THE VINDICATION: OR THE PARALLEL OF THE FRENCH HOLY-LEAGUE, AND THE. English League and Covenant, Turned into a Seditious Libel against the KING and his ROYAL HIGHNESS, BY Thomas Hunt and the Authors of the Reflections upon the Pretended Parallel in the Play called The DUKE of GVISE.  
Written by Mr. DRYDEN.  
Turno tempus erit magno cùm optaverit emptum  
Intactum Pallanta: & cùm spolia ista, diemque  
Oderit.—  
LONDON, Printed for Jacob Tonson at the Judge's Head in Chancery-Lane, near Fleetstreet, MDCLXXXIII.   

THE VINDICATION OF THE Duke of Guise.  
IN the Year of His Majesty's Happy Restauration, the First Play I undertook was the Duke of Guise, as the Fairest way, which the Act of Indemnity had then left us, of setting forth the Rise of the Late Rebellion; and by Exploding the Villainies of it upon the Stage, to Precaution Posterity against the Like Errors.  
As This was my First Essay; so it met with the Fortune of an Unfinished Piece; that is to say, It was Damned in Private, by the Advice of some Friends to whom I showed it; who freely told me, that it was an Excellent Subject; but not so Artificially wrought, as they could have wished: And now let my Enemies make their Best of This Confession.  
The Scene of the Duke of Guise's Return to Paris, AGAINST the King's Positive Command, was then written; I have the Copy of it still by me, almost the same which it now remains, being taken Verbatim out of Davila: For where the Action is Remarkable, and the very words Related, the Poet is not at liberty to change them much; and if he will be adding any thing for Ornament, it ought to be wholly of a piece. This do I take for a sufficient Justification of that Scene, unless they will make the pretended Parallel to be a Prophecy, as well as a Parallel of Accidents, that were twenty years after to come. Neither do I find that they can suggest the least colour for't in any other part of the Tragedy.  
But now comes the main Objection, Why was it stopped then? To which I shall render this just Account, with all due Respects to those who were the Occasion of it.  
Upon a wandering Rumour (which I will divide betwixt Malice and Mistake) that some Great Persons were represented or personated in it, the Matter was complained of to my Lord Chamberlain; who, thereupon, appointed the Play to be brought to him, and prohibited the Acting of it till further Order; commanding me, after this, to wait upon his Lordship; which I did, and humbly desired him to compare the Play with the History, from whence the Subject was taken, referring to the First Scene of the Fourth Act, whereupon the Exception was grounded, and leaving Davila (the Original) with his Lordship. This was before Midsummer; and about two Months after, I received the Play back again from his Lordship, but without any positive Order whether it should be Acted or not; neither was Mr. Lee or myself any way solicitous about it: But this indeed I ever said, That it was intended for the King's Service; and his Majesty was the best Judge, whether it answered that End or no; and that I reckoned it my duty to submit, if his Majesty, for any Reason whatsoever, should deem it unfit for the Stage. In the interim, a strict Scrutiny was made, and no Parallel of the Great Person designed, could be made out. But this Push failing, there were immediately started some terrible Insinuations, that the Person of his Majesty was represented under that of Henry the Third; which if they could have found out, would have concluded, perchance, not only in the stopping of the Play, but in the hanging up of the Poets. But so it was, that his Majesty's Wisdom and Justice, acquitted both the One, and the Other; and when the Play itself was almost forgotten, there were Orders given for the Acting of it.  
This is Matter of Fact; and I have the Honour of so Great Witnesses to the truth of what I have delivered, that it will need no other Appeal. As to the Exposing of any Person living, our innocency is so clear, that it is almost unnecessary to say, It was not in my Thought; and as far as any one Man can vouch for another, I do believe it was as little in Mr. Lee's. And now since some People have been so busy as to cast out false and scandalous Surmises, how far we two agreed upon the Writing of it, I must do a common Right both to Mr. Lee and myself, to declare publicly that it was at his earnest Desire, without any Solicitation of mine, that this Play was produced betwixt us. After the writing of Oedipus, I passed a Promise to join with him in another; and he happened to claim the performance of that Promise, just upon the finishing of a Poem, when I would have been glad of a little respite before the undertaking of a second Task. The Person that passed betwixt us, knows this to be true; and Mr. Lee himself, I am sure, will not disown it: So that I did not [seduce him to join with me] as the malicious Authors of the Reflections are pleased to call it; but Mr. Lee's Loyalty is above so ridiculous a Slander. I know very well, that the Town did ignorantly call and take this to be my Play; but I shall not arrogate to myself the Merits of my Friend. Two thirds of it belonged to him; and then to me only the First Scene of the Play; the whole Fourth Act, and the first half, or somewhat more of the Fifth.  
The Pamphleteers, I know, do very boldly insinuate, that before the Acting of it, I took the whole Play to myself, but finding afterwards how ill success it had upon the Stage, I threw as much of it as possibly I could upon my Fellow. Now here are three damned Lies crowded together into a very little room: First, That I assumed any part of it to my self, which I had not written; wherein I appeal, not only to my particular Acquaintance, but to the whole Company of Actors, who will witness for me, that in all the Rehearsals, I never pretended to any one Scene of Mr. Lee's, but did him all imaginable Right, in his title to the greater part of it. I hope, I may, without Vanity, affirm to the World, that I never stood in need of borrowing another man's Reputation; and I have been as little guilty of the Injustice, of laying claim to any thing which was not my own. Nay, I durst almost refer myself to some of the angry Poets on the other side, whether I have not rather countenanced and assisted their Beginnings, than hindered them from Rising. The two other Falsities are, the ill success of the Play, and my disowning it. The former is manifestly without Foundation; for it succeeded beyond my very hopes, having been frequently Acted, and never without a considerable Audience: And then 'tis a thousand to one, that having no ground, to disown it, I did not disown it; but the Universe to a Nutshell that I did not disown it for want of success, when it succeeded so much beyond my Expectation. But my malignant Adversaries are the more excusable, for this course method of breaking in upon Truth and good Manners, because it is the only way they have to gratify the Genius and the Interest of the Faction together; and never so much pains taken neither, to so very, very little purpose. They decry the Play, but in such a manner, that it has the Effect of a Recommendation. They call it a dull Entertainment; and that's a dangerous word, I must confess, from one of the greatest Masters in humane Nature, of that Faculty. Now I can forgive them this Reproach too, after all the rest: For this Play does openly discover the Original and Root of the Practices and Principles, both of their Party and Cause; and they are so well acquainted with all the Trains and Mazes of Rebellion, that there's nothing new to them in the whole History. Or what if it were a little insipid, there was no Conjuring that I remember in Pope Joan: And the Lancashire Witches were without doubt, the most insipid Jades that ever flew upon a Stage; and yet even These by the favour of a Party made a shift to hold up their heads. Now if we have outdone these Plays in their own dull way, their Authors have some sort of privilege to throw the first stone: But we shall rather choose to yield the Point of Dulness, than contend for it, against so indisputable a Claim.  
But Matters of State (it seems) are canvassed on the Stage, and things of the Gravest Concernment there managed: And who were the Aggressors, I beseech you but a few factious, popular Hirelings, that by tampering the Theatres, and by poisoning the People, made a Playhouse more Seditious than a Conventicle: So that the Loyal Party crave only the same freedom of defending the Government, which the other took beforehand of exposing and defaming it. There was no complaint of any Disorders of the Stage in the Bustle, that was made (even to the forming of a Party) to uphold a Farce of Theirs. Upon the First day, the whole Faction (in a manner) appeared; but after One sight of it, they sent their Proxies of Servingmen and Porters to Clap in the Right of their Patrons: And it was impossible ever to have gotten off the Nonsense of three hours for Half a Crown, but for the Providence of so Congruous an Audience. Thus far, I presume, the Reckoning is even, for Bad Plays, on Both Sides; and for Plays written for a Party. I shall say nothing of their Poet's Affection to the Government, unless upon an absolute and an odious necessity. But to return to the Pretended Parallel.  
I have said enough already to convince any man of common sense, That there neither was, nor could be any Parallel intended: And it will farther appear, from the nature of the Subject; there being no Relation betwixt Henry the Third and the Duke of Guise, except that of the Kings marrying into the Family of Lorraine. If a Comparison had been designed, how easy had it been either to have found a Story, or to have invented one, where the ties of nature had been nearer? If we consider their Actions or their Persons, a much less proportion will be yet found betwixt them: and if we bate the Popularity, perhaps none at all. If we consider them in reference to their Parties; the One was manifestly the Leader, the Other, at the worst, is but misled. The Designs of the One tended openly to Usurpation: those of the Other may yet be interpreted more fairly; and I hope from the natural candour and probity of his temper, that it will come to a perfect submission and reconcilement at last. But that which perfectly destroys this pretended Parallel, is that our Picture of the Duke of Guise is exactly according to the Original in the History; his Actions, his Manners; nay, sometimes his very Words, are so justly copied, that whoever has read him in Davila, sees him the same here. There is no going out of the way, no dash of a Pen to make any By-feature resemble him to any other Man: and indeed, excepting his Ambition, there was not in France, or perhaps in any other Country, any man of his Age vain enough to hope he could be mistaken for him. So that if we Would have made a Parallel, we Could not. And yet I fancy, that where I make it my business to draw Likeness, It will be no hard matter to judge who sat for the Picture. For the Duke of Guise's return to Paris contrary to the King's Order, enough already has been said; 'Twas too considerable in the Story to be omitted, because it occasioned the mischiefs that ensued: But in this likeness which was only Casual, no danger followed. I am confident there was none intended; and am satisfied that none was feared. But the Argument drawn from our evident design is yet, if possible, more convincing. The first words of the Prologue spoke the Play to be a Parallel, and then you are immediately informed how far that Parallel extended, and of what it is so. The Holy League begot the Covenant, Guisards got the Whig, etc. So than it is not, (as the sharling Authors of the Reflections tell you) a Parallel of the Men, but of the Times. A Parallel of the Factions, and of the Leaguers. And every one knows that this Prologue was written before the stopping of the Play. Neither was the name altered on any such account as they insinuate, but laid aside long before, because a Book called the Parallel had been printed, resembling the French League, to the English Covenant; and therefore we thought it not convenient to make use of another man's Title. The chief person in the Tragedy, or He whose disasters are the Subject of it, may in reason give the Name; and so it was called the Duke of Guise. Our intention therefore was to make the Play a Parallel, betwixt the Holy League plotted by the House of Guise and its Adherents, with the Covenant plotted by the Rebels in the time of King Charles the First, and those of the new Association, which was the Spawn of the old Covenant.  
