Chapter I: Part 1

THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY

SIR ROGER L'ESTRANGE

_SELECTIONS FROM_

THE

OBSERVATOR

(1681-1687)

_Introduction by_ Violet Jordain

PUBLICATION NUMBER 141

WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY

University of California, Los Angeles

1970

GENERAL EDITORS

William E. Conway, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

George Robert Guffey, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Maximillian E. Novak, _University of California, Los Angeles_

ASSOCIATE EDITOR

David S. Rodes, _University of California, Los Angeles_

ADVISORY EDITORS

Richard C. Boys, _University of Michigan_

James L. Clifford, _Columbia University_

Ralph Cohen, _University of Virginia_

Vinton A. Dearing, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Arthur Friedman, _University of Chicago_

Louis A. Landa, _Princeton University_

Earl Miner, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Samuel H. Monk, _University of Minnesota_

Everett T. Moore, _University of California, Los Angeles_

Lawrence Clark Powell, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

James Sutherland, _University College, London_

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

Robert Vosper, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

CORRESPONDING SECRETARY

Edna C. Davis, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Roberta Medford, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_

INTRODUCTION

I fancy, _Trimmer_, that if You and I could but
get leave to peep out of our Graves again a matter
of a hundred and fifty year hence, we should find
these Papers in Bodlies Library, among the Memorialls
of State; and Celebrated for the Only Warrantable
Remains concerning this Juncture of Affairs.
(_Observator_ No. 259, 16 December 1682)

When the first of 931 single, folio sheets of the _Observator_ appeared on 13 April 1681, the sixty-five-year-old Roger L'Estrange, their sole author, had been a controversial London Royalist for over twenty years. As Crown protégé, he had served intermittently as Surveyor of the Press, Chief Licenser, and Justice of the King's Peace Commission; as a writer, he had produced two newspapers, the _Intelligencer_ and the _Newes_ (1663-1666), dozens of political pamphlets, and seven translations from Spanish, Latin, and French.[1] Rightly nicknamed "bloodhound of the press," L'Estrange was notorious for his ruthless ferreting out of illegal presses and seditious publishers, as well as for his tireless warfare against the powerful Stationers' Company.[2] No less well known were his intransigent reactionary views, for we can estimate that some 64,000 copies of pamphlets bearing his name were circulating in the City during the two years preceding the _Observator_.[3] Thus the _Observator_ papers represent not only the official propaganda of the restored monarchy, but also the intellectual temper of a powerful, influential man whose London fame was sufficiently demonstrated in the winter of 1680, when he was publicly burned in effigy during that year's Pope-burning festivities.

In the muddy torrent of "Intelligences," "Mercuries," "Courants," "Pacquets," and sundry newssheets, the _Observator_ marks the beginnings of a new sort of journalism, one which was to shape the development of the English periodical. Although _Heraclitus Ridens_ and its opponent _Democritus Ridens_ initiated the dialogue form for the newspaper seventy-two days before the _Observator_, their relatively short run relegates these pioneers to a shadowy background, as it does the even earlier trade paper in dialogue, the _City and Country Mercury_ (1667).[4] The eighty-two issues of _Heraclitus Ridens_ and thirteen of _Democritus Ridens_ cannot be compared in quantity to the 931 issues of the _Observator_ published three or four times a week from 13 April 1681 to 9 March 1687, nor can their stiff dialogues be compared in importance to L'Estrange's much fuller exploitation of the form. Consequently, even though he did not initiate the newspaper in dialogue form, L'Estrange is unanimously given the honor of having popularized the form, or, in the words of Richmond P. Bond, of having "borrowed the dialogue and fastened it on English journalism for a generation as a factional procedure."[5]

Imitators did not wait long. Nine days after the first _Observator_, L'Estrange's arch-enemy, Harry Care, changed to dialogue the _Popish Courant_ section of his _Weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome_, relinquishing the expository format which he had followed since 1678. Later, after the Glorious Revolution, the popularity of L'Estrange's paper is evident in the spate of imitative "Observators" that ensued: _The English Spy: Or, the Critical Observator_ (1693); _The Poetical Observator_ (1702); Tutchin's _Observator_ (1702--a Whig organ) and Leslie's _Observator_ (1704--a Tory organ); _The Comicall Observator_ (1704); _The Observator Reviv'd_ (1707), and more. As late as 1716 there was created a _Weekly Observator_. By the turn of the century, the very term "Observator" had come to signify a controversy _in dialogue_.[6] Interestingly enough, even the typography of L'Estrange's _Observator_ may have left its mark on succeeding journals. A brief comparison of Interregnum newspapers (such as _Newes Out of Ireland_ in 1642, _The Scotch Mercury_ in 1643, _The Commonwealth Mercury_ in 1658) with John Dunton's _The Athenian Mercury_ (1693) and Charles Leslie's _Observator_ (1704) reveals a marked difference in typography. In the earlier papers the typography is generally uniform, with italics used for proper names and quotations, whereas L'Estrange's and Leslie's papers exhibit the whole range of typeface available to the seventeenth-century printer. Dissenter Dunton's _Athenian Mercury_, on the other hand, shows much less eccentricity in its typography, limiting itself to generous use of italics only, while Defoe's _Review_ goes back to the earlier restraint and presents a neat, uniform page. Whether these typographical differences are attributable to particular political views or merely to "schools" of printing is difficult to say.

In addition to this obvious sort of superficial imitation, there are many indications that L'Estrange's _Observator_ had a more permanent influence on posterity. It has been suggested that the periodical specializing in query and answer between reader and editor, which was initiated by John Dunton's _Athenian Mercury_ and which we still have today, may have been inspired by the _Observator's_ habitual retorts to opponents.[7] James Sutherland isolates in Defoe certain qualities of prose style which he attributes to Defoe's extensive reading of L'Estrange; and he sees L'Estrange's natural colloquial manner as setting a pattern for journalists who followed him.[8] Far-fetched as it may seem at first glance, even Addison's _Spectator_ shows a certain similarity to the _Observator_. Although the manner, tone, language, and political views of the two are antithetical, the _Spectator's_ peculiar blend of moralizing and diversion is reminiscent of L'Estrange's work. In both papers we notice a serious didactic purpose tempered by literary techniques and imaginative handling of material. Decades before Addison's famous credo--"to make their Instruction Agreeable, and their Diversion useful ... to enliven Morality with Wit, and to temper Wit with Morality"[9]--L'Estrange had formulated a similar theory:

_Obs._: Where there has been Any thing of That which you
call Raillery, or Farce; It has amounted to no more then
a Speaking to the Common People in their Own Way....
He that Talks Dry Reason to them, does as good as treat
'em in an Unknown Tongue; and there's no Other way of
Conveying the True Sense, & Notion of Things, either to
their Affections, or to their Understandings, then by the
Palate....
(II, No. 15)

