THere coming to my hands a Pamphlet intituled Campanella revived; with a Postscript concerning the quarrel depending betwixt H. S. and Dr Mer­ret, and wondring there should be a quarrel depending betwixt my self, and any other person, having never wrote, or said any thing against any single person, I soon run over his Epistle to the Reader, and found Henry Stubbs subscribed to it, who in other Papers stiles himself a Physician at Warwick. A person whom I never saw, but have seen Books of his writing against very learned and worthy persons, and whose best parts have been imploied in wrangling with men far better then himself, and therefore amongst all know­ing persons his Pen is no slander; Wherefore my re­solution was not to return any answer at all. But up­on second thoughts, and by the advice of some other learned Friends and Colleagues I soon dispatched these Papers, which had come abroad three weeks ago, had our Presses bin at leasure.

[Page 2]Before I come to speak particularly to his Postscript, I shall mention several falsities and untruths delivered in this Pamphlet against the R. S. and my self, and Se­condly shall offer my reasons to impartial men to make it plain, that the Apothecaries are the Authors, Fomen­tors, or adjutors in it. Thirdly I shall detect their cunning contrivances, in defending themselves from having their Books (especially this Pamphlet) made Li­bels.

As for the Falsities in matter of Fact; in his preface to the reader he saith the Royal Society would have in­corporated the Colledge of Phisicians into their Society, but that the prudent and grave did decline, a thing ne­ver dreamt on; 'tis true Mr. Colwell my Countrey­man, a very noble Benefactor to the R. S. and my self, considering the College of Physitians was consumed by Fire, and that the R. S. also wanted a convenience for their meetings, we both judged it meet to pro­pose to each Society, that a common place of meet­ing might be erected at the common charges of them both; which design none of our College but judg­ed to be much for their advantage, and most of the Council of the R. S. approved at first, but upon se­cond thoughts rejected; urging that both the name of the place and honour would be wholy the Physiti­ans, and therefore never endeavoured to incorporate the Physicians into their Society, a thing very incon­gruous and absur'd in it self; because his Majesty had established them as two Corporations with distinct Lawes and Government. When this conjunction of purses onely was first proposed at a College meeting, one onely prudent and grave person did not decline (as [Page 3] Mr. Stubs saith) but thought fit, we should consider on it, but since upon more mature deliberation the same prudent person would have brought it on again.

A second falsity is, that the R. S. promoted the Anti-College of Pseudo-Chymists incouraging Odowde and his adherents in opposition to the Physicians. This I confess is news to Physicians here who are sure never any thing was proposed, or indeavoured by the Society to that purpose. Who have been observant enough of whatsoever they have seemed at least to intrench on our Faculty.

Thirdly, H. S. hath four falsities complicated to­gether in these words. ‘Nor would I have any man to believe that there are so many eminent Physicians of the R. S., for neither is the number of those admitted con­siderable: few of note but have deserted it again, the rest approve not of it, so that all they talk of will not amount to three understanding Persons.’ To which I reply that in the List of the last year 1669, I find 34 Physicians to be members of the R. S. and that the number of them is considerable, will appear by ha­ving yearly four or five or more of the Council, the whole number amounting but to 21. And that none of the Physicians have deserted them is manifest, be­cause they have not signified in writing their mind to the President as their statutes require. But that those that remain approve not of it is most false, and will be so, 'till the Physicians find them invadors of their Faculty, prejudicial to the Arts, Church, or State, and if there be but two understanding Physicians (as you deny there are more.) You may be sure the rest of the Faculty perswaded by the reasons of these two and their own interest will soon leave them.

[Page 4]Fourthly, In the Poscript H. S. affirms, That all the books written on that subject (the Apothecaries) proceed­ed from them, (the Royal Society.) I perceive Mr. Stubbe hath not read all Books (a great accusation against the R. S. all along his papers) or else ex­treamly prevaricates, I am sure Bartholinus who pub­lished in Latin two treatises, written by two several Physicians, intituled the frauds and abuses of Apothe­caries, nor Dr. Hodges nor Dr. Manwaring. nor a ve­ry late writer (who is Anonymus) were ever members of the R. S. And for my self I do affirm that not one member of the R. S. but those that were of the College of Physitians also, joyned with some others that were never of the R. S. did know any thing concerning the Publication of my View; so far are they from being principal incendiaries in this affair, as H. S. most falsely alledgeth they were.

Fifthly, He affirms, that there wanted not some of them (the R. S.) who purposed to erect a Laboratory, and Shop whence all should be furnished cheaper and better than now, as to general Medicines, &c. This also is wholy false, and will be believed so till he names the persons that thus act.

Sixthly, H. S. makes me confess that this quarrel be­twixt the Physicians and Apothecaries was of no longer continuance than that of the R. S. Whereas in my View p. 21. I affirm the Apothecaries have continually tra­duced the College, troubled them at the Council board, Parliaments, &c. and that Anno 1639. a Quo Warranto was granted against them, besides I now say this open Contest had its rise some years before, and not long after their Corporation was erected in [Page 5] the 15th year of K. James, by the procurement of some of our College, and whosoever shall read over our Annals (as I have done twice) will find the Apo­thecaries to have been constant underminers and e­nemies to our Profession and Corporation.

Seventhly, His Postcript falsely affirms that I made him the Author of Lex Talionis. For thus he begins his Postscript. Sir, the news you writ me about Dr. Merrett did at first a little surprize me, and had I not during this last year been accustomed to the puny strata­gems of the Virtuosi, I should have wondered much to understand that I was intituled to the Lex Talionis, or that Apology for Apothecaries to practice Physick. But the Comedians finding their anger insignificant against me, by reason the advantages their ignorance had given me over them; have ascribed unto me a Book which ad­mits of an easie reply, and which interferes with the Col­lege of Physitians, that so they might seem to baffle, and inodiate me at once in the judgment of that profession for which I seemed concerned: I cannot make any defence not having seen his Book. Whereupon observe another false accusation of the R. S. in his making them Au­thors of it; whereas none of them before the Publi­cation saw line of it: Secondly what honest and fair intelligence this Physician at Warwick hath, for in that Book I clearly absolve him of being the Author of it, for in page the first I onely say that I was informed, (and say so still) that the Apothecaries gave out Mr. Stubbe was the Author of Lex Talionis, and though common fame long since said that he intended some­what to that purpose against Dr. Goddard, and my self; and though this report was strong, yet it [Page 6] could never enter into my thoughts, he had the least finger in a piece so illogical, and absur'd both as to Matter and Language; whereby the Reader may plainly see how clearly and too honourably I vindicate him from being the Author of that Book, and upon what grounds and informations Mr. Stubbes raiseth his reviling discourses, and this I writ contrary to the o­pinion of some persons of quality and parts. Because said they he cares not what he writes against the R. S. and each member of it, and that the reviling Language well suited his usual writing.

