[In Cotton's personal letter to Lord Say and Sele and Lord Brooke (Hutchinson's _Massachusetts Bay_ (1765), App. III), a fuller statement as to some features of Massachusetts practice and theory is given. The English lords evidently objected to the restriction of citizenship to church members. They wanted less of theocracy and more of aristocracy. Cotton defends the middle course of the colony as follows: ... "Your Lordships advertisement touching the civill state of this colony, as they doe breath forth your singular wisdome, and faithfulness, and tender care of the peace, so wee have noe reason to misinterprite, or undervalue your Lordships eyther directions or intentions therein. I know noe man under heaven (I speake in Gods feare without flattery) whose counsell I should rather depend upon, for the wise administration of a civill state according to God, than upon your Lordship, and such confidence have I (not in you) but in the Lords presence in Christ with you, that I should never feare to betrust a greater commonwealth than this (as much as in us lyeth) under such a _perpetuâ dictaturâ_ as your Lordship should prescribe. For I nothing doubt, but that eyther your Lordship would prescibe all things according to the rule, or be willing to examine againe, and againe, all things according to it. ... It is very suitable to Gods all-sufficient wisdome, and to the fulnes and perfection of Holy Scriptures, not only to prescribe perfect rules for the right ordering of a private mans soule to everlasting blessednes with himselfe, but also for the right ordering of a mans family, yea, of the commonwealth too, so farre as both of them are subordinate to spiritual ends, and yet avoide both the churches usurpation upon civill jurisdictions ... and the commonwealths invasion upon ecclesiasticall administrations ... Gods institutions (such as the government of church and of commonwealth may be) may be close and compact, and coördinate one with another, and yet not confounded. God hath so framed the state of church government and ordinances, that they may be compatible to any common-wealth, though never so much disordered in his frame. But yet when a commonwealth hath liberty to mould his owne frame ... I conceyve the scripture hath given full direction for the right ordering of the same. ... Mr. Hooker doth often quote a saying out of Mr. Cartwright (though I have not read it in him) that noe man fashioneth his house to his hangings, but his hangings to his house. It is better that the commonwealth be fashioned to the setting forth of Gods house, which is his church: than to accommodate the church frame to the civill state. Democracy, I do not conceyve that ever God did ordeyne as a fitt government eyther for church or commonwealth. If the people be governors, who shall