And as a link between L'Estrange and Addison we have Defoe's analogous promise in "the Introduction" to the _Review_: "After our Serious Matters are over, we shall at the end of every Paper, Present you with a little Diversion, as any thing occurs to make the World Merry."[10] These notions rest, of course, on the ancient _dulce et utile_, though modified in various ways in each of the three papers to suit the temperaments of their writers, the tastes of their mass-audiences, and different times. It is perhaps not irresponsible, then, to say that the synonymous titles of Addison's and L'Estrange's periodicals symbolize an affinity of purpose and technique. Indeed, the _Observator_ can, in many ways, be considered a rather crude and primitive ancestor of the _Spectator_.[11]

The purpose of the _Observator_ and its main targets are clearly formulated in _Observator_ No. 1, as well as in the prefatory "To the Reader," which was written in 1683 for the publication of Volume 1 of the collected papers. The "faction" which L'Estrange proposes to reprove consists at first (1681-1682) of Shaftesbury's republican-minded followers and of the perpetrators of the Popish Plot. In his evaluation of the Plot, L'Estrange agrees with some modern historians,[12] for he never doubted that it was a Whig fabrication, an invented cause around which the party members could rally and which neatly veiled the parliamentary power-struggle behind the scenes. Titus Oates is consequently the _Observator's_ _bête noire_, and Andrew Marvell's pamphlet, _The Growth of Popery_, is for L'Estrange the odious origin of the Plot:

_Obs._: I do not know Any man throughout the whole Tract
of the Controversy that has held a Candle to the Devil
with a Better Grace then the Author of that Pamphlet ...
that Furnishes so Clear a Light toward the Opening of
the Roots, Springs, and Causes of our Late Miserable
Disorders, and Confusions.... Prethee let Otes'es
Popish Plot, Stand, or Fall, to it's Own Master; provided
that Marvels may be Allow'd to be the Elder Brother....
(II, No. 16)

Toward the end of 1682, when the Whigs had ceased being an imminent threat to the government and all but one of the Whig newspapers had been silenced, L'Estrange turned his attack against the more moderate Trimmers, as illustrated in _Observator_ III, No. 88. But whether the offensive is against Whigs or Trimmers, Dissenters and advocates of toleration are always in the line of L'Estrange's fire as chief subverters of absolute monarchy and of the Church of England, as is evident in the satire of _Observator_ Nos. 13 and 110. On the eve of the Glorious Revolution, this rigid stand lost him the support of both the Anglican clergy and the universities, support of which he was so proud in his "To the Reader." Finally, _Observator_ No. 1 singles out the Whig press as one of its chief targets. The "Smith" referred to in that first number is Anabaptist Francis "Elephant" Smith, publisher of the outrageous _Mirabilis Annus_ books, the inflammatory pamphlet _Vox Populi_, and the offensive paper _Smith's Protestant Intelligence_; "Harris" is Benjamin Harris, publisher of the Whig paper, _Domestic Intelligence_. These, together with Harry Care (_Weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome_ and _Popish Courant_), Richard Janeway (_Impartial Protestant Mercury_), Langley Curtis (_The Protestant Mercury_), and hordes of anti-Royalist authors or publications are habitually quoted or referred to in L'Estrange's counterpropaganda. His untiring countering of Whig publications earned him Nahum Tate's hyperbolic praise in _The Second Part of Absalom and Achitophel_:

Than _Sheva_, none more loyal Zeal have shown,
Wakefull, as _Judah's_ Lion for the Crown,
Who for that Cause still combats in his Age,
For which his Youth with danger did engage.
In vain our factious Priests the Cant revive,
In vain seditious Scribes with Libels strive
T'enflame the Crow'd, while He with watchfull Eye
Observes, and shoots their Treasons as they fly.
Their weekly Frauds his keen Replies detect,
He undeceives more fast than they infect.
So _Moses_ when the Pest on _Legions_ prey'd,
Advanc'd his Signal and the Plague was stay'd.[13]

Parochial as these concerns seem today, the _Observator_ in its totality goes far beyond the Harry Cares and "Elephant" Smiths in its exhortation to greater rationality in areas ancillary to but transcending politics proper. Its assiduous ridicule of Enthusiasm, following in the steps of Meric Casaubon and Henry More,[14] its analyses of political manipulation of the naive populace, its explanations of psychological appeals, its Orwellian warnings against the snares of loaded diction and the dangers of affective political rhetoric--all these efforts evident in the few _Observators_ represented here are an important step in the direction of a less superstitious, less hysterical century. Paradoxically, L'Estrange mobilized progressive ideas in the service of an archaic political and religious administration, thereby familiarizing the man on the street with notions and attitudes commonly known as Enlightened.

The sugar coating in the _Observator_ is, however, as significant as the pill, and distinguishes L'Estrange's journalism from his predecessors'. Apart from the traditional satiric blend of verbal banter and polemic, which has received ample commentary,[15] his use of established literary modes further enhances the colloquies, making them especially diverting for his audience and interesting for us. As dialogues, the papers belong to a genre whose popularity has remained constant from Plato onward. The appeal of the form lies in its pleasurable verisimilitude, immediacy, adaptability to differing points of view, and, especially after the Restoration, in its potentiality for humorous repartee.[16] As _satiric_ dialogues, L'Estrange's sheets satisfy what seems to be a universal love of ridicule, an innate trait of the human mind, although there is no agreement among students of satire as to its exact psychological operations. In addition to adopting this form, which belongs to imaginative literature rather than to journalism, L'Estrange spices his _Observator_ with a number of other devices designed to provide variety, change in speed, and amusement for his reader, who is in turn bullied, joshed, castigated, reasoned, or laughed into accepting L'Estrange's views.

Frequently, for example, the dialogue gives way to a pointed anecdote (old or current, invented or factual), such as the story of Jack of Leyden in _Observator_ No. 1, or the following from a later dialogue, humorously satirizing the dour William Prynne and the Puritans' strange concepts of sin:

_Trimmer_: A Gentleman that had Cut-off his own hair on
the Saturday, came the next day to Church in his first Perriwig.
The Parson (that was already Enter'd into his Sermon)
turn'd his Discourse presently, from his Text in the
Holy Bible, to the Subject of Prynnes _Unloveliness of
Lovelocks_; and Thrash'd for a matter of a Quarter of an
hour, upon the Mortal Sin of Wearing False Hair. The
Gentleman, finding that he would never give him over,
'till he had Preach'd him into a Flat State of Reprobation,
fairly took off his Perriwig, and Clapt it upon One of the
Buttons at the Corner of the Pew. The Poor Man had not
One word more to say to the Perriwig; and was run so far
from his Text, that he could not for his heart find the way
home again: So that to make short on't; He gave the
People his Blessing, and Dismiss'd the Congregation.
(II, No. 21)

Frequently, also, L'Estrange satirizes by means of parody or ludicrous examples of his enemies' rhetoric or behavior, as in the case of the "Dissenting Academies" in _Observator_ No. 110. But most important of the techniques for entertaining are his creation of carefully delineated speaker-_personae_ and his "Characters," again both borrowed from the literary tradition.

