long ago; fo the Earl of Orrery's remarks will be read with delight, when the differtation he exposes will neither be fought nor found *. But these are no enterprizes for common hands, nor to be hoped for above once or twice in an age. Men would be more cautious of lofing their time in fuch an undertaking, if they did but confider, that to answer a book effectually, requires more pains and fkill, more wit, learning and judgment, than were employed in the writing it. And the author affures those gentlemen who have given themselves that trouble with him, that his difcourfe is the product of the study, the obfervation, and the invention of feveral years; that he often blotted out much more than he left; and, if his papers had not been a long time out of his poffeffion, they must have still undergone more fevere corrections. And do they think fuch a building is to be battered with dirtpellets, however envenomed the mouths may be that dif charge them? He hath feen the productions but of two anfwerers, one of which at first appeared as from an unknown hand, but fince avowed by a perfont, who upon fome occafions hath difcovered no ill vein of humour. "Tis a pity any occafion fhould put him under a neceffity of being fo hafty in his productions, which otherwise might often be entertaining. But there were other reasons obvious enough for his mifcarriage in this; he writ against the conviction of his talent, and entered upon one of the wrongest attempts in nature, to turn into ridicule, by a week's labour, a work which had coft so much time, and met with fo much fuccefs in ridiculing others, The manner how he handled his fubject, I have now forgot; having just looked it over when it firft came out, as others did, merely for the fake of the

title.

THE

* Boyle's remarks upon Bentley's differtation on the epistles of Phalaris.

† Supposed to be Doctor William King, the civilian, author of an Account of Denmark, a Differtation on famplars and other pieces of burlefque on the Royal Society, and the Art of cookery in imitation of Horace's Art of poetry, &c.

This we cannot recover at prefent, it being fo abfolutely forgotten, the oldest bookfellers in trade remember nothing of it.

THE other answer is from a perfon of a graver chara&ter, and is made up of half invective, and half annotation *; in the latter of which he hath generally fucceeded well enough. And the project at that time was not amifs to draw in readers to his pamphlet; feveral having appeared defirous that there might be fome explication of the more difficult paffages. Neither can he be altogether blamed for offering at the invective part; because it is agreed on all hands, that the author had given him fufficient provocation. The great objection is against his manner of treating it, very unfuitable to one of his function. It was determined by a fair majority, that this anfwerer had, in a way not to be pardoned, drawn his pen against a certain great man then alive, and univerfally reverenced for every good quality that could poffibly enter into the compofition of the most accomplished perfon. It was obferved, how he was pleafed and affected to have that noble writer called his adverfary; and it was a point of fatire well directed; for I have been told Sir William Temple was fufficiently mortified at the term. All the men of wit and politenefs were immediately up in arms, through indignation which prevailed over their contempt, by the confequences they apprehended from fuch an example; and it grew Porfenna's cafe; Idem trecenti juravimus. In fhort, things were ripe for a general infurrection, till my Lord Orrery had a little laid the fpirit, and fettled the ferment. But his Lordship being principally engaged with another antagonist †, it was thought neceffary, in order to quiet the minds of men, that this oppofer fhould receive a reprimand, which partly occafioned that difcourfe of the battle of the books; and the author was farther at the pains to infert one or two remarks on him in the body of the book.

THIS

Wotton's defence of his reflections upon antient and modern learning: from the annotation are felected the notes figned W. Wotton; thus Wotton appears bufied to illuftrate a work, which he laboured to condemn, and adds force to a fatire pointed against himself; as captives were bound to the chariot. wheel of the victor, and compelled to increase the pomp of his triumph, whom they had in vain attempted to defeat.

† Bentley, concerning Phalaris and Afop.

THIS anfwerer has been pleased to find fault with about a dozen paffages, which the author will not be at the trouble of defending, farther than by affuring the reader, that for the greater part the reflecter is entirely mistaken, and forces interpretations which never once entered into the writer's head, nor will (he is fure) into that of any reader of taste and candour. He allows two, or three at moft, there produced, to have been delivered unwarily ; for which he defires to plead the excuse offered already, of his youth, and frankness of speech, and his papers being out of his power at the time they were published.

BUT this anfwerer infifts; and says, what he chiefly diflikes, is the defign. What that was, I have already told; and I believe there is not a perfon in England who can understand that book, that ever imagined it to have been any thing elfe, but to expose the abuses and corruptions in learning and religion.

