Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	call_v	part_n	write_v	2,879	5	5.4197	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A68764	The theatre of the empire of Great Britaine presenting an exact geography of the kingdomes of England, Scotland, Ireland, and the iles adioyning: with the shires, hundreds, cities and shire-townes, within ye kingdome of England, divided and described by Iohn Speed.	Speed, John, 1552?-1629.; Hondius, Jodocus, 1563-1612, engraver.; Schweitzer, Christoph, wood-engraver.; Camden, William, 1551-1623. Britannia.	1612 (1612)	STC 23041; ESTC S117917	30,317	987

in his first Edition of this Pamphlet and all this upon your Credit as he tells you But if this Author should fall under this misfortune that neither you Doctor nor any sober Wise man should approve of his abortive births from his false Conceptions how can he make the Nation a Compensation for these abuses as without all Peradventure the Case will appear to every one that considers impartially the Plot it self that it is not an Inextricable Labyrinth but in truth is pure and easie Matter of Fact and the Essence thereof lies not at all in any of those by-Circumstantials Mr. Roger hath made use of and as he says For his own ends which is certainly true for they are not in the least to the Advantage of the Nation the Governors or Government the Protestant Religion nor the Kings witnesses but in apparent and great dishonour to all In his next Paragraph he cries out what Innocence can Warrant against Envy or Authority protect when Le Strange comes to be arraigned as a Papist for shewing the likeliest was to Extirpate Popery and yourname cannot Protect him in it nay he tells you it is well if you can uphold your self if this goes on and concludes that none can fall foul upon that Discovery without Wounding your Evidence Now certainly had this Author as well believed the truth of this reason as he cannot but imagine others do he would never under this Disguise of Friendship to you Doctor have undertaken thus publickly to Villifie you Alas he talks of Innocence that is begging the question I know not of any that can be allowed him by any one in his right Wits nor do I know nor never heard but from himself that ever he did or could shew any way that is likely to extirpate Popery I admire at his Confidence to adventure upon such a subject to the people which only and singly appertains to the Magistracy and I think he hath cause to rejoyce that he is not questioned for a Seditious Pamphletteer for that his Work in such a time as this is which calls for our Union not division He says some call his book Jesuitical for my part I think there is no man in his right Wits that can Judge less of his Book than call the Scope and Drift of it of a Jesuitical Stamp but what is that to you Doctor does it therefore follow that because he hath written a book deserves that Censure you must be accounted a Papist that was no way Privy to it but this Consequence is like the rest but upon hard Pumping he has indeavoured to bring you in by Head and Shoulders for he says he hath your Word and Oath for it for you swear the Priests and Jesuites herd themselves amongst the Non-Conformists they denie it and yet prove themselves in the Plot and discredit the Kings Evidence What Hocus Pocus is here I am sure in no part of your Evidence is it Sworn they herd with Non-Conformists nor have I yet ever seen or heard any proof that any Non-Conformists have proved themselves to be in the Plot or that any of them whatsoever discredited any of the Kings Evidence but this must be accepted upon his Veracity or else his strain of Wit by his Subsequent Querie for thus the Author argues if they Shelter not themselves in Conventicles and field-Meetings to stir up Broyls in the Government What becomes of your Testimony and none but Papists would oppose the Ferretting them out What he means or what he would be at If you know Doctor it s well but for my part I understand not the Sence of it but because you have proved there were some Jesuites or their Agents sent into Scotland to Facilitate their design amongst the discontented Scots if they could therefore all the Dessenters from the Church of England in England are guilty of the Plot I am very Confident the meanest of Grammarian School-Masters in England would have whipped the dullest Boy he had under his tuition for using such a Nonsensical Argument In Confirmation of this the Author further tells you nothing can be clearer according to your Evidence of Wright and others sent amongst the Scots with other Evidence to that Purpose and then says all this will not serve to Convince some of the Priests mingled with Fanaticks till the Pilgrims and the Forty Thousand black Bills come to open their Eyes This Author is in much wrath that every body does not wear his Spectacles for I am fully assured there is not a sober English Christian of what perswasion soever except such Sons of the Church of England as he and God-dam-me Sons that see no further than the Church-yard but do believe your Evidence in that particular as fully as your Words or intention thereby extended Then he concludes that Paragraph with a Clamorous acclamation If these Infidels I presume he means the Dessenters from the Church of England Have any Priviledg for the Defaming publick Justice and blasting the Kings Evidence above other People they should do well to produce it But I am sure it would have been better done of him to have produced some Proof of the Slander before he had aspersed the Parties with it I never heard of their guilt of the one nor the other but from his Pen which I take to be as little Slander as his mouth Then he proceeds to tell you he hath read considered and studied you and what wonderfull things you have done for him in the Dark and at length brought him into the light and when he hathlent you these Ironical Expressions he comends you in the same Dialect and further tells you of his Sensibility of the roundness of your Periods the Luxuriancy of your Invention where there is Scope for it the Frankness of your Stile and the Harmony of your C●●ceptions Indeed had it been your design Doctor to have made your trade of Living and getting Dinners by Scribling or had those things which you have published in Print been otherwise than pure matter of Fact to satisfie the Governors Government and People of the Nation and limitted and bounded to the nature and quality of the thing in question and in a great part in the nature of a report It s morally Possible you might as well have observed your Periods as the Fault-finder nay I can say it with some Assurrance It is so in all Impartial mens Judgments all things duely considered which answers may also serve you for your Inventions and Conceptions for I know not of any such in all your works and doubtless those that do as well know you Doctor and understand you as Mr. Le Strange are clearly of opinion that had you Imployed your Genius that way if it had been but in making a Play against your own Mother you might and would have come off with as much Reputation made as good Syllogismes and had as pertinent Coherences as any that have undertaken or performed the like and for the