But This Parallel is plain, that the Exclusion of the Lawful Heir was the main design of Both Parties: and that the endeavours to get the Lieutenancy of France established on the Head of the League, is in effect the same with offering to get the Militia out of the King's hands (as declared by Parliament) and consequently that the power of Peace and War should be wholly in the People. 'Tis also true that the Tumults in the City, in the choice of their Officers have had no small resemblance with a Parisian Rabble. And I am afraid that both Their Faction and Ours had the same Good Lord. I believe also that if Julian had been written and calculated for the Parisians, as it was for our Sectaries, one of their Sheriffs might have mistaken too, and called him Julian the Apostle. I suppose I need not push this Point any further, where the Parallel was intended, I am certain it will reach: But a larger account of the Proceed in the City may be expected from a better hand, and I have no reason to forestall it. In the mean time, because there has been no Actual Rebellion, the Faction triumph in their Loyalty; which if it were out of Principle, all our divisions would soon be ended, and we the happy People, which God and the Constitution of our Government have put us in condition to be: but so long as they take it for a Maxim, that the King is but an Officer in Trust, that the People, or their Representatives are superior to him, Judges of Miscarriages, and have power of Revocation, 'tis a plain case, that when ever they please they may take up arms; and, according to Their Doctrine, lawfully too. Let them jointly renounce this one opinion, as in Conscience and Law they are bound to do, because both Scripture and Acts of Parliament oblige them to it, and we will then thank their Obedience for our quiet, whereas now we are only beholding to them for their Fear. The miseries of the last War are yet too fresh in all men's memory: and they are not Rebels only because they have been so too lately. An Author of theirs has told us roundly the Westcountry Proverb; Chad eat more Cheese and chad it: Their Stomach is as good as ever it was; but the mischief on't is, they are either Muzzled or want their Teeth. If there were as many fanatics now in England, as there were Christians in the Empire, when Julian reigned, I doubt we should not find them much inclined to passive obedience; and Curse ye Meroz would be oftener preached upon, than Give to Caesar, except in the sense Mr. Hunt means it.  
Having clearly shown wherein the Parallel consisted, which no man can mistake, who does not wilfully; I need not justify myself, in what concerns the sacred Person of his Majesty. Neither the French History, nor our own could have supplied me, nor Plutarch himself, were he now alive, could have found a Greek or Roman to have compared to him, in that eminent virtue of his Clemency; even his enemies must acknowledge it to be Superlative, because they live by it. Far be it from flattery, if I say, that there is nothing under Heaven, which can furnish me with a Parallel; and that in his Mercy, he is of all men the Truest Image of his Maker.  
Henry the Third was a Prince of a mixed Character; he had, as an old Historian says of another, Magnas virtutes, nec minora vitia: but amongst those virtues, I do not find his forgiving qualities to be much celebrated. That he was deeply engaged in the bloody Massacre of St. Bartholomew, is notoriously known: and if the relation printed in the Memoires of Villeroy be true, he confesses there that the Admiral having brought him and the Queen Mother into suspicion with his Brother then reigning, for endeavouring to lessen his Authority, and draw it to themselves, he first designed his Accusers death by Maurevel, who shot him with a Carabine, but failed to kill him; after which, he pushed on the King to that dreadful Revenge, which immediately succeeded. 'Tis true, the Provocations were high, there had been reiterated Rebellions, but a Peace was now concluded; it was solemnly Sworn to by both Parties, and as great an assurance of Safety, given to the Protestants, as the Word of a King and Public Instruments could make it. Therefore the Punishment was execrable, and it pleased God, (if we may dare to judge of his secret Providence) to cut off that King in the very flower of his Youth, to blast his Successor in his Undertake, to raise against him the Duke of Guise, the Complotter and Executioner of that inhuman Action (who by the Divine Justice, fell afterwards into the same snare which he had laid for others) and finally, to die a violent Death himself; murdered by a Priest, an Enthusiast of his own Religion. From these Premises, let it be concluded. if reasonably it can, that we could draw a Parallel, where the lines were so diametrically opposite. We were indeed obliged by the Laws of Poetry, to cast into Shadows the vices of this Prince; for an Excellent Critic has lately told us, that when a KING is named, a HERO is supposed: 'Tis a reverence due to Majesty, to make the Virtues as conspicuous, and the Vices as obscure as we can possibly. And this we own, we have either performed, or at least endeavoured. But if we were more favourable to that Character than the exactness of History would allow, we have been far from diminishing a Greater, by drawing it into comparison. You may see through the whole conduct of the Play, a King naturally severe, and a resolution carried on to revenge himself to the uttermost on the Rebellious Conspirators. That this was sometimes shaken by reasons of policy and pity, is confessed; but it always returned with greater force, and ended at last in the ruin of his Enemies. In the mean time, we cannot but observe the wonderful Loyalty on the other Side; that the Play was to be stopped, because the King was represented. May we have many such proofs of their Duty and respect: but there was no occasion for them here. 'Tis to be supposed, that his Majesty himself was made acquainted with this objection; if he were so, he was the supreme and only Judge of it; and then the Event justifies us: If it were inspected only by those whom he commanded, 'tis hard if his own Officers and Servants should not see as much ill in it as other men, and be as willing to prevent it; especially when there was no solicitation used to have it acted. 'Tis known that noble person to whom it was referred, is a severe Critic on good Sense, Decency, and Morality; and I can assure the World, that the Rules of Horace are more familiar to him, than they are to me. He remembers too well that the vetus Comaedia was banished from the Athenian Theatre for its too much licence in representing persons, and would never have pardoned it in this or any Play.  
What opinion Henry the Third had of his Successor, is evident from the words he spoke upon his Deathbed: He exhorted the Nobility (says Davila) to acknowledge the King of Navarre, to whom the Kingdom of right belonged; and that they should not stick at the difference of Religion: for both the King of Navarre, a man of a sincere noble nature, would in the end return into the bosom of the Church, and the Pope being better informed, would receive him into his favour to prevent the ruin of the whole Kingdom. I hope I shall not need in this Quotation to defend myself. as if it were my opinion, that the Pope has any right to dispose of Kingdoms: my meaning is evident, that the King's judgement of his Brother-in-law, was the same which I have copied: and I must farther add from Davila, that the Arguments I have used in defence of that Succession, were chief drawn from the King's answer to the Deputies, as they may be seen more at large in page 730. and 731. of the first Edition of that History in English: There the three Estates, to the wonder of all men jointly concurred in cutting off the Succession; the Clergy, who were managed by the Archbishop of Lions, and Cardinal of Guise, were the first who promoted it; and the Commons and Nobility afterwards consented, as referring themselves (says our Author) to the Clergy; so that there was only the King to stand in the Gap; and he by artifice diverted that Storm which was breaking upon Posterity.  
The Crown was then reduced to the lowest Ebb of its Authority; and the King, in a manner, stood single, and yet preserved his Negative entire: but if the Clergy and Nobility had been on his part of the Balance, it might reasonably be supposed, that the meeting of those Estates at Blois, had healed the breaches of the Nation; and not forced him to the ratio ultima Regum, which is never to be praised, nor is it here, but only excused as the last result of his necessity. As for the Parallel betwixt the King of Navarre, and any other Prince now living, what likeness the God of Nature, and the descent of Virtues in the same channel have produced, is evident; I have only to say that the Nation certainly is happy where the Royal Virtues of the Progenitors are derived on their Descendants.  
In that Scene, 'tis true, there is but one of the Three Estates mentioned; but the Other two are virtually included; for the Archbishop and Cardinal are at the head of the Deputies: and that the rest are mute persons, every Critic understands the reason, ne quarta loqui persona laboboret; I am never willing to cumber the Stage with many Speakers, when I can reasonably avoid it; as here I might. And what if I had a mind to pass over the Clergy and Nobility of France in silence, and to excuse them from joining in so illegal and so ungodly a Decree? Am I tied in Poetry, to the strict rules of History? I have followed it in this Play more closely, than suited with the Laws of the Drama, and a great Victory they will have, who shall discover to the World this wonderful Secret, that I have not observed the Unities of place and time; but are they better kept in the Farce of the Libertine destroyed? 'Twas our common business here to draw the Parallel of the Times, and not to make an Exact Tragedy: For this once we were resolved to err with honest Shakespeare: neither can Catiline or Sejanus, (written by the great Master of our Art) stand excused any more than we, from this exception: but if we must be criticised, some Plays of our Adversaries may be exposed, and let them reckon their gains when the dispute is ended. I am accused of ignorance, for speaking of the Third Estate, as not sitting in the same House with the other two: Let not those Gentlemen mistake themselves, there are many things in Plays to be accommodated to the Country in which we live; I spoke to the understanding of an English Audience; Our three Estates now sit, and have long done so in Two Houses; but our Records bear witness, that they, according to the French Custom, have sat in one; that is the Lords Spiritual and Temporal within the Bar, and the Commons without it. If that Custom had been still continued here, it should have been so represented; but being otherwise, I was forced to write so as to be understood by our own Countrymen. If these be Errors, a Bigger Poet than either of us two has fallen into greater, and the Proofs are ready, whenever the Suit shall be recommenced.  
Mr. Hunt, the Jehu of the Party, gins very furiously with me, and says I have already condemned the Charter and City, and have executed the Magistrates in Effigy upon the Stage, in a Play called the Duke of Guise, frequently acted, and applauded, etc.  
Compare the latter end of this Sentence with what the Two Authors of the Reflections, or perhaps the Associating Club of the Devil-Tavern write in the beginning of their Libel. Never was Mountain delivered of such a Mouse; the fiercest Tories have been ashamed to defend this Piece: they who have any sparks of wit among them are so true to their pleasure, that they will not suffer dulness to pass upon them for wit, nor tediousness for diversion: which is the reason that this Piece has not met with the expected applause: I never saw a Play more deficient in Wit, good Characters or Entertainment, than this is.  
For shame, Gentlemen, pack your Evidence a little better against another time: You see, My Lord Chief Baron, has delivered his Opinion, that the Play was frequently acted and applauded; but you of the Jury, have found Ignoramus, on the Wit and the Success of it. Oats, Dugdale and Turbervile, never disagreed more than you do; let us know at last, which of the Witnesses are true Protestants, and which are Irish. But it seems your Authors had contrary Designs: Mr. Hunt thought fit to say, it was frequently acted and applauded, because, says he, it was intended to provoke the Rabble into Tumults and Disorder. Now if it were not seen frequently, this Argument would lose somewhat of its force; the Reflectors business went another way, it was to be allowed no Reputation, no Success, but to be damned Root and Branch, to prevent the Prejudice it might do their Party; accordingly, as much as in them lay, they have drawn a Bill of Exclusion for it on the Stage; But what Rabble was it to provoke? Are the Audience of a Playhouse (which are generally Persons of Honour, Noblemen and Ladies, or at worst, as one of your Authors calls his Gallants, Men of Wit and Pleasure about the Town) are these the Rabble of Mr. Hunt? I have seen a Rabble at Sir Edmundbury Godfrey's Night, and have heard of such a name, at true Protestant Meeting-houses; but a Rabble is not to be provoked, where it never comes. Indeed, we had one in this Tragedy, but it was upon the Stage; and that's the Reason, why your Reflectors would break the Glass, which has showed them their own Faces. The business of the Theatre, is to expose Vice and Folly; to dissuade men by Examples from one, and to shame them out of the other. And however you may pervert our good intentions, it was here particularly to reduce men to Loyalty, by showing the pernicious consequences of Rebellion, and Popular Insurrections. I believe no man, who loves the Government, would be glad, to see the Rabble in such a posture, as they were represented in our Play: But if the Tragedy had ended, on your side, the Play had been a Loyal Witty Poem, the Success of it, should have been recorded by immortal Og or Doeg, and the Rabble Scene, should have been true Protestant, though a Whig Devil were at the Head of it.  
