Chapter I: Part 1

THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY

SIR ROGER L'ESTRANGE

CITT AND BUMPKIN
(1680)

_INTRODUCTION_
BY
B. J. RAHN

PUBLICATION NUMBER 117
WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
1965

GENERAL EDITORS

Earl Miner, _University of California, Angeles_

Maximillian E. Novak, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Lawrence Clark Powell, _Wm. Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

ADVISORY EDITORS

Richard C. Boys, _University of Michigan_

John Butt, _University of Edinburgh_

James L. Clifford, _Columbia University_

Ralph Cohen, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Vinton A. Dearing, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Arthur Friedman, _University of Chicago_

Louis A. Landa, _Princeton University_

Samuel H. Monk, _University of Minnesota_

Everett T. Moore, _University of California, Los Angeles_

James Sutherland, _University College, London_

H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., _University of California, Los Angeles_

CORRESPONDING SECRETARY

Edna C. Davis, _Wm. Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

INTRODUCTION

According to discoveries made by Titus Oates in the autumn of 1678, England was threatened by a Roman Catholic conspiracy headed by the Pope and the King of France, whose objectives were: 1) to murder the King, 2) to overthrow the government, and 3) to destroy the Protestant religion. Although Oates was subsequently exposed as a charlatan, in 1678-81 a panic held the nation in an iron grip, and belief in the Plot fostered irrational and reprehensible excesses. The Popish Plot was not so much a religious fraud as a political _cause celebre_, the significance of which can be assessed only in the context of the republican movement of the seventeenth century to redistribute power within the state. The conflict which developed between Charles II and the Parliament during the 1670's reflects the struggle for ascendance of two opposing theories of government: absolute versus limited monarchy. Charles, supported by the Tories and the Anglican clergy, was determined to maintain all the hereditary privileges and powers of an English monarch, while the Whig coalition in Parliament, led by the Earl of Shaftesbury, was intent upon subordinating the power of the Crown to the will of Parliament. The Opposition realized almost immediately that in the Popish Plot lay means for furthering their schemes of political reform. Under the guise of counteracting the Plot, they hoped to enact legislation to: 1) increase parliamentary power, 2) limit the prerogatives of the King, 3) control the succession, and 4) curtail the influence of the prelacy. Published in 1680 when the Plot crisis was at its peak, _Citt and Bumpkin_ is one of a series of pamphlets by Sir Roger L'Estrange written to support the policies of Charles II and to defend the government from attacks by the Whig Opposition.

Since James, Duke of York, had given the Whigs every reason to believe that he would oppose their policies vehemently after he came to the throne, they decided to take advantage of the public resentment against him as a Roman Catholic to try to pass a bill in Parliament to exclude him from the succession. James had already been accused of conspiring with the French King to overthrow Protestantism in England and institute Roman Catholicism as the state religion. In addition to reiterating this charge, the Whigs enlarged upon the awkwardness and danger bound to arise in a Protestant nation with a Roman Catholic ruler. The question of a Popish successor soon came to be the principal concern of Parliament, and the battle over the Exclusion Bill dominated the political scene in 1679-81. While the Exclusion crisis was at its height, Charles II circumvented this plan to deprive the Duke of York of his hereditary title by repeatedly proroguing and dissolving Parliament so that the bill could not be brought to a final vote. This series of adjournments began when Charles dissolved the Parliament soon after the Exclusion Bill was first introduced in the spring of 1679. After a bitterly fought election contest during the summer of 1679, the newly constituted Parliament assembled in October only to be prorogued once again until 26 January 1680. The Whigs were furious and began to fear that the King had no intention of permitting the Parliament to meet even in January. Powerless to act legally out of Parliament, the Whigs realized that a long series of postponements would lead to the defeat of all their carefully drafted legislative plans. To combat Charles' delaying tactics, the Opposition hit upon the expedient of petitioning him to allow Parliament to sit. By a strong demonstration of popular will, they hoped to force the King to comply with their demands.

Under the leadership of Shaftesbury and his followers in the Green Ribbon Club, the Whigs achieved a degree of party organization and efficiency in the autumn and winter of 1679-80 which remained unrivalled during the seventeenth century.[1] While petitions were being printed in London, the country was divided into districts; then petitions were distributed to party agents everywhere who systematically canvassed for signatures. In London, blank petitions were conveniently placed in coffee houses and taverns; pens and inkstands appeared in the Strand and at the Royal Exchange. Since these petitions were designed as instruments to convey the will of the masses, emphasis was placed on collecting large numbers of signatures with scant concern for the political, economic, or social status of the subscribers. According to the Tory historian Roger North, the people were warned by the promoters of the petitions that, if the King were allowed to govern without a Parliament, despotism would inevitably ensue, followed by a resurgence of Popery.[2] Frightened, and in some cases confused by these formidable predictions and threats, many people (especially in the country) subscribed. After the canvassing had been completed, the petitions were sent to London for presentation to the King.

The petitions themselves were phrased inoffensively enough, stressing the fact that the Popish Plot had created a state of national emergency and requesting that Parliament be called to deal with this danger. The first petition, _The Humble Address and Advice of several of the Peeres of this Realm For the Sitting of the Parliament_, was presented to the King at Whitehall on 7 December by ten Whig peers. Charles accepted the petition and dismissed them. But he could not dismiss the rumors of countless other petitions in preparation and the unavoidable disturbance such an onslaught would produce. Since the petitions were not promoted through official channels, and since there was evidence that they were designed to create tumult for seditious ends, Charles denounced them as illegal. Moreover, on 11 December the King issued a Royal Proclamation forbidding seditious and tumultuous petitioning. The effects of the Proclamation were twofold. The Tories, who objected to petitioning as a popular movement carried on by men without substance or position, received the Proclamation everywhere as an expression of the King's disapproval, and cited it as an authority to discourage others from promoting and subscribing to petitions. The Whigs, on the other hand, protested that petitioning was the legal right of the subject and resumed their petitioning activities with added vigor.