After the first twenty-nine _Observators_, which are experimental in that "Q" and "A" have shifting personalities (as in Nos. 1 and 13), L'Estrange manipulates "Whig" and "Tory" for 171 papers, changes to "Whig" and "Observator" for 33 papers, briefly (six papers) shifts to "Whig" and "Courantier," and finally settles down to "Trimmer" and "Observator" for the remaining 692 papers. In all these, the Tory satirist (whether he be "Tory" or "Observator") is presented as the conventional "snarling dog" described by Robert C. Elliott,[17] with appropriate outbursts of polemic, invective, bitter irony, and railing humor. Even the traditional crudity is there, although compared to, say, the _Popish Courant_, L'Estrange manifests a Victorian restraint. "Whig," on the other hand, is presented as a naive, credulous, not-too-bright individual whose main fault is not so much that he is a Whig but that he is a Whig because he has no mental capacity for discrimination. The "A" speaker of No. 13 (apparently a humorous thrust at John Eachard, author of _Grounds and Occasions of the Contempt of the Clergy_) with his preference for Prynne, Baxter, and Smith over Tacitus, Livy, and Caesar, is typical of the later "Whig" _persona_. Humorless, misguided, and chronically given to believing even the most outrageous gossip, "Whig" cuts a foolish and therefore amusing figure when pitted against the sophisticated, trenchant-minded "Tory." "Trimmer" is quite different. L'Estrange here creates a much more intelligent opponent, one who is given the liberty of satirizing "Observator" himself and even patronizing him with the nickname "Nobs." Instead of naivete and obvious stupidity, "Trimmer" has the guile and surface morality of the perfect hypocrite, a "pretending friend" as "Observator" notes in _Observator_ III, Nos. 88 and 202. The humor in these later dialogues does not emerge from the "Trimmer" personality but from the frequent self-satire and criticism on the part of L'Estrange. "Trimmer," for example, is allowed to mock the prose style, figures of speech, stubbornness and repetitiveness of "Observator," as "Trimmer's" chiding tone in _Observator_ III, No. 88 suggests. To borrow a term from Robert C. Elliott, the entertainment of these later colloquies resides primarily in the technique of the "satirist satirized."[18] L'Estrange, in short, creates both _adversariuses_ as _dramatis personae_ rather than as simple straw men, a departure from the run-of-the-mill Restoration dialogue evident in the following interruption of his artfully built illusion:

_Obs._: For Varieties sake then, we'le to work another way.
Do You keep up your Part of Trimmer still: Do Just as
you use to do; and be sure to maintain your Character;
Leave the Whig and the Tory to Me.

_Trimmer_: For the Dialogue sake it shall be done.

_Obs._: But then you must Consider that there are Severall
sort of Trimmers: as your State-Trimmer, Your Law-Trimmer....

_Trimmer_: And You shall Suppose Mee to be a Statesman.

_Obs._: But of what Magnitude? A Lord? A Knight?...

_Trimmer_: Why truly Nobs, if they be all of a Price, I
don't care if I be a Lord.

_Obs._: We are over that Point then; And so I am your
Lordships most Humble Servant.

But this role playing within role playing is discarded at the end of the paper, the role of Lord being apparently too cumbersome:

_Trimmer_: No more of your Lordships, as you love me,
Nobs; for I am e'en as weary as a Dog of my Dignity.
(No. 242)

The "Character," however, is not only L'Estrange's favorite satiric tool but perhaps the literary form most frequently used in the _Observator_. L'Estrange himself attests to his partiality in his parting comment at the close of the _Observator_:

_Obs._: For my Fancy lyes more to Character, then to
Dialogue; and whoever will be so Kind as to Furnish me
with Spitefull Materials, shall get his Own again with
Interest, in an Essay upon Humane Nature.
(III, No. 246)

The Character was, of course, still highly popular in the latter half of the century, as Chester Noyes Greenough's listings show,[19] so that in indulging his own taste, L'Estrange was also catering to the tastes of his public. Of whatever other value the _Observator_ may be to the modern student, it is invaluable as a fine example of the state-of-the-Character toward the end of the century. Practically every type of Character analyzed by Benjamin Boyce in his two studies can be found repeatedly in L'Estrange's dialogues:[20] the earlier imitations of Theophrastan Characters, with their parallelisms and antitheses; the Overburian Character, with its extravagant metaphors; the externally dramatized; the subjective; the sprung. There are Characters of ideologies, of political parties, of virtues, of vices, of Whigs and Dissenters (vices), of Tories and Anglicans (virtues). There are several "Credo-Characters" (confessions or manifestoes), and finally there is the habitually dramatized self-exposing Character which becomes indistinguishable from the _dramatis persona_, as is the Character of the Modern Whig in Nos. 13 and 110. Among the _Observators_ included here, the definition of "Dissenter" in No. 1 is based on Character techniques, as is the conceit of the Protestant as "Adjective Noun-Substantive" in the same number. So is also the lengthy exposure of "Leaders" in III, No. 202, beginning with "They Talk, to the Ears, and to the Passions of their Hearers."

A final comment about L'Estrange's prose, which has been variously labeled "colloquial," "idiomatic," "vulgar," "coarse"--all vaguely descriptive terms suggesting value judgment, and none precise enough to give an intelligible account of what L'Estrange actually does. In addition to the obvious device of choppy syntax and deliberately careless constructions simulating extemporaneous speech, L'Estrange's figures and proverbial material demonstrate his meticulous shaping of an "applied prose"[21] particularly suitable for the audience whose opinions he tried to sway. His metaphors and analogies tend to rely on commonly known objects or experiences, and because of rhetorical necessity they are almost always unpleasantly graphic. A random sampling yielded the following results: about twenty-five percent of the figures in the _Observator_ deal with some specific part of the human body (nails, spleen, mouth, eyes, ears, knees, heels, flesh, guts, belly) or physiological processes (ulcerating, itching, chewing, digesting, spitting, reeking, seeing, crouching, sweating, gobbling). There is no euphemistic delicacy in these figures; L'Estrange carefully selects the most earthy, common vehicles, thus achieving what James Sutherland has termed "racy" and "vigorous" prose.[22] Another twenty-four percent of the figures are based on common occupations, daily activities, or objects familiar to the simpler citizen of London. These figures ordinarily pivot on barter or trade (horse traders, hagglers, fishwives, car men); on activities such as cooking, gambling, or glass-making; and on such objects as clothing, bagpipes, paper-pellets, bonnets, and chamber-pots. The rest derive from the animal kingdom, the Scriptures, street-entertainment (jugglers, puppets, high-rope walkers) and folk medicine (glysters and plasters). It is obvious that these figures--their concreteness, sensuousness, and closeness to the daily experience of the ordinary reader--are a main ingredient in the richly colloquial texture of L'Estrange's prose, as is the proverbial material which he incorporates unsparingly.