In the mean time, pray, where lies the Relation, betwixt the Tragedy of the Duke of Guise, and the Charter of London? Mr. Hunt has found a rare connexion, for he tacks them together, by the kicking of the Sheriffs: That Chain of thought was a little ominous, for something like a kicking, has succeeded the Printing of his Book; and the Charter of London was the Quarrel. For my part, I have not Law enough to state that question, much less decide it; let the Charter shift for itself in Westminster Hall, the Government is somewhat wiser, than to employ my ignorance on such a Subject; my promise to honest Nat. Lee, was the only Bribe I had, to engage me in this trouble; for which, he has the good fortune to escape Scot-free, and I am left in pawn for the Reckoning, who had the least share in the Entertainment. But the Rising, it seems, should have been on the true Protestants side, for he has tried, says ingenious Mr. Hunt, what he could do, towards making the Charter forfeitable, by some Extravagancy and Disorder of the People. A wise man I had been doubtless for my pains, to raise the Rabble to a Tumult, where I had been certainly, one of the first men, whom they had limned or dragged to the next convenient Signpost.  
But on second thought, he says, this ought not to move the Citizens: he is much in the right; for the Rabble Scene was written on purpose, to keep his Party of them in the bounds of Duty. 'Tis the business of factious men to stir up the Populace: Sir Edmond on Horseback, attended by a Swingeing Pope in Effigy, and forty thousand true Protestants for his Guard to Execution, are a Show more proper for that design, than a thou sand Stage-Plays.  
Well, he has fortified his Opinion with a Reason, however, why the People should not be moved; because I have so maliciously and mischievously represented the King, and the King's Son; nay, and his Favourite (saith he) the Duke too; to whom I give the worst strokes of my unlucky Fancy.  
This need not be answered, for 'tis already manifest, that neither the King, nor the King's Son are represented, neither that Son, he means, nor any of the rest, God bless them all. What strokes of my unlucky Fancy, I have given to his Royal Highness, will be seen, and it will be seen also, who strikes him worst and most unluckily.  
The Duke of Guise, he tells us, aught to have represented a great Prince, that had inserved to some most detestable Villainy, to please the Rage or Lust of a Tyrant; such great Courtiers have been often sacrificed, to appease the Furies of the Tyrant's guilty Conscience; to expiate for his Sin, and to atone the People. For a Tyrant naturally stands in fear of such wicked Ministers, is obnoxious to them, awed by them, and they drag him to greater evils, for their own impunity, than they perpetrated for his Pleasure, and their own Ambition.  
Sure, he said not all this for nothing, I would know of him, on what persons he would fix the Sting of this sharp satire? What too they are, whom, to use his own Words, he so maliciously and mischievously would represent? For my part, I dare not understand the villainy of his meaning; but some body was to have been shown a Tyrant, and some other a great Prince, inserving to some detestable Villainy, and to that Tyrant's Rage and Lust; this great Prince or Courtier ought to be sacrificed, to atone the People, and the Tyrant is persuaded, for his own interest, to give him up to public Justice. I say no more, but that he has studied the Law to good purpose. He is dancing on the Rope without a Metaphor, his knowledge of the Law is the Staff that poizes him, and saves his Neck. The Party indeed speaks out sometimes, for wickedness is not always so wise, as to be secret, especially when it is driven to despair. By some of their Discourses, we may guests at whom he points; but he has fenced himself in with so many Evasions, that he is safe in his Sacrilege; and he who dares to answer him, may become obnoxious. 'Tis true, he breaks a little out of the Clouds, within two Paragraphs; for there he tells you, that Caius Caesar (to give unto Caesar, the things that are Caesar's) was in the Catiline Conspiracy; a fine insinuation this, to be sneered at by his Party, and yet not to be taken hold of by public Justice: They would be glad now, that I or any man, should bolt out their Covert Treason for them: for their loop hole is ready, that the Caesar here spoken of, was a private man. But the application of the Text, declares the Authors to be another Caesar, which is so black and so infamous an aspersion, that nothing less than the highest clemency can leave it unpunished. I could reflect on his ignorance in this place, for attributing these words to Caesar, he that is not with us, is against us: He seems to have mistaken them, out of the New Testament, and that's the best defence I can make for him; for if he did it knowingly, 'twas impiously done, to put our Saviour's words into Caesar's mouth. But His Law and Our Gospel, are two things; this Gentleman's Knowledge is not of the Bible, any more than his Practice is according to it. He tells you, he will give the world a taste of my Atheism and Impiety; for which he quotes these following Verses, in the second or third Act of the Duke of Guise.  
For Conscience or Heaven's fear, religious Rules  
Are all State-bells to toll in pious Fools.  
In the first place, he is mistaken in his Man, for the Verses are not mine, but Mr. Lees: I asked him concerning them, and have this account, that they were spoken by the Devil; now, what can either Whig or Devil say, more proper to their Character, than that Religion is only a Name, a Stalking horse, as errand a Property as Godliness, and Property themselves are amongst their Party? yet for these two lines, which in the mouth that speaks them, are of no offence, he hallooes on the whole pack, against me: Judge, Justice, Surrogate, and Official are to be employed, at his Suit, to direct Process, and boring through the Tongue for Blasphemy, is the least Punishment his Charity will allow me.  
I find 'tis happy for me, that he was not made a Judge, and yet I had as lief have him my Judge as my Council, if my Life were at stake. My poor Lord Stafford was well helped up with this Gentleman for his Solicitor; no doubt, he gave that unfortunate Nobleman, most admirable advice toward the Saving of his life; and would have rejoiced exceedingly, to have seen him cleared. I think, I have disproven his instance of my Atheism, it remains for him, to justify his Religion, in putting the words of Christ into a Heathens mouth: and much more in his profane allusion to the Scripture, in the other Text; Give unto Caesar, the things that are Caesar's; which, if it be not a profanation of the Bible, for the sake of a silly Witticism, let all men, but his own Party judge. I am not malicious enough to return him the names which he has called me; but of all sins, I thank God, I have always abhorred Atheism: and I had need be a better Christian than Mr. Hunt has shown himself, if I forgive him so infamous a Slander.  
But as he has mistaken our Saviour for Julius Caesar, so he would Pompey too, if he were let alone: to him, and to his Cause, or to the like Cause it belonged, he says, to use these words, he that is not with us is against us. I find he cares not whose the Expression is, so it be not Christ's. But how comes Pompey the Great to be a Whig? He was indeed, a Defender of the ancient established Roman Government; but Caesar was the Whig, who took up Arms unlawfully to subvert it. Our Liberties and our Religion both are safe, they are secured to us by the Laws, and those Laws are executed under an established Government, by a Lawful King. The Defender of our Faith, is the Defender of our Common Freedom; to Cabal, to Write, to Rail against this Administration, are all Endeavours to destroy the Government, and to oppose the Succession in any private man, is a Treasonable Practise against the Foundation of it. Pompey very honourably maintained the Liberty of his Country, which was governed by a Commonwealth: So that there lies no Parallel betwixt his Cause and Mr. Hunts, except in the bare notion of a Commonwealth, as it is opposed to Monarchy: and that's the thing he would obliquely slur upon us. Yet on these Premises, he is for ordering my Lord Chief Justice, to grant out Warrants against all those who have applauded the Duke of Guise; as if they committed a Riot when they Clapped: I suppose they paid for their Places, as well as he and his Party did, who Hissed. If he were not half Distracted, for not being Lord Chief Baron, methinks he should be Lawyer enough, to advise my Lord Chief Justice better. To Clap and Hiss are the Privileges of a Freeborn Subject in a Playhouse: they buy them with their Money, and their Hands and Mouths are their own Property: It belongs to the Master of the Revels, to see that no Treason or Immorality be in the Play; but when 'tis acted, let every man like or dislike freely: not but that respect should be used too, in the presence of the King, for by his Permission the Actors are allowed: 'Tis due to his Person, as he is Sacred, and to the Successors, as being next related to him: there are opportunities enough for men to hiss, who are so disposed, in their absence: for when the King is in sight, though but by accident, a Malefactor is reprieved from death: Yet such is the Duty, and good manners of these good Subjects, that they forbore not some rudeness in his Majesty's presence; but when his Royal Highness and his Court were only there, they pushed it as far as their malice had power; and if their Party had been more numerous, the Affront had been greater.  
The next Paragraph of our Authors, is a Panegyrique on the Duke of Monmouth, which concerns not me, who am very far from detracting from him: the Obligations I have had to him, were those, of his Countenance, his Favour, his good Word, and his Esteem; all which I have likewise had in a greater measure from his excellent Duchess, the Patroness of my poor unworthy Poetry. If I had not greater, the fault was never in their want of goodness to me, but in my own backwardness to ask, which has always, and I believe will ever keep me from rising in the World. Let this be enough, with reasonable men, to clear me from the imputation of an ungrateful man, with which my enemies have most unjustly taxed me. If I am a mercenary Scribbler, the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury best know: I am sure, they have found me no importunate Solicitor: for I know myself, I deserved little, and therefore have never desired much. I return that slander with just disdain on my accusers; 'tis for men who have ill Consciences to suspect others: I am resolved to stand or fall with the Cause of God, my King and Country; never to trouble myself for any railing aspersions which I have not deserved, and to leave it as a Portion to my Children, that they had a Father, who durst do his duty, and was neither Covetous nor Mercenary.  
As little am I concerned at that imputation of my back friends, that I have confessed myself to be put on to write as I do: If they mean this Play in particular, that is notoriously proved against them to be false: For the rest of my Writings, my hatred of their Practices and Principles, was cause enough to expose them, as I have done, and will do more. I do not think as they do; for if I did, I must think Treason: But I must in conscience write as I do, because I know, which is more than thinking, that I writ for a lawful established Government against Anarchy, Innovation, and Sedition: But these Lies (as Prince Harry said to Falstaff) are as gross as he that made them. More I need not say, for I am accused without witness. I fear not any of their Evidences; not even him of Salamanca; who though he has disowned his Doctorship in Spain, yet there are some allow him to have taken a certain degree in Italy; a Climate they say more proper for his Masculine Constitution. To conclude this ridiculous Accusation against me, I know but four men in their whole Party to whom I have spoken for above this year last passed; and with them neither but casually and cursorily. We have been acquaintance of a long standing, many years before this accursed Plot divided men into several Parties: I dare call them to witness, whether the most I have at any time said, will amount to more than this, that I hoped the time would come when these names of Whig and Tory would cease among us; and that we might live together, as we had done formerly. I have since this Pamphet met accidentally with two of them; and I am sure they are so far from being my Accusers, that they have severally owned to me, that all men who espouse a Party, must expect to blackened by the contrary Side: that themselves knew nothing of it, nor of the Authors of the Reflections. It remains therefore to be considered, whether, if I were as much a Knave as they would make me, I am Fool enough to be guilty of this Charge: and whether they who raised it, would have made it public, if they had thought I was theirs inwardly. For 'tis plain they are glad of worse Scribblers than I am, and maintain them too, as I could prove, if I envied them their miserable subsistence. I say no more, but let my Actions speak for me: spectemur agendo, that's the trial.  
