« AnteriorContinuar »
Adamites, Sabbatarians, Cameronians, Muggletonians, Brownists, Independents, Masonites, Camisars, and the like. At the approach of Persecution, it was so contrived, that as she held up her bloody flag, the whole assembly of dead men, like those in the Rehearsal, started up and drew their swords. This was followed by great clashings and noise, when, in the midst of the tumult, the figure of Moderation moved gently towards this new army, which, upon her holding up a paper in her hand, inscribed, ' Liberty of Conscience, immediately fell into a heap of carcasses, remaining in the same quiet posture that they lay at first.” ?
No. 259. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1710.
-Vexat censura columbas. Juv.
in Sheer Lane, on Monday the 27th of November, before
ELIZABETH MAKEBATE, of the parish of St. Catherine's, spinster, was indicted for surreptitiously taking away the hassoc from under the Lady Grave-Airs, between the hours of four and five, on Sunday the 26th of November. The prosecutor deposed, that as she stood up to make a curtsey to a person of quality in a neighbouring pew, the criminal conveyed away the hassoc by stealth, insomuch that the prosecutor was obliged to sit all the whole while she was at church, or to say her prayers in a posture that did not become a woman of her quality. The prisoner pleaded inadvertency; and the jury were going to bring it in chancemedley, had not several witnesses been produced against the said Elizabeth Makebate, that she was an old offender, and a woman of a bad reputation. It appeared in particular, that on the Sunday before she had detracted from a new petticoat of Mrs. Mary Doelittle, having said in the hearing
The ridicule in this inimitable paper, on the several sects of religion, is so pointed and strong, that the gravest reader cannot help laughing at it ; yet so guarded and chaste, at the same time, that no part of it is seen to fall on religion itself. It is to be lamented, that another of our wits, I mean, in the famous Tale of a Tub, was either not so discreet, or not so happy.
of several credible witnesses, that the said petticoat was scowered, to the great grief and detriment of the said Mary Doelittle. There were likewise many evidences produced against the criminal, that though she never failed to come to church on Sunday, she was a most notorious sabbath-breaker, and that she spent her whole time, during divine service, in disparaging other people's clothes, and whispering to those who sat next her. Upon the whole, she was found guilty of the indictment, and received sentence to ask pardon of the prosecutor upon her bare knees, without eitlier cushion or hassoc under her, in the face of the court.
N. B. As soon as the sentence was executed on the criminal, which was done in open court with the utmost severity, the first lady of the bench on Mr. Bickerstaffe's right hand stood up, and made a motion to the court, that whereas it was impossible for women of fashion to dress themselves before the church was half done, and whereas many confusions and inconveniences did arise thereupon, it might be lawful for them to send a footman, in order to keep their places, as was usual in other polite and well-regulated assemblies. The motion was ordered to be entered in the books, and considered at a more convenient time.
Charles Cambrick, Linen-draper, in the city of Westminster, was indicted for speaking obscenely to the Lady Penelope Touchwood. It appeared, that the prosecutor and her woman going in a stage-coach from London to Brentford, where they were to be met by the lady's own chariot, the criminal and another of his acquaintance travelled with them in the same coach, at which time the prisoner talked bawdy for the space of three miles and a half. The prosecutor alleged, “That over against the Old Fox at Knightsbridge, he mentioned the word linen; that at the further end of Kensington he made use of the term smock; and that before be came to Hammersmith, he talked almost a quarter of an hour upon wedding-shifts.” The prosecutor's woman confirmed what her lady had said, and added further,
that she had never seen her lady in so great confusion, and in such a taking, as she was during the whole discourse of the criminal.” The prisoner had little to say for himself, but that he talked only in his own trade, and meant no hurt by what he said. The jury, however, found him guilty, and represented by their forewoman, that such discourses were apt to sully the ima
gination, and that by a concatenation of ideas, the word linen implied many things that were not proper to be stirred up in the mind of a woman who was of the prosecutor's quality, and therefore gave it as their verdict, that the linendraper should lose his tongue. Mr. Bickerstaffe said, “He thought the prosecutor's ears were as much to blame as the prisoner's tongue, and therefore gave sentence as follows: That they should both be placed over against one another in the midst of the court, there to remain for the space of one quarter of an hour, during which time, the linen-draper was to be gagged, and the lady to hold her hands close upon both her ears; which was executed accordingly.
