Answer to Pamphlet Entitled the Downfall of Old Common Councilmen

An Answer to a late scurrillous and scandalous Pamphlet, entitled, The Downfall of old Common Council men, &c.

T He unparaleld Liberty assumed in Printing Unlicenced Pamphlets is of late grown so exorbitant, that many take it for granted, that it is even lawful for them to vent by the Press, whatsoever they think may please their own, and other men's Phantasies, that are ejusdem farinae, of the like condition with them; of which sort (among the rest) they conceive, that nothing will be more acceptable to such kind of people, then that which traduceth Governors or Government.

Of this kind, lately hath been published a most base and scurrillous (I might well have said a Libellous and scandalous) Pamphlet, under the Title of The Downfall of old Common Council men. The Title page whereof, together with the Pamphlet it self, contains as many untruths as lines; the difference in Title and Pamphlet being only this, that the first hath all that malice can utter, bare-lie set down in it; and the other is flourished with sustian words, and some shreds of the Latin, but more of the lying tongue, in which it seems the Author is best versed: both of them being fitter for the draught then the Stationers stall.

And indeed this Answer to it had been better spared then framed ( a clean whip being the proper Answer for him) but that perhaps, if the Pamphlet had been permitted to pass in silence, it might have been taken (by some of his strain that made it, or by strangers to the Government of this City) pro confesso, that all which the Pamphleter had said, were true: whereas there is not one word in it that hath any alliance with Truth.

It may be well and truly averred, that this Pamphleter is true heir to his father, that from the beginning was a liar: and brother to him that for 30. pieces of silver betrayed his Master, though they were of more value then those 30. which this poor conditioned fellow received for betraying his own malice and the Cities government, being but pence at the most, and they too much too.

But not to spend more pains and paper upon him, let's take a view of this h • s good • y piece, for to bestow much time or labor to answer a fool in his folly, were but folly, as the Wiseman speaks. W • re it • ot therefore, more to vindicate the government of the City, and the credit of those upon whom his foul aspersions and scandals are laid by him, this labor might well have been spared: yet seeing his impudence in averring such falsities is so great, as that perhaps some of his own garb, and strangers to the state of the City, may be too much possessed by him, we shall descend a little lower then otherwise might be thought fit.

To begin then with him, and first with his Title page, wherein first he hath prefixed his Title, which he calls, The downfall of old Common Council men, which (for our better conceiving what he means by it) he tells us, that it was their great Repulse at Guild-Hall upon a Friday (I take it the 34. of January) by the Committee, who extruded the Old out of their corrupted Offices, and elected new in their Places. And in the next place promises (much and performs nothing) to show their manifold corruptions and unequal Taxations, which they imposed chiefly on their poor Parishioners, and connived on the Rich, being too common an abuse by them. Then exactly describing, how they have ofttimes robbed the poor of their due, and detained the Charity of other men from them, and have put it up in their own purses. And in the last place, (because there were not untruths sufficient before) he will show the manner of their Arraignment at Guild-Hall, with the Cause of their downfall, and the others uprising.

Certainly here's a grievous Charge, and I doubt not but we shall have it abundantly proved in the ensuing discourse, if it prove not like the German Mercury, whose Title page contains more, or as much as the book it self. But if you'le be a little patient, you shall hear the Pamphlets charge, with a brief answer, as also the proofs, which are so many, that I fear they will never be disproved.

In the Preamble of his Pamphlet, this shameless fellow is so arrogant, as to call men of good & unspotted reputation, and that have well deserved of the City for their industry, counsel & integrity, Corrupt streams, that either have hindered the pure current, or at least have contaminated the clear fountain of Justice, and (as if this had not been enough) the Beetle head hath bestowed upon them the name of Beetles, (for so is his Scarabeus in the Latin.) So that in the very front he hath placed two of his Lyveries for them, Corruption and Ignorance.

Now the Multiformity of their vices (as he is pleased to speak) he hath most Methodically contracted into three Branches;

• 1. The cause of their Corruptions,
• 2. The variety of their Corruptions.
• 3. The cause of those numerous Varieties.

I. The cause of the first he impudently assigns to their Ambition and Arrogancy. Now wherein their Ambition consisted, neither he expresseth, nor can it be well conceived. If labor, time, or charge (the three Concomitants of a Common Council man) be incitements or provocations to make a man Ambitious, then I will not deny this man to be in the right : but neither of these certainly can be any allurements to m • ke a man ambitious (especially of such a place, or when he is in it to make a man corrupt) therefore we may well free them from that scandal. But yet arrogant they may be: and I pray why? He tells us, they did tyrannically insult over others, who if they would not submissively subscribe to their opinions, were immediately involved in the Catalogue of their inveterate malice. Truly Tenterden steeple was the cause of Goodwin sands. And if this learned Latinist can make this Conclusion; They are malicious, therefore Arrogant, he hath a new Logic which Ramus nor Seton never heard of.

II. Now because (as he saith) the variety their of corruptions are manifold, nay infinite, and because he will not trespass upon the readers patience, he will (most learnedly) compendiate the multiplicity thereof, and collect them into some few branches of their abuses.

1. The unpardonable abuse of the poor Parishioners, which cries loud in the ears of God and man, especially it being grounded upon spleen in assessing, and against law in prosecuting them.

2. Their second abuse in assessing (tending to Emulation) the poor, equal with the rich, and sometimes more, against Equity and Ju •• ice.

