Examen Historicum: OR A DISCOVERY AND EXAMINATION OF THE Mistakes, Falsities, and Defects In some Modern Histories OCCASIONED By the Partiality and Inadvertencies of their Several Authors.  
By Peter Heylin.  
In Two Books.  Tacit in Vit. Jul. Agric. 
Vitium parvis magnisque Civitatibus common, ignoratio Recti & invida.  Horat. De Arte Poet. 

— non ego paucis  
Offender maculis, quas non incuria fudit  
Aut humana parum, cubit natura—   
LONDON, Printed for Henry Seile and Richard Royston, and are to be sold over against S. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet, and at the Angel in Ivy-lane. 1659.   

A General PREFACE to the Whole.  
IT is affirmed of History by the famous Orator, that it is Testis temporum, the Witness and Record of time, by which the actions of it are transmitted from one age to another. And therefore it concerns all those who apply themselves to the writing of Histories, to take special care that all things be laid down exactly, faithfully, and without deviation from the truth in the least particular. For if the Witnesses be suborned, the Record falsified, or the Evidence wrested, neither Posterity can judge rightly of the actions of this present time, or this time give a certain judgement of the Ages past. It is therefore a good direction which josephus the Historian gives us, and which he followed as it seems in his jewish Antiquities, not only to be careful that the stile be pleasing, but that the whole Work be framed by the Level and Line of Truth. Nam qui Historiam & rerum propter Antiquitatem obscurarum expositionem, etc. They (saith he) who make profession to write Histories, and to recite such things as are obscured by Antiquity, ought not only studiously to conform their stile, but also to beautify the same with ornaments of Eloquence, to the intent the Reader may converse in their Writings with the more delectation. But above all things they must have an especial care so exactly to set down the truth, 
Antiq. jad. Lib. 14. cap 1.  that they who know not how those things came to pass may be the more duly and fitly informed. There is another Rule, which he bound himself to. that is to say, Neither to omit any thing through ignorance, nor to bury any thing in forgetfulness; and all these cautions well observed make a perfect History. But on the contrary, there are some who do spend themselves on the stile and dress, as if their business rather were to delight the ear then inform the judgement; Others so biased by self-ends and private interest, that they seem rather Advocates to plead for some growing party, then true Reporters of affairs as they be before them. Some who endeavouring to be copious, clap all together in a huddle which is offered to them, without relation to the Ornaments and Attire of Language; and others with like carelessness as unto themselves, but greater inconvenience as unto the Reader, examine not the truth and certainty of what they write, so they write somewhat which they think may inform the Reader. Betwixt these truth is oftentimes irrecoverably lost, the Reader led aside from the ways of Verity into the crooked lanes of Error▪ and many times conducted to such dangerous praecipices as ma● prove destructive to himself, and of ill consequence to all those which are guided by him. The errors of the understanding in matters which may possibly be reduced to practice, are far more mischievous than those which do consist in the niceties of speculation, and advance no further, which moved the Orator not only to honour History with the Attribute of Testis temporum, but to style it also by the name of Magistra vitae.  
These things considered as they ought, have made me wonder many times at the unadvisedness of some Late Writers in this kind, whose Histories are composed with so much partiality on the one side, and so much inadvertency on the other, that they stand more in need of a Commentator to expound the Truth, and lay it clear and open to the view of the Reader, then either the dark words of Aristotle, or any other obscure piece of the ancient Writers. I speak of Histories here, not Libels, of which last sort I reckon Weldons Pamphlet, called, The Court of King James, and Wi●sons most infamous Pasquil of the Reign of that King; in which it is not easy to judge whether the matter be more false or the stile more reproachful in all parts thereof. Certain I am we may affirm of them, 
Tacit. Annal. lib, 4.  as Cremutius Cordus doth of the Epistles of Antonius, and the Orations of Brutus, falsa quidem in Augustum probra, se● multa cum acerbitate habent, that is to say, that they contained not only many false and disgraceful passages against the honour of Augustus, but were apparelled in all the bitterness of a scurrilous language. With such as these I shall not meddle at the present, leaving their crimes unto the punishment not of an Index, but an Ignis expurgatorius, as most proper for them. But as for those whom either the want of true intelligence or inadvertency in not weighing seriously what they were to do, or the too much indulgence to their own affections have made more capable of being bettered by correction, I have thought it more agreeable to the Rules of justice, to rectify their mistakes, and reform their Errors, then absolutely to condemn and decry their Writings. At this time I have two before me whom I conceive to stand in need of such Observations, by which the truth may be preserved, and the clear face of things presented to the Readers eye; the one of them an Author of Ecclesiastical, the other of some Civil Histories. In both I find the Truth much injured, and in one the Church. The Errors of the one tend not to the subversion of any public interest, but, being Errors, may misguide the Reader in the way of his knowledge and discourse, and therefore I have rectified him with some Advertisements (not taking notice of such passages as have been made the subject of some Observations from another hand) that so he may be read with the greatest profit. The other (besides errors of this kind too many) hath intermingled his Discourse with some Positions of a dangerous nature, which being reduced into practice, as they easily may not only overthrow the whole power of the Church as it stands constituted and established by the Laws of the Land, but lay a probable foundation for the like disturbances in the Civil State. And therefore I have fitted him with some Animadversions in the way of an Antidote, that so he may be read, if possible, without any danger.  
I know well how invidious a task I have undertaken, and that it will be charged upon me at the first apprehensions of it, that I have rather chosen to find fault with the Writings of others, then to write any things of this kind which may be subject to the like partialities and mistake. Carpere vel noli nostra, vel ede tua, might come in seasonably here, if I had not somewhat to allege for my justification. But when the Reasons which induced me to the first Adventure (mentioned in the Introduction following) be seriously considered, as they ought to be; I hope I shall be capable of excuse at the least, if not of pardon. And for my venturing on the other, I shall say nothing more at the present, but that as well my love to Truth as to do right unto the Author (whom I would willingly look on as a man well principled, and of no ill affections to Church or State) hath invited me to it. Truth is the Mistress which I serve, and I presume that none will be offended with me because I tell them of their Errors in a modest way, and bear witness for them to that Truth of which they do profess themselves such especial Lovers. In that great Disputation between the Esquires of the body of King Darius, whether the King, Wine, womans, or the Truth were of greatest power, 
1 Esdr. cap. 4. ver. 41.  the whole Assembly cried out in behalf of Truth, Magna est Veritas, & praevalet, that is to say, Great is Truth, and mighty above all things. So that in standing for the Truth, without consideration unto the recompense of reward, I hope, though I mee● some Adversaries, I shall find more Friends: If not (for I am at a reasonable pass for that) it shall be no small comfort to me that the weak Candle of my Studies hath given light to oth●rs, whereby they may discern some Historical Tru●hs even in the darkest Mists of Error, which either partiality or incogitancy hath cast before the eyes of unwary Readers. Which said, I shall now add no more, but that having two Patient's under cure of different tempers, it is not to be thought that I should administer unto both the same kind of Physic▪ an ordinary purge being sufficient for the one, whereas the foul body of the other doth require a Fluxing; as some wounds may be healed with Balm, when others more corrupt and putrified do exact a Lancing. But so it happeneth many times, that some men are more impatient of the Cure, then sensible of their Diseases, and that in stead of giving thanks to the Physician, for the great pains he took about them, they pay him with nothing but displeasures. Which being the worst that can befall me, I am armed against it. If by the hazard of my peace, I shall procure this benefit to the present and succeeding times, that men may prove more careful of what they write, and not obtrude upon the Reader (either through ignorance, inadvertency, or somewhat worse) such and so many Falsities, Mistakes and Errors, as have been lately put upon him in some Modern Histories, it is that I aimed at; and having gained that Point, I have gained my purpose.  
Non partis studiis agimur, sed sumpsimus Arma  
Consiliis inimica tuis, ignavia fallax.  
Peter Heyliu.   

Examen Historicum: OR A DISCOVERY AND EXAMINATION OF THE Mistakes, Falsities, and Defects, In some Modern HISTORY. Part. I. CONTAINING Necessary ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE Church-History of Britain. AND The History of Cambridge.  
Published by Thomas Fuller.  
For vindication of the Truth, the Church and the injured Clergy.  2 Corinth. 13. 8. 
Non possumus aliquid adversus veritatem: sed pro veritate.  Minut. Foel. in Octavio. 
Et Veritas quidem obvia est, sed requirentibus.   

A Necessary Introduction To the Following ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE CHURCH-HISTORY OF BRITAIN. Touching the Title of the Book, and the Preface to it.  
1. INtending some short Animadversions on the Church History of Britain, for Vindication of the Truth, the Church, and the injured Clergy, I have thought good to prepare the way unto them by a plain, but necessary Introduction, touching the Quality and Nature of the Book which I have in hand. Concerning which the Reader is to understand that in the Year 1642. M. Fuller published his Book called The Holy State, in the Preface whereof he lets us know, that he should count it freedom to serve two Apprenticeships (God spinning out the thick thread of his life so long) in writing the Ecclesiastical History from Christ's time to our days. And so much time it seems he had spent upon it (except some starts for recreation in the Holy Land) before he had finished and exposed it to the public view; the Book not coming out until the Year 1655. whether agreeable to his promise and such a tedious expectation, we are now to see.  
For first, The Reader might expect by the former passage, that he designed the General History of the Church, from the first preaching of Christ, and the calling of the twelve Apostles to the times we live in: whereas he hath restrained himself to the Church of Britain, which he conceives to be so far from being founded in the time of Christ, that he is loath to give it the Antiquity of being the work of any of the Apostles, of any of the Seventy Disciples, or finally of any Apostolical Spirit of those eldest times.  
And secondly, Though he entitle it by the name of the Church-History of Britain, yet he pursues not his Design agreeable to that Title neither: there being little said of the affairs of the Church of Scotland, which certainly makes up a considerable part of the Isle of Britain, and less (if any thing at all) of the Church of Ireland, which anciently passed in the account of a British Island.  
Nor is it thirdly, a Church-History rightly and properly so called, but an aggregation of such and so many Heterogeneous bodies, that Ecclesiastical affairs make the least part of it. Abstracted from the dress and trimming, and all those outward embellishments which appear upon it, it hath a very fit resemblance to that Lady of pleasure of which Marshal tells us, Pars minima est ipsa puella sui, that the woman was the least part of herself. The name of a Church-Rhapsody had been fitter for it, though to say truth (had it been answerable thereunto in point of learning) it might have passed by the old Title of Fuller's Miscellanies. For such and so many are the impertinencies, as to matters of Historical nature, more as to matters of the Church, that without them this great Volume had been brought to a narrower compass, if it had taken up any room at all. So that we may affirm of the present History as one did of the Writings of Chrysippus an old Philosopher, 
Diog. Laert. in vit● Chrysippi.  viz. Si quis tollat & Chrysippi, Libris quae aliena sunt, facil● illi vacua relinquerentur, Pergamena, that is to say, that if they were well purged of all such passages as were not pertinent to the business which he had in hand, there would be nothing left in them to fill up his Parchments.  
2. The first of this kind which I am to note, is a mere extrinsecall and outside unto those impertinences which are couched within; consisting of Title-Pages, Dedicatory Epistles, and several intermediate Inscriptions unto every Section. A new way, never traveled before by any, till he found it out, & such wherein he is not like to find many followers, though the way be opened. I know it is no unusual thing for works of different Arguments, published at several times, and dedicated to several persons, to be drawn together into one Volume; and being so drawn together, to retain still those particular Titles and Dedications which at first they had. But I dare confidently say, that our Historian is the first who writing a Book of the same Argument, not published by piecemeal, as it came from his hand, but in a full and entire Volume, hath filled his Sheets with so many Title-leaves and Dedications, as we have before us. For in this one Book, taking in the History of Cambridge, which is but an Appendix to it, there are no fewer than 12 particular Titles, beside the general; as many particular Dedications, and no fewer than fifty eight or sixty of those By-Inscriptions which are addressed to his particular Friends and Benefactors, which make it bigger by forty Sheets at the least, than it had been otherwise. Nay, so ambitious he is of increasing the Number of his Patrons, that having but four Leaves to come to the end of his History, he finds out a particular Benefactress to inscribe it to: Which brings into my mind the vanity of Vitellius in bestowing, and of Roscius Regulus for accepting the Consular Dignity, for that part of the day on which Cecina, by Order and Decree of the Senate, was degraded from it: Of which the Historian gives this Note, that it was, Magno cum irrisu accipientis tribuentisque, a matter of no mean disport amongst the People for a long time after: But of this Argument our Author heard so much at the late Act in Oxford, that I shall say no more of it at this present time.  
3. In the next rank of Impertinencies, which are more intrinsecal, part of the substance of the work, I account his Heraldry, Blazons of Arms, D●scenis of noble Families, with their Achievements intermingled as they come in his way, not pertinent, I am sure, to a Church-historian, unless such persons had been Founders of Episcopal Sees, or Religious Houses, or that the Arms so blazoned did belong to either.  
Our Author tells us, lib. 5. fol. 191. that knowledge in the Laws of this Land, is neither to be expected or required in one of his profession; and yet I trow, considering the great influence which the Laws have upon Church-matters, the knowledge of the Law cannot be so unnecessary in the way of a Clergyman, as the study of Heraldry: But granting Heraldry to be an Ornament in all them that have it, yet is it no ingredient requisite to the composition of an Ecclesiastical History: The Copies of Battle-Abbey Roll fitter for Stow and Hollingshe●d, where before we had them, can, in an History of the Church, pretend to no place at all, though possibly the names of some may be remembered as their Foundations or Endowments of Churches give occasion for it. The Arms of the Knights-Errant, billeted in the Is●e of Ely, by the Norman Conqueror, is of like extravagancy. Such also is the Catalogue of those noble Adventurers, (with their Arms, Issue and Achievements) who did accompany King Richard the first to the War of Palestine, which might have better served as an Appendix to his History of the Holy War● then found a place in the main Body of an History of the Church of England: Which three alone, besides many intercalatious of that kind, in most parts of the Book, make up eight sheets more, inserted only for the ostentation of his skill in Heraldry, in which notwithstanding he hath fallen on as palpable Errors, as he hath committed in his History: For besides those which are observed in the course of this work, I find two others of that kind in his History of Cambridge, to be noted here.  
For fol. 146. he telleth us, That Alice Countess of Oxford was Daughter and sole Heir of Gilbert Lord Samford, which Gilbert was Hereditary Lord Chamberlain of England: But by his leave, Gilbert Lord Samford was never the Hereditary Chamberlain of the Realm of England, but only Chamberlain in Fee to the Queens of England, betwixt which Offices how vast a difference there is, let our Author judge.  
And secondly, The Honour of Lord Chamberlain of England, came not unto the Earls of Oxford by that Marriage, or by any other, but was invested in that Family, before they had attained the Title and Degree of Earls: Conferred by King Henry the first on Aubrey de Vere, a right puissant Person, and afterwards on Aubrey de Vere his Son, together with the Earldom of Oxford, 
Cambd. in Oxf. fol. 389.  by King Henry the second; continuing Hereditary in that House, till the death of Robert Duke of Ireland, the ninth Earl thereof, and then bestowed for a time at the King's discretion, and at last settled by King Charles in the House of Lindsey. But because being a Cambridge Man, he may be better skilled in the Earls of that County, let as see what he saith of them; and we shall find, fol. 162. That Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York, was the eighth Earl of Cambridge.  
Whereas first, Richard Duke of York was not Earl of Cambridge.  
And secondly, If he had been such, he must have been the seventh Earl, and not the eighth: For thus those Earls are marshaled in our Catalogues of Honour, and Books of Heraldry, viz. 1. William de Meschines. 2. john de ●amalt. 3. William Marquis of juliers. 4. Edmond of Langley, D. of York. 5. Edward D. of York. 6. Richard de Conisburgh, younger Brother of Edward. 7. james Marquis Hamilton, etc. No Richard Duke of York to be found amongst them, his Father, Richard of Konisburgh, having lost that Title by Attainder, which never was restored to Richard his Son (though most improvidently advanced to the Dukedom of York) nor unto any other of that Line and Family.  
4. Proceed we in the next place to Verses, and old ends of Poetry, scattered and dispersed in all parts of the History, from one end to the other; for which he hath no precedent in any Historian, Greek or Latin, or any of the National Histories of these latter times: The Histories of Herodotus, Xenophon, Thucydides and Plutarch, amongst the Greeks; of Caesar, Livy, Sallust, Taci●us, and Sue●onius, amongst the Latins, afford him neither warrant nor example for it: The like may be affirmed of Eus●bius, Socrates, S●zomen, Theodoret, Russin and Evagrius, Church Historians all; though they had all the best choice, and the most excellent Poets of the world to befriend them in it: And he that shall consult the Histories of succeeding times, through all the Ages of the Church, to this present day, will find ●h●m all as barren of any encouragements in this kind, as the ancients were: Nay, whereas Bishop Godwin in his Annals, gives us an Epitaph of two Verses only made on Queen jane Seymour, and afterwards a Copy of eighteen verses on the Martyrdom of Arch Bishop Cranmer; 
Annal R. Mariae.  he ushers in the last with this short Apology, Contra mor●m ●●storiae liceat quaeso inserere, etc. Let me, (saith he, I beseech you) insert these following verses, though otherwise against the Rule and Laws of History▪ But what alas! were eighteen or twenty verses compared with those many hundred (six or seven hundred at the least) which we find in our Author; whether to show the universality of his reading in all kind of Writers, or his faculty in Translating (which when he meets with hard Copies, he knows how to spare) I shall not determine at the present: Certain I am, that by the interlarding of his Prose with so many Verses, he makes the Book look rather like a Church-Romance, (our late Romancers being much given to such kind of Mixtures) than a well● built Ecclesiastical History. And if it be a martyr so inconvenient to put a new piece of cloth on an old garment; the putting of so many old patches on a new pi●●e of cloth, must be more unfashionable. Besides that, many of these old ends are so light and ludicrous, so little pertinent to the business which he has in hand, that they serve only to make sport for Children, (ut pueris placeas & Declamatio fias) and for nothing else.  
5. This leads me to the next impertinency, his raking into the Channel of old Popish Legends, writ in the danker times of Superstition, but written with an honest zeal, and a good intention▪ as well to raise the Reader to the admiration of the person of whom they write, as to the emulalation of his virtues: But being mixed with some Monkish dotages, the most learned and ingenious men in the Church of Rome have now laid them by; and it had been very well if our Author had done so to, but that there must be something of entertainment for the gentle Reader, and to inflame the reckoning which he pays not for. But above all things, recommend me to his Merry Tales, and scraps of Trencher● jests, frequently interlaced in all parts of the History; which if abstracted from the rest, and put into a Book by themselves, might very well be served up for a second course to the Banquet of josts, a Supplement to the old Book, entitled, Wits, Fits and Fancies; or an Additional Century to the old Hundred Merry Tales, so long since extant. But standing as they do, they neither do become the gravity of a Church-Historian, nor are consistent with the nature of a sober Argument. But as it seems, our Author came with the same thoughts to the writing of this present History, as Poets anciently addressed themselves to the writing of Comedies, of which thus my Terence.  
Poeta cum primum animum ad scribendum appulit,  
Id sibi neg●tii credidit solum dari,  
Populo ut placerent quas ●ecisset fabulas.  
That is to say, 
Thus Poets, when their mind they first apply  
In loser verse to frame a Comedy,  
Think there is nothing more for them to do,  
Then please the people, whom they speak unto.   
6. In the last place proceed we to the manifold excursions about the Antiquity of Cambridge, built on as weak Authority as the Monkish Legends, and so impertinent to the matter which he hath in hand, that the most Reverend Mat. Parker, (though a Cambridge Man) in his Antiquitates Britanicae, makes no business of it: The more impertinent, in regard that at the fag-end of his Book there follows a distinct History of that University, to which all former passages might have been reduced: But as it seems he was resolved to insert nothing in that History but what he had some probable ground for; leaving the Legendary part thereof to the Church-Romance, as m●st proper for it. And certainly he is wondrous wise in his generation: For fearing lest he might be asked for those Bulls and Chartularies which frequently he relates unto, in the former Books; he tells us in the History of Cambridge, fol. 53. That they were burnt by some of the seditious Townsmen in the open Market place, Anno 1380. or thereabouts: So that for want of ot●e● ancient evidence, we must take his word, which whether those of Cambridge will depend upon, they can best resolve. For my part, I forbear all intermeddling in a controversy so clearly stated, and which hath lain so long asleep, till now awakened by our Author to beget new quarrels: Such passages in that History as come under any Animadversion, have been reduced unto the other, as occasion served, which the Reader may be pleased to take notice of as they come before him.  
7. All these extravagancies and impertinencies (which make up a fifth part of the whole Volumn) being thus discharged, it is to be presumed that nothing should remain but a mere Church History, as the Title promiseth; But let us not be too presumptuous on no better grounds: For on a Melius inquirendum into the whole course of the Book which we have before us, we shall find too little of the Church, and too much of the State, I mean too little of the Ecclesiastical, and too much of the Civil History: It might be reasonably expected, that in a History of the Church of England, we should have heard somewhat of the foundation and enlargement of Cathedral Churches, if not of the more eminent Monasteries and Religious Houses; and that we should have heard somewhat more of the succession of Bishops in their several and respective Sees, their personal Endowments, learned Writings, and other Acts of Piety, Magnificence, and public Interess, especially when the times afforded any whose names in some of those respects deserved to be retained in everlasting remembrance; it might have been expected also, that we should have found more frequent mention of the calling of National, and Provincial Synods, with the result of their proceedings, and the great influence which they had on the Civil State, sparingly spoken of at the best, and totally discontinued in a manner, from the death of King Henry the fourth, until the Convocation of the year, 1552. of which no notice had been taken, but that he had a mind to question the Authority of the Book of Articles which came out that year, though published as the issue and product of it, by the express Warrant and Command of King Edward the sixth: No mention of that memorable Convocation in the fourth and fifth years of Philip and Mary, in which the Clergy taking notice of an Act of Parliament then newly passed, by which the Subjects of the Temporality, having Lands to the yearly value of five pounds, and upwards, were charged with finding Horse and Armour, according to the propertion of their yearly Revenues and Possessions, did by their sole Authority, as a Convocation, impose upon themselves and the rest of the Clergy of this Land, the finding of a like number of Horses, Armour, and other Necessaries for the War, according to their yearly income, proportion for proportion, and rate for rate, as by that Statute had been laid on the Temporal Subjects: And this they did by their own sole Authority, as before was said, ordering the same to be levied on all such as were refractory, by Sequestration, Deprivation, Suspension, Excommunication, Ecclesiastical Censures all; without relating to any subsequent confirmation by Act of Parliament, which they conceived they had no need of: Nor find we any thing of the Convocations of Queen Elizabeth's time, except that of the year 1562. (and that not fairly dealt with neither, as is elsewhere showed) though there passed many Canons in the Convocation of the year 1571. and of the year 1585. and the year 1597. all Printed, and still publicly extant; besides the memorable Convocation of the year, 1555. in which the Clergy gave the Queen a Benevolence of 2●. in the pound, to be levied by Ecclesiastical Censures, without relating to any subsequent confirmation by Act of Parliament, as had accustomably been used in the Grant of Subsidies.  
It might have been expected also that we should have found in a Church History of Britain, the several degrees and steps by which the Heterodoxies and Superstitions of the Church of Rome did creep in amongst us; and the degrees by which they were ejected and cast out again, and the whole Reformation settled upon the Doctrine of the Apostles, attended by the Rites and Ceremonies of the Primitive times; as also that some honourable mention should be found of those gallant Defences which were made by Dr. Bancroft, Dr. Bilson, Dr. Bridges, Dr. Cousins, and divers others, against the violent Batteries and Assaults of the Puritan Faction in Queen Elizabeth's time; and of the learned Writings of B. Buckeridge, B. Morton, Dr. Su●cliff, Dr. Burges, etc. in justification of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, against the remnants of that scattered (and then broken) Faction in the time of King james; of which we have Negry quidem, not a word delivered: Nor could it stand with his design (which will discover itself in part in this Introduction, and shall more fully be discovered in the Animadversions) that it should be otherwise▪ All which together, make it clear and evident that there is too little of the Church or Ecclesiastical History in our Author's Book: And that there is too much of the State or Civil History, will be easily seen, by that unnecessary intermixture of State-Concernments, not pertinent to the business which he hath in hand: Of this sort to look back no further, is the long Will and Testament of King Henry the eighth, with his Gloss or Comment on the same, taking up three whole sheets at least, in which there is not any thing which concerns Religion, or which relates unto the Church, or Church-affairs; although to have the better colour to bring it in, he tells us that he hath transcribed it, not only for the rarity thereof, but because it contained many passages which might reflect much light upon his Church-History.  
Lib. 5. ●ol. 243. Of this sort also is his description of the pomp and order of the Coronation of King Charles, which though he doth acknowledge not to be within the Pale and Park of Ecclesiastical History, yet he resolves to bring it in, because it comes within the Purlieuses of it, as his own words are: But for this he hath a better reason than we are aware of, that is to say, That if hereafter Divine Providence shall assign England another King, though the transactions herein be not wholly precedential, something of state may be chosen out grateful for imitation.  
Lib. 11. fol. 124. As if the Pomp and order of a Coro●nation were not more punctually preserved in the Herald's Office (who have the ordering of all things done without the Church, and are eye-Witnesses of all which is done within) then in our Author's second-hand and imperfect Collections: The like may be said also of the quick and active Reigns of King Edward the sixth, and Queen Marry, in which the whole Body of the reformed Religion was digested, settled, and destroyed; sufficient of itself to make a competent Volumn, but contracted by our Author (like Homer's Iliads, in the Nut shell) into less than 25 sheets: And yet in that small Abstract we find many Impertinencies, as to the work he hath in hand, that is to say, The great proficiency of King Edward, in his Grammar Learning, exemplified in three pieces of Latin of his making, when he was but eight or nine years old; the long Narrative of Sir Edward Montague, chief justice of the Common Pleas, to vindicate himself from being a voluntary Agent in the business of the Lady jane Grace; the full and punctual relation of W●ats Rebellion, and the issue of it, though acted upon some false grounds of Civil Interess, without relating to Religion or to Church Affairs: Infinitum esset ●re per singula, It were an infinite labour to look into all particulars of this nature, which are found in our Author, make up a great part of the Book; but we may guests by this brief view, (as Ex pede Hereulem) that his diversion upon Civil Matters and Affairs of State, which neither have relation to, nor any influence at all upon those of the Church, do make up a considerable part of the rest of the Book: Which Civil Matters and State-Concernments being discharged also (as in all reason they ought to be) we next proceed to the Church-History itself: In which, if we should make the like defalkation, and expunge every passage which is either positively false, or ignorantly mistaken by him, there would be very little left to inform the Reader, as by the following Animadversions will appear sufficiently.  
8. But well it were, if only Abberrations from Historical truth were to be met with in our Author: In whom we find such a continual vein of Puritanism, such dangerous grounds for inconformity and Sedition to be raised upon, as easily may pervert the unwary Reader, whom the facetiousness of the stile (like a hook baited with a painted Fly) may be apt to work on. Murdering of Kings avowed for necessary prudence, as oft as they shall fall into the power of their Subjects Lib. 4 fol. 109. The Coronation of the Kings, (and consequently their succession to the Crown of England) made to depend upon the suffrage and consent of the People, Lib. 11. fol. 122. The Sword extorted from the Supreme Magistrate, and put into the hands of the common People, whensoever the Reforming humour shall grow strong amongst them, Lib. 9 fol. 51. The Church deprived of her Authority in determining controversies of the Faith, and a dispute raised against that clause of the Atticle, (in which that Authority is declared) whether forged or not: Lib. 9 f. 73. Her power in making Canons every where prostituted to the lust of the Parliament, contrary both to Law and constant practice; the Heterodoxies of Wickliff Canonised for Gospel, and calvin's Opinions, whatsoever they were, declared for Orthodox; the Sabbatarian Rigours, published for Divine and Ancient Truths, though there be no Antiquity nor Divinity in them; the Hierarchy of Bishops so coldly pleaded for, as shows he had a mind to betray the cause, whilst all things pass on smoothly for the Presbyterians, whom he chiefly acts for: And this is that which we must look for, par my & par tout, as the Frenchmen say. Nor deals he otherwise with the persons which are brought before him, than he doth with the Causes which they bring. No professed Puritan, no cunning Nonconformist, or open Separatist, comes upon the Stage, whom he follows not with Plaudites and some fair Commends, when as the Fathers of the Church, and the conformable Children of it are sent off commonly in silence, and sometimes with censure: The late Archbishop of Canterbury, so eminently deserving of the Church of England, must be raked out of his Grave, arraigned for many misdemeanours, of which none could accuse him when he was alive; all his infirmities and weaknesses mustered up together, to make him hateful to the present and succeeding Ages; when Mr. ●ov●'s Treasonable practices and seditious Speeches, must needs (for forth) be buried in the same Earth with him. The University of Oxford frequently quarrelled and exasperated, upon ●light occasions, the late King's party, branded by the odious Title of Malignants, not bettered by some froth of pretended Wit in the Etymology. The regular Clergy shamefully reproached by the Name of covetous Confo●m●sts, Lib. 9 fol. 98. And those poor men who were ejected by the late long Parliament, despitefully called Baal's Priests, unsavoury sal●, not ●i● to be thrown upon the Dungy hill; though he be doubtful of the proofs which were brought against them. Lib. 11. fol. 207. So many of all sorts wronged and injured by him, that should they all study their personal and particular Revenges, he were not able to abide it: And therefore we may justly say in the Poet's Language.  
Si de to● 〈…〉 Namin ● quis●ue Deorum  
〈◊〉 in 〈…〉 unus erit.  
Which may be Englisht in these words, 
Should all wronged 〈◊〉 seek t' avenge their same,  
〈◊〉 were not enough to bear the shame.   
9 But nothing does more evidently discover his unfaithful dealing, than his repo●t of the proceedings in the Isle of ●●gh, between his Majesty and the long Parliament Divines; of which he tells us, Lib. 11. fol. 235. That his 〈…〉 acknowledged their great pains to inform his judgement, according to their persuasions, and also took especial notice of th●ir civilities of the Application both in the beginning and body of their Reply; and having cleared himself from some misunderstanding about the Writ of Partition which they speak of, puts an end to the business. The man who reads this passage, cannot choose but think that his Majesty being vanquished by the Arguments of the presbyterians, had given over the cause; and therefore as convicted in his Conscience, rendereth them thanks for the Instruction which he had received, and the Civilities they used towards him in the way thereof: But he that looks upon his Majesty's last Paper, will find that he had Learnedly and Divinely refe●'d all their Arguments: And having so done, puts them in mind of three questions which are proposed in his former Paper, acknowledged by themselves, to be of great importance in the present controversy; without an Answer whereunto, his Majesty declared that he would put an end to that conference: It not being probable (as he told them) that they should work much upon his judgement, whil●● they are ●●arful to declare their own, nor possible to relieve his conscience, but by a free declaring of theirs: But they not able, or not daring, (for fear of displeasing their great Masters) to return an Answer to those Questions, his Majesty remained sole Master of the field, a most absolute Conqueror: For though the first blow commonly does begin the Quarrel, it is the last blow always that gets the Victory: But Regium est, cum benefeceris male audire: It hath been commonly the fortune of the greatest Princes, when they deserve best, to be worst reported.  
10. Nor deals he better with the Church, than he does with the King; concealing such things as might make for her justification, and advocating for such things as disturb her order. In the last Book we find him speaking of some heats which were raised in the Church, about placing the Communion-Table Altarwise, and great fault found for the want of Moderation in those Men, who had the managing of that business. But he conceals his Majesty's Determination in the Case of St. Gregory's, Novem. 3. 1633. by which all Bishops and other Ordinaries, were encouraged to proceed therein, and consequently those of inferior rank to defend their actings. The Chapel of Emmanuel College in Cambridge is built North and South, contrary to the usage of the Primitive times, and the Church of England, with which King james being made acquainted, he answered (as our Author tells us) That it was no ma●ter how the Chapel stood, so the heart stood right: Which Tale being told by him, and believed by others (& populum qui sibi credit habet, Ovid. in Ep. Hypsiphil.) as he is like enough to find many Believers, farewell to all external Reverence in the Service of God: What need we trouble ourselves or others with standing, kneeling, bowing in the acts of Worship; it is no matter in what posture the Body be, so the Heart be right. What need we put ourselves or others to the charge of Surplices and Hoods, of Gowns and Cassocks, in the officiating of God's Service; It is no matter in what habit the Body be, so the heart be right. There is another Chapel in Cambridge which was never consecrated, 
Hist. of Camb.  (whether a Stable or a Dormitory, is all one to me.) At which when some found themselves grieved, our Author tells them, That others of as great Learning and Religion (himself especially for one) dare defend, that the continued Series of Divine Duties, 
Hist. Camb. fol. 155.  publicly practised for more than thirty years (without the least check or control of those in authority) in a place set apart to that purpose, doth sufficiently consecrate the same: Stables and Barns by this Argument, shall in some tract of time become as sacred as our Churches; and if the Brethren think it not enough for their ease to be penned up in so narrow a Room, 'tis but repairing to the next Grove or Coppise, and that in a like tract of time shall become as holy as Solomon's Temple, or any consecrated place whatsoever it be: Churches may well be spared, pulled down, and their Materials sold for the use of the Saints; a Tub by this our Author's Logic, will be as useful as the Pulpit unto Edification: And that we may perceive that nothing is more precious with him then an irregular, unconsecrated, and unfurnished Chapel. Melvins' infamous Libel against the Furniture of the Altars in the Chapels Royal, (for which he was censured in the Star-Chamber) must be brought in by head & shoulders, out of time and place, for fear lest such an excellent piece of Puritanical Zeal should be lost to posterity: These things I might have noted in their proper places, but that they were reserved for this as a taste to the rest.  
12. Et jam finis erat, and here I thought I should have ended this Anatomy of our Author's Book, but that there is another passage in the Preface thereof, which requires a little further consideration: For in that Preface he informs us by the way of caution, That the three first Books were for the main written in the Reign of the late King, as appear by the Passages then proper for the Government: The other nine Books were made since Monarchy was turned into a State. By which it seems, that our Author never meant to frame his History by the line of truth, but to attemper it to the palate of the present Government, whatsoever it then was, or should prove to be, which I am sure agrees not with the Laws of History. And though I can most easily grant, that the fourth Book, and the rest that follow, were written after the great alteration and change of State, in making a new Commonwealth out of the ruins of an ancient Monarchy; yet I concur not with our Author in the time of the former: For it appears by some passages, that the three first Books, either were not all written in the time of the King, or else he must give himself some disloyal hopes, that the King should never be restored to his place and Powe●, by which he might be called to a reckoning for them. For in the second Book he reckons the Cross in Baptism for a Popish Trinket, by which it appears not, I am sure, to have been written in the time of the Kingly Government, that being no expression suitable unto such a time. Secondly, speaking of the precedency which was sixth in Canterbury, by removing the Archiepiscopal See from London thither, he telleth us that the 〈◊〉 is not mu●h, which See went first, when living, seeing our Age ●ath laid them ●oth alike level in in their Graves: But certainly the Government was not changed into a State or Commonwealth, till the death of the King; and till the death of the King, neither of those Episcopal Sees, nor any of the rest, were laid so level in their Graves, but that they were in hope of a Resurrection; the King declaring himself very constantly in the Treaty at the Isle of Wight, as well against the abolishing of the Episcopal Government, as the alienation of their Lands. Thirdly, In the latter end of the same Book he makes a great dispute against the high and sacred privilege of the Kings of England, in curing the disease commonly called the King's Evil, whether to be imputed to Magic, or Imagination, or indeed a Miracle; next brings us in an old Wife's Tale about Queen Elizabeth, as if she had disclaimed that power which she daily exercised; and finally, manageth a Quarrel against the form of Prayer used at the curing of that Evil, which he arraigns for Superstition and impertinencies, no inferior Crimes: Are all these Passages proper to that Government also? Finally in the third Book he derogates from the power of the Church, in making Canons giving the binding and concluding Power in matters which concern the Civil Rights of the Subjects, not to the King, but to the Lay-people of the Land assembled in Parliament; which game he after followeth in the ●ighth and last: And though it might be safe enough for him in the eighth & last to derogate in this manner from the King's supremacy in Ecclesiastical affairs; yet certainly it was neither safe for him so to do, nor proper for him so to write in the time of the Kingly Government, unless he had some such wretched hopes as before we sp●ke of.  
〈◊〉 I must need; say that on the reading of these Passages, an● the rest that follow, I found myself possessed with much indignation, and long expected when some Champion would appear in the lists against this Goliath, who so reproachfully had defiled the whole Armies of Israel. And I must needs confess withal, that I did never enter more unwillingly upon any undertaking, than I did on this: But being solicited thereunto by Letters, Messages, and several personal Addresses; by men of all Orders and Dignities in the Church, and of all Degrees in the Universities, I was at last overcome by that importunity which I found would not be resisted: I know, that, as the times now stand, I am to expect nothing for my Pains and Travel, but the displeasure of some, and the censure of others: But coming to the work with a single heart, abstracted from all self-ends and private Interesses, I shall satisfy myself with having done this poor service to the Church, my once Blessed Mother, for whose sake only I have put myself upon this Adventure. The party whom I am to deal with, is so much a stranger to me, that he is neither beneficio, nec injurià notus, and therefore no particular respects have moved me to the making of these Animadversions, which I have writ (without relation to his person) for vindication of the truth, the Church, and the injured Clergy, as before is said: So that I may affirm with an honest Conscience: Non lecta est operi sed data causa meo, That this employment was not chosen by me, but imposed upon me; the unresistable entreaties of so many friends having something in them of Commands: But howsoever, jacta est alea, as Caesar once said when he passed over the Rubicon, I must now take my fortune whatsoever it proves, so God speed me well.   

Errata on the Animadversions.  
PAge 10. line 17. for Melkinus r. Telkinus, p. 20. l. 21. for Queen of▪ r. Queen of England, p. 27. l. 6. for Woode● poir r. Woodensdike, s p. 42. l. 1. for inconsiderateness, r. the inconsiderateness of children, p. 121. l. 28. for ter r. better, p. 145. l. 2. for statuendo r. statuendi, p. 154. l. 22. Horcontnar, r. cantuur, p. 154. l. 17. for Dr. Hammond r. D. Book, p. 160. l. 1. for his r. this, p. 163. l. 28. for Jesuits r. Franciscans, p. 189. l. ult. for contemn r. confession, p. 221. in the Marg. for wether r. with other, p. 228. l. 2. for Den r. Dean, p. 239. l. 29. for Commons r. Canon, p. 271. l. ult for culis r. occulis.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
LIB. I.  
Of the Conversion of the Britan's to the Faith of Christ.  
IN order to the first Conversion o● 〈◊〉 British Nations, our Author takes beginning at the sad condition they were in be●ore the Christian Faith was preached unto them. ● And in a sad condition they were indeed as being in the estate of Gentilism, and consequently without the true knowledge of the God that made them; but yet not in a worse condition than the other Gentiles, w●● were not only darkened in their understandings, b●●●o depraved also in their Affections, as to work all ma●n●er of uncleanness, even with greediness. Not ●o 〈◊〉 in their Conversation as the Asiati●ks, no●●o 〈◊〉 as the Greeks; nor branded wi●h th●se filthy and ●●natural lusts which St. Paul chargeth on the Romans, ●nd were in ordinary practice with most Eastern Na●●●ns. And t●●●gh they were Idolaters, yea and foul Idolaters, as our A●tho● hath it, yet neither were their ●o●s of so br●tish and impu●e a nature, as the Priapus, Cl●cina, and Ster●utia amongst the Romans; or as the●● Venus, 〈…〉, common Harlots all: of whi●h ●nd such like other Gods the old Fathers tell us, th●t they were not N●mina colendorum, sed cri●ira c●lentium. No● were they so immodest and obscene in their 〈◊〉 and Ceremonies, as were the Gre●ks and Romans in the sacrifices of their Cybele or Bere●ynthia, whom they call the Mother of the Gods; 
〈…〉  described by Arnobius, Lactan●●●●, and others of the ancient W●iters, in ●u●h lively colours, 
〈…〉  as no chaste eye can look upon them without detestation. A●d for the number of their Gods, they fell extremely sho●t of that in●●●ite multitude which St. Augustine finds amongst the Romans; our Author naming only th●ee (which he calls God's Paramount) that is to say, Bel●nus, Andat●● and Diana, though wh●the● this last we●e a British Deity may be more then questioned. When therefore Gil●as tells us of the ancients Britan's, that in the numbe● of their Gods they had almost exceeded ●●●gypt (P●rtenta paene numero Aegyptiaca vin●entia, in that author's language) he must be understood with re●erence to the times in which he lived, when all the Roman Rabble had been thrust upon them, and not as speaking of the times of their first conversion: But whether they were more, o● 〈◊〉 our Author is resolved on Diana for one, whose Temple was built in or near the place where St. Paul's now stands, as our learned Antiquaries do acknowledge;  
Fo●. 1. Which (saith he) rendereth their conceit not altogether unlikely, who will have London so called from Llan-Dian which signifieth in British the Temple of Diana.] A conceit, whosesoever it was, not altogether so likely neither as our Author makes it. For though the Britan's being well stored with woods and Venison, possibly might have a hunting Goddess amongst the rest, yet certainly she was not called by the name of Diana, till the Roman Conquest and Plantations, before which time this City had the name of London (or Londinum) as we read in Tacitus. The name and sacrifices of Diana were not originally British, but of Roman race; as the great Temple in or near the place where St. Paul's now stands was of their foundation. The Britan's worshipping Apollo, by the name of Belinus, as both Camden and our Author say they did, must be supposed to have another name for Diana also; and were more likely to have called her by the name of Artemis, her old Grecian name, or by some other of as near a remembrance to it, as Belinus was to that of Bel in the Eastern Countries. Assuredly if that great City had received this name from Diana's Temple, the Welsh, being so tenacious of their ancient language, would have had some remembrance of it, who to this day call it Lundayn, 
Camd●n in 〈◊〉  and not Llan-dian according to the new conceit which our Author speaks of. But of this enough.  
Now to facilitate this great work of their conversion, Camden and Godwin, two great Antiquaries, have alleged one reason, which is not allowed of by our Author; and our Author hath alleged another reason which none can allow of but himself. The reason alleged by the two great Antiquaries is that the Druids did 〈…〉 the Britan's in the knowledge of one only God; which questionless was a great step towards their Conversion. Druids unum esse Deum semper inculcarunt, saith our Author's margin. But this he reckoneth a 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 charitably wisheth thereupon, viz.  
Power, whom generally they entitled by the name of jupiter, yet they did well enough agree in giving him the Supreme power over all the World.  
Et qui jovem Principem volunt falluntur in nomine, sed de una potestate consentiunt, 
Mi● u●. abide.  as my Author hath it. Nor did tho●e old Philosopho●s ke●p the great Truth ●nto themselves like a Candle in a dark Lantern, or hid under a Bushel, but placed it like a great light on the top of a Mountain, th●t all the people might discern it; who thereupon li●ting their hands unto the Heavens, did frequently make their addresses but to one God only, saying in common speech unto one another, that God was great, and God was true, and if God permit. Of which my Author (the same Christian Advocate) seems to make a question, 
Idem ibid.  Vulgi iste naturalis s●rmo est, an Christiani confitentis cratio? That is to say, whether those expressions ●avoured not rather of the Christian then the vulgar Heathen. And hereupon I may conclude in the behalf of the Druids, (o●●ather of those learned Pens who affirm it of them) that being Philosophers in study, a●d Divines by Office, and very eminent in their times, i● both capacities they might as well instruct the People in the knowledge of one only God, as any other of the Heathen Sage●● either Gre●ks or Romans. The reason alleged by these great Antiquaries being thus made good, we next proceed to the Examination of that which is produced by our Author, who telleth us that  
Fol. 3. It facilitated the entrance of the Gospel ●ither, that lately the Roman conquest had in part civilised th● 〈◊〉 of this Island, by transporting Colonies, and erecting of 〈◊〉 there.] Then which the●e co●ld not any thing be 〈◊〉 more different from the 〈…〉 the time of that conversion which we 〈…〉 as all 〈…〉 amongst th●m our Author himself) have affirmed f●om 〈◊〉 (who lived in the fourth Century of the Christian Church) t●mpore 〈◊〉 Tiberii Caesaris, toward the latter end of ●●e Reign of Tiberius Caesar, that is to say, about 〈◊〉 seven years after 〈…〉, at what time 〈◊〉 Romans had neither erected any one City, nor 〈◊〉 any one Colony in the South paris of the Island. ●or though julius Caesar in pursuance of his gallic 〈◊〉, had attempted this Island, crossed the Th●mes, and pierced as far as ●erulamium in the Country of the Cattieuchlani (now Hartfordshire) yet either finding h●w difficult a work it was like to prove, or having business of more moment, he gave over the enterprise, 〈…〉 with the honour of the first discovery, 〈…〉 quam tradidisse, as we read in Tacitly 〈…〉 after this in order to the conquest 〈…〉 till the time of Claudius. Augustus would by no means be pe●waded to the undertaking, and much le●s ●iberius, in whose last years the Gospel w●s first preach● in Britain, 
〈…〉  as before wa● said. Consilium id Div●s Au●●● 〈◊〉 Tibe●ius praecipue. And though 〈…〉 was once re●olv'd on the expedition, yet being never constant to his reso●●tions, he soon gave it 〈◊〉: ●●ving the honour of this conquest to his Uncle 〈◊〉, who next succeeded in the Empire, and being invited into Britain by a discontented Party amongst the Natives, reduced some part thereof into the form 〈◊〉 a Roman Province. Of this see Tacitus at large in the life of Agricola. By which it will appear most cl●●ly, that there was neither City of the Roman e●ec●ion, nor Colony of their Plantation till the time of Claudius; and consequently no such facilitating of the wo●● by either of those means which our Author dreams 〈◊〉 B●● from the time, proceed we to the Authors of this first Conversion, of which thus our Author.  
Ibid. Pa●●on● the 〈◊〉 mainly stickl●th for the Apostle Peter to have first preached the Gospel here.] And our Author doth as mainly stickle against it. The reason which induced Parsons so to stickle in it, was as our Author thinks, and telleth us, Fol. 4. To infer an obligation of this Island to the See of Rome; and to exempt this Island from that Obligation, our Author hath endeavoured to disprove the Tradition. Whereas indeed St. Peter preaching in this Island (if he were the first that Preached he●e) in the time of Tiberius must be before his Preaching in the City of Rome, to which he came not till the Reign of the Emperor Claudius. And thereupon it followeth by the Jesuits Logic, that the Britan's by sparing their Apostle to p●each at R●me, did lay an obligation upon that City, but received none f●om it: or granting that St. Peter had first preached at Rome, yet would this draw upon us no such engagement to the Pope and the Church of Rome, as our A●tho● fears; and other Germane Nations by Boni●ace, Willibald, 〈◊〉 Willibrod, and Swibert, English Saxons all, might 〈◊〉 did draw the like dependence of those Church's ●pon this of England. So that this fear being ove● blown, we will consider somewhat further of St. Peter's f●●st Preaching in this Island, not as delivered by Tradition from the Church of Rome, which is suspected to h●ve pleaded their own Interess in it; but as affirmed positively by the Greek Menologies, and in the wo●ks o● Simeon Metaphrastes and approved Greek Author. 
Camd B it. fol. 6●.  Of the Menologies (though vouched by Camden to this purpose) our Author takes no notice at all, b●t lets the weight of his displeasure fall on Metaphrastes, of whom he telleth us that  
Ibid. Metaphrastes is an Author of no credit● as B●ronius himself doth confess. B●t fi●st Ba●onius 〈◊〉 makes no such confession; that which o●r Author tells us from him being only this, In aliis multis 〈◊〉 ab ipso positis errare eum certum est; that is to say, that h● hath e●r'd in many things by him delivered. 〈◊〉 if to err in many things delivered in so great a 〈◊〉, as that of Simeon Metaphrastes, may forthwith be conceived sufficient to make an Author of no c●e●i●, God bless not only our Histo●ians, but Baronius himself from being held Authors of no credit, in both whom there are many errors not possible to be reconciled to the truth of story. But secondly, as Baronius did not, so he could not say, that Metaphrastes was an Author of no credit; the man being not only pious, b●t learned al●o for the times in which he lived, honoured as a Saint in the Greek Menologies on the 27. of November, and graced with a Funeral Oration by Michael Psellus a renowned Scholar, 
Ex●. apud Su●ium. 〈…〉  highly extolled by Balsamon for his pains and industry in this present work, and no less magnified by the Fathers in the Council of Florence, Anno 1436. All which had never set such an estimate upon him in their several times, 
S●ss. 7.  had he been an Author of no credit as 〈◊〉 Author makes him. I had now ended with St. P●ter, but that I find him appear in a Vision to King E●ward the Confessor, and telling him that he had preached the Gospel in Britain (occasioning thereby the foundation of the Abbey of St. Peter in Westminst●r) to which our Author makes this Answer;  
Ibid. To this vision pretended of Peter, we oppose the certain words of St. Paul, 1 Tim. 1. 4. Neither give heed to tables.] What pity is it that this Apparition was no● m●de, and the same tale told over again to Thomas Fuller of Hammersmith, that so it might have found some credit with our Author, though with no body else. For of this Thomas Fuller our Author telleth us (and telleth it in confirmation of some miracles done by King Henry the sixth, after his decease) that being a very honest man he had happened into the company of some who had stolen some Cattle, for which he was condemned and executed; and being on the top of the Ladder K. Harry the sixth appeared unto him, and so ordered the matter, that he was not strangled with the rope, but preserved alive; and finally that in gratitude for so great a benefit, he repaired to that King's Tomb in Chertsey Abbey, and there presented his humble thanks unto him for that great deliverance. There being as good Authors for that Apparition of St. Peter as for this of St. Henry. Vel neutrum ●●ammis ure, vel ure duos. Either let both be burnt for false, or believed for truths.  
Less opposition meets the preaching of St. joseph of Arimathea, though it meeteth some. For notwithstanding that this Tradition be as general, as universally received, as almost any other in the Christian Church; yet our Author, being resolved to let fly at all, declares it for a piece of Novel superstition disguised with pretended Antiquity. Better provided (as it seems) to dispute this point, than the Ambassadors of Castile● when they contended for precedency with those of England in the Council of Basil▪ who had not any thing to object against this Tradition of Joseph's preaching to the Britan's, although the English had provoked them by confuting their absurd pretences for St. james his preaching to the Spaniards. For first our Author does object in the way of scorn, that  
Fol. 6. The relation is as ill accoutred with tackling as their ship, in which it is affirmed that St. Philip, St. joseph and the rest were put without either Sails or Oa●es, with a purpose to drown them.] No such strange piece of Errantry (if we mark it well) as to re●der the whole truth suspected. For first we find it in the Monuments of the elder times that Acrisius King of Argos exposed his daughter Danae with her young Son Perseus, in such a vessel as this was, and as ill provided of all necessaries, to the open Seas; who notwithstanding by the divine Providence, were safely wafted to those parts of Italy which we now call Puglia. And secondly for the middle times we have th● like story in an Author above all exception, even our Author himself, who telleth us, Lib. 6. Fol. 265. of our present History, that King Athelstane put his Brother Edwine into a little wherry or Cockboat, without any tackling or furniture thereunto, to the end, that if the poor Prince perished, his wickedness might be imputed to the waves. Our Author objecteth in the next place, that  
Ib. No Writer of credit can be produced before the Conquest, who mentioneth joseph's coming hither.] For Answer whereunto it may first be said, that where there is a con●●nt uncontrol'd tradition, there is most commonly the less care taken to commit it to writing; secondly that the Charters of Glassenbury relating from the Norman to the Saxon Kings, and from the Saxons to the Britons, being all built upon St. Joseph's coming hither, and p●eaching here, may serve in stead of many Authors bearing witness to it; and thirdly, that Friar Bale, as great an enemy to the unwarrantable Traditions of the Church of Rome as our Author can de●ire to have him, hath vouched two witnesses hereunto, that is to say, Melkinus Avalonius, and Gildas Albanus, whose writings, or some fragments of them, he may be believed to have seen, though our Author hath not. As for some circumstances in the sto●y, that is to say, the dedicating of Joseph's first Church to the Virgin Mary, the burying of his body in it, and the enclosing of the same with a large Churchyard; I look upon them as the products of Monkish ignorance, accommodated un●o the fashion of those times which the writers lived in. The●e is scarce any Saint in all the Calendar, whose History would not be subject to the like misconstructions if the additaments of the middle and darker times should be produced to the disparagement of the whole Narration.  
But such an enemy our Author is to all old traditions, that he must need have a blow at Glassenbury Thorn, though before cut down by some Soldiers as himself confesseth; like Sir john Falstaff in the Play, who to show his valour, must thrust his sword into the bodies of those men which we●e dead before. The budding or blossoming of this Thorn he accounts untrue (which were it true, etc. fol. 8.) affirming f●om I know not whom, that it doth not punctually and critically bud on Christmas day, but on the days near it or about it. And were it no otherwise then so, the miracle were not much the less, then if it budded critically up●n Christmas day, as I have heard from persons of great worth and credit dwelling near the place, that indeed it did: though unto such as had a mind to decry the Festival, it was no very hard m●tter to belly the miracle.  
In fine, our Author either is unwilling to have the Gospel as soon preached here as in other places, or else we must have Preachers for it from he knows not whence. Such Preachers we must have as either drop down immediately from the heavens, as Diana's Image is said to have done by the 
Act. 19 35.  Town-clerk of Ephesus; or else m●st suddenly rise out of the earth, as Tages the first Soothsayer amongst the Tuscans, is reported to have done by some ancient Writers. And yet we cannot say of our Author neither, as Lactantius did of one Acesilas (if my memory fail not) Recte hic aliorum sustulit disciplinas, sed non rectè sundavit suam; that is to say, that though he had laid no good grounds for his own opinion, yet he had solidly conf●ted the opinions of others. Our Author hath a way by himself, neither well skilled in pulling down, nor in building up.  