In L'Estrange's language the law of the land cannot be misunderstood, for it calls _a spade a spade_ (No. 106; T-S699).[23] The factions win their objectives _by hook or crook_ (No. 100; T-H588) even though they are as _mad as March Hares_ (No. 15; T-H148) and _as Blind as Beetles_ (No. 15; T-B219). Certain things are _as clear as the Day_ (No. 25; T-D56) or _as plain as the nose o'my face_ (No. 40; T-N215), whereas others are so confused that one can _make neither Head nor tayl on't_ (No. 35; T-H258). When _noses are put out of joint_ (No. 38; T-N219) and Tories are given a _bone to pick_ (No. 55; T-B522), there will obviously be _no love lost betwixt_ Whigs and Tories (No. 97; T-L544).

Thus L'Estrange's Characters, together with the fanciful anecdotes, self-satire, parodies, and _personae_, provide the satire and humor in the _Observator_, the whole being couched in familiar, pungent language. As L'Estrange counters the faction, propagandizes, and exhorts to rational behavior, he also amuses and delights, always hoping that the laughter provoked by his satiric treatment will cure what he saw as follies of his age, always appealing to the common reader whose sense of humor, he believed, was probably more developed than his sense.

California State College,
Dominguez Hills

NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION

1: The translations before 1681 are _The Visions of Dom Francisco de
Quevedo_ (1667); _A Guide to Eternity_ (1672); _Five Love-letters
from a Nun_ (1677); _The Gentleman-Apothecary_ (1678); _Seneca's
Morals_ (1678); _Twenty Select Colloquies of Erasmus_ (1679); and
_Tully's Offices_ (1680).

2: Various perspectives on L'Estrange's life and works can be found
in the following: George Kitchin, _Sir Roger L'Estrange_ (London,
1913) for L'Estrange's life and impact on the Restoration press; J.
G. Muddiman, _The King's Journalist_ (London, 1923) for L'Estrange's
rivalry with Henry Muddiman, editor of the _Oxford [London]
Gazette_; David J. Littlefield, "The Polemic Art of Sir Roger
L'Estrange: A Study of His Political Writings, 1659-1688"
(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, 1961) for an
overview of L'Estrange as a political pamphleteer.

3: In 1679 L'Estrange wrote six new pamphlets and reprinted three
old ones; in 1680 eleven new and seventeen old; at the start of
1681, ten new and seventeen old. A probable norm of 1000-1500 copies
per pamphlet edition has been estimated by Joseph Frank, _The
Beginnings of the English Newspaper, 1620-1660_ (Cambridge, Mass.,
1961), p. 314; two orders of 1500 pamphlets each were given to the
Restoration printer Nathaniel Thompson, as noted by Leona
Rostenberg, "Nathaniel Thompson, Catholic Printer and Publisher of
the Restoration," _The Library_, 3rd ser., X (1955), 195.

4: _Heraclitus Ridens_ was considered by generations of historians
as the first newspaper in dialogue; most recently, James Sutherland
(_English Literature of the Late Seventeenth Century_, Oxford, 1969,
p. 241) has given precedence to _The City and Country Mercury_.

5: _Studies in the Early English Periodical_ (Chapel Hill, 1957), p.
38.

6: Ibid., pp. 38-39.

7: Walter Graham, _English Literary Periodicals_ (New York, 1930),
pp. 38, 63, 168.

8: _On English Prose_ (Toronto, 1965), pp. 72-74.

9: _The Spectator_, No. 10, ed. Donald F. Bond (Oxford, 1965), I,
44.

10: _The Review_, ed. Arthur Wellesley Secord (Facsimile Text
Society, New York, 1938), I, 4.

11: Several of the literary techniques in the _Spectator_ had been
introduced into journalism by L'Estrange. _Spectator_ No. 1, for
example, presents a _persona_ in the character of "Mr. Spectator";
No. 2 contains a dream-allegory; Nos. 11 and 34 present indirect
discourse between _dramatis personae_; No. 19 sketches a Character
of the Envious Man--all literary modes abundant in the _Observator_.

12: See especially J. R. Jones, _The First Whigs; The Politics of
the Exclusion Crisis, 1678-1683_ (London, 1961), pp. 20, 24, 50-51,
56, 94, 112, 123-124.

13: For attribution and identification of Sheva, see G. R. Noyes,
ed., _The Poetical Works of John Dryden_ (Boston, 1909), pp. 137,
966.

14: The works that are echoed in the Observator are Meric Casaubon,
_A Treatise Concerning Enthusiasme ..._ (London, 1655) and Henry
More, _Enthusiasmus Triumphatus ..._ (London, 1656).

15: The mixture of tones is discussed in Alvin Kernan, _The Cankered
Muse_ (New Haven, 1959), pp. 68, 76; Leonard Feinberg, _Introduction
to Satire_ (Ames, Iowa, 1967), pp. 124-125; Gilbert Highet, _The
Anatomy of Satire_ (Princeton, 1962), p. 18.

16: Hugh Macdonald, "Banter in English Controversial Prose After the
Restoration," _Essays and Studies by Members of the English
Association_, XXXII (1946), 22, 26, 38.

17: _The Power of Satire: Magic, Ritual, Art_ (Princeton, 1960), pp.
133-136, 164-165.

18: Ibid., pp. 130-222 (_passim_).

19: _A Bibliography of the Theophrastan Character in English, With
Several Portrait Characters_ (Cambridge, Mass., 1947).

20: _The Theophrastan Character in England to 1642_ (Cambridge,
Mass., 1947) and _The Polemic Character, 1640-1661_ (Lincoln, Neb.,
1955).

21: The term is suggested by Ian Gordon (_The Movement of English
Prose_, London, 1966, p. 136) in his discussion of the simple,
clear, journalistic style practiced by L'Estrange, Defoe, and Swift
in their political writings.

22: _On English Prose_, p. 70.

23: The symbol "T" and accompanying numbers refer to the entries in
Morris Palmer Tilley, _A Dictionary of the Proverb in England in the
Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries_ (Ann Arbor, 1950).

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

The sources for the parts of the _Observator_ in _Dialogue_
reprinted here are Volume I of the first collected edition published
in 1684, and Volume III, published and bound together with Volume II
in 1687, both in the collection of the William Andrews Clark
Memorial Library. The pieces reprinted from Volume I consist of the
prefatory "To the Reader," and _Observator_ Nos. 1, 13, and 110; the
papers reprinted from Volume III consist of _Observator_ Nos. 88 and
202. In this edition the following editorial changes have been made:
black letter type is indicated by underlining; inverted letters have
been corrected; obvious compositor's errors have been corrected; and
inconsistencies in font due to compositors' carelessness have been
normalized. The frontispiece to this facsimile reprint is reproduced
from the Clark copy and measures approximately 13-7/16" x 8-5/8" in
the original.

THE OBSERVATOR

To the _READER_.