AN Additional Discovery OF Mr. ●OGER L'ESTRANGE HIS FURTHER DISCOVERY OF THE Popish Plot WHEREIN Dr. TITUS OATES And the rest of the King's Evidences ARE VINDICATED From the Aspersions cast upon them in that PAMPHLET TOGETHER With some New Observations upon the said Discovery not heretofore Publisht In a Letter to Dr. Titus Oates By B. W. LONDON Printed in the Year 1680. SIR I Having been lately presented by a Friend with a Pamphlet entituled A further Discovery of the Plot Dedicated to your self Doctor by Roger L'Estrange and called the Second Edition I have perused the same and weighed it seriously and considering the Consequences thereof as it is full of gross Mistakes Fallacies Equivocations and Ironies both in the Title Page and Body of it I have spent a few leisure hours to make my Observations upon it which I recommend to your better Judgment In the Title Page is imployed new Fact to deceive the Reader but the said Author's Subject is only his own fallacious inferences of part of your Fact as the Devil did by the Scriptures with our Saviour for his own Ends. In the beginning of his Epistle to your self as a Theam to work upon he sets up a man of straw a spawn of his own brain by charging you with saying That you told him he was a Papist and that he reported you were a Fanatick and upon this Foundation he frames his whole discourse good Gentleman as he says to discharge himself and you from those two Calumnies as he calls them and as a proof of this assertion if you will believe him he tells you It was improved by a couple of Nonsensical and Seditious Libels which he names in his Pamphlet as also give you the style and character of the Author by hearsay a small thread-bare Sollicitor in the Old Bayly which as he says often uses your name and makes bolder with it than stands with the Dignity of your Figure in the Government It seems he would monopolize the abusing of you but this I take to be a much more unequal coupling than was by Doctor Wilde between Monsueir L'Estrange and Strange Lee For whether or no there be any such Sollicitor there or if there be that he was Author of such things or if he was that it was with your privity or knowledge which is thereby plainly and strongly implied but aspersedly and groundlesly insinuated is altogether uncertain and I am satisfied will hardly be found true by a packt Jury to use his own Phrase upon that Evidence of his and for the truth of it I doubt he cannot find a Second Then the Author proceeds to tell you he is reviled by being called a Papist a Lessener of the Plot a Disparager of the King's Evidence which he cannot bear but resolves either frankly to acquit himself or sinke under it and I appeal to your self and every impartial man if by that Book he merits not the latter and also the same reward he allows due to his fellow Scribler though upon several Foundations and I am sure the unerring Rule is he that is not with is against I think the Author conceives he hath done you Doctor no small honour to make you his Ghostly Father and indeed it 's enforced very vigorously by an imprecation of his hopes of Heaven and therefore he thinks you cannot without breach of the Rules of Charity but believe he is a true Son of the Church of England Indeed Doctor I cannot foresee why you should doubt of the Veracity of this Assertion seeing you have it from the mouth of one that never brake Faith with Man or Woman nor ever betrayed any unless you mean to have further and more demonstrable Evidence before you lend him your belief for in these Cases I know you generally direct your Judgment by the infallible Rule of our blessed Saviour that Trees must be known best by their Fruit not their Leaves if so then give me your patience further to acquaint you with my Sentiments of this his second Elaborate Work and see what I can find how he hath made good his Title Page or his Assertion and how good a Son Mr. L'Estrange hath proved himself thereby to his Mother the Church of England He says he is not without Bowels of humanity to men of other perswasions but I am perswaded one that dares not take upon himself to affirm he deserves such a Title with that Epithite he challenges yet would àlso allow them Bowels of Christianity but I know there are various degrees of Members in a true Church as Babes and others of a stronger constitution but I shall not determine by his expressions which of them I take the Author but leave that to more discerning Judgments He pretends to be mighty plain and open hearted to you for he tells you as a Friend as he saith he hath moxe Charity for a Moral Pagan than twenty Hypocritical Christians I shall not give you any trouble of my thoughts who this worthy Author means either by Pagan or Christian but only assure you if it were true this is one of the main parts of his Discovery in that Pamphlet especially as to me for indeed I have not learned that distinction of a Christian afore but always from the Woes pronounced in Scripture against Hypocrites I took them not to be Christians This kind Author says he hath a natural Veneration for the Government and all that love it the King 's Loyal Witnesses and Preservers of his Life he believes the Plot as much of it as every good Subject ought nay and pawns his Conscience which doubtless is large you do not believe more of it for all this give me leave to tell you Doctor I am of a quite contrary opinion for I know you are of a sharper sight than to have your Judgment eclipsed with a Fogg yet truly upon the whole Scope and Matter of his Discourse in that Pamphlet I am satisfied he could not though I know others do and would and know they ought have afforded more than a natural veneration for all those things but I may tell you Doctor though not the Author lest I should be offensive to hi● natural Judgment That things of God as I take this in a great measure to be are not to be rightly understood by meer natural men and in that capacity only he must herein be certainly apprehended as may more fully be deduced from his following Words that he cannot believe what he does not nor cannot as that Bedingfield is alive again and what is this to you and what can rationally be deduced from it but that a Crack-fart of the Nation having stuffed it into his Fardel without any privity of yours for ought appears it must be made use of as a Reflection upon you and truly this as strongly Seconded by a Learned Instance of buttered Turnips but it 's a very slippery one and indeed as saucy as all the rest and of as little moment with men of sound