In order to demonstrate his firm resolve not to be intimidated in the exercise of his prerogative to call and dismiss Parliament, and in order to rob the petitioning movement of its impetus by destroying its immediate objective, Charles issued a second Proclamation on 11 December proroguing Parliament from 26 January to 11 November 1680. Spurred on by the realization that so long a recess would utterly ruin their hopes, the Whigs directed considerable effort toward promoting an official petition from the City of London.[3] Because of the power and prestige of the City, the Whigs felt that such a petition would lend encouragement to those being prepared in the country. Accordingly, they arranged to present a petition from the City of London for a vote in the Common Council on 20 January. The King deliberately attempted to frustrate the London petition by purging the City Council of disaffected members through enforcement of the Act for Regulating Corporations. This Act disqualified all Dissenters, who usually held Whig principles. Consequently, by the time the petition was brought to a vote, the Tories had gained enough support to defeat the referendum by a small margin. Although this ballot was won in effect only by the votes of the Court of Aldermen, it was accounted a great victory for the Court Party and left the Whigs sorely disappointed.

The peak of petitioning activity occurred during the month of January, and the atmosphere became increasingly more tense as the day approached upon which Parliament was supposed to meet. The week following the Common Council's rejection of the London petition was the most strained. Petitions continued to appear daily, though the King received them with marked disfavor and sharply rebuked the delegates who delivered them. When Monday, 26 January, finally arrived, the air was charged with excitement; everyone crowded to Westminster to see what would happen. But Charles had no intention of capitulating. As soon as the Lords and Commons were assembled, the King addressed them, reaffirming his determination to prorogue them and implying that the recent petitions had served only to strengthen his resolve. The Whigs complained bitterly but offered no open resistance. Charles had won the day and emerged with his prerogative untarnished but not unchallenged. Shortly after this _coup_, a counter reaction to petitioning set in, and a wave of loyalty gained momentum and found expression in the form of abhorrence addresses which poured in from all over the kingdom condemning the practice of petitioning and professing loyalty to King and Court.

A fortnight after the prorogation of Parliament, just before the tide of abhorrence addresses began to inundate the capital, on 10 February, Narcissus Luttrell (indefatigable collector of Popish Plot ephemera) recorded possession of the most important pamphlet written about petitioning--Sir Roger L'Estrange's _Citt and Bumpkin_. Whether the date which Luttrell gives represents the day of publication as well as the day of purchase is a matter of conjecture, but his note does establish the fact that the pamphlet was available to the public and in Luttrell's hands by 10 February. Corroboration that the pamphlet was in circulation before the end of February comes also from L'Estrange's bookseller Henry Brome, who first advertised _Citt and Bumpkin_ for sale as already published in a list of pamphlets dated 27 February. On 5 March in the _Popish Courant_, a companion sheet to _The Weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome_, a violently anti-Papist newspaper in which L'Estrange was frequently traduced, Henry Care condemned _Citt and Bumpkin_ in a list of Catholic libels, "All publisht within little more than this fortnight." Although less precise than Luttrell's note, the references by Brome and Care help confirm the hypothesis that _Citt and Bumpkin_ was published by mid-February. Further evidence which helps to define the date of publication occurs within the text of the pamphlet itself. On page 24, L'Estrange mentions Henry Care's _History of the Damnable Popish Plot_ and says it appeared on 26 January. This date in turn is verified by two advertisements for the work in Care's own journal--one on 23 January announcing its impending release, and another on 30 January commenting on its recent publication. Since _Citt and Bumpkin_ obviously appeared after Care's tract was released and before Luttrell's entry was made, it must have been published during the fortnight between 26 January and 10 February.

_Citt and Bumpkin_ was not only the best written pamphlet on petitioning, it was also the most ambitious in scope. Arranging his material artfully, L'Estrange presented it with the wit and skill that demonstrate unequivocably his mastery of the polemic medium. Unlike most other party writers who confined their efforts to a few folio pages, L'Estrange sustained his performance through 38 quarto leaves of readable, entertaining prose. Moreover, his objectives and arguments were much more comprehensive and sophisticated than those of the other pamphleteers engaged in the controversy over petitioning. Most Tory writers treated petitioning as an isolated issue and directed their attack accordingly, failing to relate any of their arguments to each other or to a larger scheme. Many authors attempted to defeat petitioning by identifying the petitions of 1680 with those of the 1640's leading up to the Civil War. In addition, some insisted that petitioning was illegal and defended the Proclamation against it, while others tried to discredit the organizers and promoters of petitions as disaffected persons motivated by hopes of preferment and profit. At the same time, they launched a collateral attack upon those members of Parliament who actively encouraged petitioning. There was even a general indictment of Parliament as a whole, suggesting that it intended to usurp the King's prerogatives and take sovereignty upon itself. But there was no definite, direct statement that a plot led by the petition managers was actually underway to subvert the government. In _Citt and Bumpkin_ L'Estrange accused the republicans and Dissenters of actively promoting a Protestant Plot more insidious than the Popish Plot but with identical goals: 1) to kill the King, 2) to undermine the government, and 3) to destroy the established Church of England. Throughout the pamphlet, which is an _expose_ of this alleged conspiracy, L'Estrange supplied a great deal of specific factual detail upholding his claims. His objective was not merely to discredit petitioning, but to lessen belief in the Popish Plot and to launch a counterattack against the enemies of the Court. By indicating that petitioning was not an end in itself but an integral part of a larger plan, L'Estrange managed to censure petitioning _per se_, to increase its odium by linking it with the greater disaster of rebellion and civil war, and yet to preserve a sense of proportion by directing the brunt of his attack against the Protestant Plot as a whole.

Although it is cast in the form of an ironic dialogue, _Citt and Bumpkin_ has much in common with a dramatic skit. L'Estrange sketches the setting, develops the characterization, provides realistic conversation, and builds dramatic tension to a climax (or turning point in the action), which is followed by a falling off of tension or _denouement_. As if to make the reading of parts easier, the speeches of the characters are set in different type faces. L'Estrange even provides stage directions and indicates action in the speeches of the characters. Like many dramas, _Citt and Bumpkin_ begins _in medias res_ and draws the reader immediately into the action. In a very natural fashion, the subject of the conversation is defined and the scene is set within the first four lines. The sense of setting is never destroyed, for L'Estrange unobtrusively sustains it by occasional specific but natural references to it in the course of the conversation.

