The reply takes the very curious form of a reproduction of the condemned tract almost textually, paragraph by paragraph, with a running comment of vituperation upon the author or authors.

The following sentences, culled from the vituperative comment, will show that the writer suspected Milton as the person chiefly responsible, and will sufficiently represent the entire performance:-- "Some two days since came to my view a bold sharp pamphlet, called _Plain English_, directed to the General and his Officers....
It is a piece drawn by no fool, and it deserves a serious answer.
By the design, the subject, malice, and the style, I should suspect it for a blot of the same pen that wrote _Eikonoklastes_.

It runs foul, tends to tumult; and, not content barely to applaud the murder of the King, the execrable author of it vomits upon his ashes with a pedantic and envenomed scorn, pursuing still his sacred memory.

Betwixt him [Milton] and his brother Rabshakeh [Needham ?] I think a man may venture to divide the glory of it.

It relishes the mixture of their united faculties and wickedness....
Say, Milton, Needham, either or both of you, or whosoever else, say where this worthy person [Monk] ever mixed with you....