BUT it would be good to know what defign this reflecter was ferving, when he concludes his pamphlet with a caution to the reader, to beware of thinking the author's wit was entirely his own. Surely this must have had fome ally of perfonal animofity, at leaft mixed with the defign of ferving the public by fo useful a difcovery; and it indeed touches the author in a tender point, who infifts upon it, that through the whole book he has not borrowed one fingle hint from any writer in the world; and he thought, of all criticisms, that would never have been one. He conceived it was never disputed to be an original, whatever faults it might have. However, this anfwerer produces three inftances to prove this author's it is not his own in many places. The firft is, that the names of Peter, Martin, and Jack, are borrowed from a letter of the late * Duke of Buckingham. What ever wit is contained in those three names, the author is content to give it up, and defires his readers will fubtract as much as they placed upon that account; at the fame time protesting folemnly, that he never once heard of that letter, except in this paffage of the answerer: fo that the names were not borrowed, as he affirms, tho' they should happen to be the fame; which however is

Villers.

odd

odd enough, and what he hardly believes; that of Jack being not quite so obvious as the other two. The second inftance to fhew the author's wit is not his own, is Peter's banter (as he calls it in his Alfatia phrase) upon tranfubftantiation, which is taken from the fame Duke's conference with an Irish priest, where a cork is turned into a horse. This the author confeffes to have seen, about ten years after his book was written, and a year or two after it was published. Nay, the answerer overthrows this himself: for he allows the Tale was written in 1697; and I think that pamphlet was not printed in many years after. It was neceffary, that corruption fhould have some allegory as well as the reft; and the author invented the propereft he could, without inquiring what other people had written; and the commoneft reader will find, there is not the least resemblance between the two ftories. The third inftance is in these words: "I have been affured, "that the battle in St. James's library is mutatis mutandis "taken out of a French book, intitled, Combat des livres, "if I mifremember not." In which paffage there are two claufes obfervable: I have been affured; and, if I misremem ber not. I defire first to know, whether, if that conjecture proves an utter falfhood, thofe two claufes will be a fufficient excufe for this worthy critic. The matter is a trifle: but would he venture to pronounce at this rate upon one of greater moment? I know nothing more contemptible in a writer than the character of a plagiary; which he here fixes at a venture, and this not for a paffage, but a whole discourse, taken out from_another book, only mutatis mutandis. The author is as much in the dark about this as the answerer; and will imitate him by an affirmation at random, that if there be a word of truth in this reflexion, he is a paultry imitating pedant, and the answerer is a person of wit, manners, and truth. He takes his boldness, from never having feen any fuch treatise in his life, nor heard of it before; and he is fure it is impoffible for two writers of different times and countries, to agree in their thoughts after fuch a manner, that two continued difcourfes fhall be the fame, only mutatis mutandis. Neither will he infift upon the mistake in the title. But let the answerer and his friend produce any

book

book they please, he defies them to fhew one fingle particular, where the judicious reader will affirm he has been obliged for the fmalleft hint; giving only allowance for the accidental encountering of a single thought, which he knows may fometimes happen; though he has never yet found it in that discourse, nor has heard it objected by any body else.

So that if ever any defign was unfortunately executed, it must be that of this anfwerer; who when he would have it obferved, that the author's wit is none of his own, is able to produce but three inftances, two of them mere trifles, and all three manifeftly falfe. If this be the way thefe gentlemen deal with the world in thofe criticisms, where we have not leisure to defeat them, their readers had need be cautious how they rely upon their credit; and whether this proceeding can be reconciled to humanity or truth, let those who think it worth their while, determine.

It is agreed, this answerer would have fucceeded much better, if he had ftuck wholly to his business as a commentator upon the Tale of a Tub, wherein it cannot be denied, that he hath been of fome fervice to the public, and hath given very fair conjectures towards clearing up fome difficult paffages; but, it is the frequent error of thofe men, (otherwife very commendable for their labours) to make excurfions beyond their talent and their office, by pretending to point out the beauties and the faults; which is no part of their trade, which they always fail in, which the world never expected from them, nor gave them any thanks for endeavouring at. The part of Minellius, or Farnaby *, would have fallen in with his genius, and might have been ferviceable to many readers, who cannot enter into the abftrufer parts of that difcourfe. But optat ephippia bos piger: the dull, unweildy, ill-fhaped ox would needs put on the furniture of a horfe, not confidering he was born to labour, to plow the ground for the fake of fuperior beings, and that he has neither the shape, mettle, nor fpeed of that noble animal he would affect to perfonate.

IT

Low commentators, who wrote notes upon claffic authors

for the use of schoolboys.