Most _Prefaces_ are, (Effectually) _Apologies_; and neither the _Book_, nor the _Author_, one Jot the _Better_ for them. If the _Book_ be _Good_, it will not _Need_ an _Apology_; If _Bad_, it will not _Bear_ One: For where a man thinks, by _Calling_ himself _Noddy_, in the _Epistle_, to _Atone_, for _Shewing_ himself to be one, in the _Text_; He does (with Respect to the Dignity of an _Author_) but _Bind up Two Fools_ in _One Cover_: But there's no more Trusting some People with _Pen, Ink, and Paper_, then the Maddest Extravagants in _Bedlam_, with _Fire_, _Sword_, or _Poyson_. He that _Writes Ill_, and _Sees_ it, why does he _Write on_? And, with a kind of _Malice Prepense, Murder_ the _Ingenious_ part of _Mankind_? He that _Really Believes_ he Writes _Well_; why does he pretend to _Think_ Otherwise? Now take it which way you please, a man runs a Risque of his _Reputation_, for want, either of _Skill_, and _Judgment_, the _One_ way; Or of _Good Faith_, and _Candor_ the _Other_. Beside a Mighty Oversight, in _Imagining_ to bring himself off, from an _Ill_ Thing, _Done_, or _Said_, by Telling the World that he did it for _This_ or _That Reason_. When a Book has once past the _Press_ into the _Publique_; there's no more _Recalling_ of it, then of a _Word Spoken_, out of the _Air_ again. And a man may as well hope to Reverse the _Decree_ of his _Mortality_, as the _Fate_ of his _Writings_. In short: When the _Dice_ are _Cast_, the _Author_ must stand his _Chance_.

Now that I may not be thought to Enterfere with my self, by _Declaiming_ against _One Preface_ in _Another_: I do here previously Renounce to All the Little Arts and Forms of Bespeaking the _Good Will_ of the _Reader_; As a _Practice_, not only _Mean_, _Light_, and _Unprofitable_; but wholly _Contrary_ to the _Bent_ of _My Inclination_; as well as _Inconsistent_ with the very _Drift_, and _Quality_ of my _Design_. For These _Papers_ were _Written_, Indifferently, for the _Enformation_ of the _Multitude_; and for the _Reproof_ of a _Faction_: _Two Interests_ that I am not much _Sollicitous_, or _Ambitious_, to _Oblige_: And upon _This Consideration_ it is, that I have _Address'd_ them to the _Reader_ in _Generall_; as a _Calculation_ that will serve for _All Meridians_: But if I could have Resolved upon a _Dedication_, with any _Particular Mark_, or _Epithete_ of _Distinction_; it should have been, _To the IGNORANT, the SEDITIOUS_, or _the SCHISMATICAL Reader_; for _There_, properly, lies _my Bus'ness_.

The Reader will find in the _First Number_ of This Collection, the _True Intent_, and _Design_ of the _Undertaking_; And he will likewise find, in the very _Date_ of it, (April 13. 1681.) the _Absolute Necessity_ of some Such _Application_, to Encounter the _Notorious Falshoods_; the _Malicious Scandals_, and the _Poysonous Doctrines_ of _That Season_.

Whether I had Sufficient _Ground_, or _Reason_, for the Warmth I have Exprest in These Papers, upon Several Occasions, (out of an Affectionate Sense of my _Duty_, and a _Zeal_ for the _Peace_, _Welfare_, and _Safety_ of my _Country_;) I _Dare_, and I _Do Appeal_ to the _King_, and his _Ministers_; to the _Consciences_ of as many of his Majesties _Subjects_, as are not _Stark Blind_ because they _WILL_ not _See_; and to the Justice of the Nation. I do _Appeal_, I say, to his Majesties _Proclamations_; to his _Royal Declaration_; Several _Orders_ of _Councel_; the _Examinations_, and _Confessions_ of _Unquestionable Witnesses_; The _Solemnity_ of so many _Tryals_, _Sentences_, and _Executions_; and the _Criminals_, Every Man of 'em, Either _Acknowledging_ the _Crime_, or _Justifying_ the _Treason_: But the _FACT_, however made as _Clear_ as the _Day_. There's the _Flight_ of the _Conspirators_; Their _Arms Seiz'd_; Their _Councels Laid Open_; _Men Listed_; The _Methods_ of the _Confederacy Detected_, to the very _Time_, and _Place_ for the _Perpetration_ of the _Villany_; to the very _Circumstance_ of the _Providential Fire_ at _Newmarket_, that _Disappointed_ it. I have All These _Demonstrative Proofs_, and _Convincing Evidences_, to _Warrant_ me in the most _Violent Presumptions_ of a _Rebellion_ in _Agitation_: And the _Phanatiques Themselves_ made good the _Worst_ Things that ever I said of the _Party_: In _Vindication_ of the _Importunity_ of All my _Foreboding_, if not _Prophetical Suspicions_: Nay, they were come to the very _Point_, and _Crisis_ of the _Operation_, of That _Unaccountable_, and _Amazing Vote_. [_If his Majesty shall come by Any Violent Death (which God Forbid) it shall_ be _Reveng'd to the Utmost upon the Papists_.] The _King_, and the _Duke_ were to be _Murder'd_ by _Republican_, and _Fanatical Rebells_: _There's_ your _VIOLENT DEATH_. And _Then_, [Reuenge it upon the Papists:] For [_the Thing_ (says _Keeling_) _was to be laid upon the Papists as a Branch of the Popish Plot_. Walcots Tryal. Fol.9.] And the _Next_ Step was, for the _Traytors_ to _Unriddle_ the _Mystery_, and to _Expound_, Who were the _Papists_. [_The Lord Mayor, and the Sheriffs_] _were Three_ of 'em. _They_, were to be Kill'd; And [_as many of the_ Lieutenancy _as they could get; And the Principal Ministers of State; My Lord_ Halifax, _My Lord_ Rochester, _and my_ Lord Keeper: (_They_ were _Three Papists more_.) _My Lord_ Keeper _was to have been_ Hang'd _upon the same Post that_ College _had hung. Sir_ John Moor _to be_ Hung-up _in_ Guildhall, _as a Betrayer of the Rights and Liberties of the City. And the Judges Lordships to be_ Flay'd, _and_ Stuff'd, _and_ Hung-up _in_ Westminster Hall: _And a great many of the_ Pensionary Parliament Hang'd-up, _as Betrayers of the Rights of the People_. Walcots Tryal, p. 15.] You have here, a _Practical Explanation_ of the _True-Protestant Way_, (in case of _the King's Violent Death_) _of Revenging it to the Utmost upon the Papists_. And This Intended _Assassination_ (says _Ferguson_ (in the same Page)) [_Is a Glorious Action, and such an Action as_ I HOPE TO SEE PUBLIQUELY GRATIFY'D BY PARLIAMENT; _And Question not but you will be Fam'd for it, and_ Statues _Erected for you, with the Title of_ LIBERATORES PATRIAE. _Ibid._] Now when Matters were come to _This Pass_ once, I think it was High Time to Write _Observators_.