In the next place I shall take notice of some mistakes (to speak more gently) in his Pamphlet, and where­on he intends to rear his Fabrick. In his Preface. In Opposition to Dr. Merret, I deduce the Original of the Apothecaries, from the times of Hippocrates and Ari­stotle, through the Roman and Greek Empires, &c. which he repeats in his Postscript. In my view p. 27. I only speak negatively of the Apothecaries antiquity in Eng­land, and p. 28. I prove out of my Lord Cooke that K. Henry the sixth had none. How impertinent then will his discourse be, and quite besides the purpose? (a practice much used by him in his writings.) How­ever I will be content he shall shew that he is well verst in Lexicons and Indices, &c. but shall mind him in that impertinent discourse, that he fetcheth not their anti­quity as the Apothecaries ridiculously do from the Holy Scripture, wherein indeed the name of an Apothecary is four times found; but those texts being examined, will carry no other sense than of perfumers and makers of sweet Ointments, trades to this day familiar in the Luxurious Eastern parts of the World. Secondly [Page 7] Whether amongst the Greeks [...] doth not pri­miraly signifie Poyson, and secondarily, Spices, dy­ing things, &c. and whether the word simply used was not taken in an ill sense, and consequently, whe­ther Pharmacopaeus doth not properly signifie a Ma­ker of Poysons. Thirdly, In what good company, and for what good acts they are recorded in Authors, because in Horace I find them ranked with the basest of men, Ambubeiarum Collegia Pharmacopolae. I find also in Cicero, pro A. Cluentio, mention made of a Pharmacopola Circumforaneus, who in one night poy­soned a Citizens Wife of Rome, and ran away, but he was no Roman. But whereas you say that you will prove that there were in these elder times such Apo­thecaries as now there are (I do not mean Incorpo­rated, which by your promise you are obliged to do:) You will do somewhat, though little to the purpose, as I have said, if you can prove, that they made and sold Medicines in Shops before the time of Avicen, and were not perfectly Servants, and subordi­nate to Physicians.

The second thing proposed was, that the Apotheca­ries have a hand in all things written against the R. S. and in this Poscript: As to the former, I am inform­ed by one that is of the Apothecaries Club, that all the Papers against the R. S. were sent by Mr. Stubbe to this Club to have them Printed and disperst abroad, and that they sent him intelligence: Besides his bitter expressi­ons against the R. S. in the Poscript; most whereof is a Letter written to some of that company; where he saith, I advised them to reflect on our common Ene­mies the R. S. and see if they were not the principal In­cendiaries, and that I lookt upon it as a design of theirs [Page 8] to aggrandize themselves upon the ruine of the College, (a thing they have alwayes endeavoured) and the A­pothecaries. And p. 22. The Writings of the Virtuosi have been the principal cause of all those Controversies, and which if they be not refuted, 'tis in vain to attack Medela Medicina, Manwaring, &c. I have been in­formed also by several other persons of Credit, and worth, beyond any of this Junto, that F. B. an A­pothecary, and active against the R. S. and who long since vapoured he would answer my Book, shewed them H S. Manuscripts against the R. S. and he, with his Brethren the Apothecaries, derided the R. S. talked over what Mr. Stubbe hath since publish­ed; and much more, in a ridiculous manner, to the great dishonour of the Society, in their Clubs and Coffee Houses, places where men talk any thing, and belye, and bespatter whom they please, and surprise with falsities, and ridicule the ignorant and unwary. Now, whether those Apothecaries were not the learn­ed Persons he mentions in his Preface to the Legend, he sent to, to experiment their judgment, that his se­veral parcels and fragments were joyned together with some alterations and new connexions, without any re­view of his at London; in fine, had not some publick spirited Gentlemen there undertook to transtate the Ita­lian pieces, and to see the work transcribed, and the insertions made, and the connexion in some measure supplyed, I could never had leasure to finish my intend­ments; to which I add from the same Persons, that several passages in H. S. Papers were blotted out, some added, other where interlinings, and altera­tions made. I say upon this passage, that 'tis very [Page 9] evident that this Club of Apothecaries, convey false Intelligence to H. S. and have correspondence with him; and further, that they misinformed him of my entituling H. S. to be Author of Lex Talionis, and were the cause of publishing this present Postcript at this unreasonable time: Since he saith in the fore­cited place, The passages now Printed out of Campa­nella were to follow his Vindication of Aristotle, &c. (which hath not yet been made publick) and the breach that Piece hath made, in some other Papers, as he affirms in this Postcript. By which it appears the A­pothecaries were the Authors or Adjutors in this scandalous Pamphlet. Add hereunto the many fal­sities alledged in these Papers, agreeable to what I often accuse them elsewhere. And lastly, consider­ing what power these Apothecaries, my implacable Adversaries, have over his Papers, and what there­of they have used I leave to indifferent Readers, whether the Apothecaries were the Contrivers, or Makers of this Libel against me; and if so, then the credit of it will of it self fall to the ground, but if it came purely from H. S. 'twill find little repute from any learned, pious, or sober Person. By all which it appears, that the said Company is in perfect opposition to the R. S. As for my self, I think no ra­tional man will deny, that the false news concerning my entituling Mr. Stubbe to Lex Talionis did give oc­casion to this Postcript, and did proceed from an Apo­thecary, for who else could be so malicious as to in­form him of so great an untruth without sending him the Book? And how honestly Mr. Stubbes deals, in saying, he never saw that Book, since his Postcript [Page 10] wad dated from Ragley, June the 14th. several weeks after the publication of my Book, in which time he might have been easily informed of the falsity of his information in this particular.

The next thing is, the unfair wayes they have in publishing their Papers against me: The Author of Lex Talionis was proved in my Answer to it to be a Libel without name of Author, Printer, or Licenser. This great Goliah of the Apothecaries, hath so Printed his, that I can neither find Printer, Licencer, nor prove H. S. to be the Author of it, though his Name be af­fixed to it; nor will the prime disperser of it, nor some of his correspondents acknowledge him to be so.

And thus having dealt with the Author as with Lex Talionis, in first rehearsing his untruths, and then briefly refuting him; so having done with Mr. Stubbe as to the first part, I shall come to what is remaining in the Postscript, and I shall speak next to two heads, the one wherein we agree, the other wherein we seem to differ. I agree with him in this clause writ to the Apothecaries, in the following words, his own, That I could never invent or meet with any arguments that could induce me to allow of practicing Apotheca­ries, and that I understood so well the extent, and dif­ficulty of my Profession, that however they might in some cases prosper; and page 21. But I protested against any encouragement for Apothecaries to practice.

