Datasets:
File size: 107,637 Bytes
f8e58e4 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 |
[
{"source_document": "", "creation_year": 1723, "culture": " English\n", "content": "E-text prepared by Louise Hope, Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper, and the\nProject Gutenberg Online Distributed Proofreading Team\nTranscriber's note:\n Except for [Illustration] labels and similar, all brackets [] are\n in the original.\n The Augustan Reprint Society\n A Learned Dissertation\n PUDDING AND DUMPLING\n A COMPLEAT KEY\n DISSERTATION ON DUMPLING\n _Introduction by_\n Publication Number 140\n WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK MEMORIAL LIBRARY\n University of California, Los Angeles\nGENERAL EDITORS\n William E. Conway, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\n George Robert Guffey, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n Maximillian E. Novak, _University of California, Los Angeles_\nASSOCIATE EDITOR\n David S. Rodes, _University of California, Los Angeles_\nADVISORY EDITORS\n Richard C. Boys, _University of Michigan_\n James L. Clifford, _Columbia University_\n Ralph Cohen, _University of Virginia_\n Vinton A. Dearing, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n Arthur Friedman, _University of Chicago_\n Louis A. Landa, _Princeton University_\n Earl Miner, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n Samuel H. Monk, _University of Minnesota_\n Everett T. Moore, _University of California, Los Angeles_\n Lawrence Clark Powell, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\n James Sutherland, _University College, London_\n H. T. Swedenberg, Jr., _University of California, Los Angeles_\n Robert Vosper, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\nCORRESPONDING SECRETARY\n Edna C. Davis, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\nEDITORIAL ASSISTANT\n Roberta Medford, _William Andrews Clark Memorial Library_\nINTRODUCTION\n_A Learned Dissertation on Dumpling_ and its _Key_ (_Pudding and\nDumpling Burnt to Pot_) are typical satiric pamphlets which grew out of\nthe political in-fighting of the first half of the eighteenth century.\nThe pamphlets are distinguished by the fact that the author's level of\nimagination and writing makes them delightful reading even today. In\n_Dumpling_ the author displays a considerable knowledge of cooks and\ncookery in London; by insinuating that to love dumpling is to love\ncorruption, he effectively and amusingly achieves satiric indirection\nagainst a number of political and social targets, including Walpole. The\n_Key_ is in many ways a separate pamphlet in which Swift is the central\nfigure under attack after his two secret visits to Walpole during 1726.\n_Dumpling_ had a long life for an eighteenth-century pamphlet and was\npublished as late as 1770. Dr. F.\u00a0T. Wood has even suggested that it may\nhave influenced Lamb's _Dissertation on Roast Pig_;[1] readers might\nwish to test this for themselves.\n_Dumpling_ and its _Key_ were first claimed for Henry Carey by Dr. Wood\n(pp. 442-447). Carey (1687-1743) is generally thought to have been an\nillegitimate scion of the powerful Savile family,[2] with whose name he\nchristened three of his sons. He was perhaps best known as a writer of\nsongs. \"Sally in our Alley\" is a classic, and he has even a tenuous\nclaim to the authorship of the English national anthem. Carey's\n_Dramatic Works_ appeared in 1743, the year in which he met his death,\nalmost certainly by his own hand. Several of the plays were successful\nand particular reference should be made to the burlesques\n_Chrononhotonthologos_ (1734) and _The Dragon of Wantley_ (1737). The\nlatter even outran the performances of _The Beggar's Opera_ in its first\nyear. Not only do these plays show Carey's satiric bent, but so also do\na considerable number of his poems. In 1713, 1720, and 1729 Carey\npublished three different collections of his poetry, each entitled\n_Poems on Several Occasions_. Although a few of the poems were repeated,\nalmost always revised, each edition is very much a different collection.\nAn edition was brought out in this century by Dr. Wood.[3]\nI am strongly inclined to support Carey's claim to the authorship of\n_Dumpling_ and its _Key_ despite Dr. E.\u00a0L. Oldfield's more recent\nattempt to invalidate it.[4] There were at least ten editions of\n_Dumpling_ in the eighteenth century. The first seven (1726-27) appeared\nduring Carey's life, and these (I\u00a0have seen all but the third) contain\nthe _Namby Pamby_ verses which later appeared under Carey's own name in\nhis enlarged _Poems on Several Occasions_ (1729). There was also a\n\"sixth edition\" of _Dumpling_ (really the eighth extant edition) in\nCarey's own name published \"for T.\u00a0Read, in Dogwell-Court, White-Friars,\nFleet-Street, MDCCXLIV.\" Though _Namby Pamby_ was not added to the first\nedition of the _Key_, it appears in the second edition. Both editions\nwere published by Mrs. Dodd, of whom Dr. Oldfield says: she \"seems to\nhave been a neighbour, and known to Carey\" (p.\u00a0375). Dr. Wood indicates\nthat \"at the foot of a folio sheet containing Carey's song _Mocking is\nCatching_, published in 1726, the sixth edition of _A\u00a0Learned\nDissertation on Dumpling_ is advertised as having been lately published\"\n(p.\u00a0442). Dr. Wood adds in a footnote that this song \"appeared in _The\nMusical Century_ (1740) under the title _A\u00a0Sorrowful Lamentation for the\nLoss of a Man and No Man_.\" Even more striking would seem to be the fact\nthat although there are ninety-one entries in his _Poems_ (1729), Carey\nhas placed the _Sorrowful Lamentation_ directly adjacent to _Namby\nPamby_.\nDr. Wood maintains of _Dumpling_ that \"the general style bears a close\nresemblance to that of the prefaces to Carey's plays and collections\nof poetry\" (p.\u00a0443). I\u00a0should like strongly to support his statement.\nDr. Oldfield says that an inviolable regard for decency \"is nowhere\ncontradicted in Carey's works\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0.\u00a0. Yet the pamphlets, besides being\npalpably Whiggish, are larded _passim_ with vulgarity of the\n'Close-Stool' and 'Clyster' variety\" (p.\u00a0376). The reader need look no\nfurther than _Namby Pamby_ to see that Carey satisfies Northrop Frye's\nvery proper observation: \"Genius seems to have led practically every\ngreat satirist to become what the world calls obscene.\"\nAs for the pamphlets being \"palpably Whiggish,\" the reader will not look\nfar into the allegory before he realizes that one of the central attacks\nis against those well-known Whigs Walpole and Marlborough and their\nappetite for Dumpling (i.e., bribery and perquisites). Furthermore, the\nattack on Swift, which is central to the _Key_, is based on the very\nreal fear that the Dean's two recent private interviews with Walpole\nmight presage a return to that leader's Whig party in exchange for\nDumpling. The last pages of the _Key_ (pp.\u00a028-30) deal with the\npossibility of an accommodation between Swift and Walpole which is,\nI\u00a0feel sure, the main target of attack. In his poems (_Poems_, ed. Wood,\npp.\u00a083, 86, 88, and _passim_) Carey claims to stand between Whig and\nTory, just as he does in the pamphlets (_Dumpling_, p.\u00a01, and _Key_,\np.\u00a015 and _passim_).\nDr. Wood perceptively points to two parallels between _Dumpling_ and the\nsatiric _Of Stage Tyrants_ (1735) which Carey openly addressed to the\nEarl of Chesterfield. _Dumpling's_ \"O\u00a0Braund, my Patron! my Pleasure!\nmy Pride\" (p.\u00a0[ii]) becomes: \"O\u00a0Chesterfield, my patron and my pride\"\n(_Poems_, ed. Wood, p.\u00a0104). The passage which follows, dealing with\n\"all the Monkey-Tricks of Rival Harlequins\" (_Dumpling_, p.\u00a0[ii]),\nbecomes:\n Prefer pure nature and the simple scene\n To all the monkey tricks of Harlequin\nEven more striking is a passage in the _Key_: \"Mr. B[ooth] had spoken to\nMr. W[ilks] to speak to Mr. C[ibber] .\u00a0.\u00a0.\" (p.\u00a0111). This is similar to\nthe following lines in _Stage Tyrants_:\n Booth ever shew'd me friendship and respect,\n And Wilks would rather forward than reject.\n Ev'n Cibber, terror to the scribbling crew,\n Would oft solicit me for something new\nWhat is particularly impressive is that Carey not only refers to the\nthree managers of Drury Lane but mentions them in the same order and as\nbearing the same relationship to himself. Several highly topical\ntheatrical allusions in the pamphlets, by which the works can be dated,\naccord closely to the life, views, and writings of Carey. All three\nmanagers of Drury Lane were subscribers to Carey's _Poems on Several\nOccasions_ (1729), which was dedicated to the Countess of Burlington,\nwho (like the Earl of Chesterfield) was closely related to Carey's\nputative family. In the _Poems_ these people and many others (including\nPope) would have seen _Namby Pamby_ under Carey's name and drawn the\nobvious conclusion that _Namby Pamby_, _Dumpling_ and the _Key_ were by\nthe same author.\nWe have already seen how closely _Dumpling_ and _Stage Tyrants_ can be\ntied together; the reader can compare for himself that part of _Namby\nPamby_ containing \"So the Nurses get by Heart\u00a0/ Namby Pamby's Little\nRhymes,\" with the passage from the _Key_: \"It was here the D[ean] .\u00a0.\u00a0.\ngot together all his Namby Pamby .\u00a0.\u00a0. from the old Nurses thereabouts\"\nThere exists in the Bodleian an early copy of _Namby Pamby_ (1725?) \"By\nCapt. Gordon, Author of the Apology for Parson Alberony and the\nHumorist.\" The joke here is surely in not only letting the Whig Gordon\nattack the Whig Ambrose Phillips but then, also by association,\nconnecting Gordon's name with the attack on Walpole and Marlborough.\nThere is a parallel to this: Carey's \"Lilliputian Ode on Their Majesties\nSuccession\" appeared in _Poems_ (1729), separated from the pieces\npreviously mentioned by only one short patriotic stanza. Yet in the\nHuntington Library there is an almost identical version (1727) which was\nostensibly published by Swift.\nThe first six editions of _Dumpling_ appeared in 1726 and both editions\nof the _Key_ are dated 1727. Apart from the dates on the title page,\nthis can be verified externally by the initial entries in Wilford's\n_Monthly Catalogue_ (1723-30) of February 1726 and April 1727\nrespectively. Swift's first return visit to England (in March 1726 after\ntwelve years) was subsequent to the publication of _Dumpling_; his\nsecond visit was in the same month as the publication of the _Key_,\nwhich assigns him _ex post facto_ the authorship \"from Page 1. to Page\n25.\" of _Dumpling_ (_Key_, p.\u00a0ix).\nSir John Pudding and his Dumpling are manipulated throughout these\npamphlets to carry a multiplicity of meaning which brings them almost as\nclose to symbolism as they are to the allegory that Carey claims to be\nwriting (_Key_, pp.\u00a018, 24 and 29). Collation of _Dumpling_ with its\n_Key_ clearly reveals (with due allowance for satiric arabesque)\na\u00a0series of allegories moving backwards and forwards through history. At\nvarious stages, Sir John Pudding (ostensibly Brawn [or John Brand], the\nfamous cook of the Rummer in Queen Street who appears in Dr. King's _Art\nof Cookery_ [1708]), becomes identifiable with King John, Sir John\nFalstaff, Walpole, Marlborough, and even Queen Anne (for the change in\nsexes see _Key_, p.\u00a018). All of these enjoyed Dumpling, and their tastes\nare ostensibly approved while at the same time being heavily undercut\nwith satiric indirection. Naturally enough, Walpole (although a Dumpling\nEater) is treated with considerable circumspection. Carey has warned us\nthat he is a bad chronologist (_Key_, p.\u00a021), and the Sir John Pudding\n(be he Walpole or Marlborough [d. 1722]), who at the end of _Dumpling_\nis referred to as \"the Hero of this DUMPLEID,\" is for good reason spoken\nof in the past tense.\nThe fable of Dumpling, in the true spirit of _lanx satura_, allows Carey\nto attack by indirection a complete spectrum of traditional\neighteenth-century targets. Like the musician and the satirist that he\nis, he builds up to a magnificent crescendo (pp.\u00a019-24 of his\n\"Dumpleid\") which results in one of the finest displays of sustained\nvirtuosity in early eighteenth-century pamphlet writing.\nThe notes which follow the texts point to a number of the contemporary\nallusions, but the reader will surely wish to recognize some of the\nreferences and the more delicate ironies for himself. As the author puts\nit on page 17 of _Dumpling_:\nO wou'd to Heav'n this little Attempt of Mine may stir up some\n_Pudding-headed Antiquary_ to dig his Way through all the mouldy Records\nof Antiquity, and bring to Light the Noble Actions of Sir _John_!\nWhat scholar could refuse?\nUniversity of Victoria\nNOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION\n1. \"An Eighteenth-Century Original for Lamb,\" _RES_, V\u00a0(1929), 447.\n2. An exception is Henry J. Dane who denies the relationship in \"The\nLife and Works of Henry Carey,\" unpublished doctoral dissertation\n(University of Pennsylvania, 1967), pp.\u00a0xxix-xxx, and _passim_.\n3. _Poems_, ed. F. T. Wood (London, 1930).