(17). The Exercitation answered, in the assertions following made good against it. 1 That the usurpation pretended by the exercitator is really no usurpation, by any thing that he hath said to prove it such. 2 That former oaths in controversie oblige not against obedience to present powers. 3 That obedience is due to powers in possession, though unlawfully enter'd.
Chicago Style (17th ed.) CitationThe Exercitation Answered, in the Assertions Following Made Good Against It. 1 That the Usurpation Pretended by the Exercitator Is Really No Usurpation, by Any Thing That He Hath Said to Prove It Such. 2 That Former Oaths in Controversie Oblige Not Against Obedience to Present Powers. 3 That Obedience Is Due to Powers in Possession, Though Unlawfully Enter'd. 17.
MLA citiranjeThe Exercitation Answered, in the Assertions Following Made Good Against It. 1 That the Usurpation Pretended by the Exercitator Is Really No Usurpation, by Any Thing That He Hath Said to Prove It Such. 2 That Former Oaths in Controversie Oblige Not Against Obedience to Present Powers. 3 That Obedience Is Due to Powers in Possession, Though Unlawfully Enter'd. 17.