en Philofophie que l'étoit Madame la Princeffe Elizabeth de Boheme, fa Soeur: Et je ne crois pas que l'on refufe le méme titre à beaucoup d' Academiciens d'Allemagne dont les Ouvrages meriteroient bien d'être traduits. Il y a d'autres Princeffes en Allemagne, qui ont infiniment de l'efprit. Les François difent c'eft un Allemand, pour exprimer un homme pefant, brutal: & les Allemands, comme les Italiens, c'est un François, pour dire un fou & un etourdi. C'eft aller trop loin: comme le Prince de Salé dit de Ruyter, Il eft honnête homme, c'est bien dommage qu'il foit, Chrétien. Chevraana, Tom. I.

• Tilenus, fays Scaliger, fpeaks and writes well for a German. Gretzer has a great deal of Wit for a German, fays Cardinal Perron. And Father Bouhours makes it a Question, Whether a German can be a Wit? One ought not to judge well or ill of a Nation from a particular Perfon, nor of a particular Perfon from his • Nation. There are Germans, as there are French, who have no Wit; and Germans who are better skill'd in Greek and Hebrew than either Scaliger or the Cardinal du Perron. I have a great Honour for Father Bouhours, who " is a Man of Merit; but will be bold to fay, that there is not in all France a Perfon of more Wit than the prefent Duchess of Hanover; nor more throughly knowing in Philofophy, than was the late Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia her Sifter; and I believe none can refuse ⚫ the fame Title to many Academicians in GerC many, whofe Works very well deferve to be ⚫ tranflated into our Tongue. There are other Princeffes in Germany, who have alfo an infinite deal of Wit. The French fay of a Man, that he is a German, when they would fignify

that

that he is dull and heavy; and the Germans, as well as the Italians, when they would call · a Man a Hair-brain'd Coxcomb, fay he is a • Frenchman. This is going too far, and is like the Governor of Sallee's Saying of De Ruyter the Dutch Admiral, He's an honeft Man, 'tis great pity he is a Chriftian.'

Having already run my Paper out to its usual Length, I have not room for many Reflexions on that which is the Subject of it. The last cited Author has been beforehand with me in its proper Moral. I fhall only add to it, that there has been an unaccountable Difpofition among the English of late Years, to fetch the Fashion from the French, not only in their Drefs and Behaviour, but even in their Judgments and Opinions of Mankind. It will however be reasonable for us, if we concur with them in their Contempt of other neighbouring Nations, that we fhould likewife regard ourselves under the fame View in which they are wont to place us. The Reprefentations they make of us, are as of a Nation the leaft favoured by them; and, as these are agreeable to the natural Averfion they have for us, are more disadvantageous than the Pictures they have drawn of any other People in Europe.

N° 31

Friday, April 6.

Omnes homines, P. C. qui de rebus dubiis confultant, ab odio, amicitia, ira, atque mifericerdia vacuos effe Saluft. Bell. Catil. 51.

decet.

In confidering Matters of Doubt and Uncertainty, we fbou'd lay afide Prejudice, Partiality, Anger, and Pity.

I

HAVE purpofely avoided, during the whole Course of this Paper, to fpeak any thing concerning the Treatment which is due to fuch Perfons as have been concerned in the late Rebellion, because I would not seem to irritate Justice against those who are under the Profecution of the Law, nor incenfe any of my Readers againft unhappy though guilty Men. But when we find the Proceedings of our Government in this Particular traduced and mifreprefented, it is the duty of every good Subject to set them in their proper Light.

I am the more prompted to this Undertaking by a Pamphlet intitled, An Argument to prove the Affections of the People of England to be the best Security of the Government; humbly offer'd to the Confideration of the Patrons of Severity, and apply'd to the prefent Functure of Affairs. Had the whole Scope of the Author been answerable to his Title, he would have only undertaken to prove what every Man in his Wits is already convinced of. But the Drift of the Pamphlet is to ftir up our Compaffion towards the Rebels, and our IndigI

nation

nation against the Government. The Author, who knew that fuch a Design as this could not be carried on without a great deal of Artifice and Sophiftry, has puzzled and perplex'd his Caufe, by throwing his Thoughts together in fuch a ftudy'd Confufion, that upon this Account, if upon any, his Pamphlet is, as the Party have reprefented it, Unanswerable.

The famous Monfieur Bayle compares the anfwering of an immethodical Author to the Hunting of a Duck: When you have him full in your Sight, and fancy yourself within reach of him, he gives you the Slip, and becomes invifible. His Argument is loft in fuch a Variety of Matter, that you muft catch it, where you can, as it rifes and difappears in the feveral parts of his Discourse.

The Writer of this Pamphlet could, doubtless, have ranged his Thoughts in much better Order, if he had pleased; but he knew very well, that Error is not to be advanced by Perfpicuity. In. order therefore to answer this Pamphlet, I muft reduce the Subftance of it under proper Heads and difembroil the Thoughts of the Author, fince he did not think fit to do it himself.

In the firft place I fhall obferve, that the Terms which the Author makes ufe of are loofe, general, and undefined, as will be fhewn in the Sequel of this Paper; and what lefs becomes a fair Reafoner, he puts wrong and invidious Names on every thing to colour a falfe Way of Arguing. He allows that the Rebels indifputably merit to be feverely Chaftifed; that they deferve it according to Law; and that, if they are punished, they have none to thank but themfelves, (p. 7.) How can a Man after fuch a Conceffion make ufe fometimes of the Word Cruelty, but generally of Revenge, when he pleads against the

Exercise

Exercife of what, according to his own Notion, is at the most but rigid Juftice! Or why are fuch Executions, which, according to his own Opinion, are legal, fo often to be called Violences and Slaughters? Not to mention the Appellations given to those who do not agree with him in his Opinion for Clemency, as the Bloodthirty, the Political Butchers, State Chirurgeons, and the like.

But I fhall now speak of that Point, which is the great and reigning Fallacy of the Pamphlet, and runs more or lefs through every Paragraph. His whole Argument turns upon this fingle Confideration; Whether the King fhould exert Mercy or Juftice towards those who have openly appeared in the prefent Rebellion? By Mercy he means a general Pardon, by Juftice a general Punishment: So that he fuppofes no other Method practicable in this Juncture, than either the Forgiving All, or the Executing All. Thus he puts the Queftion, Whether it be the Intereft of the Prince to deftroy the Rebels by Fire, Sword, or Gibbet? (p. 4.) And speaking of the Zealots for the Government, he tells us, They think no Remedy fo good, as to make clear Work; and that they declare for the utter Extirpation of All who are its Enemies in the most minute Circumftance: As if Amputation were the fole Remedy thefe political Butchers cou'd find out for the Distempers of a State; or that they thought the only way to make the Top flourish, were to lop off the under Branches, (p. 5.) He then fpeaks of the Coffee-house Politicians, and the Cafuifts in Red-coats; Who, he tells us, are of the utmost Rigour, that their Laws of War or Laws of Convenience can infpire them with, (p. 5.) Again, it is reprefented, fays he, that the Rebels deferve the highest Punishment the I 2

Laws