Chapter XI: A Table of Contents (1)

By _SYLVANUS URBAN_ of _Aldermanbury_, Gent.

_Prodesse & Delectare._

The THIRD EDITION.

_LONDON:_

Printed for _R. Newton_, at St _John’s Gate_, and Sold by the
Booksellers, MDCCXXXI. (_Price_ SIX-PENCE.)

CONTENTS of No. I. _for_ JANUARY.

Remarks on the Reign of Q. _Elizabeth_, _p._ 3, 5, 7

Reflections on the Conduct of a certain great Man, 4

Political Observations from the _Craftsman_, _ibid._

Liberty of the Press asserted, 5

---- Reply’d to, 17

Of the standing Army and Riot Act, 5

---- Reply’d to, 16

Remarks on the _Craftsman_’s Hague Letter, 6

On the present State of Affairs, 7, 10

Conduct of the Ministry, 7

Of Mr. _Chubb_’s Discourse of Reason, 8

The Writers in behalf of the Government, ridiculed and
censur’d, _ibid._

Mr. _Cheselden_’s intended Operation on the Drum of the Ear,
ridicul’d, 10

---- Defended, 19

Criticisms on the New Years Ode, 10, 11

The Contagion of Poetry, 11

Of political Controversies, 12

Of Gardners; Vermin, and Ridicule, 16

Of Quackery, Authors and Criticism, 13

Of Humours and Behaviour, 13, 14

Laws of Courtship, 14, 15

Of Prostitutes, Chastity, and Fondness, 15

Poetry and Musick, _ibid._

The _Craftsman_ corrected, 16

Answer’d as to the Ministry, _ib._

---- reply’d to, about a pamphlet call’d _Sedition and
Defamation Display’d_, _ib._

Of Pawn-brokers, 18

Of the Law, Remedies for it’s Evils, 19

Poetry, _The New Year’s Ode_, 20

_An Ode to the Laureat_, _ib._

_Ode on the Twelfth-Day_, 21

_A Hymn to the Laureat_, _ib._

_Verses on the Laureat_, 22

_An Ode to Sir Rob. Walpole_, _ib._

_Epitaphs on Mrs. Oldfield_, 23

On a Lady stung by a Bee, _ib._

_Verses by a Lady_, _ib._

Domestick Occurrences, 24

A List of the Governors, _&c._ of the _African_ Company, 27

The King’s Answer to the Lds Address, _ib._

Credulity in Witchcraft, 29

Extraordinary Accidents and Casualties, 30

Narrative of an Apparition, 31

Ships lost, and Casualties, 32

Deaths of Eminent Persons, 33

Marriages and Promotions, 35

Ecclesiastical Preferments and Bankrupts, 36

Exact List of Sheriffs, 37

Course of Exchange, _ib._

Stocks, Prices of Goods, 39

Monthly Bill of Mortality, 40

Foreign Affairs, 41

Fairs in February, _&c._ 43

Observations in Gardening, 44

Books published, 45, 46

THE
_Gentleman_’s _Magazine_:
JANUARY, 1731.

_A View of the WEEKLY ESSAYS in this Month._

_The Craftsman_, _by_ Caleb D’anvers _Esq;_ and Mr _Oldcastle_. Jan. 2. No. 235.

Mr. _Oldcastle_ having begun his remarks on the conduct of the Kings of _England_, to shew how the spirit of _Faction_, and the spirit of _Liberty_ had exerted themselves at different times and occasions, had brought his Observations down to the reign of Q. _Elizabeth_. He begins No. 234, with an Eulogium upon her prudent conduct in the most arduous difficulties that attended her accession to the Throne. These difficulties he explains at large, and goes on No. 235, to speak more largely of the means whereby she establish’d her glory and confirm’d herself in the affections of her People. Her first principle was to be neither _fear’d nor despis’d_ by those she govern’d. He mentions some instances wherein she discover’d her wisdom in both these respects, particularly in maintaining her _Prerogative_, which altho’ she was fond of, yet took care it never should be grievous, or if it should happen so to particular persons, that it should appear specious to the publick. The effects, he says, of a bare-fac’d _Prerogative_ are not so dangerous to _Liberty_ as the attempts which are made to surprize and undermine it. Wherefore Q. _Eliz._ never kept up a _Standing Army_, but placed her security in the affection of her People. With respect to _parties_ he extols her moderation and equity, by which conduct she stood on firmer ground, and had less to fear from the spirit of _Faction_. She neither hastily espoused the party which she favour’d, nor inflam’d the spirits of the adverse party. The _Papists_ and _Puritans_ she used with lenity, ’till their evil practices made it necessary to execute rigours, and even then she distinguished _Papists in conscience from Papists in Faction, nor condemn’d the Zeal of the Puritans, but sometimes censured their Violence. He says from ~Cambden~, she bestowed her favours with so much caution, and so little distinction, as to prevent either party from gaining the ascendant over her, whereby she remained Mistress of her own self, and preserved both their affections and her own power and authority entire._

He proceeds to justify Q. _Eliz._ from the imputation of avarice, by observing that she neither hoarded up, nor was lavish of the publick money. Quotes a saying of the famous _Burleigh_, that, _He never cared to see the treasury swell like a disorder’d spleen, when the other parts of the common-wealth were in a Consumption_; and his mistress thought that _money in the pockets of her subjects was better than in her own_.

It was her maxim to save for the publick not for herself, and to measure her riches by the riches of the nation; refused supplies offered, and remitted payment of supplies granted, when the publick service did not require it. The two great principles of her Œconomy were _1st._ Not suffering her Officers to enrich themselves by fraud or clandestine management. _2d._ Never attempting to do any thing with money that could be done with wisdom or courage. (_See p. 319._) For which cites several instances; and observes how greatly she promoted commerce, and increased the fleet of _England_, which before was inconsiderable.

_Jan. 9._ Craftsman, No. 236.

