his Character as a Wit, his _Conferences between a_ Romish _Priest, a Fanatick Chaplain, and a Divine of the Church of_ England, _&c._ were spoken of as an excellent _Comedy_, and especially for that Part which the _Fanatick Chaplain_ acts therein, who makes as comical and as ridiculous a Figure as he does in any of the _Plays_ acted on the Stage. And in his _Controversy_ with _Dryden_ about the _Royal Papers_, and those of the _Duchess_ of _York_, he was deem'd to have out-done that famous _Satirist_ in tart Repartees and Reflections; and to have attack'd the Character of the _Poet_ with more severity, than that _Poet_, who was so remarkable for his satirical Reflections on the holy Order, did the Character of the _Divine_: As for example, he says to _Dryden_[34], "Could nothing be said by you of Bishop _Morley_, but that _Prelate of rich Memory_? Or had you a mind to tell us he was no _Poet_? Or that he was out of the Temptation of changing his Religion for Bread?" And many Citations us'd to be produc'd out of his Writings, as Specimens of his ironical Talent; among which I particularly remember his _Ridicule_ of his Adversary Mr. _Alsop_, a famous Presbyterian Wit and Divine; whose Book, which was full of low Raillery and Ridicule, he resembles [35] to _the Bird of_ Athens, as _made up of Face and Feathers_. And the Doctor himself adds, in Justification of the polite Method of Raillery in Controversy, that _there is a pleasantness of Wit, which serves to entertain the Reader in the rough and deep way of Controversy_. Nor did Mr. _Alsop_ want Approvers of his Raillery in his own Party. Mr. _Gilbert Rule_[36], a great _Scotch_ Presbyterian Divine, who defended him against _Stillingfleet_, contends in behalf of his Raillery, "That the Facetiousness of Mr. _Alsop_'s Strain needed to have bred no Disgust, being as a Condiment to prevent _Tædium_ and Nauseousness." And he adds, "That he knows none that blame the excellent Writings of Mr. _Fuller_, which have a Pleasantness not unlike that of Mr. _Alsop_."