The second rebuttal was released three months later on 14 June. Signed E. P. (possibly Edward Phillips), _The Dialogue Betwixt Cit and Bumpkin Answered_ replies not only to _Citt and Bumpkin_, but reflects upon several other polemic tracts by L'Estrange, and attacks him _ad hominem_ from beginning to end. A long prefatory letter discussing the powers and privileges of city corporations and the faults of L'Estrange's _Popery in Masquerade_ precedes the dialogue, which preserves the same general format and style of its target. The roles of the characters are only roughly analogous, however, and the development of the argument is retarded and obscured by the abuse of L'Estrange. All too often, the argument is neither pertinent nor incisive. Unfortunately, E. P. lacks all the vitality, wit, and imagination of his polemic adversary. Incensed by E. P.'s scurrility, L'Estrange replied within three days to all of his charges in _A Short Answer to a Whole Litter of Libels_. Although it does not appear in Luttrell's _Popish Plot Catalogues_, the third reply to _Citt and Bumpkin_, _Crack upon Crack: Or, Crack-Fart Whipt with his own Rod, by Citt and Bumpkin_, can be dated approximately upon the basis of internal evidence. References to L'Estrange's flight to escape a sham plot against him in October, 1680, imply a late autumn publication date. Purporting to answer both parts of _Citt and Bumpkin_, this pamphlet does not deal with any of the arguments raised in either work. The author abandons any attempt at parody, and instead borrows details of setting from the popular _Letter from Legorn_ pamphlets which appeared that year. The characters pursue the absconded Trueman (_i.e._, L'Estrange) aboard a Mahometan (_i.e._, Papist) ship and lure him ashore in order to seek revenge for their recent humiliation at his hands. The dialogue contains four pages of unimaginative abuse of Trueman which culminates in his drubbing by Citt and Bumpkin. Largely scatological, this uninspired attack upon L'Estrange does not strike a single telling blow against _Citt and Bumpkin_. In fact, _Citt and Bumpkin_ enjoyed unqualified success despite the best efforts of its various detractors. And its popularity was well deserved. Appearing just when the unrest over petitioning was at its height, _Citt and Bumpkin_ captured the interest and imagination of the public with its cogent argument and witty satire. NOTES 1: J. R. Jones, _The First Whigs_ (London, 1961), p. 117; Roger North, _Examen, or an Enquiry into the Credit and Veracity of a Pretended Complete History_ (London, 1740), p. 542. 2: North, p. 542. 3: Jones, pp. 119-20. 4: Eugene R. Purpus, "The Dialogue in English Literature, 1660-1725," _ELH_, XVII (1950), II. 58. 5: The information on the dialogue in this paragraph is taken from Purpus, pp. 48-49. 6: Purpus, pp. 50-52.