\n4. \"Henry Carey (1687-1743) and Some Troublesome Attributions,\" _BNYPL_,\nBIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE\nThese facsimiles of _A Learned Dissertation on Dumpling_ (1726) and\n_Pudding and Dumpling Burnt to Pot_ (1727) are reproduced from copies\nin the Bodleian Library and the British Museum.\n Learned Dissertation\n Its Dignity, Antiquity, and Excellence.\n With a Word upon\n Many other Useful Discoveries, of\n great Benefit to the Publick.\n _Quid Farto melius?\n Huic suam agnoscit corpus energiam,\n ---- Hinc adoleverunt pr\u00e6stantissimi,\n Hi Fartophagi in Reipublic\u00e6 commodum._\n _Mab._ de Fartophagis, _lib._ iii. _cap._\u00a02.\n _LONDON._\n Printed for _J. Roberts_ in the _Oxford-Arms_-Passage,\n _Warwick-lane_; and Sold by the Booksellers of\n _London_ and _Westminster_. 1726. [Price 6 _d._]\n[Decoration]\n TO\n Mr. BRAUND.\nSIR,\nLet Mercenary _Authors_ flatter the Great, and subject\ntheir Principle to Interest and Ambition, I\u00a0scorn such\nsordid Views; You only are Eminent in my Eyes: On You\nI look as the most Useful Member in a Body-Politic,\nand your Art far superior to all others: Therefore,\n _Tu mihi Mec\u00e6nas Eris!_\nO BRAUND, my Patron! my Pleasure! my Pride! disdain\nnot to grace my Labours with a kind Perusal. Suspend\na-while your more momentous Cares, and condescend to\ntaste this little _Fricassee_ of Mine.\nI write not this, to Bite you by the Ear, (_i.e._)\nflatter you out of a Brace or two of Guinea's: No;\nas I am a true _Dumpling Eater_, my Views are purely\n_Epicurean_, and my utmost Hopes center'd in partaking\nof some elegant _Quelque Chose_ tost up by your\njudicious Hand. I\u00a0regard Money but as a Ticket which\nadmits me to your Delicate Entertainments; to me much\nmore Agreeable than all the Monkey-Tricks of Rival\n_Harlequins_, or _Puppet-Show_ Finery of Contending\n_Theatres_.\nThe Plague and fatigue of Dependance and Attendance,\nwhich call me so often to the Court-end of the Town,\nwere insupportable, but for the Relief I find at\nAUSTIN's, your Ingenious and Grateful Disciple, who\nhas adorn'd _New Bond-street_ with your Graceful\n_Effigies_. Nor can he fail of Custom who has hung out\na Sign so Alluring to all true _Dumpling-Eaters_. Many\na time and oft have I gaz'd with Pleasure on your\nFeatures, and trac'd in them the exact Lineaments of\nyour glorious Ancestor Sir JOHN BRAND, vulgarly call'd\nSir JOHN PUDDING.\nTho' the Corruption of our _English_ Orthography\nindulges some appearance of Distinction between BRAND\nand BRAUND, yet in Effect they are one and the same\nthing. The ancient Manor of BRAND's, alias BRAUND's,\nnear Kilburn in _Middlesex_, was the very Manor-House\nof Sir JOHN BRAND, and is call'd BRAND's to this Day,\naltho' at present it be in the Possession of the\nFamily of MARSH.\nWhat Honours are therefore due to One who is in a\nDirect Male Line, an Immediate Descendant from the\nLoins of that Great Man! Let this teach You to value\nyour Self; this remind the World, how much they owe to\nthe Family of the BRAUNDS; more particularly to YOU,\nwho inherit not only the Name, but the Virtues of your\nIllustrious Ancestor. I\u00a0am,\n SIR,\n With all imaginable\n Esteem and Gratitude,\n Your very most\n Obedient Servant, _&c._\nPage 5. line 15, _&c._ for _Barnes_ read _Brand_.\n[Decoration]\n Learned Dissertation\n DUMPLING;\n Its Dignity, Antiquity, _&c._\nThe Dumpling-Eaters are a Race sprung partly from the\nold _Epicurean_, and partly from the _Peripatetic\nSect_; they were brought first into _Britain_ by\n_Julius Cesar_; and finding it a Land of Plenty, they\nwisely resolv'd never to go Home again. Their\nDoctrines are Amphibious, and compos'd _Party per\nPale_ of the two Sects before-mention'd; from the\n_Peripatetics_, they derive their Principle of\nWalking, as a proper Method to digest a Meal, or\ncreate an Appetite; from the _Epicureans_, they\nmaintain that all Pleasures are comprehended in good\nEating and Drinking: And so readily were their\nOpinions embrac'd, that every Day produc'd many\nProselytes; and their Numbers have from Age to Age\nincreas'd prodigiously, insomuch that our whole Island\nis over-run with them, at present. Eating and Drinking\nare become so Customary among us that we seem to have\nentirely forgot, and laid aside the old Fashion of\nFasting: Instead of having Wine sold at Apothecaries\nShops, as formerly, every Street has two or three\nTaverns in it, least these Dumpling-Eaters should\nfaint by the Way; nay, so zealous are they in the\nCause of _Bacchus_, that one of the Chief among 'em\nhas made a Vow never to say his Prayers 'till he has a\nTavern of _his own_ in every Street in _London_, and\nin every Market-Town in _England_. What may we then in\nTime expect? Since by insensible Degrees, their\nSociety is become so numerous and formidable, that\nthey are without Number; other Bodies have their\nMeetings, but where can the Dumpling-Eaters assemble?\nwhat Place large enough to contain 'em! The _Bank_,\n_India_, and _South-Sea_ Companies have their General\nCourts, the _Free-Masons_ and the _Gormogons_ their\nChapters; nay, our Friends the _Quakers_ have their\nYearly Meetings. And who would imagine any of these\nshould be Dumpling-Eaters? But thus it is, the\nDumpling-Eating Doctrine has so far prevailed among\n'em, that they eat not only Dumplings, but _Puddings_,\nand those in no small Quantities.\nThe Dumpling is indeed, of more antient Institution,\nand of _Foreign_ Origin; but alas, what were those\nDumplings? nothing but a few Lentils sodden together,\nmoisten'd and cemented with a little seeth'd Fat, not\nmuch unlike our Gritt or Oatmeal Pudding; yet were\nthey of such Esteem among the ancient _Romans_, that a\nStatue was erected to _Fulvius Agricola_, the first\nInventor of these Lentil Dumplings. How unlike the\nGratitude shewn by the Publick to our Modern\nProjectors!\nThe _Romans_, tho' our Conquerors, found themselves\nmuch out-done in Dumplings by our Fore-fathers; the\n_Roman_ Dumplings were no more to compare to those\nmade by the _Britons_, than a Stone-Dumpling is to a\nMarrow Pudding; tho' indeed, the _British_ Dumpling at\nthat time, was little better than what we call a\nStone-Dumpling, being no thing else but Flour and\nWater: But every Generation growing wiser and wiser,\nthe Project was improv'd, and Dumpling grew to be\nPudding: One Projector found Milk better than Water;\nanother introduc'd Butter; some added Marrow, others\nPlumbs; and some found out the Use of Sugar; so that,\nto speak Truth, we know not where to fix the Genealogy\nor Chronology of any of these Pudding Projectors,\nto the Reproach of our Historians, who eat so much\nPudding, yet have been so Ungrateful to the first\nProfessors of this most noble Science, as not to find\n'em a Place in History.\nThe Invention of Eggs was merely accidental, two or\nthree of which having casually roll'd from off a Shelf\ninto a Pudding which a good Wife was making, she found\nherself under a Necessity either of throwing away her\nPudding, or letting the Eggs remain, but concluding\nfrom the innocent Quality of the Eggs, that they would\ndo no Hurt, if they did no Good. She wisely jumbl'd\n'em all together, after having carefully pick'd out\nthe Shells; the Consequence is easily imagined, the\nPudding became a Pudding of Puddings; and the Use of\nEggs from thence took its Date. The Woman was sent for\nto Court to make Puddings for King _John_, who then\nsway'd the Scepter; and gain'd such Favour, that she\nwas the making of her whole Family. I\u00a0cannot conclude\nthis Paragraph without owning, I\u00a0received this\nimportant Part of the History of Pudding from old Mr.\n_Lawrence_ of _Wilsden-Green_, the greatest Antiquary\nof the present Age.\nFrom that Time the _English_ became so famous for\nPuddings, that they are call'd Pudding-Eaters all over\nthe World, to this Day.\nAt her Demise, her Son was taken into Favour, and made\nthe King's chief Cook; and so great was his Fame for\nPuddings, that he was call'd _Jack Pudding_ all over\nthe Kingdom, tho' in Truth, his real Name was _John\nBrand_, as by the Records of the Kitchen you will\nfind: This _John Brand_, or _Jack-Pudding_, call him\nwhich you please, the _French_ have it _Jean Boudin_,\nfor his Fame had reached _France_, whose King would\nhave given the World to have had our _Jack_ for his\nPudding-Maker. This _Jack Pudding_, I\u00a0say, became yet\na greater Favourite than his Mother, insomuch that he\nhad the King's Ear as well as his Mouth at Command;\nfor the King, you must know, was a mighty Lover of\nPudding; and _Jack_ fitted him to a Hair, he knew how\nto make the most of a Pudding; no Pudding came amiss\nto him, he would make a Pudding out of a Flint-stone,\ncomparatively speaking. It is needless to enumerate\nthe many sorts of Pudding he made, such as Plain\nPudding, Plumb Pudding, Marrow Pudding, Oatmeal\nPudding, Carrot Pudding, Saucesage Pudding, Bread\nPudding, Flower Pudding, Suet Pudding, and in short,\nevery Pudding but Quaking Pudding, which was solely\ninvented by, and took its Name from our Good Friends\nof the _Bull and Mouth_ before mentioned,\nnotwithstanding the many Pretenders to that\nProjection.\nBut what rais'd our Hero most in the Esteem of this\nPudding-eating Monarch, was his Second Edition of\nPudding, he being the first that ever invented the Art\nof Broiling Puddings, which he did to such Perfection,\nand so much to the King's likeing, (who had a mortal\nAversion to Cold Pudding,) that he thereupon\ninstituted him Knight of the Gridiron, and gave him a\nGridiron of Gold, the Ensign of that Order, which he\nalways wore as a Mark of his Sovereign's Favour; in\nshort, _Jack Pudding_, or Sir _John_, grew to be all\nin all with good King _John_; he did nothing without\nhim, they were Finger and Glove; and, if we may\nbelieve Tradition, our very good Friend had no small\nHand in the _Magna Charta_. If so, how much are all\n_Englishmen_ indebted to him? in what Repute ought the\nOrder of the Gridiron to be, which was instituted to\ndo Honour to this Wonderful Man? But alas! how soon is\nMerit forgot? how impudently do the Vulgar turn the\nmost serious Things into Ridicule, and mock the most\nsolemn Trophies of Honour? for now every Fool at a\nFair, or Zany at a Mountebank's Stage, is call'd _Jack\nPudding_, has a Gridiron at his Back, and a great Pair\nof Spectacles at his Buttocks, to ridicule the most\nnoble Order of the Gridiron. But their Spectacles is a\nmost ungrateful Reflection on the Memory of that great\nMan, whose indefatigable Application to his Business,\nand deep Study in that occult Science, rendred him\nPoreblind; to remedy which Misfortune, he had always a\n'Squire follow'd him, bearing a huge Pair of\nSpectacles to saddle his Honour's Nose, and supply his\nmuch-lamented Defect of Sight. But whether such an\nUnhappiness did not deserve rather Pity than Ridicule,\nI\u00a0leave to the Determination of all good Christians:\nI\u00a0cannot but say, it raises my Indignation, when I see\nthese Paunch-gutted Fellows usurping the Title and\nAtchievements of my dear Sir _John_, whose Memory I so\nmuch venerate, I\u00a0cannot always contain my self.\nI\u00a0remember, to my Cost, I\u00a0once carry'd my Resentment a\nlittle farther than ordinary; in furiously assaulting\none of those Rascals, I\u00a0tore the Gridiron from his\nBack, and the Spectacles from his A--e; for which I\nwas Apprehended, carried to Pye-powder Court, and by\nthat tremendous Bench, sentenc'd to most severe Pains\nand Penalties.\nThis has indeed a little tam'd me, insomuch that I\nkeep my Fingers to my self, but at the same time let\nmy Tongue run like a Devil: Forbear vile Miscreants,\ncry I, where-e'er I meet these Wretches? forbear to\nascribe to your selves the Name and Honours of Sir\n_John Pudding_? content your selves with being\n_Zanies_, _Pickled-Herrings_, _Punchionellos_, but\ndare not scandalize the noble Name of _Pudding_: Nor\ncan I, notwithstanding the Clamours and Ill Usage of\nthe Vulgar, refrain bearing my Testimony against this\nmanifest piece of Injustice.\nWhat Pity it is therefore, so noble an Order should be\nlost, or at least neglected. We have had no Account of\nthe real Knights of the Gridiron, since they appeared\nunder the fictitious Name of the _Kit-Kat Club_: In\ntheir Possession was the very Gridiron of Gold worn by\nSir _John_ himself; which Identical Gridiron dignified\nthe Breast of the most ingenious Mr. _Richard\nEstcourt_ that excellent Physician and Comedian, who\nwas President of that Noble Society.\n _Quis talia fando temperet \u00e0 Lachrymis?_\nWhat is become of the Gridiron, or of the Remains of\nthat excellent Body of Men, Time will, I\u00a0hope,\ndiscover. The World, I\u00a0believe, must for such\nDiscoveries be obliged to my very good Friend _J----\nT----_ Esq; who had the Honour to be Door-keeper to\nthat Honourable Assembly.\nBut to return to Sir _John_: The more his Wit engaged\nthe King, the more his Grandeur alarm'd his Enemies,\nwho encreas'd with his Honours. Not but the Courtiers\ncaress'd him to a Man, as the first who had brought\nDumpling-eating to Perfection. King _John_ himself\nlov'd him entirely; being of _Cesar_'s Mind, that is,\nhe had a natural Antipathy against Meagre,\nHerring-gutted Wretches; he lov'd only _Fat-headed\nMen, and such who slept o' Nights_; and of such was\nhis whole Court compos'd. Now it was Sir _John_'s\nMethod, every _Sunday_ Morning, to give the Courtiers\na Breakfast, which Breakfast was every Man his\nDumpling and Cup of Wine; for you must know, he was\nYeoman of the Wine-Cellar at the same time.