All his oratory here is pointed at the person of a _certain great man_ whom he represents as affecting all the qualities and requisites of the most consummate statesman, without any qualifications in him necessary for so high a post. He ridicules him for a ready habit of _lying_, because it is sometimes proper for a politician to conceal the truth: Charges him with a dark mysterious proceeding on all Occasions, because _secrecy_ is requir’d in a statesman, and adds, that ’tis a proof that his secret services are great by the large sums requir’d for carrying them on. Says, _good Intelligence_ is another excellent property in an able statesman, and therefore our _mock-minister_ apes him in this particular; gives a long detail of instances to illustrate what he advances.

Confesses, indeed, that the fluctuation of affairs hath oblig’d the ministry to go from _court to court_; to make treaties, which (as obsrv’d by the author of the _London Journal_) _it is by no means proper to execute_----and adds, _They found us engag’d in a treaty with the Emperor; but they have very wisely vary’d from it----They made a Treaty with ~France~; and have hitherto very wisely observ’d it----they sent a large squadron of ships, with an hostile appearance, and without any declaration of war, into the ~West-Indies~; but they wisely gave the Admiral instructions not to make use of any other force than perswasion----They sent another squadron into the ~Baltick~; and a third into the ~Mediterranean~; but they very wisely gave the Commanders of them the same pacifick instructions; even tho’ ~Spain~ was actually at war with us, and attacking one of our most valuable possessions----They afterwards enter’d into a treaty with ~Spain~; but they have hitherto very wisely declin’d to put it in execution; and if they are now negotiating another treaty at ~Vienna~, as we have been told, I doubt not that the same wisdom will appear in it, whether it is design’d to be put in execution or not._

He concludes by reducing his harangue into a kind of problematical order, and makes a great many bold interrogatories, and answering of which, he imagines, would lay his opponents under the dilemma, of disapproving their own conduct, or allowing the justness of his arguments; such as these; _Will our M----r execute the treaty of ~Seville~, or will he not? would a Reconciliation at ~Vienna~, tho’ justifiable in other persons, be so in him? hath not the ~Emperor~ shewn that he does not fear us? will he not affect to show that he doth not want us?_ and many other queries to the like purpose. See _London Journal_ of the 16th. p. 6, 7. and _Free Briton_ of the 14th, p. 16, 17.

Craftsman, _Jan. 16._ No. 237.

Complains of the hardship that the authors of the _Craftsman_ lye under; that a certain gentleman makes use of his authority to restrain their pens, while he employs others to throw about scandal at random; and others are suffer’d to call the authors of the _Craftsman_, traytors and villains!

Makes some reflections on the _London Journal Jan. 9._ which had took to pieces his _Hague_ Letter, concerning the report of a negotiation at _Vienna_.

Mr _Osborne_ in the _London Journal_ having exposed a paradox from the _Craftsman_, that the ministry are never right; when they do what the _Craftsmen_ count wrong: and yet wrong, when they do what the _Craftsmen_ count right; the _Craftsman_ observes, that ’tis allow’d that an accommodation with the Emperor is a right measure, but attended with fatal consequences, and almost insuperable difficulties; because such measures might be resented by other courts as an infraction of treaties, which Mr. _Osborne_ says, were only occasional and temporal.

The _Craftsman_ supposes these alliances to be such, but then asks, Will our allies understand ’em in the same sense! If not, what may be the consequences?

As to what the _Craftsman_ had granted, that the fulness of time was come to desert one ally, and to Mr. _Osborne_’s reasons for such desertion, he replies by demanding, Whether it was not equally reasonable long ago?

_Osborne_ had ask’d----if upon the non-execution of this treaty, occasion’d by the different views of the allies, another court should grow stubborn, what must we do? This the _Craftsman_ answers by another question, that is, Whether the different views of the allies do not proceed from their different interests?

Craftsman, _Jan. 23._ No. 238.

From the Minutes of Mr. _Oldcastle_.

This paper continues remarks on Q. _Elizabeth_’s reign; and is a long _Encomium_ on her management of treaties with foreign powers, which she always conducted in such a manner as was best suited to the good of her people and the honour and dignity of the nation. Her _Ministry_ went wisely and steadily on to their own great purposes _of preserving the peace of ~Europe~, and the trade and prosperity of the Kingdom._ (_See_ _Free Brit._ p. 8, 326.)

Craftsman, _Jan. 30._ No. 239.

Maintains the liberty of the _Press_, in opposition to those who argue for the necessity of _some_ restraint, which, if granted, he says, might be made use of to destroy all newspapers whatsoever, except the _Gazette_.

After repeating most of the points in debate, he defends his _Hague_ letter (for which the government thought fit to call him to an account) in as much as there was nothing in it asserted, but only supposed; and adds, he has as much right to reason upon suppositions as Mr. _Osborne_; and to censure the conduct of ministers, as he hath to approve it; for unless the right is reciprocal, the liberty of the press is no liberty at all.

As to what Mr. _Walsingham_ had allow’d, that we have a right to reason upon political affairs, tho’ not to lay down false facts; he replies, that he has asserted no falsehoods, and only exercised the natural right of every _Free Briton_, to offer his opinion on affairs.

Concludes with saying, that if he should be call’d upon to defend himself in a court of justice he must submit to the law; and abide the judgment of his country. _See_ p. 298.

London Journal. _Jan. 2._ No. 596. against the _Craftsman_, No. 233.