And in this also we are of the same mind, that there were many defaults needing regulation in them; moreover, that they (the Apothecaries) would not delude themselves, that they could prosecute their Trades [Page 11] long; if that famed Body of men (the College of Physi­cians) did resolve against them, with whose determina­tions, I did not doubt, but all intelligent Practicioners in the Countrey, and Counties, would comply: And els­where he professeth, He will write against the Divines, Mountebanks, Emperics, and Apothecaries, and such idle Experimentators that practice Physic. As to the practice of Apothecaries, the whole drift, and all the arguments in my Book, as also those other that have writ against them aime at that mark only, but Mr. Stubbe saith farther, He cannot invent, nor meet with any arguments for it, and doubtless would have written more bitterly then us all, if he had rightly considered the interest of the Profession: Besides, I wish that the Apothecaries might thrive and prosper as long as they keep themselves within the Laws of reason, and of the Land, which are directly against their practice; I assert also that the College have re­solved against them, in Voting it honourable for their Members to make their Medicines. I say with him, and prove that there are many faults in them needing regulation, which defaults I have reduced to several heads, and enumerated them, and I think Mr. Stubbe will not countenance them in destroying and disho­nouring that famed Body of Men, the Corporation of Physicians, which I have fully proved they have al­wayes endeavoured to do by Overt Acts, as also the intolerable affronts, tricks, and devices they use a­gainst them in their practice. I have acted also for many years together for what he hopes for in page 21. That Physicians would consider their common interests, in opposition to the Thompsons and Odowds, &c. and [Page 12] act with that moderation which became wise men, and who were tender of continuing the renown of their Fa­culty, which would suddenly else devolve into the hands of Emperics, and demean themselves with that mode­ration which might end in an accord with the Apothe­caries. How I have acted in this Your hope, I shall briefly relate, and how I have prosecuted for many years together by the College Order: All the Trigs, Barkers, Odowds, &c. and forced many Mountebanks from this City, and have published in Print, by their Order and for their Use, all that relates to their Pri­vileges, and whatsoever hath been disputed in Law concerning their Rights, since their first foundation; so that things are now so well setled, that Emperics may be prosecuted without miscarriages. I have up­on all occasions awaited the College Councel, and spent much time with them upon their Charters and Law affairs; I have also spent many hours with the best of the Apothecaries, to compose all differences betwixt them and us, I have answered all their Ob­jections, consulted and endeavoured to secure them from their petty fears, and all pretended inconvenien­cies which might arise from our Charter to their Com­pany; told them, The College would grant them what­soever they could in reason desire, if they would confine themselves to their Trades, and not usurp on our Facul­ty; and I think none of them but will say how ci­villy I have entertained them at my House, and with what moderation I have endeavoured to make an ac­cord between them and us, but what prevarications, inconstant resolutions they used with me in this affair, I hope I shall have no occasion farther to declare, [Page 13] and that my Book tended to the continuing the renown of my Faculty, I frequently say, and I think no ra­tional man can doubt thereof. Since therefore I have really and publickly acted what Mr. Stubbe owns (as is before recited) I wonder with what face he can say, He hath answered all in my Book, or this which followeth, As for Dr. Goddard who hath writ more warily and with greater prudence, I onely dissen­ted from him in the Antiquity of Apothecaries, and trea­ted him as a Physician, whom I pittyed for being mixt with so illiterate a company, which words imply Dr. Merret writ warily and prudently, for sure every comparative must have its positive, besides the same reasons and almost all the same arguments are urged by us both against the Practicing Apothecaries, and we concurr also in most of our arguments, for the necessi­ty and usefulness of Physicians making their own Medi­cines; onely my Learned Collegue recites Hypothe­tically, the abuses of Apothecaries, which every ra­tional man may easily make affirmative, and that this is his wary way of writing. Besides all the arguments and designs of us both, are to limit the Apothecaries in their Practice. Lastly, we agree in this, That it was the interest of Physicians to emply Apothecaries as a di­stinct Profession, and that it was the prudence of States that it should be so; all this I fully assent to, and say in my View, that it would save the Physician a great deal of money, time, and charges, which those that make their own Medicines are necessarily put unto, supposing still the Apothecaries kept themselves within their bounds, as to Physicians, and made their Medicines honestly, and dealt justly in their Trade, and I can­not [Page 14] think but all Physicians will be of the same mind with me, if the Apothecaries fail in either or both, or act according to what I have said in my View, so that if Mr. Stubbe makes this an universal propo­sition, he must prove it lawful (which he denied before) That the Apothecary may practice Physic, and cheat the Customer; which certainly no State will allow.

And so much for what we agree in. We seem, and perhaps but seem to differ onely in this which he affirms, p. 19. ‘That the reasons to be alleged a­gainst the Physicians preparing their own Medica­ments, were such as admitted of no Answer nor Evasion among understanding men: and page 20. Upon this account I did largely handle that Que­stion, Whether Physicians ought to make their own Medicines, which I resolved in the Negative, and urged all those arguments (with several illustra­tions) which have hitherto perswaded with pru­dent Governours and Physicians to establish the received Usage. And in his Preface to the Reader, I shew with what prudence both Physicians, and the civil Magistrates concurred to their Institution, and I have largely entreated on that Question, which the Virtuosi, in order to the ruine of the Fa­culty of Physician, and of the Trade of Apothe­caries, to the great alteration of the practice of Physic, and aggrandizing of themselves, have star­ted, and with much confidence and more igno­rance handled.’ Which great brags and vapours of his, and his performances herein, will amount to just nothing if the Question be stated as we put it, [Page 15] and it ought to be, for we say and prove that Physici­ans were established in all Nations before the Apothe­caries, and that Physicians did in all places first make their own Medicines by their own Servants; and that in process of time by the Physicians connivance, mul­titude of business, and to save themselves both trouble and charges, did permit and perhaps assist them (as hath been proved in England they did) to procure them liberty of the States, to make and compound Me­dicines and that the Apothecaries are every where sub­ordinate to the Physicians, and that the Physicians have been by no state restrained from making their own Me­dicines, and have inspection and correction over them; we farther prove that as affairs now stand betwixt the Physicians and Apothecaries in England, that they ought to make their own Medicines if they intend to support their own Faculty and the honor of it, and to wipe of all those false aspersions unjustly cast upon them by the Apothecaries of London: and that this is the only way to advance their skill in their own pro­fession and in all Natural knowledg, as also the avoid­ing the unsufferable charges imposed upon our Pati­ents by the high Bills of the Apothecaries, and the uncer­tainties of our successes by reason of their detracting, sub­stituting, putting in false, decayed and unwholesome in­gredients into our receipts, to the great discredit of our Faculty, and the unavoidable danger to the lives and healths of the Sick. I say this is the true state of the present question, and therefore all Mr. Stubbe's pro­mised answer and triumph before his reasons alleged, will be as impertinent to the present business, as his pro­mised discourse concerning the Antiquitie of Apothe­caries: [Page 16] for the question is not as he proposeth it, what arguments have swayed prudent Governours and Phy­sicians to establish the received usage at such times, I say when Apothecaries were bounded by the Laws and their own civility and interest, and where the Apothecaries were limited to a certain number from u­surping our faculty: but whether as things now stand in England, we ought not (I think Mr. Stubbe will not say de Jure we ought not) in prudence, and for the publick good to make our own Medicines, for if he doth, I am sure there are few of his mind, and the un­dertaking of many in this City, and very many more in the Countrey, and many gratulatory Letters to me will, clearly evince the contrary.

