to be believed in his own case against an English Protestant, who
is true to his government, I shall leave to the candid and
impartial reader.

The other objection is the unhappy occasion of this discourse,
and relates to an article in my predictions, which foretold the
death of Mr. Partridge, to happen on March 29, 1708. This he is
pleased to contradict absolutely in the almanack he has published
for the present year, and in that ungentlemanly manner (pardon
the expression) as I have above related. In that work he very
roundly asserts, That he is not only now alive, but was likewise
alive upon that very 29th of March, when I had foretold he should
die. This is the subject of the present controversy between us;
which I design to handle with all brevity, perspicuity, and
calmness: In this dispute, I am sensible the eyes not only of
England, but of all Europe, will be upon us; and the learned in
every country will, I doubt not, take part on that side, where
they find most appearance of reason and truth.

Without entering into criticisms of chronology about the hour of
his death, I shall only prove that Mr. Partridge is not alive.
And my first argument is thus: Above a thousand gentelmen having
bought his almanacks for this year, merely to find what he said
against me; at every line they read, they would lift up their
eyes, and cry out, betwixt rage and laughter, "They were sure no
man alive ever writ such damn'd stuff as this." Neither did I
ever hear that opinion disputed: So that Mr. Partridge lies under
a dilemma, either of disowning his almanack, or allowing himself
to be "no man alive". But now if an uninformed carcase walks
still about, and is pleased to call itself Partridge, Mr.