The _Craftsman_ having in his said _Journal_ advanced several arguments for the disbanding the _Army_ and repealing the _Riot Act_, the Author of the _London Journal_ undertakes here to confute them. He admits that a Government ought to have no more power than is necessary for the safety and protection, the preservation and happiness of the people, but adds that the laws alone, without a power to execute, and provide against all sudden emergencies, and possible dangers, will not answer these ends. Asserts that the possibility of powers being abused is not a sufficient reason to strip the Government of such a security, or to lodge the safety of the King in the affections of the people, which are variable and easily seduced, and (as the _Craftsman_ allows) very precarious, when he makes a doubt whether his present Majesty enjoys them. Not only _Armies_ and _Riot Acts_, but even the very law itself, by ill designing men may be used for our destruction, which were made for our safety. But must we part with the law, because we may suffer by the law? Every nation round us is arm’d, and must we alone stand naked and defenceless? If the liberties of many nations have been destroy’d by _standing armies_, the liberties of many have been preserv’d by them. Mentions the _Revolution_ as an instance, and believes the Pr. of _Orange_ would not have so easily succeeded, had the army been as true to the King as they were to their country. That the disbanding the army after the peace of _Riswick_ embolden’d the _French King_ to set his Grandson on the Throne of _Spain_, and declare the Pretender, which involv’d us in a ten years war: That nothing more intimidated the Ministry in the last four years of Q. _Anne_’s reign, than the honesty and bravery of the gentlemen of the army.

As to the riot act, he says that power is necessary to prevent riots and tumults, and to disperse the people when so assembled. To this purpose a law is made which tells them the consequences of it; a proper officer gives them warning; and if after this they will stay and be hang’d, ’tis their own fault.

He allows, that shou’d a Justice of the peace assume the liberty of reading the proclamation where a member of parliament is chusing, he ought to be hang’d. He don’t see how this act can injure us any other way; for while the constitution is preserv’d, and our liberties taken care of by the government, the people can’t be unjustly hurt by it.

The remaining part of his discourse is spent in setting forth the unreasonableness of repealing this act, from the behaviour of the authors of the _Craftsman_ and their abettors, who by their conduct in exciting uneasiness in the people, have made it necessary to continue it in force.

_London Journal_, _Jan. 9_, No. 597.

Contains remarks upon a paper in the _Craftsman_, called, _An extract of a letter from the ~Hague~_.

The author begins with observing, that tho’ the pretence of the _Craftsman_ is liberty and patriotism, yet his real design is opposition to the court.

He then reflects on the _Craftsman_’s incoherent way of arguing, just as it serves to vent his spleen; for according to him the ministry are never right when they do what he counts wrong, and always wrong when they do what the _Craftsman_ counts right.

When we were broken with the Emperor we were quite wrong, and now we are going to unite with the Emperor we are equally wrong.

This paper, or letter, the _Journalist_ says, is made up of mere conjectures, and suppositions; or else insinuations, unsupported by facts or reason: justifies our ministry from the aspersion that we are undoing what we have been doing these five years; and insists that we have been continuing to do the same thing, that is, pursuing the peace and happiness of the nation by different means, as alterations happen’d, or circumstances varied.

He then answers the _Craftsman_’s charge of deserting one ally, by supposing that this ally may have views inconsistent with the two other allies, and so stand disposed to act contrary to the design of that treaty and our interest. _England_ is not obliged to execute the treaty, unless the other allies will act their part.

The _Craftsman_ charges the ministry with obstinate perseverance in bad measures, and now with a precipitate alteration of councils. This the author of this _Journal_ denies, and says, it should be more justly called, a wise and prudent accommodating themselves to the late unfortunate juncture of affairs. Changing hands is not an alteration of councils, but a conduct which wise and honest men ought to observe.

_London Journal_, _Jan. 16._ No. 598.

_Reflections on the present State of Affairs, occasion’d by the ~Craftsman~, Jan. 9._

He takes notice of the _Craftsman_’s method of drawing of characters, in which he offends all the laws of honesty, propriety and decorum; charges without evidence or reason, and without common sense; makes his _Mock-minister_ a composition of insolence, malice, and a small talent for ridicule, yet is not half so odious as the _Mock-patriot_ who drest him; who, while he counterfeits publick virtue, is infamously abusing the publick: clothes himself with the love of his country, while he is making a jest of it; and injures the community, while he pretends the highest regard for it; and who, because we have tried all possible ways to preserve the peace, calls our ministers _Dupes_ of all the powers of _Europe_, _political Mendicants_, strolling about from court to court.

The _Craftsman_ having advanc’d, that we are inexcuseable for not having foreseen and prevented these conjunctures in which nothing can be done which is not a fault to do; our author asks, what conjunctures those are, in which a man is not at liberty to act reasonably and honestly? or can it be a fault so to act?

By the treaty of _Seville_ we only yielded to _Spain_ a point, which, in real interest, concerned some of the contending powers. It could hardly be imagin’d that the Emperor would have put himself to the expence, or hazard of a war, for the small deviation of the _Quadruple Alliance_, had he not been informed, that the allies could not agree about the war; or that they disagreed about the scene of action; or, for the sake of peace, the allies might all concur to wait _one Year_ to see what the Emperor would do. Any of these suppositions affords a reason why the treaty of _Seville_ is not yet executed.

As to the queries put by the _Craftsman_, (p. 4.) they are all ask’d for the sake of the two last, which demand, Will not this measure of making up with the Emperor be attended with worse consequences than turning out the minister? and----Will the objections against it, be so strong, if manag’d by another hand?----he answers no; for persons don’t alter the relation of things, or change the nature of actions. If it is reasonable, ’tis equally so whoever does it.

_London Journal_, _Jan. 23._ No. 599.

By the behaviour of the ministry for some years past, it evidently appears, that the preserving the peace of _Europe_, and securing the trade and prosperity of the kingdom, has been their greatest concern; but whether means taken to that end have been always right, is not so easily determin’d.

The sword indeed might have cut our way to peace, and added to our glory, but the event might have prov’d a general war.----Our ministry thought wisdom better than power. To this end, when our enemies arm’d we put ourselves in a posture of defence; we suffer’d little insults, as a proof that we were willing to be _one_ with a nation with whom it is our interest to be _one_. To this end we united those who were disjoin’d, and separated those who were united; still avoiding a war.

But while the ministry have been industrious in preventing confusions, and watching opportunities of accommodating differences, their adversaries have practis’d all imaginary ways to insult and embarrass them.

