AN ANSWER TO A PAMPHLET ENTITLED, A Vindication of Sir Tho. Player, and those Loyal Citizens concerned with him. In Defence of A REPLY TO A SPEECH made by Sir Tho. Player.  By H. B. Citizen of London. 
THe said H. B. for further Answer taken to the Exceptions in the said Vindication, answers and says, That the said Sir T. P. might as reasonably have taken H. B. for a Jew, as a Priest or Papist, there being nothing in his Answer, from which any such Conclusion can be drawn from the Premises. But it's observable, that any person that asserts the King's Legal Prerogative, and the established Religion, must be a Papist, without any contradiction whatever. And I must also observe, That the detecting and suppressing the Popish Plot, (in the opinion of the fanatics) cannot be effected by the present Government, without their assistance, (whether required or not.) But the Water being disturbed, they put in their Hooks, Baits and Nets, to try whether they can catch the Fish, (that is to say, the Government.) And 'tis observable, that there is a Sect of men, whose Ambition, Jenkisme, Faction, or pretended blind Zeal, will never be contented with the best of Governments, which ours is, under a qualified Monarchy, unless they themselves be at Helm steering.  
Surely this Vindicator cannot have so little Logic, as to suppose it was ever understood, that Parliaments or Courts of Judicature could ever be intended as Routs and unlawful Assemblies: He would make Sir T. P. leading up his men like these; which not being according to Law, I affirm, may be reasonably accounted so. But to make it not so, Sir T. P. had two designs in it; one, to show his Attendants whom he would have to vouch Jealousies and Fears for him: the other, to vote for Mr. J. to be a Pentioner-Sheriff, so as with that Authority to make his Factious Party the stronger. But the true Loyal Citizens, not so in title, as you title yourselves, were the greater number.  
I expected to have met with Sir T. P. at the Meeting of the Lieutenancy, on the 18th of this Month, with half a score of his Men of Sense; but because he was prohibited from bringing great numbers with him, he thought fit to wave it: Or else Sir T. P. and those persons were so employed in writing a Vindication for those Loyal Citizeus, that they could not spare time: It being better to rail at a Church of England man, by calling him Saucy Jesuit, and more ill Names than are yet invented at Billingsgate, than to be rendered Idle and Officious.  
I could wish that his Club would consider Law, as well as Faction, and they might square their actions more discreetly. For how impudently doth this Vindicator affirm, that the City of London is not altogether tied up by those Acts, etc. and that the City have the command of their Militia? and instances, That Burghers of all Cities in the world have the command of them. This is denied, for that there are no Cities, unless under Commonwealths (which we are not under the Tyranny of yet) have that command. But if it had been so, what is that to our Law established? Where by all the Acts, the Militia is declared to be absolutely in the Power of the; King. And I am sure no person durst have said the contrary, but one that would favour Rebellion, so soon as an opportunity offers itself.  
I must make bold once more to assert, that the keeping up the Guards of the City is a vast expense to the poor of the City, and tends much to the impoverishing of them. But our Vindicator says, Volenti non fit injuria, not considering it's against Law. But if he considered the use of them, he might find them useless, and against Reason too. But the Patriot, as he terms him, could once affirm, That the King having Guards for his person, was against Law. Let any man therefore judge of the Vindicator's Principles, Ex pede Herculent: Not forgetting The good old Cause. It's commendable in Sir T. P. to cloak the old grudge so, to place his Revenge under a cloak of Public Safety, and for the good of the City.  
I must declare, it's some reflection upon the City, to have made choice of Factious Persons to be our principal Officers in the City, and to place them in the Public Offices. But it so happened, it might not appear so to us then: But upon discovery, the City is ready enough to set such persons aside. Neither do I know how to reconcile the matter, for one that's Chamberlain of London to be a Parliament-man, because of the unlimitedness of that Privilege; which, if made use of, may tend to the ruin of many Orphans and other persons, that are forced to give credit to this Public Trust. Abundans Cautela non nocet. Without that there is any matter or thing material for this Respondent to make Answer unto, etc.  
And this Respondent doth demur in Law to the Vindicator, for that he being a Freeborn Citizen, and one of the Church of England as now by Law established, ought not to lie under the scurrilous Names in the said Pamphlet mentioned, and hereto annexed; but aught to have them expunged, and aught to have his Cost and Charges, etc.  
N. R.   

The Scurrilous Names mentioned in the said Pamphlet, to which the Answer hath relation.  

Saucy and dangerous Pamphleter,  
Priesthood,  
Scurrilous Libeler,  
Ghostly Citizen of Rome,  
Papist in Masquerade,  
Traitorous Make-bates,  
Popish Butcher,  
Spawn of Judas,  
Infamous Incendiary,  
Impudent,  
His Mother the old Whore of Rome,  
Unworthy Respondent,  
Daring Pamphleter,  
Incorrigible Libeler, and villainous Varlet,  
Scavenger,  
Serpent,  
Rascally lurking Scribbler,  
Petty Fogger,  
Popish Ruffian.    
FINIS.