\nThis was a great Eye-sore and Heart-burning to some\nLubberly Abbots who loung'd about the Court; they took\nit in great Dudgeon they were not Invited, and stuck\nso close to his Skirts, that they never rested 'till\nthey Outed him. They told the King, who was naturally\nvery Hasty, that Sir _John_ made-away with his Wine,\nand feasted his Paramours at his Expence; and not only\nso, but that they were forming a Design against his\nLife, which they in Conscience ought to discover: That\nSir _John_ was not only an Heretic, but an Heathen;\nnay worse, they fear'd he was a Witch, and that he had\nbewitcht His Majesty into that unaccountable Fondness\nfor a _Pudding-Maker_. They assur'd the King, That on\na _Sunday_ Morning, instead of being at Mattins, he\nand his Trigrimates got together Hum-jum, all snug,\nand perform'd many Hellish and Diabolical Ceremonies.\nIn short, they made the King believe that the Moon was\nmade of Green-Cheese: And to shew how the Innocent may\nbe Bely'd, and the best Intentions misrepresented,\nthey told the King, That He and his Associates offer'd\nSacrifices to _Ceres_: When, alas, it was only the\nDumplings they eat. The Butter which was melted and\npour'd over them, these vile Miscreants call'd\n_Libations_: And the friendly Compotations of our\nDumpling-eaters, were call'd _Bacchanalian Rites_. Two\nor three among 'em being sweet-tooth'd, wou'd strew a\nlittle Sugar over their Dumplings; this was\nrepresented as an _Heathenish Offering_. In short, not\none Action of theirs, but what these Rascally Abbots\nmade Criminal, and never let the King alone 'till poor\nSir _John_ was Discarded. Not but the King did it with\nthe greatest Reluctance; but they had made it a\nReligious Concern, and he cou'd not get off on't.\nBut mark the Consequence: The King never enjoy'd\nhimself after, nor was it long before he was poison'd\nby a Monk at _Swineshead_ Abbey. Then too late he saw\nhis Error; then he lamented the Loss of Sir _John_;\nand in his latest Moments wou'd cry out, Oh! that I\nhad never parted from my dear _Jack Pudding_! Wou'd I\nhad never left off Pudding and Dumpling! I\u00a0then had\nnever been thus basely Poison'd! never thus\ntreacherously sent out of the World!----Thus did this\ngood King lament: But, alas, to no Purpose, the Priest\nhad given him his Bane, and Complaints were\nineffectual.\nSir _John_, in the mean time, had retir'd into\n_Norfolk_, where his diffusive Knowledge extended it\nself for the Good of the County in general; and from\nthat very Cause _Norfolk_ has ever since been so\nfamous for Dumplings. He lamented the King's Death to\nhis very last; and was so cautious of being poison'd\nby the Priests, that he never touch'd a Wafer to the\nDay of his Death; And had it not been that some of the\nless-designing part of the Clergy were his intimate\nFriends, and eat daily of his Dumplings, he had\ndoubtless been Made-away with; but they stood in the\nGap for him, for the sake of his Dumplings, knowing\nthat when Sir _John_ was gone, they should never have\nthe like again.\nBut our facetious Knight was too free of his Talk to\nbe long secure; for a Hole was pick'd in his Coat in\nthe succeeding Reign, and poor Sir _John_ had all his\nGoods and Chattels forfeited to the King's Use. It was\nthen time for him to bestir himself; and away to Court\nhe goes, to recover his Lands, _&c._ not doubting but\nhe had Friends there sufficient to carry his Cause.\nBut alas! how was he mistaken; not a Soul there knew\nhim; the very Porters used him rudely. In vain did he\nseek for Access to the King, to vindicate his Conduct.\nIn vain did he claim Acquaintance with the Lords of\nthe Court; and reap up old Civilities, to remind 'em\nof former Kindness; the Pudding was eat, the\nObligation was over: Which made Sir _John_ compose\nthat excellent Proverb, _Not a word of the Pudding_.\nAnd finding all Means ineffectual, he left the Court\nin a great Pet; yet not without passing a severe Joke\nupon 'em, in his way, which was this; He sent a\nPudding to the King's Table, under the Name of a\n_Court-Pudding_, or _Promise-Pudding_. This Pudding he\ndid not fail to set off with large Encomiums; assuring\nthe King, That therein he wou'd find an Hieroglyphical\nDefinition of Courtiers Promises and Friendship.\nThis caused some Speculation; and the King's Physician\ndebarr'd the King from tasting the Pudding, not\nknowing but that Sir _John_ had poison'd\u00a0it.\nBut how great a Fit of Laughter ensu'd, may be easily\nguess'd, when the Pudding was cut up, it prov'd only a\nlarge Bladder, just clos'd over with Paste: The\nBladder was full of Wind, and nothing else, excepting\nthese Verses written in a Roll of Paper, and put in,\nas is suppos'd, before the Bladder was blown full:\n As Wynde in a Bladdere ypent,\n is Lordings promyse and ferment;\n fain what hem lust withouten drede,\n they bene so double in her falshede:\n For they in heart can think ene thing,\n and fain another in her speaking:\n and what was sweet and apparent,\n is smaterlich, and eke yshent.\n and when of service you have nede,\n pardie he will not rein nor rede.\n but when the Symnel it is eten,\n her curtesse is all foryetten.\nThis Adventure met with various Constructions from\nthose at Table: Some Laugh'd; others Frown'd. But the\nKing took the Joke by the right End, and Laugh'd\noutright.\nThe Verses, tho' but scurvy ones in themselves, yet in\nthose Days pass'd for tolerable: Nay, the King was\nmightily pleas'd with 'em, and play'd 'em off on his\nCourtiers as Occasion serv'd; he wou'd stop 'em short\nin the middle of a flattering Harangue, and cry, _Not\na Word of the Pudding_. This wou'd daunt and mortify\n'em to the last degree; they curs'd Sir _John_ a\nthousand times over for the Proverb's sake: but to no\nPurpose; for the King gave him a private Hearing:\nIn which he so well satisfy'd His Majesty of his\nInnocence and Integrity, that all his Lands were\nrestor'd. The King wou'd have put him in his old Post;\nbut he modestly declin'd it, but at the same time\npresented His Majesty with a Book of most excellent\nReceipts for all kinds of Puddings: Which Book His\nMajesty receiv'd with all imaginable Kindness, and\nkept it among his greatest Rarities.\nBut yet, as the best Instructions, tho' never so\nstrictly followed, may not be always as successfully\nexecuted, so not one of the King's Cooks cou'd make a\nPudding like Sir _John_; nay, tho' he made a Pudding\nbefore their Eyes, yet they out of the very same\nMaterials could not do the like. Which made his old\nFriends the Monks attribute it to Witchcraft, and it\nwas currently reported the Devil was his Helper. But\ngood King _Harry_ was not to be fobb'd off so; the\nPudding was good, it sate very well on his Stomach,\nand he eat very savourly, without the least Remorse of\nConscience.\nIn short, Sir _John_ grew in Favour in spite of their\nTeeth: The King lov'd a merry Joke; and Sir _John_ had\nalways his Budget full of Punns, Connundrums and\nCarrawitchets; not to forgot the Quibbles and\nFly-flaps he play'd against his Adversaries, at which\nthe King has laugh'd 'till his Sides crackt.\nSir _John_, tho' he was no very great Scholar, yet had\na happy way of Expressing himself: He was a Man of the\nmost Engaging Address, and never fail'd to draw\nAttention: Plenty and Good-Nature smil'd in his Face;\nhis Muscles were never distorted with Anger or\nContemplation, but an eternal Smile drew up the\nCorners of his Mouth; his very Eyes laugh'd; and as\nfor his Chin it was three-double, a-down which hung a\ngoodly Whey-colour'd Beard shining with the Drippings\nof his Luxury; for you must know he was a great\nEpicure, and had a very Sensible Mouth; he thought\nnothing too-good for himself, all his Care was for his\nBelly; and his Palate was so exquisite, that it was\nthe perfect Standard of Tasting. So that to him we owe\nall that is elegant in Eating: For Pudding was not his\nonly Talent, he was a great Virtuoso in all manner of\nEatables; and tho' he might come short of _Lambert_\nfor Confectionary-Niceties, yet was he not inferiour\nto _Brawnd_, _Lebec_, _Pede_, or any other great\nMasters of Cookery; he could toss up a Fricass\u00e9e as\nwell as a Pancake: And most of the Kickshaws now in\nvogue, are but his Inventions, with other Names; for\nwhat we call _Fricass\u00e9es_, he call'd _Pancakes_; as,\na\u00a0Pancake of Chickens, a\u00a0Pancake of Rabbets, _&c._\nNay, the _French_ call a Pudding an _English_\nFricass\u00e9e, to this Day.\nWe value our selves mightily for Roasting a Hare with\na Pudding in its Belly; when alas he has roasted an Ox\nwith a Pudding in his Belly. There was no Man like him\nfor Invention and Contrivance: And then for Execution,\nhe spar'd no Labour and Pains to compass his\nmagnanimous Designs.\nO wou'd to Heav'n this little Attempt of Mine may stir\nup some _Pudding-headed Antiquary_ to dig his Way\nthrough all the mouldy Records of Antiquity, and bring\nto Light the Noble Actions of Sir _John_! It will not\nthen be long before we see him on the Stage. Sir _John\nFalstaffe_ then will be a Shrimp to Sir _John\nPudding_, when rais'd from Oblivion and reanimated by\nthe All-Invigorating Pen of the Well-Fed, Well-Read,\nWell-Pay'd _C-- J----_ Esq; Nor wou'd this be all; for\nthe Pastry-Cooks wou'd from the Hands of an eminent\nPhysician and Poet receive whole Loads of Memorandums,\nto remind 'em of the Gratitude due to Sir _John_'s\nMemory.\nOn such a Subject I hope to see Sir _Richard_ Out-do\nhimself. Nor _Arthur_ nor _Eliza_ shall with Sir\n_John_ compare. There is not so much difference\nbetween a Telescope and a Powder-Puff,\na\u00a0Hoop-Petty-Coat and a Farthing-Candle, a\u00a0Birch-Broom\nand a Diamond-Ring, as there will be between the\nformer Writings of this pair of Poets and their\nLucubrations on this Head.\nNor will it stop here: The _Opera_ Composers shall\nhave t'other Contest, which shall best sing-forth his\nPraises. Sorry am I that _Nicolino_ is not here, he\nwould have made an excellent Sir _John_. But\n_Senefino_, being blown up after the manner that\nButchers blow Calves, may do well enough. From thence\nthe Painters and Print-sellers shall retail his goodly\nPhiz; and what _Sacheverel_ was, shall Sir _John\nPudding_ be; his Head shall hang Elate on every Sign,\nhis Fame shall ring in every Street, and _Cluer_'s\nPress shall teem with Ballads to his Praise. This\nwould be but Honour, this would be but Gratitude, from\na Generation so much indebted to so Great a Man.\nBut how much do we deviate from Honour and Gratitude,\nwhen we put other Names to his Inventions, and call\n'em our own? What is a Tart, a\u00a0Pie, or a Pasty, but\nMeat or Fruit enclos'd in a Wall or Covering of\nPudding. What is a Cake, but a Bak'd Pudding; or a\n_Christmas_-Pie, but a Minc'd-Meat-Pudding. As for\nCheese-cakes, Custards, Tansies, they are manifest\nPuddings, and all of Sir _John_'s own Contrivance; for\nCustard is as old if not older than _Magna Charta_.\nIn short, Pudding is of the greatest Dignity and\nAntiquity. Bread it self, which is the very Staff of\nLife, is, properly speaking, a\u00a0Bak'd Wheat-Pudding.\nTo the Satchel, which is the Pudding-Bag of Ingenuity,\nwe are indebted for the greatest Men in Church and\nState. All Arts and Sciences owe their Original to\nPudding or Dumpling. What is a Bag-Pipe, the Mother of\nall Music, but a Pudding of Harmony. And what is Music\nit self, but a Palatable Cookery of Sounds. To little\nPuddings or Bladders of Colours we owe all the choice\nOriginals of the Greatest Painters: And indeed, what\nis Painting, but a well-spread Pudding, or Cookery of\nColours.\nThe Head of Man is like a Pudding: And whence have all\nRhimes, Poems, Plots and Inventions sprang, but from\nthat same Pudding. What is Poetry, but a Pudding of\nWords. The Physicians, tho' they cry out so much\nagainst Cooks and Cookery, yet are but Cooks\nthemselves; with this difference only, the Cooks\nPudding lengthens Life, the Physicians shortens it.\nSo that we Live and Die by Pudding. For what is a\nClyster, but a Bag-Pudding; a\u00a0Pill, but a Dumpling;\nor a Bolus, but a Tansy, tho' not altogether so\nToothsome. In a word; Physick is only a Puddingizing\nor Cookery of Drugs. The Law is but a Cookery of\nQuibbles and Contentions. [a] * * * * * * * * * * *\n * * *. Some swallow every thing whole and unmix'd;\nso that it may rather be call'd a Heap, than a\nPudding. Others are so Squeamish, the greatest\nMastership in Cookery is requir'd to make the Pudding\nPalatable: The Suet which others gape and swallow by\nGobs, must for these puny Stomachs be minced to Atoms;\nthe Plums must be pick'd with the utmost Care, and\nevery Ingredient proportion'd to the greatest Nicety,\nor it will never go down.\n [Footnote a: _The Cat run away with this part\n of the Copy, on which the Author had unfortunately\n laid some of Mother _Crump_'s Sausages._]\nThe Universe it self is but a Pudding of Elements.\nEmpires, Kingdoms, States and Republicks are but\nPuddings of People differently made up.\u00a0The Celestial\nand Terrestrial Orbs are decypher'd to us by a pair of\nGlobes or Mathematical Puddings.