_Osborne_ clears himself from the imputation which the _Craftsman_ had charg’d him with, _viz._ that the supposition that we are going to unite with the Emperor, will be attended with perfidy, infraction of treaties, and violation of faith.

_London Journal_, _Jan. 30._ No. 600.

This Journal contains observations on Mr. _Oldcastle’s_ minutes of Q. _Elizabeth_’s reign, which he affirms is a collection of _Scraps_ without order or method, coherence or connexion, being sounds without sense, confusedly thrown at the present administration. _See_ p. 3.

Admits that this Queen was a wise and glorious Princess, but says that our _Constitution_, and the _exercise of Power at home_, is vastly better than what they were in her reign, and our _Foreign Affairs_ transacted with as much wisdom.

Quotes Mr. _Oldcastle_’s own words, in which he describes the _Wisdom_ and _Address_ of Q. _Elizabeth_, to describe the _Wisdom_ and _Address_ of the present Minister in negotiating _Foreign Affairs_. (See p. 3.)

Lastly, he gives several maxims out of _Cambden_ and _Francis Osborne_’s memoirs of this Queen, such as her preferring peace to war; her delaying resentment of injuries till proper seasons; her judgment of her subjects abilities, which she dextrously fitted for her favours and their employments; her steady resolution not to ransom herself from her enemies at the price of their preferments who lov’d her.

_Fog’s Journal_, _Saturday, January 9._ No. 120.

A Letter is inserted, containing remarks on Mr. _Chubb_’s discourse concerning _Reason_, in which is asserted, that _it either is, or ought to be a sufficient guide in matters of Religion_.

This Proposition the remarker explains in the words of Mr. _Chubb_, and assents to, and then proceeds to consider it more particularly. Does not comprehend Mr. _Chubb_’s observation, i. e. _The Question is not whether there be absolutely such a capacity in man_: for if man has such a capacity, as Mr. _Chubb_ insists, he may be truly said to be the possessor of it. Nor can the remarker understand the sense of that clause, _he ought to have_, because it has no relation to the dispute between Mr. _Chubb_ and the Bp of _London_, i. e. what man _now_ has, and is capable of.

The remarker goes on to shew, that the author’s argument to prove that man _ought_ to have such a capacity, is needless, because it is universally assented to.

Mr. _Chubb_ argues, _That as our species was no ways accessary to ~Adam’s~ transgression, ’tis unreasonable and unequal that they should suffer by it._

To this is answer’d, that there are other difficulties in the general scheme of providence as hard to be solved; as that, whole families are involved in misery by the mismanagement of their ancestor; the entailment of chronick and terrible disorders on children by the debaucheries of a father, for that it is _wrong intolerable_, and against reason to punish children for the crimes of their fathers. But all these difficulties which seem to clash with the wisdom and goodness of God, are rectify’d in a future state, for which we are manifestly fitted and design’d.

_Fog’s Journal_, _Jan. 16._ No. 121.

This paper begins with a piece of humourous irony; observing that as criticks never appear so disappointed as when they meet with beauties in an author; so the present sett of disaffected political writers conceive no small joy to see their country involv’d in difficulties; nor can they be worse mortified than to see this nation flourish in trade, wealth and credit.

That _Osborne_ (writer of the _London Journal_) and _Walsingham_ (of the _Free Briton_) affirm, That the present crew of factious writers proceeds on this principle. Descants upon the measures for some years past; the destruction of the _Spanish_ Fleet in the _Mediterranean_, whereby _Sicily_ was gain’d for the Emperor, and the preservation of the balance of _Europe_ so ill settled by that wicked treaty of _Utrecht_.

Mentions some of the great Actions which have stirr’d up the envy of the disaffected; as, the sending annual fleets into the _Baltick_; the treaty of _Hanover_; the maintaining a body of _Hessian_ troops; sending squadrons to the coasts of _Spain_ and the _West-Indies_, the expedition to _Spithead_ and lastly, the treaty of _Seville_. This last, he ironically says, had like to have kill’d the disaffected quite, because it was so wisely calculated for establishing a general tranquillity, and for the advancing the trade of _Great Britain_!

He goes on throwing his sarcasms at the writers on the side of the present ministry, who having challeng’d the disaffected to show any one step taken destructive of the true interest of their country, instances in the opening the harbour of _Dunkirk_, the Island of St. _Lucia_ planted by the _French_; raising recruits in _Ireland_ for the service of _France_; all which the two writers aforemention’d, convinced the world were groundless, by telling the authors of these reports, they lyed.

He makes some reflections on Mr. _Osborne_’s observations of the ill conduct of the ministry in the latter end of Q. _Anne_’s reign; as the endeavours to break the power of the Dissenters, and to weaken the security of the _Hanover_ succession; setting aside the _Quaker_’s affirmation; the disbanding the army. All which _Fog_ laughs at! and concludes with his surprize, that when he considers with how much good sense these two writers have exposed the actions of that _Tory_ ministry, and how they have defended the measures of the present, there should be a disaffected person left in the kingdom.

Fog’s Journal, _Jan. 23._ No. 123.

This Paper consists of reflections on a pamphlet, intituled, _A Defence of the Measures of the present Administration_.

He begins with the observation which the author had made: “That complaints and outcries are no foundation for supposing defects in publick counsels; for in a frame of government like ours, a continuance of the same administration will always lessen the popularity of the ministry.

“The frequent use of this observation, _Fog_ says, is enough to shew its good sense. ’Twas first started by the Rev. Author of the Enquiry, all the anniversary pamphlets have had it since, and it has been repeated by Mr. _Osborne_ 75 times; by Mr. _Walsingham_ twice as many; nor is there any thing in this pamphlet but what has the authority of, at least, 50 repetitions”: yet he cannot subscribe to his opinion; for supposing it true, it is a sure sign that affairs are well conducted; but if the contempt of all men of sense be added to this clamour, oh! then we pronounce him an angel.

