rality and irreligion; those who are the least conversant in things, will easily know where to apply them. Not that I lay any weight upon the objections of such who charge me with this proceeding; it is notorious enough, that the writers of the other side were the first aggressors. Not to mention their scurrilous libels, many years ago, directly levelled at particular persons; how many papers do now come out every week, full of rude invectives against the present ministry, with the first and last letters of their names to prevent mistakes! It is good sometimes to let these people see, that we neither want spirit nor materials to retaliate; and therefore, in this point alone, I shall follow their example, whenever I find myself sufficiently provoked; only with one addition, that whatever charges I bring, either general or particular, shall be religiously true, founded either upon avowed facts which none can deny, or such as I can prove from my own knowledge.
Being resolved publickly to confess any mistakes I have been guilty of, I do hereby humbly desire the reader's pardon for one of mighty importance, about a fact in one of my papers said to be done in the cathedral of Gloucester. A whole Hydra of errours, in two words! For, as I am since informed, it was neither in the cathedral, nor city, nor county of Gloucester, but some other church of that diocese. If I had ever met any other objection of equal weight, although from the meanest hands, I should certainly have answered it.