\nThe Success of War and Fate of Monarchies are entirely\ndependant on Puddings and Dumplings: For what else are\nCannon-Balls, but Military Puddings; or Bullets, but\nDumplings; only with this difference, they do not sit\nso well on the Stomach as a good Marrow-Pudding or\nBread-Pudding.\nIn short, There is nothing valuable in Nature, but\nwhat, more or less, has an Allusion to Pudding or\nDumpling. Why then should they be held in Disesteem?\nWhy should Dumpling-Eating be ridicul'd, or\nDumpling-Eaters derided? Is it not Pleasant and\nProfitable? Is it not Ancient and Honourable? Kings,\nPrinces, and Potentates have in all Ages been Lovers\nof Pudding. Is it not therefore of Royal Authority?\nPopes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests and Deacons have,\nTime out of Mind, been great Pudding-Eaters: Is it not\ntherefore a Holy and Religious Institution?\nPhilosophers, Poets, and Learned Men in all Faculties,\nJudges, Privy-Councellors, and Members of both Houses,\nhave, by their great Regard to Pudding, given a\nSanction to it that nothing can efface. Is it not\ntherefore Ancient, Honourable, and Commendable?\n _Quare itaque fremuerunt Auctores?_\nWhy do therefore the Enemies of good Eating, the\nStarve-gutted Authors of Grub-street, employ their\nimpotent Pens against Pudding and Pudding-headed,\n_ali\u00e0s_ Honest Men? Why do they inveigh against\nDumpling-Eating which is the Life and Soul of\nGood-fellowship, and Dumpling-Eaters who are the\nOrnaments of Civil Society.\nBut, alas! their Malice is their own Punishment. The\nHireling Author of a late scandalous Libel, intituled,\n_The Dumpling-Eaters Downfall_, may, if he has any\nEyes, now see his Error, in attacking so Numerous,\nso August a Body of People: His Books remain Unsold,\nUnread, Unregarded; while this Treatise of Mine shall\nbe Bought by all who love Pudding or Dumpling; to my\nBookseller's great Joy, and my no small Consolation.\nHow shall I Triumph, and how will that Mercenary\nScribbler be Mortify'd, when I have sold more Editions\nof my Books, than he has Copies of his! I\u00a0therefore\nexhort all People, Gentle and Simple, Men, Women and\nChildren, to Buy, to Read, to Extol these Labours of\nMine, for the Honour of Dumpling-Eating. Let them not\nfear to defend every Article; for I will bear them\nHarmless: I\u00a0have Arguments good store, and can easily\nConfute, either Logically, Theologically, or\nMetaphysically, all those who dare Oppose\u00a0me.\nLet not _Englishmen_ therefore be asham'd of the Name\nof _Pudding-Eaters_; but, on the contrary, let it be\ntheir Glory. For let Foreigners cry out ne'er so much\nagainst Good Eating, they come easily into it when\nthey have been a little while in our _Land of Canaan_;\nand there are very few Foreigners among as who have\nnot learn'd to make as great a Hole in a good Pudding\nor Sirloin of Beef as the best _Englishman_ of us all.\nWhy shou'd we then be Laught out of Pudding and\nDumpling? or why Ridicul'd out of Good Living? Plots\nand Politics may hurt us, but Pudding cannot. Let us\ntherefore adhere to Pudding, and keep our selves out\nof Harm's Way; according to the Golden Rule laid down\nby a celebrated Dumpling-Eater now defunct;\n _Be of your Patron's Mind, whate'er he says:\n Sleep very much; Think little, and Talk less:\n Mind neither Good nor Bad, nor Right nor Wrong;\n But Eat your Pudding, Fool, and Hold your Tongue._\n PRIOR.\nThe Author of these excellent Lines not only shews his\nWisdom, but his Good-Breeding, and great Esteem for\nthe Memory of Sir _John_, by giving his _Poem_ the\nTitle of _Merry Andrew_, and making _Merry Andrew_ the\nprincipal Spokesman: For if I guess aright, and surely\nI guess not wrong, his main Design was, to ascertain\nthe Name of _Merry Andrew_ to the _Fool_ of a Droll,\nand to substitute it instead of _Jack Pudding_; which\nName my Friend _Matt._ cou'd not hear with Temper, as\ncarrying with it an oblique Reflection on Sir _John\nPudding_ the Hero of this DUMPLEID.\nLet all those therefore who have any Regard to\nPoliteness and Propriety of Speech, take heed how they\nErr against this Rule laid down by him who was the\nStandard of _English_ Elegance. And be it known to all\nwhom it may concern, That if any Person whatever shall\ndare hereafter to apply the Name of _Jack Pudding_ to\n_Merry Andrews_ and such-like Creatures, I\u00a0hereby\nRequire and Impower any Stander or Standers by, to\nKnock him, her, or them down. And if any Action or\nActions of Assault and Battery shall be brought\nagainst any Person or Persons so acting in pursuance\nof this most reasonable Request, by Knocking down,\nBruising, Beating, or otherwise Demolishing such\nOffenders; I\u00a0will Indemnify and bear them Harmless.\n _FINIS._\n[Decoration]\n[Decoration]\n _Namby Pamby_:\n or,\n A PANEGYRIC on the\n New VERSIFICATION\n Address'd to\n _Nauty Pauty _Jack-a-Dandy_\n Stole a Piece of Sugar-Candy\n From the Grocer's Shoppy-shop,\n And away did Hoppy-hop._\n All ye Poets of the Age,\n All ye Witlings of the Stage,\n Learn your Jingles to reform;\n Crop your Numbers, and conform:\n Let your little Verses flow\n Gently, sweetly, Row by Row:\n Let the Verse the Subject fit;\n Little Subject, Little Wit:\n _Namby Pamby_ is your Guide;\n _Albion_'s Joy, _Hibernia_'s Pride.\n _Namby Pamby Pilli-pis_,\n Rhimy pim'd on Missy-Miss;\n _Tartaretta Tartaree_\n From the Navel to the Knee;\n That her Father's Gracy-Grace\n Might give him a Placy-Place.\n He no longer writes of Mammy\n _Andromache_ and her Lammy\n Hanging panging at the Breast\n Of a Matron most distrest.\n Now the Venal Poet sings\n Baby Clouts, and Baby Things,\n Baby Dolls, and Baby Houses,\n Little Misses, Little Spouses;\n Little Play-Things, Little Toys,\n Little Girls, and Little Boys:\n As an Actor does his Part,\n So the Nurses get by Heart\n _Namby Pamby_'s Little Rhimes,\n Little Jingle, Little Chimes,\n To repeat to Little Miss,\n Piddling Ponds of Pissy-Piss;\n Cacking packing like a Lady,\n Or Bye-bying in the Crady.\n _Namby Pamby_ ne'er will die\n While the Nurse sings _Lullabye_.\n _Namby Pamby_'s doubly Mild,\n Once a Man, and twice a Child;\n To his Hanging-Sleeves restor'd;\n Now he foots it like a Lord;\n Now he Pumps his little Wits; }\n Sh--ing Writes, and Writing Sh--s, }\n All by little tiny Bits. }\n Now methinks I hear him say, }\n _Boys and Girls, Come out to Play, }\n Moon do's shine as bright as Day._ }\n Now my _Namby Pamby_'s found\n Sitting on the _Friar's Ground_,\n _Picking Silver, picking Gold_,\n _Namby Pamby_'s never Old.\n _Bally-Cally_ they begin,\n _Namby Pamby_ still keeps-in.\n _Namby Pamby_ is no Clown,\n _London-Bridge is broken down_:\n Now he _courts the gay Ladee,\n Dancing o'er the Lady-Lee_:\n Now he sings of _Lick-spit Liar\n Burning in the Brimstone Fire;\n Lyar, Lyar, Lick-spit, lick,\n Turn about the Candle-stick_:\n Now he sings of _Jacky Horner_\n _Sitting in the Chimney corner,\n Eating of a Christmas-Pie,\n Putting in his Thumb, _Oh, fie!_\n Putting in, _Oh, fie!_ his Thumb,\n Pulling out, _Oh, strange!_ a Plum._\n And again, how _Nancy Cock_,\n Nasty Girl! _besh-t her Smock_.\n Now he acts the _Grenadier_,\n Calling for _a Pot of Beer_:\n _Where's his Money? He's forgot;\n Get him gone, a Drunken Sot._\n Now on _Cock-horse_ does he ride;\n And anon on Timber stride.\n _See-and-Saw and Sacch'ry down,\n London is a gallant Town._\n Now he gathers Riches in\n Thicker, faster, Pin by Pin;\n _Pins a-piece to see his Show_;\n Boys and Girls flock Row by Row;\n From their Cloaths the Pins they take,\n Risque a Whipping for his sake;\n From their Frocks the Pins they pull,\n To fill _Namby_'s Cushion full.\n So much Wit at such an Age,\n Does a Genius great presage.\n Second Childhood gone and past,\n Shou'd he prove a Man at last,\n What must Second Manhood be,\n In a Child so Bright as he!\n Guard him, ye Poetic Powers;\n Watch his Minutes, watch his Hours:\n Let your Tuneful _Nine_ Inspire him;\n Let Poetic Fury fire him:\n Let the Poets one and all\n To his Genius Victims fall.\n[Decoration]\n PROPOSALS\n For Printing by Subscriptions,\n The\n Antiquities of _Grub-street_:\n With OBSERVATIONS Critical, Political,\n Historical, Chronological,\n Philosophical, and Philological.\n By { JOHN WALTON and }\n { JAMES ANDREWS } Gent.\n[Decoration]\n This WORK will be Printed on a Superfine Royal\n Paper, in Ten Volumes, _Folio_: Each Volume to\n contain an Hundred Sheets; besides Maps, Cuts, and\n other proper Illustrations.\n The Price to _Subscribers_ is Fifty Guinea's each\n Set: Half Down, and Half on Delivery.\n No more to be Printed than what are Subscribed for.\n _Subscribers_ for Six Sets, have a Seventh _gratis_,\n as usual.\n The _Subscribers_ Names and Coats of Arms will be\n prefix'd to the Work.\n For those who are particularly Curious, some Copies\n will be Printed on Vellum, Rul'd and Illuminated,\n they paying the Difference.\n It is not doubted but this Great UNDERTAKING will\n meet with Encouragement from the Learned World,\n several Noble Persons having already Subscribed.\n SUBSCRIBERS are _Taken-in_ by the _Authors_, and\n most _Noted_ Booksellers in _London_,\u00a0&c.\n _N. B._ The very _Cuts_ are worth the Money; there\n being, _inter alia_, above 300 curious Heads of\n Learned Authors, on large Copper-Plates, engraven\n by Mr. _Herman van Stynkenvaart_, from the\n Paintings, Busto's, and Basso-Relievo's of the\n Greatest Masters.\n[Decoration]\n ADVERTISEMENT\n To all Gentlemen Booksellers, and others.\n At the House with Stone-Steps and Sash-Windows\n in _Hanover-Court_ in _Grape-Street_,\n vulgarly call'd _Grub-Street_,\n Liveth an _AUTHOR_,\nWho Writeth all manner of Books and Pamphlets, in\nVerse or Prose, at Reasonable Rates: And furnisheth,\nat a Minute's Warning, any Customer with Elegies,\nPastorals, Epithalamium's and Congratulatory Verses\nadapted to all manner of Persons and Professions,\nReady Written, with Blanks to insert the Names of the\nParties Address'd\u00a0to.\nHe supplieth Gentlemen Bell-Men with Verses on all\nOccasions, at 12\u00a0_d._ the Dozen, or 10 _s._ the Gross;\nand teacheth them Accent and Pronunciation _gratis_.\nHe taketh any side of a Question, and Writeth For or\nAgainst, or both, if required.\nHe likewise Draws up Advertisements; and Asperses\nafter the newest Method.\nHe Writeth for those who cannot Write themselves, yet\nare ambitious of being Authors; and will, if required,\nenter into Bonds never to own the Performance.\nHe Transmogrifieth _alias_ Transmigrapheth any Copy;\nand maketh many Titles to one Work, after the manner\nof the famous Mr. E----\u00a0C----\n N. B. _He is come down from the Garret to the First\n Floor, for the Convenience of his Customers._\n [->] _Pray mistake not the House; because there are\n many Pretenders there-abouts._\n No Trust by Retale.\n _Pudding_ and _Dumpling_\n DISSERTATION\n Wherein\n All the MYSTERY of that dark Treatise is brought\n to Light; in such a Manner and Method, that\n the meanest Capacity may know who and who's\n together.\n Published for the general Information of Mankind.\n By _J.\u00a0W._ Author of 684 Treatises.\n _Yhuchi! dandi ocatchu gao emousey._\n _LONDON:_\n _Printed and Sold by A. DODD, without _Temple-Bar_,\n and H.\u00a0WHITRIDGE, the Corner of _Castle-Alley_,\n in _Cornhill_._\n M.DCC XXVII. [_Price 6 d._]\n[Decoration]\nPREFACE\nIt very much surprizes me that six Editions of a\nMythological Pamphlet, entituled, _A\u00a0Dissertation on\nDumpling_, should escape your Notice of that wonderful\nUnriddler of Mysteries the ingenious Mr. _E---- C---_\nwho has at the same Time given such Proofs of his\nAbilities in his many and most elaborate Keys to\n_Gulliver_'s Travels; Keys, which _Gulliver_ himself\ncould never have found out! and withal, so pertinent,\nthat I shall esteem those at the Helm, no great Lovers\nof Learning, if my Friend _Edmund_ be not forthwith\npromoted: for as the Sweetness of a Kernel is\nuncomatable, but by the Fracture of its Shell, so is\nthe Beauty of a Mystery altogether hid, till the\nExpounder has riddlemayreed the Propounder's Problem,\nand render'd it obvious to the meanest Capacity.\nThe only Plea I can use in Mr. _C----'s_ behalf, is,\nthat the Author of the Dissertation has been a little\ntoo free with his Character, which probably occasioned\nthat Sullenness in our _British Oedipus_; who in Order\nto be revenged, has determined not to embelish the\nWork with his Interpretation, but rather let it rot\nand perish in Oblivion.\nThis, and nothing else, could be the Reason of so\nprofound a Silence in so great a Mysterymonger,\nto remedy which Loss to the Publick, I\u00a0an unworthy\nScribler, and faint Copier of that great Artist,\npresume with aching Heart, and trembling Hand, to draw\nthe Veil which shades the political Pamphlet in\nQuestion; and show it to my loving Countrymen in\n_Puris Naturalibus_.\nIf I succeed in this, I hope Mr. _L----t_, who all the\nWorld knows is a rare Chap to his Authors, will\nspeedily employ me to unriddle, or at least make a\nPlot to the _Rival Modes_, which it seems the Author\nhas omitted: it is true, he ought to have given it the\nBookseller with the Copy, but has not so done, which\nmakes me wonder he is not sued for Breach of Covenant;\nbut what is that to me, if I get a Job by the Bargain?\nLet Booksellers beware how they buy Plays without\nPlots for the future.