He goes on to quote another passage; “That the Peace of _Utrecht_ left us on good terms with _Spain_, which might have turn’d to our advantage, had our affairs been wisely manag’d in the late reign; but as they were not, it laid the foundation of the several perplexities that have since attended us.”

This conduct of the last reign, _Fog_ says, ought to be apply’d to a person or two since dead, and not to the present ministers. Adds, that he might have spar’d his encomium of the _Utrecht_ treaty, or shewn us the folly of cultivating a good understanding with the _Emperor_ and _Spain_ at the same time, by which our affairs, every where were left in _a stupid calm_; for had they contriv’d to make either of ’em our enemy, we should always have had a quarrel and a treaty depending, and so have given vent to our humours and money too.

The author having said, that when the present ministry came into power, they observ’d from the complexion of things mischief must be gath’ring some where, which prov’d to be an alliance betwixt _Spain_ and the _Emperor_. This, _Fog_ affirms, was very sagacious; but that the treaty he speaks of was, and still is deny’d by both the parties.

He then criticises on several other parts of the discourse, especially on those which extol the conduct of our ministry and their management of our affairs, relating to the inaction of the squadron sent to the _West Indies_, and keeping back the _Spanish_ Treasure, thereby rendring it useless, as to any dangerous purposes.

The wisdom of this conduct, _Fog_ takes notice, proved itself in the Event; The _Spaniards_ were provoked; sent out their privateers, and pillag’d our merchants!

As to humouring the Q. of _Spain_ in settling the _Italian_ dukedoms on Don _Carlos_, says, sneeringly, besides obliging a fair Lady, _Great Britain_ has gain’d the treaty of _Seville_!

Fog’s Journal, _Jan. 30._ No. 124.

_The Press_, says he, _has lately swarm’d with writing ~pro~ and ~con~, upon the present posture of affairs, by which we find that one party is of opinion, that ministers of state are no more than ~men~; t’other will have ’em to be ~angels~ (that is while they continue in power.)----Here you read, that Affairs are in no better situation than they should be----there, that we have neither past miscarriages, or present grievances to complain of, and that the nation never was in so flourishing a condition. One ~D’Anvers~, and, if I mistake not, one ~Fog~, are accused of seditiously asserting that a ~Crow~ is black, but the writers on the other side, have with infinite Wit, proved a ~black Crow~ to be the ~whitest~ bird of all the feather’d kind._

He proceeds thus merrily to remark on a pamphlet intitled, _Considerations on the present state of affairs, with regard to the Number of Forces in the Pay of ~Great Britain~_; and endeavours, in his ironical way, to overthrow the several arguments advanced by the author for maintaining the _Hessian_ troops, and concludes with giving his opinion that they will be very far from convincing the disaffected.

The Grub-street Journal, _Thursday, Jan. 14._ No. 53.

Dr. _Quibus_ chuses for the subject of his discourse the operation designed to be performed on the ears of one _Rey_, a condemn’d malefactor, by Mr. _Cheselden_. This he treats in a ludicrous manner, and supposes that if Mr. _Rey_ should prove so unphilosophical as to give the surgeon the slip as soon as the operation is over, we should be as much in the dark as we were before. He declares his opinion, that not only the drum, but the whole organ, or the ear it self, is of no use at all in hearing, and would know the truth of his conjecture by seeing the ears of some malefactor entirely extirpated. Recommends it as a thing of great use, if instead of executing malefactors they were made to undergo such kind of experiments. Trial may be made whether the _Retina_ of the eye is of any use in seeing. A needle might be introduced into the eye, and the _Retina_ quite remov’d. The spleen might be taken out of some vile malefactor, and an observation made whether their inclinations to evil courses depend not on a superfluity of the _Atra Bilis_. Another experiment he recommends as of great consequence, that is, whether the tying up one of the testicles would not determine the sex of a child begotten at such a time. By this means, he says, many illustrious families might be inform’d of a just and certain method of obtaining an heir to their estates. _See_ p. 19.

The Grub-street Journal, _Thursday, Jan. 14._ No. 54.

The author begins with the _Laureat_’s new-year’s ode (for which see p. 20.) and subjoins to it some explanatory notes; the substance of which is contain’d in the following short remarks.

_Line_ 1. The eternity of the world is here maintain’d, tho’ Dr. _Clarke_ had objected against it.

3. Old _Janus_, a heathenish emblem, is supplanted by _old Time_, as more familiar to christian readers.

5. To this is objected, making _Spring a living person calling for birth_ as it were to _old Time_; whereas _old Time_ had bid _spring pass_, so no occasion for _spring to call_. Which is defended thus; When _time bids spring pass_, it might not be ready, but as soon as it was, it _calls for birth_.

Line 7. _Harvest_ in _summer_ is very early, and something unusual.

9. But not soon enough, it seems, because here _each season_ is said _to bring ~THEIR~ stores ~TO~ winter’s wants, ~till~ warmer genial suns recall the spring_----However Mr. _Cibber_’s authority makes it current.

15. An admirable improvement of _Nocte pluit tota_, &c. which to set in a true light is translated and imitated:

_It rains all night, the shows returns with day:_
_Thus ~Jove~ and ~Cæsar~ bear divided sway._

_Plenty is Heav’n’s, and Peace our Monarch’s care,_
_Thus ~Jove~ and ~George~ divided Empire share._

But to this was objected, that we are not only indebted to heaven for _plenty_, but for _peace_ too, tho’ like marriages said to be made there, it was not yet come down.

21. It is queried what _war_ and _peace_ the poet means here.

22. An emendation of this line is offer’d to make it clear,

_We triumph most when ~MOST~ the farmer feeds._

and the _Beef eaters at ~St.~ James_’s, are appeal’d to for the justness of it.

23, 24. The elegance of these lines are literally defended, but the propriety and cadence of them are called in question.

