Londons Resurrection, Discourse 41
DISCOURSE XLI.
That the burning of a new and ſtately houſe in Mincing-Lane, ſhould not deter Londoners from going on with their building, but admoniſh them to build whole ſtreets together, &c.
LEt me take things as they come to hand, I have been lately advertiſed (and was but yeſterday, fully ſatisfied in it) that building upon the ruines of London doth begin to ſlacken, and that for ſeveral weeks paſt, ſcarce a fourth part ſo many have entred themſelves into the liſt of builders, as have done formerly, which ſome impute to the great diſcouragement taken by the late burning of a merchants houſe in Mincing Lane, which ſome are very confident was done on purpoſe, and merely in deſign to diſhearten, and diſcourage builders. Whether it were ſo, or no, God knows, and time will diſcover. I have heard the reaſons of that conjecture (or ſome of them) but hearing that one is committed upon ſuſpicion of having been an actor in it, ſhall not preſume to rehearſe them, or to interpoſe my private ſentiment, be it what it will: who made me a judg, or a determiner in the caſe?
But admit it were clearly proved (as ever any thing was) that, that new and noble ſtructure, did receive its fatal blow from treacherous and malicious hands, I ſee no reaſon at all why Londoners ſhould be ſo far affrighted at it, as to deſiſt from building, taking it for granted if they did proceed, their houſes ſhould all in like manner periſh, and be deſtroyed by fire, firſt or laſt.
The burning of that houſe (howſoever it was intended, if it were intentional) was (as it proved) but a warning piece to caution others (not againſt building, but againſt the occaſions, and opportunities of burning) and may (for ought I know) prevent the burning of many more.
Some it may be thought that a new houſe could ſecure it ſelf, and was like green wood, that will not take fire, and (if I miſtake not) the remedies againſt another burning of the City, were not to take place till ſeveral months hence, as if for preſent we had been out of all danger, defying all that fire could do to us, partly with our bricks, and partly with the newneſs of our buildings. But thoſe things we have found to be a refuge of lies, and that in deſpight of them, we were more ſecure, than ſafe. When men find that robberies are committed at noon day (which they expected not, but in the night, or dusk of the evening) they will ſoon agree to keep a perpetual watch.
Suppoſing that houſe to have been wilfully and deſignedly burnt, it may be ſome body had a particular grudg at the owner of it, (which yet is more than I know) and ſeeing it ſtand alone, thought they might take reveng on him and his, without damage to any body elſe: and if that were the cauſe, all have not the ſame reaſon to fear: for ſome may preſume they have no enemy in the world ſo malicious, at leaſt ſo deſperate, as to ſet fire upon their houſes.
If ſome one or more, had malice enough to prompt them to the burning of that goodly houſe, yet peradventure they had never made the attempt, if it had not ſtood by it ſelf, partly out of unwillingneſs to indanger the neighbourhood againſt whom they had no controverſie, and partly from an apprehenſion that their deſign could not ſo eaſily have taken effect, by reaſon of one or other that would ſoon have eſpied the fire, and given notice of it to ſuch as were at hand to aid, and aſſiſt, the extinguiſhing it.
And now fearing I have not ſaid enough to prevail with Londoners to build whole ſtreets together (upon which I have ſpent one Chapter already) I ſhall take this occaſion to ſupply what was therein omitted. Some of my arguments may look like a digreſſion from what the title of this Chapter pretends to; but if I ſtep out of my way to do my fellow Citizens a kindneſs, it is I hope but a venial fault. I may go to far in the diſcourſe of building alone, but I am ſure by the inſtance forementioned, I am fairly lead into it. How much eaſier is it to burn thoſe houſes, which ſtand ſcattering here and there, and which may be paſt quenching ere help can come to them, yea burnt to the ground ere any body diſcern them to be on fire, than to do like execution upon thoſe houſes which ſtand in the midſt of neighbours? one or other of which will probably eſpy the danger ere it be paſt remedy, and all of them be ready, to the utmoſt of their power, to put a ſtop to it.