\nI narrowly miss'd solving the Problem called _Wagner_\nand _Abericock_; Mr. _B----_ had spoke to Mr. _W----_\nto speak to Mr. _C----_, who had just consented to\nemploy me, after having made me abate half my demand:\nBut Houses running thin, _Colley_ had undertaken the\nJob himself to save Charges; intending at the same\nTime, to annex a severe Criticism on _Pluto_ and\n_Proserpine_.\nThis, gentle Reader, will, I hope, induce you to look\non me as a Writer of some Regard, and at the same\nTime, to make a little Allowance for whatever Errors\nmy great Hurry may occasion, being obliged to write\nNight and Day, Sundays and working Days, without the\nleast Assistance. All our Journeymen Writers being now\nturned Masters, I\u00a0am left to shift for my self; but am\nbringing up my Wife to the Business, and doubt not but\na long War, and our mutual Industry, may rub off old\nScores, and make us begin a new Reckoning with all\nMankind; Pamphleteering having been so dead for many\nYears last past, that (God forgive me!) I\u00a0have been\noftentimes tempted to write Treason for mere\nSustenance.\nBut Thanks to better Stars and better Days, the Pen\nrevives, and Authors flourish; more Money can be made\nnow of a Play, nay, though it be a scurvy One, than\n_Dryden_ got by all his Works. Therefore now or never\nis the Time to strike while the Iron is hot, to write\nmy self out of Debt, and into Place, and then grow\nidle and laugh at the World, as my Betters have done\nbefore\u00a0me.\n[Decoration]\nINTRODUCTION.\nWhen a Book has met with Success, it never wants a\nFather; there being those good natured Souls in the\nWorld, who, rather than let Mankind think such\nProductions sprang of themselves, will own the\nVagabond Brat, and thereby become Fathers of other\nMens Offsprings.\nThis was the Fate of Dumpling, whose real Father did\nnot take more Care to conceal himself, than some did\nto be thought its Author; but if any one will\nrecollect the Time of its Publication, they will find\nit within a\u00a0Week after the Arrival of D----n\u00a0_S----t_,\nfrom _Ireland_; the Occasion, as I am very well\ninformed, was this, the D----n, one of the first\nThings he did, went to pay a Visit to Mr. _T----_, his\nold Bookseller; but, to his Surprize, found both the\nBrothers dead, and a Relation in the Shop, to whom he\nwas an utter Stranger. Mr. _M----_ for such is this\nPerson's Name, gathering from the D--n's Enquiries who\nhe was, paid him his _Devoirs_ in the most respectful\nManner, solicited his Friendship, and invited him to a\nDinner, which the D----n\u00a0was pleased to accept. By the\nWay, you must know, he is a great Lover of Dumpling,\nas well as the Bookseller, who had ordered one for\nhimself, little dreaming of such a Guest that Day. The\nDinner, as 'twas not provided on purpose, was but a\nFamily one, well enough however for a Bookseller; that\nis to say, a\u00a0couple of Fowls, Bacon and Sprouts\nboiled, and a Forequarter of Lamb roasted. After the\nusual Complements for the unexpected Honour, and the\nold Apology of wishing it was better for his sake:\nThe Maid, silly Girl! came and asked her Master if he\npleased to have his Dumpling; he would have chid her,\nbut the D----n\u00a0mollified him, insisting at the same\nTime, upon the Introduction of Dumpling, which\naccordingly was done. Dumpling gave Cause of\nConversation, but not till it was eat; for the Reader\nmust understand, that both the Gentlemen play a\u00a0good\nKnife and Fork, and are too mannerly to talk with\ntheir Mouths full. The Dumpling eat, as I said before,\nthe D----n\u00a0drank to the Bookseller, the Bookseller to\nthe Author, and with an obsequious Smile, seem'd to\nsay ah! Dear Doctor, you have been a Friend to my\nPredecessor, can you do nothing for me? The D--n\u00a0took\nthe Hint, and after a profound Contemplation, cry'd,\nWhy ay--Dumpling will do--put me in Mind of Dumpling\nanon, but not a Word more at present, and good Reason\nwhy, Dinner was coming in. So they past the rest of\nthe Meal with great Silence and Application, and no\ndoubt dined well. Far otherwise was it with me that\nDay: I\u00a0remember to my Sorrow, I\u00a0had a Hogs Maw,\nwithout Salt or Mustard; having at that Time, Credit\nwith the Pork-Woman, but not with the Chandler: Times\nare since mended, _Amen_ to the Continuance!\nThe D----n, having eat and drank plentifully, began\nhis usual Pleasantries, and made the Bookseller\nmeasure his Ears with his Mouth; nay, burst his Sides\nwith Laughter; however, he found Interval enough to\nremind the D----n\u00a0of Dumpling, who asked him if he had\na quick Hand at Writing: he excused himself, being\nnaturally as Lazy as the other was Indolent, so they\ncontrived to ease themselves by sending for a Hackney\nWriter out of _Temple Lane_ to be the D--'s\n_Amanuensis_, while he and his new Acquaintance\ncrack'd t'other Bottle.\nThis Account may be depended upon, because I had it\nfrom the Man himself, who scorns to tell a Lye.\nTo be short, my Friend had the worst of it, being kept\nto hard Writing, without Drinking (Churls that they\nwere) about three Hours; in which Time the\nDissertation was finished, that is to say, from Page\n1. to Page 25. the rest might probably be done at some\nother leisure Time, to fill up the Chinks, but of that\nhe knows nothing; sufficient is it that the D----n\u00a0was\nthe Author. Proceed we now to the other Discoveries,\nby drawing the Veil from before the Book it self.\n [Decoration]\n DISSERTATION\nI Shall begin with his Motto, which says, _What is\nbetter than a Pudding?_ The Body owns its Power, the\nMind, its Delicacy; it will give Youth to grey Hairs,\nand Life to the most Desponding: Therefore are Pudding\nEaters of great Use in State Affairs.\nThis Quotation is of a Piece with his Motto to the\nTale of a Tub, and other Writings; altogether\nFictitious and Drole: he adds to the Jest, by putting\nan Air of Authority or genuine Quotation from some\ngreat Author; when alas! the whole is mere Farce and\nInvention.\nThe Dedication is one continued Sneer upon Authors,\nand their Patrons, and seems to carry a Glance of\nDerision towards Men of Quality in General; by setting\na Cook above them, as a more useful Member in a body\nPolitick. Some will have this _Braund_, to be Sir\n****, others Sir ****, others Sir ****; but I take it\nto be more Railery than Mystery, and that Mr.\n_Braund_, at the _Rummer_ in _Queen-street_, is the\nPerson; who having pleas'd the Author in two or three\nEntertainments, he, with a View truly _Epicurean_,\nconstitutes him his _M\u00e6cenas_; as being more agreeable\nto him than a whole Circle of Stars and Garters, of\nwhat Colour or Denomination soever.\nIn his Tale of a Tub, he has a fling at Dependance,\nand Attendance, where he talks of a Body worn out with\nPoxes ill cured, and Shooes with Dependance, and\nAttendance. Not having the Book by me, I\u00a0am forced to\nquote at Random, but I hope the courteous Reader will\nbear me out. He complains of it again in this\nTreatise, and makes a Complement to Mr. _Austin_, Mr.\n_Braund_'s late Servant; who keeps the _Braund_'s Head\nin _New Bond-street_, near _Hanover-Square_; a\u00a0House\nof great Elegance, and where he used frequently to\ndine.\nThe Distinction of _Brand_, _Braund_, and _Barnes_, is\na Banter on Criticks, and Genealogists, who make such\na Pother about the Orthography of Names and Things,\nthat many Times, three Parts in four of a Folio\nTreatise, is taken up in ascertaining the Propriety of\na Syllable, by which Means the Reader is left\nundetermined; having nothing but the various Readings\non a single Word, and that probably, of small\nImportance.\nI heartily wish some of these Glossographists would\noblige the World with a Folio Treatise or two, on the\nWord Rabbet: We shall then know whether it is to be\nspelt with an _e_, or an _i_. For, to the Shame of the\n_English_ Tongue and this learned Age, our most\neminent Physicians, Surgeons, Anatomists and Men\nMidwives, have all been to seek in this Affair.\n _Howard_, } Spell it\n _Braithwaite_, } with\n _Ahlers_ and } an _e_.\n _Manningham_, }\n and the } Spell it\n Gentleman who } with\n calls himself } an _i_.\n _Gulliver_, }\nAnd some of these great Wits, have such short\nMemories, that they spell it both Ways in one and the\nsame Page.\nThe Master-Key to this Mystery, is the Explanation of\nits Terms; for Example, by _Dumpling_ is meant a\nPlace, or any other Reward or Encouragement.\nA\u00a0_Pudding_ signifies a P----t, and sometimes a\nC----tee. A\u00a0_Dumpling Eater_, is a Dependant on the\nCourt, or, in a Word, any one who will rather pocket\nan Affront than be angry at a Tip in Time. A\u00a0_Cook_ is\na Minister of State. The _Epicurean_ and _Peripatetic_\nSects, are the two Parties of _Whigg_ and _Tory_, who\nboth are greedy enough of Dumpling.\nThe Author cannot forbear his old Sneer upon\nForeigners, but says, in his 1st Page, \"That finding\nit a Land of Plenty, they wisely resolved never to go\nhome again,\" and in his 2d, \"Nay, so zealous are they\nin the Cause of _Bacchus_, that one of the Chief among\nthem, made a Vow never to say his Prayers till he has\na Tavern of his own in every Street in _London_, and\nin every Market-Town in _England_:\" If he does not\nmean Sir J---- T---- I\u00a0know not who he means.\nBy the Invention of _Eggs_, Page 4. is meant\nPerquisites. \"He cannot conclude a Paragraph in his\n5th _Page_, without owning he received that important\nPart of the History of Pudding, from old Mr.\n_Lawrence_ of _Wilsden Green_, the greatest Antiquary\nof the present Age.\"\nThis old _Lawrence_ is a great Favourite of the D--s;\nhe is a facetious farmer, of above eighty Years of\nAge, now living at _Wilsden Green_, near _Kilburn_ in\n_Middlesex_, the most rural Place I ever saw: exactly\nlike the Wilds of _Ireland_. It was here the\nD--n\u00a0often retired _incog._ to amuse himself with the\nSimplicity of the Place and People; where he got\ntogether all that Rigmayroll of Childrens talk, which\ncomposes his _Namby Pamby_. Old _Lawrence_ told me,\nthe D--n\u00a0has sate several Hours together to see the\nChildren play, with the greatest Pleasure in Life: The\nrest he learned from the old Nurses thereabouts, of\nwhich there are a great many, with whom he would go\nand smoke a Pipe frequently, and cordially; not in\nhis Clergyman's Habit, but in a black Suit of Cloth\nClothes, and without a Rose in his Hat: Which made\nthem conclude him to be a Presbyterian Parson.\nThis Mention of old _Lawrence_, is in Ridicule to a\ncertain great Artist, who wrote a Treatise upon the\nWord _Connoisseur_ (or a Knower) and confesses himself\nto have been many Years at a loss for a Word to\nexpress the Action of Knowing, till the great Mr.\n_Prior_ gave him Ease, by furnishing him with the Word\n_Connoissance_. Our D--n\u00a0had drawn a Drole, Parallel\nto this, _viz._ _Boudineur_, a\u00a0Pudding Pyeman; and\n_Boudinance_, the making of Pudding Pies: But several\nMen of Quality begging it off, it was, at their\nRequest, scratch'd out, but my Friend, the\n_Amanuensis_, remembers particularly its being\noriginally inserted.\nIf the Reader should ask, Who is that K-- _John_\nmentioned in the fourth Page, and which I ought to\nhave taken in its Place. I\u00a0beg leave to inform him,\nthat by K. _John_ is meant the late Q. ----, with whom\nthe D-- of _M----_ was many Years in such great\nFavour, that he was nick named K. _John_; it was in\nthat Part of the Q--'s Reign, that Sir _John_ Pudding,\nby whom is meant **** _you know who_, came in Favour;\nit is true, the Name is odd, and seems to carry an Air\nof Ridicule with it, but the Character given him by\nthis allegorical Writer, is that of an able Statesman,\nand an honest Man.\nAnd here, begging Mr. D--n's Pardon, I cannot but\nthink his Wit has out run his Judgment; for he puts\nthe Cart before the Horse, and begins at the latter\nPart of Sir **** Administration: But this might be\nowing to too plentiful a Dinner, and too much of the\nCreature. Be that as it will, I\u00a0must follow my Copy,\nand explain it as it lies. Proceed we therefore to the\nDissertation, _Page\u00a06._\n\"But what rais'd our Hero most in the Esteem of this\nPudding-eating Monarch, was his second Edition of\nPudding, he being the first that ever invented the Art\nof broiling Puddings, which he did to such Perfection,\nand so much to the King's liking (who had a mortal\nAversion to cold Pudding) that he thereupon instituted\nhim Knight of the Gridiron, and gave him a Gridiron of\nGold, the Ensign of that Order; which he always wore\nas a Mark of his Sovereign's Favour.\"\nIf this does not mean the late Revival of an ancient\nOrder of Knighthood, I\u00a0never will unriddle Mystery\nmore: To prove which, we need but cross over to the\nnext Page, where he tells us, \"Sir _John_ had always a\nSquire, who followed him, bearing a huge Pair of\nSpectacles to saddle his Honour's Nose.\" _Diss.\nPage\u00a07._\nAfter this, he very severely runs upon those would-be\nStatesmen, who put themselves in Competition with his\nFavourite, Sir ****, with whom he became exceeding\nintimate, and almost inseperable, all the Time he was\nin _England_.\nThe Story of the Kit Cat Club, _Dick Estcourt_, and\n_Jacob Tonson_, is a mere Digression; and nothing more\nto the Purpose, than that we may imagine it came\nuppermost. He returns to his Subject in his 9th\n_Page_.