25, 26, 27, 21. These seem inconsistent with the 19th and 20th verses.

As in the 35th, and 46th lines, _Phœbus_ had roll’d in vain, till _Albion_ could behold such a sight as at present on the throne, well might the poet make the exclamation in the 37th and 38th.

39, 40. As it is impossible always to REACH _our own desires_, tho’ required by heaven, it is proposed to alter it to TEACH; that is, instruct united hearts to address the throne by their own loyal _desires_.

41. Read _selfish_, as better than _self-born_; all views whatever being such.

46. _Suns_ probably should be read _sons_, because it seems to be a contradiction to ever circling _sun_, line 1.

The criticiser concludes with observing, that when a song is good sense, it must be made nonsense before it is made musick; so when a song is nonsense, there’s no other way but by singing it to make it seem tolerable sense.

_Grub-street Journal_, _Jan. 21._ No. 55.

The author begins with observing that nothing has increased their society so much as poetry: We are taught it at school; if not, believe we are born poets. Every corner abounds with its professors; the bellman nightly salutes his master and mistress: the marshal, his gentlemen soldiers every Christmas; every street rings with ballads; the royal palace resounds with odes; and every church-yard with its productions: _Stephen Duck_’s good fortune has occasion’d a poor Weaver in _Spittle-fields_ to publish a miscellany of poems which he addresses to the Queen, and introduces with this line.

_Thy fortune, ~Duck~, affects my kindred mind;_

Wherefore _Grub st._ presumes to represent to her Majesty, that the best way to encourage the Weaver, would be to wear British manufactures; and the thresher, by giving him a small farm in the country; and to restrain both from writing a line more in rhime or measure.

Apprehends, that from this general inclination to write, they shall be oblig’d, like the royal society, to discourage intruders amongst them, and, to prevent misunderstanding, proposes that no person shall be a member of both societies at the same time.

_Grub-street Journal_, _Jan. 21._ No. 56.

Makes some remarks concerning the management of controversies between the political writers. This he illustrates by two examples; by which he would intimate the spirit that animates and governs both parties. The first is a quotation of two severe personal characters, from a pamphlet entitled _Sedition and Defamation display’d, in a Letter to the Author of the Craftsman_. The other is some paragraphs attacking two characters on the opposite side, drawn from the Pamphlet call’d, _A proper reply to a late scurrilous libel intitled Sedition and Defamation display’d; in a Letter to the author, by Caleb D’anvers Esq;_ which four characters he supposes imaginary, for if they were real, no man of sense, honour, or honesty would espouse them.

Weekly Register, _Jan. 9._ No. 39.

The _Register_ publishes a mystical letter from a club of Gardners, wherein is figuratively describ’d the evils which the fraternity have occasionally suffer’d from the depredations _of Locusts_, _Palmer-worms_, _Caterpillars_, and other pestiferous vermin. Several discourses were made by the members concerning the Origin and Progress of these their common enemies. One of the company said, that the first appearance of them is in a sort of spawn, spread over the cabbage-leaves, which gradually rises into _Grubs_. This _Grubbean_ race, he reckons, are descendants of the _Egyptian Locusts_, and the _Palmer-worms_ and _Caterpillars_, a spurious offspring of the _Locusts_. Another of the society believes they are of an _English_ extraction; gives several significations of the word _Grub_, and then runs a parallel between the insects called _Grubs_, and the _Grubean Society, or Grubstreet Journalists_. To which he adds a remark, that ’tis something strange a body of Men should set themselves up to make a merit of other men’s faults: they must of course be despicable themselves, because they take a pleasure in making others appear so.

Remembers that in the late wartime many postscripts to the _Flying-Posts_ were bawl’d about with abundance of news, but scarce a word of truth: So that paper gain’d the name of the _Lying Post_, and was called _Grub-street News_. And still it’s a common appellation, when we hear full and true accounts cry’d by our doors, _’tis Grubstreet, all Grubstreet_.

Weekly Register, Jan. 16. No. 40.

On _Ridicule_, address’d to the authors of the _Grubstreet-Journal_.

_Says, Ridicule is a general practice, and proceeds either from the wantonness of our own vanity, or contempt of others frailties. We take the same pleasure in scandal as monkies do in mischief. Wonders why the Tea-table should be thought the mother of scandal, or the nurse of ridicule, when all mankind is pursuing the same pleasure under different disguises. They condemn Censure in others, that they may indulge it themselves. The taverns are as accessary to it as private houses. Courts are esteemed the source of politeness and good manners; theatres of ingenuity, churches of sanctity; yet all are infected with the evil of scandal. Seems to prefer the gaming-table as freest from irony and slander; avarice being a spirit that allows of no rival. This vice is contagious, and runs thro’ the whole people: it wanders every where, like an ~ignis fatuus~, and is only at home in the ~Grubstreet-Journal~._

_Don’t pretend how far this libertinism of speech is allowable, but is certain that every moral man will use it only for the sake of him he censures; and every gentleman will make good manners the only rule of behaviour. All men are jealous of their characters, and we must have a due complaisance for one frailty while we would reform another; for the insolence of knowledge is as insupportable as the affectation of folly. The subjects of ridicule are to be justly chosen and carefully distinguished._

_Concludes with some Reflections on the authors of the ~Grubstreet-Journal~, who have undertaken the drudgery of invective under pretence of being champions for politeness._

Weekly Register, _Jan. 24._ No. 41.

He remarks, that from an ambition of emulating, without a capacity to equal another’s excellencies, have arisen an infinite number of pretenders to reputation. The regular physician is intruded upon by the empyrick; the masterly painter is slighted in favour of impudence and ignorance; the most elegant and chaste compositions of musick, are forc’d to give way to amusements less polite: Quackery interferes with trade, and undermines honesty. The pedlar stiles himself a merchant; No wonder then that authors of every character are so wretchedly personated. Exclaims against bad writers, from the Court-scribbler to the _Grubstreet_ hackney.