The dialogue between Citt and Bumpkin takes place during a casual encounter in a tavern, where the two fall to discussing religion and politics over a cup of ale. As their names suggest, Citt and Bumpkin represent a sophisticated London citizen and a naive country bumpkin. While they are not fully realized dramatic characters, neither are they mere bloodless stick figures. During the course of their conversation, they reveal information about their personalities, their social and economic status, their political affiliations, their religious sympathies, their moral values, and their occupations. One learns from Citt that he is an ex-felon who is employed as a party agent by a political organization plotting to overthrow the government and undermine the Church of England. Motivated only by ambition and avarice, Citt is a completely immoral man who openly endorses a policy of expediency, and who condones any act--no matter how evil--because he believes that the end always justifies the means. As befits a partner in crime, Bumpkin is Citt's _Doppelgaenger_ in many ways. The essential differences are those of experience and intelligence. Bumpkin is only slightly less immoral and unscrupulous than Citt, but he is just as hypocritical, lawless, and untruthful. As the two discuss how they promoted petitions in the city and the country, Citt and Bumpkin admit to all sorts of treacherous and Fraudulent practices. In addition, they reveal the goals, the methods, the leaders, the strength, and the immorality of the Protestant Plot. Ironically, they unintentionally expose themselves and the Plot to the reader's censure; for, although the characters seem to be oblivious to the immorality of their behavior, the reader is not so insensitive. The reader contrasts their ethics and conduct with ideal values, rejects their code as immoral, and carries his judgment of the characters over into the real world to condemn the petitioners as republican plotters.

To reinforce this ironic self-indictment by Citt and Bumpkin, L'Estrange introduces a third character, Trueman, who enters like a _deus ex machina_ to represent the abstract forces of truth, justice, and morality--albeit with a Tory bias. Because he functions as an abstract symbol in contrast with Citt and Bumpkin, who are very much of this world, Trueman has a personality uncomplicated by any psychological subtleties or idiosyncrasies which would emphasize his humanity. The entrance of Trueman may well be regarded as the climax of this little drama, for the plot unfolds gradually and dramatic tension builds to the point of his intrusion, when the course of action is interrupted and diverted in another direction by his arguments. Taking up the topics previously discussed by Citt and Bumpkin while he was concealed in a nearby closet, Trueman confronts them with their confessed treachery, denounces their chicanery and folly, and refutes their political views with Tory arguments. The fact that Trueman symbolizes extrahuman moral forces lends authority to his defense of absolute monarchy and the established Church.

Couched in an authentic colloquial style, the dialogue between Citt and Bumpkin progresses in an entirely natural, credible manner. Their conversation is animated, colorful, humorous, informative, and purposeful. The direction of the conversation is logically dictated by its substance; there is nothing artificial, contrived, or foreordained about it. The interaction of personality is reflected in the verbal exchange. As in a play, the development of the action depends upon each character's immediate and genuine response to the statements made by the other _dramatis personae_. Again, as in the theater, dramatic tension is created as the plot unfolds and the reader waits to see what will happen next. Except for one passage of extended quotation (pp. 32-33), the dramatic realism is sustained effortlessly.

Although _Citt and Bumpkin_ was the first of L'Estrange's Popish Plot pamphlets written in dialogue, he was thoroughly familiar with the form and had often employed it in his polemic skirmishes during the Civil War. In fact, L'Estrange found the genre so congenial that he chose to write his famous newspaper _The Observator_ (1681-87) in dialogue. This literary device, employed by hack writers, controversialists, and eminent _litterateurs_, was extremely popular in England between 1660 and 1700 and was used to conspicuous advantage for discussing issues of momentary importance as well as serious philosophical questions. According to Eugene R. Purpus in his study of the "Dialogue in English Literature, 1660-1725," few other literary forms had such universal and continual appeal.[4] In an age when the drama was the reigning literary fashion, the dialogue naturally enough had a concomitant vogue. Its popularity is attested to by the large number of dialoguists as well as by the bulk of their writing. As Purpus notes, party writers quickly discovered that this genre was an excellent vehicle for presenting highly controversial ideas and forceful arguments.

During the Restoration, there were no rigid conventions governing the genre, and any work passed as a dialogue which represented a conversation between two or more persons or which was organized in a question-and-answer manner.[5] Frequently, dialogues resembled an interrogation or a catechism rather than natural discourse between real human beings. Often writers of such artificial dialogues abandoned any attempt at characterization or conversational verisimilitude, merely substituting "Q." and "A." to indicate a series of queries and responses. Sometimes authors identified the speakers with proper names but made no effort at actual characterization. Concern for dramatic realism varied from writer to writer; and all too often, improbable puppet-like creatures were represented in illogical, unbelievable, and contrived conversations. The artistic integrity of a successful dialogue, however, lies in the dramatic exchange of differing points of view or the interplay of opposing arguments in realistic conversation between credible characters with clearly differentiated personalities.

The stilted, artificial quality of some dialogues is in part attributable to the fact that many writers turned to the genre as a facile means of expressing a particular point of view.[6] As Purpus observes, the inherent dramatic quality of the form is lost if: 1) the writer substitutes invective, prejudice, and railing for realistic conversation, and/or 2) the author obviously contrives the dialogue merely to reflect his particular bias on a given question. On the other hand, although some writers used the form as a convenient frame on which to display their opinions, other writers erred by including too much dramatic machinery. Dialogues of this sort almost became short dramas.

No matter what the content or objective purpose of dialogues, however, they were uniformly written in what became known after the Restoration as the "plain, easy, and familiar" style.[7] Sentences were more conveniently broken up than heretofore, and there was increased lightness of tone. Though there was still a great deal of invective, Hugh Macdonald notes in "Banter in English Controversial Prose after the Restoration," that banter became prominent in the literature of disputation after 1660. On the other hand, "No one would expect to find a clear-cut division between banter, satire, sarcasm, burlesque, and abuse in every passage of a book written in the seventeenth century."[8] As Mr. Macdonald states, it is largely a question of emphasis. Employing a great deal of banter, Marvell reintroduced a tradition forgotten since the Marprelate tracts--that of treating a grave subject lightly yet with serious intention of reinforcing the argument. Restoration polemicists, with L'Estrange in the vanguard, quickly realized the advantages of this technique and claimed it as their own.