\n\"Now it was Sir _John_'s Method, every _Sunday_\nMorning, to give the Courtiers a Breakfast; which\nBreakfast was every Man his Dumpling, and Cup of Wine:\nFor you must know, he was Yeoman of the Wine-Cellar at\nthe same Time.\"\nThe Breakfast is Sir *** Levee, the Yeomanship of the\nWine-Cellar, is the ***.\nThe Author of the Dissertation, is a very bad\nChronologist; for at _Page_ 10. we are obliged to go\nback to the former Reign, where we shall find the\nlubberly Abbots (_i.e._) the High Church Priests,\nmisrepresenting Sir _John_'s Actions, and never let\nthe Q---- alone, till poor Sir _John_ was discarded.\n\"This was a great Eye-sore, and Heart-burning to some\nlubberly Abbots, who lounged about the Court; they\ntook it in great Dudgeon they were not invited, and\nstuck so close to his Skirts, that they never rested\ntill they outed him. They told the King, who was\nnaturally very hasty, that Sir _John_, made-away with\nhis Wine, and feasted his _Paramours_ at his Expence;\nand not only so, but they were forming a Design\nagainst his Life, which they in Conscience ought to\ndiscover: That Sir _John_ was not only an Heretic, but\nan Heathen; nay, worse, they fear'd he was a Witch,\nand that he had bewitch'd his Majesty into that\nunaccountable Fondness for a _Pudding-Maker_. They\nassured the King, that on a _Sunday_ Morning, instead\nof being at Mattins, he and his Trigrimates got\ntogether hum jum, all snug, and perform'd many hellish\nand diabolical Ceremonies. In short, they made the\nKing believe that the Moon was made of Green-Cheese:\nAnd to shew how the Innocent may be bely'd, and the\nbest Intentions misrepresented, they told the King,\nThat he and his Associates offered Sacrifices to\n_Ceres_: When, alas, it was only the Dumplings they\neat.\n\"The Butter which was melted and poured over them,\nthese vile Miscreants, called _Libations_: And the\nfriendly Compotations of our Dumpling Eaters, were\ncalled _Bacchanalian Rites_. Two or three among them\nbeing sweet tooth'd, would strew a little Sugar over\ntheir Dumplings; this was represented as an\n_Heathenish Offering_. In short, not one Action of\ntheirs, but which these rascally Abbots made criminal,\nand never let the King alone till Sir _John_ was\ndiscarded; not but the King did it with the greatest\nReluctance; but they made it a religious Concern, and\nhe could not get off on't.\" _Diss. pag._\u00a010.\nAll the World knows that the _Tory_ Ministry got\nuppermost, for the four last Years of the Queen's\nReign, and by their unaccountable Management, teaz'd\nthat good Lady out of her Life: Which occasion'd the\nD--n\u00a0in his eleventh Page to say; \"Then too late he\nsaw his Error; then he lamented the Loss of Sir\n_John_; and in his latest Moments, would cry out, Oh!\nthat I had never parted from my dear _Jack-Pudding_!\nWould I had never left off Pudding and Dumpling! then\nI had never been thus basely poison'd! never thus\ntreacherously sent out of the World!----Thus did this\ngood King lament: But alas! to no purpose, the Priest\nhad given him his Bane, and Complaints were\nineffectual.\"\nThis alludes to Sir **** Imprisonment and Disgrace in\nthe Year ---- Nay, so barefaced is the D--n\u00a0in his\nAllegory, that he tells us, in his 12th Page,\n_Norfolk_ was his Asylum. This is as plain as the Nose\non a Man's Face! The subsequent Pages are an exact\nDescription of the Ingratitude of Courtiers; and his\nFable of the _Court Pudding_, Page 13. is the best\nPart of the whole Dissertation.\nOne would imagine the D--n had been at Sea, by his\nwriting Catharping-Fashion, and dodging the Story\nsometimes Twenty-Years backwards, at other Times\nadvancing as many; so that one knows not where to have\nhim: for in his fifteenth Page, he returns to the\npresent Scene of Action, and brings his Hero into the\nFavour of K---- _Harry_, _alias_ **** who being\nsensible of his Abilities, restores him into Favour,\nand makes Use of his admirable Skill in Cookery,\n_alias_ State Affairs.\n\"Not one of the King's Cooks could make a Pudding like\nSir _John_; nay, though he made a Pudding before their\nEyes, yet they, out of the very same Materials, could\nnot do the like: Which made his old Friends, the\nMonks, attribute it to Witchcraft and it was currently\nreported the Devil was his Helper. But good King\n_Harry_ was not to be fobb'd off so; the Pudding was\ngood, it sat very well on his Stomach, and he eat very\nsavourly, without the least Remorse of Conscience.\"\n_Diss. Page_\u00a015.\nThis seems to hint at the Opposition Sir **** met with\nfrom the contrary Party, and how sensible the K----\nwas, that they were all unable to hold the Staff in\nCompetition with him.\nAfter this the D--n runs into a whimsical Description\nof his Heroes personal Virtues; but draws the Picture\ntoo much _Alla Carraccatura_, and is, in my Opinion,\nnot only a little too familiar, but wide of his\nSubject. For begging his Deanship's Pardon, he\nmightily betrays his Judgment, when he says, Sir\n_John_ was no very great Scholar, whereas all Men of\nLearning allow him to be a most excellent one; but as\nwe may suppose he grew pretty warm by this Time with\nthe Booksellers Wine, he got into his old Knack of\nRaillery, and begins to run upon all Mankind: In this\nMood he falls upon _C---- J----n_, and Sir _R----\nBl----re_, a\u00a0pair of twin Poets, who suck'd one and\nthe same Muse. After this he has a Fling at _Handel_,\n_Bononcini_ and _Attilio_, the Opera Composers; and a\nsevere Sneer on the late High-Church Idol,\n_Sacheverel_. As for _Cluer_, the Printer, any Body\nthat knows Music, or _Bow Church Yard_, needs no\nfarther Information.\nAnd now he proceeds to a Digression, which is indeed\nthe Dissertation it self; proving all Arts and\nSciences to owe their Origin and Existence to\n_Pudding_ and _Dumpling_ (_i.e._) Encouragement. His\n_Hiatus_ in the 20th Page, I\u00a0could, but dare not\nDecypher.\nIn his 22nd Page, he lashes the Authors who oppose the\nGovernment; such as the _Craftsman_, _Occasional\nWriter_, and other Scribblers, past, present, and to\ncome. _The Dumpling-Eaters Downfal_, is a Title of his\nown Imagination; I\u00a0have run over all _Wilford_'s\nCatalogues, and see no Mention made of such a Book:\nAll that Paragraph therefore is a mere Piece of\nRablaiscism.\nIn his 23d Page, he has another confounded Fling at\nForeigners; and after having determinately dubb'd his\nHero, the Prince of Statesmen, he concludes his\nDissertation with a Mess of Drollery, and goes off in\na Laugh.\nIn a Word, the whole Dissertation seems calculated to\ningratiate the D--n\u00a0in Sir **** Favour; he draws the\nPicture of an able and an honest Minister, painful in\nhis Countries Service, and beloved by his Prince; yet\noftentimes misrepresented and bely'd: Nay, sometimes\non the Brink of Ruin, but always Conqueror. The Fears,\nthe Jealousies, the Misrepresentations of an enraged\nand disappointed Party, give him no small Uneasiness\nto see the Ingratitude of some Men, the Folly of\nothers, who shall believe black to be white, because\nprejudiced and designing Knaves alarm 'em with false\nFears. We see every Action misconstrued, and Evil made\nout of Good; but as the best Persons and Things are\nsubject to Scandal and Ridicule; so have they the\nPleasure of Triumphing in the Truth, which always will\nprevail.\nI take the Allegory of this Dissertation to be partly\nHistorical, partly Prophetical; the D--n\u00a0seeming to\nhave carried his View, not only to the present, but\neven, succeeding Times. He sets his Hero down at last\nin Peace, Plenty, and a happy Retirement, not\nunrelented by his Prince; his Honesty apparent, his\nEnemies baffled and confounded, and his Measures made\nthe Standard of good Government; and a Pattern for all\njust Ministers to follow.\nThus, gentle Reader, have I, at the Expence of these\npoor Brains, crack'd this thick Shell, and given thee\nthe Kernel. If any should object, and say this\nExposition is a Contradiction to the D--n's\nPrinciples; I\u00a0assure such Objector, that the D--n\u00a0is\nan errant _Whig_ by Education, and Choice: He may\nindeed cajole the _Tories_ with a Belief that he is of\ntheir Party; but it is all a Joke, he is a _Whig_, and\nI know him to be so; Nay more, I\u00a0can prove it, and\ndefy him to contradict me; did he not just after his\nArrival and Promotion in _Ireland_, writing to one of\nhis intimate Friends in _London_, conclude his Letter\nin this Manner?\n_Thus Dear **** from all that has occur'd, you must\nconclude me a _Tory_ in every Thing, but my Principle,\nwhich is yet as unmoved, as, that I\u00a0am,_\n Yours, _&c._\nThis Letter, his Tale of a Tub, and in a Word, all his\nInvectives against Enthusiasm and Priestcraft, plainly\nprove him to be no _Tory_; and if his Intimacy, not\nonly with Sir **** himself, but most of the prime Men\nin the Ministry, cannot prove him a _Whig_, I\u00a0have no\nmore to say.\n _FINIS._\n[Decoration]\n_Advertisement to the _Curious_._\nThe Author is Night and Day at Work (in order to get\npublished before the _Spaniards_ have raised the Siege\nof _Gibraltar_) a\u00a0Treatise, entituled, _Truth brought\nto light, _or_ D--n\u00a0_S----t_'s _Wilsden_ Prophecy\nunfolded_; being a full Explanation of a Prophetical\nPoem, called _Namby Pamby_, which, by most People,\nis taken for a Banter on an eminent Poet, now in\n_Ireland_; when in Fact, it is a true Narrative of the\nSiege of _Gibraltar_, the Defeat of the _Spaniards_,\nand Success of the _British_ Arms. The Author doubts\nnot in this Attempt to give manifest Proof of his\nAbilities, and make it apparent to all Mankind, that\nhe can see as clearly through a Milstone, as any other\nPerson can through the best Optic _Martial_ or\n_Scarlet_ ever made; and that there is more in many\nThings, not taken Notice of, than the Generality of\nPeople are aware\u00a0of.\nNOTES TO _DUMPLING_\nPp. [ii].2-[iii].25. The information on Brand, Braund, and Marsh is\nconfirmed by records in the Willesdon Public Library and by Lyson's\n_County of Middlesex_.\nP.2.30-31. Carey also attacks the Freemasons and Gormogons in _Poems_,\ned. Wood, p.\u00a0118.\nP.5.3. Old Mr. Lawrence is mentioned several times (see particularly\n_Key_, pp.\u00a016-17). There was a farmer Lawrence of 70 in Willesdon at the\ntime, but I have found no direct connection with an antiquary, with\nSwift's Namby Pamby talk (see _OED_ under _Namby Pamby_) and his\n_Wilsden Prophecy_; nor with Jonathan Richardson (see note to _Key_,\np.\u00a017). On another level, the laziness attributed to Swift (_Key_,\np.\u00a0viii) and the gridiron here connected with the Kit Cat club are both\ncommonly associated with Saint Lawrence.\nP.6.11-12. \"Bull and Mouth\" refers to a tavern known as the Boulogne\nMouth (John Timbs, _Clubs and Club Life in London_ [London, 1872],\nPp.6.13-9.6. Knight of the Gridiron: Walpole was a member of the Kit\nCat club, which originally met at the pie shop of Christopher Cat in\nShire Lane. The \"Second Edition\" probably refers to the fact that the\nOrder of the Bath was reintroduced for Walpole's benefit in June 1724.\n(See also _Key_, p.\u00a019.) There is intentional confusion with Estcourt,\nwho as providore of the Beefsteak club wore about his neck a small\ngridiron of silver and was made a Knight of Saint Lawrence. The Knights\nof the Toast were an associated group.\u00a0The gridiron is a symbol both of\ngormandizing and of the roasting of Saint Lawrence.\nP.9.9. J[acob] T[onson], the publisher, founded the Kit Cat club which\nalso met at Tonson's home in Barns Elms, and in Hampstead (which was\nonly a few miles northeast of Willesdon).\nP.11.15-18. King John is reputed either to have been poisoned or to\nhave died from overeating at Swineshead Abbey (18-19 October 1216).\nPp.14.15-16.24. See also _Key_, pp.\u00a025-26. King Harry, at this point,\nwould appear to be George I, with either Walpole or Marlborough as Sir\nJohn Pudding. Nevertheless, there are carefully interpolated overtones\nregarding Falstaff and Hal. \"One knows not where to have him\" (_Key_,\np.\u00a025) is one of several apt Shakespearian allusions in the work.\nreferences are to the writers Sir R[ichard] B[lackmore] and C[harles]\nJ[ohnso]n; opera in the hands of Nicolino, Senesino, Handel, Buononcini\nand Attilio; the high-church idol, Sacheverel (d. 1724); the _Craftsman_\n(founded to attack Walpole) and the _Occasional Writer_ (Bolingbroke's 4\npamphlets of Jan/Feb. 1727); and finally the discredited music printer,\nCluer. Carey's relationship to opera was ambivalent, but in _Mocking is\nCatching_ he strongly attacked Senesino.\nP.24.5-29. Matt. Prior (d. 1721), despite his aristocratic pretensions,\nhad been earlier associated with the Rummer Tavern. He was a member of\nthe Kit Cat club until he became a Tory for Dumpling.\nP.[32].28. E[dmund] C[url] of the \"ADVERTISEMENT\" was a publisher\nnotorious for stealing material. Carey complained frequently of his\nwritings having been \"fathered\" by others.\nNOTES TO THE _KEY_\nTitle Page. \"J. W.\": Dr. Wood suggests this is the fictitious John\nWalton of the \"Proposals\" at the end of _Dumpling_. My own preference is\nfor Dr. John Woodward, the famous antiquarian and physician. As late as\nFielding's \"Dedication\" to _Shamela_, Woodward was being mocked for\nsuggesting that the \"Gluttony [which] is owing to the great\nMultiplication of Pastry-Cooks in the City\" has \"Led to the Subversion\nof Government....