In the next place I will consider his advice given to the Apothecaries in his Letter to them, in these words; I did therefore earnestly recommend unto their conside­rations an Ʋnion: Which recommendation whether the Apothecaries have followed or no by tendering the Committee of the College some propositions, and whether the project he saith is not difficult, and which he would not intimate that the College would joyn effectually therein, I say whether they were the effect of this Let­ter let every man judge, and whether inferiors ever offered their superiors propositions with such boldness, and incivility; for having disputed amongst them­selves about an hour, whether they should deliver their proportions before the College delivered theirs to them, or whether both should deliver them inter­changeably (such punctilios have Princes with Princes, Ambassadors with Ambassadors, viz. equals with e­quals) at last they did deliver theirs first, without [Page 17] either Title, or Date, rudely written, and interlined. Their proposals or humble desires were as they Phraise it. First that the Physitians would not prepare, or compound Medicines as Apothecaries, to their preju­dice, and secondly that they would not deprive them of their friends and acquaintance, by pretence of any pri­vate Arcanum, or otherwise. And then they humbly offer two things; First, that the Physicians would not only joyn together with them in a frequent search of all that keep Apothecaries shops, and Secondly, in the pro­curing of an Act of Parliament for the regulating of Physic, whereby to suppress all Empirics and illegal practi­cers, and makers of Physic, as common enemies to both. Now let the considerate Reader judge by reflexion on what I have collected from Mr. Stubbs, whether these are not the result of his project, Secondly how their humbly desire, and humbly offer suits with their dis­pute about the manner of their delivery, and whether their implying of Physicians abilities to prepare and compound Medicine, Crosseth not what they every where object against us, and for which they have tra­duced us in Parliaments. And again whether they imply not by their frequent search of Apothecaries Shops, the increasing frauds of Apothecaries, because they desire that this search may be frequent, having been formerly but once a year, and of late years none at all, and withall the abilities of Physicians for this search, quite contrary to (their privately cryed up to unwary people, though disowned by them to all understanding persons) Lex Talionis, who saith in express terms, p. 4. the Law might as well have set two Shoemakers as Censors, to be judges of the Apothe­caries [Page 18] Medicines, those Censors for the most part not understanding the Tithe of the Medicines, and druggs in the Apothecaries shops, and p. 8. most of the Doctors not understanding the tithe of what is commonly u­sed.

Now to pass by their tautologie of Private Arca­num as much as to say red scarlet, or Apothecarie Phar­macopoeus; I will briefly consider the absurdity of the matter it self. They desire that Physicians will not pre­pare and compound Medicines as Apothecaries to their prejudice; to which I say, we never intended to make them as Apothecaries, which I have shewed in my View to be done slovenly Fulsomely of unsound and unwhole­some simples: But I suppose their meaning is, we should not make them for our own Patients, and compound them, this being to their prejudice, though it be ne­ver so much for our patients advantage, for without this preparing and compounding, I see not how our Art can make any Farther progress. For I have shewed in my view, that the want hereof hath been the cause our Art hath been at a stand, and gained no pro­gress for some hundreds of years; besides by this desire they would have the College renounce their former vote, that it was honourable for their members so to do, and also to divest our selves of one of the prin­cipal parts of our faculty mainly relating to the im­provement of our Art, and immediately concerning the lives and healths of our Patients. Again if they mean the College should tye their members from doing so, they desire that which neither Law, common sense, nor reason will allow and which they cannot do; as well may the Chirurgeons desire that Physitians would [Page 19] not dissect bodies themselves, to their prejudice and so deprive themselves of two main branches of their profession Anatomy and Pharmacy. Besides this word (to their prejudice) is of so large extent that it may be stretcht out to deny a Physician power to make Me­dicines for himself, Family and Relations, then which there's nothing more absur'd.

A second desire is, that the Physitians will not de­prive them of their friends and acquaintance by the pre­tence of any private Arcanum, or otherwise. I am glad to see that my view hath wrought them out of one piece of nonsense, viz. the calling the sick their pati­ents; but yet observe how they Pride it above the rest of the Citizens of London, of much better rank than themselves, by disdaining to call them Custo­mers.

As to the depriving them of their customers, I have treated largely in my Postscript in answer to Lex Tali­onis, and farther say that if the pretence of a private Arcanum were the onely cause thereof, I should not wholy (all circumstances rightly put) allow of it. But for their otherwise closeing up this (as to our preju­dice did the former) I have elsewhere proved by ma­ny reasons this desire to be frivolous, and uncivil. For 'tis strange if a Physician finds an Apothecary to be faulty in honesty or skill or both, or to act quite contra­ry to the prescription of the Physician, or the Life and Health of the Patient, or that he hath not a good Medi­cine in his shop, or that he endeavours to disgrace the Physician and remove his Patient to a good Apothecaries Physician; that in these cases, and in many other such as these a Physician should not deprive them of their ac­quaintance. [Page 20] Next they humbly offer that we would joyn with them in a frequent search of the shops: this alone hath some pretence for the publick good, but in re­ality endeavors an advancing themselves into an e­quality with the College. For whereas in the Act of Parliament the power is granted to the Physicians alone to destroy bad Medicines, and onely to take with them the Master and Wardens of the Apothecaries Company; Bur here they humbly offer that Physicians and Apo­thecaries may be joyned together, and be hail fellows well met. But if they refer this only to a frequent search we are beholding to them for putting more trouble, charge, loss of time and business upon us; it being impossible for us to act by others, as they do by their Servants. Besides our Corporation never gained any thing by their searches, but troubles, and Suits of Law and the particular Censors revilings, for performing their duties according to their Oaths in destroying bad Medicines. But doubtless in a short time the Censors will more effectually perform the trust herein, and with more boldness and a grea­ter neglect of revilings, or other prejudices can arise to them from so doing. Nor is it to be expected that this search will be performed as it ought to be, till the Company of the Apothecaris shall bid open defiance to our College, as they have, and do by clear consequence, or till this search shall be made by such Censors as prepare their own Medi­cines.

As to our conjunction with them for the procuring an Act of Parliament for the regulating of Physic. I sup­pose the Apothecaries mean not to be sharers with us [Page 21] in this regulation, being a business beyond their Sphere and capacity, and only proper to our College, but if these words whereby to suppress all Empirics and illegal practicers and makers of Physic, &c. explain the former, then I say we need no Act of Parliament for this: Nor in our late addresses to this present Parlia­ment desired any such power, and their Word illegal implies as much, and therefore 'twere foolish to de­sire that we have already; Nay, as I have elsewhere proved, that practizing Apothecaries are illegal pra­cticers, by the express Letters of our Charter, and Em­pirics, having noe lawful calling thereunto, but sure­ly they mean not so; so that all this seems to be but a blind to that which follows, viz. makers of Physic; this is the Alpha and Omega of their desires, the Al­pha excludes Physicians onely, the Omega is Univer­sal, makers of Physic; which whether it extends to Surgeons who by the Apothecaries Charter are allow­ed to make their own Medicines, and by all Lawes have right thereunto: and whom his Majesty and the Merchants trust before the Apothecaries to furnish their Fleets and Ships, and also to Confectioners, Chymists, Distillers, to Ladies and Charitable persons, that make Medicines for the poor and their families, &c. I leave all those that are concerned to judge, and the Apothecaries to explain, all this being to their prejudice, however this I say, it concerns not Physitians at all who make Medicines, but who pra­ctice with them; neither have I heard of any Law in any Countrey forbidding persons to make Medicines, nor I think will it ever be forbid: the Lawes onely provide who shall direct them, or who shall dispense [Page 22] them in Shops. But how these makers of Medicines are prejudicial to both I understand not. I confess with their Hector H. S and their little Lex Talionis twill be mainly prejudicial to the Apothecaries, but 'till I understand by Physicians themselves how it will be prejudicial to them, I shall say no further here, having proved it in my view to be to their great advantage: and shall onely add that these Overtures were highly resented by the whole College at their meeting as in reason they ought to be.

