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 expos'd 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 call'd it a relaps'd Heretique And to this purpose I will quote a passage out of the Journals of Henry the Third so much magnify'd 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 antient Popes that they cou'd 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 cou'd not take it into consideration till first he made appear the Right which he pretended in the Translation of Kingdoms establish'd and ordain'd by Almighty God before the Name of Pope was heard of in the World 'T is plain by this that the Parliament of Paris acknowledg'd an inherent Right of Succession in the King of Navarre though of a contrary Religion to their own And though after the Duke of Guises Murther 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 charg'd him yet the sum of all their Power to renounce him and create the Duke of Mayenne Lieutenant General depended ultimately on the Popes authority which as you see but three years before they had peremptorily denied The Colledg of Sorbonne began the Dance by their Determination that the Kingly Right was forfeited and stripping him of all his Dignities they call'd him plain Henry de Valois after this says my Author sixteen Rascals by which he means the Council of that Number having administred the Oath of Government to the Duke of Mayenne to take in quality of Lievtenant General of the Estate and Crown of France the same ridiculous Dignity was confirm'd to him by an imaginary Parliament the true Parliament being detain'd Prisoners in divers of the City-Gaols and two new Seals were order'd to be immediately made with this Inscription The Seal of the Kingdom of France I need not inlarge on this Relation 't is evident from hence that the Sorbonists were the Original and our Schismatiques in England were the Copiers of Rebellion that Paris began and London follow'd 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 Vtinam vixeris All this while this cannot be reckon'd 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 declar'd his Title void on the account of his Religion because those Estates could neither be call'd nor holden but by and under the Authority of the Lawful King It wou'd take more time than I have allow'd for this Vindication or I cou'd easily trace from the French History what Misfortunes attended France and how near it was to Ruine by the Endeavors to alter the Succession For first it was actually Dismembred the Duke of Merceur setting up a Principality in the Dutchy of Bretagne Independant 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 aspir'd with the interest of the Spaniards to be chosen by their Marriage with the Infanta Izabella The Duke of Lorrain 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 possess'd 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 ingage our selves in the like Practises of altering the Succession which our Gracious King in his Royal Wisdom well forsaw 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 preserv'd our present quiet but secur'd the Peace of our Posterity 'T is clearly manifest that no Act of State pass'd 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 wou'd prove à fortiori that if a Protestant Prince were actually excluded from a Popish Kingdom then 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 my self to maintain that there is not nor can be any Obligation for a King to destroy his Subjects of a contrary Perswasion to the establish'd 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 Soveraign as such antecedent to any tye or consideration of his Religion Indeed in those Countries where the Inquisition is introduc'd 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 chang'd which in it self is almost impossible to imagine but the Council of Trent receiv'd and the Inquisition admitted which many Popish Countries have rejected I forget not the Cruelties which were exercis'd
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 pardon'd and done good to yet he wou'd 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 prov'd on one side though in the King of Navarre it was openly profess'd 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 maintain'd the lawful King succesfully 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 answer'd by Doctor Hicks in his Preface to Jovian and thither I refer the Reader They tell us that what it concerns Protestants 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 establish'd and fundamental of the Monarchy They dare not infer a Right of taking up Arms by vertue of a Debate or Vote and yet they tacitly insinuate this I ask them what it does concern Protestants to do in this case and whether they mean any thing by that expression They have hamper'd themselves before they were aware 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 then 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 acknowledg'd a Vote to be no more than the Opinion of an House and yet from a Debate which was abortive before it quicken'd into a Vote they argue after the old Song that there 's something more to be done which you cannot chuse but guess In the next place there 's no such thing as Incapacity to be suppos'd 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 depos'd for such imperfection For the Laws which have provided for private men in this case have also made provision for the Soveraign and for the Publick 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 manag'd 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 Soveraign 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 forc'd and not made to the next Successor Neither does it follow as our Authors urge that an unalterable Succession supposes England to be the Kings Estate and the People his Goods and Chattels on it For the preservâ—tion of his Right destroys not our Propriety but maintains us in it He has ty'd himself by Law not to invade our Possessions and we have oblig'd our selves as Subjects to him and all his lawful Successors By which irrevocable Act of ours both for our selves 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 then he might sell alienate or destroy them as he pleas'd from all which he has ty'd himself by the Liberties and Priviledges which he has granted us by Laws There 's little