From the first conversion of the Britan's, proceed we now unto the second, as Parsons calls it, or rather from the first Preaching to the Propagation. The Christian faith here planted by St. Peter or St. joseph (or perhaps planted by the one, and watered rather by the other, in their several times) had still a being in this Island till the time of Lucius. So that there was no need of a new conversion, but only of some able Labourers to take in the harvest. The Miracles done by some pious Christians induced King Lucius to send Elvanus and Meduinus (two of that profession) to the Pope of Rome, requesting principally, that some Preachers might be sent to instruct him in the faith of Christ. Which the Pope did according to the King's desi●e, sending Faganus and Derwianus, two right godly men, by whom much people were converted, the Temples of the gods converted into Christian Churches, the Hierarchy of Bishops settled, and the whole building raised on so good a foundation, that it continued undemo●isht till the time of the Saxons. And in the summing up of this story, our Author having refuted some peti● Arguments which had been answered to his hand (though much mistaken by the way in taking Diotarus King of Galatia, for a King of Sicily, fol. 10.) gives us some other in their stead, which he thinks unanswerable▪ First he objects against the Pope's answer to the King, that  
Fol. 11. It relates to a former letter of King L●cius wherein he requested of the Pope to send him a Copy or Collection of the Roman Laws, which being at that time in force in the 〈◊〉 if Britain, was but actum agere.] But certainly tho●gh those parts of Britain in which Lucius reigned, were governed in part (and b●t in part) by the Laws of Rome, yet were the Laws of Rome, at that time more in number, and of a far more general practice, then to be limited to so narrow a part of their Dominions. Two thousand Volumes we find of them in justinian's time, out of which, by the help of Theophilus, Trebonianus, 
Platina in vita.  and many other learned men of that noble faculty, the Emperor composed that Book or body of Law which from the universality of its comprehension, we still call the Pandects. So that King Lucius being desirous to inform himself in the Laws of that Empire, whether in force or out of use, we regard not now, might as well make it one of his desires to the Pope of Rome; as any great person living in Ireland, in Queen Elizabeth's time, might write to the Archbishop of Canterbury to procure for him all the Books of Statutes, the Year-books, Commentaries, and Reports of the ablest Lawyers, though Ireland were governed at that time by the Laws of England. For though Pope Eleutherius knew better how to suffer Martyrdom for Christ's cause (as our Author hath it) then to play the Advocate in another's; yet did not that render him unable to comply with the King's desires, but that he thought it better to commend the knowledge of God's Law to his care, and study. In the next place it is objected, that  
This letter mounts King Lucius to too high a Throne, making him the Monarch or King of Britain, who neither was the Supreme nor sole King here, but partial and subordinate to the Romans.] This we acknowledge to be true, but no way prejudicial to the cause in hand. Lucius both was and might be called the King of Britain, though Tributary and Vassal to the Roman Emperors, as the two Balliol's john and Edward were both Kings of Scotland, though Homagers and Vassals to Edward the first, and third, of England, the Kings of Naples to the Pope, and those of Austria and Bohemia to the Germane Emperors. Nor doth the next objection give us any trouble at all, that is to say, That  
The Scripture quoted in that Letter is out of St. Hieroms Translation, which came more than a hundred years after:] Unless it can be proved with all (as I think it cannot) the Hierom followed not, in those texts, those old Translations, which were before received and used in the Western Churches. Lesle am I moved with that which follows, viz.  
That this letter not appearing till a thousand years after the death of Pope Eleutherius, might probably creep out of some Monk● Cell, some four hundred years since] Which allegation being admitted (the Monk's Cell excepted) it makes no more to the discredit of the letter which we have before us, then to the undervaluing of those excellent Monuments of Piety and Learning, which have been recovered of late times from the dust and moths of ancient Libraries. Such Treasure like money long locked up, is never thought less profitable when it comes abroad. And from what place soever it first came abroad, I am confident it came not out of any Monk's Cell; that generation being then wholly at the Pope's devotion, by consequence not likely to divulge an Evidence, so manifestly tending to the overthrow of his pretensions. The Popes about four hundred years since were mounted to the height of that power and Tyranny which they claimed as Vicars unto Christ. To which the●e could not any thing be more plainly contrary then that passage in the Pope's letter, where he tells the King, That he was God's Vicar in his own Kingdom (vos estis Vicarius De● in Regno vestro, as the Latin hath it) Too great a secret to proceed from the Cell of a Monk, who would have rather forged ten Decretals to ●pho●d the P●pis● 〈◊〉 over Sovereign Princes, then published one only (whether true or false) to subvert the same. Nor doth this Letter only give the King an empty Title, but such a Title as imports the exercise of the chief Ecclesiastical Power within his Dominions. For thus it followeth in the same; The people▪ and the folk of the Realm of Britain be yours; whom if they be divided, ye ought together in concord and peace, to call them to the faith and law of Christ, to cherish and maintain them, to rule and govern them, so as you may reign everlastingly with him whose Vicar you are. So far the very words of the letter, as our Author rendereth them, which savour far more of the honest simplicity of the Primitive Popes, than the impostures and supposititious issues of the ●atter times.  
Our Author tells us fol. 9 that he had ventured on this story with much averseness; and we dare believe him. He had not else laboured to discredit it in so many particulars, and wilfully (that I say no worse) suppressed the best part of the Evidence in the words of Beda; who being no friend unto the Britan's, 
Beda Hist. Eccles. ●ib. 1. cap. 4.  hath notwithstanding done them right in this great business. And from him take the story in these following words; Anno ab i●carnati●ne Domini, 156, etc. In the 156. year after Christ's Nativity, Marcus Antonius Verus together with Aurelius Commodus his Brother, did in the fourteenth place from Augustus Caesar, undertake the government of the Empire. In whose times when as Eleutherius a godly man was Bishop of the Church of Rome, Lucius King of the Britan's▪ sent unto him, Obsecrans ut per ejus mandatum Christianus essiceretur, entreating by his means to be made a Christian; whose vertrious desire he ein was granted; and the faith of Christ being thus received by the Britan's, was by them kept inviolate and undefiled until the time of Dioc●tian. This is the substance of the story, as by him delivered, true in the main, though possibly there may be some mistake in his Chronology, as in a matter not so canvassed as it hath been lately.  
Now to proceed unto our Author, he tells us fol. 10. out of jeffery of Monmouth, That at this time there were in England twenty eight Cities, each of them having a Flamen or Pagan Priest; and three of them, namely London, York, and Caerlion in Wales, had Archflamen, to which the rest were subjected: and Lucius placed Bishops in the room of the Flamens, and Archbishops, Metropolitans in the places of Archflamen; concluding in the way of scorn, that his Flamines, and Archflamines seem to be Flams and Archflams, even notorious falsehoods.] And it is well they do but seem so, it being possibly enough that they may seem Falsehoods to our Author, even notorious Falsehoods, though they seem true enough to others, even apparent truths. And first though jeffery of Monmouth seem to deserve no credit in this particular, where he speaks against our Author's sense; yet in another place where he comes up to his desires he is otherwise thought of, and therefore made the Foreman of the grand Inquest against Augustino the Monk, whom he enditeth for the murder of the Monks of Bancor. And certainly if jeffery may be believed when he speaks in passion, when his Welsh blood was up, 
Lib. 2. fol. 63.  as our Author words it, as one that was concerned in the cause of his Countrymen; he may more easily be believed in a cause of so remote Antiquity, where neither love nor hatred, or any other prevalent affection had any power or reason to divert him from the way of truth. And secondly, though jeffery of Monmouth be a Writer of no great credit with me, when he stands single by himself, yet when I find him seconded and confirmed by others, I shall not brand a truth by the name of falsehood, because he reports it. Now that in Britain at that time there were no fewer than eight and twenty Cities is affirmed by Beda 
* Beda. Hist. Ecclesiast. Ang. l. 8. cap. 1. . Henry of Huntingdon 
* Hist. l 1. in initio.  not only agrees with him in the number, but gives us also the names of them, though where to find many of them it is hard to say. That in each of these Cities was some Temple dedicated to the Pagan Gods, that those Temples afterwards were employed to the use of Christians, and the Revenues of them assigned over to the maintenance of the Bishops and other Ministers of the Gospel, hath the concurrent testimony of approved Authors; that is to say, Matthew of Westminster out of Gildas, Anno 187. Rodolph de Diceto cited by the learned Prima● of Armach in his Book De Primordiis Eccles. Brit. cap. 4. Gervaso of Tilbury, ibid. cap. 6. And for the Flamines, and Archflamines, they stand not only on the credit of jeffery of Monmouth, but of all our own Writers, who speak of the foundation of the ancient Bishoprics, even to Polydore Virgil. Nor want there many foreign Writers who affirm the same, 
Mart. Polon. in Chron.  beginning with Martinus Polonus, who being esteemed no friend to the Popedom (because of the Story of Pope jone which occurs in his Writings) may the rather be believed in the story of Lucius. And he agrees with jeffery of Monmouth in all parts of the story, as to the Flamines and Archflamines, as do also many other of the Roman Writers which came after him. But where both our Author and some others have raised some objections against this part of the History, for Answer thereunto I refer the Reader to the learned and laborious Work of Francis Mason late Archdeacon of Norfolk, De Ministorio Anglicano, 
L●b. 2. cap. 3.  the sum whereof in brief is this, Licet in una urbe multi Flamines, that though there were many Flamines in one City, yet was there only one which was called Pontifex or Primus Flaminum; the Pope or principal of the Flamines; of which kind one for every City, were those whom our Historians speak of. And for the Archi-Flamines or Proto-Flamines, though the name occur not in old Roman Writers, yet were there some in power and Authority above the rest, who were entitled Primi Pontificum (as indeed Coifi by that name is called in Beda) which is the same in sense with Arch-flamines although not in sound. 
Beda Hist. Ecclesi st. l 2. c. 13.  All I shall further add is this, that if these 28 Cities were not all furnished with Bishops in the time of Lucius for whom it was impossible to spread his arms and express his power over all the South parts of the Island; yet may the honour of the work be ascribed to him, because begun by his encouragement, and perfected by his example; as Romulus is generally esteemed for the Founder of Rome, although the least part of that great City was of his Foundation.  
Our Author has not yet done with Lucius. For admitting the story to be true, he disallows the turning of the Pagan Temples into Christian Churches, which he censureth as the putting of new Wine into old Vessels, which afterwards savoured of the Cask, Christianity hereby getting a smack▪ of Heathen ceremonies. But in this point the Primitive Christians were as wise as our Author, though they were not so nice. Who without fearing any such smack, accommodated themselves in many ceremonies to the Gentiles, and in some to the jews; that being all things to all men, they might gain the more, as in fine they did: which notwithstanding our Author hereupon inferreth;  
Fol. 13. They had better have built new Nests for the holy Dove, and not have lodged it where Schriech-owls and unclean Birds had formerly been harboured.] A p●ety piece of new Divinity, and such as favours strongly of the Modern Anabaptist; such as not only doth reproach the practice of most pious Antiquity, but lays a sure ground for the pulling down of all our Church's (as having been abused to Popish Superstitions in the former times) if ever that increasing faction sh●●ld become predominant. What pity is it that our Author had not lived and preached this Doctrine in King Edward's time, that the Parochial Churches and C●thedrals being sent after the Abbeys, new Nests might have been built for the Dove in some tree or other, un●er the shade whereof the people might assemble to their devotions: and not new Nests provided only, but new feathers also, the vestments prescribed to the Minister's by the Church of England, being condemned and disallowed by the Puritan party, because in use formerly with the Priests of the Church of Rome. More of this stuff, but of a more dangerous conquence to the public peace, we shall see hereafter.  
We have now done at last with the story of L●cius, and must next follow our Author unto that of Amphibalus, in prosecution whereof he kelleth us of a great slaughter of Christians in or near the City of Litchfield, from thence so denominated, of which thus saith he;  
Fol. 19 This relation is favoured by the name of Litchfield, which in the British tongue signifies a Golgotha, or a place bestrewed with sk●ls.] It's true indeed that Litchfield, or Licidfield, as Beda calleth it, is made by john Rosse to signify Cadaverum Campus, 
Com'd. in Staff shire.  or the field of dead bodies. But that it doth so signify in the British language, I do more than doubt, the termination of the word being mee●ly Saxon, as in H●fenfield, Cock-field, Camps●●●●d, and many others. As little am I satisfied in the Etymon of the name of Maidenhead, which he ascribes unto the worshipping of the head of one of those many Maidens which were martyred with Ursula at Colen, fol. 36. For which though he cite Camden for his Author (following therein, 
Camden in 〈◊〉 sh.  but not approving the old Tradition) yet when I find in the same Camden, that this Town was formerly called Maidenhith, that anciently there was a ferry near the place where the town now stands, and that Heath in the old Sax●n tongue, did signify a Wh●rse, Haven, or landing place, I have some reason to believe, that the Town took this name from the Wharse or Ferry belonging at that time to some neighbouring Nunnery, or to some private Maidens dwelling thereabout, who then received the profits of it. Just so Queen-Hith in London took that appellation, 
Shows 〈◊〉  because the profits of that Wharf were anciently accounted for to the Queens of England; and Maiden-bradly in Wiltshire was so denominated because belonging to one of the inheretrices of Manasses Basset, 
Camden in W●shire, fol. 243.  a most noble personage in his time, who founded a House here for Maiden Lepers. But to return again to L●itch-field, It must needs seem as strange to my judicious Reader, that one part of it should be borrowed from the Britan's, and the other from the Saxons; as it seems strange unto our Author, and that justly too, that Cern in Dorcetshire should anciently be called Cernel, from the Latin word Cerno, which signifies to see, and the Hebrew word El signifying God, fol. 67.  
Fol. 20. I fear that learned pen hath gone too far, who makes him founder of a Bishopric at York, and styleth him an Emperor surpassing in all virtue and Christian ●iety.] The learned pen here spoken of is that of judicious Camden, whose character of Constantius Chlorus our Author in this place will not let pass without some censure. That he did found (or rather re●ound) a Bishopric in the City of York, I am confident Camden had not said without very good grounds, though on what grounds he said it, I am yet to seek. A Bishopric and a Bishop of York we find on good Record within few years after; Eborius the Bishop of that City subscribing to the Council of Arles in the time of Constantine, the Son and next succe●●or of Constantius Chlorus. And that he was a Prince of surpassing virtue, is generally agreed upon by all Historians, both Pagans and Christians. The Question than will be only this, Whether he did surpass also in Christian piety, which our Author will not otherwise grant, b●t by our Saviour's Argument only, concluding those to be on our part who are not against us; Constantius doing no other good unto Christianity, but that he did not do it harm. A censure not agreeable to so good an Emperor, who though he were no through-paced Christian, yet did he both favour their Religion, and protect their persons, as Eusebius testifies de vita Constantini, lib. 1. cap. 1●. And not so only, but as our Author himself confesses, he b●th permitted and preserved them who would rebuild the decayed Christian Churches. If ●o 〈◊〉 the persons of Christians in the exercise of their Religion, to have them near unto him in places of greatest trust and eminence, to suffer them to rebuild their Churches and defend them in it, be not the 〈◊〉 of some good unto Christianity, more than the 〈…〉 harm, let our Author carry it, and Camden 〈◊〉 the blame of his needless Courtship. But this is not the first time, in which our Author hath clash with 〈◊〉, and I see it will not be the last, by that 〈◊〉 followeth. For speaking on the by how Wolve● 〈◊〉 entered into England, considering that Merchants would not bring them, and that they could not swim over themselves, he adds these words, viz.  
Fol. 25. Which hath prevailed so far with some, as to 〈◊〉 this now an Island, originally annexed to the Cont●●ent.] It seems that though some so conceive it, ye● 〈◊〉 Author do●h no●. And yet he cannot choose but know that tho●e whom he doth pass so slightly over by the name of some (as if not worthy to be notified by 〈◊〉 proper names) are the most eminent and renowned Antiquaries of these latter times. Amongst which if I reckon Camden for one, and a chief one too, I should but do him right, and not wrong the rest. Whose arguments to prove the point, he that lists to see, may find them at large laid down in his description of Kent; which when our Author can confute (as I doubt he cannot) he may then slight it over as a thing conceived and conceived only by some men not worth the naming Till then I shall behold it as a matter not conceived but proved, and so must he.  
I should here end this Chapter and this Book together b●t tha● I find a trifling error not worth our notice, ●ut that I would set all things right as they come be●ore me▪ which is the placing of the Emperor Co●stantine in the Catalogue of those who commonly 〈◊〉 u●der the name of the nine Worthies, and this ●aith he,  
Fol. 39 Is more than comes to the proportion of Brit●in; that amongst but nine in the whole World, two should prove Natives of this Island, Constantine and 〈◊〉. That Arthur goes for one of the Worthies, I shall easily grant, and I shall grant too, that in the opinion of some w●iters this Island gave birth unto another of them, namely Guy of Warwick. His Knight Sir Guy one of the nine, we touch but by the way, saith Warner in his Albion's England. But in the common estimate they are reckoned thus; that is to say, three jews, 1. joshua, 2. David, 3. judas Maccabaeus; three Gentiles, 4. Hector of Troy, 5. Alexander the great, and 6. julius Caesar; three Christians, 7. Arthur of Britain, 8. Charlemagne of France, and 9 Godfrey of Bovillon. But I condemn myself for mingling this poor piece of Errantry with such serious matters, though the necessity of following my Leader as he goeth may excuse me in it.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
LIB. II.  
Of the Conversion of the Saxons, and that which followed thereupon till the Norman Conquest.  
IN order to the Conversion of the Saxons, our Author begins (as he had done before in that of the Britan's) with the unhappy condition of that People in the state of Gentilism; in the description whereof he omitteth that which was indeed their greatest unhappiness, that is to say, their barbarous and inhuman sacrifices of men and women unto two of their Idols. For Camden telleth us of their God called Wooden, 
Camd. in Brit. fol. 135.  that they used to procure his favour by sacrificing unto him men alive; and I have read in Verstegan (if my memory fail not) a man inferior to none in the Antiquities of this Nation, that at their return from any conquest they used to sacrifice the noblest of their Captives to their Idol Thur. In this not much inferior to the Palestinians in their sacrifices to Moloch, or to the Carthaginians in the like abominable sacrifices to Saturn, or to the Scythians in the like to Diana Taurica, 
Lactant. lib. 16. cap. 21.  or finally to the Galls in theirs to Haesus and T●euta●es their own National Deities. But not to lay at our Authors charge these small sins of Omission, we must next see whether he be not guilty of some sin of Commission also. For making a general muster of the Saxon Gods, and showing how they were disposed of in relation to the days of the week, he concludes it thus:  
Fol. 55. And thus we see the whole week bescattered with Saxon Idols, whose Pagan Gods were the Godfathers of the days, and gave them their names.] Not the whole week, though the greatest part thereof was thus bescattered. Sunday and Monday being so called in reference to the Sun and Moon, or else in correspondence to the the names of Dies Solis, and Dies Lunae, which they found given by the Romans at their entrance here. For either the Sun and Moon were worshipped by the ancient Saxons, and then might think themselves neglected in having no place assigned them amongst the rest; or else the Saxon Pagan Gods were not the Godfathers to all the days of the week, as our Author telleth us. As much he seems to be mistaken in their God called Woden, of whom thus he telleth us.  
Fol. 54. Woden, that is wood, fierce or furious, giving the denomination to Wednesday, or Wodensday, 
In Brit. fol. 135.  Armed cap a pe with military Coronet on his head; he was the God of Battle, by whose aid and furtherance they hoped to obtain victory; correspondent to Mars.] But Camden sings another song, telling us that Wooden was not worshipped for Mars but Mercury. Above all other Gods, saith he, they worshipped Mercury, whom they called Wooden, whose favour they procured by sacrificing unto him men alive, and to him they consecrated the fourth day of the week, whereupon we call it at this day Wednesday. Thus also in another place, Wansdike in the Saxon tongue called Wodenepoic, 
Id. in Wissh. fol. 241.  that is to say, the Ditch of Wooden or Mercury, and as it should seem of Woden that false imagined God and Father of the English-Saxons. And herein I shall rather subscribe to Camden's then our Author's judgement. For certainly had the Saxons worshipped Wooden as the God of Battle, or correspondent unto Mars, they would have given him the third day of the week, or the day of Mars, and not the fourth day of the week, or the day of Mercury; as they gave Sunday and Monday unto Sol and Luna, and Thursday unto Thur, whom they worshipped in the place of jupiter, ascribing unto him (as the Greeks and Romans did to jupiter) the power of bearing rule in the Air, governing Thunder, Lightnings, Winds, Showers, fair weather, etc. as Adam Bremensis a good Writer doth inform us of them. And though it may be true, which our Author telleth us, that by his aid and furtherance they hoped to obtain victory, yet this entitleth him not to the place of Mars; as many victories being gotten by wit and stratagem (the known Arts of Mercury) as by strength and valour. But from our Author's failers in recounting the superstitions of our Saxon Ancestors, let us next see how he behaves himself in laying down the story of their conversion. In which though he ascribe something unto Austin the Monk, yet he will by no means allow him to be their Apostle.  
Fol. 54. The Papists (saith he) commonly call Augustine the English Apostle, how properly we shall see hereafter. And after fol. 68 The Papists brag that he was the Apostle of the English.] In these few words there are two things to be considered, whether he is called the Apostle of the English, by the Papists only, and secondly, whether he were not so both in fact and title. Not called so by the Papists only, I am sure of that; but called so commonly by as good Protestants as our Author himself. Thus Camden a right English Protestant, 
Camd. Brit. fol. 136.  After this Augustine, whom commonly they call the Apostle of the English men, being sent hither by Gregory the Great, having abolished these monstrous abominations of Heathenish impiety, with most happy success planting Christ in their hearts, con●erted them to the Christain faith. Nor doth he speak this only in the voice of the common people, but in another place more plainly as his own opinion. A place there is about this Shire called Augustine's Oak, 
Id. in Worcest. fol. 578.  at which Augustine the Apostle of the English men, and the Bishops of Britain met, etc.  
Dr. Philemon Holland of Coventry, a good Protestant also, making an Index unto Camden, speaks the self same language; Augustine the Apostle of the English; which is short, but full. Gabriel Richardson of Brazen Nose, an honest Protestant, in his laborious piece called the State of Europe, 
Richardsons' state of Europe. lib. 3.  telleth us of Canterbury, that the Archbishops See was founded by King Ethelbert in the person of St. Austin the Apostle of the English. More of this kind might be produced, were it not given us for a Rule in the holy Scripture, Ex ore duorum testium vel trium, that two or three witnesses were sufficient to confirm a truth.  
The next thing here to be considered is, whether Austin were not the Apostle of the English, both in fact and title. In order whereunto, we must first take notice, that the word being merely Greek, doth signify in its natural and original sense a Messenger, a Legate, an Ambassador, from whom, to whomsoever sent; and though appropriated to the twelve as by way of excellence, yet not improperly communicated unto others in succeeding times, with reference to the Nations whom they had converted. So Boniface an English man the first Archbishop of Ments is called by Dr. Holland, (as by many others) the Apostle of Germany, Palladius styled by Camden the Apostle of the Scottish Nation; 
Camd. in Scotland, fol. 45.  and the Irish would not think themselves to be fairly dealt with, if their St. Patrick should not be honoured with that Title also. In this sense Austin may be called, and that not improperly, the Apostle of the English Nation; though a derivative Apostle, an Apostle (as our Author calls him in the way of scorn, fol. 68) at the second hand, though others propagated the Gospel further than he lived to do. It was enough to entitle him to this Apostleship, that he first publicly preached the Gospel, and brought the glad Tiding of Salvation amongst the English, though he neither converted all the Nation, nor traveled into all parts of the Land to attempt the same. Neither St. Paul could be entitled the Apostle of the Gentiles, St. Thomas of the Indians, nor St. Matthew of the Ethiopians; if it were necessarily required to their Apostleships, that all the Nations of the Indians must be converted by the one, or the vast Countries of the Ethiopians must be conve●ted by the other; or finally, if St. Paul to save them a labour, must have reduced all the Gentiles to the faith of Christ. And this the Ambassadors for the King of England at the Council of Basil, understood right well, when they contended for precedency with those of Castille. For when the Castilians had objected, that although joseph of Arimathea had preached in England, it was but in a corner thereof, the grand body of Britain remaining Pagan many hundred years after: the English Ambassadors wisely answered, that the Allegation was impertinent to the present purpose, it being not the Universality, but the first Preaching of the Christian Faith which gained the name of an Apostle; there being no Disciple (as they truly urged it) that ever converted a Kingdom totally and entirely to Christianity, for which consult our very Author, Lib. 4. fol. 181.  
And yet the pains in preaching of Austin were not so limited and restrained to one Kingdom only, but that he travelled into most parts of the Saxon Heptarchy, preaching the Gospel in all places to which the Spirit did conduct him, or his business lead him. Our Author grants him to have converted the Kingdom of Kent, fol. 7. and to have taken care for planting the Gospel in the Kingdom of the East-Saxons, and for that end ordaining Mellitus the first Bishop of London, fol. 67. From hence he carries him to a conference with the British Bishops in the Country of the Wiccians (now Worcestershire) than part of the Kingdom of Mercia, fol. 60. From thence to Richmondshire in the Kingdom of Northumberland, where he is said to have baptised above ten thousand in one day, fol. 66. And finally to Cern in Dorsetshire, part of the Kingdom of the Westsaxons, where he destroyed the Idol of Heale or Aesculapius. By which we see, that he visited no fewer, than five of the seven Kingdoms in the Saxon Heptarchy, not only doing in each of them that particular work which he went about, but preaching in all fit places as he passed along. And this considered as it ought, with reference to the distance of those several places to which our very Author brings him, gives him just title to that honour which our Author would so willingly deprive him of, when telling us how the Papists called him the English Apostle, he adds these words, how properly (so called) we shall see hereafter.  
I have spent more time than I intended in defence of this Title, and therefore think it seasonable to proceed from the Person to his Acts. Of which the first we meet with is▪ the fixing of the Archiepiscopal See at Canterbury, for which our Author amongst many other Reasons, gives us this for one, viz.  
That London by reason of the receipt thereof was likely to prove the residing place for the English Monarch, and it was probable that the Archiepiscopal dignity would there be eclipsed, and outshined by the Regal Diadem.] But here I must needs ask our Author, whether he thinks, that this was really one of those many motives which occasioned Austin to resolve of Canterbury for his seat of residence. If yea, then must our Author grant him to be endued with the spirit of Prophecy, which I think he will not; if not, than a contingency so remo●e could not be taken by him into consideratior, as indeed it was not. For first, London at that time was the chief City of the Kingdom of East-sex, one of the weakest of the seven, and so not likely to prevail over all the rest. Secondly, if any of the greater Kingdoms of Mercia, West-sex, or Northumberland, should in fine prevail, it was not not probable that the Conquerors would remove the Seat Royal from their own Dominions into any of the conquered Countries. And thirdly, though the Kings of the Westsaxons, who prevailed at last, and became Monarches of the whole, settled the Royal Seat in London, yet was it not till Winchester their own Regal City was destroyed by fire, and made unable to receive them.  
Fol. 60. The first cast of his office was to call a Council for the Saxon and British Bishops to come together in the confines of the Wiccians and Westsaxons.] Our Author placeth this meeting within few lines after in the confines of Worcester and Herefordshire, and more rightly there; Worcestershire, or the Country of the Wiccii confining on the County of Hereford, but bordering in no place on the Kingdom of West-sex, the whole County of Gloucester being interposed. So that our Author being mistaken in the place of the meeting, it is no wonder if he stumble at the Monuments and Records thereof. Of one of which he telleth us,  
Fol. 61. That we can part with it without any loss to ourselves, and therefore bids it to make shift for its own Authenticalness, fol. 60.] The Record slighted thus is a Memorial of the Answer of the Abbot of Bancor to Archbishop Augustine's proposition, communicated by Peter Moston a Welsh Gentleman to that learned and industrious Antiquary Sir Henry Spelman, and by him placed in his collection of the British and Saxon Councils. Which honour he had never given it, had he not conceived it worthy to deserve that place; nor had the Papists used such violence to wrest it from us without the hope of gaining somewhat to themselves.  
But to proceed, this conference being ended without success, there followed not long after the great slaughter of the Monks of Bancor, for which our Author in a merrier humour than becomes the sadness of the matter, or the gravity of an Ecclesiastical History, hath caused Austin to be indicted, impanelling a Jury, and producing his evidence. Amongst which Matthew Parker the learned Archbishop of Cant●rbury, and john jewel, the renowned Bishop of Salisbury, must be re●ected by the Jury as incompetent witnesses; partly because of their known opposition to the Romish Church; and partly because of their modern writing, almost a thousand years after the matter in fact, fol. 64. And all this done to add the greater honour to Mr. Fox, as Modern as either of the two, and as averse as either of them from the Church of Rome. But Mr. Fox was Mr. Fox, no friend unto the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, whereas the other two were Bishops and great sticklers for them. This ma●●es our Author magnify Fo● for his moderation, whose moderate testimony (saith he) much moved the whole Court; and as much to condemn the others for the sharpeness of their expressions against Austin (whom our Author himself reproacheth often for his pride and haughtiness; fol. 62.) which made them of less credit amongst the Jury. A thread of which fine spinning we shall find frequently interwoven in the whole web of this History, and towards the latter end thereof, not a few whole pieces made of no better yarn. And let the Reader take this with him for a taste of our Authors good affections to the several parties, that it is bare M. Parker and plain Bishop jewel, without welt or guard, but reverent● Mr. Fox by all means, and so let him pass. And let us pass also to the residue of the Acts of Austin.  
Fol. 66. Who all this while was very industrious, and no less successful in converting the Saxons to the Christian faith. Insomuch that a certain Author reporteth, how in the River Small near Richmond in Yorkshire, be in one day baptised above ten thousand.] The certain Author▪ whom he means, is an old fragment of a nameless Author, cited by Camden, fol. 136. who rels the story otherwise then our Author doth. For though the Fragment tell us, that the River was call●d Small, yet that it was the River Small near Richmond in Yorkshire, is the addition of our Author. That there is a River of that name near Richmond is affirmed by Camden, 
C●mden in R●chmondsh●●e, sol. 7●0▪  who withal telleth us, That it was reputed very sacred amongst the ancient English, for that in it, when the English-Saxons first embraced Christianity, there were in one day baptised with Festival joy by Paulinus the Archbishop of York, above ten thousand Men besides Women and little Children. Of Augustine's baptising in this River, not one word saith he. Neither doth Beda touch upon it, as certainly he would have done, had the●e been ground for it. And therefore if I may have leave to venture my opinion, I shall concur with the old fragment, as to the name of the Rive●, and yet not carry Austin ou● of Kent, and much less into Richmondshire to perform that office. 
Cam●en in K●●t, fol 3●3.  For when we find in Camden that the Medway●alling ●alling into the Thames, is divided by the Isle of Sheppey into two great branches, of which the one is called East-Swale, the other West-Swale, I see no reason why we should look any where 〈◊〉 fo● that River Small mentioned in the old fragment, which before we spoke of. But herein I must submit ●y self to more able judgements. The place agreed on, ●e should next inquire into the numbers, but that our Author seems to grant as much as the fragment craveth. Only he telleth us that  
Fol. 66. If so many were baptised in one day, it appears plainly, that in that age the Administration of that Sacrament was not loaded with those superstitious Ceremonies, as essential thereunto, of crossing, spittle, Oil, Cream, Salt, and such like Trinkets.] Our Author here reckoneth the sign of the Cross in Baptism amongst the 〈◊〉 trinkets, and superstitious Ceremonies of the Church of Rome, and thereby utterly condemneth the Church of England, which doth not only require it in her Rubrics, but also pleads for it in her Canons. Not as essential to that Sacrament (the Papists not making spital, Oyl●●ream, Salt, etc. to be essential thereunto, as our Author saith) but only for a Sign significative in token that the party signed shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, 
〈…〉  and manfully to fight under his Banner, against sin, the world, and the Devil, and to continue Christ's faithful Soldier and servant unto his lives end. A Ceremony not so new, as to be brought within the compass of Popish Trinkets, though by them abused. For when the point was agitated in the Conference at Hampton Court, 
Conser●●ce pag. 71.  and that it was affirmed by some of the Bishops, that the Cross in Baptism was used in the time of Constantine; Dr. Reynolds the most able Man of the opposite party, who had before acknowledged it to have been in use in other cases, from the very times of the Apostles, had not one word to say against it. And to say truth, no man of modesty and Learning, could have spoke against it, when it was proved so clearly by Dr. Andrews then Dean of Westminster o●t of Tertullian, Cyprian, Origen, (each of which died long time before Constantine's Birth) to have been used in immortali Lavacro, in that blessed Sacrament. That good old saying of Tertullian, Caro signetur ut anima muniatur, may serve once for all. And therefore when our Author telleth us in the following words, that in that age nothing was used with Baptism, but Baptism, it must be considered as a smack of that old Leaven which more and more will sour the lump of his whole discourse. We have already had a taste of it in the very first Book, we find a continuance of it he●e▪ and we shall see more of it hereafter; Our Author not being coy in showing his good affections not only to the Persons of the Non-conformists, but their inconformity; not to the men only, but their Doctrines and Opinions also. And this is that which we must trust to in the whole course of this History.  
Having now done with the Acts of Austin, we shall not keep ourselves to so continued a discourse as before we did, but take our Author's Text by piecemeal, as it comes before us, and making such Animadversions on the same, as may best serve to rectify the story, and maintain the truth; as namely,  
Fol. 65. Thus the Italian, Spanish, and French, Daughters or Nieces to the Latin, are generated from the corrption thereof.] This is (I grant) the common and received opinion, but yet, me thinks, our Author who loves singularities, should not vouchsafe to travel on the public Road. For in my mind it is affirmed with better reason by our learned Brerewood, 
B●erewood Enqu. cap. V.  That those tongues have not sprung from the corruption of the Latin, by the inundation and mixture of Barbarous people in those Provinces, but from the first imperfect impression and receiving of it in those foreign Countries. For the Latin tongue was never so generally received in any of the conquered Provinces out of Italy, as to be spoken ordinarily by the common people; the Gentry and Nobility might be perfect in it, for the better dispatch of their Affairs with the Roman Magistrates, who had the Government and Lieutenancy in their several Countries. And some 〈◊〉 of it might be found with the vulgar also, who having continual intercourse with the Roman Soldiers, and some recourse for Trade to the Roman Colonies, could not but get a smattering of the Latin tongue. Just so the Gentry and Nobility both in Wales and Ireland, are trained up for the same reasons in the English tongue; which notwithstanding could never get the mastery of the natural Languages, 〈◊〉 much ground on those of inferior quality. Secondly, had these National Languages proceeded from the depravation of the Latin tongue by the mixture of the barbarous Nations, it must needs follow, that the Italian had not now been the language of all people in Italy, nor the French of all the Nations which inhabit France: & sic de caeteris. My reason is, because the Heruli, being settled in those parts, which we now call Piedmont, the Longobards more towards the East, the Goths about the middle parts, the Saracens and Greeks in the Realm of Naples, there must needs be as many distinct languages in that one Continent, as there were Barbarous Nations planted in it, or at the least such different Dialects, as could be scarce intelligible unto one another. Whereas it is certainly and most plainly known, that there is only one Language spoken in all that Country, equally understood by all, without so much as any sensible difference in pronunciation; more than is usual in all places between the Country Villages and the neighbouring Citizens. The like may be affirmed of the ancient Gallia, planted on the Eastside of the Loire by the Burgundians, on the West side of that River, and towards the Mediterranean, the Pyrenies and the Aquitan Ocean by the Gothish Nations, in most other parts of it by the Franks; and yet all speaking (with very little difference) the same one Language, which from the most predominant People we now call the French. More to which purpose might be said, were not this sufficient.  
Ibid. The Hebrew the common Tongue of the whole world before it was enclosed (that is to say, divided) into several Languages.] An Opinion as common as the other, and as weakly grounded, such as I marvel at in our Author, who having travelled over all the Holy-Land, should have been better studied in the true nature and original of the Holy-Tongue. Nor is it the opinion only, that this Tongue was spoken universally before the Flood, and even in Paradise itself in the state of innocency; but that it shall be spoken in the Celestial Paradise, the language of the Saints in glory: in somuch that some good women of my old acquaintance, were once very eagerly bend to learn this Language for fear (as I conceive) they should not chat it handsomely when they came to heaven. Now for the ground thereof, it is no other than an old jewish Tradition, importing, that this being the common Language of all people before the Flood, was afterwards appropriated unto Phaleg (the son of Heber) and to his Posterity, because not present with the rest a● the building of Babel, and consequently not within the curse of confounded Languages. 
〈…〉  But against this it is disputed; first that it is but a Tradition, and therefore of no sure foundation to build upon. And secondly, that it is such a Tradition, as holds no good coherence with the truth of Story; it being a most clear and demonstrative truth, that the Hebrew Tongue was not the Language which Abraham brought with him out of Chaldea and Mesopotamia, but that which he found spoken in the Land of Canaan●t ●t his coming thither, to which both he and his posterity did conform themselves. Or had it been the Language of Heber, as they say it was, (but most undoubtedly was not) yet, thirdly, had this been a privilege conferred on Heber, that he and his posterity should speak the Original Language without alteration or corruption, it must have been extended to all those of the House of I●cktan which descend from him; as also to the House of Laban in Padan-Aram, and to the Moabites, and the Ammonites, as the seed of Lot; and finally to the Madianites, Ishmaeelites, and Idumaeans, descended of Abraham and Esau; and not be limited and confined only to the House of jacob. Now that the language which afterwards was, and still is called by the name of the Hebrew, was spoken vulgarly in the land of Canaan before the coming of Abraham thither, is not affirmed by Brerewood only, but by Scaliger, Grotius, Vossius, Bochartus, (all of them men of great renown for their learned studies) and by many others of this Age. By most of which it is affirmed also, that the name of Hebrews was given unto them by the people of Canaan, not in regard of their descent from Heber the father of Phaleg, but from Abraham's passing over the River Euphrates, when he came out of Chaldaea with his Family to dwell amongst them; that name in the Canaanitish language signifying as much as trajiciens or transfluvialis; and therefore not unfitly given by them to Abraham at his first coming thither. And if the Hebrew (as we now call it) was that Holy Language which was spoken in Paradise, continued by the Patriarches before the Flood, and after to the building of Babel; it must needs seem infinitely strange, that it should be reserved only amongst the Canaanites, accursed in the person of Canaan (their common Parent) by his Grandfather Noah, and so abominated by God for their filthy wickednesses, that he resolved to spew them out of their Native Country, as in fine he did. Or if Abraham brought it with him also, when he came into the Land of Canaan, he must needs leave it behind him also amongst the Chaldees, where he was born, and where his Ancestors had dwelled before their removal unto Haran. And yet we know that the Hebrew Tongue was so different from the Chaldean, that when the jews returned from the Captivity of Babylon, where they had been accustomed to, and bred up for the most part in the Chaldean Language, they could not understand the very words of the Hebrew Text without an Interpreter, as is apparent in the eighth Chapter of Nehemiah, vers. 7, 8. But of this Argument enough, let us now go forward.  
Fol. 69. As Pitseus a Catholic Writer would have it.] A Roman Catholic if you will, but no Catholic Writer. And much I wonder, that an Author so averse from the Church of Rome, should give the Title of Catholic to a stickler in the Romish Quarrel; though others of less zeal and prudence do commonly but inconsiderately bestow it on them. A Title which they take with joy, and from thence suck unto themselves no small advantage. 
Parenes. ad S●vtos p. 99  Adeo probanda est Ecclesia ●ostra a nomine Catholici, quod extorquet etiam ab invitis Haereticis, as is bragged by Barclay. But as Pope Gregory pleading against the Patriarch of ●●●stantinople, who had then assumed unto himself the name of Ecumenical Bishop, advertiseth all the rest of that sacred Order; 
Gr●g. M. Ep●st. 70.  Si ille est Universalis, restat ut vos non sitis Episcopi: so may I say with reference to the present case. By gracifying these men with the name of Catholics, we do unwittingly confess ourselves to be no Christians, or at least but Heretics.  
Fol. 76. Oxford lays claim to the Antiquities of Crekelade and Lechlade, two ancient Schools of Greek and Latin, as some would have it, removed afterwards to Oxford, etc.] The like we find fol. 117. where our Author telleth us of two Towns or the banks of the Isis, the one called Greekelade in which the Greek, the other Lechlade, or Latinlade in which the Latin Tongue was taught by Philosopher's. 
Camden. in Wilts 141.  Most miserably mistaken in both places. For though Crekelade, of Grekelade may import a study of Greek Philosophers, as some are ready to believe, yet certainly Lechlade in no Language will signify the like study of the Latin Tongue. The Country people (as it seems) do better understand themselves then our Author doth. Amongst whom there is a common Tradition, that Crekelade, was a University of Greek Philosophers, Lechlade of Leches, or Physicians, as the name doth intimate; and Latin a small Village betwixt both to be the place of study for the Latin tongue. But though the people are mistaken in the Etymon of the name of Lechlade, yet are they not so far out as our Author is, in making Lechlade or Latinlade, to be both the same place and of the same signification; whereas in truth that Town is so denominated from the River Lech, which arising in the Hills of Cotsall, passeth first by Northlech, from thence to Eastlech, and finally falleth into the Thames near S●. johns-bridge in this Parish of Lechlade. As for the University of Oxford, which from hence took beginning, as our Author hath it, and the Antiquity thereof, I shall not meddle at the present, though our Author forgetting the Subject which he was to write of, takes all occasions to hook in every old Tradition (though less probably grounded) to justify the seniority of the younger Sister.  
Fol. 78. Deira, whence, say some, Deirham or Durham, lay betwixt Tees and Humber.] More out of this then in his Lechlade or Latinlade, which before we had. For first Durham is not so called quasi Deirham. Our learned Antiquary gives us a better and more certain derivation of it. The River (saith he) as though it purposed to make an Island, compasseth almost on every side the chief City of this Province, standing on a Hill, whence the Saxons gave it the name of Dunholm. For as you may gather out of Bede, they called an Hill Dun, and a River-Island Holme. Hereof the Latin Writers have made Dunelmum, the Normans, Duresme; but the common people most corruptly Durham▪ But secondly, (which mars all the matter) the Bishopric of Durham was not in the Kingdom of Deira, as being wholly situate on the North side of the Tees, and consequently part of the Realm of Bernicia, which makes our Author mistake in another place, fol. 51. the more remarkable, where speaking of the Kingdom of Deira, he gives us this Comment in the Margin (viz.) What this day is the Bishopric of Deirham or Durham. But as long as some say so, all is well, though who those some are (except our Author) I can no where find. Only I find that as it is held necessary for a No●body to be in all great Houses, to bear the blame of such mischances as by the carelessness of servants and inconsiderateness, do too often happen; so is it no less necessary, that there should be a somebody also in all great undertake to bear the blame of such misfortunes as our Adventurers at wit do as often meet with. And such a somebody as this our Author hath found out to be the Father of another conceit of his concerning Teyburn (that I may take in this also whilst it is in my mind) of which he tells us lib. 4. fol. 168. That some have deduced the Etymology of Teyburn from Tie and Burn; because forsooth the Lord Cobham was there hanged and burnt. Whereas indeed it was so named from the Tey, or Teybourn, a small Brook passing near unto it in the former times. Which Brook or Bourn arising not far from Paddington, hath since been drawn into several Conduits for the use of the City.  
Fol. 69. A place so marked, being foretold fortunate to Aeneas to found Alba (since Rome) therein.] A passage as well stored with Errors as the rest before, and such a piece of fine new learning, as never any Antiquary had found out till now. For first, Aeneas was not the founder of Alba, though that the place designed unto him for the fear of his Kingdom. The building of that City was the work of Ascanius, as we find in Virgil.  
At puer Ascanius— Regnumque à sede Lavini  
Transferet, & longam multa vi muniet Albam.  
That is to say; 
Ascanius from Lavinum shall translate  
To Alba strongly fenced the Regal State.  And secondly Alba was not built in the place where Rome since stood, but duodecimo ab urbe Lapide, about twelve miles off. For though the River Tiber in some ancient Writers hath the name of Albula, yet I never found many Writer either old or new (till I encountered it ●n our Author) that Rome was anciently called Alba.  
Fol. 104. It is admirable to consider what Shoals of People were formerly vented out of Cimbrica Chernonesus, take it in the largest extent, for Denmark, Norway, and Swedeland.] And in the largest extent it is taken indeed, such as no Author ever gave it before this time. The Cimbrick Chersonese truly and properly so called comprehended only those parts of the Kingdom of Denmark, which we now call juitland, divided by the River Eydore, from the Dukedom of Hostein. Ortelius, and some 〈◊〉 Geographers make it to take up all that Languel, or piece of Land on the North of Germany, extended from the River Albis in the South, and stretching Northward to that part of the Ocean which leads into the narrow Strait, or passage now called Sundt. But never any till our Author extended this name over those great Kingdoms of Denmark, Norway, and Swedeland, or unto any part of either beyond the Sundt. And yet he had need stretch it a great deal further before he can find place in it for his Huns, and Vandals: of which the first inhabited in Asia, beyond the Fens of Maeotis; the last upon the Coast of the Baltic Sea in Germany, now the Dukedom of Mecklenburg.  
Fol. 125. Datum in Grantecestria, Anno ab incarnatione Domini 915. venerabili Fratri Frithstano, Civitatis Scola●ium Cantabrig. Cancellario, & Doctori per suum, etc.] These words are the conclusion of an ancient Charter, supposed to have been given to the Scholars of Cambridge by King Edward the elder; against which our Author fancies one objection which he thinks easy to be answered, but utterly leaves out another, which I think upanswerable. The objection which our Author makes against it, is the barbarous style and language of it; which if it be a good objection against this Charter, will be as strong against all the Charters of this age, as some ages following in which there 〈◊〉 but little of the Elegancies of the Latin tongue. An● therefore this objection might have well been spared but that our Author would be thought to deal ver● equally in the business, by saying all that might b● said against himself. But yet I have another objecti●on which he takes no notice of, because not so easi● to be answered; which is, that Frithstan (whatsoever he was) is here honoured with the degree of Doctor, and the title of Chancellor. But first I would fain know where Frithstan took the degree of Doctor, and i● what faculty he took it; that title in those early days being so unusual, as hardly to be found amongst the Attributes of the learnedest men. Secondly, I conceive it to be very hard, I had almost said impossible, for him to prove, that the chief Officer of Cambridge (admitting it at that time for a place of learning) had the● name of Chancellor. When I shall see some proof o● this, and some satisfaction, I shall give some credit to the Charter, till then none at all.  
Fol. 139. Cambridgeshire men claim an ancient (new antiquated) privilege to lead the Van in all Battles.] Zealous alike not only for the University, but the County of Cambridge, his zeal in both transporting him beyond his knowledge into dark adventures. Some Authors he pretends to for the University, for this privilege none▪ telling us only that he hath read it, though he know not where. But I can tell him when and where I have read the contrary, that is to say, in learned Camden, who ascribes this honour to the Kentish. For this he citys not only the authority of a nameless Monk, but the words of johannes Sarisburiensis in his Polycratiaeon, 
Camd. in Kent, 324.  which are these that follow, For good desert (saith he) of that notable valour which Kent showed so pvissantly and patiently against the Danes, it retaineth still unto these days in all Battles the honour of the first and forward, yea and of the first conflict with the Enemy. And if this privilege was given the Kentish for their valour showed against the Danes, it could ●either be given to the men of Cambridge-shire, as our Author would, nor on the same occasion as he saith it was.  
Fol. 141. It did not afterwards embolden him to the anticipation of the Crown, attending till it descended upon him.] He speaks this of King Edward the Confessor, who had he tarried till the Crown had descended on him, might possibly have found a place amongst the Confessors, but not amongst the Kings of England. For the truth is, the right title to the Crown was at that time in Edward surnamed the Outlaw, the eldest Son of Edmund Ironside, who flying into Hungary to avoid the fury of the Danes married the King's sister of that Country, and was by her the Father of Edgar Atheling, and of Margaret wife to Malcolm Conmor King of the Scots. But these being absent at that time, Emma the Mother of Prince Edward, and Widow to Canutus the Dane, took the opportunity to set her Son upon the Throne, as being not only half-brother to King Edmund Ironside, but also half-brother, and consequently ●earest kinsman to Canutus the second; which if it were a good descent, will plead almost as strongly for King Harald, as it did for him. But by what means soever he got the Crown, he deserved to wear it, our Author telling us  
Ibid. That whereas formerly there were manifold Laws in the Land, made, some by the Britain's, others by the Danes, others by the English, etc. He caused some few of the best to be selected, and the rest as captious and unnecessary, to be rejected; from whence they had the name of the Common Laws.] That the Common-Law was so called because compounded of the Saxon, British, and Danish Laws, which were before of force only in such places where the Danes, Britan's, and Saxon▪ had the greatest sway; though it be easy to be said, will be hard to be proved. The Britan's at that time lived under their own Princes, and were governed by their own Laws, and so they were for a long time after; so that King Edward having no dominion over them could not impose a Law upon them. Not was it probable that he should borrow any of their Laws, or impose them on his natural subjects, considering the Antipathy and disaffection betwixt the Nations. There were indeed at that time in England three kinds of Laws. The first called Dane-lage or the Danish Laws, prevailing for the most part in the Kingdom of the East-Angles, and that of Northumberland; secondly Saxon-lage, used generally in the Kingdoms of the Westsaxons, East-Saxons, South-Saxons, and that of Kent; and thirdly, Merce●-lage, extending over all the Provinces of the Kingdom of Mercia. As for the Britan's of Cornwall and Cumberland, they had no distinct Law for themselves (as had those of Wales) but were governed by the Laws of that Nation unto which they were subject. By these three sorts of Laws were these Nations governed in their several and respective limits, which being afterwards reduced into one body, and made common equally to all the subjects, did worthily deserve the name of the Common-Law. But secondly I dare not give the honour of this action to King Edward the Confessor. The great justinian in this work was another Edward, called, for distinctions sake, King Edward the elder, who began his Reign Anno 900. almost 150 years before this Confessor, to whom our Author hath ascribed it. But the truth is, that these Laws being suppressed by the Danish Kings who governed either in an arbitrary way, or by the Laws of their own Country, they were revived and reinforced in the time of this Edward, from whence they had the name of Edward the Confessors Laws, and by that name were sued and fought for in the time succeeding, of which more hereafter. Now as this work may be ascribed to his love to justice, so from his piety, his successors derive as great a benefit of curing the disease which from thence is called the King's evil, which some impute (as our Author tells us) to secret and hidden causes.  
Fol. 145. Others ascribe it to the power of fancy and an exalted imagination.] Amongst which others, I may reckon our Author for one. He had not else so strongly pleaded in defence thereof. But certainly what effect soever the strength of fancy and an exalted imagination's as our Author calls it, may produce in those of riper years, it can contribute nothing to the cure of children. And I have seen some children brought before the King by the hanging sleeves, some hanging at their Mother's breasts, and others in the arms of their Nurses, all touched and cured without the help of any such fancies or imaginations as our Author speaks of. Others less charitably condemn this cure as guilty of superstition, quarrelling at the Circumstances and Ceremonies which are used; and this they do  
(Saith he ibid.) either displeased at the Collect, consisting of the first nine verses of the Gospel of St. John, as▪ wholly improper, and nothing relating to the occasion, etc.] Our Author tells us more than once, lib. 11. 167. of his being a Clerk of the Convocation, but I find by this, that he never came so high as to be Clerk of the Closet. Which had he been, he would not have mistaken the Gospel for a Collect; or touched upon that Gospel which is less material, without insisting on the other, which is more pertinent and proper to the work in hand; or suffered the displeased party to remain unsatisfied about the sign of the Cross made by the Royal hands on the place▪ infected (as it after followeth) when there is no such crossing used in that sacred Ceremony, the King only gently drawing both his hands over the sore at the reading of the first Gospel. But that both he and others may be satisfied in these particulars, I have thought fit to lay down the whole form of prayers and readings used in the healing of that malady in this manner following.  

The form of the Service at the healing of the King's-evil.  
The first Gospel is exactly the same with that on Ascension day. At the touching of every infirm person, these words are repeated, They shall lay their hands on the sick, and they shall recover.  
The second Gospel begins the first of St. john, and ends at these words, Full of grace and truth. At the putting the Angel about their necks were repeated, That Light was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.  
Lord have mercy upon us.  
Christ have mercy upon us.  
Lord have mercy upon us.  
Our Father which art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name, etc.  Min. 
O Lord save thy servants.  An. 
Which put their trust in thee.  Min. 
Send unto them help from above.  An. 
And evermore mightily defend them.  Min. 
Help us, O God our Saviour.  An. 
And for the glory of thy name sake deliver us, be merciful unto us sinners for thy name's sake.  Min. 
O Lord hear our Prayer.  An. 
And let our cry come unto thee.  

The Collect.  
Almighty God, the eternal health of all such as put their trust in thee, hear us we beseech thee on the behalf of these thy servants, for whom we call for thy merciful help, that they receiving health may give thanks ●nto thee in thy holy Church, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.  
The peace of God, etc.    
This is the whole form, against which nothing is objected, but the using of the words before mentioned at the putting on of the Angel; the pertinency whereof may appear to any who consider that the Light which was the true Light, and lighteth every man which cometh into the world, did not shine more visibly, at the least mo●e comfortably upon the people, then in the healing of ●o many sick, infirm, and leprous persons, as did from time to time receive the benefit of it. But it is time I should proceed.  