Upon the whole I shall remark two things. First, that they endeavour to ingross and monopolise to themselves all the power of making Medicines, and thereby depriving Physicians of what is essential to their profession, and their very Birth-right, and to suffer one of their hands to be cut off in the acting part of their Faculty; and that in some things they in­deavour to gain a power equal to that of Physitians, but not a word to gain the only thing we want, an a­bility to punish delinquents for ill practice, which will light most heavily on them if duly executed. Se­condly, observe that there is nothing in their desire but what was prompted by their Patron H. S.

I shall now probably conjecture at the reason of Mr. Stubbs beginning this quarrel. I understand by several persons and also by some Letters of his written to a Noble person, that civil women about Warwick, will not advise with him, so that he must shortly leave that Town; add hereunto his restless nature and fre­quent shiftings from place to place, no where setled nor quiet may induce him to repair to London, in ex­pectation of some practice from the Apothecaries, and [Page 23] that he useth several insinuations to the College of Physicians, perhaps in hope to procure of them a Li­cence to practice there, which very wise men sug­gest he designs to do, the former is very probable, and that he might become a good Apothecaries Phy­sician here, and that when he comes to Town he may have use of their Wives especially Lex Talionis Urgente necessitate, and in the next Edition of his Book set H. S. after it instead of P. O. As for his design on the Col­lege I suppose 'twill never take, for he tacitely grants (by his supposition and not confronting it) that heats and indignities had passed from the College to the Apothecaries. Besides above 20 of their Society are members of the Royal Society also, all which H. S. calls Coxcombes, Illiterate, Impertinents, Comediants, Ignorants, Ridiculous, &c. And more particularly that the number of Physicians in the R. S. will not a­mount to three understanding persons, besides else­where he nameth but three persons of the R. S. of any worth, whereof the learned Dr. Wallis is one against whom when he was Library keeper he railed in most invective language; so that there he excludes all Physicians from learning or parts, and therefore 'twill be as ridiculous in him to address himself to them as he doth to make the R. S. to address themselves to the Physicians. And now I come to the bottom of the Plot, betwixt him and the Apothecaries against my self, as may appear by what hath been said before; and this clause proves in the 22 page. The passage of Campanella being taken out thence, hath occasioned that breach in it, which I have not now leasure to redress.

Now why he should maim that piece that he cannot [Page 24] redress, cannot appear to any fober man to have any other intendment, then to bring in his railing Post­script stuft with so many falsities, and slanders; and if this common traducer had had any Sobriety, Pru­dence, or Religion: (neither of which all I have con­verst with say he hath a grain of) he would not have premised such a Libel before his promised treatise.

I shall now rehearse what ignominy he throws upon me. I answer saith he all that Dr. Merrett had alleged, and shewed his intolerable ignorance in that Book, and if we might take an estimate of his parts from that writing, 'twas manifest he might better imploy his time in study­ing the method of Physic, then composing Medicaments, that after 30 years practice 'twas evident he understood not the rudiments of that Noble Science nor could state a case therein. As to your answer of my Book it ap­pears by what I have said a little before, that H. S. hath nothing to allege against Dr. Merrett; and for shewing his intolerable ignorance in that Book, I only say that I have discourst it over with knowing persons of all conditions, well skilled in all kinds of learning, the ablest in my own Faculty; nay with the Apothe­caries themselves, yet never had the least reflection of ignorance cast upon it, a considerable part whereof consists in matter of fact, known by all Physicians of this City of any eminence; and all objections made by the Apothecaries (as to matter of fact) clearly e­vinced in my Postscript of the second Edition, the rest of the Books being clear undenyable, deducti­ons will free me from ignorance in it. But how well H. S. infers, is apparent by many other places of this Postscript, p. 21. His words are these, the disasters [Page 25] of the late Dutchwars, the Plague, and Fire of London were less inconveniencies then the perpetuity of the R. S. that these Calamities admitted of some remedies here­after, but the evils they are likely to occasion us will ne­ver be corrected by any humane prudence, and I doubt­ed whether God would support us by his providence, when they had debauched the Nation from all piety and honesty, as well as civil wisdome, H. S. every where pretends piety though he be proved in print to have preferred a little gain before his Religion, and said to a person of honour, it was not half a crown diffe­rence in what Religion he bred his Children, and for his Morality how he hath debauched some younger persons, 'tis too long for me to recite. Besides his inference out of Campanella that the R. S. are bring­ing in Popery, is so absur'd that no fresh man of the University would own for fear of being rediculous. But to inferr such a conclusion out of my Book, which hath neither a case stated, nor a word of the Rudi­ments of Physic, plainly proves his extream malice and the exceeding weakness of his judgment. But H. S. goes on and if we might take an estimate of his parts from that writing. If H. S. had pleased, or doth read Books of real learning and that on several subjects, he might have taken notice that my labours have some esteem with the learned pens of this age, and would have made another estimate of my parts, and that the Do­ctors can compose medicaments better then the whole Companie of Apothecaries; his offer not accepted of by them doth clearly evince, and hath been thought by his contemporaries, and colleguesto have not only studied, but fully understood the method of Physic, [Page 26] and that above 30 years ago he understood the rudi­ments of that Noble Science, and could state a case therein, or else the Universities are to be blamed for admitting of him to his degrees, and hereby our College also is highly accused and slander'd for admit­ting one thus ignorant 20 years ago; much more to have chosen him for so many years to be one of their Censors, and to read a Public Anatomy Lecture a­mongst them 15 years since: in which he had some opportunity to shew his skill in both, and I may mo­destly say those Pathological Lectures found some applause, as both the College Register, and several importunities for the Printing of them make manifest, and perhaps the publication of them shall declare. Add hereunto that the immortal Dr. Harvey was to blame in nominating with some Eulogy such a pitiful Physician to be his Library keeper, who necessarily was to converse with learned forreiners and travailers in the Art of Physic. Lastly my conversation hath been, and frequent consultations with ablest of my profession. But I am too large on this subject, espe­cially finding two worthy Divines Dr. Sprat and Mr. Glanvil traduced in their own profession by this per­son (whose mouth nothing less then a Serjeant can stop.) His words of them are these, p. 22. Whose abilities in matters relating to their profession are so contemptible that 'twere folly, &c. But this detraction cannot much prejudice these Divines as being fixt in their employ­ment, but his abominable scandal cunningly driven on by the Apothecaries, may do me; and for which end only this Postscript was writ who Candestinely may use this slight to my disadvantage to tell ignorant people [Page 27] not verst in men nor books, or to such who are pro­pagators of false news, that Dr. Merrett hath been prov'd in Print, and that by a very learned writer, not to understand the very rudiments of Phy­sic, and to add more what their malice can invent, and doubtless this was the sole reason of contriving and unseasonably publishing this Libel, as all circum­stances may evidence to understanding men.

