12. As I said, before wary prudence, in waving such an impertinent and ticklish question, cannot be condemned; since whatever he may be in conscience, no man in law can be obliged, so far to surrender the common privilege of all mankind, to give an account of all his inward thoughts, which are always said to be free. And as in nothing they are more various, so in nothing they can be more violented, than to have our opinion and sentiments of the current government extorted from us, a declining of which declaration of thoughts, where no ouvert act in project or practice can be proven against it, cannot be treason in any law in the world: so a cautelous answer, in such a ticklish, and intrapping imposition, cannot be censured in point of lawfulness or expediency, even though much be conceded, to stop the mouths of these bloody butchers, gaping greedily after the blood of the answerer; if he do not really own, but give them to understand, he cannot approve of this tyranny. But as these poor faithful witnesses, who were helped to be most free, have always been honoured with the most signal countenance of the Lord in a happy issue of their testimony: so those that used their prudentials most, in seeking shifts to shun severity, and studying to satisfy these inquisitors with their stretched concessions, were ordinarily more exposed to snares, and found less satisfaction in their sufferings even though they could say much to justify, or at least extenuate their shiftings. I knew one, who had proof of this, who afterwards was ashamed of this kind of prudence. A short account of whose managing of answers to this question, because it may conduce somewhat to the explication of it, may here be hinted. The question moved after the usual form, was, do ye own the authority of king James VII. In answer to which, he pleaded first, for the immunity of his thoughts, which he said were not subject to theirs or any tribunal. When this could not be an evasion from their extortions, he objected the ambiguity of the terms in which the question was conceived, being capable of divers senses: and enquired, what they meant by authority? What, by owning authority? By authority, whether did they mean the administration of it as now improved? If so, then he was not satisfied with it: or the right, as now established? If so, then he was not clear to give his opinion of it, as being neither significant nor necessary; and that it was fitter for lawyers and those that were better acquaint with the secrets of government, than for him to dispute it.