3. Their common practice in the disparity of their impositions, e •• cting most where they pleased, without any respect of Justice, even to insulting perfection.

4. Their connivence to the Rich, in excusing them, and making the poor to pay for them, Which cries for necessary and urgent Justice against them; because they take from those that have nothing or very little, and adding to those that have all, or a • least the greatest. Nay, their offense is so vicious in this regard, that he blusheth, or at least is ashamed to add any further a constructive addition to their contriving Malignity.

5. The last. In saving themselves from all payments whatsoever, and whosoever poor or rich paid, they themselves paid nothing: Yea, sometimes they would deteyne money too, and put it into their purses, being content pocket up such wrongs. So that the meanest of the Parish did yearly pay more then the chiefest of them.

3. In the last place you shall have him tell you, what was the Cause of those numerous varieties of corruptions.

1. The general and prime cause was their too licentious liberty in committing them without contradiction.

2. The second was the non-annual election of them: So that within these fair branches of his, are contained the Charge. The particulars whereof are crying sins, Spleen, Injustice, evil Conscience, Partiality and Connivence, Cruelty to the poor, Malignitie, Robbing the poor, and favoring themselves, even to the saving of all charges and taxes.

Could either Impudence or Malice it self have said more and proved less, then this scurrilous Pamphleter hath? Hath he all this while alleged any particular ptoose, or so much as given any one instance to prove that which he hath thus impudent-lie affirmed? Truly, No. And why? Because Dolosus versatur in generalibus. He that intends to raise slanders, and cast aspersions upon them that deserve them not, hath no other way to evade, then by traducing in generals: If he had meant to have dealt fairly and candidly, he would at least have instanced one example, to prove every several imputation. But this he knew he could not do.

Let us come a little nearer to him. I would fain know of him, what Assessments there are, wherein any Common Council man hath more power then many other in each Ward that are joined with them. Sure I am, that neither in Subsidies not Fifteenes he hath not any. And for the Assessments to the poor, he that hath less Latin then this Pamphleter would seem to have, can tell, that the laws of the Land have appointed others, and not Common Council men, to assesse them. As for exempting themselves from paying that which they are assessed at, I believe he would be as far short in proving it, if he were put to it, as he would be to prove himself an honest man. For it may be boldly affirmed, and as easily proved by all Records of the City, public and private, that all Common Council men ever paid their full proportion to all taxes and levyes whatsoever, Nay, more then many better men of estate then themselves; and why? eo nomine, because they were Common Council men, as if some revenues were annexed to their places: for him therefore to aver, that whosoever paid, Common Council men paid nothing, what can be more impudent? What Charity they have received, quatenus Common Council men from others, and put it into their own purses, he might have instanced, but it may well be affirmed, that he knows of none; If he do, he should have nominated him, that he might have been branded nigro Carbone: and if there be any such, he did it not in relation to the Common Council, but as a private man, upon private trust, and therefore not to be imputed to his Office.

Will you look back upon his learned and juditious assignment of the Causes of the numerous varieties of corruptions? They are two. 1. Their too licentious committing them without contradiction. This indeed is a true conjecture, for if they have been so corrupt as he would make them, and they have been so far from correction, as not to be contradicted, Certainly if they were bad one year, they would be much worse the next, for vitia transmittit ad posteros, qui praesentibus culpis ignoscit. But they having not so much as any temptations to corruption incident to their places, nor having committed the least offense which this Pamphleter impudently upon his own bare assertion lays to their charge, for what should they be contradicted?

The second cause is, their Non-annual Election of them, he would have said of others in their rooms. To this they may be answered; That if they were faulty in any of the Crimes objected by him, there were great reason for it, but if they be clear, then none so fit to serve the City as they, which are experienced and versed in the affairs of it.

To come briefly to his Close, which is; That these precedent particulars being ma • urely and s • riously considered and revolved by the City, All the old Common Council men were arraigned by the Citizens, and a select Committee appointed to regulate these abuses. And being accused, they were found so inexcusable delinquent and peccant, that they were incontinently excluded from their corrupt Offices, and new Common Council men elected in their places.

To this I say, That his Conclusion comes not short of his premisses. It is a short one, but stuffed with as many untruths as lines, as the rest of his Pamphlet. As first, There was no Arraignment of any; and I doubt of the power of that Committee (he speaks of) to arraign men; neither are any of the Crimes he scandalously alledgeth Capitall, and so out of compass of arraignment. Secondly, by his own words, they were but to regulate abuses; nor do I conceive they had so much power: They were (in this case) but to examine and report the validity of Elections, to the Common Council, not to examine and regulate abuses, of any Old Common Council men. Thirdly, if all the old were delinquent and peccant, how comes it that some continue in their places still, and are upon that Committee which he mentions? Fourthly, There were none accused or found delinquent, nor excluded from their corrupt Offices, nor new chosen in their places: where by the way one learned passage of the Pamphleter is to be observed (excluded from their corrupt Offices) whereby it appears that it was not the persons only, but the Offices which were corrupt too, and then the New had little cause to thank them for putting them into them.

To conclude all (being sorry I have troubled you and myself so much already) I shall say no more, but that it is much to be feared, that this fellow, either out of need, distemper of brain, or a natural inclination to rail against Authority, will be so far transported e're leng, that he will not rest here, but do some further Act, for which he will be exalted further upward, then any Common Council man hath yet fallen downward. And in the mean time it is to be hoped, that the Justice of the State will take some order with him, (not to his liking) for that which he hath most scandalously done in this.