Aug. 3. Since this Pamphlet was in the Press, I Received a note inclosed in a Letter from Mr. John Starkey a Book-seller near Temple-Barr, the propaga­tor of H. S' s. Postscript, who denyed not to me nor my Servant, that it came from the said H. S. The words sent me by said Mr. Starkey were these. When you see him next you may tell him. That if he please know the ground of the supposition, 'tis the case of the Apo­thecary, giving a strong purge before the fit of a Quar­tan, mentioned in his Book. He hath neither given us an account of the habit of the patients body, the time of the year, the Type and time of the quartan, whether be­ginning or inveterate with or without signs of connextion, (I suppose it should be concoction) nor of the Purge it self, nor how long ministred before the fit, all which are requisite to the true state of a case, as every Physician knows, and yet would have us condemn the Apothecary, for doing that which (whatever the event may have been) for ought I can see, no understanding Physician can con­demn, as I shall demonstrate out of a multitude of emi­nent Physicians; so that if we may judge by that case no man can make any other collection. Before I animad­vert on this passage, I shall recite it as 'tis in my [Page 28] view, p. 45 of the first, and p. 62 of the second Edi­tion; 'tis in these words. As for their skill in practice we daily see their gross errours and omissions, (which I now add some Physicians and in Print too call mur­ders) being cal'd where they have given Medicines. I shall instance onely in one that hapned at the writing hereof, viz. that an Apothecary gave strong purg­ing Pils on the fit day of a gentle quartan Ague, which turned it into a violent Fever, to the great hazard of the Patients life. Observe first, how fairly H. S. cites me, I say strong purging pills, H. S. a strong purge; just as Lex Talionis, I say on the fit day of a gentle quartan Ague, H. S. before the fit of a quartan. For this his misreciting of my words may much vary them and alter much my sense.

Secondly, take notice of his intolerable ignorance (to use his own words) in saying the type of a quartan. For type is joyned with a Fever in general, distin­guisheth the species of Fevers into Quotidian, Tertian, Quartan. And when a Physician asketh what type a Fever hath, the Answer a Quotidian, double Ter­tian, &c. Because type is as Galen, &c. [...] (i. e.) the order of intention and remission. So that I might hence conclude and deservedly too, that H. S. understands not the Terms, and consequently not the very Rudiments of that noble Science he seems so much concerned for.

Thirdly, observe his Logic. He saith I have neither given an account of the habit of the Patient, &c. and thence concludes that Dr. Merret understands not the Rudiments of Physic, nor can state a case therein, H. S' s Logic right, and such as is used at Billings-gate. I [Page 29] do not state this case in my Book, and therefore he in­fers can state none at all, excellent reasoning. Any man may better Collect from Mr. Stubbes his plus ultra p. 148. that he caused himself to bleed october 20 being not well at Warwick, by reason of a violent defluxion into the glandules of the throat, that he knows not how to put a case in Physic, because he doth not set it down with all the circumstances belonging to the disease it self. And ib. 138. Amongst other preparatives to the Bath I caused my self to be let blood for my health. But to conclude, H. S. understands cannot put a case in Physic, because he doth not fully state the two pre­sent cases I judge to be very hard, and less to the pur­pose to demonstrate out of a multitude of Eminent Physicians the badness of his practice in both cases, which is easy enough to do in his way. Certainly no man but would think this inference to be more concluding that H. S. is a subverter of the Monarchy of England, and of the repute of the Clergy, because he saith in his Preface to the History of the R. S. there were times wherein he thought it our interest to do both. But then suppo­sing (but not granting) the case had been stated (as 'twas not by his own confession) and Stated too amiss; Certainly from one particular to reason universally to a whole Science is most bruitish. I think H. S. would judge so if a man should conclude by his rendition of good nature in English by un homme de bonne nature, & l'homme d'un box naturel, in French, which signi­fies no more then a man of good natural parts, or of his [...] in Greek or [...]. I say if a man should conclude by H. S. mistake in this said case that he understands neither French nor Greek and is [Page 30] no Critic, I should confess such a concluder to be a foolish and malitious adversary to him. And who would not laugh at a person that should con­clude a Smith or other Tradesman to be wholy igno­rant in his whole Trade and every part thereof, be­cause he mistakes in putting one case in his Art. But I trifle as well as he.

Fourthly, His inference seems by himself to be far fetched, and unknown to me (as indeed it was) or else why should he say to his correspondent? if he (mean­ing my self.) please to know the ground of the supposition, 'its the case, &c.

Fifthly, I answer the nature of my Book required not the putting down the case and all the circumstan­ces thereunto belonging. And 'twould have been judged absur'd in a treatise of that nature to have put a case of practice understood only by Physicians. If the Apothecary complain'd of, had found himself aggreived, and had urged it, then indeed to have put the case fully might have been expected, but not otherwise. But if H. S. will arraign every Physician, as he doth me, for accusing Apothecaries (who are Empi­rics) of ill practice, without putting the case home, few Physicians would avoid this censure of intollerable ignorance. Nay if Mr. Stubbes or any other had de­sired to have had the case put, I should not have re­fused to have done it.

Sixthly, whereas H. S. requires an account of many things, I say, when I put that case to a Physician I shall add several material things (whereof he seems ignorant) to put it full, and as it ought to be.

[Page 31] Seventhly, I say Physicians daily do, and lawfully may speak in general, that such a man was kil'd by such an Apothecary, by not letting him blood, gi­ving an Opiat, Vomit, or Purge in such a disease, without relating all the circumstances of it; and though some ignorant people may judge him mali­tious for saying so: yet neither Physician nor these ignorants will traduce him for ignorance in that case, much less in his whole Art.

Eighthly, H. S. concludes Dr. Merrett would have us condemn the Apothecary for doing that which (what­ever the want were) for ought I can see, no under­standing Physician can condemn, as I shall demonstrate out of a multitude of Physicians.

To this I reply that all civil men of the faculty would have thought a Fellow of the College of Physicians affirmation had been sufficient enough against a practising Apothecary, without putting the case at all; and examples enough may be shown Physicians so doing. And though I rest not wholy on the event with the vulgar, which I have sufficiently confuted elsewhere, yet to make a judgment on ill success from bad practice is rational. H. S. proceeds, for ought I can see (modestly said.) Why he con­fesseth he knows nothing of the Case, neither the habit of the Patient, &c. and therefore he is to de­monstrate out of a multitude of Eminent Physicians, that 'tis lawful to give strong purging Pills on the fit day of a gentle quartan, let the circumstances and symptoms of the disease, and the condition of the Patient be what they will, or else H. S. opposeth not at all what the view affirmeth; and he here [Page 32] puts himself on as wild a task as Lex Talionis, who would prove out of Hippocr. that the old Medicines were better then mine. The Reader may plainly fee, that H. S. undertakes to confute a Story he knows nothing of, and to demonstrate out of Authors, he knows not what himself: And so let H. S. pass with his third impertinence not yet Printed, for I am weary with this pitiful stuff.