_Citt and Bumpkin_ survives close scrutiny according to the critical criteria for evaluating dialogues suggested by Purpus and Macdonald. Although L'Estrange does use the genre for a specific controversial end, he does not lapse into a barren question-and-answer type of organization nor into that of an artificial didactic catechism. While he sketches a setting, develops characterization, and creates believable conversation, L'Estrange does not err in the direction of over-dramatization either. He provides all the requisite machinery to support the dramatic realism necessary in a successful dialogue, but he goes no further. Throughout _Citt and Bumpkin_, L'Estrange maintains the appropriate "plain, easy and familiar" style. The sentence structure is simple, and clauses are well punctuated. Abounding with colloquial expressions, contractions, and slang, the vocabulary is common and especially suited to the low characters. A bantering tone predominates, accompanied by passages employing irony, satire, and invective. There is not enough invective, however, to destroy the mood. If L'Estrange's Tory bias is perfectly evident, it is not aggressive enough to prevent the accomplishment of his polemic objectives. Although the republican political theories of the Whigs are attacked satirically in the first part of _Citt and Bumpkin_, they are stated and refuted in proper controversial style in the final pages of the pamphlet. On the whole, _Citt and Bumpkin_ conforms to the conventions of a successful dialogue; where it does not, the infringements are not great enough to destroy its artistic integrity.

_Citt and Bumpkin's_ popularity was indisputable. Of all the pamphlets about petitioning, it was by far the most widely read. It went into four editions by June 1680 and a fifth in 1681. Although there were no substantive changes in the various editions, the type was reset each time, so implying a continuing demand for the pamphlet. Indeed, the contemporary response was so overwhelming that within six weeks L'Estrange wrote a sequel entitled, _Citt and Bumpkin, The Second Part; Or, A Learned Discourse upon Swearing and Lying_. In addition, there were many references in the Whig press denigrating L'Estrange and his pamphlet; derogatory remarks appeared in newspapers, ballads, and poems. In particular, three pamphlets were issued, replying directly to _Citt and Bumpkin_ and attacking L'Estrange personally. The first and most considerable of these rejoinders appeared on 16 March, a month after the publication of _Citt and Bumpkin_, when its effect was being fully realized and the need felt to combat it.

_A Dialogue Between Tom and Dick Over a Dish of Coffee Concerning Matters of Religion and Government_, issued also as _Crack-fart and Tony; Or, Knave and Fool_,[9] is a parody following closely the format and arguments of _Citt and Bumpkin_. Having appropriated the framework employed by L'Estrange, the author of _Tom and Dick_ adjusted it by a series of simple substitutions from an attack on the Protestant Plot, Dissenters, Schism, and republicans, to an assault on the Popish Plot, Papists, Roman Catholicism, and loyalists. The parallels in setting and characterization are established immediately, when Tom and Dick meet in a coffee house and agree to hold a conversation in which Tom will speak, write, invent, and hold forth as Citt had done, while Dick will hear, believe, and speak in his turn (but to little purpose) like Bumpkin. The parody breaks down, however, when one compares Trueman with Goodman, who endorses Trueman's arguments rather than misrepresenting or opposing them. Nor does Goodman observe Trueman's scrupulous care in replying to all the issues raised by the other two characters. Throughout the dialogue, the author manages to maintain dramatic realism and to sustain a mock-serious tone in the absurd-but-credible verbal exchange between his two buffoons.

The second rebuttal was released three months later on 14 June. Signed E. P. (possibly Edward Phillips), _The Dialogue Betwixt Cit and Bumpkin Answered_ replies not only to _Citt and Bumpkin_, but reflects upon several other polemic tracts by L'Estrange, and attacks him _ad hominem_ from beginning to end. A long prefatory letter discussing the powers and privileges of city corporations and the faults of L'Estrange's _Popery in Masquerade_ precedes the dialogue, which preserves the same general format and style of its target. The roles of the characters are only roughly analogous, however, and the development of the argument is retarded and obscured by the abuse of L'Estrange. All too often, the argument is neither pertinent nor incisive. Unfortunately, E. P. lacks all the vitality, wit, and imagination of his polemic adversary. Incensed by E. P.'s scurrility, L'Estrange replied within three days to all of his charges in _A Short Answer to a Whole Litter of Libels_.

Although it does not appear in Luttrell's _Popish Plot Catalogues_, the third reply to _Citt and Bumpkin_, _Crack upon Crack: Or, Crack-Fart Whipt with his own Rod, by Citt and Bumpkin_, can be dated approximately upon the basis of internal evidence. References to L'Estrange's flight to escape a sham plot against him in October, 1680, imply a late autumn publication date. Purporting to answer both parts of _Citt and Bumpkin_, this pamphlet does not deal with any of the arguments raised in either work. The author abandons any attempt at parody, and instead borrows details of setting from the popular _Letter from Legorn_ pamphlets which appeared that year. The characters pursue the absconded Trueman (_i.e._, L'Estrange) aboard a Mahometan (_i.e._, Papist) ship and lure him ashore in order to seek revenge for their recent humiliation at his hands. The dialogue contains four pages of unimaginative abuse of Trueman which culminates in his drubbing by Citt and Bumpkin. Largely scatological, this uninspired attack upon L'Estrange does not strike a single telling blow against _Citt and Bumpkin_.

In fact, _Citt and Bumpkin_ enjoyed unqualified success despite the best efforts of its various detractors. And its popularity was well deserved. Appearing just when the unrest over petitioning was at its height, _Citt and Bumpkin_ captured the interest and imagination of the public with its cogent argument and witty satire.

NOTES

1: J. R. Jones, _The First Whigs_ (London, 1961), p. 117; Roger North, _Examen, or an Enquiry into the Credit and Veracity of a Pretended Complete History_ (London, 1740), p. 542.

2: North, p. 542.

3: Jones, pp. 119-20.

4: Eugene R. Purpus, "The Dialogue in English Literature, 1660-1725," _ELH_, XVII (1950), II. 58.