Fol. 148. These chose Harald to be King▪ whose Title to the Crown is not worth our deriving of it● much 〈◊〉 his relying on it.] A Title not so despicable as our Author makes it, nor much inferior unto that by which hi● Predecessor obtained the Kingdom. Harald being ●on to Earl Godwin, (the most potent man of all the S●●xons) by Theyra the natural Daughter of Canutus the fi●st, was consequently Brother by the whole blood to Harald Har●agar, and Brother by the half blood to Canutus the ●econd, the two last Danish Kings of England. In which respect being of Saxon Ancestry by his Father, and of the Danish Royal blood by his Mother, he might be looked on as the fittest person in that conjuncture to con●ent both Nations. But whatsoever his Title was, it was undoubtedly better than that of the Norman, had either his success been answerable, or his sword as good. Upon occasion of which Conquest our Author telleth us that  
Ibid. This was the fifth time wherein the South of this Island was conquered; first by Romans, secondly by Picts and Scots, thirdly by Saxons, fourthly by the Danes, and fifthly● by the Norman] But this I can by no means yield to, 〈◊〉 Scots and Picts not being to be named amongst those Nations who subdued the South part of this Island. That they did many time's harass and depopulate the South part of it, I shall easily gr●nt; but to the subduing of a Co●ntrey there is more required then to waste and spoil it: that is to say, to fix their dwelling and abode (for some time at least) in the Country conquered; to change the Laws, alter the language, or new mould the Government; or finally to translate the Sceptre from the old Royal Family to some one of their own. None of which things being done in the Invasions of the Scots and Picts, they cannot properly be said to have subdued the South parts of the Island, as our Author (out of love perhaps to the Scots) would persuade the Reader.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Third and Fourth Books OF The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
From the time of the Norman Conquest, to the time of King Henry the Eighth.  
WE are now come unto the times of the Norman Government, when the church beg●n to settle on a surer bottom, both fo● 〈◊〉 and polity; the Bishops less obnoxious to the Ki●●● then formerly, because elected by the Monks and Canon's of their own Cathedrals▪ their Consistories free 〈◊〉 the intermixture of Lay-assistance, and their Synods managed by themselves. Wherein tho●gh the 〈◊〉 power of making such Synodical Constitutions 〈…〉 facto bind all pa●ties, yet our Author is resolved to have ●●otherwise.  
Fol. 19 The Pr●ceedings (saith he) of the Canon Law were never wholly received into practice in the Land; but so as made subject in whatsoever touched temporals, to Secular Laws, and National Customs. And the Laity at 〈◊〉 limited Canons in this behalf.] How false this is, ●ow contrary to the power and practice of the Church be●ore the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the ei●●●; and finally how dangerous a ground is hereby 〈◊〉 to weaken the Authority of Convocations, will 〈◊〉 appear by ●●ying down the sum of a Petition pre●●●●ed by the House of Commons to the same King H●nry, together with the Answer of the Prelate's and inferior Clergy, then being Synodically assembled, to the said Petition.  
The substance of the Petition was as followeth, viz.  
THat the Clergy of this your Realm, being you▪ Highness Subjects, in their Convocation by th●m holden within this your Realm, have made and daily make divers Sanctions or Laws concerning Temporal things, 
Acts 〈…〉 An●o ●532.  and some of them be repugnant to the Laws and Statu●e● of your Realm, not having 〈◊〉 requiring your most Royal assent to the same Laws so by them made, nother any assent or knowledge of your Lay Subjects, is had to the same, no●he● to them published and known in their Mother tongue al●●it dive●s and sundry of the said Laws extend in certain causes to your excellent Pe●son, your liberty and Prerogative Royal, and to the interdiction 〈◊〉 your Laws and Possessions, and so likewise to the Good● and Possessions of your Lay Subjects, declaring the in●ringers of the same Laws so by them ma●e not only to incur the terrible censure of Excommunication, but also to the detestable crime and sin of Her●●e, by the which divers of your humble and obedient Lay Subjects be brought into this Ambiguity, whether they may do and execute your Laws according to your Jurisdiction Royal of this Realm, for dread of the same Censures and pains comprised in the same Laws so by them made in their Convocations, to the great trouble and inquietation of your said humble and obedient Lay subjects', etc. the impeachment of your Jurisdiction and Prerogative Royal.  
The Answer thereunto was this. 
TO this we say, that forasmuch as we 〈◊〉 and take our Authority of making Laws to be grounded upon the Scripture of God, and the determination of holy Church, which must also be 〈◊〉 rule and squire to try the justice and righteousness of all Laws, as well Spiritual as Temporal; we verily trust that considering the Laws of this Realm be such as have been made by most Christian, religious and devout Princes and People, how both these Laws proceeding from one fountain the same being sincerely interpreted, and after the good meaning of the makers, there shall be found no repugnancy, nor contrariety, but that the one shall be found as aiding, maintaining and supporting the other. And if it shall otherwise appear, as it is our duty (whereunto we shall always most diligently 〈◊〉 ourselves) to reform our Ordinance▪ to Gods Commission, and to conform our Statutes and Laws; and those of our predecessors, to the determination of Scripture and holy Church; so we hope in 〈◊〉 and shall daily pray for the same, that your Highness will, 〈…〉 came why, with the assent of your 〈…〉 temper your Grace's Laws accordingly. 〈…〉 shall 〈◊〉 a most happy and perfect 〈◊〉 and agreement, as God being Lapis angula●● to agree and conjoin the same. And as concerning 〈…〉 of your Highness Royal assent to the 〈◊〉 of such Laws as have been by our 〈◊〉, or shall be made by us in such points and 〈◊〉 as we have by God authority to rule and 〈◊〉 by such Provisions and Laws; we knowing your Highness' wisdom, and virtue, and learning, nothing doubt but the same perceiveth how the granting hereunto dependeth not upon our will and liberty. And that we your most humble Subjects may not 〈◊〉 the execution of our charge and duty certainly prescribed by God, to you● Highness assent, although in very deed the same is most worthy for your most Noble, Princely, and excellent virtues, not only to give yo●● Royal assent, but also to devi●e and comm●nd what we should fo● good order and 〈…〉 Statutes and Law provide in the Church, nevertheless considering we may not so ne in such sort refrain the doing of our office in the ●ee●ing and ruling of 〈◊〉 people your Grace's Subjects; we most humbly desiring your Grace as the same hath heretofore, so from hence forth to show your Grace's 〈◊〉 and opinion unto us, what your high Wisdom shall think convenient, which we shall most gladly hear and follow i● it shall please God to in●●● is so to do, with all submission and humility beseech the same, following the step● of your most Noble Progenitors, and conformably to your our own Acts do maintain and defend such Laws, and Ordinances, as we according to our calling and by Authority of God, shall for his honour make, to the edification of virtue, and maintaining Christ's faith, of which your Highness is named Defender, and hath been hitherto indeed a special Protector.  
Furthermore whereas your said Lay Subjects say, that sundry of the said Laws extend in certain causes to your excellent Person, your Liberty and Prerogative Royal, and to the interdiction of your Land and Possessions: To this your said Orators say, that having submitted the trial and examining of the Laws made in the Church by us and our Predecessors, to the just and strait Rule of God's Laws, which giveth measure of Power, Prerogative, and Authority to all Emperors, Kings, Princes, and Potentates, and all other; we have conceived such opinion, and have such estimation of your Majesty's goodness and virtue, that whatsoever any persons not so well learned as your Grace is would pretend unto the same, whereby we your most humble Subjects may be brought in your Grace's displeasure and indignation, surmising that we should by usupation and presumption, extend our Laws to your most noble Person, Prerogative and Realm, yet the same your Highness being so highly learned, will of your own most bounteous goodness facilly discharge and deliver us from that envy, when it shall appear that the said Laws are made by us, or our Predecessors conformable and maintenable by the Scripture of God, and determination of the Church, against which no Laws can stand or take effect.   
Somewhat to this purpose had been before endeavoured by the Commons in the last Parliament of King Edw. 3. of which, because they got nothing by it, but only the showing of their teeth without hurting any body; I shall say nothing in this place, reserving it to the time of the long Parliament, in the Reign of King Charles, when this point was more hotly followed, and more powerfully prosecuted than ever formerly.  
What says our Author unto this? Finds he here any such matter, as that the Laity at their pleasure could li●●● the Canons of the Church? Or that such Canons in whatsoever touched temporals were subject unto secular Laws and National Customs? And hereof I desire the Reader to take special notice, as that which is to serve for a Catholicon, of general Antidote against those many venomous insi●nations, which he shall meet with up and down in the course of this History. As for the case in which our Author grounds this pestilent Position, it was the Canon made in a Synod at Westminster, in the time of Anselm, Anno 1102. prohibiting the sale of men and women like brute beasts in the open Market. Which Canon not finding presently an universal obedience over all the Kingdom (as certainly ill customs are not easily left, when they are countenanced by profit) occasioned our Author to adventure upon this bold assertion.  
Fol. 24. Indeed St. david's had been Christian some hundred of years, whilst Canterbury was yet Pagan. ● Not many hundred years I am sure of that, nor yet so many as to make a plural number by the Latin Grammar; Kent being conquered by the Saxons, who brought in Pae●●nism, Anno 455. Converted unto Christianity by the preaching of Austin, An. 569. Not much more than 140 years betwixt the one and the other.  
Fol. 29. To whose honour he (viz. King Stephen) erected St. Stephen's Chapel in Westminster near the place whero lately the Court of Requests was kept.] Our Author is here 〈…〉, and will not parler le tout, as the French men say. For otherwise he might have told us that this Chapel is still standing, and since the ●●endry of it to King Edward the sixth, 
〈…〉  ha●● been 〈◊〉 for a Parliament House, employed to that purpose by the Common, as 〈…〉 be thus reserved, I can hardly tell; unless it be to prevent such inferences and observations, which by some wanton wits might be made upon it.  
Fol. 40. By the same title from his Father Jeffery Plantagenet, he possessed fair lands in Anjou and Maine. I had thought he had possessed somewhat more in Anjou and Maine, than some fair Lands only, his Father jeffery Plantagenet being the Proprietary Earl of Anjou, Maine, and Toureine, not a●itular only, succeeded in the same by this King Henry and his two sons, Richard, and john, till lost unhappily by the last with the rest of our Estates on that side of the Sea. From this jeffery descended fourteen Kings of the name of Plantagenet, the name not yet extinguished, though it be impoverished: our Author speaking of one of them, who was found not long since at the Blow. Lib. 2. p. 170. Another of that name publishing a Book about the Plantation of new Albion, An. 1646. or not long before.  
Fol. 53. King John sent a base, degenerous and unchristian Embassage to Admiralius Murmelius a Mahometan King of Morocco, then very puissant, and possessing a great part of Spain.] This Admiralius Murmelius, as our Author and the old Monks call him, was by his own name called Mahomet Enaser, the Miramomoline of Morocco; to whom if King john sent any such Message, it was as base, unchristian and degenerate as our Author makes it. But being the credit of the ●ale depends upon the credit of the Monkish Authors, to which b●ood of men that King was known to be a professed Enemy ●ha●ing and hated by one another's it is not to be esteemed so highly as a piece of Apocrypha, and much less to be held for Gospel Possible it is, that being overlaid by his own subjects, and distressed by the 〈◊〉 he might send unto that King for aid in his great extremities. And doing this 〈◊〉 this were a●●) he did no 〈…〉 and in ignation, and 〈…〉 so much as was done afterwards upon far weaker grounds by King Francis the first, employing the Turks Forces both by Sea and Land against Charles the fifth. But the Monks coming to the knowledge of this secret practice, and construing his actions to the worst, improved the Molehill to a Mountain, rendering him thereby as odious to posterity, as he was to themselves.  
Fol. 63. I question whether the Bishop of Rochester (whose Country house at Brumly is so nigh) had ever a House in the City.] There is no question but he had, St●w finding it in Southwark by the name of Rochester 〈◊〉 adjoining on the South side to the Bishop of winchester's, minons, and out of ●eparation in his time (as possibly not much frequented since the building of Bromly House) and since converted into Tonements for private persons. But since our Author hath desired others to recover the rest from oblivion, I shall help him to the knowledge of two more, and shall thank any man to find out the third. The first of these two is the Bishop of Lincoln's House, situate near the old Temple in Holborn, first built by Robert de Chesney Bishop of Lincoln, Anno 1147. Since aliened from that See to the Earls of Southampton, and passing by the name of Southampton House. The second is the Bishop of Bangors, a fair House situate in Shoo-lane near St. Andrews Church, of late time Leased out by the Bishops, and not long since the dwelling of Dr Smith Doctor in Physic, a right honest and ingenuous person, and my very good Friend. Of all the old Bishops which were founded before King Harry the eight, there is none whose House we have not found but the Bishop of A●aph▪ to the finding whereof, if our Author, or any other will hold forth the Candle, I shall follow the 〈◊〉 the best I can, and be thankful for it.  
Fol. 67. And though some high Royalists look on it as the product of subjects, 〈◊〉 themselves on their 〈…〉 Our Author tells us in his Brerewood upon a diligent enquiry hath found it otherwise then our Author doth▪ letting us know, That the first Country in Christendom, whence the Jews were expelled without hope of return, 
Brevewoods' ●nq. cap 13.  was our Country of England, whence they were banished, Anno 1290. by King Edward the first; and not long after out of France, Anno 1307. by Phi●ippus Pulcher. Not out of France first, out of England afterwards, as our Author would have it.  
Fol. 100 Thus men of yesterday have pride too much to remember what they were the day before.] An observation true enough, but not well applied. The two Spen●●rs whom he speaks this of, were not men of yesterday, or raised out of the dirt or dunghill to so great an height; 
Camden in Monmouthsh.  but of as old and known Nobility as the best in England: insomuch that when a question grew in Parliament, whether the Baroness de Spencer, or the Lord of Aburgaveny were to have precedency, it was adjudged unto de Spencer, thereby declared the ancientest Barony of the Kingdom at that time then being. These two Spencers, Hugh the Father was created Earl of Winchester for term of life; and Hugh the Son by marrying one of the Daughters and coheirs of Gilbert dt Cl●re, became Earl of Gloster. Men more to be commended for their Loyalty, then accused for their pride, but that the King was now declining, and therefore it was held fit by the prevalent faction to take his two supporters from him, as they after did.  
Fol. 113. The Lord Chancellor was ever a Bishop.] If our Author by this word ever understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, most commonly, or for the most part, he is right enough; but than it will not stand with the following words, viz. as if it had been against equity to employ any other 〈◊〉. 〈…〉 he take the word ever in its proper and more natural sense, as if none but Bishops had ever been advanced unto that office, he doth not only misinform the Reader, but confute himself, he having told us fol. 31. of this present book, that Thomas Becket being then but Archdeacon of Canterbury, was made Lord Chancellor, and that as soon as he was made Archbishop, he resigned that office. But the truth is, that not only men in holy Orders, but many of the Laity also had attained that dignity, as will appear to any who will take the pains to 〈◊〉 the Catalogue of the Chancellors and 〈◊〉 of the Gr●at Seal, in the Glossary of Sir Henry 〈◊〉: in which appear not only some of inferior dignity, as Deans, Archdeacon's, household Chaplains; but many also not dignified with any Ecclesiastical ●●●●or Notification, and therefore in all probability to be looked on as mere Laymen, Counsellors, and Servants to the Kings in whose times they lived, or otherwise studied in the Laws, and of good affection's, and consequently capable of the place of such trust and power.  
Fol. 116. This year● viz. 1350. as Authors generally agree, King Edward instituted are Order of the Garter.] Right enough as unto the time, but much mistaken in some things which relate unto that ancient and most noble Order: our Author taking up his Commodities at the second hand, neither consulting the Records, no● dealing in this business with men of credit. For first there are not 〈◊〉 Canons resident in the Church of Win●or, but thirteen only with the Dean: it being King Edward's purpose when he founded that O●de●, consisting of twenty 〈◊〉 Knights, himself being one, to 〈◊〉 as many greater and lesser Canons, and as many old Soldiers commonly called poor Knights' to be pensioned there. Though in this last the number was 〈…〉 up to his first intention. He tells us secondly, that if he be not mistaken (as indeed he is) Sir Thomas Row was the last Chancellor of the Order; whereas Sir james Palmer one of the Gentlemen Ushers of the Privy Chamber succeeded him in the place of Chancellor after his decease, Anno 1644. He tells us thirdly, that there belongs unto it one Register being always the Dean of Windsor, which is nothing so. For though the Deans of late times have been Registers also, yet ab initio non suit sic, it was not so from the beginning; The first Dean who was also Register, being john Boxul, Anno 1557. Before which time, beginning at the year 1414. there had been nine Registers which were not Deans; but how many more before that time I am not able to say, their names not being on Record. And so●●thly he tells us, that the Garter is one of the extraordinary Habiliments of the Knights of this Order, their ordinary being only the blue Ribbon about their necks, with the picture of St. George appendent, and the Sun in his glory on the left shoulder of their Cloak; whereas indeed the Garter is of common wearing, and of such necessary use, that the Knights are not to be seen abroad without it, 
Hist. of St George L. 3. cap. 3, 8.  upon pain of paying two Crowns to any Officer of the Order who shall first claim it, unless they be to take a journey; in which case it is sufficient to wear a blue Ribbon under their Boots to denote the Garter. Lastly, whereas our Author tells us, that the Knights hereof do wear on the left shoulder of their Cloaks a Sun in his glory, and attributes this wearing, as some say, to King Charles'; I will first put him out of doubt, that this addition was King Charles his; then show him his mistake in the matter itself. And first, in the first year of that King, Ap. 26, 1626. it was thus enacted at a public Chapter of the O●der, viz. That all Knights and Companions of the Order, shall wear upon the left part of their Cloaks, Coats, and riding Cassocks, at all times when they shall not wear their Robes, and in all places of Assembly, an Escocheon of the Arms of St. George, id est, a Cross within a Garter, not enriched with Pearls or Stones: in token of the honour which they hold from the said most noble Order, instituted and ordained for persons of the highest worth and honour. Our Author, secondly, may perceive by this Act of the Kings, that St. George's Cross within the Garter is the main device enjoined to be worn by all the Knights of that noble Order; to which the adding of the Sun in his glory served but for ornament and imbellishing, and might be either used or not used (but only for conformities sake) as they would themselves. So many errors in so few lines one shall hardly meet with.   

The Fourth Book.  
From the first Preaching of Wickliff, to the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the Eighth.  
OUR Author begins this Book with the Story of Wickliff, and continueth it in relating the successes of him and his followers, to which he seems so much addicted, as to christian their Opinions by the name of the Gospel. For speaking of such encouragements and helps as were given to Wickliff by the Duke of Lancaster, with other advantages, which the conditions of those times did afford unto him, he addeth that  
Fol. 129. We must attribute the main to Divine Providence blessing the Gospel.] A name too high to be bestowed upon the Fancies of a private Man, many of whose Opinions were so far from truth, so contrary to peace and civil Order, so inconsistent with the Government of the Church of Christ, as make them utterly unworthy to be looked on as a part of the Gospel. Or if the Doctrines of Wickliff must be called the Gospel, what shall become of the Religion then established in the Re●l● of England, and in most other parts of the Western wo●ld? Were all but Wickliff's Followers relapsed to 〈◊〉, were they turned Jews, or had embraced 〈◊〉 of Mahomet? If none of these, and that they 〈…〉 in the faith of Christ, delivered to them in the Gospels of the four Evangelists, and other Apostolical Writers, Wickliff's new Doctrines could not challenge the name of Gospel, nor ought it to be given to him by the pen of any. But such is the humour of some men, as to call every separation from the Church of Rome, by the name of Gospel, the greater the separation is, the more pure the Gospel. No name but that of Evangelici would content the Germans when they first separated from that Church, and reform their own; and Harry Nichols, when he separated from the Germane Churches, and became the Father of the Familists, bestows the name of Evangelium Regni on his Dreams and Dotages. Gospels of this kind we have had, and may have too many, quot Capita tot fides, as many Gospels, in a manner, as Sects and Sectaries, if this world go on.  
Now as Wickliff's Doctrines are advanced to the name of Gospel, so his Followers (whatsoever they were) must be called Gods servants, the Bishops being said fol. 151. to be busy in persecuting Gods servants; and for what crime soever they were brought to punishment, it must be thought they suffered only for the Gospel and the service of God. A pregnant evidence whereof we have in the story of Sir john Oldcastle, accused in the time of King Harry the fifth for a Design to kill the King and his Brethren, actually in Arms against that King in the he●● of 20000 men, attainted for the same in open Parliament, and condemned to die, and executed in St. Giles his Fields accordingly, as both Sir Roger Acton his principal Counsellor, 
Stow in Hen. 5.  and 37 of his Accomplices had been before. For this we have not only the Authority of our common Chronicles, Walsingham, Stow, and many others; but the Records of the Tower, and Acts of Parliament, as is confessed by our Author, fol. 168. Yet coming out of Wickliff's Schools, and the chief Scholar questionless which was trained up in them, he must be Registered for a Martyr in Fox his Calendar. And though our Author dares not quit him, (as he says himself) yet such is his tenderness and respect to Wickliff's Gospel, that he is loath to load his Memory with causeless Crimes, fol. 167. taxeth the Clergy of that time for their hatred to him, discrediteth the relation of T. Walsingham, and all later Authors, who are affirmed to follow him as the Flock their Bell-wether; and finally leaves it as a special verdict to the last day of the Revelation of the righteous judgements of God.  
From the Scholar pass we to the Master, of whom it is reported in a late Popish Pamphlet, that he made a recantation of his Errors, and lived and died conformable to the Church of Rome. This I behold as a notorious falsehood, an imposture of the Romish party, though the argument used by our Author, be not of strength sufficient to enforce me to it. If, saith he, Wickliff was sufficiently reconciled to the Roman faith, why was not Rome sufficiently reconciled to him? Using such cruelty to him many years after his death, fol. 171. But this, say I, is no reason, of no force at all. Wickliff might possibly be reconciled to the Church of Rome, and yet the Minister's of that Church, to strike a terror into others, might▪ execute that vengeance on him after his decease, which they had neither power nor opportunity to do when he was alive. Quam vivo iracundiam debuerant, in corpus mort●i contulerunt. And hereof we have a fair example in Marcus Antonius de Dominis Archbishop of Spalleto, who coming into England, 1616. did manifestly oppose the Doctrines of the Church of Rome, in some learned Volumes. But being cunningly wrought on by some Emissary's of the Romish party in the year 1622. he went ba●k to Rome, was reconciled to that Church, and writ the e most reproachfully of the Church of England; which notwithstanding, he was kept prisoner all the rest of his life, and his body burnt to ashes after his decease. So than it is no such new matter for a dissenting Christian, such as Wickliff and de Dominis were, though branded by the n●me of Heretics, to be admitted to a reconciliation with the Church of Rome, and yet that Church to carry a revengeful mind towards them when occasion serves.  
And all this while we have expected that our Author would have given us a brief summary of Wickliff's Doctrines, that by seeing the Piety and Orthodoxy of his Opinions, we might have thought more reverently both of him and his Followers. But therein our expectation must remain unsatisfied, our Author thinking it more agreeable to his Design to hold the Reader in suspense, and conceal this from him: dealing herein as the old Germans did with those of other Nations, who came to wait upon Valeda a great Queen amongst them; not suffering any to have a sight of her, to keep them in a greater admiration of her parts and Person. Arcebantur aspectu quò plus venerationis inesset, 
Hist. Lib. 4.  as it is in Tacitus. The wheat of Wickliff was so soul, so full of chaff, and intermingled with so many and such dangerous Tares, that to expose it to the view, were to mar the market. And therefore our Author having formerly honoured his Opinions by the name of Gospel, and his followers with the Title of God's servants, as before was noted; had reason not to show them all at once, in a lump together, that we might think them better and more Orthodox than indeed they were. But the best is (to save us the trouble of consulting Harpsfield, and others who have written of them) our Author hath given them us at last on another occasion, Lib. 5. fol. 208. many of which the Reader may peruse in these Ammadversions, Numb. 113. Thus having laid together so much of this present Book as relates to Wickliff and his followers, I must behold the rest in fragments as they lie before me.  
Fol. 152. He lies buried in the South Isle of St. Peter's Westminster, and since hath got the company of Spencer and Drayton.] Not Draytons' company I am sure, whose body was not buried in the South-Isle of that Church, but under the North wall thereof in the main body of it, not far from a little door which openeth into one of the prebend's houses. This I can say on certain knowledge, being casually invited to his Funeral, when I thought not of it; though since his Statue hath been set up in the other place which our Author speaks of.  
Fol. 153. The Right to the Crown lay not in this Henry, but in Edmund Mortimer Earl of March, descended by his Mother Philippe, from Lionel Duke of Clarence, elder son to Edward the third.] I shall not now dispute the Title of the House of Lancaster, though I think it no hard matter to defend it; and much less shall I venture on the other controversy, viz. whether a King may Legally be deposed, as is insinuated by our Author in the words foregoing. But I dare grapple with him in a point of Heraldry, though I find him better studied in it, then in matter of History. And certainly our Author is here out, in his own dear Element. Edmund Mortimer Earl of March not being the Son, 
Camd●n in R●dnor. 624,  but Husband of the Lady Philippe Daughter of Lionel, Duke of Clarence, and Mother of Roger Mortimer Earl of March, whom Richard the second (to despite the House of Lancaster) declared Heir apparent to the Kingdom of England. 'Tis true, this Edmond was the son of another Philippe, that is to say, of Philip Montacute, wife of a former Roger Earl of March, one of the founders of the Garter. So that in whomsoever the best Title lay, if lay not in this Edmond Mortimer as our Author makes it.  
〈◊〉. 154. This is one of the clearest distinguishing 〈…〉 the Tempora●● and Spiritual Lords● that 〈…〉 be tried per pares, by their Peers, being 〈…〉.] No● shall I here dispute the point, 〈…〉 may not challenge to be tried by his 〈…〉 whe●●er the Bishops were not Barons and 〈◊〉 of the Realm. Our Author intimates that they were not, but I think they were, and this I think on the authority of the learned Selden, 
〈…〉  in whom we find, that at a Parliament at Northampton 〈◊〉 Henry the 2. the Bishops thus challenge their own ●ee age, viz. Non sedemus hi● Episcopi, said Barones, Nos ●●●●nes, v●s Barones; Pares hi● sumus: that is to 〈◊〉 We 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 as Bishops only but as Barons; We are Barons, and you are Barons; here we sit as Peers. Which last is also 〈…〉 in terminis, by the words of a Statu●e 〈◊〉 Act of Parliament, 
〈…〉  wherein the Bishops are acknowledged to ●e Peers of the Land. And for further proof he● eo●, John stratford Archbishop of Canterbury (if I remember it aright) being fallen into the displeasure of King Edward the third, and denied entrance into the House of 〈◊〉 made his Protest, that he was Primus 〈◊〉 Regni, the 〈◊〉 Peer of the Realm, and therefore not to be 〈…〉 from his place and Suffrage. But of this Argument enough, i● not too much as the case now stands▪ 〈…〉 thing, to consider what they have 〈…〉 what they are at this pre●ent.  
〈…〉 Reign the●e pa●● an Act of Pa●liament, by which it was enacted, That the Country of Wales should be, stand and continue for ever from thenceforth incorporated, united, and annexed to and with this Realm of England. And that all and singular person and persons born and to be born in the said principality, country or dominion of Wales▪ shall have, enjoy, and inhe ●it all and singular Freedoms, Liberties, Rights, 
〈◊〉 H. 8. c. 26.  Privileges, and Laws within this Realm, and other the King's Dominions, as other the King's Subjects naturally bo●n within the same, have, and enjoy, and inherit. And thirdly, between the time which our Author speaks of, being the 14 year of King Henry the fourth, and the making of this Act by King Henry the eighth, there passed bo●e an hund●ed and twenty years, which intimates a longer time than some years after, as out Author words it.  
Fol. 168. I will not complain of the dearness of this University, where seventeen weeks cost me more than seventeen years in Cambridge▪ even all that I had.] The ordinary and unwary Re●der might collect from hence, that Oxford is a chargeable place, and that all commodities there are exceeding dear, but that our Author lets him know, that it was on some occasion of disturbance. By which it seems our Author doth 〈◊〉 to the time of the War, when men from all 〈◊〉 did repair to Oxford, not as a University, but a place of safety, and the fear Royal of the King; at 〈◊〉 time notwithstanding all provisions were so plen●●ull and at such cheap rates, as no man had reason to complain of the 〈◊〉 of them. No better argument of the 〈◊〉 of the soil and richness of the 〈◊〉 in which Oxford standeth, then that the 〈…〉 on the accession of such 〈…〉 at that 〈◊〉 and on that occasion. 〈◊〉 Author therefore 〈◊〉 be thought to relate unto somewhat else then is here expressed, and possibly may be, that his being at Oxford at that time, 〈◊〉 him within the compass of Delinquency, and consequently of Sequestration. And 〈…〉 hath 〈…〉 son to complain of the University, or the dearness of it; but rather of himself, for coming to a place so chargeable and destructive to him. He might have tarried where he was (for I never heard that he was sent fo●) and then this great complaint against the dearness of that University would have found no place.  
Fol. 175. Surely what Charles the fifth is said to have said of the City of Florence, that it is pity 〈◊〉 should be seen save only on holy-days, etc.] Our Author is somewhat out in this, in fachering that saying on Charles the fifth, Emperor and King of Spain, which Boterus and all other Authors ascribe to Charles Archduke of Austria; that is to say, to Charles' of Inspruch, one of the younger sons of the Emperor Ferdinand the first, and consequently Nephew to Charles the fifth. Not is o●r Author very right in taking Aquensis for Aix in Provence;  
Fol. 178. Especially (●aith he) if, as I take it, by Aquensis Aix be meant scited in the f●rthermost parts of Provence, though even now the English power in France was a waning.] For first, the English never had any power in Provence, no interest at all therein, nor pretensions to it: as neither had the French Kings in the times our Author speaks of. Provence in tho●e days was independent of that Crown, an absolute Estate and held immediately of the Empire, as being a part and member of the Realm of Burgundy, and in the actual possession of the Dukes of anjou: on the expiring of which House, by the last will and Testament of Duke Rene the second, it was bequeathed to Lewis the eleventh of France, by him and his successors, to be enjoyed upon the death of Charles Earl of Maine, as it was accordingly. And secondly, that Bernard, whom the Latin calls Episcopus Aquensis is very ill taken by our Author to be Bishop of Aix. He was indeed Bishop of Acqus or Aux in Guienne called anciently Aquae Augustae from whence those parts of France had the name of Aquitaine; and not of Aix (which the ancient writers called Aquae Sextiae) in the Country of Provence. Now Guienne was at that time in the power of the Kings of England, which was the reason why this Bernard was sent with the rest of the Commissioners to the Council of Basil; and being there amongst the rest maintained the rights and preeminences of the English Kings.  
In agitating of which controversy as it stands in our Author, I find mention of one johannes de Voragine a worthless Author, fol. 181. Mistake both in the name of the man, and his quality also. For first, the Author of the Book called Legenda aurea related to in the former passage, was not johannes, but jacobus de Voragi●e. In which Book, though there are many idle and unwarrantable fictions; yet secondly was the man of more esteem, then to pass under the Character of a Worthless Author, as being learned for the times in which he lived, Archbishop of Gen●a a chief City of Italy, & moribus & dignitate magno precio, as Philippus Bergomensis telleth us of him, Anno 1290. at what time he lived; most eminent for his translation of the Bible into the Italian tongue (as we read in Vossius) a work of great both difficulty and danger as the times than were, 
Vossig de Lat. Hist.  sufficient (were there nothing else) to free him from the ignominious name of a worthless Author. A greater mistake than this, as to the person of the Man, is that which follows, viz.  
Fol. 185. ●umph●y Duke of G●oue● son to King Henry the fifth.] This though I cannot look on as a fault of the Presle, yet I can easily consider it as a slip of the pen; it being impossible that our Author should be so far mistaken in Duke Humphrey of Gloster, who was not son but b●othe● to King Henry the fifth. But I cannot think so charitably of some other errors of this kind which I find in his History of Cambridge, fol. 67. Where amongst the English Dukes which carried the title of Earl of Cambridge, he reckoneth Edmund of Langly fifth son to Edward the third, Edward his son, Richard Duke of York his brother, father to King Edward the fourth. But first this Richard whom he speaks of, though he were Earl of Cambridge by the consent of Edward his elder brother, yet was he never Duke of York; Richard being executed at South-Hampton for treason against King Harry the fifth, before that Kings going into France, and Edward his elder brother slain not long after in the Battle of Agincourt. And secondly, this Richard was not the Father, but Grandfather of King Edward the fourth. For being married unto Anne, sister and heir unto Edmund Mortimer Earl of March, he had by her a son called Richard, improvidently restored in blood, and advanced unto the Title of Duke of York by King Henry the sixth, Anno 1426. Who by the L●dy Cecely his wife one of the many Daughters of Ralph Earl of Westmoreland, was father of King Edward the fourth, George Duke of Clarence, and King Richard the third. Thirdly, as Richard Earl of Cambridge was not Duke of York, so Richard Duke of York was not Earl of Cambridge; though by our Author made the last Earl thereof (Hist. of Cam. 162.) before the restoring of that title on the House of the hamilton's. If our Author be no better at a pedigree in private Families, than he is in those of Kings and Princes, I shall not give him m●●h for his Art of Memory, for his History less, and for his Heraldry just nothing. But I see our Author is as good at the succession of Bishops, as in that of Princes. For saith he, speaking of Cardinal Beaufort,  
Fol. 185. He built the fair Hospital of St. Cross near Winchester, and although Chancellor of the University of Oxford, was no grand Benefactor thereunto, as were his Predecessors Wickam and Wainfleet.] Wickam and Wainfleet are here made the Predecessors of Cardinal Beaufort in the See of Winchester, whereas in very deed, though he succeeded Wickam in that Bishopric, he preceded Wainfleet. For in the Catalogue of the Bishops of Winchester they are marshaled thus, viz. 1365. 50. William of Wickham, 1405. 51. Henry Beaufort, 1447. 52. William de Wainfleet, which last continued Bishop till the year 1486. the See being kept by these three Bishops above 120. years, and thereby giving them great Advantages of doing those excellent works, and founding those famous Colleges, which our Author rightly hath ascribed to the first and last. But whereas our Author telleth us also of this Cardinal Beaufort, that he built the Hospital of St. Cross, he is as much out in that as he was in the other; 
Camd. in Hun. fol. 267.  that Hospital being first built by Henry of Blais, Brothe● of King Stephen and Bishop of Winchester, Anno 1129. augmented only, and perhaps more liberally endowed by this Potent Cardinal. From these Foundations made and enlarged by these three great Bishops of Winchester successively, proceed we to two others raised by King Henry the sixth, of which our Author telleth us  
Fol. 183. This good precedent of the Archbishop's bounty (that is to say, the foundation of All-Souls College by Archbishop Ch●cheley) may be presumed a Spur to the speed of the King's liberality; who soon after founded Eton College, etc. to be a Nursery to King's College in Cambridge, fol. 184.] Of ●aton College, and the condition of the same, our Author hath spoken here at large, but we must look fo● the foundation of King's College, in the History of Cambridge, fol 77. where I find some thing which requireth an Animadversion. Our Author there chargeth Dr. Heylyn for avowing something which he cannot justify, that is to say, for saying, That when William of Wainfleet Bishop of Winchester (afterwards founder of Magdalen College) persuaded King Henry the Sixth to erect some Monument for Learning in Oxford, the King returned, Imo potius Cantabrigiae, ut duas (si fieri possit) in Anglia Academias habeam. Yea rather (said he) at Cambridge, that (if it be possible) I may have two Universities in England. As if Cambridge were not reputed one before the founding of King's College therein. But here the premises only are the Doctors, the inference or conclusion is our Authors own. The Doctor infers not thereupon, that Cambridge was not reputed an University till the founding of King's College by King Henry the sixth; and indeed he could not: for he acknowledged before out of Robert de Reningt●n that it was made an University in the time of King Edward the second. All that the Doctor says, is this, that as the University of Cambridge was of a later foundation than Oxford was, so it was long before it grew into esteem, that is to say, to such a measure of esteem at home or abroad (before the building of King's College, and the rest that followed) but that the King might use those words in his Discourse with the Bishop of Winchester. And for the Narrative, the Doctor (whom I have talked with in this business) doth not shame to say, that he borrowed it, from that great Treasury of Academical Antiquities Mr. Brian Twine, whose learned Works stan● good against all Opponents; and that he found the passage justified by Sir Isaac Wake in his Rex Platonicus. Two Persons of too great wit and judgement, to relate a matter of this nature on no better ground then common 〈◊〉- talk, and that too spoke in merriment by Sir Henry Savil. Assuredly Sir Henry Savil was too great a Zealot for that University, and too much a friend to Mr. Wake, who was Fellow of the same College with him, to have his Table-talk and discourses of merriment to be put upon Record as grounds and arguments for such men to build on in that weighty Controversy. And therefore when our Author tells us, what he was told by Mr. Hubbard, Mr. Hubbard by Mr. Barlow, Mr. Barlow by Mr. Bust, and Mr. Bust by Sir Henry Savil; it brings into my mind the like Pedigree of as true a Story, even that of Mother Miso in Sir Philip Sidney, telling the young Ladies an old Tale, which a good old woman told her, which an old wise man told her, which a great learned Clerk told him, and gave it him in writing; and there she had it in her Prayer-book; as here our Author hath found this on the end of his Creed. Not much unlike to which, is that which I find in the Poet; 
Quae Phoebo Pater omnipotens, mihi Phoebus Apollo  
Praedixit, vobis Furiarum ego maxima pand●.   
That is to say; 
What jove told Phoebus, Phoebus told to me,  
And I the chief of Furies tell to thee.   
But to proceed,  
Fol. 190. This was that Nevil, who for Extraction, Estate, Alliance, Dependants, Wisdom, Valour, Success, and popularity, was superior to any English Subject since the Conquest.] Our Author speaks this of that Richard Nevil, who was first Earl of Warwick, in right of Anne his Wife, Sister and Heir of Henry Beauchamp, the last of that Family, and after Earl of Salisbury by descent from his Father; a potent and popular man indeed, but yet not in all or in any of those respects to be matched with Henry of Bullenbrook son to john of Gaunt, whom our Author must needs grant to have lived since the time of the Conquest. Which Henry after the death of his Father was Duke of Lancaster and Hereford, Earl of Leicester, Lincoln, and Derby, etc. and Lord High Steward of England. Possessed by the donation of King Henry the third of the County Palatin of Lancaster, the forfeited Estates of Simon de Montfort Earl of Leicester, Robert de Ferrars Earl of Derby, and john Lord of Monmouth; by the compact made between Thomas Earl of Lancaster, and Alice his Wife, of the Honour of Pomfret, the whole Estate of the Earl of Lincoln, and a great part of the Estates of the Earl of Salisbury; of the goodly Tertitories of Ogmore and Kidwelly in Wales, in right of his descent from the Chaworths; of the Honour and Castle of Hartford by the grant of King Edward the third, and of the Honour of Tickhill in Yorkshire by the donation of King Richard the second; and finally of a Moiety of the vast Estate of Humphrey de Bohun Earl of Hereford, Essex and Northampton in right of his Wife. So royal in his Extraction, that he was Grandchild unto one King, Cousin german to another, Father and Grandfather to two more. So popular when a private person, and that too in the life of his Father, that he was able to raise and head an Army against Richard the Second, with which he discomfited the King's Forces, under the command of the Duke of Ireland; so fortunate in his successes, that he not only had the better in the battle mentioned, but came off with Honour and Renown in the War of afric▪ and finally obtained the Crown of England. And this I trow, renders him much Superior to our Authors Nevil, whom he exceeded also in this particular, that he died in his bed, and left his Estates unto his Son. But having got the Crown by the murder of his Predecessor, it stayed but two descents in his Line, being unfortunately lost by King Henry the sixth, of whom being taken and imprisoned by those of the Yorkish Faction, our Author telleth us,  
Fol. 190. That Statesmen do admire how blind the Policy of that Age was in keeping King Henry alive, there being no such sure Prison as a Grave for a Captive King, whose life (though in restraint) is a fair mark for the full Aim of mal-contents to practise his enlargement.] Our Author might have sp●r'd this Doctrine so frequently in practice amongst the worldly Politicians of all times and ages, 
Ovid. Met. Lib. 2.  that there is more need of a Bridle to hold them in, than a Sput to quicken them. Parce precor stimulis, & fortiùs utere loris, had been a wholesome Caveat there, had any friend of his been by to have advised him of it. The murdering of deposed and Captive Princes, though too often practised, never found Advocates to plead for it, and m●●h less Preachers to preach for it, until these latter times. First made a Maxim of State in the School of Machiavelli, 
History of Flo●ence.  who lays it down for an Aphorism in point of policy, viz. that great Persons must not at all be touched, or if they be, must be made sure from taking Revenge; inculcated afterwards by the Lord Grace, who being sent by King james to intercede for the life of his Mother, did underhand solicit her death, and whispered nothing so much in Queen Elizabeth's ears, 
Camden's Annals An. 1586.  as Mortua non mordet, if the Scots Queen were once dead, she would never bite. But never pressed so home, never so punctually applied to the case of Kings, as here I find it by our Author; of whom it cannot be affirmed, that he speaks in this case the sen●e of others, but positively and plainly doth declare his own. No such Divinity p●each'd in the Schools of Ignatius, though fitter for the Pen of a Mariana, then of a Divine or Minister of the Church of England. Which whether it passed from him before o● since the last sad accident of this nature, it comes all to one; this being like a two-hand-sword made to strike on both ●●des, and if it come too late for instruction, will serve abundantly howsoever for the justification. Another note we have within two leaves after as derogatory to the Honour of the late Archbishop, as this is dangerous to the Estate of all Sovereign Princes, if once they chance to happen into the hands of their Enemies. But of this our Author will give me an occasion to speak more in another place, and then he shall hear further from me. Now to go on.  
Fol. 197. The Duke requested of King Richard the Earldom of Hereford and Hereditary Constableship of England.] Not so, it was not the Earldom, that is to say, the Title of Earl of Hereford, which the Duke requested, but so much of the Lands of those Earls as had been formerly enjoyed by the House of Lancaster. Concerning which we are to know, that Humphrey de Bohun the last Earl of Hereford, left behind him two Daughters only, of which the eldest called Eleanor was married to Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Gloster, Mary the other married unto Henry of Bullenbrook Earl of Derby. Betwixt these two the Estate was parted, the one Moiety which drew after it the Title of Hereford falling to Henry Earl of Derby, the other which drew after it the Office of Constable to the Duke of Gloucester. But the Duke of Gloucester being dead, and his estate coming in fire unto his Daughter who was not able to contend, Henry the fifth forced her unto a sub-division, laying one half of her just partage to the other Moiety. But the issue of Henry of Bullenbrook being quite extinct in the Person of Edward Prince of Wales Son of Henry the sixth, these three parts of the Lands of the Earls of Hereford, having been formerly incorporated into the Duchy of Lancaster, remained in possession of the Crown, but were conceived by this Duke to belong to him as being the direct Heir of Anne Daughter of Thomas Duke of Gloucester, and consequently the direct Heir also of the House of Hereford. This was the sum of his demand. Nor do I find that he made any suit for the Office of Constable, or that he needed so to do, he being then Constable of England, as his Son Edward the last Duke of Buckingham of that Family, was after him.  
Fol. 199. At last the coming in of the Lord Stanley with three thousand fresh men decided the controversy on the Earls side.] Our Author is out in this also. It was not the Lord Stanley, but his Brother Sir William Stanley, who came in so seasonably, and thereby turned the Scale, and changed the fortune of the day. For which service he was afterward made Lord Chamberlain of the new King's Household, and advanced to great Riches and Estates, but finally beheaded by that very King, for whom, and to whom, he had done the same. But the King looked upon this action with another eye. And therefore when the merit of this service was interposed to mitigate the King's displeasure, and preserve the man, the King remembered very shrewdly, that as he came soon enough to win the Victory, so he stayed long enough to have lost it.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Fifth and Sixth Books OF The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
Relating to the time of King Henry the Eighth.  
WE are now come to the busy times of King Henry the Eighth, in which the power of the Church was much diminished, though not reduced to such ill terms as our Author makes it. We have him here laying his foundations to overthrow that little which is left of the Church's Rights. His superstructures we shall see in the times ensuing more seasonable for the practice of that Authority which in this fifth Book he hammereth only in the speculation. But first we will begin with such Animadversions as relate unto this time and story as they come in our way, leaving such principles and positions as concern the Church, to the close of all; where we shall draw them all together, that our discourse and observations thereupon may come before the Reader without interruption.  
And the first thing I meet with is a fault of Omission; Dr. Newlen who succeeded Dr. jackson in the Presidentship of Corpus Christi College in Oxford, Anno 1640. by a free election, and in a statuteable way being left out of our Author's Catalogue of the Precedents of C. C. C. in Oxford, fol. 166. and Dr. Stanton who c●me in by the power of the Visitors above eight years after being placed therein. Which I thought fit (though otherwise of no great moment) to take notice of, that I might do the honest man that right which our Author doth not.  
Fol. 168. King Henry endeavoured an uniformity of Grammar all over his Dominions; that so youths though changing their Schoolmasters might keep their learning.] That this was endeavoured by King Henry, and at last en●oyned, I shall easily grant. But then our Author should have told us (if at least he knew it) that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thereof proceeded f●om the Convocation in the yea● 1530. in which complaint being made. Quod multiplex & varius in Scholis Grammaticalibus modus esset 〈◊〉 etc. That the multiplicity of Grammars did much him to learning; it was thought meet by the Prelates and Clergy then assembled, Vt una & eadem edatur formula Auctoritate 〈…〉 singula Schola Gramma●icals per 〈…〉 
Acta Convocation●s 1530.  that is to say that one only 〈…〉 that within few years after, it was enjoined by the King's Proclamation to be used in all the Schools thoughout the Kingdom. But here we are to note withal, that our Author anticipates this business, placing it in the eleventh year of this King● Anno 1519. whereas the Convocation took not this into consideration till the eighth of March, Anno 1530. and certainly would not have meddled in it then, if the King had settled and enjoined it so long before.  
Fol. 168. other●ardiner ●ardiner gathered the Flowers (made the Collections) though King Henry had the honour to wear the Posy.] I am not ignorant that the making of the King's Book against Martin Luther, is by some Popish writers ascribed to Dr. john Fisher, than Bishop of Rochester. But this Cav●● was not made till after this King had re●ected the Pope's Supremacy, and consequently the less credit to be given unto it. It is well known, that his Father King Henry the seventh designed him for the Archbishopric of Canterbury, and to that end caused him to be trained up in all parts of learning, which might enable 〈◊〉 for that place. But his elder Brother Prince Arthur d●ing, and himself succeeding in the Crown, though he had laid aside the thoughts of being a Priest, he could not but retain that Learning which he had acquired, and reckon it amongst the fairest Flowers which adorned his Diadem. Too great a Clerk he was to be called Beauclerk junior, as if he were as short in learning of King Henry the first (whom commonly they called Beauclerk) as he was in time; though so our Author would fain have it, Hist. Cam. p. 2, 3. A little learning went a great way in those early days, which in this King would have made no shew● in whose ●●me both the Arts and Languages began to flourish. And if our Author doth not suspect this King's lack of learning, he hath no reason to suspect his lack of 〈◊〉 the work being small, the glory great, and helps enough at hand if he wanted any. But of this enough.  
Fol. 196. Which when finished (as Whitehall, Hampton-Court, etc.) he either freely gave to the King, or exchanged them on very reasonable considerations.] That Hampton Court was either freely given by Wolsey, or otherwise exchanged on very reasonable terms, I shall grant as easily; but Whitehall was none of his to give, as belonging to the Archbishop in the right of the See of York, and then called York place. But the King's Palace at Westminster being lately burnt, and this House much beautified by the Cardinal, the King cast a longing eye upon it; and having attainted the Cardinal in a Praemunire, he seized upon this house with all the furniture thereof as a part of the spoil. Which when he found he could not hold, as being the Archbishops and not the Cardinals, he sent an Instrument unto him to be signed and sealed for the surrendry of his title and estate therein; and not content to have forced it from him, (the Cardinal honestly declaring his inability to make good the grant) he caused the Dean and Chapter of York to confirm the same unto him under their Common Seal in due form of Law, which being obtained and much cost bestowed upon the House, he caused it to be called Whitehall; gratifying the Archbishops of York with another House, belonging then to the See of Norwich, and now called York-house.  
Fol. 170. So that lately there were maintained therein one Dean, eight Canons, three public professors of Divinity, H●brew and Greek, sixty Students, etc.] Our Author tells us Lib. 4. that the spent seventeen weeks in this University, but he that looks on this and some other passages will think he had not tarried there above seventeen hours. For besides his omitting of Dr. Newlin spoken of before, and his giving of the name of Censors to the Deans of Magdalen, which I find afterwards, Lib. 8. ●. 7. he is very much mistaken in the matters of Christ Church. For first the three Professors of Divinity, Hebrew, and Greek are no necessary parts of that foundation, nor can be properly said to be founded in it. Till of late times they were and might be of other Colleges, as they are at this present, this College being only bound to pay them for their annual Pensions forty pounds apiece. In after times King james annexed a prebend's place in this Church to the Professor of Divinity, as King Charles' did another to the Hebrew Reader. But for the Greek Reader he hath only his bare pension from it, and hath no other relation to it, but by accident only; the last Greek Reader of this House being Dr. john Perin who died in the year 1615. And secondly, he is very far short in the number of Students, diminishing them from an hundred to sixty, there being an Hundred and one of that foundation by the name of Students, equivalent to the Fellows of most other Colleges in the Revennes of their place and all advantages and encouragements in the way of learning. But this perhaps hath somewhat in it of design, that by making the foundations of Oxford to seem less than they are, those in the other University, might appear the fairer.  
Fol. 171. And here Wolsey had provided him a second Wife (viz.) Margaret Countess of Alanzon, sister to Francis King of France.] As much ou● in his French, as his English Heraldry. For first the Lady Margaret here spoken of was never Countess, though sometimes Duchess of Alanzon, as being once wife to Charles the fourth Duke thereof. And secondly, at the time when King Henry's divorce from Queen Katherine was first agitated, this Lady was not in a capacity of being projected for a Wife to King Henry the eighth, being then actually in the bed of another Henry, that is to say, Henry of Albret King of Navarre, as appears plainly by the Articles of Pacification which were to be propounded for the restoring of King Francis the first (being then Prisoner in Spain, Anno 1525.) to his Realm and Liberty. 
Hollinshead in Henry 8.  In which it was propounded amongst other things, that Francis should not send any Aid to the said Henry of Albret (for the recovery of his Kingdom) notwithstanding that he had married the King's Sister, and other Sister that King had none but this Margaret only.  
Fol. 178. Yet had he the whole Revenues of York Archbishop's ick (worth then little less than four thousand pounds yearly) besides a large Pension paid him out of the Bishopric of Winchester.] And a large Pension it was indeed (if it were a Pension) which amounted to the whole Revenue. But the truth is, that Wolsey having gotten the Bishopric of Winchester, to be holden by him in Commendam with the See of York, was suffered to enjoy it till the time of his death, Anno 1631. After which time as Dr. Edward Lee succeeded him in the Church of York, so then, and not before, Dr. Stephen Gardiner principal Secretary of State, was made Bishop of Winchester, by which name, and in which capacity I find him active in the Convocation of the following year.  
Fol. 184. The Clergy of the Province of Canterbury alone bestowed on the King One hundred thousand pounds, to be paid by equal portions in the same year, say some; in four years say others, and that in my opinion with more probability.] Here have we three Authors for one thing, some, others, and our Author himself, more knowing then all the ●est in his own opinion. But all out alike. This great sum was not to be paid in one year, nor in four years neither, but to be paid by equal portions (that is to say, by twenty thousand pound per annum) in the five years following. And this appears plainly by the Instrument of Grant itself. Where having named the sum of an hundred thousand pounds by them given the King, they declare expressly, Ad usum Majestatis ejusdem intra quinquiennium ex nunc proxime & immediate sequens per qui●q, aequales portiones solvend ' etc. The first payment to be made the morrow after Michaelmas day then next ensuing after the day of the date thereof, which was the 22 of March 1530.  
Fol. 186. But he might have remembered, which also produced the peerless Queen Elizabeth, who perfected the Reformation.] Either our Author speaks not this for his own opinion, as in that before, or if he do, it is an opinion of his own, in which he is not like to find many followers. The Puritan party whom he acts for in all this work, will by no means grant it; comparing that most excellent Lady in their frequent Pasquil's to an idle Huswife, who sweeps the middle of the house to make a show, but leaves all the dirt and rubbish behind the door. The grand Composers of the Directory do persuade themselves, that if the first Reformers had been then alive they would have joined with them in the work, 
Pref to the Directory.  and laboured for a further Reformation. And what else hath been clamoured for during all her Reign, and by the Ringleaders of the Faction endeavoured ever since her death, but to carry on the work of Reformation from one step to another, till they had brought it unto such a perfection as they vainly dreamt of, and of which now we feel and see the most bitter consequences? And as for the Prelatical party, the high Royalists, as our Author calls them, they conceive the Reformation was not so perfected in the time of that prudent Queen, but that there was somewhat left to do for her two Successors; that is to say, the altering of some Rubrics in the Book of Common-prayer, the adding of some Collects at the end of the Litany, the enlargement of the common Catechism, a more exact translation of the Bible then had been before, the settling of the Church upon the Canons of 603. and finally, a stricter and more hopeful course for suppressing Popery, and for the maintenance both of conformity and uniformity by the Canons of 640.  
Fol. 187. And now I cannot call King Henry a Bachelor, because once married; nor a married man, because having no wife; nor properly a Widower, because his wife was not dead.] Our Author speaks this of Henry the eighth immediately after his divorce, but is much mistaken in the matter. King Henry was so averse from living without a Wife, that he thought it more agreeable to his constitution to have two Wives together then none at all. To that end while the business of the Divorce remained undecided, 
holinsh. pag. 129.  he was married privately to the Lady Anne Bollen, on the 14 of November (Stow puts it off till the 25 of january than next following) by Dr. Rowland Lee his Chaplain, promoted not long after to the Bishopric of Coventry and Lichfield; the Divorce not being sentenced till the April following. And whereas our Author tells us in the following words, that soon after he was solemnly married to the Lady Anna Bollen, he is in that mistaken also. King Henry though he was often married, yet would not be twice married to the same Woman; that being a kind of Bigamy, or Anabaptistry in marriage, to be hardly met with. All that he did in order to our Author's meaning is, that he avowed the marriage openly which before he had contracted in private; the Lady Anne Bollen being publicly showed as Queen on Easter Eve, 
Stow in H. 8. pag. 562.  and solemnly crowned on Whitsunday being june the second. Assuredly unless our Author makes no difference between a Coronation and a Marriage, or between a marriage solemnly made, and a public owning of a Marriage before contracted: King Harry cannot be affirmed to have married Anne Bollen solemnly after the Divorce, as our Author telleth us.  