else material in this Pamphlet for to say I wou'd insinuate into the King a hatred to his capital City is to say he shou'd 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 Serjeant with the rest of the Officers who are generally well affected and who have kept out their factious Memfrom its Government To say I wou'd 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 scorn'd in it an Authority which they deriv'd not from the Crown but exercis'd against it And for them to confess I expos'd 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 rail'd 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 'T is manifest that there is no such Parallel in the Play as the Faction have pretended that the Story wou'd not bear one where they have plac'd it and that I cou'd not reasonably intend one so contrary to the nature of the Play and so repugnant to the Principles of the Loyal Party On the other side 't is clear that the Principles and Practices of the Publick Enemies have both formerly resembled those of the
have mistaken too and call'd 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 Proceedings 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 superiour to him Judges of Miscarriages and have power of Revocation 't is a plain case that when ever they please they may take up arms and according to Their Doctrine lawfully too Let them joyntly 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 mens memory and they are not Rebels only because they have been so too lately An Author of theirs has told us roundly the West-Country 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 Muzled or want their Teeth If there were as many Fanatiques now in England as there were Christians in the Empire when Julian reign'd I doubt we should not find them much enclin'd to passive obedience and Curse ye Meroz wou'd be oftner preach'd 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 justifie my self 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 vertue 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 mix'd Character he had as an old Historian says of another Magnas virtutes nec minora vitia but amongst those vertues I do not find his forgiving qualities to be much celebrated That he was deeply engag'd 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 suspition with his Brother then reigning for endeavouring to lessen his Authority and draw it to themselves he first design'd his Accusers death by Maurevel who shot him with a Carabine but fail'd to kill him after which he push'd on the King to that dreadful Revenge which immediately succeeded 'T is 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 Publick Instruments could make it Therefore the Punishment was execrable and it pleas'd 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 Undertakings to raise against him the Duke of Guise the Complotter and Executioner of that inhumane Action who by the Divine Justice fell afterwards into the same snare which he had laid for others and finally to dye a violent Death himself murder'd by a Priest an Enthusiast of his own Religion From these Premisses 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 Critique has lately told us that when a KING is nam'd a HEROE is suppos'd 'T is a reverence due to Majesty to make the Vertues as conspicuous and the Vices as obscure as we can possibly And this we own we have either perform'd or at least endeavour'd 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 confess'd but it always return'd with greater force and ended at last in the ruine of his Enemies In the mean time we cannot but observe the wonderful Loyalty on the other Side that the Play was to be stopp'd because the King was represented May we have many such proofs of their Duty and respect but there was no occasion for them here 'T is to be suppos'd that his Majesty himself was made acquainted with this objection if he were so he was the supream and only Judg of it and then the Event justifies us If it were inspected only by those whom he commanded 't is 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 sollicitation us'd to have it acted 'T is known that noble person to whom it was referr'd is a severe Critique 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 banish'd from the Athenian Theatre for its too much licence in representing persons and would never have pardon'd it in this or any Play What opinion Henry the Third had of his Successor is evident from the words he spoke upon his Death-bed He exhorted the Nobility says Davila to acknowledge the King of Navarre to whom the Kingdom of right belong'd 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 inform'd would receive him into his favour to prevent the ruine of the whole Kingdom I hope I shall not need in this Quotation to defend my self as if it were my opinion that the Pope has any right to dispose of Kingdoms my meaning is evident that the
at large related Well who is it then why 't is a Prince who has no fault but that he is the Kings Son Then he has no fault by consequence for I am certain that 's no fault of his The rest of the Complement is so silly and so fulsome as if he meant it all in ridicule And to conclude the Jeast 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 secur'd in so doing But why in Intervals of Parliament How are the more oblig'd to honour the Kings Son out of Parliament than in it And why this prosecution of Love for the Kings Sake Has he order'd 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 Fathers 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 Talent than Flattery was that of Esop's Ass and therefore falls immediately from pawing with his fore-feet and grinning upon one Prince to downright braying against another He says I have not us'd 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 chang'd 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 layd their noddles together about this Accusation For 't is their business to prove the King of Navarre to have been a most successful magnanimous gentle and grateful Prince in which Character they have follow'd 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 magnify'd 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 Dukes Character has blacken'd that King as much as he is able to show the likeness Now this wou'd be ridiculous pleading at a Barr by Lawyers