aints
that Author makes of this ill Custom, I did not take notice of any one
Example he mentions, further than of such Books as had been published
under Names of Persons dead, or else under such as were wholly
fictitious, and made at their own pleasures; Which last has peradventure
appear'd in most Ages and Countries where Printing has been used, but
toucht no Man farther than a Satyr of _Don Quixot_, or _Francion_, or
any such like. But I have never observed, nor heard of any Example of
this kind besides this Answer, where the Author, whose Name was
borrowed, was alive, and in the same Kingdom, and so avowedly with the
Name of a known Bookseller in the Title-page.

Whatever the intention may have been in the Writer, whether wholly
innocent, or a little interessed to give Vogue to his Pamphlet, or in
considering the Bookseller's profit by making it pass for an Author's,
whose Name he knew would _help it off the_ better; yet I cannot but
apprehend the Example of it ill, and the Consequences of it may be
worse, if it should fall into Common practice; for by this way of
Writing and Publishing either Books or Pamphlets, any Man may be made a
publick Defamer of himself at another Man's pleasure, and not only _so_,
but to accuse himself of any Crime which the Rigour of our Laws requires
no man to do. As far as my Thoughts will reach, I do not conceive why it
should not be as bad to counterfeit a Book as a Bond; and to wrong a Man
in his Reputation, as great an Injury, as to cheat him of his Money:
This must be the reason why Slander and Scandal are as sufficient a
ground to maintain an Action in Law, as Damage and Battery: Nothing is
an injury any farther than it is taken, and hurts a Man more or less, as
he is sensible of it. Now, tho it may be true, that in every Age there
may be more than _Nine Worthies_ who put a greater value on their Money
than their Honour, yet there may be every where, and at all times, some
_silly Foplings_, who do quite the contrary; and I know no reason, why
they should not pretend to be safe in the Possessions they most value,
as well as the others; nor why the Law should not take some care of such
poor Innocents. Nor further, can I find out why a _Stationer_ should not
be punisht for _Forgery_, as well as a _Notary_ or _Scrivener_ may be.
Whether I am too serious or no, upon a Subject that may appear trivial
at first sight, or whether such a Trifle be worth any legal Provisions
against it, I am s