I am apt to think, it was to supply such defects as these, that satire was first introduced into the world; whereby those whom neither religion, nor natural virtue, nor fear of punishment, were able to keep within the bounds of their duty, might be withheld by the shame of having their crimes exposed to open view in the strongest colours, and themselves rendered odious to mankind.  Perhaps all this may be little regarded by such hardened and abandoned natures as I have to deal with; but, next to taming or binding a savage animal, the best service you can do the neighbourhood, is to give them warning, either to arm themselves, or not come in its way.

Could I have hoped for any signs of remorse from the leaders of that faction, I should very gladly have changed my style, and forgot or passed by their million of enormities.  But they are every day more fond of discovering their impotent zeal and malice:  witness their conduct in the city about a fortnight ago,[11] which had no other end imaginable, beside that of perplexing our affairs, and endeavouring to make things desperate, that themselves may be thought necessary.  While they continue in this frantic mood, I shall not forbear to treat them as they deserve; that is to say, as the inveterate, irreconcilable enemies to our country and its constitution.

[Footnote 1:  No. 38 in the reprint. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 2:  “It is a shameful thing in a state which is governed by laws, that there should be any departure from them.” [T.S.]]

[Footnote 3:  This paper called forth a reply which was printed in two forms, one with the title:  “A Few Words upon the Examiner’s Scandalous Peace” (London, 1711), and the other, “Reflections upon the Examiner’s Scandalous Peace” (London:  A. Baldwin, 1711).  A careful comparison of these pamphlets shows that the text corresponds page for page.  The author commences:  “Though ‘The Examiner’ be certainly the most trifling, scurrilous, and malicious writer that ever appeared, yet, in spite of all his gross untruths and absurd notions, by assuming to himself an air of authority, and speaking in the person of one employed by the ministry, he sometimes gives a kind of weight to what he says, so as to make impressions of terror upon honest minds.”  Then, after quoting several of the Queen’s Speeches to Parliament, and the Addresses in reply, he observes:  “The ‘Examiner’ is resolved to continue so faithful to his principal quality of speaking untruths, that he has industriously taken care not to recite truly the very Address he makes it his business to rail at;” and he points out that it was not the “restitution of Spain,” but the restoration of the Spanish Monarchy to the House of Austria that was desired. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 3:  “How near to sin they can go without actually sinning.” [T.S.]]

[Footnote 4:  The Muscovite Ambassador (A.A.  Matveof) was arrested and taken out of his coach by violence.  A Bill was brought into the House of Commons “for preserving the Privileges of Ambassadors,” February 7th, 1708/9, and obtained the Royal Assent, April 21st, 1709 (7 Ann. c. 12).