Friend perused it in French, or in English only. Which yet in the
present Case are Material Circumstances, and such as ought not to have
been concealed, for Two Reasons particularly, which I hold myself
obliged to give the Reader Intimation of.

The First is, That the following Reply produces and answers some
Passages of the French Discourse, not to be found in the English. And
these not only Expressions or single Sentences, but entire Arguments.
Such is that of Plays being a Diversion suitable to the Design of
instituting the Sabbath. Such again That which justifies the Acting them
the whole Lent throughout. Now this manner of dealing is not exactly
agreeable with that _Impartiality_ and _Freedom_ promised in the
beginning of the _Worthy Divines_ Letter. [Footnote: _P. IX._] And
therefore I can very hardly be perswaded, that One of that Character
and Function, had the Forming of the _Discourse_, in the manner it now
appears before _Mr. M's._ Play.

The other Reason, why I Suspect the _Discourse_ not to be translated,
or indeed so throughly approved, by a _Divine of the Church of England_,
is, that, even in what does appear there, he speaks very favourably of
acting Plays upon Sundays. Now admitting, that all the Profession are
not such sowr Criticks as _Mr. Collier_, yet this is a Liberty, which I
do not remember to have heard, that any Modern Divines of that Church
allow. And whatever the Poet's Friend may be in _His_ esteem, I shrewdly
suspect, that He would hardly pass for a very _Worthy Divine_, who
should so far Countenance these _Diversions_, as to let them into a
share of that Holy day, dedicated to the Worship and more immediate
Service of Almighty God,

One would not hastily question Testimonies in matters of Fact, where