Much less am I concerned at the noble name of Bays; that's a Brat so like his own Father, that he cannot be mistaken for any other body: they might as reasonably have called Tom Sternhold, Virgil, and the resemblance would have held as well.  
As for Knave and Sycophant, and Rascal, and Impudent, and Devil, and old Serpent, and a thousand such Good-morrows, I take them to be only names of Parties: And could return Murderer and Cheat, and Whig-napper, and Sodomite; and in short the goodly number of the seven deadly Sins, with all their Kindred and Relations, which are Names of Parties too; but Saints will be Saints in spite of Villainy. I believe they would pass themselves upon us for such a Compound as Mithridate, or Venice-Treacle; as if Whiggism were an admirable Cordial in the Mass, though the several Ingredients are rank Poisons.  
But if I think either Mr. Hunt a Villain, or know any of my Reflectors to be ungrateful Rogues, I do not owe them so much kindness as to call them so; for I am satisfied that to prove them either, would but recommend them to their own Party. Yet if some will needs make a merit of their infamy, and provoke a Legend of their sordid lives, I think they must be gratified at last; and though I will not take the Scavenger's employment from him, yet I may be persuaded to point at some men's doors, who have heaps of filth before them. But this must be when they have a little angered me; for hitherto I am provoked no further than to smile at them. And indeed, to look upon the whole Faction in a lump, never was a more pleasant sight than to behold these bvilders of a new Babel, how ridiculously they are mixed, and what a rare confusion there is amongst them. One part of them is carrying Stone and Mortar for the building of a Meetinghouse, another sort understand not that Language; they are for snatching away their Work-fellows materials to set up a Bawdy-house: some of them blaspheme, and others pray; and both I believe with equal godliness at bottom: some of them are Atheists, some Sectaries, yet ALL True Protestants. Most of them love all Whores, but her of Babylon. In few words, any man may be what he will, so he be one of Them. 'Tis enough to despise the King, to hate the Duke, and rail at the Succession: after this 'tis no matter how a man lives; he is a Saint by infection; he goes along with the Party, has their mark upon him; his wickedness is no more than frailty; their righteousness is imputed to him: So that as ignorant rogues go out Doctors when a Prince comes to an University, they hope at the last day, to take their Degree in a Crowd of True Protestants, and thrust unheeded into Heaven.  
'Tis a credit to be railed at by such men as these. The Charter-man in the very Title-page, where he hangs out the Cloth of the City before his Book, gives it for his Motto, Si populus vult deeipi; decipiatur; as if he should have said, you have a mind to be cozened, and the Devil give you good on't: If I cry a Sirreverence, and you take it for Honey, make the best of your bargain. For shame, good Christians, can you suffer such a man to starve, when you see his design is upon your Purses? He is contented to expose the Ears representative of your Party on a Pillory, and is in a way of doing you more service than a worn out Witness, who can hang no body hereafter but himself. He tells you the Papists clap their hands in the hopes they conceive of the ruin of your Government: does not this single syllable YOUR deserve a Pension, if he can prove the Government to be Yours, and that the King has nothing to do in your Republic? he continueth, as if that were as sure and certain to Them, as it is to Us, without doubt, that they (the Papists) once fired the City, just as certain in your own Consciences. I wish the Papists had no more to answer for, than that accusation: pray let it be put to the Vote, and resolved upon the question, by your whole Party, that the North-east Wind, is not only illaffected to Man and Beast, but is also a Tory or Tantivy Papist in Masquerade. I am satisfied, not to have so much art left me as to frame any thing agreeable, or verisimilar, but 'tis plain that he has, and therefore, as I ought in justice, I resign my Laurel, and my Bays too, to Mr. Hunt; 'tis he sets up for the Poet now; and has the only art to amuse and to deceive the people. You may see how profound his knowledge is in Poetry; for he tells you just before, that my Heroes are commonly such Monsters as Theseus and Hercules; renowned throughout all Ages for destroying. Now Theseus and Hercules you know have been the Heroes of all Poets, and have been renowned through all Ages, for destroying Monsters, for succouring the Distressed, and for putting to death inhuman arbitrary Tyrants. Is this your Oracle? If he were to write the Acts and Monuments of Whig Heroes, I find they should be quite contrary to mine: destroyers indeed, but of a Lawful Government; Murderers, but of their fellow Subjects; Lovers as Hercules was of Hylas; with a journey at last to Hell, like that of Theseus.  
But mark the wise Consequences of our Author. I have not, he says, so much art left me to make any thing agreeable, or verisimilar, wherewith to amuse or deceive the people: and yet in the very next Paragraph, my Province is to corrupt the Manners of the Nation, and lay waste their Morals, and my endeavours are more happily applied, to extinguish the little remainders of the Virtue of the Age. Now I am to perform all this, it seems, without making any thing verisimilar or agreeable: Why, Pharaoh never set the Israelites such a Task, to build Pyramids without Brick or Straw. If the Fool knows it not, verisimilitude and agreeableness, are the very Tools to do it; but I am willing to disclaim them both, rather than to use them to so ill purpose as he has done.  
Yet even this their celebrated Writer, knows no more of Style and English, than the Northern Dedicator. As if Dulness and Clumsiness were fatal to the Name of TOM. 'Tis true, he is a Fool in three Languages more than the Poet, for they say, he understands Latin, Greek and Hebrew, from all which, to my certain knowledge, I acquit the other. Og may write against the King if he pleases, so long as he Drinks for him; and his Writings will never do the Government so much harm, as his Drinking does it good: for true Subjects, will not be much perverted by his Libels; but the Wine Duties rise considerably by his Claret. He has often called me an Atheist in Print, I would believe more charitably of him; and that he only goes the broad way, because the other is too narrow for him. He may see by this, I do not delight to meddle with his course of Life, and his Immoralities, though I have a long Bead-roll of them. I have hitherto contented myself with the Ridiculous part of him, which is enough in all conscience to employ one man: even without the story of his late fall at the Old Devil, where he broke no Ribs, because the hardness of the Stairs could reach no Bones; and for my part, I do not wonder how he came to fall, for I have always known him heavy; the Miracle is, how he got up again. I have heard of a Sea-Captain as fat as he, who to scape Arrests, would lay himself flat upon the ground, and let the Bailiffs carry him to Prison, if they could. If a Messenger or two, nay, we may put in three or four, should come, he has friendly Advertisement how to scape them. But to leave him, who is not worth any further consideration, now I have done laughing at him, Would every man knew his own Talent, and that they who are only born for drinking, would let both Poetry and Prose alone.  
I am weary with traceing the Absurdities and Mistakes of our great Lawyer, some of which indeed are wilful; as where he calls the Trimmers, the more moderate sort of Tories. It seems those Politicians are odious to both sides; for neither own them to be theirs. We know them, and so does he too in his Conscience, to be secret Whigs, if they are any thing. But now the designs of Whiggism are openly discovered, they tack about to save a Stake, that is, they will not be villains to their own ruin. While the Government was to be destroyed, and there was probability of compassing it, no men were so violent as they; but since their Fortunes are in hazard by the Law, and their Places at Court by the King's displeasure, they pull in their horns, and talk more peaceably; in order, I suppose, to their vehemence on the right side, if they were to be believed. For in laying of Colours, they observe a Medium; Black and white are too far distant, to be placed directly by one another, without some shadowings to soften their contrarieties. 'Tis Mariana I think (but am not certain) that makes the following relation; and let the noble Family of Trimmers, read their own Fortune in it. Don Pedro, King of Castille, Surnamed the Cruel, who had been restored by the Valour of our Edward the Black Prince, was finally dispossessed by Don Henry the Bastard, and he enjoyed the Kingdom quietly, till his Death; which, when he felt approaching, he called his Son to him, and gave him this his last Counsel. I have, said he, gained this Kingdon, which I leave you, by the Sword; for the Right of Inheritance was in Don Pedro; but the favour of the People, who hated my Brother for his Tyranny, was to me instead of Title. You are now to be the Peaceable Possessor of of what I have unjustly gotten: and your Subjects are composed of these three sorts of men. One Party espoused my Brother's Quarrel, which was the undoubted Lawful Cause; those, though they were my Enemies, were men of Principle and Honour: cherish them, and exalt them into Places of trust about you, for in them you may confide safely, who prized their Fidelity above their Fortune. Another sort, are they who fought my Cause against Don Pedro, to those you are indeed obliged, because of the accidental good they did me, for they intended only their private Benefit, and helped to raise me, that I might afterwards promote them: You may continue them in their Offices, if you please; but trust them no farther than you are forced, for what they did, was against their Conscience. But there is a third sort, which during the whole Wars, were Neuters; let them be crushed on all occasions, for their business was only their own Security. They had neither Courage enough to engage on my Side, nor Conscience enough to help their Lawful Sovereign: therefore let them be made Examples, as the worst sort of interessed men, which certainly are Enemies to both, and would be profitable to neither.  
I have only a dark remembrance of this Story, and have not the Spanish Author by me, but I think, I am not much mistaken in the main of it: and whether true or false, the Counsel given, I am sure, is such, as aught in common prudence, to be practised against Trimmers, whether the Lawful or Unlawful Cause prevail. Loyal men may justly be displeased with this Party, not for their Moderation, as Mr. Hunt insinuates; but because, under that Masque of seeming mildness, there lies hidden either a deep treachery, or at best, an interressed lukewarmness. But he runs riot into almost treasonable Expressions, as if Trimmers were hated because they are not perfectly wicked, or perfectly deceived, of the Catiline make, bold, and without understanding, that can adhaere to men that publicly profess Murders, and applaud the design: By all which villainous names, he opprobriously calls His Majesty's most loyal Subjects; as if Men must be perfectly wicked who endeavour to support a lawful Government; or perfectly deceived, who on no occasion dare take up arms against their Sovereign: as if acknowledging the right of Succession, and resolving to maintain it in the Line, were to be in a Catiline Conspiracy; and at last, (which is ridiculous enough, after so much serious Treason) as if to clap the Duke of Guise, were to adhaere to men that publicly profess Murders, and applaud the design of the Assassinating Poets.  
But together with his Villainies, pray let his incohaerences be observed. He commends the Trimmers (at least tacitly excuses them) for men of some moderation; and this in opposition to the instruments of wickedness of the Catiline-make, that are resolute and forward, and without consideration. But he forgets all this in the next twenty lines; for there he gives them their own, and tells them roundly, in internecino bello medii pro hostibus habentur. Neutral men are Traitors, and assist by their indifferency to the destruction of the Government. The plain English of his meaning, is this; while matters are only in dispute, and in machination, he is contented they should be moderate; but when once the Faction can bring about a Civil War, than they are Traitors, if they declare not openly for them.  