5: The information on the dialogue in this paragraph is taken from Purpus, pp. 48-49.

6: Purpus, pp. 50-52.

7: Purpus, p. 48; Hugh Macdonald, "Banter in English Controversial Prose after the Restoration," _Essays and Studies by Members of the English Association_, XXXII (1946), 21-22.

8: Macdonald, p. 23.

9: One of L'Estrange's opponents nicknamed him the "Crack-fart of the Nation" and the epithet stuck to him for years.

=Text=

The text of _Citt and Bumpkin_
here reprinted is the copy in
the William Andrews Clark
Memorial Library.

CITT

AND

BUMPKIN.

IN A

DIALOGUE

OVER

A Pot of Ale,

CONCERNING

MATTERS

OF

RELIGION

AND

GOVERNMENT.

_LONDON_,

Printed for _Henry Brome_ at the Gun in S. _Pauls_
Church-yard, 1680.

_Citt_ and _Bumkin_,

In a DIALOGUE, _&c._

_Citt._ So that you would know, _First_, how we _manag'd_ the _Petition_; and _Secondly_, how it came to _miscarry_.

Bum. _Those are the two Points_, Citt, _but first take off your_ Pot, _and then tell your_ Story; _you shall have mine afterward_.

Committees to promote the Petitions.

_Citt._ There was no way, you must know, to carry the business clear, without getting a _Vote_ of _Common-Council_ for the _Petition_; and so making it an Act of the _City_: And in order to this End, we planted our _Committees_ every where up and down, from _Algate_ to _Temple-barr_, at convenient distances; some few of them in _Taverns_ but most at _Coffee-houses_; as less liable to suspition. Now we did not call these _Meetings_, _Committees_, but _Clubs_; and _there_ we had all Freedom both for _Privacy_ and _Debate_: while the _Borough_ of _Southwark_, _Westminster_, and the _Suburbs_, proceeded according to our Method.

Bum. _And what were these_ Committees _now to do_?

Their Powers and Instructions.

_Citt._ Their _Commission_ was to procure _Subscriptions_, to justify the Right of _Petitioning_, and to gain _Intelligence_: And then every _Committee_ had one man at least in it that wrote _short-hand_.

Bum. _Well, and what was he to do?_

_Citt._ It was his part to go smoking up and down from One Company to another, to see who was _for_ us, and who _against_ us: and to take Notes of what people said of the _Plot_, or of the _Kings Witnesses_, or against this way of _Petitioning_.

Bum. _But how came those Committees (as ye call 'um) by their_ Commissions?

Two Grand Committees.

_Citt._ For that, let me tell you, we had _two Grand Committees_, that adjourn'd from place to place, as they saw occasion: But they met most commonly at _Two Coffee-houses_; the _One_ near _Guild-Hall_, the _Other_ in the _Strand_; for you must take notice that we went on, hand in hand with our _Neighbours_ in the _Main Design_.

Bum. _But you do not tell me yet who set up the_ Other Committees.

The Office of the Grand Committees.

_Citt._ These two _Grand Committees_, I tell you, nominated and appointed the _Sub-Committees_, gave them their _Orders_, and received their _Reports_: It was their Office moreover to digest _Discoveries_, and _Informations_; to instruct _Articles_, improve _Accusations_, manage _Controversies_, defray the charge of _Intelligencers_, and _Gatherers of hands_, to dispose of _Collections_; to influence the _Anglicus_'s and _Domesticks_, and fortify those that were weak in the Faith; to furnish matter sometimes for _Narratives_.----

Bum. _What dost thou mean by_ Narratives, Citt?

_Citt._ They are only _Strange Storys_; as that of the _Dragon_ in _Essex_; _Earth-quakes_, _Sights in the Air_, _Prodigies_, and the like.

Bum. _One would think it should not be worth their while, to busy their heads about such Fooleries as these._

Stories of Prodigies startle the Common People.

_Citt._ Now this is thy simplicity _Bumpkin_, for there is not any thing that moves the hearts of the People so effectually toward _the Work of the Lord_, especially when the _Narrative_ carries some _Historical Remarque_ in the Tayl of it: As for the purpose, _this or that happen'd in such a Kings Reign, and soon after such and such troubles befell the Church and State_: such a _Civil War_, such or such a _Persecution_, or _Invasion_ follow'd upon it. When the People perceive once that the Lord hath declared himself against the Nation, in these tokens of his Displeasure, the Multitude seldom fail of helping the Judgment forward.

Bum. _I don't know what ye call your_ Committees, _but Our Gentry had their_ Meetings _too; and there was a great Lord or two among 'um that shall be Nameless_.

_Citt._ We could shew you _othergates Lords_ among _Us_, I'le assure you, then any you have; but let that passe.

Bum. _You told me that your_ Committees _were to procure_ Subscriptions; _we were hard put to't, I'm sure, in the_ Country _to get_ Hands.

The way of getting hands in and about _London_.

_Citt._ And so were we in the City _Bumpkin_; and if it had not been to advance the _Protestant Interest_, I'de have been torn to pieces by wild Horses, before I'de have done what I did. But _extraordinary Cases_ must have _extraordinary allowances_. There was hardly a _Register_ about the Town that scap'd us for _Names_: _Bedlam_, _Bridewell_, all the _Parish-books_, nay the very _Goals_, and _Hospitalls_; we had our _Agents_ at all _Publick Meetings_, _Court_, _Church_, _Change_, all the _Schools_ up and down; _Masters_ underwrit for their _Children_, and _Servants_, _Women_ for their _Husbands_ in the _West-Indies_, nay we prevail'd upon some _Parsons_, to engage for their whole _Congregations_; we took in _Jack Straw_, _Wat Tyler_, and the whole Legend of _Poor Robins Saints_ into our List of _Petitioners_; and the _same Names_ serv'd us in four or five _several places_. And where's the hurt of all this now? So long as the Cause it self is Righteous.

Several ways of getting Hands in the Country.