\" (See Woodward's _The State of Physick and of\nDiseases_ [London, 1718], pp.\u00a0194-196 and 200-201. Compare this with\n_Dumpling_, pp.\u00a022-23, on the _Dumpling-Eaters Downfall_, also pp.\u00a09 and\n16, and _Key_, p.\u00a017.) Swift deals with \"repletion\" in _Gulliver's\nTravels_ (ed. Herbert Davis [Oxford, 1941], pp.\u00a0253-254 and 262).\nP.iii.1-22. L[intot] was Pope's publisher. B[ooth], W[ilks], and\nC[ibber] were the managers of Drury Lane. _The London Stage, Part 2:\n1700-1729_, ed. Emmett L. Avery (Carbondale, Ill., 1960), shows that\nJ.\u00a0M. Smythe's _Rival Modes_ was first played 27 January 1727 at Drury\nLane; John Thurmond's pantomime _The Miser: Or Wagner and Abericock_ was\nfirst played 30 December 1726 at Drury Lane; and Lun's pantomimes\n_Harlequin a Sorcerer: With The Loves of Pluto and Proserpine_ and _The\nRape of Proserpine_ were first played at the Lincoln's Inn Fields\nTheatre 21 January 1725 and 13 February 1727 respectively.\nP.iv.16-25. The preface ends on a similar note to Carey's _Of Stage\nTyrants_ (p.\u00a0108).\nP.[v].3-4. To \"it never wants a Father,\" compare _Of Stage Tyrants_\nP.vi.1-9. Swift's \"old Bookseller\" had been T[ooke] (though there may\nbe overtones here regarding Tonson). His new publisher was [Benjamin]\nM[otte].\nPp.viii.24-ix.14. The \"Hackney Writer out of _Temple Lane_\" could very\nwell be Carey. (See Carey's _Records of Love_ [London, 1710], pp.\u00a0175,\nP.13.6-9. Carey's poem \"The Plague of Dependence\" cautions: \"You may\ndance out your shoes in attendance;/ [while you] .... wait for a court\ndependence\" (p.\u00a090).\nPp.14.7-15.2. Here Carey cleverly ties in Swift's surgeon Gulliver,\nthrough the \"Pancake of Rabbets\" (_Dumpling_, p.\u00a017), with the topical\nand notorious case of Mary Tofts, who in November 1726 was \"delivered\"\nof fifteen rabbits. All the people mentioned were connected with this\ncase. Nathaniel St. Andr\u00e9 was the surgeon and anatomist to the King,\nand Cyriacus Ahlers the King's private surgeon; John Howard was the\napothecary. The imposture was finally brought to light before Sir\nRichard Manningham (the famous man-midwife who probably influenced\nSterne) and Dr. James Douglas. Among the many contemporary pamphlets on\nthis subject is one by Thomas Braithwaite.\nPp.16.14-17.13. The following is a very revealing quotation from\nrecords in the Willesdon Public Library under F.\u00a0A. Wood [not Dr. F.\u00a0T.\nWood], _Willesdon_ I, 99: \"These nurse children must have been sent from\nworkhouses round Willesdon ... the parish must have become a baby\nfarm.... The large number of deaths between 1702 and 1727 ought to have\ncaused some official enquiry, which probably did take place, as after\n1727 they soon ceased altogether.\"\nP.17.14-22. See Jonathan Richardson, _Works_, Strawberry Hill Press\n(London, 1792), pp.\u00a0198-199: \"...had the honour of a letter ... the term\n_Connoisance_ was used.... I\u00a0must not conceal the name it was Mr.\nPrior.\" Richardson, a\u00a0frequent visitor to Hampstead, painted both Prior\nand Pope. His essay on \"The Connoisseur\" was frequently published.\nP.18.6-22. See also p. 24 and _passim_. Robert Walpole was born and\ndied at Houghton in Norfolk; he was helped up by Marlborough but lost\npower with him under the Tories. Walpole went to the Tower for five\nmonths in 1712 before going to his home county, where Defoe calls him\n\"King Walpole in Norfolk.\"\nP.24.19-20. The \"Fable of the _Court Pudding_\" (see also _Dumpling_,\npp.\u00a013-14) ties together both meanings of the scatological Latin-English\npun on the title page of _Dumpling_.\n WILLIAM ANDREWS CLARK\n MEMORIAL LIBRARY\n University Of California, Los Angeles\n [Decoration]\n THE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY\n Publications In Print\nTHE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY\nPublications In Print\n [Decoration]\n [Transcriber's Note:\n Where available, Project Gutenberg e-text numbers (5 digits) are\n shown in [brackets]. Most other titles are in preparation.]\n16. Henry Nevil Payne, _The Fatal Jealousie_ (1673). [16916]\n18. Anonymous, \"Of Genius,\" in _The Occasional Paper_, Vol. III, No. 10\n(1719), and Aaron Hill, Preface to _The Creation_ (1720). [15870]\n19. Susanna Centlivre, _The Busie Body_ (1709). [16740]\n20. Lewis Theobald, _Preface to the Works of Shakespeare_ (1734).\n22. Samuel Johnson, _The Vanity of Human Wishes_ (1749), and two\n23. John Dryden, _His Majesties Declaration Defended_ (1681). [15074]\n26. Charles Macklin, _The Man of the World_ (1792). [14463]\n31. Thomas Gray, _An Elegy Wrote in a Country Churchyard_ (1751), and\n_The Eton College Manuscript_. [15409]\n41. Bernard Mandeville, _A Letter to Dion_ (1732).\n104. Thomas D'Urfey, _Wonders in the Sun; or, The Kingdom of the Birds_\n110. John Tutchin, _Selected Poems_ (1685-1700).\n111. Anonymous, _Political justice_ (1736).\n112. Robert Dodsley, _An Essay on Fable_ (1764).\n113. T. R., _An Essay Concerning Critical and Curious Learning_ (1698).\n114. _Two Poems Against Pope:_ Leonard Welsted, _One Epistle to Mr.\nA. Pope_ (1730), and Anonymous, _The Blatant Beast_ (1742). [21499]\n115. Daniel Defoe and others, _Accounts of the Apparition of Mrs. Veal_.\n116. Charles Macklin, _The Covent Garden Theatre_ (1752).\n117. Sir George L'Estrange, _Citt and Bumpkin_ (1680).\n118. Henry More, _Enthusiasmus Triumphatus_ (1662).\n119. Thomas Traherne, _Meditations on the Six Days of the Creation_\n120. Bernard Mandeville, _Aesop Dress'd or a Collection of Fables_\n123. Edmond Malone, _Cursory Observations on the Poems Attributed to Mr.\nThomas Rowley_ (1782).\n124. Anonymous, _The Female Wits_ (1704).\n125. Anonymous, _The Scribleriad_ (1742). Lord Hervey, _The Difference\nBetween Verbal and Practical Virtue_ (1742).\n129. Lawrence Echard, Prefaces to _Terence's Comedies_ (1694) and\n_Plautus's Comedies_ (1694).\n130. Henry More, _Democritus Platonissans_ (1646).\n132. Walter Harte, _An Essay on Satire, Particularly on the Dunciad_\n133. John Courtenay, _A Poetical Review of the Literary and Moral\nCharacter of the Late Samuel Johnson_ (1786).\n134. John Downes, _Roscius Anglicanus_ (1708).\n135. Sir John Hill, _Hypochondriasis, a\u00a0Practical Treatise_ (1766).\n136. Thomas Sheridan, _Discourse ... Being Introductory to His Course of\nLectures on Elocution and the English Language_ (1759).\n137. Arthur Murphy, _The Englishman From Paris_ (1736).\n138. [Catherine Trotter], _Olinda's Adventures_ (1718).\nPublications of the first fifteen years of the Society (numbers 1-90)\nare available in paperbound units of six issues at $16.00 per unit, from\nthe Kraus Reprint Company, 16 East 46th Street, New York, N.Y. 10017.\nPublications in print are available at the regular membership rate of\n$5.00 yearly. Prices of single issues may be obtained upon request.\nSubsequent publications may be checked in the annual prospectus.\n [Decoration]\nThe Augustan Reprint Society\n William Andrews Clark\n Memorial Library\nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES\n2520 Cimarron Street (at West Adams), Los Angeles, California 90018\n [Decoration]\n_Make check or money order payable to_\nTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA\n William Andrews Clark Memorial Library:\n University of California, Los Angeles\nTHE AUGUSTAN REPRINT SOCIETY\n2520 Cimarron Street, Los Angeles, California 90018\n_General Editors_: William E. Conway, William Andrews Clark Memorial\nLibrary; George Robert Guffey, University of California, Los Angeles;\nMaximillian E. Novak, University of California, Los Angeles\n_Corresponding Secretary_: Mrs. Edna C. Davis, William Andrews Clark\nMemorial Library\nThe Society's purpose is to publish rare Restoration and\neighteenth-century works (usually as facsimile reproductions). All\nincome of the Society is devoted to defraying costs of publication and\nmailing.\nCorrespondence concerning memberships in the United States and Canada\nshould be addressed to the Corresponding Secretary at the William\nAndrews Clark Memorial Library, 2520 Cimarron Street, Los Angeles,\nCalifornia. Correspondence concerning editorial matters may be addressed\nto the General Editors at the same address. Manuscripts of introductions\nshould conform to the recommendations of the M L A _Style Sheet_. The\nmembership fee is $5.00 a year in the United States and Canada and\n\u00a31.19.6 in Great Britain and Europe. British and European prospective\nmembers should address B.\u00a0H. Blackwell, Broad Street, Oxford, England.\nCopies of back issues in print may be obtained from the Corresponding\nSecretary.\nPublications of the first fifteen years of the Society (numbers 1-90)\nare available in paperbound units of six issues at $16.00 per unit, from\nthe Kraus Reprint Company, 16 East 46th Street, New York, N.Y. 10017.\nMake check or money order payable to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF\nCALIFORNIA\nREGULAR PUBLICATIONS FOR 1969-1970\n139. John Ogilvie, _An Essay on the lyric poetry of the ancients_\n(1762). Introduction by Wallace Jackson. [25008]\n140. _A Learned Dissertation on Dumpling_ (1726) and _Pudding burnt to\npot or a compleat key to the Dissertation on Dumpling_ (1727).\nIntroduction by Samuel L. Macey. [_present text_]\n141. Selections from Sir Roger L'Estrange's _Observator_ (1681-1687).\nIntroduction by Violet Jordain.\n142. Anthony Collins, _A Discourse concerning Ridicule and Irony in\nwriting_ (1729). Introduction by Edward A. Bloom and Lillian D. Bloom.\n143. _A Letter from a clergyman to his friend, with an account of the\ntravels of Captain Lemuel Gulliver_ (1726). Introduction by Martin\nKallich.\n144. _The Art of Architecture, a poem. In imitation of Horace's Art of\npoetry_ (1742). Introduction by William A. Gibson.\nSPECIAL PUBLICATION FOR 1969-1970\nGerard Langbaine, _An Account of the English Dramatick Poets_ (1691),\nIntroduction by John Loftis. 2 Volumes. Approximately 600 pages. Price\nto members of the Society, $7.00 for the first copy (both volumes), and\n$8.50 for additional copies. Price to non-members, $10.00.\nAlready published in this series:\n1. John Ogilby, _The Fables of Aesop Paraphras'd in Verse_ (1668), with\nan Introduction by Earl Miner. 228 pages.\n2. John Gay, _Fables_ (1727, 1738), with an Introduction by Vinton A.\nDearing. 366 pages.\n3. _The Empress of Morocco and Its Critics_ (Elkanah Settle, _The\nEmpress of Morocco_ [1673] with five plates; _Notes and Observations on\nthe Empress of Morocco_ [1674] by John Dryden, John Crowne and Thomas\nSnadwell; _Notes and Observations on the Empress of Morocco Revised_\n[1674] by Elkanah Settle; and _The Empress of Morocco. A\u00a0Farce_ [1674]\nby Thomas Duffett), with an Introduction by Maximillian E. Novak. 348\npages.\n4. _After THE TEMPEST_ (the Dryden-Davenant version of _The Tempest_\n[1670]; the \"operatic\" _Tempest_ [1674]; Thomas Duffett's _Mock-Tempest_\n[1675]; and the \"Garrick\" _Tempest_ [1756]), with an Introduction by\nGeorge Robert Guffey. 332 pages.\nPrice to members of the Society, $3.50 for the first copy of each title,\nand $4.25 for additional copies. Price to non-members, $5.00. Standing\norders for this continuing series of Special Publications will be\naccepted. British and European orders should be addressed to B.\u00a0H.\nBlackwell, Broad Street, Oxford, England.\nErrors and Inconsistencies noted by transcriber:\n As Wynde in a Bladdere ypent...\n [_printed in black-letter type_]\nThe _Key to the Dissertation_ was printed with marginal opening quotes.\nMost closing quotes were supplied by the transcriber.\n_Introduction_\n_Dumpling_ and _Key_\n Note author's correction:\n Page 5. line 15, _&c._ for _Barnes_ read _Brand_.\n Tu mihi Mec\u00e6nas Eris! [_spelling unchanged_]\n but for the Relief I find at AUSTIN's [' invisible]\n and trac'd in them the exact Lineaments [' invisible]\n and is call'd BRAND's to this Day [' invisible]\n his real Name was _John Brand_,\n [_here and above, see Author's Correction_]\n not one of the King's Cooks [' invisible]\n There is not so much difference between [differenee]\n some of Mother _Crump_'s Sausages [' invisible]\n See-and-Saw and Sacch'ry down [' invisible]\n with Elegies, Pastorals, Epithalamium's\n [_comma after \"Elegies\" invisible;\n apostrophe in \"Epithalamium's\" unchanged_]\n [->] _Pray mistake not the House; [-> represents pointing finger]\n that both the Gentlemen play a\u00a0good Knife and Fork\n [_unchanged: error for \"ply\"?_]\n having at that Time, Credit with the Pork-Woman\n [_printed text reads \"ha-/ing\" at line break_]\n made-away with his Wine [_hyphen in original_]\n_Editor's Notes_\n the scatological Latin-English pun [scatalogical]\n_Augustan Reprints_\n 20. Lewis Theobald, _Preface to ... [Prepace]\n 120. Bernard Mandeville ... (1704). [final . missing]\n 125. ... Lord Hervey... (1742). [_open parenthesis missing_]\n 2520 Cimarron Street (at West Adams), Los Angeles, California\n [. for , after \"Los Angeles\"]", "source_dataset": "gutenberg", "source_dataset_detailed": "gutenberg - A Learned Dissertation on Dumpling (1726)\n"},