H. S. in the said note appeals to some of our Col­lege, and permits me to chose whom I please to be as judges in the case. Bravely said, were H. S. in London he would soon find the Censors of the College, and the whole body severe judges against him, and that this young Physician at Warwic were impudent to appeal to them in so notorious a scandal, besides the ac­cused, not the accuser appeals; and too be sure their sentence would be against him, not only for so bruitish­ly traducing one of their members, (their statute of civil conversation where of H. S. hath none requiring the contrary to what he acts) but also for main­taining so their fellows, and his promised Support of them would make them (as it doth) very good sport.

H. S. concludes his letter to the Apothecaries thus, p. 22. This was the subject of that Book, which I doubt not but will be approved by all judicious persons; and the College will see I can write against Dr. Merret, without derogating from them; or rather that my in­tendments were to SUPPORT them and not disserve the APOTHECARIES in the least. I intend to make it public in Michaelmass term.

[Page 33]I shall make a short commentary on this Epiphone­ma of H. S. setting out his confidence of judicious per­sons approving this Book, which sober men would have left to the Censure, and opinion of the Readers; and not have so long before hand triumphed and sung the praises on his own undertakings. Of which I shall say in general what the most learned, and indifferent persons judge of his writings, that they are wholy void of judgment, reason and Logic, and consist only of railings, impertinent readings, and contain little but Pedantic learning, Antiquity and Grammar, of little use to such as write of things. But to the particulars. This was the subject of that Book. And was this all? The Title page mentions a Postscript concerning the quarrel depending be­twixt H. S. and Dr. Merret, and yet the Postscript its self hath the least part of this quarrel. The greater part whereof directly opposeth the R. S. onely, much of it relates to the College and Apothecaries, something to Dr. Goddard and not much to my self besides the falsity in the beginning, so that the whole Postscript seems to be written onely to defame me: so well doth the Title and Postscript answer one a­nother. Besides this, you will doubtless run an im­pertinent Risco for the old Medicines, and against the new discoveries in your Pedantic way, and no man knowes whether H. S. goes on. I doubt not this Book will be approved by all judicious persons. Sure­ly scarcely by any, not by the learned persons the Apothecaries you sent your Papers to, to experiment them, &c. For you restrain them from practise, tell them many things needed regulation in them, that [Page 34] the College resolving against them would destroy their trade; that you in your intendments were to Sup­port the College; you rank them in the lowest place of Emperics and Quacksalvers. Certainly none of these things will the Apothecaries approve, nor Physicians neither; you oppose their vote, that 'tis honourable for their members to make their own Medicines: you suppose that indignities and heats had passed from the College toward the Apothecaries, you recom­mend to the Apothecaries an union with the Col­lege, and as they apply it to make them our Peers, you say of 20 of their Society members also of the R. S., that they are Coxcombs, Impertinents, &c. as be­fore. You here proudly take upon you to be their support as if they were not able, or willing to sup­port themselves, but an extraneous person ignorant of their affairs, so infamous and notorious must do it for them, you would deprive all Physicians of their Essential privilege, nay which is common for all per­sons to do, viz. making their own Medicaments, you call some of the Fellows of the College princi­pal incendaries. And therefore you may very well doubt whether Physicians really so, and who are the most proper judges of this matter will approve your Book at all, I am sure none I have conversed with, will in the least, you profess your self an implacable adversary to the R. S. threaten each Virtuosi there, and surely not one member of that illustrious body will approve your Book.

As for Divines you have written against them in general and endeavoured to distroy their very order, and particularly against the learned Dr. Wallis, Dr. [Page 35] Sprat, and Mr. Glanvil, and say of the two latter, 'twere folly to expect much from them where they profess; and if they displease you, you will say of all of them as you do of the two latter, that their abilities in matters relating to their profession are contemp­tible.

As for Gentlemen of the long Robe, and all persons Loyal to the King, few of them either read or value your writings, and several of these are members of the R. S. also. And on good grounds think you would act over again your former disloyalties.

And if none of the three professions will approve of your Book, then certainly neither will either of the Universities, as neither do they disapprove of Dr. Merretts view, I am sure many forreigners Dutch and French besides judicious persons of all orders have given the Author thanks for it; and more espe­cially such as have found double advantage by it, as well to their healths as purses.

Besides 'tis strange this Physician at Warwic should conceive so well of his Book, founded wholy either on falsities or impertinencies, as hath been proved, and also on defamations so gross, and deductions so absurd and ridiculous as hath been said.

H. S. proceeds. And the College will see that I can write against Dr. Merrett, without derogating from them; or rather that my intendments were to SƲP­PORT them, and not disserve the Apothecaries in the least.

Here you sind H. S. performing some wonders, first he can write against Dr. Merrett, and not dero­gate from the College, if he means he can rail at, [Page 36] and misrepresent Dr. Merrett, and not in express terms the College, perhaps H. S. can out of his rich maga­zine of both perform his promise. But doubtless the College cannot conceive but that the writing against one or more of their members will derogate from them, especially acting but their duties according to their faith given, and asserting their Honours, Rights, Privileges, Statutes, and Votes, and speaking their own private Language and Discourses. And surely no man can judge otherwise then that Dr. Merrett in his Book intended the good and wellfare of the College, and hath industriously prosecuted that end before his own profit, and undergone all tasks though never so ungratefull in order thereunto. How then H. S. can write against Dr. Merrett and not dero­gate from the College, I think none of them can see. And farther H. S. will be hard put to it, to bring one instance to prove any Corporation ever thought themselves not derogated from, when one of their members, hath been traduced for asserting their rights. And H. S. if displeased, will then call them the College of insensaty for so doing, as he doth the R. S. and consequently a consequently a considerable number of them allready.

But here he not only professeth he will not dero­gate from them, (a great kindness in him towards learned men, though in many places he hath dimini­shed and decried many of them) but rather (saith he) that my intendments were to support them (the College) and not disserve the Apothecaries in the least. Behold here the intendments of this man of might, doing wonders if not impossibilities. He intends to [Page 37] do more then the established Lawes and Charters, or­ders of the Council board, proclamations of the King; judgments of Courts, the understanding labour industry and expences of the College, and all their interest ever could effect. Behold here this Hoghen Moghen PATRON and SUPPORT of the College, nay which is more for all this hee will not disserve the Apothecaries in the least. He can blow in one breath hot and cold, he can support the Col­lege, and reserve to them alone the practice of Phy­sic (which is all the support they crave) and yet not disserve the Apothecaries in the least, whose onely aim and indeavour is, and hath been to supplant and depreciate the Physicians; whereby to gain all the practice into their own hands, and without which (they say) they cannot gain a lively-hood.