Fol. 208. Though many wild and distempered Expressions be found therein, yet they contain the Protestant Religion in Oar, which since by God's blessing is happily refined.] Our Author speaks this of a paper containing many erroneous Doctrines presented by the Prolocutor to the Convocation: some few of which as being part of Wickliffs' Gospel and chief ingredients in the Composition of the new Protestant Religion lately taken up, I shall here subjoin.  
1. That the Sacrament of the Altar is nothing else but a piece of bread or a little predie round Robin.  
2. That Priests have no more Authority to minister Sacraments then the Laymen have.  
3. That all Ceremonies accuestomd in the Church, which are not clearly expressed in Scripture, must be taken away, because they are men's inventions.  
4. That the Church commonly so called is the old Synagogue; and that the Church is the Congregation of good men only.  
5. That God never gave grace nor knowledge of holy Scripture to any great Estate or rich man, and that they in no wise follow the same.  
6. That all things ought to be common.  
7. That it is as lawful to christian a child in a Tub of water at home, or in a Dirch by the way, as in a Font-stone in the Church.  
8. That it is no sin or offence to eat White-meats, Eggs, Butter, Cheese or flesh in Lent, or other Fasting days commanded by the Church, and received by consent of Christian people.  
9 That it is as lawful to eat flesh on Good-Friday, as upon Easter day, or other times in the year.  
10. That the Ghostly Father cannot give or enjoin any penance at all.  
11. That it is sufficient for a Man or Woman to make their confession to God alone.  
12. That it is as lawful at all times to confess to a Layman, as to a P●iest.  
13. That it is sufficient that the sinner do say, I know myself a sinner.  
14. That Bishops, Ordinaries, and Ecclesiastical judges, have no Authority to give any sentence of Excommunication or censure; ne yet to absolve or lose any man from the same.  
15. That it is not necessary or profitable to have any Church or Chapel to pray in, or to do any divine service in.  
16. That bury in Churches and Churchyards be unprofitable and vain.  
17. That the rich and costly Ornaments in the Church are rather high displeasure than pleasure or honour to God.  
18. That our Lady was no better than another Woman, and like a bag of Pepper or Saffron when the spice is out.  
19 That Prayers, Suffrages, Fasting, or Alms-deeds do not help to take away sin.  
20. That Holidays ordained and instituted by the Church, are not to be observed and kept in reverence, in as much as all days and times be alike.  
21. That Ploughing and Ca●ting, and such servile work may be done in the same as on other without any offence at all as on other days.  
22. That it is sufficient and enough to believe, though a man do no good works at all.  
23. That seeing Christ hath shed his blood for us and Redeemed us, we need not to do any thing at all, but to believe and repent if we have offended.  
24. That no humane Constitutions or Laws do bind 〈◊〉 Christian man, but such as be in the Gospels, Paul's Epistles, or the New Testament: and that a man may break them without any offence at all.  
25. That the singing or saying of Mass, Matins, or Even song, is but a roaring, howling, whistling, mumming, tomring, and juggling, and the playing on the Organs a foolish vanity.  
This is our Authors golden Oar, out of which his new Protestant Religion was to be extracted. So happily refined, that there is nothing of the Old Christian Religion to be found therein. Which though our Author doth defend as Expressions rather than Opinions, the Careers of the Soul, and Extravagancies of humane infirmity, as he doth the rest, yet he that looks upon these points, and sees not in them the rude draught and lineaments of the Puritan Platform, which they have been hammering since the time of Cartwright, and his Associates, must either have better eyes than mine, or no eyes at all. I see our Author looks for thanks for this discovery for publishing the paper which contained these new Protestant truth's, and I give him mine.  
Fol. 239. At this time also were the Stews suppressed by the King's command.] And I could wish that some command had been laid upon our Author by the Parliament to suppress them also, and not to have given them any place in the present History, especially not to have produced those arguments by which some shameless persons endeavoured to maintain both the conveniency and necessity of such common Brothel houses. Had Bishop jewel been alive, 
Defence of the Apolog.  and seen but half so much from Dr. Harding pleading in behalf of the common women permitted by the Pope in Rome, he would have thought that to call to him an Advocate for the Stews had not been enough. But that Doctor was nor half so wise as our Author is, and doth not fit each Argument with a several Antidote as our Author doth▪ hoping thereby by, but vainly hoping, that the arguments alleged will be washed away. Some of our late Critics had a like Design in marking all the wanton and obscene Epigrams in Martial with a Hand or Asterism, to the intent that young Scholars when they read that Author, might be forewarned to pass them over. Whereas on the contrary it was found, that too many young fellows, or wanton wits, as our Author calls them, did ordinarily skip over the rest, and pitch on those which were so marked and set out unto them. And much I fear that it will so fall out with our Author also, whose Arguments will be studied and made use of when his Answers will not.  
Fol. 253. Otherwise, some suspect, had he survived King Edward the sixth, we might presently have heard of a King Henry the ninth.] Our Author speaks this of Henry Fitz Roy, the King's natural Son by Elizabeth Blunt, and the great disturbance he might have wrought to the Kings two Daughters in their Succession to the Crown. A Prince indeed whom his Father very highly cherished, creating him Duke of Somerset and Richmond, Earl of Nottingham, and Earl Marshal of England, and raising him to no small hopes of the Crown itself, as appears plainly by the Statute 22 H. 8. c. 7. But whereas our Author speaks it on a supposition of his surviving King Edward the sixth, he should have done well in the first place to have informed himself whether, this Henry and Prince Edward were at any time alive together. And if my Books speak true, they were not; Henry of Somerset and Richmond dying the 22. of july, Anno 1536. Prince Edward not being born till the 12. of October, An. 1537. So that if our Author had been but as good at Law or Grammar, as he is at Heraldry, he would not have spoke of a Survivor-ship in such a case, when the one person had been long dead before the other was born.  
These incoherent Animadversions being thus passed over, we now proceed to the Examination of our Author's Principles, for weakening the Authority of the Church, and subjecting it in all proceedings to the power of Parliaments. Concerning which he had before given us two Rules Preparatory to the great business which we have in hand. First that the proceedings of the Canon Law were subject in whatsoever touched temporals to secular Laws and National Customs. And the Laity at pleasure limited Canons in this behalf, Lib. 3. n. 61. And secondly, that the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Court in cases of Heresy. Lib. 4. n. 88 And if the Ecclesiastical power was thus kerbed and fe●●ered when it was at the highest, there is no question to be made, but that it was much more obnoxious to the secular Courts, when it began to sink in reputation, and decline in strength. How true and justifiable, or rather how unjustifiable and false these two principles are, we have shown already, and must now look into the rest, which our Author in pursuance of the main Design hath presented to us. But first we must take notice of another passage concerning the calling of Convocations or Synodical meetings, formerly called by the two Archbishops in their several Provinces by their own sole and proper power, as our Author grants, fol. 190. to which he adds,  
Fol. 190. But after the Statute of Praemunire was made (which did much restrain the Papal power, and subject it to the Laws of the Land) when Archbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute command, but at the pleasure of the King.] In which I must confess myself to be much unsatisfied, though I find the same position in some other Authors. My reasons two, 1. Because there is nothing in the Statute of Praemunire to restrain the Archbishops from calling these meetings as before; that Act extending only to such as purchase or pursue, or cause to be purchased or pursued, in the Court of Rome, or elsewhere any such translatations, Processes, Sentences of Excommunication, Bulls, Instruments, or any other things whatsoever which touch the King, against him, his Crown and his Regality, or his Realm; or to such as bring within the Realm or them receive, or make thereof notification, or any other Execution whatsoever within the same Realm, or without, etc. And 2. because I find in the Statute of the submission of the Clergy, that it was recognized and acknowledged by the Clergy in their Convocation, that the Convocation of the said Clergy is, 
Stat. 25 H 8. c. 19  always hath been, and aught to be assembled always by the King's Writ. And if they had been always called by the King's Writ, then certainly before the Statute of Praemunire; for that the whole Clergy in their Convocation should publicly declare and avow a notorious falsehood, especially in a matter of fact, is not a thing to be imagined. I must confess myself to be at a loss in this intricate Labyrinth, unless perhaps there were some critical difference in those elder times between a Synod and a Convocation: the first being called by the Archbishops in their several and respective Provinces, as the necessities of the Church; the other only by the King, as his occasions and affairs did require the same. But whether this were so or not, is not much material, as the case now stands, the Clergy not assembling since the 25 of King Henry the eighth, but as they are convocated and convened by the Kings w●it only. I only add that the time and year of this submission is mistake by our Author, who pl●ceth it in 1533. whereas indeed the Clergy made this acknowledgement and submission in their Convocation, Anno 1532. though it passed not into an Act or Statute till the year next following. Well then, suppose the Clergy called by the King's Authority, and all their, Acts and Constitutions ratified by the R●yal assent, are they of force to bind the Subject to submit and conform unto them? Not, if our Author may be judge, for he tells us plainly  
Fol. 191. That even such Convocations with the Royal assent, subject not any (for recusancy to obey their Canons) to a civil penalty in person or property, until confirmed by 〈◊〉 of Parliament.] I marvel where our Author took up this opinion, which he neither finds in the Registers of Convocation, or Records of Parliament. Himself hath told us, fol. 190. that such Canons and Constitutions as were concluded on in Synods or Convocations, before the passing of the Statute of Praemunire, were without any further Ratification, obligatory to all subjected to their jurisdiction. And he hath told us also of such Convocations as had been called between the passing of the Statute of Praemunire, and the Act for Submission, that they made Canons which were binding, although none other than Synodical Authority did confirm the same. Upon whi●●●remisses I shall not fear to raise this Syllogism, viz▪ That power which the Clergy had in their Convocations before their submission to the King to bind the subject by their Canons and Constitutions without any further Ratification than own Synodical Authority, the same they had when the King's power signified in his Royal assent was added to them; but the Clergy (by our Authors own confession) had power in their Convocations before their submission to the King to bind the Subject by their Canons and Constitutions without any further ratification than their own Synodical Authority; Ergo they had the same power to bind the Subjects when the King's power signified by the Royal assent was added to them. The Minor being granted by our Author, as before is showed, the Major is only to be proved. And for the proof hereof, I am to put the Reader in mind of a Petition or Remonstrance exhibited to the King by the House of Commons, Anno 1532. in which they showed themselves aggrieved, that the Clergy of this Realm should act Authoritatively and Supremely in the Convocations, and they in Parliament do nothing but as it was confirmed and ratified by the Royal assent. By which it seems that there was nothing then desired by the House 〈◊〉 ●ommons, but that the Convocation should be brought down to the same level with the Houses of Parliament; and that their Acts and Constitutions should not bind the Subject as before in their Goods and Possessions, until they were confirmed and ratified by the Regal power. The Answer unto which Remonstrance being drawn up by Dr. Gardiner then newly made Bishop of Winchester, and allowed of by both Houses of Convocation, was by them presented to the King. But the King not satisfied with this Answer ●●solves to bring them to his bent, le●t else perhaps they might have acted something to the hindrance of his divorce, which was at that time in agitation; and therefore on the 10 of May he sends a paper to them by Dr. Fox (after Bishop of Hereford) in which it was peremptorily required, That no Constitution or Ordinance shall be hereafter by the Clergy Enacted, Promulged, or put in Execution unless the King's Highness do approve the same by his high Authority and Royal assent; and his advice and favour be also interponed for the execution of every such constitution among his Highness' Subjects. And though the Clergy on the receipt of this paper removed first to the Chapel of St. Katherine's, and after unto that of St. Dunstan to consult about it, yet found they no Saint able to inspi●e them with a resolution contrary to the King's desires; and therefore upon the Wednesday following, being the 15 of the same Month, they made their absolute submission, binding themselves in Verbo Sacerdotii not to make or execute any Canons or other Synodical Constitutions, but as they were from time to time enabled by the King's Authority. But this submission being made unto the King in his single person, and not as in conjunction with his Houses of Parliament, could neither bring the Convocation under the command of Parliaments, nor render them obnoxious to the power thereof, as indeed it did not. But to the contrary hereof it is said by our Author, that  
Fol. 194. He (viz. the King) by the advice and consent of his Clergy in Convocation and great Council in Parliament, resolved to reform the Church under his inspection from gross abuses crept into it.] To this I need no other Answer then our Author himself, who though in this place he makes the Parliament to be joined in Commission with the Convocation, as if a joint Agent in that great business of Reforming the Church; yet in another place he tells us another tale. For fol. 188. it will appear, saith he, (and I can tell from whom he saith it) upon serious examination, that there was nothing done in the Reformation of Religion, save what was acted by the Clergy in their Convocations, or grounded on some Act of theirs precedent to it, with the Advice, Counsel and Consent of the Bishops and most eminent Churchmen; confirmed upon the Postfact, and not otherwise by the Civil Sanction, according to the usage of the best and happiest times of Christianity. So then the Reformation of the Church was acted chiefly by the King with the advice of the Clergy in their Convocation; the confirmation on the post-fact by the King in Parliament: and that (by his leave) not in all the Acts and Particulars of it, but in some few only, for which consult the Tract entitled, The Way and Manner of the Reformation of the Church of England. Now as our Author makes the Parliament a joint Assistant with the King in the Reformation, so he conferreth on Parliaments the supreme Power of ratifying and confirming all Synodical Acts.  
Fol. 199. The Parliament (saith he) did notify and declare that Ecclesiastical power to be in the King, which the Pope had formerly unjustly invaded. Yet so that they reserved to themselves the confirming power of all Canons Ecclesiastical; so that the person or property of Refusers should not be subjected to temporal penalty without consent of Parliament.] But certainly there ●is no such matter in that Act of Parliament, in which the submission of the Clergy and the Authority of the King grounded thereupon is notified and recorded to succeeding times; nor any such reservation to themselves of a confirming power as our Author speaks of in any Act of Parliament (I can knowingly and boldly say it) from that time to this. Had there been any such Privilege, any such Reservation as is here declared, their power, in confirming Ecclesiastical Canons had been Lord Paramount to the Kings; who could have acted nothing in it but as he was enabled by his Houses of Parliament. Nor is this only a new and unheard of Paradox, an Heterodoxie (as I may call it) in point of Law, but plainly contrary to the practice of the Kings of England from that time to this; there being no Synodical Canons or Constitutions (I dare as boldly say this too) confirmed in Parliament, or any otherwise ratified, then by the superadding of the Royal assent. For proof whereof look we no further than the Canons of 603 and 640 confirmed by the two Kings respectively, and without any other Authority concurring with them in these following words (viz.) We have therefore for Us, our Heirs, and lawful Successors, of our especial Grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, given, and by these presents do give our Royal assent according to the fo●m of the said Statute or Act of Parliament aforesaid, to all and every of the said Canons, Orders, Ordinances, and Constitutions, and to all and every thing in them contained. And furthermore, we do not only by our said Prerogative Royal, and Supreme Authority, in causes Ecclesiastical, ratify, confirm, and establish by these our Letters Patents the said Canons, Orders, Ordinances, and Constitutions, and all and every thing in them contained, as is aforesaid, but do likewise propound, publish, and straightly enjoin and command by our said Authority, and by these our Letters Patents, the same to be diligently observed, executed and equally kept by all our loving Subjects of this our Kingdom, both within the Province of Canterbury and York, in all points wherein they do or may concern every or any of them according to this our Will and Pleasure hereby signified and expressed. No other Power required to confirm these Canons, or to impose them on the people but the Kings alone. And yet I ●row there are not a few particulars, in which those Canons do extend to the property and persons of such Refusers as are concerned in the same; which our Author may soon find in them if he list to look. And having so done, let him give us the like Precedent for his Houses of Parliament (either abstractedly in themselves, or in cooperation with the King) in confirming Canons; and we shall gladly quit the cause, and willingly submit to his ●er judgement.  
But if it be Ob●ected, as perhaps it may, That the Subsidies granted by the Clergy in the Convocation are ratified and confirmed by Act of Parliament, before they can be levied either on the Granters themselves, or the rest of the Clergy.  
I answer, that this makes nothing to our Author's purpose, that is to say, that the person or property of Refusers should not be subjected to temporal penalty without consent of Parliament. For first, before the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the 8. they granted Subsidies and other aids unto the King in their Convocations, and levied them upon the persons concerned therein by no other way then the usual Censures of the Church, especial, by Suspension and deprivation, if any Refuser prove so refractory as to dispute the payment of the sum imposed. And by this way they gave and levied that great sum of an Hundred thousand pounds in the Province of Canterbury only, by which they bought their peace of the said King Henry, at such time as he had caused them to be attainted in the Praemunire. And secondly, there is a like Precedent for it since the said Submission. For whereas the Clergy in their Convocation in the year 1585. being the 27 year of Queen Elizabeth, had given that Queen a Subsidy of four shillings in the pound confirmed by Act of Parliament in the usual way; they gave her at the same time (finding their former gift too short for her present occasions) a Benevolence of two shillings in the pound to be raised upon all the Clergy by virtue of their own Synodical Act only, under the penalty of such Ecclesiastical Censures as before were mentioned. Which precedent was after followed by the Clergy in their Convocation. an. 1640. the Instrument of the Grant being the same verbatim with that before; though so it happened (such influence have the times on the actions of men) that they were quarreled and condemned for it by the following Parliament in the time of the King, and not so much as checked at, or thought to have gone beyond their bounds in the time of the Queen. And for the ratifying of their Bill by Act of Parliament, it came up first at such times (after the Submission before mentioned) as the Kings of England being in distrust of their Clergy, did not think fit to empower them by their Letters Patents for the making of any Synodical Acts, Canons, or Constitutions whatsoever, by which their Subsidies have been levied in former times, but put them off to be confirmed and made Obligatory by Act of Parliament. Which being afterwards found to be the more expedite way, and not considered as derogatory to the Church's Rights, was followed in succeeding times without doubt or scruple; the Church proceeding in all other cases by her ●●tive power, even in cases where both the person and property of the Subject were alike concerned, as by the Canons 1603, 1640. and many of those past in Q. Elizabeth's time (though not so easy to be seen) doth at full appear. Which said we may have leisure to consider of another passage relating not unto the power of the Church, but the wealth of the Churchmen. Of which thus our Author.  
Fol. 253. I have heard (saith he) that Queen Elizabeth being informed that Dr. Pilkington Bishop of Durham had given ten thousand pounds in marriage with his Daughter; and being offended that a Prelate's daughter should equal a Princess in portion, took away one thousand pounds a year from that Bishopric, and assigned it for the better maintenance of the Garrison of Barwick.] In telling of which story ou● Author commits many mistakes, as in most things el●e. For first to justify the Queen's displeasure (if she were displeased) he makes the Bishop richer, and the Portion greater than indeed they were. The ten thousand pounds Lib. 9 fol. 109. being shrunk to eight; and that eight thousand pound not given to one Daughter (as is here affirmed) but divided equally between two: whereof the one was married to Sir james Harrington, the other ●nto Dunch of Berk-shire. Secondly, this could be no cause of the Queen's displeasure, and much less of the Cour●ie●s envy; that Bishop having sat in the See of Durham above seventeen years. And certainly he must needs have been a very ill Husband if our of such a great Revenue he had not saved five hundred pounds per annum to prefe● his Children; the income being as great, and the charges of Hospitality less than they have been since. Thirdly, the Queen did not take away a thousand pound a year from that Bishopric, as is here affirmed. The Lands were left to it as before, but in regard the Garrison of Barwick preserved the Bishop's Lands and Tenants from the spoil of the Scots; the Queen thought fit, that the Bishops should contribute towards their own defence, imposing on them an annual pension of a thousand pound for the better maintaining of that Garrison. Fourthly, Bishop Pilkington was no Doctor, but a Bachelor of Divinity only; and possibly had not been raised by our Author to an higher Title and Degree than the University had given him, but that he was a Conniver at Nonconformity, as our Author telleth us Lib. 9 fol. 109. Lastly, I shall here add that I conceive the Pension above mentioned not to have been laid upon that See after Pilkingtons' death, but on his first preferment to it, the French having then newly landed some forces in Scotland, which put the Queen upon a necessity of doubling her Guards and increasing her Garrisons. But whatsoever was the cause of imposing this great yearly payment upon that Bishopric, certain I am, that it continued and the money was duly paid into the Exchequer for many years, after the true cause thereof was taken away; the Queen's displeasure against Pilkington ending either with his life or hers, and all the Garrisons and forces upon the Borders being taken away in the beginning of the Reign of King james. So true is that old saying, Quod Christus non capit fiscus rapit, never more fully verified then in this particular.   

The Sixth Book.  
Containing the History of Abbeys.  
THis Book containing the History of Abbeys seems but a Supplement to the former, but being made a distinct book by our Author, we must do so likewise. In which the first thing capable of an Animadversion, is but merely verbal, viz.  
Fol. 266. Cistercians so called from one Robert living in Cistercium in Burgundy.] The place in Burgundy from whence these Monks took denomination, though called Cistercium by the Latins, is better known to the French and English by the name Cisteaux; the Monks thereof the Monks of Cisteaux by the English, and Lesmoines de Cisteaux by the French, and yet our Author hath hit it better in his Cistercians, than Ralph Brook York Herald did, in his Sister-senses, for which sufficiently derided by Augustin Vincent, as our Author being so well studied in Heraldry, cannot choose but know.  
Fol. 268. But be he who he himself or any other pleaseth brother if they will to St. George on Horseback. ● Our Author not satisfying himself in that Equitius, who is supposed to be the first Founder of Monks in England, makes him in scorn to be the Brother of St. George on Horseback; that is to say, a mere Chimaera, a Legendary Saint, a thing of nothing. The Knights of that most noble Order are beholding to him for putting their Patron in the same Rank with St. Equitius; of whose existence on the Earth he can find no Constat. But I would have him know, how poorly so ever he thinks of St. George on Horseback, that there hath more been said of him, his Noble birth, Achievements with his death and Martyrdom, than all the Friends our Author hath, will or can justly say in defence of our present History.  
Fol. 270.— So they deserve some commendation for their Orthodox judgement in maintaining some Controversies in Divinity of importance against the Jesuits.] Our Author speaks this of the Dominicans or preaching Friars, who though they be the sole active managers of the Inquisition, deserve notwithstanding to be commended for their Orthodox judgement. How so? Because forsooth in some Controversies of importance, that is to say, Predestination, Grace, freewill, and the rest of that link, they hold the same opinions against the Jesuits and Franciscans, as the Rigid Lutherans do against the Melanchthonians, and the Rigid or Peremptory Calvinists against the Remonstrants. As powerful as the Jesuits and Franciscans are in the Court of Rome, they could never get the Pope to declare so much in favour of their Opinion, as here our Author (out of pure zeal to the good Cause) declares in favour of the Dominicans. It was wont to be the property or commendation of Charity, that it hoped all things, believed all things, thought no evil, and in a word covered a multitude of ●ins. But zeal to the good cause having eaten up Charity, so far ascribes unto itself the true qualities of it, as to pass over the sins and vices of such who have engaged themselves in defence thereof. And he that favours the good cause, though otherwise heterodox in Doctrine, irregular in his Conversation, as bloody a Butcher of the true Protestants as these Preaching Friars, shall have his imperfections covered, his vices hidden under this disguise, that he is Orthodox in judgement, and a true Professor. Otherwise the Dominicans had not ●ound such favour from the hands of our Author, who would have drawn as much blood into their cheeks with his pen, as they have drawn from many a true Protestant by their persecutions.  
Fol. 300. We will conclude with their observation (as an ominous presage of Abbeys ruin) that there was scarce a great Abbey in England, which once at least, was not burnt down with lightning from Heaven.] ● Our Author may be as well out in this, as he hath been in many things else; it being an ordinary thing to ascribe that to Lightning or fire from Heaven, which happened by the malice or carelessness of Knaves on Earth, of which I shall speak more hereafter, on occasion of the firing of St. Paul's steeple in London, lib. 9 Now only noting by the way, that scarce any, and but thirteen (for our Author names no more which were so consumed) hang not well together. If only thirteen were so burnt (and sure our Author would have named them if they had been more) he should have rather changed his style, and said that of so many Religious Houses as suffered by the decays of time and the fury of the Danish W●●s, or the rage of accident I fires, scarce any of them ●●d been stricken by the hand of Heaven.  
Fol. 313. Hence presently arose the Northern Rebellion, wherein all the open undertakers were North of Trent, etc.] Not all the open undertakers, I am sure of that our Author telling us in the words next following, that this commotion began first in Lincolnshire, no part whereof except the River- Isle of Axholm, lies beyond the Trent. Concerning which we are instructed by john Stow, 
Stow in Hen. 8. fol 573.  that at an Assize for the King's Subsidy kept in Lincolnshire, the people made an insurrection, and gathered nigh twenty thousand persons, who took certain Lords and Gentlemen of the Country, causing them to be sworn to them upon certain Articles which they had devised. For which Rebellion, and some other practices against the State 12 of that County, 
Id. fol. 5●4.  that is to say, 5 Priests, and 7 Laymen were not long after drawn to Tyborn, and there hanged and quartered. By which we see, that all the open undertakers in the Northern Rebellion were not North of Trent▪ nor all the principal undertakers neither; some Lords and Gentlemen of that County (though against their wills) appearing in it, 
Camden in Lincolnshire fol▪ 535.  and amongst others Sir john Hussey created Baron not long before by King Henry the eighth, and shortly after punished by him with the loss of his head, for being one of the Heads of this Insurrection.  
Fol. 316. Where there be many people, there will be many offenders, there being a Cham amongst the eight in the Ark, yea a Cain amongst the four Primitive Persons in the beginning of the world.] In this, our Author's Rule is better than his Exemplification. For though there where but eight persons in the Ark, whereof Cham was one, yet in all probability there were more than four persons in the world at the Birth of Abel, reckoning him for one. For though the Scripture doth subjoin the Birth of Abel unto that of Cain, yet was it rather in relation to the following story wherein Abel was a principal party, then that no other children had been born between them. The world had peopled very slowly, and never increased to such vast multitudes in so short a time, if Eve had not twinned at least at every birth, and that some other children had not intervened between Cain and Abel. Not was Cain in relation to the time of his brother's birth to be accounted of as Cain in our Author's sense, that is to say, a Malefactor, an Offender, a murderer of his innocent brother; or if we take him in that sense, there must be then some scores of persons at the least, if not many hundreds, and consequently no such Cain amongst the Four Primitive Persons in the beginning of the world, as our Author would.  
Fol. 338. Such who are Prelatically affected, must acknowledge these new Foundations of the Kings for a worthy work, etc.] So then the Foundation of six Bishoprics, with the Capitular Bodies, Schools, Almshouses and other Ministers and Officers subservient to them, is to be thought a worthy work (with reference to the work itself) by none but such as are Prelatically affected. The Preferment of so many men of Learning, the Education of so many children, the maintenance of so many Quire-men, the relief of so many decayed and impotent persons, the provision made for so many of all sorts, who had their being and subsistence in the said Foundations, had nothing in it which might Signify a worthy work▪ unless there be somewhat of a Prelatical persuasion in them, who put that value and esteem upon it. If any of a contrary judgement do approve the same, it is not to be attributed to the worth of the work, but to the accidental use which the unhappiness of this Age hath put them to, that is to say, by selling all the Lands which severally belonged unto them to supply the present necessities of of the Commonwealth, as our Author telleth us. Assuredly such as are now founded in Colleges, or possessed of Tithes, have good cause to thank him for this Discourse, which by this Rule and Reason are to be approved of by none but those who are interessed and concerned in th●m; except it be with reference to some subsequent sal●, when the pretended exigencies of the Commonwealth, or of any prevailing party in it shall require the s●me.  
Fol. 340. It was in those days conceived highly injurious, to thrust Monks and Nuns out of House and Home, without assigning them any allowance for their subsistence.] Our Author says very well in this, there being few Religious persons thrust out of their Houses, (except those that suffered by the first act of dissolution) who either were not preferred in the Church, (as Wakeman the last Abbot of Tewksbery, was by the King made the first Bishop of Gloucester) or otherwise provided of some liberal pension, according to their age, wants, and quality; insomuch as Sir William Weston Lord Prior, of the order of St. john's, had an yearly Pension of a thousand pounds; Rawson the Subprior of a thousand Marks, some of the Brethren of two hundred pounds per annum, and thirty pounds per annum he that had least. Not did the King only give them such competent Pensions as might yield them a subsistence for the future, but furnished them with ready money beforehand (their viaticum or advance money as it were) toward their setting up in the world, which commonly amounted to a fourth part of their yearly Pension. The like honest care to which I find in our Author's History of Waltham Abbey, fol. 8. where he telleth us, that the Canons founded there by King Harold, were not removed thence by King Henry the second, (notwithstanding the scandalous conversation which was charged upon them) and Augustinian Friars brought into their place, done● praedictis Canonicis sufficienter provisum fuisset, till the said Canons were other ways provided of sufficient maintenance. And this may serve for the instruction (I will not say the reproach) of the present times, in which so many Bishops, Deans, and Prebendaries no was obnoxious to any such scandalous accusations, have been thrust out of their Cathedrals without the allowance of one penny towards their subsistence▪ The like may be said also in the case of the sequestered Clergy. For though by an Order of the House of Commons, their wives' and children were to enjoy a fifth part of the yearly profits of their Benefices, yet the unconscionable Intruders found so many shifts to evade that Order, that very few enjoyed the just benefit of it, and they that did, found their attendance on the Committee for plundered Ministers so troublesome and chargeable to them, that it did hardly quit the cost. One man I know particularly, who after above twenty Orders pro and con● and the riding of above a thousand miles backward and forward, besides a chargeable stay in London to attend the business; was fain at last to make a private agreement with the adverse party, and take a tenth part in stead of a fifth. The like may be said also of the late Bill, by which the Presbyterian Intruders are settled in the Benefices of the sequestered Clergy for term of life. For though it be thereby provided, that the Commissioners for rejecting of scandalous Ministers, shall have power to grant a fifth part, together with the arrears thereof, to the sequestered and e●ected Clergy; yet is the Bill clogged with two such circumstances, as make it altogether unuseful to some, and may make it little beneficial unto all the rest. For by the first it is declared, that no man shall receive any benefit by it, who hath either thirty pound per annum in Real, or five hundred pounds in Personal Estate; by means whereof many who have had some hundreds of pounds yearly to maintain their Families, are tied up to so poor a pittance as will hardly keep their children from begging in the open streets. By the other, there is such a power given to the Commissioners, that not exceeding the fifth part, they may give to the poor sequestered Clergy as much and as little as they please, under that proportion. And one I know particularly in this case also, who for an Arrear of twelve years out of a Benefice rent formerly at 250 l. per annum, to my certain knowledge could obtain but 3 l. 6 s. 8 d. (the first Intruder being still living, and possessed of that Benefice) and no more than 20 Marks par annum for his future subsistence, which is but a nineteenth part in stead of a fifth. And this I have observed the rather, that if these peppers should chance to come into the hands of any of those who have the conduct of affairs, they would be pleased to cause the said Bill to be reviewed, and make the benefit thereof more certain and extensive than it is at the present. Our Author might have saved me the greatest part of this Application, had he been minded to do the poor Clergy any right, as he seldom doth. For proof whereof we need but look upon a passage in his very Book, fol. 283. which is this that followeth. Once (saith he) it was in my mind to set down a Catalogue (easy to do, and useful when done) of such Houses of Cistercians, Templars, and Hospitallers, which were founded since the Lateran Council, yet going under the general notion of Tithe-free, to the great injury of the Church. But since on second thoughts, I conceived it better to let it alone, as not sure on such discovery of any blessing from such Ministers which should gain, but certain of many curses from such Laymen who should lose thereby. So he. But I have heard it for a usual saying of King Henry the fourth of France, That he that feared the Pope's curse, the reproaches of discontented people, and the frowns of his Mistress, should never sleep a quiet hour in his bed. And so much for that.  
Fol. 357. But this was done without any great cost to the Crown, only by altering the Property of the place from a late made Cathedral to an Abbey.] Our Author speaks this of the Church of Westminster, which though it suffered many changes, yet had it no such change as our Author speaks of; that is to say, from a Cathedral to an Abbey, without any other alteration which came in between. For when the Monastery was dissolved by King Henry the eighth, An. 1539. it was made a Deanery, Will. Benson being the first Dean. In the year 1541. he made it an Episcopal See, or Cathedral Church, and placed Thomas Thurlby the first Bishop there. But Thurlby being removed to Norwich, Anno 1550. the Bishopric was suppressed by King Edward the sixth, and the Church ceased from being Cathedral, continuing as a Deanery only till the 21. of November, 1557. at what time Dr. Hugh Weston the then Dean thereof, unwillingly removed to Windsor, made room for Feckna● and his Monks, and so restored it once again to the State of an Abbey, as our Author telleth us.  
Fol. 359. Nor can I find in the first year of Queen Elizabeth any particular Statute wherein (as in the r●ign of King Henry the eighth) these Orders are nominatim suppressed, etc.] But first, the several Orders of Religious Persons were not suppressed nominatim, except that of St. john's, by a Statute in the time of King Henry the eight. Secondly, if there were no such Statute, yet was it not because those Houses had no legal settlement, as it after followeth; Queen Mary being vested with a power of granting Mortmains, and consequently of founding these Religious Houses in a Legal way. Thirdly, there might be such a Statute, though our Author never had the good luck to see it; and yet for want of such good luck, I find him apt enough to think there was no such Statute. Et quod non invenit usquam, esse putat nusquam, in the Poet's language. And such a Statute as he speaks of there was indeed, mentioned and related to in the Charter of Queen Elizabeth for founding the Collegiate Church of St. Peter in Westminster. But being an unprinted Statute, and of private use, it easily might escape our Author's diligence, though it did not Camden's; who being either better ●ighted, 
Camd. ●n Midlesex, fol 4●9.  or more concerned, had a view thereof. For telling ●s how the Monks with their Abbot had been set in possession again by Queen Mary, he after addeth, that they within a while after being cast out by Authority of Parliament, the most virtuous Queen Elizabeth converted it into a Collegiate Church, or rather into a Seminary or Nurse Garden of the Church, etc.  
Fol. 369. Jesuits the last and newest of all Orders.] The newest if the last, there's no doubt of that, but the last they were not; the Oratorians (as they call them) being of a later brood. The Jesuits founded by Ignatius Loyola, a Spaniard▪ and confirmed by Pope Paul the thi●d, Anno 1540 The Oratorians founded by Philip Meri● a Florentine, and confirmed by Pope Pius the fourth, Anno 1564. By which account these Oratorians are younger Brethren to the Jesuits by the space of four and twenty years; and consequently the jesuits not the last and newest of Religious Orders.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Seventh and Eighth Books OF The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
Containing the Reigns of King Edward the sixth, and Queen Mary.  
WE are now come unto the Reign of King Edward the sixth, which our Author passes lightly over, though very full of action and great alterations. And he●e the first thing which I meet with, is an unnecessary Quaere which he makes about the Injunctions of this King. Amongst which we find one concerning the religious keeping of the Holidays, in the close whereof it is declared, That it shall be lawful for all people in time of Harvest to labour upon Holy and Festival days, and save that thing which God hath sent, and that scrupulosity to abstain from working on those days doth grievously offend God. Our Author he●upon makes this Quaere, that is to say,  
Fol. 375. Whether in the 24 Injunction labouring in time of Harvest upon Holidays, and Festivals, relateth not only to those of Ecclesiastical Constitution (as dedicated to Saints) or be inclusive of the Lordsday also.] Were not our Author a great Zealot for the Lords-day-Sabbath, and ●●●dious to entitle it to some Antiquity, we had not met with such a Quaere. The Law and Practice of those times make this plain enough. For in the Statute of 5 and 6 of Edward the sixth, c. 3. the names and number of the Holidays being first laid down, that is to say, All Sundays in the year, the Feasts of the circumcision of our Lord jesus Christ, of the Epiphany, etc. with all the rest still kept, and there named particularly, it is thus enacted, viz. That it shall and may be lawful to every Husbandman, Labourer, Fisherman, and to all and every other person and persons of what Estate, Degree, or Condition he or they be, upon the Holiday's aforesaid in Harvest, or at any other times in the year, when necessity shall so require, to labour, ride, fish, or work any kind of 〈◊〉, at their free-wils and pleasure: any thing in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding. The Law being such, there is no question to be made in point of practice, nor consequently of the meaning of the King's injunction. For further opening of which truth we find in Sir john Haywoods' History of this King, that not the Country only, but the Court were indulged the liberty of attending business on that day; it being ordered by the King amongst other things, That the Lords of the Council should upon Sundays attend the public Affairs of the Realm, 
Hist. Edward 6. p●g 353.  dispatch Answers to Letters for good order of the State, and make full dispatches of all things concluded the week before: Provided that they be present at Common Prayer. And that on every Sunday night the King's Secretary should deliver him a memorial of such things as are to be debated by the Privy Council in the week ensuing. Which Orders had our Author read and compared with the Statute, he had not needed to have made this Quere about the true intent and meaning of the King's Injunction.  
Fol. 386. In the first year of King Edward the sixth, it was recommended to the care of the most grave Bishops and others (assembled by the King at his Castle at Windfor) and when by them completed, set forth in Print 1548. with a Proclamation in the King's name to give Authority thereunto, being also recommended unto every Bishop by especial Letters from the Lords of the Council to see the same put in execution. And in the next year a penalty was imposed by Act of Parliament on such who should deprave or neglect the use thereof.] Our Author here mistakes himself, and confounds the business; making no difference between the whole first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth, and a particular form of Administration. For the better understanding whereof, he may please to know, that in the first Parliament of this King there past a Statute, 
1 E●. 6. c. 1.  Entitled, An Act against such as speak against the Sacrament of the Altar; and for the receipt thereof in both kinds. Upon the coming out whereof, the King being no less desirous (as Fox relates it) to have the form of Administration of the Sacrament reduced to the right Rule of the Scriptures, and first use of the Primitive Church, than he was to establish the same by Authority of his own Regal Laws, appointed certain of the most grave and learned Bishop and others of his Realm to assemble together at his Castle of Windsor, 
Acts and Mon. pag. 658.  there to argue and entreat of this matter, and conclude upon and set forth one perfect and uniform Order, according to the Rule, and use aforesaid; which Book was printed and set out March 8. 1548. (which is 1547. according to the account of the Church of England) with a Proclamation of the Kings before, as by the Book itself appea●●●. But this Book thus set out and published, contained nothing but a Form and Order of Adminis●ing the Holy Communion under both kinds, in pursuance of the Statute before mentioned; and served but as a preamble to the following Liturgy, a B●e● fast (as it were) to the Feast ensuing. The Liturgy came not out till near two years after, confirmed in Parliament Anno 2. 3. Edw. 6. cap. 1. and in that Parliament cried up as made by the immediate aid and inspiration of the holy Ghost. Which notwithstanding some exceptions being taken at it (as our Author notes) by Calvin ab●o●d, and some Zealots at home, the Book was brought under a Review; much altered in all the parts and offices of it, but whether ●nto the better, or unto the worse, let some others judge.  
Fol. 404. At last the great Earl of Warwick deserted his Chaplain in open field to shift for himself. Indeed he had higher things in his head, then to attend such trifles.] A man may easily discern a Cat by her claw, and we may find as easily by the scratches of our Author's pen to what party in the Church he stands most inclined. He had before declared for the Dominicans and Rigid Calvinists in some points of Doctrine, and now declares himself for the Non-Conformists in point of Ceremony. He had not else called the Episcopal Ornaments, particularly the Rochet, Chimere and Square-cap by the name of trifles; such trifles as were not worth the contending for, if Res●lute Ridley had been pleased to dispense therein. The truth is, that Hoopers' opposition in this particular, gave the first ground to those Combustions in the Church which after followed; Calvin extremely stickling for him, and writing to his party here to assist him in it. And this I take to be the reason why our Author is so favourable in his censure of him fol. 402. and puts such Answers in the mouths of the Nonconformist fol. 404. as I can hardly think were so well hammered and accommodated in those early days. Such as seem rather fitted for the temper and acumen of the present times after a long debating of all particulars and a strict search into all the niceties of the Controversy, then to the first beginnings and unpremeditated Agitatious of a newborn Quarrel.  
Fol. 406. Yet this work met afterwards with some Frowns even in the faces of great Clergymen, etc. because they concoived these singing Psalms erected in Corrivality and opposition to the reading Psalms, which were formerly sung in Cathedral Churches.] And tho●e great Churchmen ●ad good re●son for what they did, wisely foreseeing that the singing of those Psalms so translated in Rythme and Meeter would work some alteration in the executing of the public Liturgy. For though it be expressed in the Title of those singing Psalms that they were set forth and allowed to be sung in all Churches before and after morning and evening Prayer; and also before and after Sermons; yet this allowance seems rather to have been a Connivance then an approbation: no such allowance being ●ny whe●e found by such as have been most industrious and concerned in the search thereof. Secondly, whereas ●t was intended that the said Psalms should be only 〈◊〉 before and after morning and evening Prayer; and also before and after Sermons (which shows they were not to be intermingled in the public Liturgy) in very little time they prevailed so far in most Parish Churches, as to thrust the Te Deum, the Benedictus, the Magnificat, and the Nunc dimittis, quite out of the Church. And thirdly, by the practices and endeavours of the Puritan party, they came to be esteemed the most divine part of God's public service; the reading Psalms together with the first and second Lessons being heard in many places with a covered head, but all men ●itting bareheaded when the Psalm is sung. And to that end, the Parish Clerk must be taught when he names the Psalm to call upon the people to sing it to the praise and glory of God, no such preparatory Exhortation being used at the naming of the Chapters of the daily Psalms. But whereas our Author seems to intimate that the Reading Psalms were formerly sung only in Cathedral Churches, he is exceedingly mistaken both in the Rubrics of the Church, and the practice too: the Rubrics l●●ving them indifferently to be said or sung, according as the Congregation was fitted for it, the practice in some Parish Churches within the time of my memory being for it also. And this our Author (as I think) cannot choose but know, if he be but as well studied in the Rules of the Church, as in some Popish Legends and old ends of Poetry.  
Fol. 407. Let Adonijah and this Lord's example deter Subjects from meddling with the Widows of their Sovereigns, lest in the same match they espouse their own danger and destruction.] I see little reason for this Rule, less for his examples. For first Abishag the Shunamite, whom Adonijah desired to have to wife, was ●ever married unto David; and therefore cannot properly be called his Widow. And secondly, Queen Katheri●e Parr the Widow of King Henry the eighth, and wife unto Sir Thomas Seimor (the Lord here mentioned) is generally charactered for a Lady of so meek a nature, as not to contribute any thing towards his destruction. Had the Duchess of Somerset been less impetious than she was, or possessed but of one half of that aequanimity which carried Queen Katherine off in all times of her troubles, this Lord might have lived happily in the arms of his Lady, and gone in peace unto the grave. We find the like match to have been made between another Katherine the Widow of another Henry, and Owen Tudor a private Gentleman of Wales, prosperous and comfortable to them both; though Owen was inferior to Sir Thomas Seimor both in Birth and Quality, and Katherine of Valois Daughter to Charles the sixth of France, far more superior in her blood to Queen Katherine Parr. The like may be said also of the marriage of Adeliza Daughter of Geofry Earl of L●vain and Duke of Brabant, and Widow to King Henry the first, married to William de Albeney a noble Gentleman, to whom she brought the Castle and Honour of Arundel, conferred upon her by the King her former Husband, continuing in the possession of their posterity, though in several Families, to this very day; derived by the Heirs general from this House of Albeney to that of the Fitz-●lans, and from them to the Howards the now Earls thereof. Many more examples of which kind fortunate and successful to each party might be easily ●ound, were it worth the while.  
Fol. 421. This barren Convocation is entitled the Parent of those Articles of Religion (forty two in number) which are printed with this Preface, Articuli de quibus in Synodo Londinensi, etc.] Our Author here is guilty of a greater crime then that of Scandalum Magnatum, making King Edward the sixth of pious memory, no better than an impious and lewd Impostor. For if the Convocation of this year were barren (as he saith it was) it could neither be the Parent of those Articles nor of the short Catechism which was Printed with them, countenanced by the King's Letters Patents pre●ixt before it. For  
First, the Title to the Articles runneth thus at large, viz. Articuli de quibus in Synodo Londinensi Anno 1552 inter Episcopos & alios eruditos viros convenerat ad tollendam opinionum dissensionem, & consensum verae Religionis firmandum Regia Authoritate in lucem editi. Which title none durst have adventured to set before them, had they not really been the products of that Convocation.  
Secondly, the King had no reason to have any such jealousy at that time of the major part of the Clergy, but that he might trust them with a power to meddle with matters of Religion (which is the only Argument our Author bringeth against those Articles) This Convocation being holden in the sixth year of his Reign when most of the Episcopal Sees and Parochial Churches were filled with men agreeable to his desi●es, and generally conformable to the form of worship the● by Law established.  
Thi●dly, the Church of England for the first five years of Queen Elizabeth retained these Articles and no other as the public tendries of the Church in points of Doctrine, which certainly she had not done, had they been recommended to her by a less Authority than a Convocation.  
Fourthly and las●ly, we have the testimony of our Author against himself, who telling us of the Catechism above mentioned, that it was of the san●e extraction with the Book of Articles, adds afterwards, that being first composed by a single person, it was perused and allowed by the Bishops and other learned men (understand it the Convocation) and by Royal Authority commended to all Subject, and commanded to all Schoolmasters to teach it their Scholars. So that this Catechism being allowed by the Bishops and other learned men in the Convocation, and the Articles being said to be of the same extraction; it must needs follow thereupon, that these Articles had no other Parent than this Convocation. The truth is, that the Records of Convocation, during this King's whole Reign, and the first years of Queen Mary, are very imperfect and defective; most of them lost, and amongst others those of this present year; and yet one might conclude as strongly that my Mother died childless, because my Christening is not to be found in the Parish Register; as that the Convocation of this year was barren, because the Acts and Articles of it are not entered in the Journal Book.   

The Eighth Book; OR The Reign of Queen MARY.  
WE next proceed unto the short, but troublesome Reign of Queen Mary; in which the first thing 〈◊〉 occurs, is,  
●ol. 1. But the Commons of England who for many ye●●s together had conned Loyalty by-heart, out of the Sta●●●e of the succession, were so perfect in their Lesson, that they would not be put out of it by this new started design.] In which I am to note these things; first that he makes the Loyalty of the Commons of England not to depend upon the primogeniture of their Princes, but on the Statute of Succession, and then the object of that Loyalty must not be the King, but the Act of Parliament, by which they were directed to the knowledge of the next successor: and then it must needs be in the power of Parliaments to dispose of the Kingdom as they pleased; the People's Loyalty being tied to such dispositions. Secondly, that the Statutes of Succession had been so many, and so contrary to one another, that the common people could not readily tell which to trust to; and for the last it related to the King's last Will and Testament, so lately made and known unto so few of the Commons, that they had neither opportunity to see it, nor time to con the same by heart. Nor thirdly, were the Commons so perfect in this lesson of Loyalty, or had so fixed it in their hearts, but that they were willing to forget it within little time, and take out such new lessons of disobedience and disloyalty, as Wyatt and his Partisans did preach unto them. And finally they had not so well conned this lesson of Loyalty in our Authors own judgement, but that some strong pretender might have taught them a new Art of Oblivion: it being no improbable thing (as himself confesseth) to have heard of a King Henry the ninth, if Henry Fitz-Roy the Duke of Somerset and Richmond, had lived so long as to the death of King Edward the sixth.  
Fol. 11. Afterwards Philpot was troubled by Gardiner for his words spoken in the Convocation. In vain did he plead the privilege of the place, commonly reputed a part of Parliament.] I cannot find that the Convocation at this time, nor many years before this time, was commonly reputed as a part of the Parliament. That anciently it had been so, I shall easily grant; there being a clause in every letter of Summons by which the Bishops were required to attend in Parliament, that they should warn the Clergy of their several and respective Dioceses, some in their persons, and others by their Procurators to attend there also. But this hath been so long unpractised, that we find no tract of footsteps of it since the Parliaments of the time of King Richard the second. It's true indeed, that in the 8. year of King Henry the sixth, there passed a Statute by which it was enacted, That all the Clergy which should be called thenceforth to the Convocation by the King's Writ, together with their servants and Families, should for ever after fully use and enjoy such liberty or immunity in coming, tarrying, and returning, as the great men & Commonalty of the Realm of England, called or to be called to the King's Parliament, have used, or aught to have, or enjoy. Which though it make the Convocation equal to the Parliament, 
Rost●l● Abrid ●f. 423.  as to the freedom of their Persons; yet can it not from hence be reckoned, and much less commonly reputed for a part thereof.  
Fol. 14. Indeed the Queen bare Poole an unfeigned affection, and no wonder to him that considereth, 1. their Age, he being about ten years older, the proportion allowed by the Philosopher betwixt Husband and Wife, etc.] In Queen Mary's affection unto Pool, and the reasons of it, I am very well satisfied, better than in the explication which he adds unto it. For if by the Philosopher, he means Aristotle, as I think he doth, he is very much out in making no more than ten years to be the proportion allowed by him betwixt the Husband and the Wife. For Aristotle in the seventh Book of his Politics having discoursed of the fittest time and age for marriage both in men and women, 
Arist. Pol. l. 7▪ cap. 16.  concludes at last, that it is expedient that maidens be married about the age of eighteen years, and Men at seven and thirty, or thereabouts. His reason is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ that is to say, Because they shall then be joined in wedlock, while their bodies be in full strength, and shall● cease from procreation in fit time. Whether so great a disproportion were allowed of then, or that it was a matter of Speculation only, and not reducible to practice, I dispute not now. Only I note that it is twenty years, not ten, which the Philosopher requires in the different ages of the Man and Wife.  
Fol. 19 Lincoln Diocese the largest of the whole Kingdom, containing Leicester, etc. with parts of Ha●tford and Warwickshires.] That the great●. Diocese of Lincoln containeth the whole Counties of Bedford, Buckingham, Huntingdon, Leicester, and Lincoln, with part of Hartfordshire is confessed by all; but that it containeth also some part of Warwickshire, I do very much doubt. Certain I am, 
Antiquit. B●itan.  that Archbishop Parker, a man very well skilled in the jurisdiction of his Suffragan Bishops, assigns no part of Warwickshire to the See of Lincoln; dividing that County between the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, and the Bishop of Worcester. I see by this our Author is resolved to play at all games, though he get by none.  
Fol. 27. The Litany, Surplice, and other Ceremonies in Service and Sacraments they omitted, both as superfluous and superstitio●s.] Our Author speaks this of the Schismatical Congregation at Frankford, who t●rn'd the public Church Liturgy quite out of their Church, fashioning to themselves a new form of Worship, which had no warrant and foundation by the laws of this Realm. And first (saith he) the Litany, Surplice, and other Ceremonies they omitted both as superfluous and superstitious. Superfluous, and superstitious, in whose opinion? In that of the Schismatics at Frankford, our Authors, or in both alike. Most probably in our Authors as well as theirs, for otherwise he would have added some note of qualification, such as they thought, they judged, or they supposed them: according as he hath restrained them to their own ●ense in the clause next following, viz. in place of the English Confession, they used another, adjudged by them of more effect. Adjudged by them in this, not the former sentence, makes me inclinable to believe that the Litany, Surplice, and other Ceremonies are both superfluous and superstitious in our Author's judgement, not in theirs alone. Secondly, our Author (as we have noted formerly on the second Book of this History) reckons the Cross in Baptism, used and required to be used by the Church of England, among the superstitious Ceremonies and such like Trinkets with which that Sacrament is loaded. And if he durst declare himself so plain in this second Book written as he affirms, in the Reign of the late King, when he might fear to be called to an account for that expression, there is little question to be made, but since Monarchy was turned into a State, he would give his pen more liberty than he did before, in counting the Litany, Surplice, and other Ceremonies is superfluous and superstitious, as the Cross in Baptism. Thirdly, having laid down an abstract of the form of worship contrived by the Schismatics at Frankford, he honoureth them with no lower Title then that of Saints; and counts this liberty of deviating from the Rules of the Church for a part of their happiness. For so it followeth, fol. 28. This, saith he, is the Communion of Saints, who never account themselves peaceably possessed of any happiness, until (if it be in their power) they have also made their fellow-sufferers partakers thereof. If those be Saints, who separate themselves schismatically from their Mother Church; and if it be a happiness to them to be permitted so to do; our Author hath all the reason in the world to desire to be admitted into their Communion, and be made partaker of that happiness which such Saints enjoy. And if in order thereunto he counts the Litany, Surplice, and other Ceremonies of the Church to be both superstitious and superfluous too, who can blame him for it?  
Fol. 39 Trinity College built by Sir Thomas Pope. ●I shall not derogate so much from Sir Thomas Pope, as our Author doth from Trinity College, naming no Bishop of this House, as he doth of others. He tells us that he lived in this University about 17 weeks, and all that time D●. Skinner the Bishop of Oxford lived there too. Dr. Wright the Bishop of Li●chfield, probably was then living al●o, (for he deceased not till after the beginning of the year 1643.) but living at that time in his own House of Ecclesal Castle. Both of them Members of this College, and therefore worthily deserving to have found some place in our Author's History. And because our Author can find no learned Writers of this College neither, I will supply him with two others in that kind also. The first whereof shall be john S●lden, of the Inner Temple, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that renowned Humanitian and Philologer, sometimes a Commoner of this House, and here initiated in those Studies in which he afterwards attained to so high an eminence. The second William Chillingworth, an able and acute Divine, and once a Fellow of this College; whose Book entitled The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation, written in de●ence of Dr. Potter's Book called Charity mistaken, commended by our Author, Lib. 3. fol. 115. remains unanswered by the Jesuits, notwithstanding all their brags beforehand, to this very day. Which Book though most ridiculously buried with the Author at Arundel (get thee gone thou accursed Book etc.) by Mr. Francis Cheynel, the usu fructuary of the rich personage of Pe●worth, shall still survive unto the world in its own just value, when the poor threepenny commodities of such a sorry Haberdasher of Small Wares shall be out of credit. Of this Pageant, see the Pamphet called Chillingworthi Novissima, printed at London, Anno 1644.  