Proceeds to the description of a good author; says, his principal end, in occasional writings, should be to entertain the publick innocently and genteely; to insinuate knowledge in the disguise of amusement, and trifle the world into virtue and good manners: he should consider every reader as a critick and a gentleman, and be earful of offending either: points out what a writer should observe, who would recommend himself and entertain the world; _i. e._ an important subject, a clear and expressive method, a flowing and natural stile, imagination and judgment, truth and impartiality, modesty in his images, pity for the failings of human nature, and endeavours to amend ’em. He shou’d think himself a son of the publick and be an example of the generous spirit he would recommend; he should be able to race the passions thro’ all their disguises; have knowledge in his head, and good humour in his heart: he should be an enemy to vice, but a friend to all mankind.

Weekly Register, _Jan. 30._ No. 42.

This is a continuation of a former discourse upon criticism, wherein he points out several excellencies that distinguish a good critick from a bad.

He then considers the manner of criticism, that some are _Fox-hunters_ in censure, and declare war against all writers in general. Some are like _Fig_ and _Sutton_, the declar’d antagonists to one another. Some are _Whigs_ and _Tories_, divided into parties, always applauding themselves, and condemning their opposers. Some are _Grubstreet_ hawkers, who make a penny of throwing about censure at random without distinction or regard of persons.

The design of criticism is amendment; and concludes with acknowledging his own failings, and his readiness to be handsomely corrected.

The Universal Spectator, _Saturday Jan. 2._ No. 117.

_Great wits to madness nearly are ally’d_
_And thin partitions do their bounds divide._

Dryden.

Mr. _Stonecastle_, the nominal author, begins this day’s entertainment with observing that men are not born for themselves; that we are not only bound to relieve the necessities of others, but in all our dealings, _&c._ with mankind to render ourselves grateful to all, offensive to none, much less take pleasure in doing disagreeable things. Says there is a sett of people who are frequently committing ill-bred, rude, and even shocking things, which they excuse by only saying, ’tis their humour. Instances in a certain knight, who never spoke himself, nor suffer’d any body in his presence to speak louder than to be barely heard; insomuch that his servants, as they were accustom’d to be mutes at home, behav’d like no body when they came abroad.

His nephew _Silvio_, just come from the university, declaims on every subject you can mention, and imagines himself master of every science. Whatever is the topick of discourse, he will suffer no body to talk upon it but himself; his uncle has but one hope of curing him of his folly, that is, by engaging him to talk of maritime affairs before captain _Firebal_ of the _Tempest_, who, very probably, will beat him into better manners.

Beauty itself loses its attraction when accompanied with these humours.

_Artemisa_ is exquisitely handsome, but takes the liberty of abusing every body at random, by asking ill-natur’d questions, and being witty upon others imperfections: excuses herself by saying, ’tis her way to tell unlucky truths and she can’t help it.

_Crito_ is a man of sense, learning, and accuracy of judgment; but this ought not to privilege him to treat every writer he does not like with opprobrious language.

_Belliza_ has wit and beauty, accompanied with a solid judgment. Yet all this will hardly palliate the disgust she gives people with whom she eats. She never uses a fork, is be-greased up to the knuckles, and by her immoderate taking of snuff, which frequently falling among her sauce, she gives her guests their bellies full before they have half din’d. Concludes with a merry story of a certain Colonel, whose flight it was, when he had drank a glass or two too much, to fire off and play tricks with his pistols. One night the col. having drank too freely order’d, his footman, who was an _Irishman_ newly hired, to bring his pistols, _Teague_ obey’d; the Col. loaded them both, and having lock’d the door commanded his man to hold one of the candles at arm’s length, till he snuff’d it with a ball. Prayers and intreaties were in vain, and comply he must, and did, tho’ trembling; the Col. perform’d the operation at the first attempt, then laying down his pistols was going to unlock the door. _Teague_ catches up that which was loaded, ‘Arra Maishter, says he, but now you must take up t’other candle, and let me have my shoot too.’ The col. call’d him rogue and rascal to no purpose, _Teague_ was now vested with power, and would be obey’d: Accordingly his master extended the candle, but this being the first time of _Teague_’s performing, he not only miss’d, but shot off a button from the breast of the colonel’s coat. So narrow an escape had a good effect, and cur’d him of this humour of turning marksman in his drink.

The Universal Spectator, _Jan. 9._ No. 118.

Contains two Letters, with the _Spectator’s_ answers to them.

The first is from a gentleman, who, about three months since, fell passionately in love with a lady at a ball; gives an account of his courtship, and of the kind reception of his addresses during that time, till of a sudden, without any reason given, or objection made, the lady sent him a peremptory message to desist any further pursuit. Complains that ’tis ungenerous and unjust to keep people so long in suspence, with no design but to gratify female pride and vanity.

To this the _Spectator_ replies, That the lady gave him fair play, and an opportunity of rendring himself agreeable; which when she found he could not, she very civilly, by a third person, desir’d him to desist. However, he says, ’tis but reasonable that the lady should give him a certificate of his good behaviour during his courtship.

The second letter is from a young lady of 15, who signs herself _Carolina_, which may be summ’d up and comprized in those two queries.

1. _May a Woman entertain several lovers at the same time?_

2. _After a Woman has once receiv’d a man’s addresses, may she with honour turn him off?_

To the first he answers, _That such a licence might be granted, if nothing was design’d by it but the chusing of the most deserving for a husband; but considering the inconveniences that would necessarily attend such an indulgence, he durst not allow it._

The second query he grants in the affirmative; that is, _if she discovers him false and base, or uncapable of making her happy_.

Universal Spectator, _January, 16._ No. 119.

Contains a letter from a physician, in which he describes the miserable condition of his patients, that apply to him on the _venereal_ account. Of this sort the most unfortunate and pitiful object is a woman of the town, who, if not quite abandon’d, gives a loose to her passion on such occasions. The consideration of her past, present, and future state, fills her with distraction, and involves her in endless evils, from which death only can deliver her.

