the Parliaments of both Nations had a blessed Opportunity of settling a disputed Succession without Mr. Butler's Expedient Then as to his Instance of Richard the II. any Body that has read that History knows that the War began in his own time not because he wanted Issue but because he unjustly seiz'd the Duke of Lancaster's Estate and design'd to banish his Son for ever who landed in England when Richard was in Ireland and left the Duke of York his Uncle to govern in his Absence But the Nation was so much displeas'd with Richard that the Duke of York was not able to resist the Duke of Lancaster so that the Nation in Parliament charg'd Richard with the Breach of his Coronation Oath in 32 Articles oblig'd him to resign the Crown to the Duke of Lancaster who came to the Possession of the Throne that way before Richard was murder'd So that it was not his want of Issue which began that War nor the want of Lineal Heirs the Posterity of Lionel Duke of Clarence having a Right precedent to that of the Duke of Lancaster But the Parliament laid their Claim aside as in all probability they would have done that of his Son 's if he had left any considering the prevailing Interest and Victorious Arms of the Duke of Lancaster but Mr. Butler is much such another Historian as he is a Divine And now let him see to it whether he hath sufficiently vindicated his Bedding with Mary Tomkins or Concubinage in general by those or any other Instances But because Mr. Butler shall have all the fair Dealing imaginable I shall take Notice of a Text quoted by those of his Opinion to prove their Point which it's like he has forgot viz. Deut. 21. 15. If a Man have two Wives one beloved and another hated and they have born him Children both the beloved and the hated and if the first-born Son be hers that was hated He may not make the Son of the beloved first-born before the Son of the hated which is indeed first born This I quote now lest it should be applied by him or others afterwards against what I have already said and the Answer is as follows 1. Moses here acts the part of a Political Law-giver but not of a Spiritual Doctor And Poligamy being conniv'd at in the Jews at that time He lays down Rules to prevent Injustice to the Children of the least-beloved Wife 2. It 's plain from hence that Poligamy distracts the Affections of the Husband and naturally occasions Injustice to some of his Offspring which must needs cause Hatred Contention and all manner of Confusion in a Family else Moses would not have here provided against it 3. That the Words the Son of her that was hated would seem to imply that both the Wives were not alive together and then it makes nothing for Poligamy 4. This cannot be supposed to be any thing at most but a meer Permission of the thing because it is contrary to the Law against taking two Wives Levit. 18. 18. which the Karaei or Jews that adhere to the Scriptures understand to be clearly prohibited by that Text. 5. Our Saviour and his Apostles Mat. 19. and 15 and 1 Cor. 6. 16. and 7. 2. which I have taken Notice of already say that Poligamy was forbidden and seeing they say Let every Man have his own Wife and every Woman her own Husband all that Liberty which was granted to or assumed by the Patriarchs is taken away 6. The Chaldee Paraphrast understands that Text Levit. 18. 18. to be against Poligamy and says that was the Reason why Ruth's Kinsman Ruth 4. 6. refused to marry Ruth because he had a Wife before and that to marry another would break the Peace of his Family divide his Estate and occasion Discords amongst the Children of the two Wives 7. It is not like that God would allow two Wives to the Israelites by a Law which some of the better Heathens disapprov'd as may be seen in Phocylides and Euripides and Dioclesian made a Law against it as may be seen Cod. Lib. 5. Tit. 5. Leg. 2. 8. Poligamy or Concubinage is against the Apostle's Prohibition of Married Persons defrauding one another it being impossible for one Man ordinarily to satisfie more than one Woman so that to marry more than one exposes them to the Danger of Satan's Tentation for their Incontinence of which Bilhah and David's Concubines c. are sad Instances 9. The Apostle could not say Let every Woman have her own or proper Husband 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if he allowed Concubinage for then he should be common to two or more 10. That which is made one Flesh with the Body cannot be made a Member of another Body therefore a Man who is one Flesh with his Wife cannot be one Flesh also with another in a Lawful Sense for there can be no Union where there is a Division as in this Case there must be 11. If Concubinage were allow'd Marriage could be no proper Resemblance of the Union betwixt Christ his Church for Christ has but one Church whereas in that Case a Man should have more than one Wife Some again object that seeing the Apostle prescribes that he who was to be chosen Bishop should be the Husband of one Wife 1 Tim. 3. 2. Poligamy was allowed in others To which 't is answer'd that many of the Jews and Gentiles in those times had two Wives And therefore it 's supposed they were tolerated to keep them during Life or at least till they were confirm'd in the Faith but it would have been scandalous to have had such for Ministers or Bishops 2 The Law of Monogamy being reviv'd by Christ and Preach'd up by this same Apostle elsewhere he cannot be imagin'd to allow it here 3. Another Reason of this Injunction is suppos'd to be that it would have been accounted scandalous in Christian Bishops to come short of the Heathen Priests in Continency who were forbid to have two Wives as may be seen in Plutarch and other Authors 4. It cannot be thought that any such thing was allow'd in the ancient Church when to marry twice was by them so much scrupled that some think the Apostle forbids such Persons here to be ●hosen Bishops 5. Beza on the Place tells us that not only Bigamy and Poligamy were forbid by the Ancient Canons but likewise the Marriage of such Persons as had rashly divorc'd their Wives And Dr. Hammond on the Place quotes Theophilact and Athenagoras for it That Marriage after Divorce was forbidden to the Antient Christians So falsly has Mr. Butler alledged the Customs of the Primitive Church to defend his Practice I shall conclude with what Willet says on 1 Sam. 25. that if it seems strange that the Patriarchs should so long continue in an Error unreform'd The like Instance is given Nehem. 8. 17. where the People of Israel are said not to have kept the Feast of Tabernacles from Joshua's time till then by the space almost of 1000 Years But tho God winked at those times of Ignorance he now calleth all Men to repent and the worst I wish Mr. Butler is that he would glorifie God by confessing his Sin and taking Shame upon himself and not add Fuel to those Flames of Uncleanness which have well-nigh ruin'd the Nation already and will bring down the Flames of Divine Vengeance upon us if we don't Repent and Reform FINIS ADVERTISEMENTS 1. GOD's Judgments against Whoring Being an Essay to a General History of it from the Creation of the World to the Reign of Augustulus which according to common Computation is 5190 Years and from thence down to the present Year 1697. Being a Collection of the most Remarkable Instances of Uncleanness that are to be found in Sacred or Prophane History during that time with Observations thereon Pr. 3s 6d 2. The Secrer History of White-Hall from the Restoration of King Charles II. down to the Abdication of the late King James Writ at the Request of a Noble Lord and Convey'd to him in Letters by late Secretary Interpreter to the Marquis of Louvois who by that Means had the Perusal of all the Private Minutes between England and France for many Years The whole consisting of Secret Memoirs which have hitherto lain conceal'd as not being discoverable by any other Hand Published from the Original Papers by D. Jones Gent. Price 5s 3. By the same Author A Continuation of the Secret History of White-Hall from the Abdication of the late King James in 1688. to the year 1696. Together with the Tragical History of the Stuarts from the first Rise of that Family in the Year 1068. down to the Death of her Late Majesty Queen Mary of Blessed Memory Price 5s All Sold by R. Baldwin in Warwick-Lane