Fol. 41. But now it is gone, 
Calais.  let it go; it was but a beggarly Town, and cost England ten times yearly more than it was worth● in keeping thereof.] Admit it be so, yet certainly it was worth the keeping, had it cost much more. The English while they kept that Town, had a door open into France upon all occasions, and therefore it was commonly said that they carried the Keys of France at their Girdles. Sound Statesmen do not measure the benefit of such Towns and Garrisons as are maintained and kept in an Enemy's Country, by the profit which they bring into their Exchequer, but by the opportunities they give a Prince to enlarge his Territories. Of this kind was the Town of Barwick situate on the other side of the Tweed, upon Scottish ground; but Garrisoned and maintained with great charge by the Kings of England, because it gave him the same advantage against the Scots, as Calais did against the French. The government of which last Town is by Comines said to be the goodliest Captain ship in the world, so great an Eyesore to the French, that Mounsieur de Cordes (who lived in the time of Lewis the eleventh) was used to say, that he would be content to lie in Hell seven years together, upon condition that Calais were regained from the English; and finally judged of such importance by the French, when they had regained it, that neither the Agreement made at the Treaty of Cambray, nor the desire to free New-haven from the power of the English, nor the necessities which Henry the fourth was reduced unto, could ever prevail upon them to part with it. But it is dry meat said the Country fellow, when he lost the Hare; and so let Cali●e pass for a Beggarly Town, and not worth the keeping, because we have no hope to get it.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Ninth Book OF The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
Containing the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.  
THe short Reigns of King Edward the sixth, and Queen Mary being briefly passed over by our Author, he spends the more time in setting out the affairs of the Church under Queen Elizabeth; not so much because her Reign was long, but because it was a busy Age and full of Faction. To which Faction how he stands affected he is not coy to let us see on all occasions, giving us in the very first entrance this brief but notable Essay, viz.  
Fol. 51. Idolatry is not to be permitted a moment; the first minute is the fittest to abolish it: all that have power have right to destroy it by that grand Charter of Religion, whereby every one is ●ound to advance God's glory. And if Sovereigns forget, no reason but Subjects should remember their duty] Our Author speaks this in behalf of some forward Spirits, who not enduring the la●inesse of Authority in order to the great work of Reformation, fell beforehand to the beating down of superstitious Pictures and Images. And though some others condemned their indiscretion herein, yet our Author will not, but rather gives these Reasons for their justification; 1. That the Popish Religion is Idolatry. 2. That Idolatry is to be destroyed by all that have power to do it. 3. (Which is indeed the main) that if the Sovereigns do forget, there is no reason but Subjects should remember their duty. This being our Author's Masterpiece, and a fair groundwork for Seditious and Rebellious for the times ensuing, I shall spend a little the more time in the examination of the propositions, as before we had them. And  
1. It will be hard for our Author to prove that the Romish Religion is Idolatry, though possible it is that some of the members of that Church may be proved Idolaters. I know well what great pains Dr. Reynolds took in his laborious work entitled, De Idololatria Ecclesiae Romanae; and I know too that many very learned and moderate men were not thoroughly satisfied in his proofs and Arguments. That they are worshippers of Images, as themselves deny not, so no body but themselves can approve them in it. But there is a very wide difference betwixt an Image and an Idol, betwixt the old Idolaters in the state of Heathenism, and those which give religious worship unto Images in some pa●ts of Chris●endom. And this our Author being well studied in Antiquity, and not a stranger to the 〈…〉 of the present times, cannot choose but know; tho●gh zeal to the good cause, and the desire of being constant to himself, drew this p●●●age from him. The Christian faith delivered in the h●ly Gospels succeeded over the greatest part of the then known wo●●d in the place of that Idolatrous worship, whi●h like a Leprosy had generally overspread the whole face thereof. And therefore that the whole Mass of Wickliff's He●erodoxies might be Christened by the name of Gospel, our Author thinks it necessary that the Popish Mass, and the rest of the Superstitious of that Church should be called Idolatry.  
2. That Idolatry is to be destroyed by all them that have power to do it, I shall easily grant. But than it must be understood of a lawful power, and not permitted to the liberty of unlawful violence. Id possumus, quod jure possumus, was the rule of old, and it held good in all attempts for Reformation in the elder times. For when the Fabric of the Jewish Church was out of order, and the whole Worship of the Lord either defiled with superstitions, or intermingled with Idolatries, as it was too often: did not Gods servants carry and await his leisure, till those who were supreme both in place and power, were by him prompted and inflamed to a Reformation? How many years had that whole people made an Idol of the Brazen Serpent, and burnt ●●cense to it, before it was defaced by King H●zekiah? How many more might it have longer stood undefaced▪ untouched by any of the common people, had not the King given order to demolish it? How many years had the seduced Israelites adored before the Altar of Bethel, before it was hewn down and cut in p●eces by the good King josiah? And yet it cannot be denied but that it was as much in the power of the jews to destroy that Idol, and of the honest and religious Israelites to break down that Altar; as it either was, or could be in the power of our English Zealots to beat down superstitious Pictures and Images, had they been so minded. Solomon in the Book of Canticles compares the Church unto a Army, Acies Castrorum ordina●a, as the Vulgar hath it, an Army terrible with Banners, as our English reads it. A powerful Body out of doubt, able which way soever it moves, to waste and destroy the Country, to burn and sack the Villages through which it passeth. And questionless too many of the Soldiers knowing their own power, world be apt to do it, if not restrained by the Authority of their Commanders and the Laws of war. 
Tacit. H●●st. l 1.  Ita se Ducum Authoritas, sic Rigor Disciplinae habet, as we find in Tacitus. And if those be not kept as they ought to be, Confusi Equites Peditesque in exitium ruunt; the whole runs on to a swift destruction. Thus is it also in the Church with the Camp of God; If there be no subordination in it, if every one might do what he list himself, and make such uses of that power and opportunity as he thinks are put into into his hands, what a confusion would ensue, how speedy a calamity must needs fall upon it? Courage and zeal do never show more amiably in inferior powers, than when they are subordinate to good directions, especially when they take directions from the right hand, from the Supreme Magistrate, not from the interests and passion of their fellow subjects. It is the Prince's office to command, and theirs to execute. With which wise caution the Emperor Otho once repressed the too great forwardness of his Soldiers, when he found them apt enough to make use of their power in a matter not commanded by him, Vobis Arma & Animus, 
Tacit. Hi●t. l. 1.  mihi Consilium & virtutis vestrae Regimen relinquites as his words there are. He understood their duty, and his own authority, allows them to have power and will, but regulates and restrains them both to his own command. So that whether we behold the Church in its own condition, proceeding by the warrant and examples of holy Scripture, or in resemblance to an Army (as compared by Solomon) there will be nothing left to the power of the people either in way of Reformation or Execution▪ till they be vested and entrusted with 〈◊〉 lawful power derived from him whom God hath placed in Authority over them. And therefore though Idolatry be to be destroyed, and to be destroyed by all which have power to do it, yet must all those be furnished with 〈◊〉 lawful power, or otherwise stand guilty of as high a crime as that which they so zealously endeavour to condemn in others.  
3. But our Author is not of this mind, and therefore adds, That if the Sovereign do forget, the Subjects should remember their duty. A lesson which he never learned in the Book of God. For besides the examples which we have in demolishing the Brazen Serpent, and the Altar of Bethel, not acted by the power of the people, but the command of the Prince; I would 〈◊〉 know where we shall find in the whole cour●e and current of the holy Scriptures, that the common people in and by their own authority, removed the high places, and destroyed the Images, or cut down the G●oves, those excellent Instruments of Superstition and Idolatry; or that they did attempt any such thing till warranted and commissionated by the Supreme Powers. Where shall we find that any of the seven thousand person: which had not bowed the knee to Baal, did ever go about to destroy that Idol? Or that Eliah or Elisha (two men as extraordinary for their calling, as their zeal and courage) did excite them to it? Where shall we find the Primitive Christians, when living under the command of Heathenish Emperors busied in destroying Idols, or defacing the Temples of those Gods whom the Pagans worshipped; tho●gh grown in those times to such infinite multitudes, that they filled all places of the Empire, & Vestra omnia implevim●●, Cities, Ills, Castles, Burroughs, your places of Assembly, Camps, Tribes, Palaces, yea the very Senate and common Forum, as Tertullian pleads it. No other Doctrine 〈◊〉 ●eard of till either the new Gospel of Wickliff, or the new Lights shining from Geneva, gave beginning to it: when the Genevians were resolved on a Reformation, and could not get the consent of their Bishop, who was also their immediate Prince, they resolved to take the work into their own hands, and proceed without him. And that the presence of their Bishop might not be a hindrance unto their designs, they raised a tumult, put themselves in to a posture of war, and thereby force him and his Clergy to forsake the City. And this being done, they did not only order matters of Religion as they pleased themselves, but took the Sovereignty of the City into their own hands, changing the Government thereof to the form of a Commonwealth. Eo ejecto Genevates Monarchiam in popularem Statum commutarunt, as Calvin hath it in his Epistle unto Cardinal Sadolet. The practice of these men drawn afterwards into example by Knox, and others, became at last to be the standing Rule and Measure of all Reformations. For when the King and Queen of Scots, refused to ratify two Acts which were sent unto them concerning the abolishing of the Mass, and the Pope's supremacy, 
Hist. of Q. Mary s. 25.  Knox, Winram, and the rest of that gang without more ado devised, and set up a new form of Discipline, engrossing that power unto the Kirk, which formerly had been usurped by the Popes of Rome. Afterwards when the Queen was returned into Scotland, and that some of their importunate Petitions were neglected by her, it was concluded by the Ministers in as plain terms as might be, that if the Queen will not, than we must, ibid. fol. 33.  
According to this Rule the Netherlands proceeded also, not only driving on the design which they had in hand (as the French Hugonots also did) without the King's Authority, but against it also. Finally, from a matter practical it came at last to be delivered for a point of Doctrine, that if the Prince or Supreme Magistrate did not reform the Church, than the people might. For this I find in Clesselius, one of the Contra-Remonstrants of Rotterdam. If saith he, the Prince and Clergy do neglect their duties in the Reforming of the Church, Necesse est tumid facere plebeios Israelitas, that then, it doth belong to the common people. And it is with a Necesse too, if you mark it well▪ they might not only do it, but they must be doing. Not in the way of Mediation or Petition, by which the dignity of the Magistrate might be preserved, but by force and violence, Licet ad sanguinem usque pro eo pugnent, even to the shedding of their own blood, and their brethren's too. Our Author preacheth the same Doctrine, whether by way of Application or Instruction, it comes all to one; for, Qui Parents laudat filios provocat, as Lactantius has it, Posterity is too soon taught to follow the ill examples of their Predecessors. And though he press it not so home as Clesselius did, yet when the gap is once set open, and the Hedge of Authority torn down, bloodshed and war, and other acts of open violence will come in of course. So that we may affirm of this dangerous Doctrine, as the Sorbonists once did of the Jesuits, viz. Videtur in negotio sidei periculosa, pacis Ecclesiae perturbativa, & magis ad destructionem quam ad aedificationem. But I have stayed too long upon these first Notes, I now proceed unto the rest.  
Fol. 54. This Parliament being very active in matters of Religion, the Convocation (younger Brother thereunto) was little employed and less regarded.] Our Author follows his design of putting matters of Religion into the power of Parliaments though he hath chosen a very ill Medium to conclude the point. This Parliament as active as he seems to make it, troubled itself so little with matters of Religion, that had it done less, it had done just nothing. All that it did, was the Repealing of some Acts made in the time of Queen Mary, and settling matters in the same State in which she found them at her first coming to the Crown. The Common Prayer Book being reviewed and fitted to the use of the Church by some godly men, appointed by the Queen alone, received no other confirmation in this present Parliament then what it had before in the last years of King Edward. The Supremacy was again restored, as it had been formerly; the Title of Supreme head which seemed offensive unto many of both Religious, being changed into that of Supreme Governor, nothing, in all this done de novo, which could entitle this Parliament to such activity in matters of Religion, but that our Author had a mind to undervalue the Convocation, as being little employed, and less regarded. I grant indeed, that the Convocation of that year did only meet for forms sake, without acting any thing; and there was very good reason for it. The Bishops at that time were so tenaciously addicted to the Church of Rome, that they chose all (except Anthony Kitchen of Landaffe) rather to lose their Bishoprics then take the Oath of Supremacy. So that there was little or no hope of doing any thing in Convocation to the Queen's content in order to the Reformation of Religion, which was then designed, had they been suffered to debate, treat, and conclude of such particulars as had relation thereunto. But we shall see when things are somewhat better settled, that the activity of the next Convocation will make amends for the silence and unsignificancy of this.  
In the mean time I would fain know our Author's Reason, why speaking of the Convocation, and the Parlialiament in the notion of Twins, the Convocation must be made the younger Brother. Assuredly there had been Convocations in the Church of England some hundreds of years before the name of Parliament had been ever heard of; which he that lists to read the collection of Councils published by that learned and industrious Gentleman Sir Henry Spelman, cannot but perceive.  
Fol. 71. This year the spire of Poles- steeple covered with lead strangely fell on fire.] More modestly in this then when he formerly ascribes the burning of some great Abbeys to Lightning from heaven. And so this steeple was both reported and believed to be fired also, it being an ordinary thing in our Common Almanacs till these latter times, to count the time (among the other E●oches of Computation) from the year that St. Paul-steeple was fired with Lightning. But afterwards it was acknowledged (as our Author truly notes) to be done by the negligence of a Plumber carelessly leaving his Coals therein; ●●nce which acknowledgement we find no mention of this accident in our yearly Almanacs. But whereas our Author finds no other Benefactors for the repairing of this great Ruin but the Queen's bounty, and the Clergies Benevolence, I must needs tell him that these were only accessories to the principal charge. The greatest part hereof, or to say better, the whole work was by the Queen imposed on the City of London, it being affirmed by john Stow, that after this mischance the Queen's Majesty directed her Letters to S●ow Su●ve● the Mayor, willing him to take order for the speedy repairing of the same. 
S●ow Su●ve● of Lond. p. 623.  And in pursuance of that order (besides what issued from the public stock in the Chamber of London) the Citizens gave first a great Benevolence, and after that three Fifteen to be speedily paid. What the Queen did in the way of furtherance, or the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury in the way of help, is to be looked upon as their free voluntary Act, no otherwise obliged thereto, but as the public Honour of the Church and State did invite them to it. The Mayor and City were the parties upon whom the command was laid, as most concerned in the Repair of their own Cathedral▪ Which I thought good to put our Author in mind o● as a fault of omission only, leaving such use as may be made of the Observation to the 〈◊〉 of others.  
Fol. 71. Here I would fain be informed by some learned men in the Law, what needed the restoring of those Children whose ●ather was condemned and died only for Heresy, which is conceived a personal crime, and not tainting the bl●nd. The Parliament this year had passed an Act for the Restitution in blood of the children of Thomas Cranmer late Archbishop of Canterbury, for which our Author as it seems can see no reason, in regard he was condemned and died only for Heresy. For though (saith he) this Archbishop was first accused of High-Treason, yet it afterward was waved, and he tried upon Heretical opinions But in this our Author is mistaken. For though Cranmer was condemned and died for Heresy, yet he was not condemned for that only; nor was the accusation for Treason waved, as he saith it was, but the conviction of him as an Heretic superadded to it. Being accused of High-Treason for subscribing (though unwillingly) to the Proclamation of the Lady jane, he was committed to the Tower on the 15. of September, 
S●ow● An. fol. 617.  and on the 13. of November following arraigned at the Guildhall in London, and there convicted and condemned, together with the said Lady jane, the Lord Guildford Dudley her Husband, and the Lord Ambrose Dudley her Husband's Brother. Of which four the Lady jane and her Husband only suffered death on that condemnation; the Lord Ambrose Dudley being reprieved for a better fortune, and the Archbishop reserved for a mo●e cruel death. For the Queen finding it more satisfactory to the Court of Rome to have him burnt for an Heretic then hanged for a Traitor, and being implacably bend against him for his activeness in the Divorce; thought good to wave her first proceeding, and to have him put to death for Heresy. But the Attainder holding still good at the Common-Law, there was great reason why his Children should desire a restitution in blood, not otherwise to be obtained but by Act of Parliament. And so without troubling the learned in the Law for our information, I hope our Author will be satisfied, and save his Fee for other more necessary uses.  
Fol. 72. In the Convocation now sitting, the nine and thirty Articles were composed, agreeing for the main with those set forth in the Reign of King Edward the sixth, though in some particulars allowing more liberty to dissenting judgements.] This is the active Convocation which before I spoke of, not settling matters of Religion in the same estate in which they were left by King Edward; but altering some Articles, expunging others, addingsome de novo, and fitting the whole body of them unto edification; Not leaving any liberty to dissenting judgements, as our Author would have it, but binding men unto the literal and Grammatical sense. They had not otherwise attained to the end they aimed at which was ad tollendam opinionum dissensionem, & consensum in vera Religione firmandum; that is to say, to take away diversity of Opinions, and to establish an agreement in the true Religion. Which end could never be effected, if men were left unto the liberty of dissenting, or might have leave to put their own sense upon the Articles. But whereas our Author instances in the Article of Christ's descent into Hell, telling us that Christ's preaching unto the Spirits there (on which the Article seemed to be grounded in King Edward's Book) was left out in this; and thereupon inferreth that men are left unto a latitude concerning the cause, time, manner of his descent; I must needs say, that he is very much mistaken. For first the Church of England hath always constantly maintained a local Descent, though many which would be thought her Children, the better to comply with Calvin and some other Divines of foreign Nations, have deviated in this point from the sense of the Church. And secondly, the reason why this Convocation left out that passage of Christ preaching to the Spirits in hell; was not that men might be left unto a latitude concerning the cause, time, and manner of his Descent, as our Author dreams; but because that passage of St. Peter being capable of some other interpretations, was not conceived to be a clear and sufficient evidence to prove the Article. For which see Bishop bilson's Survey, p. 388, 389.  
Fol. 74. In a word, concerning this clause whether the Bishops were faulty in their addition, or their opposites in their substraction, I leave to more cunning Arithmeticians to decide.] The Clause here spoken of by our Author is the first Sentence in the twentieth Article entitled De Ecclesiae Authoritate, where it is said that the Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies, and Authority in Controversies of the Faith. Which being charged upon the Bishops as a late addition, the better to support their power and maintain their Tyranny; the late Archbishop of Canterbury in his Speech▪ in the Star-Chamber, june the 15▪ 1637. made it appear that the said Clause was in a Printed Book of Articles published in the year 1563. being but very few months after they had passed in the Convocation, which was on the 29. of january 1562. in the English account. And more than so, he showed unto the Lords a Copy of the twentieth Article exemplified out of the Records, and attested by the hands of a public Notary, in which that very Clause was found, which had been charged upon the Bishops for an innovation. And thus much I can say of mine own knowledge, that having occasion to con●●●t the Records of Convocation, I found this controverted Clause verbatim in these following words, Habet Ecclesia Ritus statuendo jus, & in fidei Controversis Authoritatem. Which makes me wonder at our Author, that having access to those Records, and making frequent use of them in this present History, he should declare himself unable to decide the doubt, whether the addition of this Clause was made by the Bishops, or the substraction of it by the opposite party. But none so blind as he that will not see, says the good old proverb.  
But our Author will not so give over. He must first have a fling at the Archbishop of Canterbury upon this occasion. In the year 1571. (the Puritan Faction beginning then to grow very strong) the Articles were again Printed both in Latin and English, and this Clause left out; published according to those copies in the Harmony of Confessions Printed at Geneva, Anno 1612. and published by the same at Oxford (though soon after rectified) Anno 1636. Now the Archbishop taking notice of the first alteration, Anno 1571. declares in his said Speech, that it was no hard matter for that opposite Faction to have the Articles Printed and this clause left out, 
Archbishop's Speech, p. 71.  considering who they were that then governed businesses and rid the Church almost at their pleasure. What says our Author to this? Marry, saith he, I am not so well skilled in Historical Horsemanship as to know whom his Grace designed for the Rider of the Church at that time, fol. 74. Strange that a man who undertakes to write an History should profess himself ignorant of the names of those who governed the business of the times he writes of. But this is only an affected ignorance, professed of purpose to preserve the honour of some men whom he beholds as the chief Patrons of the Puritan Faction. For afterwards (this turn being served) he can find out who they were that then governed businesses, and rid the Church almost at their pleasure, telling us, fol. 138▪ that the Earl of Leicester interposed himself Patron-general to the non-subscribers, and that he did it at the persuasion of Roger Lord North. Besides which two we find Sir Francis Knollys to be one of those who gave countenance to the troubles at Frankfor●▪ at such time as the Faction was there hottest against the Liturgy, 
Lib. 8 fol 35.  and other Rites and ceremonies of the Church of England. Who being a mere kinsman of the Queens and a Privy Counsellor, made use of all advantages to pursue that project, which being 〈◊〉 on foot beyond sea, had been driven on here, and though Leicester was enough of himself to rid the Church at his pleasure, it being fitted with such helps, Sir Francis Walsingham and many more of that kind which the times than gave him, they drove on the faster, till he had almost plunged all in remediless Ruin. But our Author hath not done with these Articles yet, for he tells us of this Clause, that it was  
Ibid. Omitted in the English and Latin Arti●●●●● set forth 1571 when they were first ratified by Act●●▪ Our author doth so dream of the power of Parliaments in matters of Religion, that he will not suffer any, Canon or Act of Convocation to be in source or obligatiory to the subject, till confirmed by Parliament. But I would fain know of him where he finds any Act of Parliament (except it be in his own dreams) to confirm these Articles; or that the Parliament of the 13 of the Queen (being that he speaks of) appointed any Committee for Religion to examine the Oxthodoxy of those Articles and make report unto the House. All that was done was this, and on this occasion. Some Ministers of the Church too stiffly wedded to their old Mumpsimus of the Mass, and some as furiously prosecuting their new Sumpsimus of Inconformity, it was thought fit, that between these contending parties, the Doctrine of the Church should be kept inviolate. And thereupon it was Enacted, That every person under the degree of a Bishop, which did or should pretend to be a Priest or Minister of God's holy word and Sacraments in the Church of England, 
13 El. ●. 12.  should before Christmas than next following, in the presence of his Diocesan Bishop testify his assent, and subscribe to the said Articles of the year 1562. Secondly, that after such subscribing before the Bishop he should on some Sunday in the forenoon in the Church or Chappel where he served, in time of Divine Service read openly the said Articles on pain of being deprived of all his Ecclesiastical promotions, as if he were then naturally dead. Thirdly, that if any Ecclesiastical person should maintain any Doctrine contrary to any of the said Articles, and being convented by his Bishop, etc. should persist therein, it should be just cause to deprive such person of his Ecclesiastical promotions. Fourthly, that all persons to be admitted to any Benefice with Cure, should likewise subscribe to the said Articles, and publicly read the same in the open Church within two months after their induction, with declaration of their unfeigned assent to the same, on the pain aforesaid, in all which there was northing done to confirm these Articles, but only a pious care expressed for reformation of such disorders as were like to rise amongst the Ministers of the Church, by requiring their subscription and assent unto them under such temporal punishments, which at that time the Canons of the Church had not laid upon them. So that our Author very well might have spared this Flourish, that the Obligatoriness of these Articles as to temporal punishments bears not date nine years before, from their composition in Convocation, but henceforward from their confirmation in Parliament. And here I must crave leave to fetch in another passage relating to the Acts of this Convocation fol. 102. in which he telleth us that till the year 1572. The Bishops had been more sparing in pressing, and others more daring in denying subscription, because the Canons made in the Convocation, Anno 1563. were not for nine years after confirmed by Act of Parliament etc. In which on● Author shows much zeal, and but little knowledge, the●e being no Canons mad● in the Convo●ation of 1562. (1563. in our Authors reckoning) no● any thing at all done in it more than the settling of the Articles, and passing a bill for the granting of a Subsidy to the Queen, as by the Records thereof may be easily seen. But rather than the Parliament shall not have the power of confirming Canons, our Author will find our some Canons for them to confirm which never had a being or existence but in his brains only. From the Articles our Author proceeds unto the Homilies approved in those Articles, and of them he tells us,  
Fol. 75. That if they did little good, they did little harm.] With sco●● and insolence enough. Those Homilies were so composed, as to instruct the people in all positive Doctrines necessary for Christian men to know, with reference both to Faith and Manne●s; and being penned in a plain style, as our Author hath it, were ●●tter for the edification of the common people then either the strong lines of some, or the flashes of 〈◊〉 wi● in others, in these latter times. And well it had been for the peace and happiness of this Church, if they had been more constantly read, and nor discredited by those men who studied to advance their own inventions, above those grave and solid pieces composed by the joint counsels and co-operations of many godly learned and religious person's. But it is well howsoever, that by reading these (so much vi●ified) Homilies, the Ministe●● though they did little good, did but little harm; it being to be feared that the precommant humour of Sermonizing hath on the contrary done much harm, and but little good. But our Author hath not yet done with this Convocation, for so it followeth:  
Fol. 76. The English Bishops conceiving themselves impowered by their Canons, began to show their authority, in urging the Clergy of their Di●●e●s to subscribe to the Liturgy, Ceremonies and Discipline of the Church, and such as refused the same, were braaded with the odious name of Puritans.] Our Author having given the Parliament a power of confirming no Canons, as before was showed, he brings the Bishops acting by as weak Authority in the years 1563. & 1564. the●e being at that time no Canons for them to proceed upon for requiring th●ir Clergy to subscribe to the Liturgy, Ceremonies, and Discipline of the Church. And therefore if they did any such thing, it was not a● t●ey were impowered by their Canons, but as they were indebted by that Authority whi●h was inherent naturally in their Episcopal Office. But whereas he tells us in the following words, th●t the name of Puritan in that notion began this year, viz. 15●4. I fear he hath anticipated the time a little, Genebrard a right good Chronologer placing it (ortos in Ang●●● Puritan●s) about two years after, Anno 1566. And so far I am of our Author's mind, that the grief had not been great if the name had ended that year, upon condition th●t the occasion for which it was given them had then ended also▪ But when he tells us that the name of Puritans was given to the opposers of the Hierarchy and Church-Service● and signifies a Nonconformist; as often as I meet such Opposers, and such Non-conformists' in the co●●e of this Hi●●ory, I have warrant good enough to call them by the name of Puritans. If any did abuse the n●m●s as ●●●●leth us afterwards, (lib. x. fol. 100) to asperse the most Orthodox in Doctrine, and religious in Conversation; they we●e the mo●e to blame, let them answer for it: But if those Orthodox and religious persons were Orthodox only in his sense, and under the colour of Religion did secretly 〈◊〉 with those who opposed the Hierarchy and the established Orders of the Church; it might be a disgrace, but no wrong unto them to be called Puritan. And if it 〈◊〉 extended further to denote such men also, as maintained any of the private Opinions and Doctrines of 〈◊〉 against the tendries of the Church; I see no reason why our Author should complain of it so much as he does in the place aforesaid. The practices of some men are many times Doctrines to others: and the Calvinia. 〈◊〉 being built upon calvin's practices, and those ●b●tted and confirmed by his following Doctrines: the name of Puritan, though first found out to denote such as followed Calvin, in dissenting from the Hierarchy in Discipline and Church-government, might not unfitly be applied to such as maintained his Doctrines also. But of this Argument enough, I shall add only, and so proceed to other businesses, that Mr. Fox is brought in as required to subscribe to the Canons by Archbishop Parker; whereas there were at that time no Canons to subscribe unto, nor is it the custom of the Church to require subscription unto Canons, but unto those only who consented to the making of them.  
Fol. 9●. John Felton who fastened the Pope's Bull to the Palace ●f London, being takend and refusing to fly, was hanged on a Gibbet before the Pope's Palace.] The Bull here mentioned was that of Pope Pius the fifth, for excommunicating Queen Elizabeth, which this john Felton (a 〈◊〉 Papist) had hanged up at the Gates of the Bishop of Lond●●s House, that the Subjects might take no●●●e of it; and for that fact was hanged near the same 〈…〉 he had offended. But why our Author should call the Bishop of London's House by the name of the Pope's 〈◊〉, I do very much wonder; unless it were to hold 〈◊〉 with the style of Martin Mar-Prelate, and the 〈…〉 Faction. Amongst whom nothing was more common then to call all Bishop's Petty-popes'▪ & more particularly to call the Archbishop of Canterbury the Pope of Lambeth, and the Bishop of London, Pope of London. But I hope more charitably than so, being more willing to impure it to the fault of the Printers, than the pen of our Author. I only add, that to make even with this john Felton (a zealous Papist) another john Felton of the next age, a zealous Puritan, committed that execrable murder on the Duke of Buckingham.  
Fol. 98. Against covetous Conformists it was provided, that no Spiritual Person, College, or Hospital, shall let lease other then for twenty one years, or three lives, etc.] No mention in the Statute of Covernous Con●ormists, I am sure of that; and therefore no provision to be made against them, the Coverous Conformist is our Authors own. I find indeed that long and unreasonable Leases had been 〈◊〉 by, Colleges, Deans, and Chapters, Parsons, Vicar●, and other ●aving Spiritual promotions; which being found to 〈◊〉 the causes of Dilapidations, and the decay of all Spiritual Livings and Hospitality, 
13. Eliz. c. 20.  and the utter impoverishing of all Successors incumbents in the same, the Parliament thought it high time to provide against it. In all which Bedroll, it were strange if we should find no Non-conformists, who had by this time got a great part of the Church Preferments, and were more likely to occasion those dilapidations than the regular and conformable Clergy: these la●●● looking▪ on the Church with an eye to succession, the former being intent only on the present profit: And if we mark it well, we shall find that Coverousness and Nonconformity are so married together, that it is not easy to divorce them: though here the crime of coverousness be wrongfully charged on the Conformists, to make them the more odious in the eye of the vulgar Reader. High Royalists in one place, Covetous Conformists in another, are no good signs of true affections to Conformity, and much less to Royalty.  
Fol. 121. These Prophesying were founded on the Apostles Precept; For ye may all Prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all be comforted; but so as to make it out, they were fain to make use of humane prudential Additions.] Not grounded, but pretended to be grounded on those words of St. Paul; the Prophesying there spoke of not being 〈◊〉 be drawn into example in the change of times, when 〈…〉 of the Spirit were more restrained and limited than they had been formerly. For were they grounded on that Text, it had been somewhat saucily done, to add their own prudential Additions to the direction and dictamen of the holy Spirit. A course much favoured as it seems by Archbishop Grindal, whose Letter to the Queen is recommended to the welcome of the pious Reader. fol. 122. But both the Queen and her wise Council conceived otherwise of it, looking upon these Prophesying as likely to prove in fine the ●ane of the Commonwealth, as our Author hath it. No● did King james conceive any better of them, 
Co●fer p. 80.  as appear by the conference at Hampton Court, in which it was moved by Dr. Reynolds, (chief of the Millenary party) That the Clergy might have meetings once every three weeks, and therein to have prophesying, according as the Reverend Father Archbishop Grindall, and other Bishops desired of her late Majesty. No, said the King, (looking upon this motion as a preamble to a Scottish Presbytery) than jack, and I●m, and Will, and Dick, shall at their pleasures, ce●●●re me and my Council, and all our proceedings: then Will shall stand up and say, It must be thus; then Dick shall reply and say, Nay, marry, but we will have it thus: And therefore stay I pray you for one 7 years before you demand that of me: and then if you find me 〈◊〉 and fat and my windepipes stuffed, I will perhaps hearken to you: for if that government be once up, I am sure I shall be kept in breath, then shall we all of us have work enough, both our hands full. But let King james and Queen Elizabeth conceive what they will, our Author hath declared it to be Gods and the Church's cause, fol. 130. And being such, it is enough to make any man confident in pleading for it, or appearing in it.  
Fol. 135. A loud Parliament is always attended with a silent Convocation, as here it came to pass. The Activity of the former in Church matters left the latter nothing to do.] A man would think by this, that the Parliament of this year, being the 23. of the Queen, had done great feats in matters of Religion, as making new Articles of Faith, or confirming Canons, or something else of like importance. But for all this great cry we have little wool; our Author taking notice of nothing else which was done this Parliament, but that it was made● aeson for the Priests or Jesuits to seduce any of the Queen's Subjects to the Romish Religion, and for the Subjects to be reconciled to the Church of Rome, with other matters nor within the power and cognizance of the Convocation. But he conceals another Statute as necessary to the peace and safety of the Church and State as the other was. 
29 Eliz. c. 2.  By which it was Enacted, that if any person or persons should advisedly devise, or write, print, or set ●orth any manner of Book, Rhyme, Ballad, Letter, or Writing, containing any false, seditious and slanderous matter, to the defamation of the Queen's Majesty, or to the encouraging, stirring, or moving of any In●●●rection or Rebellion within this Realm, etc. or that shall procure, or cause such Book, Rhyme, Ballad, etc. to be written, printed, published, or set forth, etc. The offenders to suffer such pain of death, and forfeiture as in case of Felony. A Statute made of purpose to restrain the insolences of the Puri●●n Faction, and by which many of them were adjudged to death in the times ensuing: some as the Authors, and others as the publishers of seditious Pamphlers. But being made with limitation to the life of the Queen, it expired with her; And had it been revived (as it never was) by either of the two last Kings, might possibly have prevented those dreadful mischiefs, which their posterity is involved in.  
Fol. 157. Sure I am, it is most usual in the Court of Marches (Arches rather) whereof I have the best experience.] This is according to the old saying, to correct Magnificat. Assuredly Archbishop Whitgift knew better when he was to write, then to need any such critical emendations. And therefore our Author might have kept his Arches for some public Triumph after his conquest of the Covetous Conformists and High Royalists which before we had. It was the Court of the Marches which the Bishop speaks of, and of which he had so good experience; he being made Vice-Precedent of the Court of the Marches by Sir Henry Sidney, immediately on his first coming to the See of Worcester, as Sir George Paul telleth us in his life.  
Fol. 163. By the changing of Edmond into John Contnar, it plainly appears, that as all these letters were written this year, so they were indicted after the sixth of July (and probably about December) when Bishop Grindal deceased. ● I grant it for a truth, that Grindal died on the sixth of july, and I know it also for a truth, that Whitgift was translated to the See of Canterbury on the 23. of September than next following. But yet it follows not thereupon, that all the Letters here spoken of (being 12 in number) which are here exemplified, were writ in the compass of one year, and much less in so narrow a time as about December. Nay the contrary hereunto appears by the Letter's themselves. For in one of them written to the Lord Treasurer, fol. 160. I find this passage viz. Your Lordship objecteth, tha● it is said I took this coarse for the better maintenance of my Book. My Enemies say so indeed, but I trust my friends have a better opinion of me: what should I look after any Confirmation of my Book after twelve years, or what should I get thereby more than already? Now the Book mentioned by the Bishop, was that entitled, The Defence of the Answer to the Admonition against the Reply of T. C. printed at London, An. 1574. To which the 12 years being added, which we find mentioned in this Letter, it must needs be, that this Letter to the Lord Treasurer was written in the year 1586. and consequently not all written in the year 1583. as our Author makes them. The like might be collected also from some circumstances in the other Letters, but that I have more necessary business to employ my time on.  
Fol. 171. The severe enforcing of Subscription hereunto, what great disturbance it occasioned in the Church, shall hereafter by God's assistance be made to appear, leaving others to judge, whether the offence was given or taken thereby.] Our Author tells us fol. 143. that in the business of Church government he would lie at a close guard, and offer as little play as might be, on either side. But for all that he cannot but declare himself for the stronger party. He had not else left it as a matter doubtful, whether the disturbances which ensued on the Archbishops enforcing of Subscription, and the scandal which did thence arise, were to be imputed to the Imposer who had Authority on his side (as himself confesseth) or the refusers, carried on by self ends and untractable obstinacy. As for the Articles to which subscriptions were required, they were these that follow, viz.  
1. That the Queen only had Supreme Authority over all persons bo●n within her Dominion.  
2. That the Book of Common-Prayer and Ordination of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, containeth nothing contrary to the Word of God.  
3. That the Articles of Religion agreed on in the year 1562. and published by the Queen's Authority, were consonant to the word of God.  
All which being so expressly built on the Laws of the Realm, must needs lay the scandal at their doors who refused subscription, and not at his who did require it. But love will creep (they say) where it cannot go. And do our Author what he can, he must discover his affection to the cause●pon ●pon all occasions. No where more manifestly then where he telleth us,  
Fol. 187. That since the High-Commission and this Oath (it is that ex Officio which he meaneth) were taken away by the ●●ct of Parliament, it is to be hoped, that (if such swearing were s● great a grievance) nihil analogum, nothing like unto it (which may amount to as much) shall hereafter be substituted in the room thereof.] What could be said more plain to testify his disaffections one way, and his ze●l another? The High-Commission and the Oath reproached as Grievances, because the greatest curbs of the Puritan party, and the strongest Bulwarks of the Church, a congratulation ●o the times for abolishing both, though as yet I ●●nde no Act of Parliament against the Oath except it be by consequence and illation only; and finally a hope expressed that the Church never shall revert to her fo●mer power, in substituting any like thing in the place thereof by which the good people of the Land may be stopped in their way to the fifth Monarchy so much fought after. And yet this does not speak so plain as the following passage, viz.  
Fol. 193. Wit's will be working, and such as have a Satirical vein, cannot better vent it then in lashing of sin.] This spoken in defence of those scurrilous Libels which job Throgmorton, Penry, Fenner, and the rest of the Puritan Rabble published in Print against the Bishops, Anno 1588. thereby to render them ridiculous both abroad and at home. The Queen being 〈◊〉 exclaimed against, and her Honourable Council scandalously censured for opposing the Gospel, they fall more foully on the Bishops, crying them down as Antichristian, Petty-popes', Bishops of the Devil, cogging and cozening knaves, dumb dogs enemies of God, etc. For which cause much applauded by the Papists beyond Sea (to whom nothing was more acceptable then to see the English Hierarchy reproach● and vilified) and frequently ●●red by them as unquestioned evidences. For if our Author's rule be good, fol. 193. That the fault is not in the writer, if he truly cite what is false on the credit of another, they had no reason to examine punctually the truth of that which tended so apparently to the great advantage of their cause and party. But this Rule whether true or false cannot be used to justify our Author in many passages though, truly cited, considering that he cannot choose but know them to be false in themselves. And he that knowing a thing to be false, sets it down for true, not only gives the lie to his own conscience, but occasions others also to believe a falsehood. And from this charge I cannot see how he can be acquitted in making the Bishops to be guilty of those filthy sins, for which they were to be so lashed by Satyrical wits, or imputing those base Libels unto wanton wits, which could proceed from no other fountain then malicious wickedness.  
But I ●m we●ry and ashamed of taking in so impure a kennel, and for that cause also shall willingly pass over his apology for Hacket that blasphemous wretch, and most execrable miscreant, justly condemned and executed for a double Treason, against the King of Kings in Heaven, and the Queen on earth. Of whom he would not have us think, fol. 204. that he and his two Companions (his two Prophets, for so they called themselves) were worse by nature then all others of the English Nation, the natural corruption in the hearts of others being not less headstrong, but more bridled: And finally, that if Gods restraining grace be taken from us, we shall all run unto the same excess of Riot. Which Plea if it be good for Hacket, will hold good for judas; and pity it is, that some of our fine wits did never study an apology for him.  
From Hack●● he goes on to Travers, a man of an unquiet spirit, but not half so mischievous, of whom he saith,  
Fol. 214. At Antwerp he was ordained Minister by the Presbytery there, and not long after that, he was put in Orders by the Presbytery of a foreign Nation.] Here have we Ordination and putting into Orders ascribed to the Presbytery of A●t●●erp; a Mongrel company consisting of two blue Aprous to each Cruel nightcap: and that too in such positive terms, and without any the least qualification, that no Presbyterian in the pack could have spoke more plainly. The man hath hitherto stood distracted betwixt shame and love; love to the cause, and shame to be discovered for a party in it, drawing several ways. Pudor est qui suade●● illinc, Hinc dissuadet Amor, in the Poet's language. And in this fit he thought it good to withdraw himself or stand by a● a silent Spectator, that his betters might have room to come forth and speak in the present controversy of Church Government, fol. 143. But here love carries it away, and he declares himself roundly for the Presbyterians, by giving them the power of Ordination, and consequently of Ecclesiastical censure in their several Consistories. Had he used the words of the Certificate, which he grounds upon, and told us that Travers was admitted by that Presbytery to the Ministry of the holy word (in sacr● verbi Dei Ministerio institutus, a● their words there are) he had done the part of an Historian. They may make Ministers how and of whom they list, and put that Heavenly treasure into what vessels they please. Scripturarum ars est quam omnes passim sibi vindicant, as St. jerom complained in his time. Let every Tradesman be a Preacher, and step from the shopboard to the Pulpit, if they think well of it. This may be called a making of Ministers in such a sense as Phoebe is said to be a Minister of the Church of Cenchrea, to minister to the necessities of their Congregations. But to ascribe unto them a power of Ordination or of giving Orders which they assume not to themselves, savours too strong of the party, and contradicts the general Rules of the ancient Fathers. At this time I content myself with that saying of jerom, because esteemed no friend to Bishops, viz. Quid facit Episcopus, excepta Ordinatione, quod Presbyter non faciat? and for the rest refer the Reader to the learned Treatise of Dr. Hammond, Entitled, Observations upon the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons at Westminster for the Ordination of Ministers pro tempore, Printed at Oxford 1644. Only I shall make bold to quit my Author with a merry tale (though but one for an hundred) and 'tis a tale of an old jolly popish Priest, who having no entertainment for a friend who came to him on a Fasting day, but a piece of Pork, and making conscience of observing the appointed Fast, dipped it into a tub of water, saying down Pork up Pike. Satisfied with which device (as being accustomed to transubstantiate, he well might be) he caused it to be put into the p●t and made ready for dinner. But as the Pork for all this sudden piece of wit, was no other than Pork; so these good fellows of the Presbytery by laying hands upon one another, act as little as he: the parties so imposed upon (imposed upon indeed in the proper notion) are but as they were, Lay-brothers of the better stamp, Ministers if you will, but not Priests nor Deacons, nor any ways Canonically enabled for divine performances. But fearing to be chidden for his levity, I knock off again, following my Author as he leads me; who being over shoes, will be over boots also. He is so lost to the High Royalist and covetous Conformist, that he cannot be in a worse case (with them) than he is already. And therefore having declared himself for a Presbyterian in point of Government, he will go thorough with his work, showing himself a professed Calvinist in point of Doctrine, and a strict Sabba●arian too in that single point, though therein differing (as the rest of that party do) from their Master Calvin. First for the Sabbath (for the better day the better deed) having repeared the chief heads of Dr. Bounds book published Anno 1595. in which the Sabbatarian Doctrines were first set on soot, he adds, that learned men were much divided in their judgements about the same.  
Fol. 228. Some (saith he) embraced them as ancient truths consonant to Scripture, long disused and neglected, now seasonably revived for the increase of piety.] Amongst which some, he that shall take our Author for one, will not be m●ch mistaken either in the man, or in the matter. For that he doth approve Bounds Doctrines in this particular, appears;  
First, By a passage, fol. 165. where he con●nts with him in reckoning the casual falling of the Scaffolds at Paris-Garden on the Lordsday, Anno 1583. for a divine judgement upon those who perished by it, as they were beholding that rude pastime.  
Secondly, By his censure of the proceedings of Archbishop Whitgift against these Doctrines, of whom he telleth us, fol 229. That his known opposition to the p●●ceedings of the Brethren, rendered his actions more odious, as if out of envy he had caused such a pearl to be concealed.  
Thirdly, by making these Sabbath Doctrines to be the Diamond in the Ring, of those Catechisms and Controversies which afterwards were set out by the stricter Divines. And  
Fourthly, by the sadness which he finds in recounting the grief and distraction occasioned in many honest men's hearts by the several publishing of the Declaration about lawful sports, lib. ●o. fol. 74.  
But leaving him to stand or fall to his own Master, I would fain know what text of Scripture, ancient Writer, or approved Council can be brought to justify Bounds Doctrines which he affirms for ancient truths and consonant to holy Scripture. But more particularly where he can show me any ground for the third Position, viz. That there is as great reason why we Christians should take ourselves as straightly bound to rest upon the Lord's day as the Jews were upon their Sabbath; it being one of the moral Commandments, whereof all are of equal authority. This if it be a truth is no ancient truth; and whensoever it be received and allowed for truth, will in conclusion lay as heavy and insupportable Burdens upon the consciences of God's people as ever were imposed upon the Jews by the Scribes and Pharisees. And secondly, I would fain know the meaning of the following words, in which it is said, that others conceived them grounded on a wrong bottom, but because they tended to the manifest advance of Religion, it was pity to oppose them. I would fain know I say, considering that the foundation of the Christian faith is laid on the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles, Christ himself being the chief corner stone; how any thing which is not built upon this foundation, but grounded on a wrong bottom (as this seemed to be) could tend to the manifest advance of the true Religion. That it tended to the manifest advance of some Religion I shall easily grant; and if our Author mean no otherwise, we shall soon agree. But sure I am, no part of the true Religion was ever grounded upon falsehood, and therefore is 〈◊〉 Doctrine were grounded on so ill ● bottom a● they say it was, it might ●on●●● to the advancement of a Faction and men's private 〈◊〉, but to the true Religion it was likely to contribute nothing but disgrace and scandal. L●stly, I am to mind our Author, that he makes Mr. greenham's Treatise of the Sabbath to be published in pursuance of Bounds opinions, which could not be till in or after the year 1595. Whereas he had laid him in his grave above two years before, telling us that he died of the Plugue in London, Anno 1592. fol. 219. By which it seems that Greenham either writ this Treatise after his decease; o● else our Author hath done ill in giving the f●●st honour of these new Doctrines unto Dr. Bound. In the next place we shall see our Author engage himself in defence of the Calvi●an Doctrines about Predest●ation, Grace, etc. of which he telleth us, that  
Fol. 229. Having much troubled both the Schools and Pulpit, Archbishop Whitgift, out of his Christian care to propagate the truth, and suppress the opposite errors, 〈◊〉 used a solemn meeting of many grave and learned 〈◊〉 at Lanib●th.] The occasion this. The controvers●● about Predestination, Grace, etc. had been long 〈◊〉 in the Schools between the Dominicant on the one side and the Francis●ans on the other 〈◊〉 the Dominicans grounding their opinion on the Authority of St. Augustin, Prosper, and some others of the following 〈◊〉 the Franciscans, on the general current of the 〈◊〉 Fathers, who lived ante mot● certamina Pelagiana▪ before the rising of the Pelagian Heresies. 〈◊〉 disputes being after taken up in the 〈◊〉 Churches, 〈◊〉 moderate Lutherans (as they 〈◊〉 them) followed the Doctrine of Melanch●hon, conformable to the 〈…〉 those particulars: The others whom they 〈…〉 or rigid Lutherans, of whom 〈◊〉 Illyricus was the chief, go in the same way with the Dominicans. The authority of which last opinion, after it had been entertained and publish in the works of Calvin, for his sake found admittance in the Schools and Pulpits of most of the Reformed Churches. And having got footing here in England by the preaching of such Divines as had fled to Geneva in Queen Mary's time, it was defended in the Schools of Cambridge without opposition, till Peter Bar● a French man came and settled there. Who being the Lady Margaret's Professor in that University, and liking better of the Melanchthonian way, then that of Calvin, defended it openly in the Schools; many of parts and quality being gained unto his opinion. Which gave so much displeasure to Dr. Whitaker, Dr. Tyndall, Mr. Perkins, and some other leading men of the contrary judgement, that they thought best to use the Argument ab Authoritat● to convince their Adversaries; and complained thereof to the Archbishop, and in the end prevailed with him to call that meeting at Lambeth which our Author speaks of: in which some Articles (commonly called the Nine Articles of Lambeth) were agreed upon, and sent down to Cambridge in favour of Dr. Whitaker and his Associates. But our Author not content to relate the story of the Quarrel, must take upon him also to be a judge in the Controversy. He had before commended the Dominicans for their Orthodoxy in these points of Doctrine as they were then in agitation betwixt them and the jesuits. He now proceeds to do the like between the two parties (men of great piety and learning appearing in it on both sides) disputing the same points in the Church of England: honouring the opinion of Dr. Whitaker and his Associates with the name of the truth; and branding the other with the Title of the opposite error. And yet not thinking that he had declared himself sufficiently in the favour of the Calvinian party, he telleth us not long after of these Lambeth Articles, fol. 232. that though they wanted the Authority of Provincial Acts, yet will they readily be received of all Orthodox Christians for as far as their own purity bears conformity to God's word. Which last words (though somewhat perplextly laid down) must either intimate their conformity to the word of God, or else signify nothing. But whatsoever opinion our Author hath of these Nine Articles, certain it is that Queen Elizabeth was much displeased at the making of them, and commanded them to be suppressed, which was done accordingly; and with such diligence withal, that for long time a Copy of them was not to be met with in that University. Nor was King james better pleased with them then Queen Elizabeth was▪ Insomuch that when Dr. Renalds moved (in the Conference of Hampton-Court) that the Nine Articles of Lambeth might be superadded to the 39 Articles of the Church of England; King james upon an information of the true sta●e of the business, did absolutely refuse to give way to it. But of this more at large elsewhere. I only add a Memorandum of our Authors mistake in making Dr. Richard Bancroft Bishop of London, to be one of the Bishops which were present at the meeting at Lambeth, whereas indeed 〈◊〉 was Richard Fletcher, Bishop elect of London, and by that name entitled in such Authors as relate this story; Dr. Bancroft not being made Bishop of London or of any place else till the year 1597. which was two years after this Assembly. Alike mistake relating to this business also, I find in the History of Cambridge, about Dr. Baro● of whom our Author tells us thus:  
Fol. 125. Hist. Cam. The end of Dr. Peter Baro (the Margaret Professor) his triennial Lectures began to draw near, & C. And not long after, the University intended to cut him off at the just joint, when his three year's should be expired.] This shows our Author, though well traveled in other Countries, to be but peregrinus domi, a stranger in his own University; in which the Margaret Professor is not chosen for three years, but for two years only. And this appears plainly by the Statutes of that Foundation, the precise words whereof are these, viz. Et volumus insuper quod de caetero quolibet biennio ultimo die cessationis cujustibet termini ante magnam vacationem Vniversitatis praedictae, una habilis, apta & idonea persona in lectorem lecturae praedictae pro uno biennio integro, viz. a festo Nativitatis B. Mariae virginis tunc proximè sequente duntaxat durature, eligatur, fol. 105. in nigro cedice. For this I am beholding to the Author of the Pamphlet called the Observator observed, and thank him for it. Which said we shall close up this ninth Book with some considerations on these following words, which our Author very ingenuously hath laid before us, viz.  
Fol. 233. If we look on the Non-conformists, we shall find all still and quiet, who began now to repose themselves in a sad silence, especially after the execution of Udal and Penry had so terrified them, that though they might have secret designs, we meet not their open and public motions.] And to say truth, it was high time for them to change their course in which they had so often been foiled and worsted. The learned works of Dr. Bilson, (after Bishop of Winchester) in defence of the Episcopal Government, of Dr. Cousin's Dean of the Arches, in maintenance of the proceedings in court's Ecclesiastical; with the two Books of Dr. Bancroft, the one discovering the absurdities of the Pretended holy Discipline, the other their practices & Positions to advance the same, gave the first check to their proceedings at the push of pen. All which being published, An. 1593. were seconded about two years after by the accurate & well studied Works of Ric. Hooker, than Master of the Temple, and Prebend of Canterbury; in which he so asserted the whole body of the English Liturgy, & laid such grounds to found her polity upon, that he may justly be affirmed to have struck the last blow in this Quarrel. But it was not so much the Arguments of these learned 〈◊〉, as the seasonable execution of some principal sticklers, which occasioned the great calm both in Church and State, not only for the rest of the Queen's time, but a long time after. For besides, that Cartright, and some other of the principal and most active Leaders, had been imprisoned and proceeded against in the Court of Starchamber; the edge of the Statute 23 Eliz. c. 2. which before we spoke, of, had made such terrible work amongst them, that they durst no longer venture on their former courses. Copping and Thacker hanged at St. Edmondsbury in Suffolk, Barrow and Greenwood executed at Tyburn, and Penry at St. Thomas of Water, udal, Billot Studley, and Bouler condemned to the same death, though at last reprieved, (not to say any thing of Hacke●, with Coppinger, and Arthington his two Prophet's, as more mad than the rest) could not but teach them this sad lesson, that, 〈◊〉 is no safe dallying with fire, nor jesting with edge tools. But there are more ways to the Wood than one, and they had wit enough to cast about for some other way, s●nce the first had failed them, Hac non successit, aliâ tentandum est, 〈◊〉, had been learned in vain, if not reducible to practise. So that it is no marvel, if after this we find them not in any public and open motion; when wearied with their former blusterings, and terrified with the sad remembrance of such executions, they betook themselves to secret and more dark designs. Occultior Pompeius Caesare, non mesior, as it is in Tacitus. Pompey's intentions were not less mischievous to the Commonwealth than Caesar's were, but more closely carried. And b●cause closely carried, the more likely to have took effect, had any but Caesar been the head of the opposite party. The Fort that had been found impregnable by open batteries, hath been took at last by undermining. Nor ever were the Houses of Parliament more like to have been blown up with gunpowder, then when the Candle which was to give fire to it was carried by 〈◊〉 in a dark 〈◊〉. Henceforward therefore we shall find the Brethren 〈◊〉 another ward, practising their party underhand, working their business into a State-faction, and never so dangerously carrying on the 〈◊〉 as when least observed. Fill in the end when all preventions were let slip, and the danger grown beyond prevention, they brought their matters to that end which we shall find too evidently in the end of this History. To which before we can proceed, we must look back upon a passage of another 〈◊〉, which without 〈◊〉 the coherencies of the former Observations could not be taken notice of and rectifed in its proper place, and is this that followeth▪  
Fol. 179. Queen Elizabeth coming to the Crown, sen● for Abbot Fecknam to come to her, whom the Messenger found setting of Elms in the Orchard of Westminster Abbey: But he would not follow the messenger, till first he had finished his Plantation. ● The tale goes otherwise by Tradition then is here delivered; and well it may. For who did ever hear of my Elms in Westminster Orchard, or to say truth, of any Elms in any Orchard whatsoever of a late Plantation? Elms are for Groves, and Fields, and Forests, too cumbersome and overspreading to be set in Orchards. But the tale goes that Abbot Feck●an● being busied in planting Elms near his Garden wall in the place now 〈◊〉 the Dea●s-yard was encountered with one of his acquaintance, saying, My Lord you may very well save your labour the Bill for dissolving of your Monastery being just now passed. To which the good old man, unmoved, returned this answer, that he would go forwards howsoever in his plantation; not doubting, though it pleased not God to continue it in the state it was, but that it would be kept and used as a 〈◊〉 of Learning for all times ensuing. Which said, our 〈◊〉 need not trouble himself with thinking how his 〈…〉 this day, as he seems to do; he knows where to find them.   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Tenth Book OF The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
Containing the Reign of King James.  
