IT is well known, That the rebellion against King _Charles_ the first was begun, when all grievances (which in his reign were far from amounting to a total subversion of the constitution) had been fully redressed and repaired. And it was the declared resolution of those who engaged in it, not to defend, but to change the laws and settled form of government, and to encroach upon the just rights of their soveraign; who laboured indefatigably to maintain the established laws and government; who by the laws, to which he had without compulsion consented, had given sufficient proof, that he was as willing to secure his peoples rights as his own; and who was so far from affecting power, that did not belong to him, that his greatest weakness was, that he did not hold fast the rains of government in his hands, but parted with his authority too easily, and made too large concessions to those who were not disposed to make him suitable returns. When the rebels had got the mastery, they then actually compleated a far greater change, than they had at first professed to desire. A high court of justice was erected for the judging and condemning the King himself as a criminal; the whole royal family were excluded from succeeding to the crown; and kingly government itself was declared against and abolished, and several illegal forms of government were one after another set up in the room of it. BUT in the reign of the late King _James_, no redress of grievances, no opportunity of redressing them in a parliamentary way, could be obtained. Instead of being removed they were justified by pretending, that the King had a power to dispense with the laws at pleasure. And it was very visible that the King and his ministers governed by this pernicious and tyrannical maxim. Now this was plainly a subversion of the constitution, by changing the government from limited to absolute, from legal to arbitrary. When the power of the people prevailed, they made it very evident, that the motive to the measures they had then taken was necessity, and not the being given to change. No remedy was so much as sought for against the person of the King. No prejudice was manifested against the illustrious family, which had long swayed the scepter of these kingdoms: but all possible regard was shewn to it. The King himself had render'd the setting of the crown upon a person who now pretends to it impracticable; tho' the nation had been ever so well satisfied concerning his birth. But it was immediately settled upon the King's undoubted issue then in the kingdom, and upon a grandson of the Royal Martyr; and afterwards, in default of the issue from them, upon the next branch of the royal family professing the Protestant Religion; with whom alone our constitution could with any prospect of security be entrusted. Nor was there any invasion of the royal prerogative; but the same government in church and state was chearfully submitted to by the people; as on