{"created_timestamp": "02-11-1723", "downloaded_timestamp": "10-18-2021", "url": "https://founders.archives.gov/API/docdata/Franklin/01-01-02-0023", "content": "Title: The Printer to the Reader, 11 February 1723\nFrom: Franklin, Benjamin,Franklin, James\nTo: \nArrest and imprisonment had not intimidated James Franklin. Probably encouraged by the refusal of the House of Representatives to concur in the Council\u2019s proposal to reestablish press censorship, he printed, July 30, Chapter XXIX of Magna Carta, with glosses, on the freeman\u2019s right to trial by jury according to the law. On September 17, 1722, appeared a burlesque rhymed account of his case and on January 14, 1723, a long essay on religious hypocrites and some comments on Governor Shute\u2019s departure from the colony. As a result James Franklin came under official notice once more. The General Court, censuring the Courant for its tendency to mock religion, reflect on the ministers, and affront the magistrates, forbade him \u201cto print or Publish the New England Courant, or any other Pamphlet or Paper of the like Nature, except it be first Supervised by the Secretary of this Province.\u201d Franklin ignored the order, printed his next issue without the Secretary\u2019s permission, and the week after that published an ironical letter of advice to himself on how to avoid offending the authorities. Ordered arrested for contempt, he went into hiding, and, as Benjamin remembered it, \u201cthere was a Consultation held in our Printing House among his Friends what he should do in this Case. Some Propos\u2019d to evade the Order by changing the Name of the Paper; but my Brother seeing Inconveniencies in that, it was finally concluded on as a better Way to let it be printed for the future under the name of Benjamin Franklin.\u201d That the paper might not appear as published by the printer\u2019s apprentice, it was proposed that Benjamin\u2019s indenture be returned to him \u201cwith a full Discharge on the Back of it, to be shown on Occasion,\u201d and that he sign new indentures for the remainder of his time, \u201cwhich were to be kept private.\u201d This \u201cvery flimsy Scheme\u201d was immediately executed; the first issue under the new arrangement appeared on February 11. It opened with an address to the public, only part of which, to judge by its style, was by Benjamin Franklin.\nHaving thus provided for the continuation of his paper, James Franklin delivered himself up February 12, and gave his bond to keep the peace. One of his sureties was Thomas Fleet, a contributor to the Courant. The charges were considered by the Grand Jury in May, but no indictment was returned, and the printer was discharged. The Courant, however, continued to appear over Benjamin Franklin\u2019s name until it expired in 1726, although the nominal publisher had run away from Boston in September 1723.\nThe late Publisher of this Paper, finding so many Inconveniencies would arise by his carrying the Manuscripts and publick News to be supervis\u2019d by the Secretary, as to render his carrying it on unprofitable, has intirely dropt the Undertaking. The present Publisher having receiv\u2019d the following Piece, desires the Readers to accept of it as a Preface to what they may hereafter meet with in this Paper.\nNon ego mordaci distrinxi Carmine quenquam,\nNulla vonenato Litera onista Joco est.\nLong has the Press groaned in bringing forth an hateful, but numerous Brood of Party Pamphlets, malicious Scribbles, and Billingsgate Ribaldry. The Rancour and bitterness it has unhappily infused into Mens minds, and to what a Degree it has sowred and leaven\u2019d the Tempers of Persons formerly esteemed some of the most sweet and affable, is too well known here, to need any further Proof or Representation of the Matter.\nNo generous and impartial Person then can blame the present Undertaking, which is designed purely for the Diversion and Merriment of the Reader. Pieces of Pleasancy and Mirth have a secret Charm in them to allay the Heats and Tumors of our Spirits, and to make a Man forget his restless Resentments. They have a strange Power to tune the harsh Disorders of the Soul, and reduce us to a serene and placid State of Mind.\nThe main Design of this Weekly Paper will be to entertain the Town with the most comical and diverting Incidents of Humane Life, which in so large a Place as Boston, will not fail of a universal Exemplification: Nor shall we be wanting to fill up these Papers with a grateful Interspersion of more serious Morals, which may be drawn from the most ludicrous and odd Parts of Life.\nAs for the Author, that is the next Question. But tho\u2019 we profess our selves ready to oblige the ingenious and courteous Reader with most Sorts of Intelligence, yet here we beg a Reserve. Nor will it be of any Manner of Advantage either to them or to the Writers, that their Names should be published; and therefore in this Matter we desire the Favour of you to suffer us to hold our Tongues: Which tho\u2019 at this Time of Day it may sound like a very uncommon Request, yet it proceeds from the very Hearts of your Humble Servants.\nBy this Time the Reader perceives that more than one are engaged in the present Undertaking. Yet is there one Person, an Inhabitant of this Town of Boston, whom we honour as a Doctor in the Chair, or a perpetual Dictator.\nThe Society had design\u2019d to present the Publick with his Effigies, but that the Limner, to whom he was presented for a Draught of his Countenance, descryed (and this he is ready to offer upon Oath) Nineteen Features in his Face, more than ever he beheld in any Humane Visage before; which so raised the Price of his Picture, that our Master himself forbid the Extravagance of coming up to it. And then besides, the Limner objected a Schism in his Face, which splits it from his Forehead in a strait Line down to his Chin, in such sort, that Mr. Painter protests it is a double Face, and he\u2019ll have Four Pounds for the Pourtraiture. However, tho\u2019 this double Face has spoilt us of a pretty Picture, yet we all rejoiced to see old Janus in our Company.\nThere is no Man in Boston better qualified than old Janus for a Couranteer, or if you please, an Observator, being a Man of such remarkable Opticks, as to look two ways at once.\nAs for his Morals, he is a chearly Christian, as the Country Phrase expresses it. A Man of good Temper, courteous Deportment, sound Judgment; a mortal Hater of Nonsense, Foppery, Formality, and endless Ceremony.\nAs for his Club, they aim at no greater Happiness or Honour, than the Publick be made to know, that it is the utmost of their Ambition to attend upon and do all imaginable good Offices to good Old Janus the Couranteer, who is and always will be the Readers humble Servant.\nP.S. Gentle Readers, we design never to let a Paper pass without a Latin Motto if we can possibly pick one up, which carries a Charm in it to the Vulgar, and the learned admire the pleasure of Construing. We should have obliged the World with a Greek scrap or two, but the Printer has no Types, and therefore we intreat the candid Reader not to impute the defect to our Ignorance, for our Doctor can say all the Greek Letters by heart.", "culture": "English", "source_dataset": "Pile_of_Law", "source_dataset_detailed": "Pile_of_Law_founding_docs", "source_dataset_detailed_explanation": "Letters from U.S. founders.", "creation_year": 1723},
{"created_timestamp": "02-18-1723", "downloaded_timestamp": "10-18-2021", "url": "https://founders.archives.gov/API/docdata/Franklin/01-01-02-0024", "content": "Title: On Titles of Honor, 18 February 1723\nFrom: Franklin, Benjamin\nTo: \nMero meridie si dixerit illi tenebras esse, credit.\nThere is nothing in which Mankind reproach themselves more than in their Diversity of Opinions. Every Man sets himself above another in his own Opinion, and there are not two Men in the World whose Sentiments are alike in every thing. Hence it comes to pass, that the same Passages in the Holy Scriptures or the Works of the Learned, are wrested to the meaning of two opposite Parties, of contrary Opinions, as if the Passages they recite were like our Master Janus, looking two ways at once, or like Lawyers, who with equal Force of Argument, can plead either for the Plaintiff or Defendant.\nThe most absurd and ridiculous Opinions, are sometimes spread by the least colour of Argument: But if they stop at the first Broachers, they have still the Pleasure of being wiser (in their own Conceits) than the rest of the World, and can with the greatest Confidence pass a Sentence of Condemnation upon the Reason of all Mankind, who dissent from the peculiar Whims of their troubled Brains.\nWe were easily led into these Reflections at the last Meeting of our Club, when one of the Company read to us some Passages from a zealous Author against Hatt-Honour, Titular Respects, &c. which we will communicate to the Reader for the Diversion of this Week, if he is dispos\u2019d to be merry with the Folly of his Fellow-Creature.\n\u201cHonour, Friend, says he, properly ascends, and not descends; yet the Hat, when the Head is uncover\u2019d, descends, and therefore there can be no Honour in it. Besides, Honour was from the Beginning, but Hats are an Invention of a late Time, and consequently true Honour standeth not therein.\n\u201cIn old Time it was no disrespect for Men and Women to be call\u2019d by their own Names: Adam, was never called Master Adam; we never read of Noah Esquire, Lot Knight and Baronet, nor the Right Honourable Abraham, Viscount Mesopotamia, Baron of Carran; no, no, they were plain Men, honest Country Grasiers, that took Care of their Families and their Flocks. Moses was a great Prophet, and Aaron a Priest of the Lord; but we never read of the Reverend Moses, nor the Right Reverend Father in God, Aaron, by Divine Providence, Lord Arch-Bishop of Israel: Thou never sawest Madam Rebecca in the Bible, my Lady Rachel, nor Mary, tho\u2019 a Princess of the Blood after the Death of Joseph, call\u2019d the Princess Dowager of Nazareth; no, plain Rebecca, Rachel, Mary, or the Widow Mary, or the like: It was no Incivility then to mention their naked Names as they were expressed.\u201d\nIf common civility, and a generous Deportment among Mankind, be not put out of Countenance by the profound Reasoning of this Author, we hope they will continue to treat one another handsomely to the end of the World. We will not pretend an Answer to these Arguments against modern Decency and Titles of Honour; yet one of our Club will undertake to prove, that tho\u2019 Abraham was not styl\u2019d Right Honourable, yet he had the Title of Lord given him by his Wife Sarah, which he thinks entitles her to the Honour of My Lady Sarah; and Rachel being married into the same Family, he concludes she may deserve the Title of My Lady Rachel. But this is but the Opinion of one Man; it was never put to Vote in the Society.\nP.S. At the last Meeting of our Club, it was unanimously agreed, That all Letters to be inserted in this Paper, should come directed to old Janus; whereof our Correspondents are to take Notice, and conform themselves accordingly.", "culture": "English", "source_dataset": "Pile_of_Law", "source_dataset_detailed": "Pile_of_Law_founding_docs", "source_dataset_detailed_explanation": "Letters from U.S. founders.", "creation_year": 1723},
{"created_timestamp": "01-01-1723", "downloaded_timestamp": "10-18-2021", "url": "https://founders.archives.gov/API/docdata/Franklin/01-01-02-0025", "content": "Title: [Other Courant Essays Possibly by Franklin, 1723]\nFrom: Franklin, Benjamin\nTo: \nFranklin\u2019s contributions to the New-England Courant were not limited to the fourteen letters of Mrs. Silence Dogood. After he had revealed himself as their author and \u201cbegan to be considered a little more by my Brother\u2019s Acquaintance,\u201d he was doubtless occasionally invited or emboldened to do another piece. When James Franklin was in prison, Franklin \u201chad the Management of the Paper,\u201d which meant that he had to see that its columns were filled each week. No doubt the Couranteers helped him. But the young printer composed articles himself. Some of these were well-chosen extracts from English publications calculated to \u201cgive our Rulers some Rubs\u201d; in addition young Franklin may have written some news notes and essays in the spirit of Dogood.\nThe issues of the Courant between the last of the Dogood letters and Franklin\u2019s departure from Boston in the following fall contain a number of essays the authorship of which cannot now be determined. James Franklin or members of his circle could have written them all; Benjamin Franklin could have written some, and probably did, but the editors have found no evidence to establish an identification. Listed below, by title and date only, are the essays the ascription of which to Benjamin Franklin seems most tempting; other scholars are invited to examine them anew and prove or disprove his authorship.\nHigh Tide in Boston, March 4, 1723\nTatlers and Tale Bearers, March 18, 1723\nTimothy Wagstaff, April 15, 1723\nAbigail Twitterfield, July 8, 1723\nOn Lecture-Day Visiting, August 19, 1723.", "culture": "English", "source_dataset": "Pile_of_Law", "source_dataset_detailed": "Pile_of_Law_founding_docs", "source_dataset_detailed_explanation": "Letters from U.S. founders.", "creation_year": 1723}
] |