THE Puritan clamours being hushed, and the Papists giving themselves some hopes of better days, afforded King james a quiet entrance to the Crown. But scarce was he warm upon the Throne, but the Puritans assaulted him with their Petitions, and some of the Papists finding their hopes began to fail them, turned their private discontents into open practices, endeavouring to settle their Religion by the destruction of the King, and the change of Government. And first beginning with the Papists, because first in time.  
Fol. 5. Watson with William Clark (another of his own profession) having fancied a Notional Treason, imparted it to George Brooks.] To these he after adds the Lord Cobham a Protestant, the Lord Grace of Whaddon a Puritan, and Sir Walter Raleigh an able Statesman, and some other Knights. In the recital of which names our Author hath committed a double fault, the one of omission, and the other of commission. A fault of omission in leaving out Sir Griffith Markham, as much concerned as any of the principal actors, designed to have been Secretary of Estate, had the Plot succeeded, and finally arraigned and condemned at Winchester, as the others were. His fault of commission is, his call the Lord Grace by the name of the Lord Grace of Whaddon (a fault not easily to be pardoned in so great an Herald) whereas indeed though Whaddon in Buckinghamshire was part of his Estate, yet Wilton in Herefordshire was his Barony and ancient Seat; his Ancestors being called LL. Grace of Wilton, to difference them from the Lord Grace of Reuthen, the Lord Grace of Codnor, etc.  
Having thus satisfied our Author in this particular, I would gladly satisfy myself in some others concerning this Treason▪ in which I find so many persons of such different humours, and Religions, that it is very hard to think how they could either mingle their interefles, or unite their counsels. But discontentments make men fuel fit for any fire, and discontents had been on purpose put upon some of them, the more to estrange them from the King, and the King from them. And though I am not Oedipus enough for so dark a Sphinx, yet others who have had more light into the businesses of that time, have made their discontents to grow upon this occasion; Sir Robert Cecil then principal Secretary to the Estate, fearing the great abilities of Raleigh, and being wearied with the troublesome impertinencies of Grace and Cobham, all which had joined with him in design against the Earl of Essex their common Enemy; had done their errand to Kings james (whose counsels he desired to engross to himself alone) before his coming into England. And the Plot took so good effect, that when the Lord Cobham went to meet the King as he came towards London, the King checked him (being then Warden of the Cinqne Ports) for his absence from his charge in that dangerous time. The Lord Grace, was not looked upon in the Court, as he had been formerly, there being no longer use of his rashness and praecipitations. And the better to discountenance Raleigh, who had been Captain of the Guard to Queen Elizabeth, the King bestowed that Office on Sir Thomas Erskin, than Viscount Fenton, and Captain of his Guard in Scotland. All which being publicly observed, it was no ha●d matter for George Brook, to work upon the weak spi●its of Grace and Cob●am, of which the last was his brother, and the first his brother's special friend: and by such Artifices as he used in laying before them their disgraces, and showing them a way to right themselves, to draw them into the confederacy with Clark and Watson. And it is possible, that they not being substantive enough to stand alone, might acquaint Raleigh with the Plot, whose head was able to do more than all their hands. But of his actings in it, or consenting to it, when the pa●ties were brought unto their Trial, there appeared no proof, but that Cobham in his confession taken before the Lords had accused him of it; and that not only as an accessary, but a principal actor. But Cobham not being brought into the open Court to justify his accusation face to face, as the custom as, it was thought a good argument by many, that Raleigh was not so criminal in this matter as his Enemies made him. And though found guilty by the Jury on no other evidence, than a branch of Cobham's, confession, not so much as subscribed by his hand, yet all men were not satisfied in the manner of this proceeding: it being then commonly affirmed that Cobham had retracted his accusation, as since it hath been said and printed, that in a letter written the night before his Trial, and then sent to the Lord●● he cleared Rawl●igh from all manner of Treasons against the King or State, for which consult the Observations upon some particular Persons and passages, etc. printed Anno 1656.  
But from the practices of the Papists, which have led me thus far out of my way, it is now time that I proceed to the Petition of the Puritans, presented to the King much about that time.  
Fol. 7. This called the Millenary Petition.] And it was called so, because given out to be subscribed by 〈◊〉 thousand hands, though it wanted a fourth part of thi● number. More modest now then they had been in P●●ries time, when in stead of one thousand, they threatn●● to bring a Petition which should be presented by the hands of a hundred thousand. More modest also in the style and phrase of their Petition, and in the subject M●●ter of it, than they had been when Martin Mar, Pr●●●rul'd the Roast, and would be satisfied with nothing 〈◊〉 the ruin of the English Hierarchy. Which notwithstanding the King thought fit to demur upon it, and 〈◊〉 commended the answering of their Petition to the University of Oxford, and was done accordingly. The An●●● and Petition printed not long after, gave the first stop●● this importunity; repressed more fully by the Confer●●● at Hampton-Court, of which it is told us by our Auth●● how some of the Millenary party complained that 〈◊〉  
Fol. 21. This Conference was partially set forth only 〈◊〉 Dr. Barlow Dean of Chester, their professed Adversa●● to the great disadvantage of their Divines.] If so, 〈◊〉 did it come to pass, that none of their Divines th●● present, no● any other in their behalf did ever manifest the world the partialities, and falsehoods of it? The 〈◊〉 was printed not long after the end of the Conference publicly passing from one hand to another, and ne● convicted of any such crime as it stands charged with, 〈◊〉 any one particular p●●●age to this very day. Only pleased some of the Zealo●s to scatter abroad some tri●●ing Papers, not amounting to half a sheet amongst them, which tended to the holding up of their sinking Party; and being brought by Dr. Barlow, were by him put in Print, and published at the end of his Book, Vt deterrim & comparatione gloriam sibi compararet, in the words of Tacitus. He could not better manifest his own abilities, then by having those weak and imperfect Scribbles for a foil unto them. And here before I leave this conference, I must make a start to fol. 91. for rectifying a mistake of our Authors, which relates unto it. Where speaking of Dr. King, then Bishop of London, and reciting the course both of his preferments and employments, he telleth us, that soon after the Kings coming to the Crown●● he was made Dean of Christ-Church in Oxon, and chosen one of the four Preachers in the Conference at Hampton-Court. But first Dr. King was not Dean of Christ-Church at the time of the Conference at Hampton-Court; that Conference being held in january, An. 1603. and Dr. King not coming to the Deanery of Christ-Church till the year 1605. Secondly, he was none o● the fou● Preachers in the Conference at Hampton-Court, there being no such Preachers chosen for the ●ime of that Conference. But as it is a true and old saying, that Omnis fabula fundatur in Historia; so I may ●●y, that there was something true and real, which might ●arry him inadvertently upon this Error. For in Sep●●mber, Anno 1606. it pleased King james to call before ●im at Hampton-Court the Melvins, and some other of ●he principal sticklers for Presbytery of the Scottish Na●ion. For information of whose judgement, and re●●ucing them, if possible, to some conformity, he caused four Sermons to be there preached in their hea●ing, by ●our of his most able Divines, that is to say, Dr. Andrews then Bishop of Chichester, Dr. Barlow (before mentioned) than Bishop of Rochester, Dr. King, than Dean of Christ-Church, after Bishop of London, and Dr. Buckeridge, who after succeeded in the See of Rochester● and died Bishop of Ely. Which four Sermons being afterwards printed, and bound together, though they gave very good satisfaction to most persons else, could get no ground upon those refractory Scots, who were resolved aforehand, not to hear the voice of those Charmers, charmed they never so sweetly.  
Fol. 27. Indeed a Statute had formerly been made th● 13. of Queen Elizabeth, which to prevent final 〈◊〉 of Church Land, did disable all Subjects from 〈◊〉 them: but in that Statute a liberty was left unto the Crown to receive the same.] Our Author speaks this on occasion of a Statute made in the first Parliament of King Iam●● by which the King and his Successors were made uncapable of receiving any Grants or Leases of Lands, from any Archbishops, or Bishops, for longer than 21 years, or three lives. But he is much mistaken in the grounds of it. For first the Statute he relates unto, was not made in the thirteenth year of the Queen, that Statute extending only unto Deans and Chapters, Masters of Colleges and Hospitals, as also unto Parsons and Vicars, who by long Leases had dilapidated the public Patrimony of the Church, and their several Houses, Not a word in it, which concerns Archbishops and Bishops, or any Leases by them made. And secondly, that Statute, whatsoever it be, doth not disable all Subjects from accepting such Leases, Grants, and Alienations, but disableth the said Archbishops, and Bishops, from making such Grants unto the Subjects. But the truth is, that Statute which our Author means, is an unprinted Statute made in the first year of Queen Elizabeth. By which it was enacted, That it should be lawful for the said Queen, as often as any Archbishopric or Bishopric should be vacant, to take unto herself any of the Castles, Manors, Lan●s, Tenements, and Here ditaments to the same belonging, and to pay the said Archbishop, or Bishop, in Impropriations, Tithes, and Portions of Tithes. And this is that Statute which our Author relates unto, lib. 9 fol. 70. where it is said, That a Bill passed for the assurance of certain Lands assumed by the Queen from some Bishoprick● during their Vacation. And secondly, it was enacted in the said unprinted Statute, that it should not be lawful for any Archbishop, or Bishop, to grant any Lands, Leases, or Estates for more than 21 years, or three lives to any person whatsoever, except it were unto the Queen 〈◊〉 Heirs and Successors; which last words opened such a gap to sacrilege and rapine, that what the Queen thought fit to leave unto the Church vacant seed, the Cou●●iers would find some way to divest it of by making use of this last clause, first in obtaining such a 〈◊〉 to be made to the Queen, and then from the Queen unto themselves: So that our Author might have saved his Advocating for this clause of that Act, considering that he saw the ill consequents and effects thereof.  
Fol. 54. Some of the greatest Prelates (how much Self is there 〈◊〉 all men!) though seemingly forward, really remi●● in the matter.] This spoken in relation to Che●sey College, the stop whereof must be imputed to some great Prelate's, fearing to grow less, both in esteem, power and jurisdiction, if that work went forward. Contrary whereunto he kelleth us of fol●57 ●57. That he was very forward in founding Chelsey Co●●edge, which as a two edged Sword, was to cut on both sides, to suppress Papists and Sectaries. Upon which grounds there is no question to be made, but that the work was furthered also by the rest of the Bishops, at the least not hindered. Our Author hath indeed afforded us this Marginal Note, viz. This obstruction signifies nothing of discreet men, how ever it must pass for company sake. But it had argued more discretion in him (as I conceive) to have left this obstruction, as he calls it, out of his Discourse, than first to break the Bishop's heads and then give them this plaster. Howsoever he (viz. Mr. Nicholas ●uller) left behind him the reputation of an honest man. No question of it. It is a thing so incident to the name, that whatsoever they do or say, they are honest still. Before we had the story of Thomas Full●r of Hammersmith condemned for felony, but still so honest, and to entirely beloved by King Harry the sixth, after his decease, that he appeared to him on the top of the Gallows, encouraged him, and so cla●m'd the Rope, that it did not strangle him, lib. 4. 154. Afterwards we meet with john Fuller, Doctor of the Laws (a better than he) a Persecutor in Queen Mary's days, but a pitiful man, as the Index telleth us. Here we have Nicholas Fuller a Counsellor, (the best of the three) decrying openly the Authority of the High Commission, and thereby giving a legal advantage to Archbishop Bancroft, by whom imprisoned, and there dying, but dying with the reputation of an honest man. And then another Thomas Fuller a Minister, (the best of all the company) and an honest man too, so well deserving of the Church, and all good Churchmen (both alive and dead) by this notable History, as not to doubt of the like favour at their hands (should there be occasion) as Thomas of Hammersmith received of King Harry the sixth.  
Fol. 57 I am credibly informed from a good hand, how in the days of King James, a Scotch- man, and a prevalent Courtier, had swallowed up the whole Bishopric of Durh●m, had not this Archbishop seasonably interposed his power with the King and dashed the design.] Credible though the information were, yet it was not true; there being no such prevalent Courtier, not no such Design. 'Tis 〈◊〉, the stomach of the Scots were sharp set, still crying Give, give, but never satisfied; King james as bountiful and open handed towards them, as they could desire. But neither were they to impudent as to crave, nor the King to impotent as to give a whole Bishopric 〈◊〉 on●e, especially so rich a Bishopric as this of Durham. But the truth is, that George Hume, Earl of Dunbar, Lord Treasurer of Scotland, and highly favoured by the King, having procured a grant of all the batable grounds, as they then called them, upon the Borders of both Kingdoms, began to cast his eye upon Norham-Castle and the Lands about it, belonging to the See of Durham, conceiving it a fit place to command the rest. But being a well principled man, and a great Minister of that Kings, in restoring the Episcopal Government to the Church of Scotland, he acquainted Bishop Bancroft with his desires; who knowing what great use might be made of him for the good of this Church, and being sure enough of the consent of Dr. Matthews, than Bishop of Durham, he thus ordered the business. Whereas the Revenue of Norham-Castle, and the lands adjoining were valued at one hundred twenty pounds per annum in the Bishop's Rental, it was agreed that the Earl should procure of the King an abatement of sixscore pounds yearly out of the annual pension of a thousand pound which had been said upon that Bishopric by Queen Elizabeth, as before is said. Secondly, that he should obtain from the King for the said Dr. Matthews, and his Successors a restitution of his House in the Strand called Durham-House, with the Gardens, Stables, and Tenements thereto appertaining, which had been alienated from that Bishopric ever since the dissolving of it by King Edward the sixth. Thirdly, that in consideration hereof Bishop Matthews should make a grant of Norham-Castle, and the Country adjoining in Feefarm to the King, by him immediately to be conveyed to the Earl of Dunbar. And fourthly, that his own 〈◊〉 being thus served, the said Earl should join with Bishop Bancroft, and his friends, for obtaining from the King an Act of Parliament, whereby both he and his successors should be made uncapable of any the like Grants and Alienations for the time to come; which as it was the 〈◊〉 Marke● that ever Toby Matthews was at, so was it the best bargain which was ever driven for the Church of England; so ●ar from swallowing up that Bishopric, that it was the only means to save that, and preserve the rest. And yet perhaps the credible information which our Author speaks of, might not relate unto the Bishopric, but the Deanery of Durham, bestowed by that King (being then not well studied in the Composition of the Church of England) on Sir Adam Newton, a Courtier prevalent enough, as having been Tutor to Prince Henry the King's eldest Son. And possible it is, that the Scots might have kept it in their hands from one generation to another, if Dr. Hunt (not otherwise to be remembered) had not bought him out of it, and put himself into the place.  
Fol. 59 And as about this time some perchance overvalued the Geneva Notes, out of that especial love they bore to the Authors, and place whence it proceeded, so on the other side, some without cause did slight, or rather without charity did slander the same. ● I trow, our Author will not take upon him to condemn all those who approve not of the Genevian Notes upon the Bible, or to appear an Advocate for them, though he tells us not many lines before, that they were printed thirty times over with the general liking of the people. I hope he will not do the first for King james his sake, who in the Conference at Hampton-Court, did first declare, that of all the Translations of the Bible into the English Tongue, that of Geneva was the worst; and secondly, that the Notes upon it were partial, untrue, seditious, and savouring too much of dangerous and traitorous conceits. For p●oof whereof his Majesty instanced in two places, the one on Exod. 1. vers. 19 where disobedience to Kings is allowed of; the other in ● Chron. 8. 15▪ 16. where Asa is taxed for deposing his Mother only, and not killing her. A Note, whereof the Scottish Presbyterians made special use, not only deposing Mary their lawful Queen from the Regal Th●one, but prosecuting ●er openly and under hand, till they had took away her life. These instances, our Author in his Summary of that Conference, hath passed over in silence; as loath to have such blemishes appear in the Genevians, or their Annotations. And I hope also that he will not advocate for the rest. For let him tell me what he thinks of that on the second of St. Matthews Gospel, v. 12. viz▪ Promise ought not to be kept, where God's honour and preaching of his truth is hindered, or else it ought not to be broken. What a wide gap, think we, doth this open to the breach of all Promises, Oaths, Covenants, Contracts, and Agreements, not only betwixt man and man, but between Kings and their Subjects? Wh●t Rebel ever took up Arms without some pretences of that nature▪ What Tumults and Rebellions have been raised in all parts of Christendom, in England, Scotland, Ireland, France, the Netherlands, Germany, and indeed where not? under colour that God's honour, and the preaching of the truth is hindered? If this once pass for good sound Doctrine, neither the King, nor any of his good Subjects in what Realm ●oever, can live in safety. God's Honour, and the preaching 〈◊〉 his Truth, are two such pretences, as will make void all Laws, elude all Oaths, and thrust our all Covenants and Agreements, be they what they will. Ne●● I would have our Author tell me, what he thinks of this Note on the ninth of the Revelation, ver. 3. where the 〈◊〉 which came out of the smoke, are said to be 〈◊〉 teachers, Heretics, and worldly subtle prelate's, with 〈◊〉 F●iers, Cardinals, Patriarches, Archbishops, Bishops, 〈◊〉, Bachelors, and Masters. Does not this note 〈◊〉 fasten the name of Locusts on all the Cle●●y of 〈◊〉 Realm, that is to say, Archbishops, Bishops, and all 〈◊〉 as are graduated in the University, by the name of Doctors, Bachelors, and Masters? And doth it not as plainly yoke them with F●iers, Monk●, and Cardinals▪ principal instruments in all times to advance the Popecom? I know the words which follow after are alleged by some, to take off the envy of this Note, viz. who forsake Christ to maintain false doctrines. But the enumeration of so many particulars makes not the Note the lets invidious, the said explication notwithstanding; because the Note had been as perfect and significant, had it gone thus in generals only, that is to say, by Locusts here are meant false Teachers, Heretics, and other worldly subtle men, that seduced the people, persuading them to forsake Christ, to maintain false Doctrine. But the Genevians, who account Archbishops, and Bishops, to be limbs of the Pope, resolved to join them with the rest of his members, Friars, Monks, and Cardinals; and our Author, being a great favourer of the Presbyterians, must not take notice of this scandal: especially considering that Papacy and Praelacy are joined together, in the language of the present times, and therefore fit to go together in this Annotation.  
Fol. 68 In this Parliament Dr. Harsnet Bishop of Chichester, gave offence in a Sermon preached at Court, pressing the word, Reddite Caesari quae sunt Caesaris, as if all that was levied by Subsidies, or paid by Custom to the Crown, was but a redditum of what was the Kings before.] This Parliament is plac●● by our Author in the year 1613. but 〈◊〉 Parliament, in the sitting whereof Bishop Ha●●●et 〈◊〉 the Sermon above mentioned, was held by Prorogation in the year 1609. and afterwards dissolved by Proclamation in December of the year next following. Concerning which Sermon, King james gives this account to the Lords and Commons assembled before him at Whitehall, March 23. (and therefore s●ith he) That Reverend B●shop here amongst you, though I hear by divers he was mistaken, or not well understood, yet did he preach both learnedly and 〈◊〉 ancient this point concerning the power o● a King▪ for what he spoke of a King's power in abstracto, is most true in Divinity; for to Emperors or Kings, that are Monarches, their Subjects bodies and goods are due, for their defence and maintenance. But if I had been in his place, I would only have added two words which would have cleared all: for after I had told as a Divine, what was due by the Subjects to their Kings in general, I would then have concluded as an English man, showing this people, that as in general all subjects were bound to relieve their King, so to exhort them, that as we lived in a settled state of a Kingdom that was governed by his own fundamental Laws and Orders, that according thereunto they were now (being assembled for this purpose in Parliament) to consider how to help such a King as now they had, and that according to the ancient form and order, established in this Kingdom, putting so a difference between the general power of a King in Divinity, and the settled and established state of this Crown and Kingdom: and I am sure that the Bishop meant to have have done the same, if he had not been straitened by time, which in respect of the greatness of the present Preaching before us and such an Auditory he durst not presume upon. 〈◊〉 that the doctrine of the Bishop being thus justified and explained by King james, and the Parliament continuing undissolved till December following, we have no reason to believe that the Parliament was dissolved upon this occasion; and much less on the occasion of some words spoken in that Parliament by Bishop 〈◊〉, of which thus our Author.  
Ibid. Likewise Dr. Neile Bishop of Rochester, uttered words in the House of Lords, interpreted to the disparagement of some reputed zealous Patriot in the House of Commons. ● In this passage I have many things to except against: As 1. That this Patriot is not named, to who●e disparagement the words are pretended to be uttered. And 2. that the words themselves are not here laid down, and yet are made to be so heinously taken, that to s●ve the Bishop from the storm, which was coming ●owards him, the King should principally be occasioned to dissolve that Parliament. 3. That Dr. Neile is here called Bishop of Rochester, whom twice before, viz. sel. 64. & 67. he makes to be Bishop of Coventry and Lei●hfield. And 4. That the words here intimated, should be spoken in Parliament, Anno 1613. whereas by giving Dr. Neile the Title of Rochester, it should rather be referred to the Parliament holden by prorogation till the last of December, Anno 1610. when it was dissolved, and then dissolved as appears by the King's Proclamation, for not supplying his necessities, and other reasons there expressed, whereof this was none.  
Fol. 70. Some conceive that in revenge Mr. John Selden soon after set forth his Book of Tithes, wherein he Historically proveth, that they were payable jure humano, and not otherwise.] Whether the acting of the Comedy called Ignoramus, might move Mr. Selden at the first to take this revenge, I inquire not here, though it be probable it might; that Comedy being acted before King james, Anno 1614 and this Book coming out about two years after, Anno 1616. But here I shall observe in the first place our Author's partiality, in telling us that Mr. Selden in that book hath proved Historically that Tithes are payable 〈◊〉 humano, and not otherwise; whereas indeed he undertook to prove that point, but proved it not; as will appear to any which have read the Answers set out against him. I observe secondly, our Author's ignorance in the Book itself, telling us within few lines after, that the first part of it is a mere jew, of the practice of Tithing amongst the Hebrews, the second a Christian, and chiefly an English man; whereas indeed that part thereof which precedes the manner of Tithing amongst Christians, hath as much of the Gentil as of the jew, as much time spent upon examining of the Tithes paid by the Greeks and Romans, as was in that amongst the Hebrews. Thirdly, I must observe the prejudice which he hath put upon the Cause, by telling us in the next place, that though many Divines undertook the Answer of that Book, yet sure it is, that never a fiercer storm fell on all Parsonage Barn; since the Reformation, than what this Treatise raised up. And so our Author leaves this matter without more ado, telling us of the Church's danger, but not acquainting us at all with her deliverance from the present storm; neither so violent, not so great, nor of such continuance, as to blow off any one Tile, or to blow aside so much as one Load of Corn from any Parsonage barn in England. For though this History gave some Country Gentlemen occasion and matter of discourse against paying Tithes, yet it gave none of them the audaciousness to deny the payment; So safe and speedy a course was took to prevent the mischief: which since our Author hath not told us (as had he played the part of a good Historian he was bound to do) I will do it for him.  
No sooner was the Church's Patrimony thus called in question, but it pleased God to stir up some industrious and learned men to undertake the answering of that History, which at the first made so much noise amongst the people. Dr. Tillesly Archdeacon of Rochester first appeared in the Lists, managing that part of the Controversy, which our Author calls a Christian, and an Englishman, relating to old Chartularies and Infeodations. The three first Chapters which Dr. Tillesly had omitted concerning the payment of Tithes by the jews and Gentiles, were solidly, but very smartly, examined and confuted by Mr. M●ntague, at that time Fellow of Eton College, and afterwards Lord Bishop of Chichester; as finally the two first Chapters about the Ti●hing of the jews were learnedly reviewed by Mr. Nettles a Country 〈◊〉, but excellently well skilled in Talmudical Learning. In which encounters the Historian was so galled by Tillesly, so gagged by Montague, and stung by Nettles, that he never came off in any of his undertake with such loss of credit. In the Preface to his History, he had charged the Clergy with ignorance and laziness; upbraided them with having nothing to keep up their credit but beard, habit and title; and that their Studies reach no further than the Breviary, the Postils, and the Polyanthea. But now he found by these encounters, that some of the ignorant and lazy Clergy were of as retired studies as himself, and could not only match, but overmatch him too in his own Philologic.  
But the Governors of the Church went a shorter way, and not expecting till the Book was answered by particular men, resolved to seek for reparation of the wrong from the Author himself, upon an Information to be brought against him in the High Commission. Fearing the issue of the business, and understanding what displeasures were conceived against him by the King and the Church, he made his personal appearance in the open Court at Lambeth on the eight and twentieth day of january, Ann● 1618. where, in the presence of George L. Archbishop of Canterbury, john L. B. of London, Lancelot L. B. of Winchester, john L. B. of Rochester, Sir john Benet, Sir William Bird, Sir George Newman Doctors of the Laws, and Th●mas Mothershed Notary and Register of that Cou●t, he tendered his submission and acknowledgement, all of his own hand-writing, in these following words.  
My go● Lords, I most humbly acknowledge my error whic● ha●e committed in publishing the History of Tithes, and especially in that I have at all by showing any interpretation of Holy Scriptures, by meddling with Counsels, Father's, or Canon's, or by whatsoever occurs in it, offered any occasion of argument against any right of Maintenance ●ure divino of the Ministers of the Gospel; beseeching your Lordships to receive this ingenuous and humble acknowledgement, together with the unfeigned protestation of my grief, for that through it I have so incurred both his Majesties and your Lordship's displeasure conceived against me in behalf of the Church of England.  
JOHN SELDEN  
Which his submission and acknowledgement being received, and made into an Act of Court, was entered into the public Registers thereof by this Title following, viz. Officium Dominorum contra Joh. Selde●● de inter. Templo London. Armigerum.  
So far our Author should have gone (had he played the part of a good Historian) but that he does his work by halfs in all Church-concernments.  
Fol. 72. James Montague Bishop of Winchester a potent Courtier, took exceptions that his Bishopric in the marshalling of them was wronged in method, as put after any whose Bishop is a Privy Counsellor.] The Bishop was too wise a man to take this (as our Author hates it) for a sufficient ground of the proceeding against Dr. Mocket, who had then newly translated into the Latin tongue, the Liturgy of the Church of England, the 39 Articles, the Book of the Ordination of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, and many Doctrinal points extracted out of the Book of Homilies. All which with Bishop jewels Apology, Mr. Noels' Catechism, and a new Book of his own entitled Politi● Ecclesiae Anglicanae he had caused to be Printed and bound up together. A Book which might have been of great honour to the Church of England amongst foreign Nations, and of no less use and esteem at home, had there not been somewhat else in it which deserved the fire then this imaginary Quarrel. For by the Act of Parliament 31 H. 8. 6. 10. the precedency of the Bishops is thus Marshaled; that is to say, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of London, the Bishop of Durham, the Bishop of Winchester, the rest according to the order of their Consecrations; yet so, that if any of them were Secretary to the King, he should take place of all those other Bishops to whom otherwise by the Order of his Consecration he had been to give it. If the Doctor did mistake himself in this particular (as indeed he did) the fault might easily have been mended, as not deserving to be expiated by so sharp a punishment. The following reason touching his derogating from the King's power in Ecclesiastical matters, and adding it to the Metropolitan whose servant and Chaplain he was, hath more reason in it (if it had but as much truth as reason) and so hath that touching the Propositions by him gathered out of the Homilies, which were rather framed according to his own judgement, then squared by the Rules of the Church. But that which I conceive to have been the true cause why the Book was burned, was, that in publishing the twentieth Article concerning the Authority of the Church he totally left out the first clause of it, viz. Habet Ecclesia Ritus sive Ceremonias statuendi jus & in Controversus ●ides Authoritatem. By means whereof the Article was apparently falsified, the Church's Authority disavowed, and consequently a wide gap opened to dispute her power, in all her Canons and Determinations of what sort soever. And possible enough it is, that some just offence might be taken at him, for making the Fasting days appointed in the Liturgy of the Church of England to be commanded and observed ob Politi● is solum rationes, for Politic Considerations only, as insinuated pag. 308. whereas those Fasting-days were appointed in the first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth Anno 1549. (with reference only to the primitive Institution of those several Fasts) when no such Politic considerations were so much as thought of. But whatsoever was the true cause, or whether there were more than one, as perhaps there was, certain I am it could not be for derogating any thing from the King's Power, and enlarging that of the Archbishop in confirming the election of Bishops, as our Author tells us. For though the Doctor doth affirm of the Metropolitans of the Church of England, pag. 308. Vt Electiones Episcoporum suae Provinciae confirment, that it belongs to them to confirm the Electio●s of the Bishops of their several Provinces, and for that purpose citys the Canon of the Council of Nice, which our Author speaks of; yet afterwards he declares expressly, that no such confirmation is or can be made by the Metropolitans, without the King's assent preceding, Cujus 〈◊〉 electi comprobantur, comprobati confirmantur, confirmati consecrantur, pag. 313. which very fully clears the Doctor from being a better Chaplain than he was a Subject, as our Author makes him.  
Fol. 77. At this time began the troubles in the Law-Countries about matters of Religion, heightened between two opposite parties, Remonstrants, and Contra-remonstrants; their Controversies being chiefly 〈◊〉 to five points, &c] Not at this time, viz. 1618. which our Author speaks of, but some years before. They were now come unto their height, and had divided the whole body of the united Belgic Provinces into two great Factions: that of the Remonstrants (whom in reproach they call their Minions) being headed by john Olden Barnevelt, a principal Counsellor of State and of great Authority in his Country: the other of the Calvinists or Contra-Remonstrants, being managed by Maurice Prince of Orange, the chief Commander of the Forces of the States united both by Sea and Land. But the troubles and divisions were now come to their full growth, they began many years before; occasioned by a Remonstrance exhibited to the States of Holland by the followers of Dr. james Harmin, who liked better the Melanchthonian way, then that of Calvin, Anno 1610. and that Remonstrance counterballanced by a Contra-remonstrants made by ●uch Divines who were better pleased with calvin's Doctrine in the deep Speculations of Predestination, Grace, Freewill, etc. then with that of Melanchthon. Hence grew the names of Remonstrants, and Contra-Remonstrants, occurring frequently in the Writings on both sides, till the Remonstrants were condemned in the Synod of Dort, and either forced to yield the Cause, or quit their Country. Each party in the mean time had the opportunity to disperse their Doctrines, in which the Remonstrants gained exceedingly upon their Adversaries, especially after they had been admitted to a public Conference at the Hague, Anno 1611. in which they were conceived to have had much the better of the day, and so continued in increase of their power and credit, till the Quarrels and Animosities between the Prince and Barnevelt put a full period to the business by the death of the one, and the Authority of the other.  
Fol. 82. Hereby the equal Reader may judge how candidly Mr. Montague in his Appeal dealeth with our Divines, charging them that the Discipline of the Church of England is in this Synod held unlawful. And again the Synod of Dort in some points condemneth upon the by even the Discipline of the Church of England.] Assuredly Mr. Montague deals very candidly with our Divines, 
Appell. Caesaram. cap. 7. pag. 69.  professing that he doth reverence them for their places, worth, and learning; though not obliged (as he conceived) to all or any of the Conclusions of the Synod at Dort. And he might very well declare, as indeed he doth, that the Discipline of the Church of England in that and other Dutch Synods was held unlawful, and by them condemned upon the by. For whereas in the Confession of the Belgic Churches ratified and confirmed in the Synod of Dort, it is declared and maintained, that all Ministers are by the word of God of equal power, it must needs follow thereupon, that the Superiority of Bishops over other Ministers is against God's word. Quantum verò attinet Divini verbi Ministros, 
Co●●es. Belg. Art. 31.  ubicunque locorum sint, eandem illi Potestatem & Authoritatem habent, ut qui omnes sint Christi unici illius Episcopi universalis, unicique Capitis Ecclesiae Ministri. These are the words of that Confewon, as it stands ratified and recorded in the Acts of the Synod of Dort, as before was said. In which and by which if the Discipline of the Church of England be not made unlawful in terminis terminantibus, as they use to say; I am sure it is condemned upon the by, which is as much as Mr. Montague had affirmed of it. And howsoever Dr. Charleton then Bishop of Landaffe, as well to vindicate his own dignity, as the honour of the Church of England, tendered his Protestation of that Synod in behalf of Episcopacy; yet was it made to signify nothing, nor so much as honoured with an Answer; our Author noting at the end of this protestation, Britannorum interpellationi responsum ne gru q●●dem, viz. to this interpellation of the British Divines, nothing at all was answered. There might be some wrong done to our Divines by the rest of that Synod; but no wrong done by Mr. Montague, neither to our Divines nor unto that Synod.  
Fol. 89. Now whilst in common discourse some made this judge, others that Sergeant Lord Chancellor, King James made Dr. Williams, lately (and still) Dean of Westminstet, and soon after Bishop of Lincoln.] In this and the rest which follows touching the advancement of Dr. Williams to the place and dignity of Lord Keeper, there are three things to be observed. And first it is to be observed, that though he was then Dean of Westminster when the custody of the Great Seal was committed to him; yet was he not then and still Dean of that Church, that is to say, not Dean thereof at such time as our Author writ this part of the History. For fol. 80. speaking of Dr. Hals return from the Synod of Dort, Anno 1618. he adds that he continued in health till this day thirty three years after, which falls into the year 1651. And certainly at that time Dr. Williams (then Archbishop of York) was not Dean of Westminster, that place having been bestowed by his Majesty upon Dr. Steward Clerk of the Closet, An. 1645. being full six years before the time which our Author speaks of. Secondly, whereas our Author tells us, that the place was proper not for the plain but guarded Gown; I would ●ain know how it should be more proper for the guarded Gown than it was for the plain. There was a time when the Chancellors (as our Author telleth us elsewhere) were always Bishops; and from that time till the fall of Cardinal Wolsey, that Office continued for the most part in the hands of the Prelates; at what time that great Office was discharged with such a general contentment, that people found more expedition in their Suits, and more ease to their Purses then of later times. By which it seems, that men who are never bred to know the true grounds and reasons of the Common Law, might and could mitigate the Rigour of it in such difficult cases as were brought before them; the Chancery not having in those days such a mixture of Law as now it hath, not being so tied up to such intricate Rules as now it is. But thirdly, whereas our Author in advocating for the Common Lawyers, prescribeth for them a Succession of six Descents, he hath therein confu●ed himself, and ●aved me the trouble of an Animadversion, by ● 〈◊〉 Note; in which netelle●● us, that Sir Ch. Hatton was not bred a Lawyer. If so, than neither was the Title 〈◊〉 strong, nor the P●oscriptions so well grounded as ou● Author makes i●; the interposition of Sir Christopher Hatton▪ between Sir Tho. Bromley and Sir john Puckering, 〈◊〉 it to three descents, and but thirty years, which is too short a time 〈◊〉 a Prescription to be built upon.  
Fol. 93. He had 14 years been Archbishop of Spalleto, etc. Conscience in show, and covetousness indeed caused his coming hither. ● This is a very hard s●ying, a censure, which en●●enches too much upon the Privileges of Almighty God, who alone knows the secrets of the heart of man. Interest tenebris, interest cogitationibus nostris, quasi alteris tenebris, as Minutius hath it. The man here mentioned had been in the Confession of our Author himself, Archbishop of Spalleto in Dalmatia, ● dignity of great power and reputation, and consequently of a fair Revenue in proportion to it. He could not hope to mend his Fortunes by his coming hither, or to advance himself to a more liberal entertainment in the Church of England, than what he had attained unto in the Church of Rome. Covetousness therefore could not be the motive for leaving his own estate, of which he had been possessed 14 years in our Author's ●eckoning, to betake himself to a strange Country, where he 〈◊〉 promise himself nothing but protection and the ●●eedom of conscience. Our Author might have said with more probability, that covetousness, and not conscience, 〈…〉 cause of his going hence; no b●it of pro●●t or preferment being laid before him to invite him 〈◊〉 ●s they were both, by those which had the managing 〈…〉 him hence. He had given great 〈◊〉 to the Pope by his defection from that Church, and no 〈◊〉 councenance to the Doctrine of the 〈◊〉 Churches by his coming o●er unto ou●s. The 〈◊〉 of ●o great a 〈…〉 of that Church was not like to stand. And yet he gave greater blows to them by his Pen, then by the defection of his Person; his learned Books entitled De Republica Ecclesiasticâ, being still unanswered. In which respect, those of that Church bestirred themselves to disgrace his person, devising many other causes by which he might be moved or forced to forsake those parts, in which he durst no longer tarry. But finding little credit given to their libellous Pamphlets, they began to work upon him by more secret practices: insinuating, that he had neither that respect, nor those advancements which might encourage him to stay; that the new Pope Gregory the fifteenth, was his special friend; that he might choose his own preferments, and make his own conditions, if he would return. And on the other side, they cunningly wrought him out of credit with King james by the arts of Gondomar; and lessened his esteem amongst the Clergy by some other Artifices: so that the poor man, being in a manner lost on both sides, was forced to a necessity of swallowing that accursed bait by which he was hooked over to his own destruction. For which and for the rest of the story, the Reader may repair for satisfaction to this present History.  
Fol. 96. Besides the King would never bestow an Episcopal charge in England on a foreiner, no not on his own Countrymen the Scots.] This must be understood with reference to the Church of England, King james bestowing many Bishoprics upon his Countrymen the Scots in the Realm of Ireland. And if he did not the like here (as indeed he did not) it neither was for want of affection to them, nor of confidence in them; but because he would not put any such discouragement upon the English, who looked on those preferments, as the greatest and most honourable rewards of Arts and Industry. Quis enim virtutem exquireret ipsum, Proemia si ●ollin?  
Fol. 100 All men's mouths were now 〈◊〉 with discourse of Prince Charles his match with 〈…〉 Infanta of Spain. The Protestants grieved thereat, fearing that this marriage would be the Funerals of their Religion, etc.] The bu●●ness of the match with Spain●ath ●ath already been sufficiently agitated between the Author of the History of the Reign of King Charles and his Observator, And yet I must add something to let our Author and his Reader to understand thus much, that the Protestants had no cause to fear such a Funeral▪ They knew they lived under such a King, who loved his Sovereignty too well to quit any part thereof to the Pope of Rome; especially to part with that Supremacy in 〈◊〉 matters, which he esteemed the fairest Flower in the Royal Garland. They knew they lived under ●●ch a King, whose interest it was to preserve Religion in the same state in which he found it; and could not fear but that he would sufficiently provide for the 〈◊〉 of it. If any Protestants ●eared the funeral of their Religion, they were such Protestants as had been frighted out 〈…〉 as you know who used to call the Puritans; 〈…〉 under the name of Protestants had contrived themselves into a Faction not only against Episcopacy, but even Monarchy also. And to these nothing was more 〈◊〉 than the match with Spain▪ fearing (●nd perhaps 〈◊〉 fearing) that the King's 〈◊〉 with that Crown might a●m him both with power and counsel to suppress those practices which have since proved the Funeral of the Church of England. But as it seems, they 〈…〉 fear was our Author telling us fol. 112. that the 〈…〉 State had no mind or meaning of a match: and that this was quickly discovered by Prince Charles at his coming 〈◊〉. How so? Because saith he  
Fol. 112. They demanded 〈…〉 in education of the 〈…〉 English Papists, &c▪] 〈…〉 nothing. For thus the argument seems to stand, viz. The Spaniards were desirous to get as good conditions as they could for themselves and their Party, Ergo they had no mind to the match. Or thus, The demands of the Spaniards when the business was first in Treaty, seemed to be unreasonable, Ergo they never really intended that it should proceed. Our Author cannot be so great a stranger in the shops of London, as not to know that Tradesmen use to ask many times twice as much for a commodity as they mean to take; and therefore may conclude as strongly, that they do not mean to sell those wares for which they ask such an unreasonable 〈◊〉 at the first demand. Iniquum petere ut aequum obtineas, hath been the usual practice (especially in driving S●a●e-bargains) of all times and ages. And though the Spaniards at the first spoke big, and stood upon such points as the King neither could▪ nor would in honour or conscience consent unto: yet things were after brought to such a temperament, that the marriage was agreed upon, the Articles by both Kings subscribed, a Proxy made by the Prince of ●ales to espouse the Infanta, and all things on her part prepared for the day of the wedding. The b●each which ●ollowed came not from any averseness in the Court of Spain, though where the fault was, and by what means occasioned, need not here be said. But well ●are our Author for all that; who finally hath absolved the Spaniard from this brea●h, and laid the same upon King james, despairing of any restitution to be made of the Palatinate, by the way of Treaty.  
Ibi●▪ Whereupon King James not only broke off all Treaty 〈◊〉 pain▪ but also called the great Council of his Kingdom together.] By which it seems, that the breaking off of the Treaty did precede the Parliament. But multa apparent quae non sunt, Every thing is not as it seems. The Parliament in this ca●e came before, by whose continual importunity and 〈◊〉, the breach of the Treaties followed after. The King loved peace ●oo well to lay aside the Treaties, and engage in War before he was desperate of success any other way then by that of the Sword, and was assured both of the hands and hearts of his subjects to assist him in it. And therefore ou● Author should have said, that the King not only called together his great Council, but broke off the Treaty, and not have given us here such an Hysteron Proteron, as neither doth consist with reason, not the truth of story▪   

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Eleventh Book OF The Church History OF BRITAIN.  
Containing the Reign of King Charles.  
THis Book concludes our Author's History, and my Animadversions. And 〈◊〉 the end be 〈◊〉 unto the beginning, it is like to 〈…〉 enough; our Author stumbling at the Threshold, 〈◊〉 ●mo●gst superstitious people hath been 〈…〉 presage. Having placed King Charles upon 〈…〉 he goes on to tell us that  
Fol. 117. On the fourt●enth 〈…〉 James his Funerals were 〈…〉 Collegiat Church at 〈…〉 but the fourth, saith the 〈…〉 Reign of King Charles; and 〈…〉 was on the 〈…〉 ●●venth of May on which those solemn Obsequies were 〈…〉 Westminster. Of which if he will not take my word se● him consult the Pamphlet called the 〈…〉 (●ol. 6.) and he shall be satisfied. Our 〈…〉 mu●● keep time better, or else we shall neve● know how the day goes with him.  
Fol. 119. As for Dr. Pre●●on, etc. His party would 〈◊〉 us that he might have chose his own Mitre.] And 〈…〉 his party would persuade us, That he had not only large parts of sufficient receipt to manage the broad 〈…〉, but that the Seal was proffered to him, fol. 131. But we are not bound to believe all which is said by that party, who looked upon the man with such a reverence as came near Idolatry. His Principles and engagements were too well known by those which governed Affairs, to vent●●e him ●nto any such great trust in Church or State; and his activity so suspected, that he would not have been long suffered to continue Preacher at Lincoln's Inn. As for his intimacy with the Duke (too violent to be long lasting) it proceeded not from any good opinion which the Duke had of him, but that he found how instrumental he might be to manage that prevailing party to the King's advantage. But when it was 〈◊〉 that he had more of the Serpent in him then of the 〈◊〉, and that he was not tractable in steering the 〈◊〉 of his own Party by the Court Compass; he was discountenanced and ●aid by, as not worth the keeping. He seemed the Court M●reor for a while, 〈◊〉 to a s●dden height of expectation, and having 〈◊〉 and blazed a 〈◊〉, went out again, and was as sudd●●nly forgotten.  
●ol. 119. Next day the King coming from Canterbury, 〈…〉 with all solemnity she was 〈…〉 in London, where a Chapel 〈…〉 her Devotions with a Covent 〈…〉 to the Articles of her 〈…〉; how ●ame he to be suffered to be present at 〈◊〉 in the capacity of Lord Keeper? For that he did so, is affirmed by our Author, saying, That the King took a S●role of Parchment out of his bosom, and gave it to the L●rd 〈…〉 who read it to the Commons four sev●ra● times, East-West, North, and South, fol. 123. Thirdly the Lord Keeper, who read that Scroll, was not the 〈◊〉 Keeper Williams, but the Lord Keeper Coventry; 〈◊〉 Seal being taken from the Bishop of Lincoln, and 〈◊〉 to the custody of Sir Thomas Coventry, in October before. And therefore fourthly, our Author is much ou● in placing both the Coronation and the following Parliament before the change of the Lord Keeper; and sending Sir john Suckling to fe●ch that Seal at the end of a Parliament in the Spring, which he had brought away with him before Michaelmas Term. But as our Author was willing to keep the Bishop of Lincoln in the Dea●●y of Westminster, for no less than five or six years after it was conferred on another; so is he as desirous to continue him Lord Keeper for as many months after the Seal had been entrusted to another hand.  
Fol. 122. The Earl of Arundel as Earl Marshal of 〈◊〉 and the Duke of Buckingham as Lord High Constable of England, for that day went before his Majesty in that great Solemnity.] In this passage and the next that follows ou● Author shows himself as bad an Herald in marshalling a Royal show, as in stating the true time of the creation of a Noble Peer. Here in this place he playeth the Earl Marshal before the Constable; whereas by the 〈◊〉 31 H. 8. c. 10. the Constable is to have 〈◊〉 before the Marshal. Not want there Precedents to show that the Lord High-Constable did many times direct his Mandates to the Earl Marshal, as one of the Minister's of his Court, willing and requiring him to perform such and such services as in the said Precepts were expressed. In the next place we are informed that Ibid. That the King's Train being six yards long of Purple Velvet, was held up by the Lord Compton, and the Lord Viscount Dorcester.] That the Lord Compton was one of them which held up the King's Train, I shall easily grant; he being then Master of the Robes, and thereby challenging a right to perform this service. But that the Lord Viscount Dorcester was the other of them, I shall never grant, there being no such Viscount at the time of the Coronation. I cannot 〈◊〉, but that Sir D●dley Carleton might be one of those which held up the Train, though I am not sure of it. But sure I am, that Sir Dudley Carleton was not made Baron of Imber-Court till towards the latter end of the following Parliament of An. 1626. nor created Viscount Dorcester until some years after.  
Fol. 122. The Lord Archbishop did present his Majesty to the Lords and Commons, East, West, North, South, ask their minds four several times, if they did consent to the Coronation of King Charles their lawful sovereign.] This is a piece of new State-doctrine never known before that the Coronation of the King (and consequently his Succession to the Crown of England) should depend on the consent of the Lords and Commons who were then assembled; the Coronation not proceeding (as he after kelleth us) till their consent was given four times by ●cclamations. And this I call a piece of new State-doctrine never known before, because I find the contrary in the Coronation of our former Kings. For in the form and manner of the Coronation of King Edward 6. described in the Catalogue of Honour, ●et ●orth by Tho. Mills of Canterbury, Anno 1610. we find it thus: The King being carried by certain Noble Courtiers in another Chair ●nto the four sides of the Stage, was by the Archbishop of Canterbury declared unto the people (standing round about) both by Gods and man's Laws, to be the right and lawful King of England, France, and Ireland, and proclaimed that day to be crowned, consecrated and anointed, unto whom he demanded, whether they would obey and serve, or not? By whom it was again with a loud cry answered; God save the King, and ever live his Majesty. The same we have in substance, but in sewer words in the Coronation of King james, where it is said, that The King was showed to the people, and that they were required to make acknowledgement of the●● allegiance to his Majesty by the Archbishop; which they did by acclamations. Assuredly, the difference is exceeding va●t betwixt obeying and consenting, betwixt the people's acknowledging their allegiance, and promising to obey and serve thei● lawful Sovereign, and giving their consent to his Coronation, as if it could not be performed without such consent. Nor had the late Archbishop been reproached so generally by the common people, (and that reproach published in several Pamphlets) for altering the King's Oath at his Coronation, to the infringing of the Libe●●ies and diminution of the Rights of the English Subjects; had he done them such a notable pie●e of service, as freeing them from all promises to obey and ●erve, and making the King's Coronation to depend on their consent. For Bishop Laud being one of that Committee, which was appointed by the King to review the form and o●der of the Coronation, to the end it might be fitted to some Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, which had not been observed before; must bear the greatest blame in this alteration (if any such alteration had been made, as our Author speaks of) because he was the principal man whom the King re●●ed on in that business. But our Author tells us in his Preface, that this last Book with divers of the rest were written by him, when the Monarchy was turned into a State, and I dare believe him. He had not el●e so punctually conformed his language to the new State-doctrine, by which the m●king (and consequently the unmaking) of Kings is wholly ve●ted in ●he people, according to that Maxim of Buchannan, ●opulo jus est, imperium cui velit deferat; then which ●here is not a more pestilent and seditious passage ●n his whole Book De jure Regni apud Scotos, though ●here be nothing else but Treason, and Sedition ●n it.  
Fol. 123. Then as many Earls and Barons as could conveniently stand about the Throne, did lay their hands ●n the Crown on his Majesty's head, protesting to spend their bloods to maintain it to him and his lawful He●rs.] A promise faithfully performed by many of them, some losing their lives for him in the open field, others exhausting their Estates in defence of his, many more venturing their whole fortunes by adhering to him to a confiscation; a Catalogue of which la●t we may find subscribed to a Letter sent from the Lords and Commons of Parliament assembled in Oxford, to those at Westminster, Anno 1643. And by that Catalogue we may also see what and who they were who so ignobly broke faith with him, all those whose names we find not in that subscription, or presently superadded to it, being to be reckoned amongst those who in stead of spending their blood to maintain the Crown to him, and to his lawful successors, concurred with them either in opere, or in 〈◊〉, who despoiled him of it. And to say truth, they were rewarded as they had deserved, the first thing which was done by the House of Commons (after the King, by their means, had been brought to the fatal Block) being to turn them out of power, to dissolve their House, and annul their privileges, reducing them to the same condition with the re●t of the Subjects.  
Fol. 127. And it had not been amiss, if such who would be accounted his friends and admirers had followed him in the footsteps of his Moderation, content with the enjoying without the enjoining their private practices and opinions 〈◊〉 others.] This comes in as an inference only on a forme● passage, in which it is said of Bishop Andrews, that in Wh●● place soever he came, he never pressed any other Ceremonies upon them, than such as he found to be used there before 〈◊〉 coming, though otherwise condemned by some romany superstitious Ceremonies, and superfluous Ornaments, in his private Chapel. How true this is, I am not able to affirm, less able (if it should be true) to commend it in him. It is not certainly the office of a careful Bishop only to leave things as he found them▪ but to reduce them, if amiss, to those Rules and Canons, from which by the forwardness of some to innovate, and the connivance of others at the innovations, they had been suffered to decline. And for the inference itself, it is intended chiefly for the late Archbishop of Canterbury against whom he had a fling before in the fourth Book of this History, not noted there, because reserved to another place, of which more hereafter. Condemned here for his want of moderation in enjoining his private practices and opinions on other men. But 〈◊〉 our Author had done well to have spared the man, who hath already reckoned for all his errors, both with God and the world. And secondly, it had been bette● if he had told us what those private practices and opinions were which the Archbishop with such want of moderation did enjoin on others. For it is possible enough that the opinions which he speaks of, might be the public Doctrines of the Church of England, maintained by him in opposition to those private opinions which the Calvinian p●rty had intended to obtrude upon her. A thing complained of by Spalleto, who well observed that many of the opinions, both of Luther and Calvin, were received amongst us as part of the Doctrine and Confession of the Church of England, which otherwise he acknowledged to be capable of an Oxtho●x sense. Praeter Anglicanam Confessionem ●uam mihi ut modestam praedicabant) multa 〈◊〉 Lutheri & Calvini dogmata obtinuisse, 
Consil. red●undi.  ●he there objects. And it is possible enough ●●at the practices, which he speaks of, were not private either, but a reviver of those ancient and public ●ages, which the Canons of the Church enjoined, ●nd by the remissness of the late Government had been discontinued. He that reads the Gag, and the Appello ●aesarem of Bishop Montague, cannot but see, that those opinions, which our Author condemned for private, were ●he true Doctrine of this Church professed and held forth ●n the Book of Articles, the Homilies and the Common-Prayer-Book. But for a justification of the Practices (the private practices he speaks of) I shall direct ●im to an Author of more credit with him. Which ●●thor first tells us of the Bishops generally, That being of late years either careless or indulgent, 
History of K. C. fol. 143.  they had not required within their Dioceses that strict obedience to Ecclesiastical Constitutions which the Law expected; upon which the Liturgy began totally to be laid aside, and in conformity the uniform practice of ●he Church. He tells us secondly, of Archbishop Abbot in particular, 
Fol. 131.  That his extraordinary remissness in not exacting a strict conformity to the prescribed Orders of the Church in point of Ceremony, seemed to dissolve those legal ce●erminations to their firs● principle of indifferency, ●nd led in such an habit of inconformity, as the future education of those tender conscienced men too long discontinued obedience, was interpreted an innovation. And finally he tells of Archbishop Laud, 
F●l. 143.  who succeeded A●b●t in that See, that being of another mind an● mettle, he did not like that the external worship of God should follow the fashion of every private fancy; and what he did not like in that subject, as he was in State, so he thought it was his duty to reform. To which en● in his Metropolitical visitation, he calls upon all both Clergy and Laity to observe the Rules of the Church. And this is that, which our Author cal● the enjoining his private practices; private perhaps i● the private opinion of some men, who had declared themselves to be professed enemies to all public● Order.  