But it is not, he says, the Duke of Guise, who is to be assassinated, a turbulent wicked and haughty Courtier, but an innocent and gentle Prince: By his favour, our Duke of Guise, was neither Innocent nor Gentle, nor a Prince of the Blood Royal, though he pretended to descend from Charlemaign, and a Genealogy was printed to that purpose, for which the Author was punished, as he deserved; witness Davila, and the Journals of Henry the Third, where the Story is at large related. Well, who is it then? why, 'tis a Prince who has no fault, but that he is the King's Son: Then he has no fault by consequence; for I am certain, that's no fault of his. The rest of the Compliment, is so silly, and so fulsome, as if he meant it all in ridicule. And to conclude the Jest, he says, that the best People of England, have no other way left, to show their Loyalty to the King, their Religion and Government, in long intervals of Parliament, than by prosecuting his Son, for the sake of the King, and his own merit, with all the Demonstrations of the highest esteem. Yes, I can tell them one other way to express their Loyalty, which is, to obey the King, and to respect his Brother, as the next Lawful Successor; their Religion commands them both, and the Government is secured in so doing. But why in Intervals of Parliament? How are the more obliged to honour the King's Son out of Parliament, than in it? And why this prosecution of Love for the King's Sake? Has he ordered more Love to be shown to one Son, than to another? Indeed, his own quality, is cause sufficient for all men to respect him, and I am of their number, who truly honour him, and who wish him better than this miserable Sycophant; for I wish him, from his Father's Royal Kindness what Justice can make him, which is a greater Honour, than the Rabble can confer upon him.  
But our Author finds, that Commendation is no more his Talon, than Flattery was that of Esop's Ass; and therefore falls immediately, from pawing with his fore-feets, and grinning upon one Prince, to downright braying against another.  
He says I have not used my Patron Duke much better: for I have put him under a most dismal and unfortunate Character, of a Successor, excluded from the Crown by Act of State, for his Religion; who fought his way to the Crown, changed his Religion, and died by the hand of a Roman Assassinate.  
If it please his Royal Highness to be my Patron, I have reason to be proud of it; because he never yet forsook any man, whom he has had the goodness to own for his. But how have I put him under an unfortunate Character? the Authors of the Reflections, and our John a Nokes, have not laid their noddles together about this Accusation. For 'tis their business to prove the King of Navarre to have been a most successful, magnanimous, gentle, and grateful Prince: in which Character they have followed the stream of all Historians. How then happens this jarring amongst friends, that the same man is put under such dismal circumstances on one side, and so fortunate on the other, by the Writers of the same Party? The answer is very plain, that they take the cause by several handles. They who will not have the Duke resemble the King of Navarre, have magnified the Character of that Prince, to debase his Royal Highness; and therein done what they can to show the disparity. Mr. Hunt, who will have it to be the Duke's Character, has blackened that King as much as he is able, to show the likeness. Now this would be ridiculous pleading at a Bar, by Lawyers retained for the same Cause; and both sides would call each other fools, because the Jury betwixt them would be confounded, and perhaps the Judges too.  
But this it is to have a bad Cause, which puts men of necessity upon knavery; and that knavery is commonly found out. Well Mr. Hunt has in another place confessed himself to be in passion, and that's the reason he is so grossly mistaken in opening of the Cause. For first the King of Navarre was neither under dismal, nor unfortunate circumstances. Before the end of that very Sentence, our Lawyer has confessed that he fought his way to the Crown; that is, he gloriously vanquished all his Rebels, and happily possessed his Inheritance many years after he had regained it. In the next place, he was never excluded from the Crown by Act of State. He changed his Religion indeed, but not till he had almost weathered the Storm, recovered the best part of his Estate, and gained some glorious Victories in pitched Battles; so that his changing cannot without injustice be attributed to his fear. Monsieur Chiverny, in his Memoirs of those times plainly tells us, that he solemnly promised to his Predecessor Henry the Third, then dying, that he would become a Romanist; and Davila, though he says not this directly, yet denies it not. By whose hands Henry the fourth died, is notoriously known; but it is indiviously urged, both by Mr. Hunt and the Reflectors: for we may, to our shame, remember, that a King of our own Country was barbarously murdered by his Subjects, who professed the same Religion; though I believe that neither Jaques Clement, nor Ravillac, were better Papists, than the Independents and Presbyterians were Protestant's: So that their Argument only proves that there are Rogues of all Religions: Iliacoes intra muros peccatur & extra. But Mr. Hunt follows his blow again, that I have offered a Justification of an Act of Exclusion against a Popish Successor in a Protestant Kingdom, by remembering what was done against the King of Navarre, who was de facto excluded by an Act of State. My Gentleman, I perceive, is very willing to call that an Act of Exclusion, and an Act of State, which is only in our Language, called a Bill: for Henry the third could never be gained to pass it, though it was proposed by the three Estates at Blois. The Reflectors are more modest; for they profess, (though I am afraid it is somewhat against the grain) that a Vote of the House of Commons is not an Act: But the times are turned upon them, and they dare speak no other Language. Mr. Hunt indeed is a bold Republican, and tells you the bottom of their meaning. Yet why should it make the courage of his Royal Highness quail, to find himself under this representation? which by our Author's favour, is neither dismal, nor disastrous. Henry the Fourth escaped this dreadful Machine of the League: I say dreadful; for the three Estates were at that time composed generally of Guisards, factious, hot headed rebellious interressed men: The King in possession, was but his Brother-in-Law; and at that time publicly his Enemy; for the King of Navarre was then in arms against him: and yet the sense of Common Justice, and the good of his People so prevailed, that he withstood the Project of the States, which he also knew was levelled at himself; for had the Exclusion proceeded, he had been immediately laid by, and the Lieutenancy of France conferred on Guise: after which the Rebel would certainly have put up his Title for the Crown. In the Case of his Royal Highness, only one of the three Estates have offered at the Exclusion; and have been constantly opposed by the other two, and by his Majesty: Neither is it any way probable, that the like will ever be again attempted: For the fatal Consequences, as well as the Illegality of that Design, are seen through already by the People. So that instead of offering a justification of an Act of Exclusion, I have exposed a rebellious, impious, and fruitless contrivance tending to it. If we look on the Parliament of Paris, when they were in their right wits, before they were intoxicated by the League, (at least wholly) we shall find them addressing to King Henry the third in another Key, concerning the King of Navarr's Succession, though he was at that time (as they called it) a relapsed Heretic. And to this purpose I will quote a passage out of the Journals of Henry the Third, so much magnified by my Adversaries.  
Towards the end of September, 1585. there was published at Paris, a Bull of Excommunication, against the King of Navarre, and the Prince of Conde: The Parliament of Paris, made their Remonstrance to the King upon it, which was both grave, and worthy of the Place they held, and of the Authority they have in this Kingdom. Saying, for conclusion, that their Court had found the Style of this Bull, so full of Innovation, and so distant from the Modesty of ancient Popes, that they could not understand in it, the voice of an Apostles Successor; forasmuch, as they found not in their Records, nor in the search of all Antiquity, that the Princes of France, had ever been subject to the Justice or Jurisdiction of the Pope, and they could not take it into consideration, till first he made appear the Right which he pretended in the Translation of Kingdoms, established and ordained by Almighty God, before the Name of Pope was heard of in the World. 'Tis plain by this, that the Parliament of Paris, acknowledged an inherent Right of Succession in the King of Navarre, though of a contrary Religion to their own: And though after the Duke of Guise's Murder at Blois, the City of Paris revolted from their Obedience to their King, pretending that he was fallen from the Crown, by reason of that and other Actions, with which they charged him; yet the sum of all their Power to renounce him, and create the Duke of Mayenne Lieutenant General, depended ultimately on the Pope's authority; which as you see, but three years before, they had peremptorily denied.  
The College of Sorbonne began the Dance, by their Determination, that the Kingly Right was forfeited; and stripping him of all his Dignities, they called him plain Henry de Valois: after this, says my Author, sixteen Rascals (by which he means the Council, of that Number) having administered the Oath of Government to the Duke of Mayenne, to take in quality of Lieutenant General of the Estate and Crown of France; the same ridiculous Dignity, was confirmed to him, by an imaginary Parliament, the true Parliament being detained Prisoners, in divers of the City-Gaols, and two new Seals were ordered to be immediately made, with this Inscription: The Seal of the Kingdom of France. I need not enlarge on this Relation, 'tis evident from hence, that the Sorbonists were the Original, and our Schismatics in England, were the Copiers of Rebellion; that Paris began, and London followed.  
The next Lines of my Author are, that a Gentleman of Paris, made the Duke of Mayenne 's Picture to be drawn, with a Crown Imperial on his Head, and I have heard of an English Nobleman, who has at this day, the Picture of Old Oliver, with this Motto underneath it, utinam vixeris. All this while, this cannot be reckoned an Act of State, for the Deposing King Henry the Third; because it was an Act of Ouvert Rebellion in the Parisians: neither could the holding of the three Estates at Paris, afterwards, by the same Duke of Mayenne, devolve any Right on him, in prejudice of King Henry the Fourth; though those pretended States, declared his Title void, on the account of his Religion: because those Estates could neither be called nor holden, but by and under the Authority of the Lawful King. It would take more time than I have allowed, for this Vindication, or I could easily trace from the French History, what Misfortunes attended France, and how near it was to Ruin, by the Endeavours to alter the Succession. For first, it was actually Dismembered, the Duke of Merceur setting up a Principality in the Duchy of Bretagne, Independent of the Crown: the Duke of Mayenne had an evident design to be elected King, by the favour of the People and the Pope: the young Dukes of Guise and of Nemours, aspired with the interest of the Spaniards, to be chosen, by their Marriage with the Infanta Izabella. The Duke of Lorraine, was for cantling out some part of France, which lay next his Territories; and the Duke of Savoy, had before the Death of Henry the Third, actually possessed himself of the Marquisate of Saluces. But above all, the Spaniards fomented these Civil Wars, in hopes to reduce that flourishing Kingdom, under their own Monarchy. To as many, and as great Mischiefs, should we be evidently subject; if we should madly engage ourselves, in the like Practices of altering the Succession, which our Gracious King, in his Royal Wisdom well foresaw; and has cut up that accursed Project by the Roots; which will render the memory of his Justice and Prudence, Immortal and Sacred to future Ages, for having not only preserved our present quiet, but secured the Peace of our Posterity.  
'Tis clearly manifest, that no Act of State passed, to the Exclusion of either, the King of Navarre, or of Henry the Fourth; consider him, in either of the two circumstances: but Oracle Hunt, taking this for granted, would prove à fortiori, that if a Protestant Prince, were actually excluded from a Popish Kingdom, than a Popish Successor is more reasonably to be excluded from a Protestant Kingdom; because, says he, a Protestant Prince, is under no Obligation to destroy his Popish Subjects, but a Popish Prince, is to destroy his Protestant Subjects: upon which bare supposition, without farther Proof, he calls him insufferable Tyrant, and the worst of Monsters.  
