tyranny and oppression, and thereby, according to the law both of God and man, not only forfeited their lives, had the same been duly executed; but also divested themselves of all just right and title to act the part of the nations’ representatives, in choosing and installing any in the office of supreme civil governor, until at least they had given suitable evidence of their repentance.  Yet such were the constituent members of that committee of estates, and first parliament, employed in the Revolution settlement, without so much as making any suitable public acknowledgment of their wickedness in the active hand the generality of them had in the former bloody persecution, as appears from a comparative view of the lists of the members of parliament, and particularly the duke of York’s last parliament, with act second of the acts and orders of the meeting of estates, anno 1689.  Yea, by viewing the lists of James VII, his privy council, annexed by Wodrow to the second volume of his history, it is evident, that a great number of the nobility alone, members of that bloody council, were also members of foresaid convention of estates, the members of which convention (seven bishops excepted) were exactly the same with the members of the first parliament at the Revolution.  For this, compare second act of the meeting of estates, with act first, parliament first, of William and Mary.  By all which it is evident, that from princes who had thus removed the bound, and discovered no just remorse for their sins, there was little ground left to expect a happy establishment of religion, in restoring the flock of Christ to the full possession of those valuable privileges and liberties wherewith he had made them free.

The character of the constituent members being considered, the constitution itself, and wherein it is inconsistent with our covenanted establishment, and is therefore hereby testified against, comes next to be considered.  Although the declaration of the meeting of estates in this kingdom, containing their claim of right, comprehended much more of their civil liberties, and formal rights of government, than was enjoyed under the former monstrous tyranny, yet by no means sufficiently provided for the legal establishment of our former happy reformed constitution, which necessarily obliged the civil rulers to employ their power to maintain and defend, not only the doctrine, but also the Presbyterian worship, discipline and government, as the only and unalterable form instituted by Christ in his house.  Whereas this craves the abolition of prelacy, and the superiority of any office in the church above presbyters in Scotland, simply as it hath been a great and insupportable grievance and trouble to this nation, and contrary to the inclinations of the generality of the people ever since the reformation from Popery, without regarding the divine right of Presbytery, and the contrariety of Prelacy to scripture