Proceeds to argue with the infamous authors of the misery of these wretches, who first seduce the poor young creatures from their innocence, and then triumph in their wickedness. He who debauches a maiden, and then exposes her to want and shame, is arrived to such a monstrous height of villany, that no word in our language can reach it. Mentions a further species of cruelty, that is, the necessity some of these poor wretches are under, if with child, of applying to a magistrate to procure some pitiful maintenance for her unfortunate babe.----When all that is to be done by the father, is to make the best bargain he can with the church-wardens to take it off his hands; which is commonly done for a treat, and 10 or 12_l._ So the child is placed upon the parish, and the woman upon the town.

Univers. Spectator, _Jan. 23._ No. 120.

Entertains his readers with two letters; the first is from _Tristitia Stale_, who complains that she is continually persecuted, merely because she is an old maid.

Virginity, she says, has not always been a reproach, sees no encouragement in matrimony, and begs the _Spectator_ to reprimand the malaperts, who ridicule chastity; adds, that a single life in woman was esteem’d among the ancient as well as modern Romans; vestals then, and nuns now.

The other letter is from _Charlotte Wilful_, a young lady of 19, who says she has two admirers. The first is ’squire _Scrape_, who has 1200_l._ _per annum_, which he keeps in his own hands and farms himself, and therefore is favour’d in his pretentions by her father.

Mr _Myrtle_, her mother’s favourite, is the other, who, by his own account is near 40, by that of his acquaintance 10 years older, has squander’d away a good estate, but by the death of an uncle is now worth 1000_l._ _per annum_, and is a perfect humourist.

But to both these she prefers Mr _Plume_ of the _Inner-Temple_, who has no estate, but is of a sweet temper. Concludes with desiring Mr _Stonecastle_ to declaim on parents making choices for their Children, with a stroke on antiquated beaus, and rural animals, and to recommend a fine gentleman with no fortune. Desires, by way of postscript, that he would not delay publishing her letter, because Mr _Plume_ and she had agreed to run away together on _Tuesday_ next.

The Universal Spectator, _Jan. 30._ No. 121.

Among all those amusements people find to pass away the time, _Poesy_ and _Musick_ are the most elegantly entertaining. By the ancients they were look’d upon as immediately inspired from above, and the professors reverenc’d as sacred, and the favourites of heaven.

He adds, that we excel the ancients in musick, if not in poetry, and prefers a good _English_ song, tho’ set to a common tune, before the _Italian_ trifling unnatural compositions. The _one_ ravishes the ear only, the _other_ entertains the understanding also.----Hence he takes occasion to recommend _A collection of ~Lyric~ poems and songs with musick annexed_, lately publish’d.

Free Briton, _Jan. 7._ No. 58.

The author refutes a falsity advanced by Mr _D’anvers_ in the _Craftsman_ of the 13th of _Dec._ wherein, speaking of the riot-act, he says, “That an election of Church-wardens hath been already made a handle for putting this law in execution. That the master of a small vessel was kept a whole year in prison, to the loss of his voyage, and almost the ruin of his family, upon happening to go thro’ the church-yard, from visiting a friend, an hour after the proclamation was read. Nay, that the poor man might have run the hazard of his life, as well as have been put to further expences, if his late Majesty had not been graciously pleas’d to grant him a _Noli prosequi_.”

The falsehood of this story the _Free Briton_ thus corrects.--The gentlemen of _Greenwich_ disagreeing upon the choice of a church-warden at _Easter_ 1722, a poll was demanded and a scrutiny afterwards agreed on. The scrutineers met, but a number of dissolute persons tumultuously assembling at the same time, insulted the justices in a rude and outragious manner, (justice _Savory_ receiving a blow on the back by a great stone) so that it was thought proper to read the proclamation in order to disperse them. Among the rioters was _Charles Curtis_, master of a small vessel. He was with them before, at, and after the proclamation was read, and very notorious by his behaviour; was several times admonished by the justices to depart; and as often very civilly acquainted by them with the ill consequence of his continuance in that riotous assembly. But notwithstanding their repeated admonitions, he still continued, and was found among the rioters an hour and a half after the Proclamation was read, and being even then advised to leave that place, and to avoid the fatal consequence, the said _Curtis_, still refused to depart, and insisted with uncommon insolence, that he was as much about his business in that place as the justices themselves. Whereupon he was apprehended, committed to _Maidstone Gaol_, try’d, and convicted, but in compassion to his family his punishment was suspended; but a _Noli prosequi_ was never granted.

The aim of the _Free Briton_, in this paper, is to shew the inconclusive reasoning of the _Craftsman_ from matters of fact _falsely_ asserted.

Free Briton, _Jan. 14._ No. 59.

In the conclusion of this paper is a letter by way of reply to the _Craftsman_, Jan. 9. wherein that author calls upon the _Free Briton_ to justify the administration for breaking with the Emperor. To which the _Free Briton_ answers, that it will be full time to make a defence when such measures are undertaken; that their insolence is astonishing, in imputing the same crimes to our ministers for which themselves have deserved a halter. Asks the _Craftsman_ whether he imagines the ministry are so fond of the Emperor on the sudden, as to sacrifice the trade of _Spain_, and abandon all the powers of _Europe_, only to run into his arms?

In _Feb._ last an outcry was rais’d on a pretended discovery that the ministry were making up at _Vienna_ by an implicit guarantee of the Emperor’s succession to the _Austrian Netherlands_, as he should settle it; yet this could not be obtain’d of the _British_ councils; and now we are told we are ready to lurch all our allies for his sake.

The authors of the _Craftsman_ allow that this Treaty-breaking measure would be right, provided a certain great man was removed. As if national compacts could be dissolv’d by the change of the ministers: The nation must answer for the faith of treaties. Grants that such a conduct might be expected, should this ministry be chang’d.