Procedure, 21 February 1706, Edinburgh

Procedure: committee formed, 28 December 1706, Edinburgh

Att Edinburgh the Twentie first day of February Jaj vijc and Six years

A1706/2/121

Procedure

Refused petition for Mr John Mathers

Anent the petition given in and presented to the Lords of her Majesties privie Councell by Mr John Mathers Minister of the Gospell Shewing that wher the petitioner haveing been cited to compear befor the saids Lords the fyfteinth of November past, He did in obedience therto attend severall Subsequent Councell dayes without being called, and haveing not only given very early prooffs of his affection and Loyaltie to her Majesties Royall persone and Government by congratulating her happie accession to the Throne; and constantly praying for her ever since, But hes also altho not obleidged by law, taken the oath of alleadgance and subscribed the assureance, as the saids Lords ther records will testifie, He thought himselfe heirby Sufficiently intituled to the saids Lords ther protection in the exercise of his Ministrie; Conforme to her Majesties most gratious Letter, all which being well knowen to the persewers they thought fitt to pass from your petitioner, and delate his name out of the lybell, So that he rested every way secure, And beleived ther was no need of compearance when the lybell was Called Notwithstanding wherof the petitioner was very much Surpryzed to find that the persewers takeing occasion of calling some others, not being legally qualified, have procured the saids Lords ther order for Shutting wp the petitioners meeting house, which Sentence being only Levelled against the Petitioner, And being pronounced parte inaudita, He humbly craves leave to represent, Primo that the petitioner was the only persone who was Setled in that meeting house since Doctor Weddalls removeing, And the other Ministers who preached ther, did it only transiently at the Petitioners Desyde, And wer no otherwayes concerned, nor had they any fixed residence in that place Secundo, The Acts of parliament lybelled wpon doe nowayes meet the petitioners case, For the act 1693. Ordained the oath of alleadgance and assureance to be taken by all in publict trust Ecclesiastick, Civill or military, and is only to be understood of Ministers who possess Churches and benefices, But ex Super abundante the petitioner is legally qualified, as is abovementioned; and it is evident that the act 1695 is only framed against such as Should intrude themselves into Churches and benefices without a Call prescrybed by law, which the petitioner had never presumed to doe, but contented himselfe to preach in by law, which the petitioner had never presumed to doe, but contented himselfe to preach in a meeting house to Such as wer inclyned that way, And tho this proces was raised at the instigation of the Minister at St Andrews, yet it is most certaine that the meeting house is in the parish of St Leonards, and ther is no Complaint of intrusion from that Minister Thirdly Ther Seems no reasone to quarrell the meeting house, Because it is keept in the Seat of the University; For it is most certaine that many Gentlemen and others in that place, are so averse from the present establishment, that they will neather hear the presbiterian Ministers themselves, nor Sufferr ther children to goe to ther Churches, And its hoped the most zealous of that perswasion will not deney that these whose inclinations are so disposed, Should rather goe to a meeting house, then be Suffered to Spend the Lords day idly, which in a short tyme could wndoubtedly efface all thoughts and concerne for religion, And the petitioner might appeall to the Masters of that Universities, if any of ther Schoollers who frequent the meeting house have been deficient in any pairt of ther duty, and have not been rather eminent examples both of virtue and good manners, and ther is no fear of the receiving any ill impression ther, For the petitioner takes care to preach nothing but the pure doctrine of Christianitie without giveing the least ground of offence to the Government either civill or Ecclesiastick, and