Edward Callicoat was indicted as an accomplice to Charles Cambrick, for that he the said Edward Callicoat did, by his silence and his smiles' seem to approve and abet the said Charles Cambrick in everything he said. It appeared, that the prisoner was foreman of the shop to the aforesaid Charles Cambrick, and by his post obliged to smile at everything that the other should be pleased to say: upon which he was acquitted.
Josias Shallow was indicted in the name of Dame Winifred, sole relict of Richard Dainty, Esq., for having said several times in company, and in the hearing of several persons there present, that he was extremely obliged to the widow Dainty, and that he should never be able sufficiently to express his gratitude. The prosecutor urged, that this might blast her reputation, and that it was in effect a boasting of favours which he had never received. The prisoner seemed to be much astonished at the construction which was put upon his words, and said, “That he meant nothing by them, but that the widow had befriended him in a lease, and was very kind to his younger sister.” The jury finding him a little weak in his understanding, without going out of the court, brought in their verdict, ignoramus.
Ursula Goodenough was accused by the Lady Betty Wou'dbe, for having said, that she the Lady Betty Wou'dbe was painted. The prisoner brought several persons of good credit to witness to her reputation, and proved by undeniable evidences, that she was never at the place where the words were said to have been uttered. The Censor observing the behaviour of the prosecutor, found reason to believe that she had indicted the prisoner for no other reason but to
make her complexion be taken notice of, which indeed was very fresh and beautiful; he therefore asked the offender with a very stern voice, how she could presume to spread so groundless a report ? And whether she saw any colours in the Lady Wou’dbe's face that could procure credit to such a falsehood ? “Do you see (says he) any lilies or roses in her cheeks, any bloom, any probability ?”—The prosecutor, not able to bear such language any longer, told him, that he talked like a blind old fool, and that she was ashamed to have entertained any opinion of his wisdom : but she was put to silence, and sentenced to wear her mask for five months, and not to presume to show her face till the town should be empty.
Benjamin Buzzard, Esq. was indicted having told the Lady Everbloom at a public ball, that she looked very well for a woman of her years. The prisoner not denying the fact, and persisting before the court that he looked upon it as a compliment, the jury brought him in non compos mentis. The court then adjourned to Monday the 11th instant.
Copia Vera, CHARLES LILLIE. [Sir Richard Steele assisted in this paper. T.]
No. 260. THURSDAY, DECEMBER 7, 1710.
Non cuicumque datum est habere nasum. MART.
From my own Apartment, December 6. We have a very learned and elaborate dissertation upon thumbs in Montaigne's Essays, and another upon ears in the Tale of å Tub. I am here going to write one upon noses, having chosen for my text the following verses out of Hudibras :
So learned Talicotius from
Off dropped the sympathetic snout.
knowledge, and that I intend to give as little offence as may be to readers of a well-bred imagination, I must, for my own quiet, desire the critics (who in all times have been famous for good noses) to refrain from the lecture of this curious tract. These gentlemen were formerly marked out and distinguished by the little rhinocerical nose, which was always looked upon as an instrument of derision, and which they were used to cock, toss, or draw up in a contemptuous manner, upon reading the works of their ingenious contemporaries. It is not, therefore, for this generation of men that I write the present transaction,
-Minus aptus acutis
Maribus horum hominum,2 but for the sake of some of my philosophical friends in the Royal Society, who peruse discourses of this nature with a becoming gravity, and a desire of improving by them.
Many are the opinions of learned men concerning the rise of that fatal distemper which has always taken a particular pleasure in venting its spite upon the nose.
I have seen a little burlesque poem in Italian that gives a very pleasant account of this matter. The fable of it runs thus: Mars, the god of war, having served during the siege of Naples in the shape of a French colonel, received a visit one night from Venus, the goddess of love, who had been always his professed mistress and admirer. The poem says, she came to him in the disguise of a suttling wench, with a bottle of brandy under her arm. Let that be as it will, he managed matters so well, that she went away big-bellied, and was at length brought to bed of a little Cupid. This boy, whether it were by reason of any bad food that his father had eaten during the siege, or of any particular malignity in the stars that reigned at his nativity, came into the world with a very sickly look, and crazy constitution. As soon as he was able to handle his bow, he made discoveries of a most perverse disposition. He dipped all his arrows in poison, that rotted everything they touched; and what was more particular, aimed all his shafts at the nose, quite contrary to the prac
· He says, the “lecture," instead of the “reading,” or “the perusal of,” to ridicule the pedantic style of learned critics.
? Pleasantly said. But this paper (except in one instance, or two, which shall be pointed out) has nothing to apprehend from the best-nosed critic.