So that if H. S. take from them the practice of Physic (which he twice doth in this Postscript) he doth them the greatest disservice imaginable; but if he means to support the College, he must take out of their hands the practical part of our faculty, and so consequently (as the Apothecaries confess them­selves) undo them, and certainly this is not to disserve them in the least, but in the whole. So that (as matters now stand) 'tis impossible to support the one, but he must disserve the other. And if his project (he saith is not difficult) can secure the Physicians in their practice from the usurpation of the Apothecaries, and not do the latter disservice (the sole intendment and end of our Books) we shall confess him the only seeing person, and that he seeth more at a distance then we do upon the place, and shall for working [Page 38] this admirable and incredible wonder both admire and thank him.

Lastly, the support of Physicians implies the secu­ring them from the frauds and abuses committed in remedies, and the chargeableness of their Bills, the removing whereof (a thing impossible) must needs be disservice at least to the Apothecaries, and he is bound to make good and justifie, or deny all those com­plaints mentioned in my view, or else he doth disserve them. But perhaps he means by not disserve them, he will do them no harm in the least, though posi­tively he will not serve them in the least, and then they are but a little beholding to him, unless he will say that two negatives not and dis make an affir­mative and so reserve to himself by this ambiguous ex­pression a power of doing them no prejudice, or do­ing them real service if occasion, and his advantage prompt him to it.

Now here I shall make a very short Apology for speaking and treating so harshly and personally (con­trary to my genius and reply to LexTalionis) the Author of this Postscript; had he not malitiously, conspiring­ly, and upon no provocation given, nor upon any grounds raised such a defamation upon me in my own profession, I should not have made the least reflection upon him.

Secondly, because many ignorant and vain persons understand not, or at least take little or no notice of what is substantial; 'twas but just to take off by this way the scandal designedly cast upon me, and to invalidate his conclusion, as Lawyers do the testimo­nies of their adversaries by a lawfull recrimination. [Page 39] Neither have I said more then was necessary for my own defence. The rest, and what I have said will shortly be made publick concerning his life, and more fully, and if I am not misinformed, will render him the most notoriously ill natured, as well as ill man­nered man in this Nation; especially in one that pre­tends to learning, and who hath had University edu­cation. He hath his hand against every man, and therefore cannot in reason but expect that every mans hand will be against him. And did I not confine my self to his Postscript, I could shew multitude of absurdities, impertinences, falsities, weak inferences wanton expressions, and mistakes of his in some other writings of his, I have read since the publication of his Campanella, and this Postscript. All which I doubt not but Mr. Glanvil will effectually and shortly perform. And now I leave him to make publick what he pleaseth at Michaelmas Term, when he is like to have other Irons in the fire. Besides he may now perceive by a third Author, a worthy member of our College and of the R. S. also, who this day published some papers writ in the year 1664. at the request of several Fellows of the College of Physicians, that many of us now have, and have had the same thoughts touching the practice of Physic in England, and invasi­on of our Art by Apothecaries; and that they are more dangerous Enemies to our practice then all the others you mention Divines, Quacks, and Mountebanks, &c. I have seen several other treatises on the same subject, which in time may come abroad too, writ long since by those which are not members of the R. S. but of our College onely; so that he will have work enough to de­rogate [Page 40] from the College, and that this writing against me, is written at least against many of the College, and those not the meanest of that Corporation, or famed body of men.

Whereas H S. doth in his last page so confound things and persons, that I cannot tell to whom some passages relate: Yet 'tis manifest what ever he faith throughout, hath reference to the Virtuosi; and that therefore I may give full answer to all his Postscript: I shall take notice of two things, in the one he saith their Medicines are delusory, and their new discoveries we very well knew before. But this is said most insensi­bly and blindly, (in his own Language) for how can any man know or judge of those Medicines made pri­vately by a single person, that they are delusory or were known before. When 'tis scarcely possible any man can know any of the ingredients themselves, much less of the preparing and compounding them. And how can H. S. tell who have or have not been con­versant with the practice of the most eminent Physi­cians, or read their Books, when they intend not to tell him what their new discoveries are?

As to the second where he affirms, Ordinary prudence would have foreseen the issue of those kinds of writings. I speak thus in my view, knowing that hereby a whole Company of men, (who by their number, noice, and tricks) may be able to decry and Physician, will be­come my implacable adversaries, &c. but not fearing the utmost their malice can invent or proclaim, &c. This I expresly foresaw, that the Apothecaries were not able to answer the Book, unless by the railing pen of a Lex Talionis, which H. S. himself dislikes, and [Page 41] 'twas easy also for me to see that the Apothecaries would procure some mercinary pen to act their part of falsities and railings, and that you were the onely person likely to perform this task for them, all this I say I foresaw and foretold, and much more con­cerning these writings; as well as I did foretel in print the Fall of your Patron, under the name of Hen. Vanus, when he was in the prime of his prosperity, a considerable time before the Kings return. You con­clude with a performance too great for the Merretts and the Sydenhams, and never say, what this performance is? what you mean by the Sydenhams I know not, but this I may modestly say, that the Merretts can per­form as much as the H S' ss. or the Talion asses.

Observe Reader I will not any more be diverted by the Pens of either of them, or their accomplices; all whose notorious and illiterate malice, their forge­ries and falsities or impertinent answers: I shall here after pass over without any other reply, then that of a scorn­ful silence, as H. S. phraiseth it; permitting him or them to ramble up and down in their impertinencies, and pretended answers, as he doth to the Plus Ʋltra, and the History of the R. S. cavelling onely at some few passages in a large Book; and sometimes setting up himfelf a man of clouts, and so fighting with it, and that is all you are to expect of him at Michaelmas Term against Dr. Goddard and my self. One thing I had almost forgot to mention, wherein perhaps he might as­sault my Book, not spoken of in his Postscript; but in his plus ultra, viz. his commendation of the anti­ent Medicines, for this time let the Learned Zwelfer often commended by himself answer for me, and when [Page 42] he hath answered him (which is impossible to be done) I shall in few sheets of paper make some Additions to what Zwelfer hath said on that Argument; and for the future shall think it no disiepute to be detracted from by this Physician at Warwic, who hath endeavoured to diminish my most honoured friends, the ever re­nowned Dr. Harvey, Mr. Boyl, Dr. Willis, Dr. Lower, and the inquisitive sober and discreet persons Mr. Henshaw, Mr. Evelyn, &c. and many other Famous men of our Nation: And shall conclude with an ad­monition to the Apothecaries, that 'tis convenient for them to vindicate their reputation from the base titles of Wittals and Cuckolds cast upon their Company, and to vindicate the College also from the slanders of their Lex Talionis, and to give him just punishment and that they may have some ground for their search, I shall give them some directions to find him out; my information was by a person of Quality well ac­quainted with his hand writing, who saw his directi­ons for the Printing of it; and hath often heard him speak the same Language comprised in that Book: to­gether with the merry and feigned stories in it, if this be sufficient light for them to ground their discovery on, he is a Brother Apothecary, and shall be named unto them, if the Company desire it by their Master and Wardens.