I might Enlarge my self, upon the _Inducements_ that Mov'd me to Enter upon This _Province_; The _Needfullness_ of some _Popular Medium_ for the _Rectifying_ of _Vulgar Mistakes,_ and for _Instilling_ of _Dutyfull_, and _Honest Principles_ into the _Common People_, upon That _Turbulent_, and _Seditious Juncture_: But I am not Willing to _Clogg_ my _Preface_, with the _Repetition_ of what I have spoken so _Expressly_ to, in the _Book_.

I am now to Advertise the _Reader_, in the next Place; That as I have not Strain'd, so much as _One Syllable_, in the _Whole Course_ of _These Papers_, beyond the _Line_ of _Truth_, Nor let fall _One Word, Contrary_ to my _Conscience_; Nor _Layd-on_ so much as _One False Colour_, for a _Blind_, or a _Disguise_: As I have not done any Thing of All This, I say; Nor _Gratify'd_ so much as _One Passion_ to the Prejudice, of any _MAN_, or _THING_; or of _Common Justice it Self_: So neither, on the _Other_ hand, was I less _Cautious_, and _Considerate_, in the _Undertaking_ of This _Duty_, then I have been _Clear_, and _Impartial_, in the _Discharge_, and _Manage_ of it.

I was no sooner Possess't, of the _Reason_, and the _Expedience_ of the _Thing_; but I fell presently to _Deliberate_ upon the _Invidious Difficulties_; The _Scandals_, _Reproches_, and a Thousand Other _Mischiefs_, and _Inconveniencies_, that would probably _Attend_ it. I laid them All _before_ me; And upon a _Full Computation_ of the _Matter, Pro_ and _Con_; I Resolv'd, at last, to Put _pen to paper_; not without some _Vanity_ perhaps, in _Affecting_ the _Honour_ of being _Revil'd_, by the _Blasphemers_ of _God_, and the _King_. I shall say Nothing of the _Traytors_; The _Papists_; The _Fidlers_; The _All-manner-of-Rogues_, and _Debauchees_ that they have _made_ me: For their _Cause_ is _Founded_ upon a _Sacrilegious Hypocrisy; Maintain'd_ by _Fraud_, _Scandal_, and _Imposture_. And when they have a mind to _Blacken_ a man, 'tis not a _Straw_ matter, for any _Foundation_ of _Fact_, or _History_: But _Paint_ him as like the _Devil_ as they _Can_; and to make short Work on't, _One Fanatique_ Sits to _Another_, for the _Picture_. But _These Scurrilities_ have more of _Noise_ in 'em, then of _Weight_: And Those People that had the face to _Calumniate Charles the First_, for a _TYRANT_, and a _PAPIST_; And the _Confidence_, at This very day, to do as much for _Charles the Second_; They that _Preach REBELLION_ out of the _GOSPEL_; Give it the _Name_ of _GOD'S TRUTH, GOD'S CAUSE_; And offer up the _Bloud_ of _Kings_ as an _Acceptable Sacrifice_ to _Jesus Christ_: What _Christian_ will not _Value_ himself, upon the _Reputation_ of lying under the _Scourge_ of _Those Tongues_, and _Pens_, that Offer these _Outrages_ to their _Maker_, and their _Saviour_? So that these _Clamours_, and _Maledictions_, I look upon, as Matter, rather of _Advantage_, then _Discredit_; Where _Loyalty_ to the _King_, and to the _Church_, is made the _Crime_: But yet I must Confess, I had _Some Other Mortifications_ in my _Thought_, that went a little _Nearer_ me.

As first, the _Indecency_ of a _Gentlemans_ Entring into a _Street-Brawl_, (and _Bare-fac'd_ too) with the _Sink_ of _Mankind_, both for _Quality_, and _Wickedness_. 21y. The _Disproportion_, and the _Indecorum_ of the Thing, for an _Old Fellow_ that now Writes _Sixty Eight_, to run about, a _Masquerading_, and _Dialoguing_ of it, in _Twenty Fantastical Shapes_, only to furnish a _Popular Entertainment_, and _Diversion_. 31y. The _Scandalous Appearance_ of it, for Me to take up the _Profession_, and _Bus'ness_ of a _Pamphleteer_; And (almost) to Lose the _Name_ of my _Family_, by it, in _Exchange_ for That of the _Observator_. 41y. I had This Prospect before me too. What _Construction_ would be made upon't; (If I may speak it with _Modesty_) even to the _Lessening_ of my _Character_; And Consequently, to my Detriment, Every way, as well in Respect of _Fortune_, as _Esteem_: For men are apt, in such Cases as This, to _Mistake_, the _Intent_, as well as the _Reason_ of the _Office_; and to Impute the most _Sacred_, and _Consciencious Zeal_ of an _Upright Heart_, in the performance of the most _Important_, and _Necessary Duty_, only to a _Levity_ of _Mind_, perchance; Or in Other Terms; to an Over _Officious_, and _Pragmatical Itch of Medling_: It makes a man to be lookt upon, as if a _Pamphlet_ were his _Masterpiece_; and when he's once _Nail'd_ to _That Post_, he may reckon upon't, that he's at the _Top_ of his _Preferment_. Upon These _Four Difficulties_, I Reason'd with my self, after This Manner. To the _First_; What do I care, for having so much _Dirt_ Thrown at me, that will _Wash off_ again? And at the worst, the Engaging with such a _Rabble_ of _Contaminated Varlets_, is no more then _Leaping_ into the _Mud_ to help my _Father. Secondly. 'Tis not for a man in years_, to do so and so. Well! And here's a _Reputative Circumstance_, on the _One_ hand, against an _Indispensable Duty_, on the _Other_. The _Common people_ are _Poyson'd_, and will run _Stark Mad_, if they be not _Cur'd_: Offer them _Reason_, without _Fooling_, and it will never _Down_ with them: And give them _Fooling_, without _Argument_, they're never the _Better_ for't. Let 'em _Alone_, and All's _Lost_. So that the _Mixture_ is become as _Necessary_, as the _Office_; And it has been _My Part_, only to _Season_ the _One_ with the _Other. Thirdly_, I must Set the _Conscience_ of the Action, against the _Reproch_. And _Lastly; 'Tis nothing to me what Other People_ Think, _so long as I am Conscious to my Self that I Do what I_ Ought.

All This I Computed upon, _before-hand_; And thus far, I have not been _Deceiv'd_ in my _Account_. I have been _Baited_ with _Thousands_ upon _Thousands_ of _Libells_. I have Created _Enemies_ that do me the _Honour_ to _Hate_ me, perhaps, next to the _King Himself_ (God Bless him) and the _Royal Family_. Their _Scandals_ are _Blown over_: Their _Malice, Defeated_, And whenever _my Hour comes_, I am ready to Deliver up my _Soul_, with the _Conscience_ of an _Honest Man_, as to what I have done, in _This Particular_: And I do here Declare, in the _Presence_ of an _All-Seeing_, and an _All-Knowing God_, That as I have never yet receiv'd any _Answer_, more then _Cavil_, and _Shuffling_, to the _Doctrine_, and _Reasoning_ of _These Papers_: So I never _made use_ of Any _Sophism_, or _Double Meaning_, in Defence of the _Cause_ that I have here taken upon me to _Assert_: But have dealt _Plainly_, and _Above-Bord_, without either _Fallacy_, or _Collusion_.