Fol. 127. A Commission was granted unto five Bishop● (Whereof Bishop La●d of the Q●orum) to suspend Archbishop Abbot from exercising his Authority any longer because uncanonical for casual Homicide.] Had our Author said, that Bishop Laud had been one of the number, he had hit it right, the Commission being granted to five Bishops, viz. Dr. Montain Bishop of London Dr. Neil Bishop of Durham, Dr. Buckeridge Bishop o● Rochester, Dr. Howson Bishop of Oxford, and Dr. Lau● Bishop of bath and Wells; or to any four, three, 〈◊〉 two of them▪ and no more than so. Had Bishop Laud been of the Quorum, his presence and consent had been so necessary to all their Consultations, Conclusions▪ and dispatch of Businesses, that nothing could be done without him; whereas by the words of the Commission, any two of them were impowered, and consequently all of them must be of the Quorum, as well as he; which every justice's Clerk cannot choose but laug●● at. Nor is there any such thing as a Casual Homicide mentioned, or so much as glanced at in that Commission, the Commission only saying, That the sai● Archbishop could not at that present in his own person attend those services which were otherwise proper for his 〈◊〉, and Jurisdiction, and which as Archbishop of Canterbury he might and ought in his own person to have performed and executed. I am loath to rub longer on this sore, the point having been so vexed already betwixt the Historian and the Observator, that I shall not trouble it any further. Only I must crave leave to rectify our Author in another passage relating to that sad Accident, for which saith he,  
Ibid. It would be of dangerous consequence to condemn him by the Canons of foreign Counsels, which were never allowed any Legislative power in this Land.] Which words are very ignorantly spoken, or else very improperly. For if by Legislative power, he means a Power of making Laws, as the word doth intimate, than it is true, That the Canons of foreign Counsels, had never any such power within this Land. But if by Legislative power he means a Power or Capability of passing for Laws within this Kingdom; then (though he use the word improperly) it is very false that no such Canons were in force in the Realm of England. The Canons of many foreign Counsels, General, National, and Provincial, had been received in this Church, and incorporated into the body of the Canon-Law, by which the Church proceeded in the exercise of her jurisdiction, till the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the eighth. And in the Act confirmative of that Submission, it is said expressly, That all Canons, Constitutions, Ordinances, and Synodals Provincial, as were made before the said Submission, which be not contrary or repugnant to the Laws, Statutes and Customs of this Realm, nor to the damage or hurt of the King's prerogative Royal, we●e to be used and executed as in ●ormer times. 25 H. 8. c. 19 So that unless it can be proved, that the proceedings, in this case, by the Canons of foreign 〈◊〉, was either contrary or repu●●ant to the Laws and 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 or to the damage of the King's prerogative Royal; there is no dangerous consequence at all to be ●ound therein. But whereas our Author adds in some following words, that ever since (he means ever since that unhappy accident) he had executed his jurisdiction without any interruption; I must needs add, that he is very much mistaken in this partilar; Dr. William's Lord elect of Lincoln, Dr. Carew Lord elect of Exeter, and Dr. Laud Lord elect of St. David's, and I think some others refusing to receive episcopal Consecration from him upon that account. Far more mistaken in the next, in which he telleth us, that  
Fol. 128. Though this Archbishop survived some years after, yet henceforward he was buried to the world.] No such matter neither. For though for a while he stood confined to his house at Ford, yet neither this confinement, nor that Commission were of long continuance. For about Christmas in the year 1628., he was restored both to his liberty and jurisdiction, sent for to come unto the Court, ●eceiv'd as he came out of his Barge by the Archbishop of York, and the Earl of Dorset, and by them conducted to the King, who giving him his hand to kiss, en●oyned him not to fail the Council Table twice a week. After which time we find him sitting as Archbishop in the following Parliament, and in the full exercise of his Jurisdiction, till the day of his death, which happened upon Sunday August 4. 1633. And so much for him.  
Fol. 137. My pen passing by them at present, may safely salute them with a God speed, as neither seeing nor suspecting any danger in the design.] Our Author speaks this of the Feoffees appointed by themselves for buying in such Impropriations as were then in the hands of Lay-people. I say appointed by themselves, because not otherwise authorized, either by Charter from the King, Decree in Chandlery, or by Act of Parliament, but only by a secret combination of the Brotherhood to advance their projects. For though our 〈…〉 us, fol. 136. that they were legally settled in trust to make such Purchases; yet there is more required to a legal settlement, than the consent of some few persons ●mongst themselves: for want whereof this combination w●s dissolved, the Feoffees in some danger of sentence, and the impropriations by them purchased adjudged to the King on a full hearing of the cause in the Cou●t of Exchequer, Anno 1632. Howsoever our Author 〈◊〉 them good speed, as neither seeing nor suspecting any danger in their design; but other men as wi●e as he, did not only suspect, but see the danger. And this our Author might see also, if zeal to the good cause had not darkened the eyes of his understanding.  
For first, the Parties trusted in the managing of this Design were of such affections, as promised no good unto the peace and happiness of the Church of England. Their names our Author truly gives us 〈◊〉. 36. four Ministers, four Common Lawyers, and four Citizens, men not unknown to such as then lived▪ and observed the conduct of Affairs, to be averse unto the Discipline of the Church then by law established. And ●f such public mischiefs be presaged by Astrologers●rom ●rom the conjunction of jupiter and Saturn, though the first of them be a Planet of a most ●weet and gentle 〈◊〉; what dangers, what calamities might not be ●eared from the conjunction of twelve such persons, of which there was not one that wished well to the p●e●ent Government? And therefore I may say of them 〈◊〉 Domitius Aenobarbus said unto his Friends when they came to congratulate with him ●or the birth of Nero, 
〈…〉  Nihil 〈…〉 nisi detestabile & malo public● 〈…〉,  
〈…〉, this will ●u●ther appear by their pro●●●dings in the business, not laying the imp●opriation● by them purchased to the Church or Chappelry ●o 〈◊〉 they had anciently belonged, nor ●etling them on the 〈◊〉 of the place, as many hoped they would. That had been utterly destructive to their main 〈◊〉, which was not to advantage the Regular and established Clergy, but to set up a new body of 〈◊〉 in convenient places, for the promoting of the cause. And therefore having bought an impropriation, they parceled it out into annual Pensions of 40 or 50 l. per annum, and therewith ●alared some 〈◊〉 in such Market Towns where the people had commonly less to do, and consequently were more apt to ●action and Innovation, then in other places. Our Author notes it of their Predecessors, in Cartwrights days, that they preached most diligently in 〈◊〉 places; it b●ing observed in England, that those who hold the Helm of the Pulpit, always steer people's h●arts as they please, Lib. 9 fol. 195. And he notes it al●o of these ●eoffees, that in conformity hereunto, they set up a P●eaching Ministry in places of greatest need, not in such Parish-churches, to which the Tithes properly belonged) but where they thought the Word was most wanting, that is to say most wanting to advance their p●o●ect.  
Thi●dly, if we behold the men whom they made choice of and employed in p●eaching in such Market Towns as they had an eye on, either because most populous, o● because capable of electing Burgesses to serve in 〈◊〉, they were for the most part Nonconform, and sometime such as had been silenced by 〈…〉, or the High-commission, for their 〈…〉. And 〈◊〉 an one was placed by 〈…〉 Town of 〈…〉 by the Archbishop of Canterbury, out of 〈◊〉 in Middlesex by the Bishop of London, 〈…〉 Yorkshire by the Archbishop of York▪ 〈…〉 Hartfordshire by the Bishop of Lincoln, and finally ●●●pended from his Ministry by the High-Commission; yet thought the 〈◊〉 man by Jeering (as indeed he was) to begin this Lecture.  
Fourthly and finally, these Pensions neither were so settled, nor the●e Lecturers so well established in their several places, but that the one might be withdrawn and the other removed, at the will and pleasure of their Patrons, if they grew slack and negligent 〈◊〉 the holy cause, or ab●red any thing at all 〈…〉 and fury they first brought with them. Examples of which I know some, and have heard of more. And now I would fain know of our Author whether there be no danger to be seen or suspected in this 〈…〉 these Feoffees in short time would not 〈◊〉 had more Chaplains to depend upon them, than all the Bishops in the Kingdom; and finally whether such needy fellows depending on the will and pleasure of their gracious Masters, must not be forced to Preach such Doctrines only as best please their humours. And though I shall say nothing here of their giving under hand private Pensions, not only unto such as had been silenced or suspended in the Ecclesiastical Courts but many times also to their Wives and Children after their decease, all issuing from this common-stock: yet othe●s have beheld it as the greatest piece of Wit and 〈◊〉 both to encourage and increase their 〈…〉 could be possibly devised. If as our 〈…〉 Design was generally 〈…〉 〈◊〉 men were 〈…〉 ●as because they neither 〈…〉 the mischiefs, which 〈…〉 crush● in tim●.  
●ol. 148. However▪ there was no express in this Declaration that the Ministers of the Parish should be pressed to the 〈◊〉.] Our Author doth here change his style. He had 〈◊〉 told us, that on the 〈◊〉 publishing of the Decla●ation about lawful Sports on the Lord's day, no Mini●●er was de facto enjoined to read it in his Parish, lib. x. fol. 76. and here he tells us, that there was no express Order in the Declaration (when revived by King Charles) that the Minister of the Parish should be pressed to the 〈◊〉 of it; adding withal, that many thought it a mo●e proper work for the Constable or Tithing-man, than it was for the Ministers. Bu● if our Author mark it well▪ he may easily find that the Declaration of King james was commanded to be published by order from the Bishop of the Diocese through all the Parish Churches of his Jurisdiction; 
〈…〉  and the Declaration of King Charles to be published with like order from the several Bishops through all their Parish Churches of their several Dioceses respectiuly. 
Ibid▪ p. 17.  The Bishop of the Diocese in the singular number in the Declaration of King james, because it principally related to the County of Lancaster: the Bishops in the plural number in that of King Charles, because the benefit of it was to be extende● over all the Realm. In both, the Bishops are commanded to take Order for the publishing of them in their several Parishes; and whom could they require to publish them in the Parish Churches, but the Ministers only? The Constable is a Lay-Officer merely, bo●nd by his place to execute the Warrants and commands of the justices, but not of the Bishop. And though the ●i●hing man have some relation to Church matters, and consequently to the Bishop, in the way of pres●●●●ents; yet was he not bound to execute any such commands because not tied by any Oath of Canonical 〈…〉 were. So that the Bishops did no● tha●● conceive he will not ofte● to gainsay him. It is the Author of the Book called the Holy Table, Name and Thing, 
〈◊〉 Table, ● 4 ●. 68  who resolves it thus: All the commands of the King (saith he) that are not upon the first inference and illation (without any Prosyllogisms) contrary to a clear passage in the Word of God, or to an evident Sunbeam of the Law of Nature, are precisely to be obeyed. Nor is it enough to find a remote and possible inconvenience that may ensue therefrom; (which is the ordinary objection against the Book of Recreations) for every good subject is bound in conscience to believe and rest assu●ed, that his Prince (environed with 〈◊〉 Council) will be more able to discover, and as 〈◊〉 to prevent any ill sequel, that may come of it, as himself possibly ●an be. And therefore I must not by disobeying my Prince commit a certain ●in, in preventing a probable but contingent inconveniency. This if it were good Doctrine then, when both the Author and the Book we●e cr●ed up even to admiration, is not to be re●●●ted as fal●e Doctrine now; truth being constant to 〈◊〉, not varying nor altering with the change of times. B●t o●r Author will not s●op here, he goes on and saith▪  
Ibid. M●●y moderate men are of opinion, that this abuse of the Lord-day was a principal procurer of God's anger, 〈◊〉 poured out on this Land, in a long and bloody Civil 〈◊〉 And moderate perhaps they may be in apparel, 〈…〉 the like civil acts of life and conversation; but 〈…〉 moderate enough in this Observation. For who hath k●●wn the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his Couns●ll● 〈…〉 the great Apostle. But it is as common with some men of the newest Religions, to ascribe 〈…〉 judgements to some special Reasons, as 〈…〉 the Key which opens into his Cabinet 〈…〉 as i● they were admitted to all 〈…〉 in the 〈…〉 Heaven, before that dreadful 〈◊〉 o● the year 1562. and 1565. the constant 〈◊〉 of the Chapels in his Majesty's Houses, most 〈◊〉 the Cathedral, and some of the Parochial Churches, and finally a Declaration of the King, Anno 1633. commending a Conformity in the Parish Churches to their own Cathedrals. They on the other side stood chiefly upon discontinuance, but urged withal, that some Rubrics in the Common-Prayer-Book seemed to make for them. So that the Question being reduced to a matter of ●act, that is to say, the Table must 〈◊〉 this way, or it must stand that way, I would fain know how any condescension might be made on either 〈…〉 to an accommodation, or what our Moderat●● would have done to at one the differences. Suppo●e him ●●tting in the Chair, the Arguments on both 〈…〉, ●nd all the Audience full of expectation 〈…〉 would carry it. The Moderator Fuller of old Me●●y-Tales then ordinary, thus resolves the business, that he had heard it commended for a great piece of wisdom in Bishop Andrews 
* 〈…〉 , That wheresoever he was a Parson, a Dean, or a Bishop, he never troubled Parish, College, or Diocese, with pressing other Ceremonies upon them, than such which he found used there before his coming thither; that King james finding the Archbishop of Spalleto in a resolution of questioning all such Leases as had been made by his 〈◊〉 in the Savoy, gave him this wise Counsel, Relinque res sicut eas invenisti, That he should leave things as he found them; 
〈…〉  that the s●id King being told by a great person of the inverted situation of a Chapel in Cambridge, 〈◊〉 answer that it did not matter how the 〈◊〉 stood so their hearts who go thither were 〈…〉 in God's service. 
〈…〉  But for his part he liked 〈◊〉 of the Resolution of Dr. Prideaux when wearied with the Businesses of the Councel-Table, and the High Commission. But as he was soon hot, so he was soon cooled. And so much is observed by Sir Edward Deering 
* Collection of Speeches, p 5.  though his greatest adversary, and the first that threw dirt in his face in the late long Parliament; who telleth us of him, that the roughness of his uncourtly Nature, sent most men discontented from him; 〈◊〉 so, that he would often (of himself) ●inde ways and means to sweeten many of them again when they least looked for it. In this more modest than our Author, who gives us nothing of this Prelate but his wants and weaknesses. But of this Reverend Prelate he will give cause to speak more hereafter. Let us now on unto another of a different judgement, his pro●est enemy Mr. Prin; of whom thus our Author.  
Fol. ●57. Mr. William Prinne was borne about Bath in Glocestershire, etc. and began with the writing of some Orthodox books.] In this story of Mr. Prinne and his sufferings, our Author runs into many errors, which either his love unto the Man, or zeal to the good cause, or carelessness of what he writes, have brought upon him.  
For first, Bath is not in Glostershire, but a chief City in the County of Somerset.  
Secondly, though I look on Mr. Prinne (so far forth as I am able to judge by some Books of his not long since published) as a man of a far more moderate spirit, than I have done formerly; yet can I not think his first Books to have been so Orthodox as our Author makes them. For not to say any thing of his Perpetuity, his Books entitled, Lame Giles his Halting; Cousins Cozening Devotions, and his Appendix to another, have many things repugnant to the Rules and Canons of the Church of England. No 〈◊〉 Champion against bowing at the name of jesus, nor greater enemy to some Ceremonies here by Law 〈◊〉. In whic● particulars i● our Author t●i●k him to be Orthodox, he declares himself to be no true Son of the Church of England.  
Thirdly, the Book called Histriomastix was not writ by Mr. Prinne about three years before his 〈…〉, as our Author telleth us, for than it must be w●it or published Anno 1634. whereas indeed that Book was published in Print about the latter end of 1632. and the Author censured in Star-chamber for some passages in i●, abou● the latter end of the year 1633. Otherwise had it been as our Author telleth us, the punishment 〈…〉 the offence, and he must suffer for ● Book which was not published at that ●ime, and perhaps not w●itten. But our Author h●th a special faculty in this kind▪ which few writer's 〈◊〉. For ●s he post-dateth this Histriomastix, by making it come into the 〈…〉 after it did; so he aunt- 〈◊〉 a Book of D●. White then Lord Bishop of Ely, which he makes to be published two yea●s sooner than indeed it w●s. Th●t book of his entitled A Treatise of the Sabbath, came no●●ut ●ill Michaelmas Anno 1635. though placed by ou● Author as then written Anno 1633. for which see fol. 144.  
Next unto Mr. Prinne, in the co●●se of his Censure, comes the Bishop of Lincoln, the 〈◊〉 whereof we have in our Author, who having left a 〈…〉 somewhat which he thinks not ●it to make known to all gives some occasion to suspect that the matter was far wo●se on the Bishop's side then perhaps it was. And therefore to prevent all further misconstructions in thi● 〈◊〉, I will lay down the story as I find it thus, viz. The Bishop's purgation depending chiefly upon the testimony of one Prideon, it happened ●hat the 〈◊〉 after▪ one Elizabeth Hea●on was delivered of a 
Hist of K. 〈…〉  base child, and laid to this Prideon. The Bishop finding his great witness charged with such a load of filth 〈…〉 would invalidate all his 〈…〉 valid, the Bishop could easily prognosticate his own ruin; therefore he bestirs himself amain, and though by order of the Justices at the public Session at Lincoln, Prideon was charged as the reputed father, the Bishop by his two Agents Powel and Owen procured that order to be suppressed, and by subornation and menacing of, & tampering with Witnesses, at length in May 10. Car. procured the child to be fathered upon one Boon, and Prideon acquit. Which le●d practices for the supportation of his Favourites credit cost the Bishop, as he confessed to Sir john Munson and others, twelve hundred pounds, so much directly, and by consequence much more. But to proceed, the cause being brought unto a censure,  
Fol. 157. Secretary Windebank motioned to degrade him; which (saith he) was lustily pronounced by a Knight and a Layman, having no precedent for the same in former ages.] But first it is not very certain that any such thing was moved by Sir Francis Windebank. A manuscript of that day's proceedings I have often seen, containing the Decree and Sentence, with the substance of every Speech then made, and amongst others, that of Sir Francis Windebank, in which I find no motion tending to a Degradation, nor any other punishment inflicted on him then Fine, Suspension, and Inprisonment, in which the residue of the Lords concurred, as we find in our Author. Secondly, it had been more strange if the Knight had not been a Layman, the Church of England not acknowledging any Order of Spiritual Knighthood. Knights in Divinity, are greater strangers in this Land, then Lay-Divines; these last being multiplied of late, even ad infinitum, the first never heard of. And thirdly, had it been so moved, and so lustily moved, as our Author makes it, the Knight and Layman might have found a precedent for it in the former ages.  
Which last clause is to be understood (as I suppose) with reference to the times since the Reformation: For in the former times many precedents of like nature might be easily found. And being understood of the times since the Reformation, it is not so infallibly true, but that one precedent of it at the least may be found amongst us. Marmaduke Middleton advanced to the Bishopric of St. David's Anno 1567. after he had sat in that See three and twenty years, was finally condemned (for many notable misdemeanours) not only to be deprived of his Bishopric, but degraded from all holy Orders. Which sentence was accordingly executed by and before the High Commissioners at Lambeth house, not only by reading it in Scriptis, but by a formal divesting of him of his Episcopal Robes and Priestly vestments 
* Whether Ceremonies used at his bringing into the Court, and his thrusting out of it. , as I have heard from a person of good credit who was present at it. And somewhat there is further in the story of this Marmaduke Middleton which concerns the Bishop now before us. Of whom our Author telleth us further, that being pressed by two Bishops and three Doctors to answer upon Oath to certain Articles which were tendered to him in the Tower; he utterly refused to do it, claiming the privilege of a Peer, fol. 159. Which Plea was also made by the said Bishop of St. David's, offering to give in his Answer to such Articles as were framed against him, on his Honour only, but refusing to do it on his Oath. Which case being brought before the Lords then sitting in Parliament, was ruled against him; it being ordered that he should answer upon Oath, as in fine he did. To this Bishop let us join his Chaplain Mr. Osbolstone, who being engaged in the same Bark with his Patron suffered shipwreck also, though not at the same time, nor on the same occasion. Censured in Star-Chamber not only to lose his Ecclesiastical Promotions, but to corporal punishments.  
Fol. 166. But this last personal penalty he escaped by going beyond Canterbury, conceived seasonably gone beyond the Seas, whilst he secretly concealed himself in London.] And he had scaped the last penalty, had he stayed at home. For though Mr. Osbolston at that time conceived the Archbishop to be his greatest enemy, yet the Archbishop was resolved to show himself his greatest friend, assuring the Author of these Papers (before any thing was known of Mr. Osbolstons supposed flight) that he would cast himself at the King's ●eet for obtaining a discharge of that corporal punishment unto which he was sentenced. Which may obtain the greater credit; First, in regard that no course was taken to stop his flight, no search made after him, nor any thing done in Order to his apprehension. And secondly, by Mr. Osbolstons readiness to do the Archbishop all good Offices in the time of his troubles, upon the knowledge which was given him (at his coming back) of such good Intentions. But of these private men enough; pass we now to the public.  

Lib. XI. Part. II.  
Containing the last 12. years of the Reign of King Charles.  
ANd now we come to the last and most unfortunate part of this King's Reign, which ended in the loss of his own life, the Ruin of the Church, and the Alteration of the Civil Government. Occasioned primarily, as my Author saith, by sending a new Liturgy to the Kirk of Scotland, for he thus proceeds.  
Fol. 160. Miseries caused from the sending of the Book of Service, or new Liturgy thither, which may sadly be termed a Rubric indeed, died with the blood of so many of both Nations slain on that occasion.] Our Author speaks this in relation to the Scottish tumults, Anno 1637. In telling of which story he runs (as commonly elsewhere) into many Errors. For first those miseries, and that bloodshed was not caused by sending the Liturgy thither, the Plot had been laid long before upon other grounds, that is to say▪ questioning of some Church Lands then in the hands of some great Persons, of which they feared a Revocation to the Crown; And secondly, the Manu-mitting of some poor subjects from the Tyranny and Vassalage which they lived under in respect of their Tithes, exacted with all cruelty and injustice by those whom they call the 〈…〉 for raising of a tumult first, a Rebellion afterwards; and this occasion they conceived they had happily gained by sending the new Liturgy thither, though ordered by their own Clergy first, as our Author tells us, at the Assembly of Aberdeen, Anno 1616. and after at Perth, Anno 1618. and fashioned for the most part by their own Bishops also. But of this there hath so much been said between the Observator and his Antagonist, that there is nothing necessary to be added to it. Secondly, there was no such matter as the passing of an Act of Revocation for the restoring of such Lands as had been aliened from the Crown in the Minority of the King Predecessors. Of which he tells us fol. 192. The King indeed did once intend the passing of such an Act, but finding what an insurrection was likely to ensue upon it, he followed the safer counsel of Sir Archibald Acheson, by whom he was advised to sue them in his Courts of Justice. Which course succeeding to his wish so terrified many of those great Persons, who had little else but such Lands to maintain their Dignities; that they never thought themselves secure, as long as the King was in a condition to demand his own. Thirdly, though it be true enough, that some Persons of Honour had been denied such higher Titles as they had desired, fol. 163. Yet was it not the denying of such Titles unto Men of Honour, which wrote these terrible effects, but the denying of an Honorary Title to a Man of no Honour. If Colonel Alexander Lesley an obscure fellow, but made rich by the spoils and plunder of Germany, had been made a Baron, when he first desired it, the rest of the Malcontents in Scotland might have had an heart, though they had no head. But the King not willing to dishonour so high a Title by conferring it on so low a person, denied the favour: which put the man into such a heat, that presently he joined himself to the faction there, drove on the Plot, and finally undertook the command o● their Armie●. Rewarded fo● which notable service with the Title of Earl of Levin by the King himself, he could not so digest the injury of the first refusal, but that he afterwards headed their Rebellions upon all occasions.  
Fol. 163. Generally they excused the King in their writings as innocent therein, but charged Archbishop La●d as the principal, and Dr. Cousins for the instrumental compiler thereof.] This is no more than we had reason to expect f●om a former passage, lib. 4. fol. 193. where our Author telleth us, that the Scottish Bishops withdrew themselves from their obedience to the See of York, in the time when George Nevil was Archbishop. And then he adds, Hence forwards no Archbishop of York meddled more with Church matters in Scotland; and happy had it been, if no Archbishop of Canterbury had since interessed himself therein. His stomach is so full of choler against this poo● Prelate, that he must needs bring up some of it above an hundred years before he was born. Hence is it that he rakes together all reports which make against him, and sets them down in rank and file in the course of this History. If Archbishop Abbot be suspended from his Jurisdiction, the blame thereof was laid on Archbishop Laud, as if not content to succeed, he endeavoured to su●plant him, fol. 128. The King sets out a Declaration about lawful sports, the reviving and enlarging of which must be put upon his account also, some strong presumptions being urged for the proof thereof, fol. 147. The 〈◊〉 of the Church to her ancient Rules and public Doctrines, must be nothing else but the enjoining of his own private practices and opinions upon other men, fol. 127. And if a Liturgy be composed for the use of Church of Scotland, who but he must be charged to be the Compiler of it? But what proofs have we for all this? Only the 〈◊〉 or his Enemies, or our Authors own 〈…〉, or some common fame. And if it once be 〈…〉 shall pass for truth; and as a truth 〈…〉 Author's History, though the greatest falsehood. 
Minut. F●el.  Tam facilis in mendaciis fides, ut quicquid famae liceat fingere, illi esset libenter audire, in my Author's language. But for the last he brings some p●oof, (he would have us think so at the least) that is to say, the words of one Bayly, a Scot, whom it concerned to make him as odious as he could, the better to comply with a Pamphlet called The Intentions of the Army; in which it was declared, that the Scots entered England with a purpose to remove the Archbishop from the King, and execute their vengeance on him. What hand Dr. Cousins had in assisting of the work, I am not able to say. But sure I am, that there was nothing done in it by the Bishops of England, but with the counsel and co-operation of their Brethren in the Church of Scotland, viz. the Archbishop of St. Andrews, the Archbishop of Glasco, the Bishop of Murray, Ross, Brechin, and Dunblane, as appears by the Book entitled Hidden Works of Darkness, etc. fol. 150, 153, 154, etc. And this our Author must needs know (but that he hath a mind to quarrel the Archbishop upon every turn) as appears plainly, 1. By his Narrative of the Design in King james his time, from the first undertaking of it by the Archbishop of St. Andrews, and the Bishop of Galloway then being▪ whose Book corrected by that King with some additions, expunctions, and accommodations, was sent back to Scotland. 2. By that unsatisfiedness which he seems to have when the project was resumed by King Charles, whether the Book by him sent into Scotland, were the same which had passed the hands of King james, or not: which he expresseth in these words, viz. In the Reign of King Charles, the project was resumed, but whether the same Book or no, God knoweth, fol. 160. If so, if God only knoweth whether it were the same or no, how dares he tell us that it was not? and if it was the same (as it may be for aught he knoweth) with what conscience can he charge the making of it upon Bishop Laud. Besides (as afterwards he telleth us fol. 163.) the Church of Scotland claimed not only to be Independent, and free as any Church in Christendom, a Sister, not a Daughter of England. And consequently the Prelates of that Church had more reason to decline the receiving of a Liturgy imposed on them or commended to them by the Primate of England, for fear of acknowledging any subordination to him; then to receive the same Liturgy here by Law established, which they might very safely borrow from their Sister Church without any such danger. But howsoever it was, the blame must fall on him who did least deserve it.  
Fol. 167. Thus none, seeing now foul weather in Scotland, could expect it fair Sunshine in England.] In this I am as little of our Author's opinion as in most things else. The Sun in England might have shined with a brighter beam, if the clouds which had been gathered together, and threatened such foul weather in Scotland, had been dispersed and scattered by the Thunder of our English Ordinance. The opportunity was well given, and well taken also, had it not been unhappily lost in the prosecution. The Scots were then weak, unprovided of all necessaries, not above three thousand complete Arms to be found amongst them: The English on the other side making a formidable appearance, gallantly Horsed, completely armed, and intermingled with the choicest of the Nobility and Gentry in all the Nation. And had the Scots been once broken, and their Country wasted (which had been the easiest thing in the world for the English Army) they had been utterly disabled from creating trouble to their King, disturbances in their own Ch●rch, and destruction to England. So true is that of the wise Historian, Conatus subditor●m irritos imperia ●●●per promovere; the Insurrections of the people when they are suppressed, do always make the King stronger, and the Subjects weaker.  
Fol. 167. The Sermon ended We chose Dr. Stewart Den of Chichester Prolocutor, and the next day of sitting We met at Westminster in the Chapel of King Henry the seventh.] Had it not been for these and some other passages of this nature, our Author might have lost the honour of being took notice of, for one of the Clerks of the Convocation; and one not of the lowest form, but passing for some of those wise men, who began to be fearful of themselves, and to be jealous of that power by which they were enabled to make new Canons. How so? Because it was feared by the judicious (himself still for one) l●st the Convocation whose power of meddling with Church matters, had been bridled up for many years before, should now enabled with such power, overact their parts, especially in such dangerous, and discontented times, as it after followeth. Wh●ly fore-seen. But then why did not WE, that is to say, our Author, and the rest of those wise and judicious Persons, fore-warn their weak and unadvised Brethren of the present danger; or rather why did they go along with the rest for company, and follow those who had before outrun the Canons by their additional Conformity? How wise the rest were I am not able to say. But certainly our Author showed himself no wiser than Walthams' Calf, who ran nine mile to suck a Bull, and came home a thirst, as the Proverb saith. His running unto Oxford, which cost him as much in seventeen weeks, as he had spent in Cambridge in seventeen years, was but a second Sally to the first Knight-Errantry.  
Fol. 168. Next day the Convocation came together, etc. when, contrary to general expectation, it was motioned, to improve the present opportunity, in perfecting the new Canons which they had begun.] I have not heard of any such motion as our Author speaks of from any who were present at that time, though I have diligently laboured to inform myself in it. Not is it probable, that any such motion should be made, as the case then stood. The Parliament had been dissolved on Tuesday, the 5 o● May. The Clergy met in Convocation on the morrow after, expecting then to be dissolved, and licenced to go home again. But contrary to that general expectation, in stead of hearing some news of his Majesties Writ for their dissolution, there came an Order from the Archbishop to the Prolocutor, to adjourn till Saturday. And this was all the business which was done that day, the Clergy generally being in no small amazement when they were required not to dissolve, till further Order. Saturday being come, what then? A new Commission saith he was brought from his Majesty, by virtue whereof WE were warranted still to sit not in the capacity of a Convocation, but of a Synod. I had thought our Author with his wise and judicious Friends had better harkened to the ●enor of that Commission, then to come out with such a gross and wild absurdity, as this is, so fit for none as Sir Edward Deering, ●nd for him only to make sport within the House of Commons. At the beginning of the Convocation, when the Prolocutor w●s admitted, the Archbishop produced his Majesty's Commission under the Great Seal, whereby the Clergy was enabled to consult, treat of, & conclude such Canons, as they conceived most expedient to the pe●ce of the Church, and his 〈◊〉 service. But this Commission being to expire with the end of the Parliament, it became void, of no effect assoon as the Parliament was dissolved. Which being made known unto the King, who was resolved the Convocation should continue, and that the Clergy should go on in completing those Canons which they had so happily began; he caused a new Commission to be sent unto them in the same words, and to the very same effect as the other was, but that it was to continue durante beneplacito only, as the other was not. It follows next that  
Ibid. Dr. Brownrig, Dr. Hacket, Dr. Holdsworth, etc. with others, to the number of thirty six, earnestly protested against the continuance of the Convocation.] It's possible enough, that Dr. Brownrig, now Lord Bishop of Excester, Dr. Hacket, and the rest of the thirty six, our Author being of the Quorum, (in his own understanding of the word) might be unsatisfied in the continuance of the Convocation, because of some offence, which as they conceived would be taken at it. But if they had protested, and protested earnestly, as our Author tells us, the noise of so many Vo●es concurring must needs be heard by all the rest which were then assembled; from none of which I can lea●n any thing of this Protestation. Or if they did protest●o ●o earnestly as he says they did, why was not the Protestation reduced into writing, subscribed wi●h their hands in due form of Law, and so delivered to the Register to remain upon Record (among● the other Acts of that House) for their indemnity? Which not being done, rendereth this Protest of theirs (if any such Protest there were) to signify nothing but their dislike of the continuance. But whereas our Author tells us, that the whole ●ouse consisted but of six score persons, it may be thought that he diminisheth the number of 〈◊〉 purpose to make his own party seem the greater. For in the lower ●ouse of Convocation for the Province of Canterbury i● all pa●ties summoned do appear, there are no fewer than two and twenty Deans, four and twenty Prebendaries, fifty four Archdeacon's, and forty four Clerk's, representing the Diocesan Clergy, amounting in the total to an hundred fo●ty four persons, whereof the thirty six Protesters (if so many they were) make the fourth part only. Howsoever all parties being not well satisfied with the lawfulness of their continuance, his Majesty was advertised of it, who upon conference with his Jud●es, and Council learned in the Laws, caused a short Writing to be d●wn and subscribed by their several hands in these following words, viz. at Whitehall, May the 10. 1640. the Convocation being called by the King's Writ, is to continue till it be dissolved by the King's Writ, notwithstanding the dissolving of the Parliament. Subscribed by Finch Lord Keeper, Manchester Lord Privy Seal, Littleton chief Justice of the Common Pleas, Banks Attorney General, Whitfield, and Heath, his Majesty's Sergeants. Which writing (an Instrument our Author calls it) being communicated to the Clergy by the Lord Archbishop on the morrow after, did so compose the minds of all men, that they went forward very cheerfully with the work in hand: the principal of those whom o●r Author calls Dissenters, bringing in the Canon o● preaching for conformity (being the eighth Canon in the Book as now they are placed) which was received and allowed of, as it came from his hand without alteration. Howsoever our Author keeps himself to his former folly, shutting up his extravagancy with this conclusion:  
Folly 169. Thus was an old Convocation converted into a new Synod.] An expression borrowed from the speech of a witty Gentleman, as he is called by the Author of the History of the Reign of King Charles, and since by him declared to be the Lord George Digby now Earl of Bristol. But he that spent most of his wit upon it, and thereby gave occasion unto others for the like mistake was Sir Edward Deering in a Speech made against these Canons, Anno 1640. where we find these flourishes, Would you confute the Convocation? They were a Holy Synod. Would you argue against the Synod? 
Collection of Spe●●●es, p 26.  Why they were Commissioners. Would you dispute the Commission? They will mingle all powers together, and answer that they were some fourth thing, that neither we know nor imagine; that is to say (as it follows afterwards▪ p. 27.) a Convocational-Synodical-Assembly of 〈◊〉 More of this fine stuff we may see hereafter. In the mean time we may judge by this Remnant of the whole Piece, and 〈◊〉 i● upon proof to be very ●light, and not worth the we●ring. For first the Gentleman could not, & our Author cannot choose but know, that a Convocation and a Synod (as 〈◊〉 in England of late times) are but the same one thing under dive●s names, the one borrowed from a Grecian, the other from a Latin Original: the Convocation of the Clergy of the Province of Canterbury being nothing but a Provincial Synod, as a National Synod is nothing el●e but the Convocation of the Clergy of both Provinces. Secondly, our Author knows by this time, that the Commission which seems to make this doughty difference, changed not the Convocation into a Synod (as some vainly think) but only made that Convocation active in order to the making of Canons, which otherwise had been able to proceed no ●urther than the grant of Subsidies. Thirdly, that nothing is more ordinary then for the Convocations of all times since the Reformation, to take unto themselves the name of Synods. For the Articles of Religion made in the Convocation, An. 1552. are called in the Title of the Book Articuli de quibus in Synodo Londinensi convenit, etc. The same name given to those agreed on in the Convocation, An. 1562. as appears by the Title of that Book also in the Latin Edition. The Canons of the year 1571. are said to be concluded and agreed upon in Synodo inchoat â Lond. in aede Divi Paul●, etc. In the year 1575. came out a Book of Articles with this title following, viz. Articles whereupon it was agreed by the most Reverend Father in God, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and other the Bishops, & the whole Clergy of the Province of Canterbury in the Convocation or Synod holden at Westminster. The like we find in the year 1597. (being the last active Convocation in Q. Elizabeth's time) in which we mee● with a Book entitled, Constitutiones Ecclesiasticae, etc. in Synodo in●heata Londini vic●simo quinto die Mensis Octobris. Our Author finally is to know, that though the members of the two Convocations of York and Canterbury did not mee● in person, yet they communicated their counsel's, the Re●ults of the one being dispatched unto the other, and there agreed on, or rejected, as they saw 〈◊〉 for it. Which laid together shows the vanity of ●●●ther passage in the Speech of Sir Edward Deering, where he vapo●reth thus, viz. A strange Commission, wherein no one Commissioners name is to be found; a 〈◊〉 Convocation, that lived when the Parliament was 〈◊〉: a strange Holy Synod, where one 〈…〉 conferred with the other. Lastly, Si● Edward Deeri●g seems to marvel at the Title of the Book of Cano●● then in question, expressing that they were treated upon in Convocation, 
〈◊〉. p. 2●.  agreed upon in Synod. And this, saith he, is a new Mould to cast Canons in never used before. But had he looked upon the 〈◊〉 of the Book of Canons, An. 160●. he h●d found it otherwise. The Title this viz. Constitutions and Canons 〈…〉 by the Bishop of London, Precedent of the Convocation for the Province of Canterbury, etc. and agreed upon with the King's Majesty's Licence in their Synod 〈◊〉 at London, An. 1603. And so much for the satisfaction of all such persons, whom either that gentleman, or this o●r Author h●ve misinformed, and consequently ab●●ed in this particular.  
Ibid. Now because great B●aies m●ve 〈…〉. it was thought fit to contract the 〈…〉 of some 26, beside the Prolocutor.] No ●●ch contracting of the Synod as our Author speaks of. There was indeed a Committee of twenty ●ix, or thereabouts appointed to consider of a Canon for uniformity in some Rites and Ceremonies, of which number were the principal of those whom he calls dissenters, and our Author too amongst the rest: who having agreed upon the Canon, it was by them presented to the rest of the Clergy in Convocation, and by them approved. And possible it is, that the drawing ●p of some other Canons might be referred also to that Committee ● as is accustomed in such cases) without contracting the whole Ho●se into that small body, or excluding any man from being present at their consultation. But whereas our Author afterwards tells us, that nothing should be accounted the Act of the House till thrice (as he takes it) publicly voted therein; It is but as he takes it, or mistakes it rather, and so let it go. But I needed not to have signified that our Author was one of this Committee, he will tell it himself. And he will tell us more than that, publishing himself for one of the thirty six Dissenters, the better to ingratiate himself with the rising side. The next day (so he lets us know) We all subscribed the Canons, suffering ourselves ● (according to the Order of such meetings) to be all concluded by the majority of votes, though some of US in the Committee privately dissented in the passing of many particulars. So then our Author was content to play the good fellow at the last, and go along hand in hand with the rest of his company; dissenting privately, but consenting publicly, which is as much as can be looked for.  
Ibid. No sooner came these Canons abroad into a public view, but various were men's censures upon them.] Not possible that in such a confusion both of Affections and Opinions, it should otherwise be. Non omnibus una voluntas, was a note of old, and will hold true as long as there are many men to have many minds. And yet if my information deceive me not, these Canons found great approbation from the mouths of some, from whom it had been least expected; particularly from Justice Crook, whose Argument in the case of Ship-money was printed afterwards by the Order of the House of Commons. Of whom I have been told by a person of great worth and credit, that having read over the Book of Canons, when it first came out, he lifted up his hands, and gave hearty thanks to Almighty God, that he had lived to see such good effects of a Con●●●●tion. It was very well, that they pleased him; but that they should please all men was not to be hoped for.  
Fol. 171. Many took exception at the hollowness of the Oath in the middle thereof, having its Bowels puffed up with a windy etc. a cheveral word, which might be stretched as men would measure it.] Of this etc. which has made so much noise in the world I shall now say nothing. Somewhat is here subjoined by our Author in 〈◊〉 thereof, the rest made up by the Observator. Only I shall make bold to ask him, why he observed not this etc. when the Oath was first under consideration; or why he signified not his dissent when it came to the vote, and showed some reasons which might move him to object against it. It had been fitter for a wise and judicious man to signify his dislike of any thing when it might be mended, then to join with others in condemning it when it was past remedy. But Mala m●ns malus animus, as the saying is. The Convocation had no ill intent in it when they passed it so, though some few, out of their perverseness and corrupt affections, were willing to put their own sense on it, and spoil an honest-meaning Text with a factious Gloss. But let us follow our Author as he leads the way, and we shall find that  
Ibid. Some Bishops were very forward in pressing this Oath even before the time thereof. For whereas a liberty was allowed to all, to deliberate thereon, until the Feast of Michael the Archangel, some presently pressed the Ministers of their Dioceses for the taking thereof.] It seems by this that our Author was so far from taking notice of any thing done in the Convocation, when the Canon for the Oath was framed, that he never so much as looked into the Canon itself, since the Book came out. He had not else dreamt of a liberty of Deliberation, till the Feast of St. Michael the Archangel, which I am sure the Canon gives not. The Synod did indeed decree, that all Archbishop, 
Canon. 7. 1640.  and Bishops, and all other Priests and Deacons, in places exempt or not exempt, should before the second day of November next ensuing, take the following Oath against all innovation of Doctrine or Discipline. By which we see, that the Oath was to be given and taken before the second of November, but no such thing as Liberty of Deliberation till the Feast of St. Michael. And therefore if some Bishops did press the Clergy of their several and respective Dioceses, assoon as they returned home from the Convocation; they might well do it by the Canon, without making any such Essay of their Activity, if providence (as our Author most wisely words it) had not prevented them. If any of the Bishops did require their Clergy to take the Oath upon their knees (as he says they did) though it be more than was directed by the Canon, yet I conceive that no wise man would scruple at it, considering the gravity and greatness of the business which he was about. But then  
Ibid. The Exception of Exceptions was, because they were generally condemned as illegally passed to the prejudice of the fundamental Liberty of the Subject, whereof we shall hear enough in the next Parliament.] Not generally condemned, either as illegally passed, or as tending to prejudice of the Subject's Rights, I am sure of that. Scarce so much as condemned by any for those respects, but by such whom it concerned (for carrying on of their Designs) to weaken the Authority of the Church, and advance their own. But because our Author tells us, that we shall find enough of this in the following Parliament, we are to follow him to that Parliament for our satisfaction. And there we find that Mr. Maynard made a Speech in the Committee of Lords against the Canons, 
Church Hist. fol 180.  made by the Bishops in the last Convocation, in which he endeavoured to prove, that the Clergy had no power to make Canons, without common consent in Parliament, because in the Saxon times Laws and Constitutions Ecclesiastical had the confirmation of Peers, and sometimes of the People, to which great Counsels our Parliaments do succeed. Which Argument if it be of force to prove, That the Clergy can make no Canons without consent of the Peers and people in Parliament; it must prove also that the Peers and People can make no Statutes without consent of the Clergy in their Convocation. My reason is, because such Counsels in the times of the Saxons were mixed Assemblies, consisting as well of Laics, as of Ecclesiastics, and the matters there concluded on of a mixed nature also; Laws being passed as commonly in them in order to the good governance of the Commonwealth, as Canons for the Regulating such things as concerned Religion. But these great Counsels of the Saxons being divided into two parts in the times ensuing, the Clergy did their work by themselves without any confirmation from the King or Parliament, till the submission of the Clergy to King Henry the eighth. And if the Parliaments did succeed in the place of those great Counsels (as he says they did) it was because that anciently the Procurators of the Clergy, not the Bishops only, had their place in Parliament, though neither Peers nor People voted in the Convocations. Which being so, it is not much to be admired that there was some checking (as is said in the second Argument) about the disuse of the general making of such Church Laws. But checking or repining at the proceeding of any superior Court makes not the Acts thereof illegal. For if it did, the Acts of Parliaments themselves would be reputed of no force, or illegally made, because the Clergy for a long time have checked (and think they have good cause to check) for thei● being excluded. Which checking of the Commons appears not only in thos● ancient Authors which the Gentleman cited, but in the Remonstrance tendered by them to King Henry the Eighth, exemplified at large in these Animadversions, lib. 3. n. 61. But because this being a Record of the Convocation, may not come within the walk of a common Lawyer, I shall put him in mind of that memorable passage in the Parliament 51. Edw. 3. which in brief was this: The Commons f●nding themselves aggrieved, as well with certain Constitutions made by the Clergy in their Synods, as with some Laws or Ordinances which were lately passed, more to the advantage of the Clergy than the common people, put in a Bill to this effect, viz. That no Act nor Ordinance should from thenceforth be made or granted on the Petition of the said Clergy, without the consent of the Commons; and that the said Commons should not be bound in times to come by any Constitutions made by the Clergy of this Realm for their own advantage, to which the Commons of this Realm had not given consent. The reason of which is this (and 'tis worth the marking;) Car eux ne veulent estre obligez a nul de vos Estatuz ne Ordinances faitz sanz leur Assent, because the said Clergy did not think themselves bound (as indeed they were not in those times) by any Statute, Act, or Ordinance, made without their Assent in the Court of Parliament. But that which could not be obtained by this checking of the Commons in the declining and last times of King Edw. 3. was in some part effected by the more vigorous prosecution of King Hen. 8. who to satisfy the desires of the Commons in this particular, and repress their checkings, obtained from the Clergy, that they should neither make nor execute any Canons without his consent, as before is said; so that the King's power of confirming Canons was grounded on the free and voluntary submission of the Clergy, and was not built, as the third Argument objecteth, on to weak a foundation as the Pope's making Canons by his sole power: the Pope not making Canons here, nor putting his Rescripts and Letters decretory in the place of Canons, but only as a remedy for some present exigency. So that the King's power in this particular not being built upon the Popes, as he said it was, it may well stand, That Kings may make Canons without consent of Parliament, though he saith they cannot. But whereas it is argued in the fourth place, that the clause in the Statute of Submission, in which it is said, that the Clergy shall not make Canons without the King's leave, doth not imply that by his leave alone they may make them; I cannot think that he delivered this for Law, and much less for Logic. For had this been looked on formerly as a piece of Law, the Parliaments would have checked at it at some time or other, and been as sensible of the King's encroachments in executing this power without them, as anciently some of them had been about the disuse of the like general consent in the making of them.  
Fol. 180. In the next place our Author tells us that Mr. Maynard endeavoured also to prove, that these Canons were against the King's Prerogative, the Rights, Liberties, and Properties of the Subject.] And he saith well, th●t it was endeavoured to be proved, and endeavoured only, nothing amounting to a proof being to be found in that which follows. It had before been voted by the House of Commons, that the Commons are against fundamental Laws of this Realm, 
Hist K Charles. fol. 208.  against the King's Prerogative, prop●●● of the Subject, the Right of Parliament, and do tend to faction and sedition; and it was fit that some endeavours should be used to make good the Vote. But this being but a general charge, requires a general answer only, and it shall be this. Before the Canons we●e subscribed, they were imparted to the King by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and by the King communicated to the Lords of the Council; who calling to them the assistance of the Judges, and some of the King's Council learned in the Laws of this Realm, caused the said Canons to be read and considered of, the King being then present. By all which upon due and mature deliberation the Canons were approved, and being so approved, were sent back to the Clergy in the Convocation, and by them subscribed. And certainly it had been strange that they should pass the approbation of the Judges and learned Lawyers, had they contained any thing against the fundamental Laws of the Land, the property of the Subject, and the Rights of Parliament; or been approved of by the Lords of his Majesty's Conncel, had any thing been contained in them derogatory to the King's Prerogative, or tending to Faction and Sedition. So that the foundation being ill laid, the superstructures and objections which are built upon it, may be easily shaken and thrown down. To the first therefore it is answered, that nothing hath been more ordinary in all former times, then for the Canons of the Church to inflict penalties on such as shall disobey them; exemplified in the late Canons of 603. many of which extend not only unto Excommunication, but even to Degradation and Irregularity, for which see Can. 38. 113. etc. To the second, That there is nothing in those Canons which determineth or limiteth the King's Authority, but much that makes for and defendeth the Right of the Subject, for which the Convocation might rather have expected thanks then censure from ensuing Parliaments. To the third, That when the Canon did declare the Government of Kings to be founded on the Law of Nature, it was not to condemn all other Governments as being unlawful, but to commend that of Kings as being the best. Nor can it Logically be inferred, that because the Kingly Government is not received in all places, that therefore it ought not so to be: or that the Government (by this Canon) should be the same in all places, and in all alike; because some Kings do and may lawfully p●t with many of 〈◊〉 Rights for the good of their Subjects, which others do 〈◊〉 may as lawfully retain unto themselves. ●o the fourth, That the Doctrine of Nonresistance is 〈…〉 the words of St. Paul, Rom. 〈…〉 condemn the Canon in that behalf, 〈…〉 Word of God upon which it is 〈…〉 fifth and last, That the Statute 〈…〉 that the days there mantione 〈…〉 day's and no other, rel●tes only to the 〈…〉 some other Festivals whi●h had been formerly 〈…〉 in the Realm of England, and not to the 〈…〉 Church from ordaining any other Holy 〈…〉 causes) in the times to come. Assuredly 〈…〉 Lawyer would have spoke more home 〈…〉 could the cause have born it. Floquent●m 〈…〉 in the Orator's language. And therefore 〈…〉 on the heads of the Arguments ●s our 〈…〉 them to us) I must needs think that they were 〈◊〉 fitted to the sense of the House, than they were 〈…〉 own.  
What influence these arguments might have on the House of Peers, when reported by the Bishop of 〈◊〉 I am not able to affirm: But ●o far I 〈…〉 our Author, that they lost neither 〈…〉 came from his mo●th, (who as our Author says) 〈◊〉 back friend to the Canons▪ because made 〈…〉 and durance in the Tower. A piece of 〈…〉 I did not look for. The power of 〈…〉 thus shaken and endangered, that of 〈…〉 and the Bishop's Courts was not 〈…〉 one being taken away by Act of 〈…〉 other much weakened in the 〈…〉 a clause in that Act, of which 〈…〉  
Fol. 182. Mr. 〈…〉 should so supinely suffer themselves to be surprised in their power.] And well might Mr. Pim triumph, as having gained the point he aimed at in subverting the coercive power, and consequently the whole exercise of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction. But he had no reason to impute it to the ●inger of God, or to the carelessness of the Bishops in suffering themselves to be so supinely surprised. For first ●e Bishops saw too plainly, that those general words by which they were disabled from inflicting any pain or penalty, would be extended to Suspension, Excommunication, and other Ecclesiastical censures. But secondly, they saw withal that the stream was too strong for them to ●ive against, most of the Lords being wrought on by the popular party in the House of Commons, to pass the Bill. Thirdly, they were not without hope, that when the Scots A●my was disbanded, and that Nation satisfied, by the King's condescensions to them, there might be such an explication made of those general words, as to restrain them unto temporal pains and civil penalties, by which the censures of the Church might remain as formerly. And fourthly, in order thereunto they had procured a Proviso to be entered in the House of Pa●s, That the general words in this Bill should extend only to the High Commission Court, and not reach other Ecclesiastical jurisdictions, for which consult our Author▪ fol. 181. ●aving thus passed over such matters as concern the Ch●●ch, we will now look upon some few things which relate to the Parliament. And the first is that  
Fol. 174. D●. Pocklington, and Dr. Bray were the tw● first that felt the displeasures of it, the former for preaching and printing, the later for licensing two Books, one cal●● Sunday no Sabb●h, the other the Christian Altar.] No other way to 〈◊〉 the hig● displea●ures of the Bishop of Lincoln, but by ●uch a Sacrifice, who therefore is entrusted to gather such Propositions out of those tw● Books as were to be recanted by the one▪ and for which the other was to be deprived of all his preferments. And in this the Bishop served his own turn, and the people's too: his own turn first in the great controversy of the Altar, in which he was so great a ●●ickle●, and in which Pocklington was thought to have provoked him to take that revenge. The People's turn he served next, in the condemning and recanting of some points about the Sabbath, though therein he ran cross to his former practice. Who had been not long since so far from tho●e Sabbatarian rigours (which now he would fain be thought to countenance) that he caused a Comedy to be acted before him at his house at Bugden, not only on a Sunday in the afternoon, but upon such a Sunday also on which he had publicly given sacred Orders both to Priest's and Deacons. And to this Comedy he invited the Earl of Manchester, and divers of the neighbouring ●entry, though on this turning of the tide, he did not only cause these Doctors to be condemned for some Opinions which formerly himself allowed of, but moved at the Assembly in jerusalem Chamber, that all Books should be publicly burnt, which had disputed the Morality of the Lords-day-Sabbath. Quo teneam nodo, etc. as the Poet hath it. But whereas our Author tells us in the following words, that soon after both the Doctors deceased for grief, I dare with some confidence tell him, there was no such matter; Dr. Pocklington living about two years, and Dr. Bray above four years after, with as great cheerfulness and courage as ever formerly. How he hath dealt with Dr. Cousin, we shall see more at large hereafter in a place by itself, the discourse thereof being too long and too full of particulars, to come within the compass of an Animadve●●on. In the mean time proceed we unto Bishop 〈◊〉 of whom thus as followeth.  