If that be not argument enough for building whole ſtreets together, I could eaſily produce many more. That it were ſo agreed upon, were beſt for them that deſire to ſell their ground, beſt for them that reſolve to build, and beſt for them that would fain build, but fear their money will not hold out. Firſt I ſay it will be beſt for them that deſire to ſell their ground, and have no thoughts to build, becauſe in ſtreets that are intended to be forthwith built, intirely (and conſequently ſoon inhabited, and cuſtomed for matter of trade) the ſoil is like to yield double that value, that can be expected for it, in ſuch places, where thoſe few houſes that are built, for want of neighbours, are like to ſtand (no body knows how long) without tenants or (which is almoſt as bad) without a trade.
As for thoſe that ſhall build, where a whole ſtreet is building together, they will not be afraid to live in their houſes when they have done (as others are that have built in ſolitary places) nor can they want for tenants, if they have a mind to let them, of better quality than Victuallers, and Alehouſekeepers (the uſual ſeaſoners of ſolitary houſes, with ſmoak, and what is worſe) nor is it like they ſhould want a trade, ſuch as other places do afford, whilſt ſolitary houſes are like to want cuſtomers, as much as neighbours, unleſs the powerful attractive of good liquor, or the deſirableneſs of obſcurity for works of darkneſs, ſhall draw them thither.
They that have ſoil of their own, in places that are, out of hand, to be intirely built, need not want for money to build their houſes, though they have but little of their own. For ſurely the ſoil it ſelf, and the rent of ſuch houſes, (which we preſume will preſently be tenanted) will be a ſufficient ſecurity for ſo much money as went to the building of them, and who that hath money to ſpare (as doubtleſs there are ſome ſuch) will not lend upon good ſecurity, and upon ſo good an occaſion?
Whileſt men build ſucceſſively, and not together, in one and the ſame ſtreet, they give a continual annoyance to one another, and to all that paſs by, like them, that would be in an houſe, in which were ſeveral families, and one or other of them, were waſhing, or ſcouring every day, one after another; by which means the houſe would never lie clean. Now the ſtreets cannot be paved, the wayes cannot be made good, filth and rubbiſh cannot be all removed, becauſe the ſtreets are yet unfiniſhed. We can hardly come at thoſe that have built in ſome places, for the lets, and impediments we meet with from them that are yet to build.
Houſes that ſtand alone, are like people in a ſingle condition, from whom it is not to be expected they ſhould multiply: but where whole ſtreets are built together, there is as it were a numerous family of married perſons, from whom we may look for a ſecond, and third generation, and who may quickly make their preſent number manifold what it is. Hundreds will be deſirous to build near unto thoſe ſtreets (be it but in by-lanes and alleys) where is a neighbourhood, and a trade having an eye to ſafety, and that there will be ſomething to do: One goodly ſtreet would quickly be invironed, and incircled with neighbouring houſes, on every ſide of it; as if that were the mother, and theſe the children: (the Olive plants round about her table) that the hen, and theſe the chickens, gathering about her.
Who cannot eaſily perſwade himſelf, that if the building of any whole ſtreets together, and at once, (one or more) were agreed upon, that thoſe Honourable perſons who are to decide all controverſies betwixt man, and man: as to the preſent building, would ſo far incourage ſo good a work, as to vouchſafe thoſe whole ſale Builders, (if I may ſo call them) the firſt hearing and determining of all their Titles, and poſt pone the retailers, till they had done with them. Now that by many would be accounted no ſmall priviledg, viz. To have the precedency of build…ng, whilſt others muſt wait ſeveral moneths longer, if not years, ere they can begin to build, for want of a hearing before the Commiſſioners.
Now theſe five laſt paragraphs you may call a digreſſion if you pleaſe, but I ſhall never repent of it, if it may attain its end, viz. to prevail with Londoners to build whole ſtreets together (ſome eſpecially that are of moſt conſideration (and are the greateſt roads and through-fares) which till it be done, London will neither have the conntenance, nor the convenience, nor the credit, nor the cleanlineſs, nor the trade, nor the ſafety of a City; neither will any thing (or very little) be done to thoſe inferiour places, alleys and ſuch like, which are but appendices to more noble ſtreets, and like their hand-maids will wait to ſee them go up firſt.
But to return to what I ſpake of at the firſt, viz. that Citizens ſhould not deſiſt from building, becauſe of that one houſe, that was burnt in Mincing Lane.