retain'd for the same Cause and both sides wou'd call each other fools because the Jury betwixt them wou'd 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 confess'd himself to be in passion and that 's the reason he is so grosly mistaken in opening of the Cause For first the King of Navarre was neither under dismall nor unfortunate circumstances Before the end of that very Sentence our Lawyer has confess'd that he fought his way to the Crown that is he gloriously vanquish'd all his Rebells and happily possest his Inheritance many years after he had regain'd it In the next place he was never excluded from the Crown by Act of State He chang'd his Religion indeed but not till he had almost weather'd the Storm recover'd the best part of his Estate and gain'd some glorious Victories in pitch'd Battels 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 Predecessour Henry the Third then dying that he wou'd become a Romanist and Davila though he says not this directly yet denyes it not By whose hands Henry the fourth died is notoriously known but it is indiviously urg'd both by Mr. Hunt and the Reflectors for we may to our shame remember that a King of our own Country was barbarously murther'd by his Subjects who profess'd the same Religion though I believe that neither Jaques Clement nor Ravillac were better Papists than the Independents and Presbyterians were Protestants So that their Argument only proves that there are Rogues of all Religions Iliacos intra muros peccatur extra But Mr. Hunt follows his blow again that I have offer'd a Justification of an Act of Exclusion against a Popish Successour in a Protestant Kingdom by remembring 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 call'd a Bill for Henry the third cou'd never be gain'd to pass it though it was propos'd 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 turn'd 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 Authors favour is neither dismal nor disastrous Henry the Fourth escap'd this dreadful Machine of the League I say dreadful for the three Estates were at that time compos'd generally of Guisards factious hot headed rebellious interressed men The King in possession was but his Brother-in-Law and at that time publickly 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 prevail'd that he withstood the Project of the States which he also knew was levell'd at himself for had the Exclusion proceeded he had been immediately lay'd by and the Lieutenancy of France conferr'd on Guise after which the Rebel wou'd certainly have put up his Title for the Crown In the Case of his Royal Highness only one of the three Estates have offer'd at the Exclusion and have been constantly oppos'd by the other two and by his Majesty Neither is it any way probable that the like will ever be again attempted
Kings judgment 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 chiefly 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 joyntly concurr'd in cutting off the Succession the Clergy who were manag'd by the Arch-bishop of Lyons 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 preserv'd his Negative entire but if the Clergy and Nobility had been on his part of the Ballance it might reasonably be suppos'd that the meeting of those Estates at Blois had heal'd the breaches of the Nation and not forc'd him to the ratio ultima Regum which is never to be prais'd nor is it here but only excus'd 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 Vertues in the same channel have produced is evident I have only to say that the Nation certainly is happy where the Royal Vertues of the Progenitors are deriv'd on their Descendants In that Scene 't is true there is but one of the Three Estates mention'd but the Other two are virtually included for the Arch-bishop and Cardinal are at the head of the Deputies and that the rest are mute persons every Critique 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 joyning in so illegal and so ungodly a Decree Am I ty'd in Poetry to the strict rules of History I have follow'd 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 observ'd the Unities of place and time but are they better kept in the Farce of the Libertine destroy'd 'T was our common business here to draw the Parallel of the Times and not to make an Exact Tragedy For this once we were resolv'd to erre with honest Shakespear neither can Catiline or Sejanus written by the great Master of our Art stand excus'd any more than we from this exception but if we must be criticis'd some Plays of our Adversaries may be expos'd and let them reckon their gains vvhen the dispute is ended I am accus'd 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 vvhich vve live I spoke to the understanding of an English Audience Our three Estates novv sit and have long done so in Two Houses but our Records bear witness that they according to the French Custom have sate in one that is the Lords Spiritual and Temporal within the Barr and the Commons without it If that Custom had been still continued here it should have been so represented but being otherwise I was forc'd to write so as to be understood by our own Country-men If these be Errours a Bigger Poet than either of us two has fallen into greater and the Proofs are ready whenever the Suit shall be recommenc'd Mr. Hunt the Jehu of the Party begins very furiously with me and says I have already condemn'd the Charter and City and have executed the Magistrates in Effigie upon the Stage in a Play call'd the Duke of Guise frequently acted and applauded c. Compare the latter end of this Sentence with what the Two Authors of the Reflections or perhaps the Associating Clubb of the Devil-Tavern write in the beginning of their Libel Never was Mountain deliver'd of such a Mouse the fiercest Tories have been asham'd 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 Oates 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 allow'd no Reputation no Success but to be damn'd 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 Play-house 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 Godfreys 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 shewed them their own Faces The business of the Theatre is to expose Vice and Folly to disswade 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 shewing 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