After This _View_ of the _Worst side_ of my _Case_; (And (in truth) a kind of _Abstract_ of it, in _Minutes_) I should be Extremely wanting, both to _God_ and _Man_, in not taking _This Occasion_, of making _known_ to the _world_, the _Many Generous Instances_ of _Affection_, and _Respect_, which I have received, not only from the most _Considerable_ Part of his Majesties _Loyal Subjects_ of _All Qualities_, and _Degrees_; But _Particularly_ from the _Two Famous Universities Themselves_: And, in short, from the most _Eminent Persons_ of the _Long Robe_, in their _Several Professions_: In _Testimony_ of their _Favourable Acceptance_ of my _Honest Endeavours_ toward the Service, both of the _Church_, & the _State_. And This I am Obliged to leave behind me, upon _Record_; out of a _Double Right_, & _Regard_, as well to my _Friends_, as to my _Self_: For I reckon upon it, as an _Accumulation_ of _Honour_, to _Me_, to be _Rescu'd_ out of the hands of _Publique Enemies_, and _Apostates_, by Men of the Clear _Contrary Character_; That is to say; by Men of _Unquestionable Integrity_, and of _Unspotted Faith_.

My _Back Friends_ are as _Merry_, now, as _a Laugh on One side of the Mouth_ can Make 'em; at the _Conceit_ of calling the several _Presents_ which have been made me (and they are very _Considerable_) by the name of a _Gathering_; and they do not Stick to put it about, That I was my _Own Sollicitor_ for the _Begging_ of it. I have been Told of One, that _said_ as much; _for whose sake_, I would Advise _All Parents_ to take it for a _Warning_, not to _Stuff_ their _Childrens Heads_ so Damnably, with _Greek and Latin_, as to leave no _Room_ for _Brains_, and _Good Manners_. But what if it _be a Gathering_? Are not All _Publique Benevolences; Publique Works; Publique Acknowledgments_; the _same Thing_? Neither do I find any more _Scandal_, in receiving a _Reward_ for a _Service_ in a _Common Cause_, then in a _Lawyers_ taking a _Fee_, in a _Private_ One: But be it what it _will_: I shall Transmit the _Acknowledgment_ of it, with This Paper, as the _Glory of my Life_: And Value my self Incomparably more upon so _Eminent_ a _Mark_ of a _General Esteem_; then upon the _Advantage_ of _Ten times a Greater Sum_, by _Any Other way_. But _Gatherings_, with some People, are only _Honourable_, when they are Apply'd to the _Maintaining_ of _Conspirators_, and _Affidavit-Men_: And they Account _Money_ much better _Bestow'd_ upon the _Subversion_ of the _Government_, then toward the _Defending_ of it: But _That Orange is Squeez'd as far as 'twill Drop, already_.

Now to the _Calumny_ of _My Setting This Bus'ness afoot; First_, I thank God, that neither my _Mind_, nor my _Condition_ were ever Sunk _so_ Low, yet, as to _Descend_ to _That way of Application_. 21y, As I hope to be Sav'd, the Matter was Proceeded upon, in _Several Places_, and a _Long Time_, before ever I had the Least _Inkling_, or _Imagination_ of it; And when it was so far _Advanc'd, without my Privity_, I must Certainly have been both a Great _Fool_, and a Great _Clown_, either to have _Oppos'd_, or _Refus'd_, a Token of so _Obliging_, and so _Generous_ a _Respect_. To Conclude; If any man has been so _Misled_, as to _Intend_ That for a _Personal Charity_; which I cannot _Honourably_ Own the _Receiving_ of, under _That Notion_; I am ready to Return him his Proportion, with a Thousand Acknowledgments: But This shall not Hinder me yet, from _Cherishing_ in my _Thoughts_, the _Remembrance_ of what _Honour_ soever has been done me for the sake of the _Publique_.

The Reflexions that have been Pass'd upon my _Quality_, and _Conversation_, need no Further Answer, then to Appeal to my very _Name_, and my _Acquaintance_: But for the _Charge_ of being a _Papist_, it is as _False_, as it is _Malicious_.

I am to say One Word more now, concerning my _L. Shaftsbury_; whose _Name_, and _Title_, I have often Occasion to make mention of, in This Book. The _Reader_ is to take Notice, that it is Intended of the _Late Earl of Shaftsbury_, who Dy'd at _Amsterdam, Jan. 168-2/3. The Surviving Heir of That Honour, and Family, having ever Demean'd himself with a Remarkable Loyalty, and Respect, toward the King, and his Government_.

=Numb. 1.=

THE OBSERVATOR.

In _QUESTION_ and _ANSWER_.

=WEDNESDAY=, April 13. 1681.

_Q. WEll! They are so. But do you think now to bring'um to their Wits again with a_ Pamphlet?

_A._ Come, Come; 'Tis the _Press_ that has made'um _Mad_, and the _Press_ must set'um _Right_ again. The Distemper is _Epidemical_; and there's no way in the world, but by _Printing_, to convey the _Remedy_ to the _Disease_.

_Q. But what is it that you call a_ Remedy?

_A._ The _Removing_ of the _Cause_. That is to say, the _Undeceiving_ of the _People_: for they are well enough Disposed, of themselves, to be Orderly, and Obedient; if they were not misled by _Ill Principles_, and Hair'd and Juggled out of their Senses with so many Frightful _Stories_ and _Impostures_.

_Q. Well! to be Plain and Short; You call your self the_ Observator: _What is it now that you intend for the Subject of your_ Observations?

_A._ Take it in few words then. My business is, to encounter the _Faction_, and to Vindicate the _Government_; to detect their _Forgeries_; to lay open the Rankness of their _Calumnies_, and _Malice_; to Refute their _Seditious Doctrines_; to expose their _Hypocrisy_, and the _bloudy Design_ that is carry'd on, under the Name, and Semblance, of _Religion_; And, in short, to lift up the Cloke of the _True Protestant_ (as he Christens himself) and to shew the People, the _Jesuite_ that lies skulking under it.

_Q. Shall the_ Observator _be a_ Weekly Paper, _or How_?

_A._ No, No; but oftner, or seldomer, as I see Occasion.

_Q. Pray favour me a word; When you speak of a_ True Protestant, _don't you mean a_ Dissenting Protestant?

_A._ Yes, I do: For your _Assenting_ and _Consenting Protestant_ (you must know) is a _Christian_.

_Q. And is not a_ Dissenting Protestant _a_ Christian too?

_A._ Peradventure, he _is_ one; peradventure, _not_: For a _Dissenter_ has his Name from his _Disagreement_, not from his _Perswasion_.