Bum. _Nay, the thing was well enough_ Citt, _if we could but have gone through with it: And you shall see now that we were put to our shifts in the_ Country, _as well as you in the_ City. _I was employ'd you must know, to get_ Names _at_ four shillings a Hundred, _and I had all my_ Real Subscriptions _written at such a distance, one from another, that I could easily clap in a Name or two betwixt 'um; and then I got as many_ School-boys _as I could, to underwrite after the same manner, and after this, fill'd up all those spaces with_ Names _that I either_ Remember'd, _or_ Invented _my self, or could get out of two or three_ Christning-books. _There are a World (ye know) of_ Smiths, Browns, Clarks, Walkers, Woods, _so that I furnish'd my Catalogue with a matter of Fifty a piece of these_ Sir-names_, which I_ Christen'd _my self. And besides, we had all the_ Non-conformist Ministers _in the_ Country _for us, and they brought in a power of hands_.

The Protestant Dissenters great Promoters of the Petition.

_Citt._ What do you talk of _your Non-conformists_? They do but work _Journey-work_ to _Ours_. We have the _Heads_ of all the _Protestant Dissenters_ in the _Nation_ here in this Town, why, we have more _Religions_, _Bumpkin_, in _this City_, then you have _People_ in your whole _Country_.

Bum. _Ay, and 'tis a great blessing too, that when_ Professors _are at so mighty Variance among_ themselves_, there should be so wonderfull an_ Agreement _in the_ Common Cause.

_Citt._ And that's notably observ'd, _Bumkin_; for so we found it here. The _Presbyterian_ got hands of _His Party_; the _Independent_ of _His_; the _Baptist_ of _His_; the _Fifth-Monarchy_ man of _His_; and so throughout all our Divisions: and we had still the most zealous man in His way, to gather the _Subscriptions_: And when they had completed their _Roll_, they discharg'd themselves as Naturally into the _Grand Committee_, as _Rivers_ into the _Sea_. And then we were sure of all the _Republicans_.

Bum. _But after all this_ Care _and_ Industry_, how was it possible for the business to_ Miscarry?

_Citt._ Why I know 'tis laid in our dish, that when we had set the whole Kingdome agogg upon _Petitioning_, our hearts would not serve us to go through stitch, and so we drew our own necks out of the Collar, and left the Countries in the Lurch.

Bum. _Nay that's the Truth on't,_ Citt_; We stood all gaping for_ London _to lead the way_.

_Citt._ The great work that we look't upon was the gaining of a _well-affected Common-Council_; which we secur'd upon the _Election_, with all the skill, and watchfullness imaginable.

Bum. _And that was a huge point_ Citt; _but how were ye able to compasse it_?

Tricks to defeat Elections.

_Citt._ Why we had no more to do, then to mark those that we knew were not for our turns, either as _Courtiers_, or _Loose-livers_, or _half-Protestants_, and their business was done.

Bum. _We went the same way to work too in the_ Country_, at all our_ Elections; _for it is a Lawfull Policy, you know, to lessen the Reputation of an Enemy_.

_Citt._ Nay we went further still; and set a _Report_ a foot upon the _Exchange_, and all the _Coffee-houses_ and _Publique Houses_ thereabouts, which held from _Change-time_, till the very _Rising_ of the _Common-Councill_, when the _Petition_ was _laid aside_; that past so currant, that no mortall doubted the Truth on't.

Bum. _But you ha' not told me what that_ Report _was yet_.

_Citt._ It was this, _that the King had sent a Message to the City to let them understand that he took notice how much they stood affected to the_ Petition; _that he expected they would proceed upon it; and that his Majesty was ready to give them_ a gracious Answer.

Bum. _But was this fair dealing, Brother?_

_Citt._ Did not _Abraham_ say of _Sarah, She's my Sister_?

Bum. _Well thou'rt a heavenly man_, Citt! _but come to the Miscarriage it self_.

The Petition laid aside in the _Common-Council_.

_Citt._ After as Hopefull a _Choice_ as ever was made, we procur'd a _Common-Councill_: where the _Petition_ was put to the _Vote_, and it was carry'd in the _Commons_ by _two Voyces_, for the presenting it, and by _Fourteen_, or _Fifteen Votes_ in the _Court of Aldermen_, on the _Negative_.

Bum. _So that_ your Damn'd Aldermen_, and_ our Damn'd Justices, _have ruin'd us both in_ City _and_ Country.

_Citt._ Hang'um, they are most of them _Church-Papists_; but we should have dealt well enough with _them_, if it had not been for that confounded _Act_ for _Regulating Corporations_.

Bum. _Prethee let me understand that, for I know nothing on't._

The Act for Corporations brake the neck on't.

_Citt._ Take notice then that this Devillish Statute has provided, that _no man shall serve as a_ Common-Councell man, _but upon condition of taking three_ Oaths, _and subscribing_ one Declaration, _therein mention'd; and having taken the_ Sacrament _of the_ Lords Supper, _according to the Rites of the Church of_ England, _within one year next before his Election_. Now it so fell out, that what with this _Act_, and a _Court-Letter_ for putting it in _Execution_, a matter of _thirty_ of our _Friends_ were put _by_, as not duly qualify'd; And upon this Pinch we lost it. Nay let me tell ye as a friend, there were at least _twenty_ or _thirty_ of the rest too, that would hardly have past Muster.

Bum. _But is this certain?_

_Citt._ Why I am now in my Element, _Bumkin_; for thou know'st my Education has been toward the Law.

Bum. _This was a Plaguy jobb_, Citt, _but we must look better to our Hitts next bout_.

_Citt._ Nay my life for thine we'll have another touch for't yet. But tell me in short; how came you off with your _Petition_ in the _Country_?

Bum. _It went on for a good while prettily well at the_ Quarter-Sessions; _till at last one_ Cross-grain'd Curr _there upon the_ Bench _claw'd us all away to the Devill, and got an Order of Court against it, while you would say what's this_.

_Citt._ But what did he say?

The Petition baffled in the Country.