Now I take the matter quite otherwise, and bind myself to maintain, that there is not, nor can be any Obligation, for a King to destroy his Subjects of a contrary Persuasion, to the established Religion of his Country: for quatenus Subjects, of what Religion soever, he is infallibly bound to preserve and cherish, and not to destroy them: and this is the first duty of a Lawful Sovereign, as such, antecedent to any tye or consideration of his Religion. Indeed, in those Countries where the Inquisition is introduced, it goes harder with Protestants, and the reason is manifest, because the Protestant Religion has not gotten footing there, and severity is the means to keep it out: But to make this instance, reach England, our Religion must not only be changed (which in itself, is almost impossible to imagine) but the Council of Trent received and the Inquisition admitted, which many Popish Countries have rejected. I forget not the Cruelties, which were exercised in Queen Mary's time, against the Protestants; neither do I any way excuse them: But it follows not, that every Popish Successor should take example by them, for every ones Conscience of the same Religion, is not guided by the same Dictates in his Government: Neither does it follow, that if one be cruel, another must; especially, when there is a stronger Obligation, and greater Interest to the contrary: For if a Popish King in England should be bound to destroy his Protestant People, I would ask the Question, over whom he meant to Reign afterwards? and how many Subjects would be left?  
In Queen Mary's time, the Protestant Religion had scarcely taken root: And it is reasonable to be supposed, that she found the number of Papists, equalling that of the Protestants, at her entrance to the Kingdom; especially if we reckon into the account those who were the Trimmers of the times; I mean such, who privately were Papists, though under her Protestant Predecessor they appeared otherwise. Therefore her difficulties in persecuting her reformed Subjects, were far from being so insuperable, as ours now are, when the strength and number of the Papists is so very inconsiderable. They who cast in the Church of England as ready to embrace Popery, are either Knaves enough to know they lie, or Fools enough not to have considered the Tenants of that Church, which are diametrically opposite to Popery; and more so than any of the Sects.  
Not to insist on the quiet and security, which Protestant Subjects at this day enjoy in some parts of Germany, under Popish Princes; where I have been assured, that Mass is said, and a Lutheran Sermon preached in different parts of the fame Church, on the same day, without disturbance on either side; nor on the Privileges granted by Henry the Fourth of France to his Party, after he had forsaken their Opinions, which they quietly possessed for a long time after his death:  
The French Histories are full of Examples, manifestly proving, that the fiercest of their Popish Princes have not thought themselves bound to destroy their Protestant Subjects: and the several Edicts granted under them, in favour of the Reformed Religion, are pregnant instances of this truth. I am not much given to Quotations, but Davila lies open for every man to read. Tolerations, and free exercise of Religion, granted more amply in some, more restraindly in others, are no sign that those Princes held themselves obliged in Conscience to destroy men of a different Persuasion. It will be said those Tolerations were gained by force of Arms: In the first place 'tis no great credit to the Protestant Religion, that the Protestants in France were actually Rebels. But the truth is, they were only Geneva Protestants, and their opinions were far distant from those of the Church of England, which teaches passive obedience to all her Sons, and not to propagate Religion by Rebellion. But 'tis further to be considered, that those French Kings, though Papists, thought the preservation of their Subjects, and the public Peace, were to be considered, before the gratification of the Court of Rome; and though the number of the Papists, exceeded that of the Protestants, in the proportion of three to one; though the Protestants were always beaten when they fought, and though the Popes pressed continually with Exhortations and Threaten to extirpate Calvinism, yet Kings thought it enough to continue in their own Religion themselves, without forcing it upon their Subjects, much less destroying them who professed another. But it will be objected those Edicts of Toleration were not kept on the Papists side: They would answer, because the Protestants stretched their Privileges further than was granted: and that they often relapsed into Rebellion: But whether or no the Protestants were in fault, I leave History to determine: 'tis matter of fact, that they were barbarously massacred, under the protection of the Public Faith: Therefore to argue fairly, either an Oath from Protestants is not to be taken by a Popish Prince; or if taken, ought inviolably to be preserved. For when we oblige ourselves to any one, 'tis not his person we so much consider, as that of the most high God, who is called to witness this our action: and 'tis to him we are to discharge our Conscience. Neither is there, or can be any tye on humane Society, when that of an Oath is no more regarded: which being an appeal to God, he is immediate Judge of it; and Chronicles are not silent how often he has punished perjured Kings. The instance of Vladislaus King of Hungary, breaking his faith with Amurath the Turk, at the instigation of Julian the Pope's Legate, and his miserable death ensuing it, shows that even to Infidels, much more to Christians, that obligation ought to be accounted sacred. And I the rather urge this, because it is an Argument taken almost verbatim from a Papist, who accuses Catharine de Medicis for violating her word given to the Protestants during her Regency of France. What securities in particular we have, that our own Religion and Liberties would be preserved, though under a Popish Successor, any one may inform himself at large in a Book lately written by the Reverend and learned Doctor Hicks, called Jovian, in answer to Julian the Apostate: in which, that truly Christian Author has satisfied all scruples which reasonable men can make, and proved that we are in no danger of losing either; and wherein also, if those assurances should all fail (which is almost morally impossible) the Doctrine of Passive Obedience is unanswerably demonstrated: a Doctrine delivered with so much sincerity, and resignation of spirit, that it seems evident the Assertor of it is ready, if there were occasion, to seal it with his blood.  
I have done with mannerly Mr. Hunt, who is only magni nominis umbra; the most malicious, and withal, the most incohaerent ignorant Scribbler of the whole Party. I insult not over his misfortunes, though he has himself occasioned them: and though I will not take his own excuse, that he is in passion, I will make a better for him; for I conclude him cracked: and if he should return to England, am charitable enough to wish his only Prison might be Bedlam. This Apology is truer than that he makes for me: for writing a Play, as I conceive, is not entering into the Observators Province; neither is it the Observators manner to confound truth with falsehood, to put out the eyes of People, and leave them without understanding. The quarrel of the Party to him, is that he has undeceived the ignorant, and laid open the shameful contrivances of the new vampt Association: that though he is on the wrong side of life, as he calls it, yet he pleads not his Age to be Emeritus: that in short, he has left the Faction as bare of Arguments, as Esop's Bird of feathers; and plumed them of all those fallacies and evasions which they borrowed from Jesuits and Presbyterians.  
Now for my Templar and Poet in association for a Libel, like the Conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in a fiery Sign: what the one wants in Wit, the other must supply in Law. As for Malice, their quotas are indifferently well adjusted: the rough Draught I take for granted, is the Poets, the finishings the Lawyers. They begin, that in order to one Mr. Friend's commands, one of them went to see the Play. This was not the Poet, I am certain, for no body saw him there, and he is not of a Size to be concealed. But the Mountain, they say, was delivered of a Mouse: I have been Gossip to many such Labours of a dull fat Scribbler, where the Mountain has been bigger, and the Mouse less. The next Sally, is on the City Elections, and a Charge is brought against my Lord Mayor, and the two Sheriffs, for excluding true Electors. I have heard, that a Whig Gentleman of the Temple, hired a Livery-Gown, to give his Voice among the Companies at Guild-Hall: let the question be put, whether or no, he were a true Elector? Then their own Juries are commended from several Topiques; they are the Wisest, Richest, and most Conscientious: to which is answered Ignoramus. But our Juries give most prodigious and unheard of Damages. Hitherto there is nothing but Boys-play in our Authors: My Mill grinds Pepper and Spice, your Mill grinds Rats and Mice. They go on, if I may be allowed to judge (as men that do not Poetize, may be Judges of Wit, Humane nature and Common Decencies:) So then the Sentence is begun with I: there is but one of them puts in for a Judge's Place: that's he in the Grey: but presently 'tis mwn; two more in Buckram, would be Judges too. Neither of them it seems, Poetize; that's true, but both of them are in at Rhyme Doggrel; witness the Song against the Bishops, and the Tunbridge-Ballad. By the way, I find all my Scribbling Enemies have a mind to be Judges, and Chief Barons: proceed Gentlemen. This Play (as I am informed by some, who have a nearer Communication with the Poets and the Players, than I have.) Which of the two Sosia's is it that now speaks? If the Lawyer, 'tis true, he has but little Communication with the Players: if the Poet, the Players have but little Communication with him. For 'tis not long ago, he said to some body, By G— my Lord, those Tory-rogues will act. none of my Plays. Well, but the Accusation, that this Play was once written by another, and than 'twas called the Parisian Massacre: Such a Play, I have heard indeed was written; but I never saw it. Whether this be any of it or no, I can say no more, than for my own part of it. But pray, who denies the unparallelled villainy of the Papists, in that bloody Massacre? I have enquired, why it was not Acted, and heard it was stopped, by the interposition of an Ambassador, who was willing to save the Credit of his Country, and not to have the Memory of an Action so barbarous, revived. But that I tempted my Friend to alter it, is a notorious Whiggism to save the broader Word. The Sicilian Vespers I have had Plotted by me above these seven years: The Story of it, I found under borrowed Names in Giraldo Cinthio; but the Rape in my Tragedy of Amboyna, was so like it, that I forbore the Writing. But what had this to do with Protestants? for the Massacres and the Massacred were all Papists.  
But 'tis observable, they say, that though the Massacre could not be acted, as it was first written against Papists, yet when it was turned upon Protestants, it found reception.  
Now all's come out, the Scandal of the Story, turns at last upon the Government: that Patronises Popish Plays, and forbids Protestant. Ours is to be a Popish Play, why? because it exposes the Villainy of Sectaries and Rebels? Prove them first to be Protestants, and see what you will get by it when you have done? your Party are certainly the men whom the Play attaques; and so far I will help you: the Designs and Actions represented in the Play, are such as you have Copied from the League; for though you have wickedness enough, yet you wanted the Wit to make a new Contrivance. But for shame, while you are carrying on such palpable villainy, do not assume the name of Protestants. You will tell us, you are friends to the Government, and the King's best Subjects; but all the while, you are aspersing both it and him. Who shall be Judges, whether you are Friends or not? the Government or you? Have not all Rebels always sung the same Song? Was ever Thief or Murderer Fool enough to plead Guilty? For your Love and Loyalty to the King, they who mean him best amongst you, are no better Subjects than Duke Trinculo: They would be content he should be Viceroy, so they may be Viceroys over him.  
The next Accusation is particular to me, that I the said Bays, would falsely and feloniously, have robbed Nat. Lee, of his share in the Reputation of Oedipus: Now I am Culprit; I writ the first and third Acts of Oedipus, and drew the Scenary of the whole Play: when ever I have owned a farther Proportion, let my Accusers speak: this was meant mischievously, to set us two at variance: Who is the old Serpent and Satan now? When my Friends help my barren Fancy, I am thankful for it: I do not use to receive assistance, and afterwards ungratefully disown it.  
Not long after, Exemplary Punishment is due to me, for this most devilish Parallel. 'Tis a devilish one indeed; but who can help it, if I draw Devils like one another, the fault is in themselves for being so: I neither made their Horns nor Claws, nor cloven Feet: I know not what I should have done, unless I had drawn the Devil a handsome proper Gentleman, like the Painter in the Fable, to have made a Friend of him; but I ought to be exemplarily punished for it; when the Devil gets uppermost, I shall expect it. In the mean time, let Magistrates (that respect their Oaths and Office) which words you see, are put into a Parenthesis, as (if God help us) we had none such now; let them put the Law in execution, against lewd Scribblers, the Mark will be too fair upon a Pillory, for a Turnip or a rotten Egg to miss it. But for my part, I have not Malice enough, to wish him so much harm; not so much as to have a Hair of his head perish, much less, that one whole side of it should be dismantled: I am no Informer who writ such a Song, or such a Libel, if the Dulness betrays him not, he is safe for me. And may the same dulness preserve him ever from public Justice: 'tis a sufficient thick Mad-wall, betwixt him and Law: 'tis his Guardian Angel, that protects him from Punishment, because in spite of him, he cannot deserve it. 'Tis that which preserves him innocent, when he means most mischief; and makes him a Saint, when he intends to be a Devil. He can never offend enough, to need the Mercy of the Government; for 'tis beholding to him, that he writes against it: and he never offers at a satire, but he converts his Readers to the contrary pinion.  