_Q. What is a Dissenter then?_

_A._ Tis Impossible to say either what a _Dissenter IS_, or what he is _NOT_. For he's a _NOTHING_; that may yet come to be _ANY thing_. He may be a _Christian_; or he may be a _Turk_; But you'l find the best account of him in his _Name_. _A DISSENTER, is one that thinks OTHERWISE._ That is to say, let the _Magistrate_ think what he pleases, the _Dissenter_ will be sure to be of _another Opinion_. A _Dissenter_ is not of _This_, or of _That_, or of _Any Religion_; but _A Member Politique of an Incorporate Faction_: or Otherwise; A _Protestant-Fault-Finder_ in a _Christian Commonwealth_.

_Q. Well! but tho' a_ Dissenter _may be_ any thing; _A_ Dissenting Protestant _yet tells ye_ what _he Is_.

_A._ He does so, he tells ye that he _is_ a _Negative_: an _Anti-Protester_; One that _Protests AGAINST_, but not _FOR_ any thing.

_Q. Ay; but so long as he opposes the_ Corruptions _of the Church of_ Rome.

_A._ Well: And so he does the _Rites_, and _Constitutions_ of the Church of _England_ too. As a _Protestant_, he does the _former_; and the _Other_ as a _Dissenter_.

_Q. But is there no_ Uniting _of These_ Dissenters?

_A._ You shall as soon make the Winds blow the same way, from all the Poynts of the Compass.

_Q. There are_ Good _and_ Bad, _of_ all Opinions, _there's no doubt on't: But do you think it fayr, to Condemn a_ whole Party _for some_ Ill men _in't_?

_A._ No, by no means: The _Party_ is neither the _Worse_, for having _Ill_ men in it, nor the _Better_, for _Good_. For whatever the _Members_ are, the _Party_ is a _Confederacy_; as being a _Combination_, against the _Law_.

_Q. But a man may_ Mean honestly, _and yet perhaps ly under some_ Mistake. _Can any man help his Opinion?_

_A._ A man may _Mean well_, and _Do Ill_; he may shed _Innocent Bloud_, and _think he does God good Service_. 'Tis True: A man cannot help _Thinking_; but he may help _Doing_: He is _Excusable_ for a _Private_ Mistake, for _That's_ an Error only to _himself_; but when it comes once to an _Overt Act_, 'tis an _Usurpation_ upon the _Magistrate_, and there's no Plea for't.

_Q. You have no kindnesse, I perceive, for a_ Dissenting Protestant; _but what do you think of a bare_ Protestant _without any_ Adjunct?

_A._ I do look upon _Such_ a _Protestant_ to be a kind of an _Adjective Noun-Substantive; It requires something to be joyn'd with it, to shew its Signification_. By _Protestancy_ in _General_ is commonly understood a _Separation_ of Christians from the Communion of the Church of _Rome_: But to _Oppose Errors_, on the _One hand_, is not Sufficient, without keeping our selves _Clear_ of Corruptions, on the _Other_. Now it was the _Reformation_, not the _Protestation_, that Settled us upon a _true Medium_ betwixt the two _Extreams_.

_Q. So that you look upon the_ Protestation, _and the_ Reformation, _it seems, as two several things_.

_A._ Very right; But in such a manner only, that the _Former_, by Gods Providence, made way for the _Other_.

_Q. But are not all_ Protestants _Members of the_ Reformed Religion?

_A._ Take notice, _First_, that the _Name_ came Originally from the _Protestation_ in 1529. against the _Decree of Spires_; and that the _Lutheran Protestants_ and _Ours_ of the Church of _England_, are not of the _Sam Communion_. Now _Secondly_; If you take _Protestants_ in the _Latitude_ with our _Dissenters_, they are not so much a _Religion_, as a _Party_; and whoever takes this Body of _Dissenters_ for _Members_ of the _Reformed Religion_ sets up a _Reformation_ of a _hundred and fifty Colours_ and as may [sic] _Heresies_. The _Anabaptists, Brownists, Antinomians, Familists, &c._ do all of them set up for _Dissenting Protestants_; but God forbid we should ever enter these _People_ upon the Roll of the _Reformation_.

_Q._ Well! _but what do you think of_ Protestant Smith _and_ Protestant Harris?

_A._ Just as I do of _Protestant Muncer_, and _Protestant Phifer_; a Brace of _Protestants_ that cost the Empire 150000 Lives: and our own _Pretended Protestants_ too, of Later Date, have cost _This Nation little lesse_.

_Q. Ay: But these are men of quite another Temper: Do not you see how zealous they are for the Preservation of the_ King's Person, _the_ Government, _and the_ Protestant Religion?

_A._ I _See_ well enough what they _Say_, and I _know_ what they _do_. Consider, _First_, that they are Profess'd _Anabaptists: Smith_ no less then a _pretended Prophet_; and the _Other_, a kind of a _Wet Enthusiast. Secondly_; 'tis the very _Doctrine_ of the _Sect_ to root out _Magistracy_, Cancel _Humane Laws; Kill_, and take _Possession_; and _wash their Feet with the Bloud of the Ungodly_; and where ever they have set Footing, they have _Practic'd_ what they _Taught_. Are not these likely men now, to help out a _King_, and a _Religion_, at a dead lift? If you would be further satisfy'd in the Truth of things, reade _Sleidan, Spanhemius, Gastius, Hortensius, Bullinger, Pontanus, The Dipper dipp'd, Bayly's Disswasive, Pagets Heresiography_, &c. _Hortensius_ tells ye, how _Jack of Leydens Successor_ murthered his Wife, to make way to his Daughter, _P._ 74. and after that, cut a girls throat, for fear she should tell Tales. _Gastius_ tells us of a Fellow that cut off his brothers Head, as by Impulse, and then cry'd, _The Will of God is fulfilled, lib. I. Pa. 12. Jack of Leyden_ started up from Supper, _to do some business_ (he said) _which the Father had commanded him_, and cut off a Soldiers Head; and afterwards cut off his Wives head in the _Market-place. Sleydans Comment. Lib. 10._

_Q. You will not make the_ Protestant-Mercury _to be an_ Anabaptist _too, will ye_?

_A._ If you do make him _any thing_, I'le make him _That_. But in one word, they are _Factious_ and _Necessitous_; and consequently, the fittest Instruments in the world, for the Promoting of a _Sedition_. First, as they are _Principled_ for't; and then, in respect of their _Condition_; for they are every man of them under the Lash of the Law, and Retainers to Prisons; So that in their _Fortunes_ they can hardly be _worse_. Insomuch, that it is a common thing for them to lend a Name to the countenancing of a Libel which no body else dares own.

_Q. Well! but let them be as_ poor, _and_ malicious _as_ Devils, _so long as they have neither_ Brains, _nor_ Interest, _what hurt can their Papers do_?

_A._ The Intelligences, you must know, that bear their _Names_, are not of _their Composing_, but the Dictates of a _Faction_, and the Venom of a Club of _Common-wealths-men_ instill'd into those Papers.

_Q. These are_ Words, _all this while, without_ Proofs; _Can you shew us particularly where the Venom lies?_