Firſt what will all the houſes they have built already ſignifie, if they ſhall build no more? Is London yet any thing like a City? is it fit for the purpoſe of trade. Though poſſibly more than a thouſand houſes are finiſhed: and three times ſo many foundations laid? will you loſe all the coſt and pains which you have been at hitherto? ſhall your new houſes ſtand untenanted, and go to ruine? ſhall they have leave to burn them that will, becauſe no body will dwell in them? (for want of neighbourhood and a trade) Is the fine City you had begun upon come to this, or is this all it is like to come to? here a fine houſe or two in a dirty ſtreet, and and there another. Think of that text Luke 14.30. Leaſt all that behold it begin to mock him ſaying, this man began to build, and was not able to finiſh. What is a mother the nearer for having conceived, and bred, with much ſickneſs, and ſorrow, if ſhe cannot go out half her time? can ſhe rejoyce in the untimely fruit of her womb? ſuch a thing is London if you now break off.
What diſcouraged by the burning of one houſe! The Iſraelites when by Gods command they went to fight againſt the Benjamites, were twice defeated, and loſt two and twenty thouſand men the firſt, and eighteen thouſand the ſecond time, Judg. 20.21, 25. and yet they went up the third time, and proſpered, v. 30. God would teach us an humble dependance upon himſelf, by ſome rebukes at firſt, when yet he hath kind intentions towards us afterwards.
I hear the Gentleman whoſe houſe was burnt, is building it again (as faſt as he can) and he is to be commended for it. If the daughters of Sarah be not afraid of any amazement, as it is, 1 Pet. 3.6. Why ſhould they, who profeſs themſelves the ſons of Abraham? He hath been twice burnt out, you but once, why ſhould you be more afraid to build the ſecond time, than he to build the third? God grant him ſucceſs anſwerable to his courage, and others a courage as good as his. Men ſo reſolved, would make thoſe weary of burning, who think to make them weary of building.
Who would comply with the deſign of an enemy, and gratifie him at the firſt daſh? So do they who are ſo far diſcouraged by the burning of that one houſe, as to deſiſt from building, or from the thoughts of it; for they give them what they deſire, whom they preſume to have kindled that fire for no other end but to diſcourage thoſe who had an intent to build.
A wiſe man will not ſeem to be moved at thoſe things which are done, or ſpoken, on purpoſe to make him angry; as knowing he ſhall vex his enemy, if he can make him think that he is not vexed by him. Mical put an edge upon David when ſhe thought to make him leave dancing before the Ark, by ſcoffing at him, as if he made himſelf vile, cauſing him to anſwer her, 2 Sam. 6.22. I will be yet …ore vile than thus, &c. It were better for us to reſolve that for every houſe they burn we will build two (God permitting) than that we will build no more. If there be incendiaries that burn houſes on purpoſe, ten to one but they will be taken naping (and foreign, as they ſay) one time or other, and when the actors are diſcovered, the ſnare will be broken, and we for the future delivered. If London were once up again, (being built as now it is with brick, &c.) It would not be ſo eaſy to burn it, as it was before, (though God could melt it down if it were all of ſolid Gold.) I ſay in an ordinary way, a general conflagration would be with much more difficulty, and as for particular burnings, men did always venture them, and build as chearfully, as if they had been liable to no ſuch thing.
The excellent way of blowing up houſes (little confided in, but rather dreaded before) having gotten into uſe, and credit, ſince the burning of London, is I am perſwaded a great diſcouragement to the maſters of powder plots, from making any more attempts of that nature, with hope of a general ſucceſs, ſo that if they ſtill deſign our deſtruction, they will take ſome other courſe; in reference to which, either to build, or not to build, may be all a caſe, (I mean) to which neither building will expoſe us, nor yet forbearing to build will from thence exempt us.
Not to rebuild London for fear of enemies and their new attempts, is no better pollicy, than for an army that were routed to refuſe to rally and come into order again (though they could) for fear of a freſh onſet from the enemy, whom they are in no capacity to withſtand, or to defend themſelves, unleſs they rally again and ſtand to order. My humble advice upon the whole matter is this. Be not terrified at a probable conjecture, ſo as if it were an abſolute certainty. It is yet undemonſtrated how that houſe came burnt, though much feared, and ſuſpected to have been by treachery. Bleſs God it went no farther. Build not alone but get as many as you can to build near, and about you. Get up the whole City as faſt as you can. The more of it gets up, the harder it will be to get it down. Buds are not ſo eaſily deſtroyed as bloſſoms, or ripe fruit as either of them.