Bum. _Oh there was a great deal of stuff on't; the_ King, _and the_ Judges _(he said) had declared it to be_ Seditious, _and so they were to take it. That they sat there to_ keep _the_ Kings Peace, _not to countenance the_ Breaking _of it; and then (says he) these fellows don't know what they would have_. One _Petitions for_ Chalk, _and_ Another _for_ Cheese; _the Petition was at first_ for the meeting of the Parliament; _and then they came to Twit the King with his_ Coronation-Oath, _and then_, Delinquents _must be brought to_ Punishment; _and then the_ Parliament _was to Sit as_ long _as_ they pleas'd, _and at_ last, _every man must be_ mark'd _for a_ Common Enemy _that would not_ Subscribe _it. So that first they would have the_ Parliament Sit; _and then they'd cut 'um out their work; and in fine, it was little other then a_ Petition _against_ those _that would_ not Petition. _He said there were Ill practices in the getting of hands, and so they threw out the_ Petition, _and order'd an_ Enquiry _into the_ Abuses.

_Citt._ Well, there's no remedy but Patience.

Bum. _I had need of Patience I'm sure, for they're Examining the Hands allready, as hard as they can drive; You'l see me in the_ Gazette next Thursday, _as sure as a Gun_.

_Citt._ Why then we must play the _Domestique_ against _him, next Fryday_.

Bum. _Nay, I'm sure to be trounc'd for't to some tune, if I be_ taken.

_Citt._ Pre'thee what art affraid of? There's no _Treason_ in getting hands to a _Petition_ man.

Bum. _No, that's true; but I have put in such a Lurry of_ Dog-Rogues; _they cry_ they're defam'd, _with a Pox_, they'le have their remedy; _and they make such a Bawling_.

_Citt._ Come, come, set thy heart at rest: and know that in this City th'art in the very Sanctuary of the _Well-affected_. But 'tis good however to prepare for the _worst_, and the _best_ (as they say) _will help its self_. But art thou really afraid of being _taken_?

Bum. _And so would you be too, if you were in my condition, without a_ penny, _or a_ friend _in the world to help ye_.

The blessing of having neither friends nor Mony.

_Citt._ Thou art two great Owls, _Bumkin_, in a very few words. _First_, thou hast _great friends_ and do'st not _know on't_, and _Secondly_ thou do'st not understand the _Blessing_, of having neither _Friends_, nor _Money_. In one word, I'll see thee provided for; and in the mean time, give me thy answer to a few questions.

I make no doubt but they that put thee into this _Trust_, and _Employment_ of helping on the _Petition_, are men of _Estate_, and men _well-inclin'd_ to the _Publique Cause_.

Methods of _Popularity._

Bum. _O, their_ Landlords _and_ Masters _are men of huge Estates; but 'tis the_ Tenants, _and the_ Stewards _that I have to do withall. But then (do you mark me) those people are all in all with their Masters._

_Citt._ I suppose you may be known to the _Landlords_ and _Masters themselves_ too. Do they ever take any notice of you?

Bum. _Yes, yes; I go often to their Houses man, and they speak mighty kindly to me; and there's nothing but_ Honest Obadiah, _and_ Good Obadiah _at every turn; and then the Men take me into the Kitchin, or into the Cellar, or so. And let me tell you_ Citt, _if it had not been for them once, I had been plaguyly paid off in the_ Spirituall Court _upon a certain Occasion_.

_Citt._ That's a very good sign of _Affection_ to the _Cause_, as I told thee: and it would be never the worse if they were under a Cloud at _Court_; for _an Honest Revenge_, ye know _goes a great way with a tender Conscience_.

Bum. _I have hear'd some Inkling that way, but we'le scatter no words._

_Citt._ They never speak any thing to you in private, do they? As of _Grievances_, (I mean) _Religion, the Liberty of the Subject_, and such like?

Bum. _No, no, but they talk as other people do, of the_ Plot, _and the_ Jesuits, _and_ Popery, _and the_ French King, _and so_.

_Citt._ And what is the reason now, do ye think, that you are not receiv'd into their _Bed-Chambers_, their _Closets_, into their _Arms_, and into their very _Hearts_, as well as some other people as we know?

Bum. _Alas! what should they do with me? I'm not a man fit to keep them Company._

A Golden Sentence.

_Citt._ Why then _Honest Bumpkin_, here's a Golden Sentence for thee; _Be Taken, Sifted, Imprison'd, Pillory'd_, and stand true to thy _Principles_, and th'art company for the best _Lord_ in _Christendom_. They'l never dare to trust thee till th' art _Jayl_ and _Pillory-proof_; and the bringing of _thee into_ a Jayl would be a greater kindness, then the fetching of _Another man Out_.

Bum. _Prethee Cit, tell me one thing by the way, hast thou ever made Tryal of this Experiment thy self?_

A Jayl is the High-way to Preferment.

_Citt._ To tell thee as a friend, I have try'd it, and I'm the best part of a thousand pound the better for't. 'Tis certainly the high way to preferment.

Bum. _And yet for all this_, Citt, _I have no minde in the World to be_ taken.

_Citt._ And that's because th' art an arrant buzzard; the Lord deliver me from a fellow that has neither _Mony_, nor _Friends_, and yet's afraid of being _Taken_. Why 'tis the very making of many a mans Fortune to be _Taken_. How many men are there that give mony to be Taken, and make a _Trade_ on't; _Nay_ happy is the man that can but get any body to _Take_ him. Why I tell ye, there are people that will _quarrel_ for't, and make _Friends_ to be _Taken_. 'Tis a common thing in _Paris_, for a man in _One six Months_, to start out of a _Friendless_, and _Monyless_ condition, into an Equipage of _Lacquays_ and _Coaches_; and all this by nicking the blessed Opportunities of being _discreetly Taken_.

Bum. _I have heard indeed of a man that set fire to_ one Old House, _and got as much Mony by a_ Brief _for't, as built him_ two New ones.

_Citt._ Have not I my self heard it cast in a fellows Teeth, _I was the making of you_, Sirrah, _though y' are so high now a body must not speak to you: You had never been_ Taken _and_ clapt up, Sirrah, _but for me_.

Bum. _Father! what Simpletons we_ Country-folks _are to you_ Citizens!

_Citt._ Now put the case _Bumpkin_, that you were _Taken, Examin'd_ and _Committed_, provided you _stand to your Tackle_, y'are a Made man already; but if you _shrink in the wetting_, y'are lost.

Bum. _Pray'e what do you mean by_ standing to my Tackle?