Some of the succeeding Pargraphs, are intended for very Ciceronian: There the Lawyer flourishes in the Pulpit, and the Poet stands in Socks amongst the Crowd to hear him. Now for Narration, Refutation, Calumniation, Aggravation, and the whole Artillery of Tropes and Figures, to defend the Proceed at Guild-Hall: the most minute circumstances of the Elections, are described so lively, that a man, who had not heard he was there in a Livery-Gown, might suspect, there was a quorum pars magna fui in the Case: and multitudes of Electors, just as well qualified as himself, might give their Party the greater Number: but throw back their guilt Shillings, which were told for Guinnies, and their true Sum was considerably less. Well, there was no Rebellion at this time, therefore says my Adversary, there was no Parallel. 'Tis true, there was no Rebellion; but whoever told him, that I intended this Parallel so far? if the likeness had been throughout, I may guests by their good will to me, that I had never lived to write it. But to show his mistake, which I believe wilful, the Play was wholly written a month or two before the last Election of the Sheriffs. Yet, it seems there was some kind of Prophecy in the Case: and till the Faction gets clear of a Riot, a part of the Comparison will hold even there; yet, if he pleases to remember, there has been a King of England forced by the Inhabitants from his Imperial Town. 'Tis true, the Son has had better fortune than the Father; but the reason is, that he has now a stronger Party in the City, than his Enemies: the Government of it is secured in Loyal and Prudent Hands, and the Party is to weak to push their designs farther. They rescued not their beloved Sheriffs, at a time (he tells you) when they had most important use of them. What the importance of the occasion was, I will not search; 'tis well if their own Consciences will acquit them. But let them be never so much beloved, their Adherents knew it was a Lawful Authority that sent them to the Tower; and an Authority, which to their sorrow, they were not able to resist: so that if four men guarded them without disturbance, and to the contempt of their strength, at broad noon day, and at full Exchange time, it was no more their honesty, to stand looking on with their hands in their Pockets, than it is of a small Band of Robbers, to let a Caravan go by, which is too strong for them to assault.  
After this, I am called after the old rate, lose and infamous Scribbler, and 'tis well I scape so cheap: bear your good fortune moderately, Mr. Poet: for as lose and as infamous as I am, if I had written for your Party, your Pension would have been cut off, as useless. But they must take up with Settle, and such as they can get: Bartholomew-Fair Writers, and Bartholomew-Close Printers; there's a famine of Wit amongst them, they are forced to give unconscionable rates, and after all to have only Carrion for their money.  
Then I am an ignorant fellow for not knowing there were no Juries in Paris: I do not remember I have written any such thing: but whoever did, I am confident it was not his ignorance. Perhaps he had a mind to bring the case a little nearer home: if they had not Juries in Paris, we had them from the Normans, who were Frenchmen: and as you managed them, we had as good have had none in London: Let it satisfy you we have them now; and some of your lose and infamous Scribblers may come to understand it a little better.  
The next is the Justification of a Noble Peer deceased: the Case is known, and I have no quarrel to his memory: let it sleep; he is now before another Judge. Immediately after I am said to have intended an abuse to the House of Commons; which is called by our Authors, the most August Assembly of Europe. They are to prove I have abused that House; but 'tis manifest They have lessened the House of Lords, by owning the Commons to be the more August Assembly. 'Tis an House chosen (they say) by every Protestant who has a considerable Inheritance in England; which word considerable signifies forty shillings per annum of free Land. For the interest of the loyal Party, so much undervalved by our Authors, they have long ago confessed in print, that the Nobility and Gentry have disowned them: and the Yeomanry have at last considered, queis haec consevimus arva? they have had enough of unlawful and arbitrary power; and know to their cost, what an August Assembly they had once without a King and House of Peers.  
But now they have me in a burning scent, and run after me full cry: Was ever such licence connived at yet, in an impious Libeler and Scribbler, that the Succession, so solemn a matter, that is not fit to be debated of but in Parliament, should be profaned so far as to be played with on the Stage?  
Hold a little, Gentlemen, hold a little (as one of your fellow Citizens says in the Duke of Guise:) Is it so unlawful for me to argue for the Succession in the right Line upon the Stage; and is it so very lawful for Mr. Hunt, and the Scribblers of your Party, to oppose it in their Libels off the Stage? Is it so sacred, that a Parliament only is suffered to debate it, and dare you run it down both in your Discourses and Pamphlets out of Parliament? In conscience what can you urge against me, which I cannot return an hundred times heavier on you? And by the way you tell me, that to affirm the contrary to this, is a Praemunire against the Statute of the 13. of Eliz. If such a Praemunire be, pray answer me who has most incurred it? In the mean time do me the favour to look into the Statute-Book, and see if you can find the Statute: you know yourselves, or you have been told it, that this Statute is virtually repealed, by that of the first of King James, acknowledging his immediate lawful and undoubted right to this Imperial Crown, as the next lineal Heir: those last words are an implicit anti-declaration to the Statute in Queen Elizabeth, which for that reason is now omitted in our Books. The lawful Authority of an House of Commons I acknowledge; but without fear and trembling, as my Reflectors would have it: For why should I fear my Representatives? they are summoned to consult about the public good, and not to frighten those who chose them. 'Tis for you to tremble who libel the supreme Authority of the Nation. But we knavish Coxcombs and Villains are to know, say my Authors, that a Vote is the opinion of that House. Lord help our understandings that know not this without their telling! What Englishman do you think does not honour his Representatives, and wish a Parliament void of heats and animosities, to secure the quiet of the Nation? You cite his Majesty's last Declaration against those who dare trifle with Parliaments: (a Declaration by the way, which you endeavoured not to have read publicly in Churches, with a threatening to those that did it.) But we still declare (says his Maje●●●) that no irregularities of Parliament shall make us out of love with them: Are not you unfortunate Quoters why now, should you rub up the remembrance of those irregularities mentioned in that Declaration, which caused, as the King informs us, its dissolution?  
The next Paragraph is already answered; 'tis only a clumsey Commendation of the D. of M. copied after Mr. Hunt, and a proof that he is unlike the Duke of Guise.  
After having done my drudgery for me, and having most officiously proved that the English Duke, is no Parallel for the French; which I am sure he is not, they are next to do their own business, which is, that I meant a Parallel betwixt Henry the Third, and our most gracious Sovereign. But, as fallacies are always couched in general Propositions, they plead the whole course of the Drama, which, they say, seems to insinuate my intentions. One may see to what a miserable shift they are driven: when, for want of any one instance, to which I challenge them, they have only to allege, that the Play SEEMS to insinuate it. I answer, it does not seem, which is a bare Negative to a bare Affirmative; and then we are just where we were before. Fat Falstaff was never set harder by the Prince for a Reason, when he answered, that that if Reasons grew as thick as Blackberries, he would not give one. Well, after long pumping, lest the lie should appear quite barefaced, they have found, I said, that at Kiug Henry's Birth, there shone a Regal Star: so there did at King Charles the seconds: therefore I have made a Parallel betwixt Henry the third, and Charles the second. A very concluding Sillogism, if I should answer it no farther.  
Now let us look upon the Play, the words are in the fo●●th Act. The Conjurer there is ask his Devil, what Fortune attended his Master, the Guise, and what the King? The familiar answers concerning the King. He cannot be Deposed, he may be killed; a violent Fate attends him: but at his Birth, there shone a Regal Star, (Conj.) My Master had a stronger, (Devil) no not a stronger, but more Popular. Let the whole Scene (which is one of the best in the Tragedy, though murdered in the Acting) he read together; and it will be as clear as daylight, that the Devil gave an Astrological account of the French Kings Horoscope: that the Regal Star, then culminating, was the Sun in the tenth House or Mid-heaven; which Caeteris paribus is a Regal Nativity in that Art. The rest of the Scene confirms what I have said: for the Devil has taken the Position of the Heaven's, or Scheam of the World, at the point of the Sun's entrance into Aries: I dispute not here the Truth or Lawfulness of that Art; but 'tis usual with Poets, especially with the Italians, to mix Astrology in their Poems: Chawcer, amongst us, is frequent in it; but this Revolution particularly I have taken out of Luigi Pulci, and there is one almost the same in Boiardo's Orlando Inamorato. Now if these Poets knew, that a Star were to appear at our King's Birth, they were better Prophets than Nostradamus', who has told us nothing of it. Yet this they say is Treason with a Witness, and one of the Crimes for which they condemned me to be hanged drawn and quartered: I find they do not believe me to be one of their Party at the bottom, by their charitable wishes to me; and am proud enough, to think I have done them some little mischief, because they are so desirous to be rid of me. But if Jack Catch must needs have the handling of us Poets, let him begin first where he may take the deepest Say: let me be hanged, but in my turn; for I am sure I am neither the fattest Scribbler nor the worst; I'll be judged by their own Party. But for all our Comforts, the days of hanging are a little out of date: and I hope there will be no more Treason with a Witness, or Witnesses; for now there is no more to be got by Swearing, and the Market is over-stock'd besides.  
But are you in earnest, when you say I have made Henry the Third fearful, weak, bloody, perfidious, hypocritical and fawning in the Play? I am sure an unbiass'd Reader will find a more favourable image of him in the Tragedy; what ever he was out of it. You would not have told a lie so shameless, but that you were resolved to second it with a worse; that I made a Parallel of that Prince. And now it comes to my turn, pray let me ask you, why you spend three Pages and a half, in heaping up all the villainies true or false, which you can rake together, to blast his memory? Why is all this pains taken, to expose the Person of King Henry the Third? are you Leaguers, or Covenanters, or Associators? What has the poor dead man done to nettle you? Were his Rebels your Friends, or your Relations? Were your Norman Ancestors of any of those Families, which were Conspirators in the Play? I smell a Rat in this business: Henry the Third is not taken thus to task for nothing. Let me tell you, this is little better than an implicit confession of the Parallel which I intended. This Gentleman of Valois sticks in your stomaches: and though I do not defend his Proceed in the States, any otherwise, than by the inevitable necessity which caused them, yet acknowledging his Crime, does not extenuate their Gild, that forced him to it. 'Twas bad on both sides, but the Revenge was not so wicked as the Treason: for 'twas a voluntary act of theirs, and a compelled one of his. The short on't is, he took a violent course to cut up the Covenant by the Roots; and there's your quarrel to him.  