is knowen to be of a harmeless lyfe and conversation, and therfor Craveing In regaird of all which and particularly that the petitioner is qualified according to law, and that he was not called when the meeting house was Shutt up, tho the Sentence militats directly against him, That ther lordships would allow him to returne to the exercise of his Ministrie In the meeting house att St Andrews, And grant him that protection her Majestie recomends to ther care in her most Gracious letter, As the said petition bears, The Lords of her Majesties Privie Councell haveing upon the threttie first day of January last Considered the above petition given in to them by Mr John Mathers, And the Samen being Read in ther presence, The Saids Lords delayes the Same till the nixt Councell day, And in the mean tyme Appoynts Sir James Steuart her Majesties Advocat and John Blair Agent for the Kirk to See and answer the Samen, And accordingly her Majesties Advocat gave in the following answers by way of representation Viz The Said Mr John Mathers had offerred Such a petition to the saids Lords against their Sentence for Shutting wp the meeting house at St Andrews, As hath not appeared Since the Revolution, The Saids Lords ordained that meeting house to be Shutt up on the account that after Doctor Waddell was therfrom removed, other persons not qualified, but manifastly disaffected to the Government had keept up the Samen To the great disturbance of the quyet and peace of the place; Mr Mathers2 now3 appears by his petition and affirms that it was his meeting house, but by what pleadable right is hitherto unknowen /2o/ He affirms that by the act of parliament 1693. No Minister not qualified is debarred from preaching but Such as possess Churches and benefices, wheras the Act expressly Statuts that Such who offerr to preach not being qualified in the terms therof, And not haveing Churches and benefices Should be banished the realme or otherwayes punished, /3o/ He affirms that the Act 1695. Against Intruders Is only against Such as Intrude into Churches and benefices, wheras the act is expressly against any who Shall exerce any pairt of the Ministeriall function in any Church or perish not being therto Law fully Called and ordained, 4o/ He avows that the other Ministers who preached ther in that meeting house, tho they wer not qualified, yet did preach ther at his desyre, /5o/ He pretends the Interest of the University, wheras its manifast that nothing cane be more prejudiciall to the said University, and the right education of youth therin then to give them incouragment to breake and dispyse the Setled order of the Church, wherof the tendencie is but too well knowen to be to the prejudice of her Majesties Government, and the peace of the realme, And /6o/ He pretends to have ane Allowance from her Majesties Letter, Wheras her Majesties Letter contains nothing, but what is expressly qualified to be according to law, and gives no countenance to Such as manifastly transgress the Same, either by preaching, not being qualified, or by Intruding into parishes contrary to Law, And /7o/ This petition does not only mispresent the law, and pretends to ane Indullgence and Tolleration not heirtofour granted, But offers to controull the saids Lords ther most Just Sentence tho the petitioner hath not the least Interest to doe the Same; And therfor her Majesties Advocat humbly obtests that Such a petition in the very face of law, and against their lordships most Just Sentance May not only be refused, But rejected with Such a Reprimand as it deserves, Especiallie it being so well knowen that the Saids Lords administration in these matters Is with all the moderation that the peace and quyet of the kingdomes will allow, And cane consist with the authority of the law and preservation of her Majesties Government, The Lords of her Majesties privie Councell haveing this day again considered the petition given in to them by Mr John Mathers, and the Samen with answers therto by my Lord Advocat being Read in ther presence, The Saids Lords have Refused and heirby Refuse the desyre of the said petition.