_Citt._ You must be sure to keep your self upon a Guard, when y'are before the _Justice_; and not to be either _wheedled_, or _frighten'd_ into any _Discovery_; for they'le be trying a thousand Tricks with you.

Bum. _But may I deny any thing that's charg'd upon me, point-blank, if I be guilty of it?_

A Salvo for a Lye.

_Citt._ Yes, in the case of _self-preservation_, you may; but you must be sure then that no body can _disprove_ you; for if it be _known_, 'tis a _Scandall_, and no longer _Lawfull_: Your best way will be not to answer any Questions against your self.

Bum. _But now you have brought me into a_ Goal, _you would do well to tell me how I shall get out again_.

The Benefits of a Prison.

_Citt._ Why before you turn your self thrice in your _Kennell_, (if _Baylable_) Y'are out again, upon a _Habeas Corpus_: But in the mean time, the Town rings of your _Commitment_, the _Cause_ of it, and how bravely you carry'd it upon your _Examination_; all which shall be Reported to your Advantage; and by this time, y'are Celebrated for the _Peoples Martyr_. And now come in the _Bottles_, the _Cold-Pies_, and the _Guynnies_: But you must lay your finger upon your Mouth, and keep all as close as if the _Fayries_ had brought it.

Bum. _Pre'thee_, Citt, _wert thou ever bound_ Prentice _to a_ Statesman?

_Citt._ No, not altogether so neither; but I serv'd a Convenient time in two of his Majesties Houses; and there I learnt _My Politiques_; that is to say, in _Newgate_, and the _Gate-house; Two schools_ (says one) _that send more wise men into the World, then the_ four Inns of Court. Now let your suffering be what it will, the _Merit_ of it will be rated according to the _Difficulty_ and _hazzard_ of the _Encounter_: For there's a great difference betwixt the Venture of a _Pillory_, and of a _Gibbet_. But in what case soever; if you stand fast, and keep your Tongue in your head, you shall want neither _Mony_, nor _Law_; nor _Countenance_, nor _Friends_ in the _Court_, nor _Friends_ in the _Jury_.

Bum. _Hold, hold_, Citt; _what if all my great Friends should deceive me at last_?

_Citt._ They'le never dare to do that, for fear you should deceive _them_. I have found the Experiment of it my self, and every _Term_ yields us fresh Instances of _people that make their Fortunes in a trice, by a generous contempt of Principalities, and Powers_.

Bum. _Thou'rt a brave fellow_ Citt; _but pre'thee what may thy Employment be at present, if a body may ask thee_?

The Secretary to a Grand Committee.

_Citt._ _I_ am at this present, _Bumpkin, under the Rose, a Secretary-Extraordinary_ to one of the _Grand Committees_ I told thee of; and my business is to draw up _Impeachments, Informations, Articles_; to lick over now and then a _Narrative_; and to deal with the _Mercuries_ to publish nothing against the Interest of that Party: and _in fine_, there's hardly any thing stirs, but I have a finger in't. Mine is a business I can tell you, that brings in _Money_.

Bum. _I make no doubt on't_ Citt: _But could ye put me in a way to get a little money too_?

_Citt._ We'l talk of that presently. You may think perhaps now the _City-Petition's_ blown off, that our _Committee_ will have nothing to do. But, I do assure you, businesse comes in so fast, upon us, that I shall never be able to go through it without an _Assistant_; and if I find you fit for't, you shall be the man.--Nay hold, let Me speak, First; do you continue the use of your _Short-hand_?

Bum. _Yes, I do; and I have mended my_ Bastard-Secretary _very much since you saw it_.

_Citt._ Will you be _Just_, _Diligent_, and _Secret_?

Bum. _I'le give you what security you'le ask, for my_ Truth _and_ Diligence; _and for my_ Secrecy, I could almost forget to _speak_.

_Citt._ That Figure pleases me; but I must shrift you further. How stands your appetite to _Wine_ and _Women_?

Bum. _Why truly at the rate of_ other flesh and blood.

_Citt._ 'Tis not to barr ye neither; but what Liberties ye take, let them be _Private_; and either to advance the _Common-cause_, or at _spare hours_.

Bum. _You cannot ask or wish more then I'le do._

_Citt._ Only a word or two more, and then I'le let you into my affairs. What course did you propound to your self, in case your _Petition_ had succeeded? I ask this, because you seem so much troubl'd at the Disappointment.

Other Petitions upon the Anvill.

Bum. _Why if this_ Petition _had gone_ on, _and the_ Parliament _had_ met, _I was promis'd four or five_ Petitions _more; One against_ Danby, _and the Lords in the_ Tower, _another_ for the Sitting of this Parliament, till they had gone through all they had to do; _a_ Third, _for taking away the_ Bishops Votes, _a_ Fourth _for the Remove of_ Evill Counsellours; _and a_ Fifth _for putting the_ Militia _into_ Safe hands.

_Citt._ These points you must know, have been a long time upon the Anvill; and our Friends have Instructions all over the Kingdom, to proceed upon them to shew the Miraculous _Union_ of the Nation. But do you think because the _First Petition_ has receiv'd a _checque_, and the _Parliament_ is _Prorogu'd_, that therefore _the other Petitions must fall to the ground_?

Bum. _I cannot well see how it should be otherwise._

_Citt._ Why then let me tell you, _Bumpkin_, We'l bring the whole business about again, and carry it on, in spite of Fate: for we have better _heads_ at work perhaps then you are aware of.

Bum. _Ay, but what_ Hands _have we_ Citt? _for it will come to that at last_.

_Citt._ Those _Heads_ will find _Hands_, never trouble your self, if there should be occasion; but 'tis too early-days for that sport yet. 'Twas an unlucky thing however to be so surpriz'd; For our Friends did no more dream of the _Sacrament_, then of their _Dying day_.

Bum. _Well there's no recalling of what's past: But the Question is how we shall avoid it for the time to come._

_Citt._ Nay _Bumpkin_, there's a Trick worth two of _avoiding_ it, we'l _Take_ it next bout, and then we're safe; we'l carry it; I'le undertake by _fifty Voices_.

Bum. _But cannot the_ Aldermen _hinder you from putting it to the Vote_?

A Designe upon the Common-Council.