Now for a long wound Panegyrique of the King of Navarre: and here I am sure they are in earnest, when they take such over pains, to prove there is no likeness, where they say I intended it. The Hero at whom their malice is levelled, does but laugh at it I believe: And amongst the other virtues of that Predecessor, wants neither his Justice nor his Clemency, to forgive all the Heads of the League, as fast as they submit: As for obliging them, (which our Authors would fain hook in for an Ingredient) let them be satisfied, that no more Enemies are to be bought off with Places and Preferments: the Trial which has been made in two Kings Reigns, will warn the Family from so fruitless and dangerous an Expedient. The rest is already answered, in what I have said to Mr. Hunt; but I thank them by the way, for their instance of the fellow, whom the King of Navarre had pardoned, and done good to, yet he would not love him: for that Story reaches home somewhere.  
I must make haste, to get out of hearing from this Billingsgate Oratory; and indeed, to make an end with these Authors, except I could call Rogue and Rascal as fast as they. Let us examine the little reason they produce, concerning the Exclusion.  
Did the Pope, the Clergy, the Nobility and Commonalty of France think it reasonable to exclude a Prince for professing a different Religion, and will the Papists be angry if the Protestants be of the same Opinion? No sure, they cannot have the impudence.  
First, here's the different Religion taken for granted, which was never proved on one side: though in the King of Navarre, it was openly professed. Then the Pope, and the three Estates of France had no power to alter the Succession, neither did the King in being, consent to it: or afterwards, did the greater part of the Nobility, Clergy and Gentry adhere to the Exclusion, but maintained the lawful King successfully against it; as we are bound to do in England, by the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy; made for the benefit of our Kings, and their Successors: The Objections concerning which Oath, are fully answered by Doctor Hicks, in his Preface to Jovian, and thither I refer the Reader.  
They tell us, that what it concerns Protestant's to do in that case, enough has been heard by us in Parliament Debates.  
I answer, that Debates coming not by an Act to any Issue, conclude that there is nothing to be done against a Law established, and fundamental of the Monarchy. They dare not infer a Right of taking up Arms, by virtue of a Debate or Vote, and yet they tacitly insinuate this: I ask them, what it does concern Protestant's to do in this case, and whether they mean any thing by that expression? They have hampered themselves before they were ware; for they proceed in the very next lines to tell us, they believe the Crown of England being Hereditary, the next in Blood, have an undoubted right to succeed, unless God make them, or they make themselves uncapable of Reigning: So that according to them, if either of those two Impediments shall happen, than it concerns the Protestants of England to do that something, which if they had spoken out, had been direct Treason. Here's fine Legerdemain amongst them; they have acknowledged a Vote to be no more than the Opinion of an House, and yet from a Debate, which was abortive before it quickened into a Vote, they argue after the old Song, that there's something more to be done, which you cannot choose but guests. In the next place, there's no such thing as Incapacity to be supposed, in the immediate Successor of the Crown; That is, the rightful Heir cannot be made uncapable on any account whatsoever to succeed. It may please God, that he may be inhabilis, or inidoneus ad gerendam Rempublicam, unfit or unable to govern the Kingdom; but this is no impediment to his right of reigning; he cannot either be excluded or deposed for such imperfection: For the Laws which have provided for private men in this case, have also made provision for the Sovereign and for the Public: and the Council of State or the next of Blood, is to administer the Kingdom for him. Charles the sixth of France (for I think we have no English Examples which will reach it) forfeited not his Kingdom by his Lunacy, though a victorious King of England was then knocking at his Gates; but all things under his Name, and by his Authority, were managed. The case is the same, betwixt a King non compos mentis, and one who is nondum compos mentis, a distracted or an Infant King. Then the People cannot incapacitate the King, because he derives not his Right from them, but from God only: neither can any Action, much less Opinion of a Sovereign, render him uncapable for the same reason; excepting only a voluntary Resignation to his immediate Heir, as in the case of Charles the fifth: for that of our Richard the second was invalid, because forced; and not made to the next Successor.  
Neither does it follow, as our Authors urge, that an unalterable Succession supposes England to be the King's Estate, and the People his Goods and Chattels on it: For the preservation of his Right, destroys not our Propriety, but maintains us in it. He has tied himself by Law, not to invade our Possessions, and we have obliged ourselves as Subjects to him and all his lawful Successors: By which irrevocable Act of ours, both for ourselves and our Posterity, we can no more exclude the Successor, than we can depose the present King. The Estate of England is indeed the Kings, and I may safely grant their supposition, as to the Government of England: but it follows not, that the People are his Goods and Chattels on it; for than he might sell, alienate, or destroy them as he pleased, from all which he has tied himself by the Liberties and Privileges which he has granted us by Laws.  
There's little else material in this Pamphlet: for to say, I would insinuate into the King, a hatred to his capital City, is to say, he should hate his best friends, the last and the present Lord Mayor, our two Honourable Sheriffs, the Court of Aldermen, the worthy and Loyal Mr. Common Sergeant, with the rest of the Officers, who are generally well affected, and who have kept out their factious Memfrom its Government. To say I would insinuate a scorn of Authority in the City, is in effect, to grant the Parallel in the Play: For the authority of Tumults and Seditions is only scorned in it: an Authority which they derived not from the Crown, but exercised against it. And for them to confess I exposed this, is to confess that London was like Paris.  
They conclude with a Prayer to Almighty God: (in which I therefore believe the Poet did not club:) to libel the King through all the Pamphlet, and to pray for him in the conclusion, is an action of more prudence in them than of piety: perhaps they might hope to be forgiven, as one of their Predecessors was by King James; who after he had railed at him abundantly, ended his Lampoon with these two Verses.  
Now God preserve our King, Queen, Prince and Peers,  
And grant the Author long may wear his Ears.  
To take a short review of the whole; 'Tis manifest, that there is no such Parallel in the Play, as the Faction have pretended: that the Story would not bear one where they have placed it; and that I could not reasonably intent one, so contrary to the nature of the Play, and so repugnant to the Principles of the Loyal Party. On the other side, 'tis clear, that the Principles and Practices of the Public Enemies, have both formerly resembled those of the League, and continue to hold the same Resemblance. It appears by the outcry of the Party before the Play was acted, that they dreaded and foresaw the bringing of the Faction upon the Stage: and by the hasty printing of Mr. Hunt's Libel, and the Reflections, before the Tragedy was published, that they were infinitely concerned to prevent any farther operation of it. It appears from the general consent of the Audiences, that Their Party were known to be represented; and Themselves owned openly by their hissing, that they were incensed at it, as an Object which they could not bear. 'Tis evident by their endeavours to shift off this Parallel from Their Side, that their Principles are too shameful to be maintained: 'Tis notorious, that They, and They only have made the Parallel betwixt the Duke of Guise and the Duke of M. And that in Revenge for the manifest likeness they sinned in the Parties themselves, they have carried up the Parallel to the Heads of the Parties, where there is no Resemblance at all. Under which colour, while they pretend to advert upon One Libel, they set up Another: For what resemblance could they suggest betwixt two persons so unlike in their descent, the qualities of their minds, and the disparity of their warlike Actions, if they grant not, that there is a Faction here, which is like that other that was in France? so that if they do not first acknowledge one Common Cause, there is no foundation for a Parallel. The Dilemma therefore lies strong upon them; and let them avoid it, if they can: that either they must avow the wickedness of their designs, or disown the likeness of those two persons. I do furcher charge those audacious Authors, that they themselves have made the Parallel which they call Mine, and that under the covert of this Parallel they have odiously compared our present King with King Henry the Third. And farther, that they have forced this Parallel expressly to wound his Majesty in the Comparison. For since there is a Parallel (as they would have it) it must be either Theirs or Mine. I have proved that it cannot possibly be Mine; and in so doing, that it must be Theirs by consequence. Under this shadow all the Vices of the French King are charged by those Libelers (by a side-wind) upon Ours: And 'tis indeed the bottom of their design to make the King, cheap; his Royal Brother, odious; and to alter the course of the Succession.  
Now after the Malice of this sputtering Triumvirate (Mr. Hunt, and the Two Reflectors) against the Person and Dignity of the King, and against all that endeavour to serve him (which makes their hatred to his Cause apparent,) the very charging of our Play to be a Libel, and such a Parallel as these Ignoramus's would render it, is almost as great an affront to his Majesty, as the Libellous Picture itself, by which they have exposed him to his Subjects: for it is no longer our Parallel, but the Kings, by whose Order it was Acted, without any shuffling or importunity from the Poets; The Tragedy (cried the Faction) is a Libel against such and such Illustrious Persons. Upon this the Play was stopped, examined, acquitted, and ordered to be brought upon the Stage: Not one stroke in't, of a Resemblance to answer the Scope and intent of the Complaint. There were some Features indeed, that the Illustrious Mr. Hunt, and his brace of Beagles (the Reflectors) might see resembling theirs. And no other Parallel either found or meant, but betwixt the French Leaguers and Ours: and so far the Agreement held from Point to Point, as true as a couple of Tallies. But when neither the King, nor my Lord Chamberlain, with other honourable Persons of eminent Faith, Integrity and Understanding, upon a strict perusal of the Papers, could find one syllable to countenance the Calumny; up starts the Defender of the Charter, etc. opens his Mouth, and says; What d'ye talk of the King? he's abused, he's imposed upon. Is my Lord Chamberlain and the Scrutineers that succeed him, to tell US, when the King and the Duke of York are abused? What says my Lord Chief Baron of Ireland to the business? What says the Livery-man Templer? What says Og the King of Basan to't? We are men that stand up for the King's Supremacy in all Causes, and over all Persons, as well Ecclesiastical as Civil, next and immediately under God and the PEOPLE. We are for easing his Royal Highness of his Title to the Crown, and the Cares that attend any such Prospect; and shall we see the King and the Royal Family paralleled at this rate, and not reflect upon't?  
But to draw to an End. Upon the laying of matters fairly together, what a King have these Balderdash Scribblers given us, under the Resemblance of Henry the Third? How scandalous a Character again, of his Majesty, in telling the World that he is Libelled, and Affronted to his face, told on't, pointed to't, and yet neither He, nor Those about him can be brought to see or understand it. There needs no more to expound the meaning of these People, than to compare them with Themselves: when it will evidently appear, that their Lives and Conversations, their Writings and their Practices do all take the same Bias: and when they dare not any longer revile his Majesty or his Government point blank, they have an intention to play the Libelers in Masquerade, and do the same thing in a way of Mystery and Parable. This is truly the Case of the Pretended Parallel. They lay their Heads together, and compose the Lewdest Character of a Prince that can be imagined, and then exhibit that Monster to the People as the Picture of the King in the Duke of Guise: So that the Libel passes for current with the Multitude, whoever was the Author of it: And it will be but Common Justice to give the Devil his due. But, the truth is, their contrivances are now so manifest, that their Party moulders both in Town and Country: (for I will not suspect that there are any of them left in Court.) Deluded well-meaners come over out of honesty, and small offenders out of common discretion, or fear. None will shortly remain with them, but men of desperate fortunes or Enthusiasts: those who dare not ask pardon, because they have transgressed beyond it, and those who gain by Confusion, as Thiefs do by Fires: to whom forgiveness were as vain, as a Reprieve to condemned Beggars; who must hang without it, or starve with it.  
FINIS.