which I am sure few will deny to be of much more pernicious
consequence, according to the saying of Tiberius, DEORUM OFFENSA
DIIS CUROE. As to the particular fact related, I think it is not
fair to argue from one instance, perhaps another cannot be
produced: yet (to the comfort of all those who may be apprehensive
of persecution) blasphemy we know is freely spoke a million of
times in every coffee-house and tavern, or wherever else good
company meet. It must be allowed, indeed, that to break an English
free-born officer only for blasphemy was, to speak the gentlest of
such an action, a very high strain of absolute power. Little can
be said in excuse for the general; perhaps he was afraid it might
give offence to the allies, among whom, for aught we know, it may
be the custom of the country to believe a God. But if he argued,
as some have done, upon a mistaken principle, that an officer who
is guilty of speaking blasphemy may, some time or other, proceed so
far as to raise a mutiny, the consequence is by no means to be
admitted: for surely the commander of an English army is like to
be but ill obeyed whose soldiers fear and reverence him as little
as they do a Deity.

It is further objected against the Gospel system that it obliges
men to the belief of things too difficult for Freethinkers, and
such who have shook off the prejudices that usually cling to a
confined education. To which I answer, that men should be cautious
how they raise objections which reflect upon the wisdom of the
nation. Is not everybody freely allowed to believe whatever he
pleases, and to publish his belief to the world whenever he thinks
fit, especially if it serves to strengthen the party which is in
the right? Would any indifferent foreigner, who should read the
trumpery lately written by Asgil, Tindal, Toland, Coward, and forty