At Edinburgh 21 February 1706

A1706/2/121

Procedure

Refused petition for Mr John Mathers

Concerning the petition given in and presented to the lords of her majesty’s privy council by Mr John Mathers, minister of the gospel, showing that where the petitioner having been cited to appear before the said lords 15 November past, he did in obedience thereto attend several subsequent council days without being called, and having not only given very early proofs of his affection and loyalty to her majesty’s royal person and government by congratulating her happy accession to the throne, and constantly praying for her ever since, but has also, although not obliged by law, taken the oath of allegiance and subscribed the assurance, as the said lords their records will testify, he thought himself hereby sufficiently entitled to the said lords their protection in the exercise of his ministry, conform to her majesty’s most gracious letter. All which being well known to the pursuers, they thought fit to pass from your petitioner, and delete his name out of the libel, so that he rested every way secure, and believed there was no need of appearance when the libel was called. Notwithstanding whereof, the petitioner was very much surprised to find that the pursuers, taking occasion of calling some others, not being legally qualified, have procured the said lords their order for shutting up the petitioner’s meeting house, which sentence being only levelled against the petitioner, and being pronounced parte inaudita, he humbly craves leave to represent, firstly that the petitioner was the only person who was settled in that meeting house since Doctor Weddall’s removing, and the other ministers who preached there did it only transiently at the petitioner’s determination, and were not otherwise concerned, nor had they any fixed residence in that place. Secondly, the acts of parliament libelled upon do not meet the petitioners case, for the act [of] 1693 ordained the oath of allegiance and assurance to be taken by all in public trusts, ecclesiastical, civil, or military, and is only to be understood of ministers who possess churches and benefices, but ex super abundante the petitioner is legally qualified, as is abovementioned, and it is evident that the act [of] 1695 is only framed against such as should intrude themselves into churches and benefices without a call prescribed by law, which the petitioner had never presumed to do, but contented himself to preach in by law, which the petitioner had never presumed to doe, but contented himself to preach in a meeting house to such as were inclined that way, and though this process was raised at the instigation of the minister at St Andrews, yet it is most certain that the meeting house is in the parish of St Leonards, and there is no complaint of intrusion from that minister. Thirdly, there seems no reason to quarrel the meeting house, because it is kept in the seat of the university; for it is most certain that many gentlemen and others in that place, are so averse from the present establishment, that they will neither hear the presbyterian ministers themselves, nor suffer their children to go to their churches, and it is hoped the most zealous of that persuasion will not deny that those whose inclinations are so disposed, should rather go to a meeting house, than be suffered to spend the lord’s day idly, which in a short time could undoubtedly efface all thoughts and concern for religion. And the petitioner might appeal to the masters of that university, if any of their scholars who frequent the meeting house have been deficient in any part of their duty, and have not been rather eminent examples both of virtue and good manners, and there is no fear of the receiving any ill impression there, for the petitioner takes care to preach nothing but the pure doctrine of Christianity without giving the least ground of offence to the government, either civil or ecclesiastical, and is known to be of a harmless life and conversation, and therefor craving in regard of all which, and particularly that the petitioner is qualified according to law, and that he was not called when the meeting house was shut up, though the sentence militates directly against him, that their lordships would allow him to return to the exercise of his ministry in the meeting house at St Andrews, and grant him that protection her majesty recommends to their care in her most gracious letter, as the said petition bears. The lords of her majesty’s privy council, having upon 31 January last considered the above petition given in to them by Mr John Mathers, and the same being read in their presence, the said lords delay the same till the next council day. And in the meantime appoint Sir James Stewart, her majesty’s advocate, and John Blair, agent for the Kirk, to see and answer the same. And accordingly, her majesty’s advocate gave in the following answers by way of representation viz the said Mr John Mathers had offered such a petition to the said lords against their sentence for shutting up the meeting house at St Andrews, as has not appeared since the revolution. The said lords ordained that meeting house to be shut up on the account that after Doctor Waddell was therefrom removed, other persons not qualified, but manifestly disaffected to the government, had kept up the same, to the great disturbance of the quiet and peace of the place; Mr Mathers now appears by his petition and affirms that it was his meeting house, but by what pleadable right is hitherto unknown. Secondly, he affirms that by the act of parliament [of] 1693, no minister not qualified is debarred from preaching but such as possess churches and benefices, whereas the act expressly statutes that such who offer to preach not being qualified in the terms thereof, and not having churches and benefices, should be banished [from] the realm or otherwise punished. Thirdly, he affirms that the act [of] 1695 against intruders is only against such as intrude into churches and benefices, whereas the act is expressly against any who shall exercise any part of the ministerial function in any church or perish not being thereto lawfully called and ordained. Fourthly, he avows that the other ministers who preached there in that meeting house, though they were not qualified, yet did preach there at his desire. Fifthly, he pretends the interest of the university, whereas it is manifest that nothing can be more prejudicial to the said university, and the right education of youth therein, than to give them encouragement to break and despise the settled order of the Church, whereof the tendency is but too well known to be to the prejudice of her majesty’s government, and the peace of the realm. And sixthly, he pretends to have an allowance from her majesty’s letter, whereas her majesty’s letter contains nothing but what is expressly qualified to be according to law, and gives no countenance to such as manifestly transgress the same, either by preaching, not being qualified, or by intruding into parishes contrary to law. And seventhly, this petition does not only misrepresent the law, and pretends to an indulgence and toleration not heretofore granted, but offers to check the said lords their most just sentence, though the petitioner has not the least interest to do the same. And therefore her majesty’s advocate humbly entreats that such a petition in the very face of law, and against their lordships’ most just sentence may not only be refused, but rejected with such a reprimand as it deserves, especially it being so well known that the said lords’ administration in these matters is with all the moderation that the peace and quiet of the kingdoms will allow, and can consist with the authority of the law and preservation of her majesty’s government. The lords of her majesty’s privy council having this day again considered the petition given in to them by Mr John Mathers, and the same with answers thereto by my lord advocate being read in their presence, the said lords have refused and hereby refuse the desire of the said petition.

1. NRS, PC1/53, 441-3.

2. The word ‘as’ scored out here.

3. Insertion.

1. NRS, PC1/53, 441-3.