Fol. 182. A Bill was sent up by the Commons against Matthew Wren of●ly ●ly, containing 25 Articles, etc.] That such a Bill was ●●nt up from the House of Commons is undoubtedly true. And no less true it is, that many impeachments of like nature were hammered at and about the same time against many other Clergy men of good note, though in●erior Order; the Articles whereof were printed and exposed to open sale to their great disparagement. And therefore I would fain know the reason, why this man should be singled ou● amongst all the rest to stand impeached upon Record in our Author's History; especially considering that there was nothing done by the Lords in pursuance of it, the impeachment dying in a manner assoon as born. Was it because he was more criminal than the others were 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉 was better proved, or for what 〈…〉? Well, since our Author will not, I will tell you 〈◊〉. And I will tell it in the words of King 〈◊〉, in the Conference at Hampton-Court, upon occasion of a 〈…〉 exception taken by Dr. Reynolds at a passage in Ecclesi●sticus. What trow ye, said the King, makes these men so a●g●y with Eccles●●●cus? By my Sal, I think he was a Bishop● or else they would never use him so. And so much for tha●.  
Fol. 174. About this time was the first motion of a new Protestation to be taken all over England, which some months ●●ter was generally performed.] What time this was ou● A●tho● tells us in the margin, pointing to Feb. 4. about which time there was no mention of the Protestation, nor occasion for it. The first mention which was made of the Protestation was upon Monday, May the third, on which day it was mentioned, framed, and taken by all the Members of the House of Commons, excepting the Lord George Digby (now Earl of Bristol) and an Uncle of 〈◊〉. The occasion of it was a Speech made by the King in the House of Peers in favour of the Earl of 〈◊〉 upon the Saturday before; which moved them to unite themselves by this 〈…〉 bringing to condign punishment all such as ●●all either by ●orce, practice, plots, counsels, conspiracies, or otherwise do any thing to the contrary of any thing in the same Protestation contained. Which Protestation being carried into the 〈◊〉 of Peers, was after some few d●yes generally taken by that House also. But t●e prevalent party in the 〈◊〉 of Commons having f●●ther aims then such as our Author pleaseth to take notice of, first ca●s'd 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 by an Order of the fifth of May▪ that they 〈…〉 down to the Sheriffs and Justices of Peace in the several Shires; to whom the intimated, that as they 〈◊〉 the taking of it in themselves▪ so they c●uld not but approve it in all such as should take i●. But f●nding that this did not much edify with the Count●●● 〈◊〉, they desired the Lords to concur with them 〈…〉 the same. Failing thereof, by an Order of their own House only, july 30. it was declared, that the Protestation made by them was fit to be taken by every Person that was well affected in Religion, and to the good ●f the Commonwealth; and therefore what Person ●●ever 〈◊〉 not tak● the same, was unfit to bear Office in the Church or Commonwealth. Which notwithstanding many refused to take it, as our Author telleth us, not knowing b●t 〈…〉 use might be made thereof: as afterwards 〈◊〉 by those Pikes and Protestations, which cond●●●ed some of the five Members to the House of Commons.  
Fol. 183▪ About this time came forth the L●rd B●ook his Book against Bishops, accusing them in respect of their Parentage to be de faece populi, of the 〈◊〉 of the pe●ple; and in respect of their Studies no way fi● for Government, or to be Barons in Parliament:] A passage mis-be●oming no man's pen so much as his 〈…〉 whose Father neither was of a better Extraction than some, no● better le●t as in the way of his subsistence then any of the Bishops (whom he thus upbraideth) had been left by their Father's. From the first part of which calumny the Bishops freed themselves well enough, as appears by our Author. And from the second, since they were too modest to speak in their own commendations, our Author might have freed them with one of the old tales which are in his budget. And the tale is of a Nobleman in King Harry the eighths' time, 
Camd. Rem. pag. 286.  who told Mr. Pac● one of the King's Secretaries, in contempt of Learning, that it was enough for Nobleman's sons to wind their horn, and carry their Hawk fair, and to leave study and learning to the children of mean men: to whom the aforesaid Mr. Pace replied; than you and other Noblemen must be content, that your children may wind their horns, and keep their Hauks, while the children of mean men do manage matters of Estate. And certainly there can be no reason why men that have been versed in Books, studied in Histories, and thereby made acquainted with the chief occurrences of most States and Kingdoms, should not be thought as fit to manage the affairs of State, as those who spend their time in Hawking and Hunting, if not upon some worse employments. For that a Superinduction of holy Orders should prove a Supersedeas to all civil prudence, is such a wild extravagant fancy as no man of judgement can allow of.  
Fol. 188. The next day the 12 Subscribers were voted to be committed to the Tower, save that Bishop Morton of Durham, and Hall of Norwich found some favour.] Our Author speaks this of those twelve Bishops who had subscribed a Protestation for preserving their Rights and Votes in the House of Peers during the time of their involuntary absence, to which they were compelled by threats, menaces, and some open acts of violence committed on them. But in the name of one of the Bishops, who found the favour of not being sent unto the Tower, he is much mistaken; it not being Dr. Hall Bishop of Norwich, but Dr. Wright Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, who found that favour at their hands. The like Misnomer I find after, fol. 193. where he speaks of William Earl of Bath; the Earl of Bath of whom he speaks being named Henry, and not William, unless he changed his name when he succeeded in that Earldom, as I think he did not, & I am sure our Author will not say he did. As much he is mistaken also in point of time, leaving the Bishops in prison for eighteen weeks, whereas they were scarce detained there for half that time. For being committed to the Tower in the end of December, they were released by an Order of the House of Peers on the fifteenth of February, being the next day after the Bill for taking away their Votes had passed in Parliament. But then the Commons looking on them, as devested of their Right of Peerage, and consequently (as they thought) in the same rank with themselves, returned them to the Tower again▪ and having kept them there some few weeks (long enough to declare their power) discharged them upon Bail, and so sent them home.  
Fol. 195. About this time the word Malignant was 〈◊〉 born (as to common use) in England, and first as a n●te ●f disgrace on the King's Party, and (because one had had as good be dumb as not speak with the volge) possibly in that sense it may occur in our ensuing History.] Nothing more possible than that our Author should make use of any word of disgrace with which the King's party was reproached. And if he calls them formerly by the name of Royalists and High Royalists, as he sometimes 〈◊〉 it was not because he thought them worthy of no wo●●e a Title, but because the name of Malignant h●d not then been born. He cannot choose but know, that the name of Round-head was born at the same time also, and that it was as common in the King's Party to call the Parliamentarians by the name of Roundheads, as it was with those of the Parliament Party, to call the King's Adherents by the name of Malignants. And yet I 〈◊〉 〈…〉, that the word Round-head, as it was fixed as a 〈◊〉 of disgrace on the Parliament party, doth not occur, on any occasion whatsoever, in our Author's History. But kissing goes by favour, as the saying is, and therefore let him ●avour whom he pleases, and kiss where he favoureth.  
Fol. 196. By this time ten of the eleven Bishops formerly 〈◊〉 their Protestation to the Parliament, were after s●me month's durance (upon good Bail given) released, etc.] Of the releasing of these Bishops we have spoke already. We a●e now only to observe such mistakes and errors as relate unto it. And first they were not released at or about the time which our Author speaks of, that is to say, after s●ch time as the word plunder had begun to be used amongst us. Plunder both name and thing was unknown in England, till the beginning of the war; and the war began not till September, Anno 1642. which was some months after the releasing of the Bishops. Secondly, he telleth us, that ten of the eleven which had subscribed, were released, whereas the●e were twelve which had subscribed, as appears fol. 187. whereof ten were sent unto the Tower, and the other two committed to the custody of the Black-Rod, f●l. 188. And if ten only were released, the other two must be kept in custody for a longer time: whereas we find the Bishop of Norwich at home in his Diocese, and the Bishop of Durham at liberty in London; they being the two whom he makes so far favoured by the Parliament, as they s●apt the Tower. Thirdly, he telleth us, that when all others were released, Bishop Wren 〈…〉 detained in the Tower, which is nothing so. That Bishop was released upon bail when the other were, returned into his 〈◊〉 as the othe●s did, and there continued for a time, when on a sudden he was snatched 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 at 〈◊〉 in the Isle of Ely, carried 〈◊〉 the Tower, and there imprisoned, never being brought unto a hearing, nor any cause shown 〈◊〉 his imprisonment to this very day. Fourthly, Archbishop Williams after his restoring unto liberty went not into the King's Quarters, as our Author saith, but unto one of his own houses in Yorkshire, where he continued till the year 1643. and then came to Ox●●rd: not that he found the North too cold for him, o● the 〈◊〉, but to solicit for renewing of his C●mm●ndam in the Deanery of Westminster, the time for which he w●s to hold it drawing towards an end.  
Fol. 196. Some of the aged Bishops had their tongues so used to the language of a third Estate, that more than once they ran on that (reputed) Rock in their spe●ches, for which they were publicly s●en●, and enjoined an acknowledgement of their mistake.] By whom they were so publicly shent, and who they were th●t so ingenrously acknowledged their mistake, as my Author telleth us not, so neither can I say whether it be 〈◊〉 or false. But I must needs say, that there was small ingenuity in acknowledging a mistake in that wherein they 〈◊〉 not been mistaken; or by endeavouring to avoid a reputed Rock, to run themselves on a certain Rock, even the Rock of scandal. For that the English Bishops had their vote in Parliament as a third 〈◊〉, and not in the capacity of temporal Barons, will evidently appear by these reasons following. For first the Clegy in all other Christian Kingdoms of the●e North-west p●rts make the third Estate; that is to say, in the Germane Empire, as appears by Thuanus the Historian, lib. 2. In France, as is affirmed by Paulus Aemilius, lib. 9 in Spain, as testifieth Bodinus in his De Bepub. lib. 3. Fo● which consult also the General History of Spain, as in point of practice, lib. 9, 10, 11, 14. In H●ng●ry, as witnesseth Bonfinius, Dec. 2. l. 1. In 〈…〉 by Thuanus also, lib. 56. In Denmark● as 〈◊〉 telleth us in Historia 〈…〉 observing anciently the same form and order of Government as was used by the Danes. The like we find in Camden for the Realm of Scotland, in which anciently the Lords Spiritual, viz. Bishops, Abbots, Priors, made the third Estate. And certainly it were very strange, if the Bishops and other Prelates in the Realm of England, being a great and powerful body, should move in a lower Sphere in England, than they do elsewhere. But secondly, not to stand only upon probable inferences, we find first in the History of Titus Livius, touching the Reign and Acts of King Henry the fifth, that when his Funerals were ended, the three Estates of the Realm of England did assemble together, and declared his Son King Henry the sixth, being an Infant of eight months old, to be their Sovereign Lord as his Heir and Successor. And if the Lords Spiritual did not then make the third Estate, I would know who did. Secondly, the Petition tendered to Richard Duke of Gloucester, to accept the Crown, occurring in the Parliament Rolls, runs in the name of the three Estates of the Realm, that is to say, The Lords Spiritual, and Temporal, and the Commons thereof. Thirdly, in the first Parliament of the said Richard lately Crowned King, it is said expressly, that at the request and by the consent of the three Estates of this Realm, that is to say, the Lords Spiritual, and Temporal, and Commons of this Land assembled in this present Parliament, and by Authority of the same it be pronounced, decreed, and declared, That our said Sovereign Lord the King, was, and is the very and undoubted King of this Realm of England, etc. Fourthly, it is acknowledged so in the Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 3. where the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in that Parliament assembled, being said expressly, and in terminis, to represent the three Estates of this Realm of England, did recognize the Queen's Majesty to be their true, lawful and undoubted Sovereign Liege Lady, and Queen. Add unto these the Testimony of Sir Edward Cook, though a private person, who in his Book of the Jurisdiction of Courts (published by order of the long Parliament) chap. 1. doth expressly say; That the Parliament consists of the Head and Body; that the Head is the King, that the Body are the three Estates, viz. the Lords Spiritual, and Temporal, and Commons. In which words we have not only the opinion and testimony of that learned Lawyer, but the Authority o● the long Parliament also, though against itself. Tho●e aged Bishops had been but little studied in their own concernments, and betrayed their Rights, if any of them did acknowledge any such mistake in challenging to themselves the name and privileges of the third 〈◊〉.  
Fol. 196. The Convocation now not sitting● and matters of Religion being brought under the cognizance of the Parliament, their Wisdoms adjudged it not only convenient, but necessary, that some prime Clergy men might be consulted with.] It seems then, that the setting up o● the new Assembly, consisting of certain Lords and Gentlemen, and two or more Divine● out of every County, must be ascribed to the not sitting of the Convocation. Whereas if that had been the rea●on, the Convocation should have been first wa●ned to reassemble, with liberty and safe conducts given them to attend that service, and freedom to debate such matters as conduced to the Peace of the Church. If on those terms they had not met, the substituting of the new Assembly might have had some ground: though being called and nominated as they were by the Ho●se of Commons, nothing they did could bind the Clergy, further than as they were compellable by the power of the sword. But the truth is, the Convocation was not held fit to be trusted in the present Designs; there being no hope that they would 〈…〉 change of the Government, or to the abrogating of the Liturgy of the Church of England, in all which the Divines of their own nomination were presumed to serve them. And so accordingly they did, advancing their Presbyteries in the place of Episcopacy, their Directory in the room of the Common Prayer Book, their Confession to the quality of the Book of Articles: all of them so short lived, of so little continuance, that none of them past over their Probationers year. Finally having se●v'd the turn, amused the world, with doing nothing, they made their Exit, with far fewer Plaudites than they expected at their entrance. In the Recital of whose names, our Author craves pardon for omitting the greatest part of them, as unknown to him: whereas he might have found them all in the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons by which they were called and impowered to be an Assembly. Of which pardon he afterwards presumes in case he hath not marshaled them in their Seniority; because saith he  
Fol. 198. It ●avours something of a Prelatical Spirit to be offended about Precedency.] I ●ee our Author is no Changeling, Primus ad extremum similis sibi, the very same at last as he was at the first. Certainly if it ●avour of a Prelatical Spirit to contend about Precedencies, that Spirit by some Pythagorean Metempsychosis hath passed into the bodies of the Presbyterians, whose pride had swelled them in conceit above Kings and Princes. Nothing more positive than that of Travers (one of our Authors shining Lights, for so he calls him, Lib. 9 fol. 218.) in his Book of Discipline; Huic Discipline omnes Principes submittere Fasces suos necesse est, as his words there are. Nothing more proud and arrogant then that of the Presbyterians in Queen Elizabeth's time, 
R●g in Praef. to the Artic.  who used frequently to say, That King and Queens must lay down their Sceptres, and lick up the very dust of the Churrches feet, that is, their own. And this, I trow, doth not savour so much of a Prelatical as a Papal Spirit. Diogenes the Cynic affecting a vainglorious poverty, came into Plato's Chamber, and trampled the Bed and other furniture thereof under his feet, using these words: Calco Platonis fastum, that he trampled on the pride of Plato. To which Plato very gravely answered, Sed majori fastu, intimating that the Cynic showed more pride in that foolish action, than all the Ornaments of his Chamber could accuse him of. Our Author need not travel far for the application, it comes home unto him.  
Fol. 203. We listen not to their fancy who have reckoned the words in the Covenant, six hundred sixty six, etc.] I must confess myself not to be so much a Pythagorean, as to ●●nde Divinity in Numbers, nor am taken with such Mysteries as some fancy in them. And yet I cannot choose but say, that the Number of Six hundred sixty six words, neither more nor less, which are found in the Covenant, though they conclude nothing, yet they signify something. Our Author cannot choose but know what pains were taken even in the times of Irenaeus to find out Antichrist by this number: Some thinking then that they had found it in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with reference to the▪ persecuting Roman Emperors. Some Protestants think that they had found it in a Dedication to Pope Paul the fifth, which was Paulo V to Vice-Deo; the numeral letters whereof, that is to say D. C. L. V. V. V. I. amount exactly unto six hundred sixty six, which is the Number of the Beast in Revelation. The Papists on the other side find it in the name of Luther, but in what language or how spelled, I remember not. And therefore whosoever he was, which made this Observation upon the Covenant, he deserves more to be commended for his wit, then condemned for his idleness. But much less is our Author pleased with their parallel, who finding this Covenant to consist of six branches, compare it to the terrible Statute of the six Articles made by Harry the eighth. And not compared so without cause. For though I cannot say, that the Ordinance which enjoined the Covenant did draw so much blood from the poor Protestants as that Statute did; yet I may warrantably say, that there were mo●e Families undone by the one, then lives lost by the other. And secondly, it may be said (I fear too truly) that though the Covenant were writ in ink, it was sealed with blood; many thousands of true English Protestants having lost their lives by the coming in of the Scottish Armies drawn into England, in pursuance of this Band or Covenant. So that the Lashes of each Whip being equal in number, o●r Author hath no reason to be displeased with them that made that Parallel, though he may have some reason to himself not to applaud them.  
Fol. 207. Now began the great and general purgation of the Clergy in the Parliaments Quarters, etc. Some of whose offences were so foul, it is a shame to report them, crying to justice for punishment.] And it was time that such a purgation should be made, if their offences were so foul as our Author makes them. But first our Author might have done well to have satisfied himself in all particulars before he raised so foul a scandal on his Christian Brethren, and not to have taken them up upon hearsay, or on no better grounds than the credit of the first Century, which he after mentions. Which modesty he might have learned, 1. From the Author of that scandalous and infamous Pamphlet (whatsoever he was) desisting from the writing of a second Century, as being sensible, that the Subject was generally odious. And certainly if it were odious in that party to write the same, it must be much more odious in our Author to defend the writing. He might have learned it 2. from the most excellent Master in the Schools of Piety and Morality which this Age hath given us, even the King himself; who as our Author telleth us, fol. 208. would not give way that any such Book should be w●itten of the vicious lives of some Parliament Ministers, when such an undertaking was presented to him. But if their Offences were so foul, the Writer of the Century had some reason for what he did, and our Author hath some reason for what he saith, especially if the putting in of one Herb had not spoiled all the Pot of Pottage. But first, Qui alterum incusat probri seipsum intueri oportet, is a good rule in the Schools of Prudence, and therefore it concerns our Author to be sure of this, that all things be well at home, both in his own Person and in his Family, before he throw so much foul dirt in the face of his Brethren. In which respect Manutius was conceived to be the unfittest man in Rome (as indeed he was) to perform the Office of a Censor, though most ambitiously he affected and attained that Dignity; of whom it is affirmed by Velleius Paterculus, Nec quicquam ob●icere po●uit Adolescentibus quod non agnosceret Senex, that is to say, that he was able to object no crime to the younger sort, of which himself being then well in years, was not also guilty. And secondly, Non temere de fratre mali aliquid credendum esse, was anciently a Rule in the Schools of Charity; which our Author either hath forgotten, or else never learned. He would otherwise have examined the Proofs, before he had pronounced the Sentence; and not have positively condemned these poor men for such foul offences as cried to justice for punishment; and of such scandalous enormities, as were not fit to be covered with the Mantle of Charity. But he takes himself up at last with a doubt, that there might want sufficient proof to convict them of it. Nothing (saith he) can be said in their excuse, if (what was the main matter 〈◊〉 crimes were sufficiently proved. And if they were not sufficiently proved, as indeed they were not, (no witness coming in upon Oath to make good the Charge) our Author hath sufficiently proved himself an unrighteous judge, an Accusator fratrum, as we know who is, in accusing and condemning them for scandalous enormities and foul offences, branding them by the name of Baal, and calling them unsavoury Salt, not fit to be thrown upon the dunghill, yet all this while to be unsatisfied in the sufficiency of the proof. Decedis ab Officio Religiosi judicis, 
Minut. Fael.  is the least than can be said here, and I say no more. Only I note, what sport was made by that Century then, and may be made hereafter of this part of the History in the Court of Rome; to which the libellous Pamphlets of Martin-Mar-Prelate published in Queen Elizabeth's time served for Authentic Witnesses, and sufficient evidence to disgrace this Church. Nor have they spared to look upon this whole business as an act of divine Retaliation in turning so many of the Regular and Orthodox Clergy out of their Benefices and Preferments by our new Reformers, under colour of some Scandalous Enormities by them committed; under pretence whereof so many poor Monks and Friars were (as they say) turned ou● of their Cells with like inhumanity by those which had the first hammering of the Reformation here by law established.  
But to say truth, it is no wonder if he concur with othe●s in the condemnation of particular persons, since he concurs with others in the condemnation of the Ch●rch itself. For speaking of the separation made by Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Nye, etc. fol. 209. he professeth, that he rather doth believe, that the sinful corruptions of the worship and government of this Church taking hold on their consciences, and their inability to comport any longer therewith, was rather the true cause of their deserting of their Country; then that it was for Debt, or Dangers as Mr. Edward's in his Book of his had suggested of them. What grounds Mr. Edward's had for his suggestion, I inquire not now; though coming from the P●n of one who was no friend unto the Government and Liturgy of the Church of England, it might have met with greater credit in our Author. For if these men be not allowed for witnesses against one another, the Church would be in worse condition than the ancient Borderers: Amongst whom though the testimony of an English man against a Scot, or of a Scot against the English (in matters of spoil and depredation) could not find admittance; yet a Scots evidence against a Scot was beyond exception. Lege inter Limitaneos cautum, ut nullus nisi Anglus in Anglum, 
Annal Eliz.  nullus nisi Scotus in Scotum testis admittatur, as we read in Camden. We see by this, as by other passages, which way our Author's Bowl is biased, how constantly he declares himself in favour of those, who have either separated from the Church, or appeared against it. Rather than such good people shall be thought to forsake the Land for Debt or Danger, the Church shall be accused for laying the heavy burden of Conformity upon their Consciences, which neither they, nor their forefathers (the old English Puritan) were resolved to bear. For what else were those sinful Corruptions of this Church in Government and Worship, which laid hold of their Consciences, (as our Author words it) but the Government of the Church by Bishops, the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church here by law established; which yet must be allowed of by our Author as the more true and real cause of their Separation, then that which we find in Mr. Edward's. Nor can our Author save himself by his parenthesis, in which he tells us, that he uses their language only; for using it without check or censure, he makes it his own as well as theirs, and justifies them in the action, which he should have condemned.  
Fol. 214. Here Mr. Christopher Love gave great offence to the Royalists in his Sermon, showing the impossibility of an Agreement, etc.] This happened at the Treaty at Uxbridge, where he had thrust himself (as the Commissioners affirmed) upon that attendance. And for the words at which the offence was taken, they were these, viz. That the King's Commissioners came with Hearts full of blood, 
Treaty at Vxb●idge, p. 31.  and that there was as great distance between that Treaty and Peace, as between Heaven and Hell. For which, though some condemn him for want of charity, and others for want of discretion; yet our Author seems more willing to have men's censures fall lightly on him, because since he hath suffered, and so salified here for his faults in this, or any other kind. This Rule I both approve, and am willing to practise, and could wish our Author were so minded; who will not let the Archbishop of Canterbury be at rest in his grave after all his sufferings, notwithstanding the great difference between the persons, and the impulsives to their deaths. But Mr. Love was Mr. Love, and Bishop Laud was but a Bishop, to whom now we come.  
Fol. 216. As appears by his own Diary, which if evidence against him for his faults, may be used as a witness of his good works.] The Diary which our Author speaks of, was the Archbishop's practical Commentary on those words of David, viz. Teach me O Lord so to number my days, that I may apply my heart unto wisdom. No memorable passage happened in the whole course of his life, till the end of May, 1633. (when his Papers were seized on by Mr. Prin) which he had not booked in a Memorial by the way of a Diary or Journal. Out of which, though Mr. Prin excerpted nothing but that which he conceived might tend most visibly to his disgrace and disadvantage, and published it to that end in p●int; yet when it came to the perusal of equal and indifferent men, it was so far from serving as an evidence of his faults, (as our Author words it) that it showed him to be a Man of Exemplary Piety in himself, unmoved fidelity to his friend, of most perfect loyalty to his Master, and honest affections to the Public. He that shall look upon the list of the things projected to be done, and in part done, by him, fol. 28, 29. will find, that both his heart was set on, and his hand engaged in many excellent pieces of work, tending to the great honour and benefit both of Church and State; not incident to a man of such narrow comprehensions, as some of his professed Enemies were pleased to make him. Certain I am, that as Mr. Prin lost his end, so he could not get much thanks for that piece of service.  
Fol. 217. He is generally charged with Popish inclinations, and the story is commonly told and believed of a Lady, etc.] Here is a charge of the Archbishop's inclination unto Popery, and the proof nothing but a tale, and the tale of a Lady, Quid vento? Mulier; Quid Muliere? Nihil. The substance of the tale is this, that a certain Lady (if any Lady may be certain) who turning Papist, was asked by the Archbishop the cause of her changing; to which she answered, that it was because she always hated to go in a crowd. And being asked the meaning of that expression, she replied again, that she perceived his Lordship, and many others making haste to Rome, and therefore to prevent going in a press, she had gone before them. Whether this tale be true or false, though he doth not know, yet he resolves to set it down, and to set it down also with this Item, that it was generally believed. Be it so for once. For not being able to disprove it, I shall quit our Author with one story, and satisfy the equal Reader with another. First for my Author, I have hea●d a tale of a Lady too, to whose Table one Mr. Fuller was a welcome though a frequent guest; and being asked once by her whether he would please to eat the wing of a Woodcock, he would needs put her to the question, how her Ladyship knew it was a Woodcock, and not a Woodhen. And this he pressed with such a troublesome importunity, that at last the Lady answered with some show of displeasure, that the woodcock was Fuller headed, Fuller breasted, Fuller thighed, and in a word, every way Full●r. Whether this tale be true or false, I am not able to s●y; but being generally believed▪ I have set it down also.  
B●t my other story is more serious, intended for the satisfaction of our Author, and the Reader both. It was in Nobember, Anno 1639. that I received a message from the Lord Archbishop, to attend him the next day at two of the clock in the afternoon. The Key being tu●n'd which opened the way into his Study, I found him sitting in a chair, holding a paper in both hands, and his eyes so fixed upon that paper, that he observed me not at my coming in. Finding him in that posture, I thought it fit and manners to retire again. But the noise I made by my retreat, bringing him back unto himself, he recalled me again, and told me after some short pause, that he well remembered that he had sent for me, but could not tell for his life what it was about. After which he was pleased to say (no● without tears standing in his eyes) that he had then newly received a letter acquainting him with a Revolt of a Person of some Quality in North-Wales, to the Church of Rome; that he knew that the increase of Popery by such frequent Revolts, would be imputed unto him, and his Brethren the Bishops, who were all le●st guilty of the same; that for his part he had done his utmost, so far forth as it might consist with the Rules of Prudence, and the Preservation of the Church to suppress that party, and to bring the chief sticklers in it to condign punishment, to the truth whereof (lifting up his wet eyes to Heaven) he took God to witness; conjuring me (as I would answer it to God at the day of Judgement) that if ever I came to any of those places, which he, and his Brethren by reason of their great age were not like to hold long, I would employ all such abilities as God had given me in suppressing that party, who by their open undertaking, and secret practices were like to be the ruin● of this flourishing Church. After some words of mine upon that occasion, I found some argument to divert him from those sad remembrances, and having brought him to some reasonable composedness, I took leave for the present; and some two or three days after waiting on him again, he then told me the reason of his sending for me the time before. And this I deliver for a truth on the faith of a Christian; which I hope will overbalance any Evidence which hath been brought to prove such Popish inclinations, as he stands generally charged with in our Author's History.  
Fol. 217. However most apparent it is by many passages in his life, that he endeavoured to take up many controversies betwixt us and the Church of Rome.] And this indeed is Novum Crimen, that is to say, a crime of a new stamp, never coined before. I thought, that when our Saviour said Beati Pacifici, it had been sufficient war●ant unto any man to endeavour Peace, to build up the breached in the Church, and to make jerusalem like a City which is at Unity in itself; especially where it may be done not only salva charitare, without breach of charity, but saluâ fide too, without wrong to the faith. The greatest part of the Controversies betwixt us and the Church of Rome, not being in the Fundamentals, o● in any Essential Points in the Christian Religion; I cannot otherwise look upon it, but as a most Christian pious work, to endeavour an atonement in the S●perstructures. But hereof our Author seems to doubt, first whether 〈◊〉 endeavours to agree and compose the differences be lawful or not; and secondly, whether they be possible. As for the lawfulness thereof, I could never see any reason produced against it, nor so much as any question made of it till I found it here: against the possibility thereof, it hath been objected, that such, and so great is the pride of the Church of Rome, that they will condescend to nothing. And therefore if any such composition or agreement be made, it must not be by their meeting us, but our going to them. But as our Author says, that many of the Archbishops equals adjudged that design of his to be impossible; so I may say (without making any such odious Comparisons) that many of our Author's betters have thought otherwise of it. It was the petulancy of the Puritans on the one side, and the pragmaticalness of the jesuits on the other side, which made the breach wider than it was at the first; and had those hot spirits on both sides been charmed a while, moderate men might possibly have agreed on such equal terms, as would have said a sure Foundation for the Peace of Christendom. Now that all those in the Church of Rome are not so stiffly wedded to their own opinions as our Author makes them, appears, first by the testimony of the Archbishop of Spalleto declaring in the High Commission a little before his going hence, that he acknowledged the Articles of this Church to be true, or profitable at the least, and none of them Heretical. It appears secondly, by a Tractate of Franciscus de Sancta Clara (as he calls himself) in which he putteth such a gloss upon the nine and thirty Articles of the Church of England, as rendereth them not inconsistent with the Doctrines of the Church of Rome. And if without prejudice to the truth, the Controversies might have been composed, it is most probable, that other Protestant Churches would have sued by their Agents to be included in the Peace: if not, the Church of England had lost nothing by it, as being hated by the Calvinists, and not loved by the Lutherans.  
But our Author will not here desist (so soon hath he forgotten his own rule made in the case of Mr. Love) and therefore mustereth up his faults, viz. 1. Passion, though an human frailty. 2. His severity to his predecessor, easing him before his time, and against his will, of his jurisdiction. 3. His over-medling in State-matters. 4. His imposing of the Scottish Liturgy. Of all which we have spoke so much upon other occasions, that is to say, num. 246. 251. 289. 259. and therefore do not count it necessary to add any thing here. And so I leave him to his rest, in the Bosom of Abraham, in the land of th● Living.  
From the Archbishop of Canterbury, I should proceed to Dr. Williams, Archbishop of York; but that I must first remove a Block which lies in my way. Our Author having told us of the making and printing the Directory, is not content to let us see the cold entertainment which it found when it came abroad, but let● us see it in such terms as we did not look for.  
Fol. 222. Such (saith he) was, call it constancy, or obstinacy, love, or doting, of the generality of the Nation, on the Common Prayer, that the Parliament found it fit, yea necessary, to back their former Ordinance with a second. Assuredly the generality of the people of England is much beholding to our Author, for making question, whether their adhering to the Liturgy then by Law established, were not to be imputed rather unto obstinacy and doting, then to love and constancy. The Liturgy had been looked on as a great blessing of God upon this Nation by the generality of the people, for the sp●ce of fourscore years and upwards, they found it established by the Law, sealed by the blood of those that made it, confirmed by many godly and religious Princes; and had almost no other form of making their ordinary addresses to Almighty God, but what was taught them in the Book of Common-Prayer. And could any discreet man think, or wise man hope, that a form of Prayer so universally received, and so much esteemed, could be laid by without reluctancy in those who had been so long accustomed to it, or called obstinacy or doting in them, if they did not presently submit to every new nothing, which in the name of the then disputable Authority should be laid before them. And though our Author doth profess, that in the agitating of this Controversy pro and con, he will reserve his private opinion to himself; yet he discovers it too plainly in the present passage. Quid verba audiam, cum facta videam? is a good rule here. He must needs show his private opinion in this point, say he what he can; who makes a question, whether the adhesion of the people generally to the public Liturgy, were built on obstinacy and doting, or on love and constancy. But if it must be obstinacy or doting in the generality of the people to adhere so cordially unto the Book of Common-Prayer, I marvel what it must be called in Stephen Marshal of Essex (that great Bell-wether for a time of the Presbyterians) who having had a chief hand in compiling the Directory, did notwithstanding marry his own Daughter by the form prescribed in the Common-Prayer Book; and having so done, paid down five pound immediately to the Churchwardens of the Parish, as the fine or forfeiture for using any other form of Marriage, then that of the Directory. The like to which (I have credibly been informed) was done by Mr. Knightly of Fawsley, on the like occasion, and probably by many others of the same strain also. With like favour he beholds the two Universities as he d●e; the Liturgy, and hard it is to say, which he injureth most. And first beginning with Oxford, he lets us know, that  
Fol. 231. Lately certain Delegates from the University of Oxford, pleaded their privileges before the Committee of Parliament, that they were only visitable by the King, and such who should be deputed by him. But their Allegations were not of proof against the Paramount power of Parliament, the rather because a passage in an Article at the rendition of Oxford, was urged against them, wherein they were subjected to such a Visitation.] Our Author here subjects the University of Oxford to the power of the Parliament, and that not only in regard of that Paramount power, which he ascribes unto the Parliament, that is to say, the two Houses of Parliament (for so we are to understand him) above all Estates; but also in regard of an Article concerning the surrendry of Oxford, by which that University was subjected to such Visitations. I find indeed, that it was agreed on by the Commissioners on both sides touching the Surrendry of that City; That the Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxon, and the Governors and Students of Christ-Church of King H. 8. his Foundation, and all other Heads and Governors, 
Artic. 13.  Masters, Fellows, and Scholars of the Colleges, Halls, and Bodies Corporate, and Societies of the same University, and the publi●●● Professors and Readers, and the Orator thereo●, and all other persons belonging to the said University, or to any Colleges or Halls therein, shall and may, according to their Statutes, Charters and Customs, enjoy their ancient form of government, subordinate to the immediate Authority and power of Parliament. But I find not, that any of the Heads or Delegates of that University were present at the making of this Article, or consented ●o it, or tho●ght themselves obliged by any thing contained in it. Nor indeed could it stand with reason, that they should wave the patronage of a gracious Sovereign, who had been a Nursing Father to them, and put themselves under the arbitrary power of those who they knew minded nothing but destruction toward them. And that the University did not think itself obliged by any thing contained in that Article, appears even by our Author himself, who tells us in this very passage, that the Delegates from the University pleaded their privileges before the Committee of Parliament, that they were only visitable by the King, and such as should be deputed by him; which certainly they had never done (unless our Author will conclude them to be fools or madmen) had they before submitted to that Paramount power, which he adscribes unto the Houses. Nor did the Houses of Parliament find themselves impowered by this clause of the Article, to obtrude any such Visitation on them. And therefore when the Delegates had pleaded, and proved their privileges, a Commission for a Visitation was issued by the two Houses of Parliament in the name of the King, but under the new broad Seal which themselves had made; which notwithstanding, the University stood still on their own defence, in regard that though the King's name was used in that Commission, yet they knew well, that he had never given his consent unto it. Whereupon followed that great alteration both 〈◊〉 the Heads and Members of most Colleges which our Author speaks of.  
Nor deals he much more candidly in relating the proceedings of the Visitation, which was made in Cambridge; the Visitors whereof (as acting by the Paramount power of Parliament) he more sensibly favoureth, than the poor sufferers, or malignant members, as he calls them, of that University. For whereas the Author of the Book called Querela Cantabrigionsis, hath told us of an Oath of Discovery, obtruded by the Visitors upon several persons, whereby they were sworn to detect one another, 
Hist. of Cam, fol. 168.  even their dearest friends; Our Author who was out of the storm, seeming not satisfied in the truth of this relation, must write to Mr. Ash, who was one of those Visitors, to be informed in that which he knew before; and on the reading of Mr. Ash his Answer, declares expressly, that no such Oath was tendered by him to that University. But first, Mr. Ash doth not absolutely deny, that there was any such Oath, but that he was a stranger to it, and possibly he might be so far a stranger to it, as not to be an Actor in that part of the Tragedy. Secondly, Mr. Ash only saith, that he cannot call to mind, that any such thing was moved by the Earl of Manchester; and yet I ●row, such a thing might be moved by the Earl of Manchester, though Mr. Ash after so many years was willing not to call it to mind, or else if no such Oath was tendered by him, as our Author is assured there was not, that part of the Tragedy might be acted by Mr. Good the other Chaplain, without communicating his Instructions to his fellow Visitor. And therefore thirdly, I would know why Mr. Good was not writ to also, that having from him the like Certificate, our Author might have had the better grounds for his unbelief, before he had pronounced so positively against the Author of that Querela. Fourthly, and finally, it is not easy to be thought, that the Author of that Book should have vented s●ch a manifest falsehood, especially in a matter so derogatory to all Christian charity, and that neither the Earl of Manchester, nor either of his two Chaplains, or any friend of theirs, should in the space of ten years and more, endeavour to wipe off such an odious imputation, till our Author out of pure zeal to the Paramount power, played the Advocate in it.  
But to return again to Oxford, one of the first effects which followed on the alteration before remembered (though mentioned by our Author in another place) was the risling of the Treasury in Magdalen College, of which he tells us, lib. 9 fol. 234. That a considerable sum of gold, being by Dr. Humphrey (who had been Master of that College) left in a Chest, not to be opened, except some great necessity urged thereunto, was lately shared between Dr. Wilkinson (who then held the place of Precedent by the power of the Visitors) and the Fellows there. But first our Author is mistaken in Dr. Humphrey, though he be willing to entitle him (whom he calls a moderate Nonconformist) to some benefaction. The sum there found amounted to above twelve hundred double Pistolets, the old Doctor having no fewer than one hundred for his part of the spoil, and every Fellow thirty a piece for theirs; each Pistolet exchanged at sixteen shillings six pence, and yet the Exchanger got well by the bargain too. Too great a sum for Dr. Humphrey, who had many children, and no provident woman to his wife, to leave behind him to the College, had he been so minded. The money (as the Tradition went in that College) was left there by the Founder, to remedy and repair such ruins as either the casualty of fire, or the ravages of a Civil war might bring upon it; to which the nature of the Coin being all French pieces (remember that the English at that time were Masters of a great part of France) gives a further testimony. Secondly, I would have our Author observe, that those whom he accuseth of this act of Rapine, were neither high Royalists, nor Covetous Conformists, as we know who words it, but men agreeable to the times, and of the same temper and affections which himself is of, the Conformists never being so covetous as to cast an eye tow●r●s it, nor the high Royalists so ignoble in their greatest extremities, as to lay hands on it. And thirdly, I must needs charge our Author with some partiality in aggravating this fact (which indeed cannot be excused) with so many circumstances, and passing over the like at Cambridge, as a thing incredible; I cannot believe, saith he, Hist. Camb. fol. 38. what I have read in the Querela Cantabrigiensis, That three or four hundred pounds worth of Timber brought to Clare-hall for the repair of that House, was lately taken away; that is to say, inverted to the use of some private persons, whom our Author hath befriended with this incredulity. Nay so extremely favourable he is to his friends in Cambridge, as to pro●ess, that had he seen it, he would n●t have believed his own eyes; which is the highest point of partiality, and most invincible unbelief that I ever met with. There remains nothing now to conclude these Animadversions, but some passages relating to Archbishop Williams: in which I must confess myself not willing to meedle, but that I think it is as much against the Rule of distributive Justice to give one man to much, as to give another man too little. Let us see therefore what he saith of this Prelate, and how far he saith truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And first saith he,  
Fol. 227. He sueth to the Parliament for favour, and obtained it, whose●General in a manner he becomes in laying siege to the Town and Castle of Abercon-way, etc.] This is the truth, but whether it be the whole truth, o● not, I do more than doubt. His suing for and obtaining pardon from the Parliament, precedeth in the order o● time, his being their General; and therefore it is not to be thought, but that he had done some special service to the Parliament to prepare the way for such a favour. Before his commitment to the Tower about the Bishop's Protestation, he was grown as odious to the Commons, as before he had been honoured by them. He had lived some time with the King at Oxford, and is said to have done him good services in Wales; and (which is most) he had a fair temporal Estate, able to yield some thousands of pounds for Composition in Goldsmiths-hall. So that there must be somewhat in it more than ordinary, which occasioned that he neither came under Fine nor Ransom, as the rest of the King's Party did. But what that was, whether he served them with intelligence when he was at Oxford, or by inhibiting his Tenants and neighbours to pay their accustomed Taxes to the King's Forces when he lived in Wales, I determine not. Certain it is, that before his redintegration with them, he had been in a manner besieged in his House of Penrin by the Lord Byron, for the prohibiting of sending in such provisions as had been required; and that observing with what carelessness the King's Soldiers did attend that service, he caused a sally to be made out of the House, and slew many of them. Upon the merit of which service, and the promise of greater, it is no wonder if such Ministers and Solicitors of his as were employed in that business, compounded for him without fine, though not without money. That which our Author tells us of his being their General, seems to have been fore-signified some five or six years before the siege of Conway Castle. For I remember that about such time as he was Prisoner in the Tower with the rest of the Bishops, his picture was sold commonly in black and white, in his Episcopal Robes, with a square Cap on his head, a Rest in his hand, a Musket on his shoulder, and a Bandeleir about his neck. For which fancy at that time I could learn no reason, though he came up to it at the last. But he goes on.  
Ibid. He was very chaste in his Conversation.] And I hope so too, notwithstanding the scandalous reports of Weldon the nameless Author aimed at (in the following words) in his Pamphlet called the Court of King james, and some vulgar fames or hearsays too much credited by a late Historian. 
Hist▪ of King Char. ●ol 21.  But I must needs say, that I am not satisfied in the arguments which are brought to prove it. Wilson in his unworthy History of the Reign of King james, make● him to be Eunuchus ab utero, an Eunuch from his Mother's womb. The Author of the Pamphlet called the Observator observed, conceives that Wilson went too far in this expression, and rather thinks, that he contracted some impotency by falling on a stake when he was a Boy, fol. 10. Our Author here seems to incline unto this last, assuring us from such who knew the Privacies and casualties of his infancy, that this Archbishop was but one degree removed from a Misogynist, though to palliate his infirmity to n●ble Females he was most complete in his Courtly Addresses. But first, the falsity and frivolousness of these Defences leave the poor man under a worse suspicion than they ●oun● him in. His manly countenance, together with his masculine voice, showed plainly that he was no Eunuch; and the agreeableness of his conversation with the female Sex, did as plainly show, that he was no Misogynist, or woman-hater. And secondly, admitting these surmises to be true and real, they rather serve to evidence his impotency, then to prove his chastity; it being no chastity in that man to abstain from women, who either by casualty, or by nature is disabled from such copulations. The virtue of chastity consisteth rather in the integrity of the soul, than the mutilation of the body; and therefore more to be ascribed to those pious men, Qui salvis ●o●lis foemi●am vident 
* Animo adversus libidinem ●aeco. Apol. c. 21. , in Tertullia's language, then to the old Philosopher, who put out his eyes to avoid temptations of that nature. So that if this be all which they have to say for the Bishop's chastity, these Advocates had showed more wisdom in saying nothing, then speaking so little to the purpose.  
Ibid. Envy itself cannot deny, but that whither soever he went, he might be traced by the footsteps of his benefaction.] Amongst which benefactions it was none of the least, that in both the Universities he had so many Pensioners; more (as it was commonly given out) than all the Noblemen and Bishops in the Land together: some of which received twenty Nobles, some ten pounds, and other twenty Marks per annum. And yet it may be said without envy, that none of all these Pensions came out of his own purse, but were laid as Rent-charges upon such Benefices as were in his disposing, either as Lord Keeper or Bishop of Lincoln, and assigned over to such Scholars in each University as applied themselves to him. And because I would not be thought to say this without Book, I have both seen and had in my keeping, till of late, (if I have it not still) an Acquittance made unto a Minister in discharge of the payment of a Pension of twenty Nobles per annum, to one who was then a Student in Christ-Church. The names of the parties I forbear, he that received it, and he for whom it was received, (and perhaps he that paid it too) being still alive. And possible enough it is, that this Pensioning of so many Scholars had not been passed over in silence by our Author, if he had not known the whole truth as well as the truth.  
Ibid. Much he expended on the Repair of Westminster Abbey-Church, &c The Library at Westminster was the effect of his bounty.] This though it be true in part, yet we cannot say of it, that it is either the whole truth, or nothing but the truth. For the plain truth is, that neither the charge of repairing that Church, nor ●urnishing that Library, came out of his own private Coffers, but the Church's rents: For at such time as he was made Lord Keeper of the great Seal; he caused it to be signified unto the Prebendaries of that Church, how inconvenient it would be both to him and them to keep up the Commons of the College; and gained so far upon them that they passed over to him all the rents of that Church, upon condition that he should pay the annual pensions of the Prebendaries, Schoolmasters, Quire-men, and inferior Officers, and maintain the Commons of the Scholars. The rest amounting to a great yearly value, was left wholly to him upon his honourable word and promise to expend the same for the good and honour of that Church. The surplusage of which expenses received by him for four years and upwards, amounted unto more than had been laid out by him on the Church and Library; as was offered to be proved before the Lords Commissioners at the visitation Anno. 1635. And as for the Library at St. john's, it might possibly cost him more wit than money; many books being daily sent in to him (upon the intimation of his purpose of founding the two Libraries) by such as had either suits in Court, or business in Chancery, or any ways depended on him, or expected any favours from him, either as Bishop of Lincoln, or Dean of Westminster.  
Fol. 228. He hated Popery with a perfect hatred.] But Wi●son in his History of great Britain sings another song, whether in tune, or out of tune, they can best tell who lived most near those times, and had opportunities to observe him. There is a mu●tering of some strange offer which he made to K. james at such time as the Prince was in Spain, and the Court seemed in common apprehension to warp towards Popery, which declared no such perfect hatred (as our Author speaks of) unto that Religion. Nor was he coy of telling such whom he admitted unto privacies with him, that in the time of his greatness at Court, he was accounted for the Head of the Catholic Party, not sparing to declare what free and frequent accesses he gave the principal Sticklers in that cause both Priests and jesuits, and the special services which he did them: And it must be somewhat more than strange if all this be true that he should hate Popery with a perfect hatred; yet not more strange than that he should so stickle in the preferment of Dr. Theodore Price to the Archbishopric of Armagh in Ireland, who died a professed Catholic, reconciled to the Church of Rome, as our Author hath it, fol. 226. But if there be no more truth in the Bishop of Lincoln's hating Popery, then in Dr. Prices dying a professed Papist, there is no credit to be given at all to that part of the Character. Dr. Price, though once a great Favourite of this Bishop, and by him continued Subdean of Westminster many years together, was at the last supposed to be better affected to Bishop Laud, than to Bishop Williams; Bishop Laud having lately appeared a Suitor for him for the Bishopric of St. Asoph. And therefore that two Birds might be killed with the same bolt; no sooner was Dr. Price deceased, but the Bishop of Lincoln being then at Westminster, calls the Prebend● together, tells them that he had been with Mr. Sub-Deane before his death, that he left him in very doubtful terms about Religion, and consequently could not tell in what ●orme to bury him; that if the Dr. had died a professed Papist he would have buried him himself, but being as it was, he could not see how any of the Prebendaries could ●ither with safety or with credit perform that office. But the Artifice and design being soon discovered, took so little effect that Dr. Newel one of the Senior Prebenda●ies performed the Obsequies, the rest of the whole Chapter attending the body to the grave, with all due solemnity.  
Folly, 228. He was so great an honourer of the English 〈◊〉 that of his own cost he caused the same to be translated into Spanish, and fairly printed to confute their false concept of our Church, etc.] If this be true, it makes not only to his honour, but also to the honour of the English Liturgy translated into more languages than any Liturgy in the world whatsoever it be; translated into Latin by Alexand. Alesius, a learned Scot in King Edward's time; as afterward by Dr. Walter Haddon in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and his translation mended by Dr. Mocket in the time of King james: translated into French by the command of that King, for the Isles of Guernsey and jersey, into Spanish at the charge of this Bishop (as our Author telleth us) and finally into Greek by one Mr. ●etly by whom it was dedicated and presented to the late Arch Bishop of Canterbury the greatest Patron and Advancer of the English Liturgy. But 2. I have some reason to doubt, that the Liturgy was not translated at the charges of Bishop William's. That it was done by his procurement I shall easily grant: but whosoever made the Bill of Charges, the Church paid the ●eckoning; the Dominican Friar who translated it being rewarded with a Benefice and a good Prebend, as Cab▪ p. 7●. ●he Bishop himself did signify by letter to the Duke of buckingham. And as for the printing of the book, I cannot ●hink that it was at his charges neither, but at the char●es of the Printer; it not being usual to give the Printers ●oney and the copy too. And 3. Taking it for granted, that the Liturgy was translated and printed at this ●ishops charges, yet does not this prove him to be so ●reat an honourer of it as our Author makes him, for ●●d he been indeed a true honourer of the English Liturgy 〈◊〉 would have been a more diligent attendant on it then 〈◊〉 showed himself: never repairing to the Church at Westminster (whereof he was Dean) from the 18. o● february 1635. when the business of the great ●ew was judged against him till his Commitment to the Tower in july 1637. Nor ever going to the Chapel of the Tower (where he was a Prisoner) to attend the Divine Service of the Church, or receive the Sacrament, from july 1637. when he was committed, to November 1640 when he was enlarged. A very strong Argument that he was no such Honourer of the English Liturgy, as is here pretended: A Liturgy most highly esteemed in all places wheresoever it came, and never so much vilified, despised, condemned as amongst ourselves; and those amongst ourselves who did so vilify and despise it, by none more countenanced then by him, who is here said to be so great an Honourer of it. But for this Blow our Author hath his Buckler ready, telling us that  
Ibid▪ Not out of Sympathy to Non-conformists, but Antipathy to Archbishop Laud, he was favourable to some select Persons of that Opinion. An Action somewhat like to that of the Earl of Kildare, who being accused before Henry the Eighth, 
Camd. Rem.  for burning the Cathedral Church of Cassiles in Ireland, professed ingeniously, That he would never have burnt the Church, if some body had not told him that the Bishop was in it. Hare to that Bishop, and Archbishop of Ir●land, incited that mad Earl to burn his Cathedral Church: and hate to Bishop Laud, the Primate and Metropolitan of all England, stirred up this Bishop to raise a more unquenchable Combustion in the Church of England. So that we may affirm of him as Tertullian (in another case) of the Primitive Christians, Viz. Tanti non est bonum, quanti est odium Christianorum. But are we sure that he was favourable to the Non-Conformists out of an antipathy to Bishop Laud only? I believe not so. His antipathy to the King did at strongly bias him that way, as any thing else. For which I have the Testimony of the Author of the History of King Charles, published 1656. who telleth us of him, That being malevolently inclined (about the loss of the great Seal) he thought he could not gratify beloved Revenge better than to endeavour the supplanting of his Sovereign. 
Hist. of King Ch. fol. 151.  To which end finding him declining in the Affection● of his People, he made his Apostrophe and Applications to them, fomenting popular discourses tending to the King's dishonour, & C. And being once set upon that Pin (flectere si nequeo superos, Ach●ronta moveb●, as we know who said) it is no marvel if he showed himself favourable to the N●n Conformists, as being Enemies to King's an● a Kingly Government, and therefore likeliest to provide Fuel for a public Fire: and yet besides these two there was a third impressive which might move a● strongly on his Nature, as either of them. Our Author f●rmerly told us of him, that he was A b●ck Friend to the Canons, because he had no hand in the making of them. And for the same reason also I conceive, that he might show himself a back Friend to the Church a Patron to the Non Conformists, of purpose to subvert those Counsels, and ruinate those Designs for uniformity which had been resolved and agreed on without his Advice. Consilii omnis cujus ipse non Author esset, 
Tacit. Hist. L. ●.  inimicus, as we know who said. In order whereunto he had no sooner heard that there was a purpose in some great Bishops of the Court to regulate the standing of the Communion Table, according to the Pattern of the Mother Cathedral, and the royal Chapels; but he presently set himself against it, dispercing Copies of a Letter pretended to be writ●en ●y him to the Vicar of Grantham on that occasion, and publishing his Book called the Holy Table, ●ull of quotations, but more in number then in weight. An● this he did out or a mere Spirit of Contradiction, directly contrary to his own practice in all places where he had to do; that is to say, not only in the Collegiate Church at Westminster, whereof he was Dean, and in the Cathedral Church of Lincoln whereof he was Bishop, but in his own private Chapel at Bugden also, where there was no body to act any thing in it but himself alone. And so I take my leave of this great Prelate, whom I both reverence for hi● Place, and honour for his Parts, as much as any. And yet I cannot choose but say, that I find more reason to condemn, than there is to commend him; so that we may affirm of him as the Historian doth of Caiu● C●●sar, Son of Agrippa, and Nephew to the great Augustus, viz. Tamburlaine vary se gessit, ut nec laudaturum magna nec vitupera●urum mediocri● materia deficiat, 
〈◊〉 Hist. l. 2.  as my Author hath it. And with the same Character, accommodated to our Author, and this present History I conclude these Notes; subjoyning only this old Saying as well for my comfort as defence, viz.  
Truth, though it may be blamed, can never be shamed.    


AN APPENDIX To the foregoing ANIMADVERSIONS; CONTAINING THE APOLOGY OF Dr. JOHN COUSINS, Dean of PETER BURROUGH: In Answer to some Passages in the Church-History of BRITAIN; In which He finds himself concerned   

AN APPENDIX To the foregoing ANIMADVERSIONS; etc.  
'tIS well known to some in London, that the foregoing Animadversions were finished, and fitted for the Press before Michaelmas, Anno 1657. the reasons why they have lain so long unpublished were these two especially: First, A Report that the Task was undertaken by a Cambridge man, who had more knowledge of the Author whom I had to deal with then I can pretend to; and I desired rather that the burden of it the public, satisfaction to all parties entrusted, should be born by any then myself. Secondly, There was a general opinion spread abroad in all places (to what ends I know not, nor much care) that the Church Historian was in hand with a Review of the Work before us, in which he was resolved to make some fair amends to Truth, to correct the errors of his Pen, and to make reparation to the injured Clergy, and, to say truth, there was none fitter than himself for that undertaking, none fitter to give Plasters for the broken head●, than the man that breaks them. The Poet wa● right enough in this, 
— ●●m qui mihi vultern 〈◊〉  
Solus Achilleo tollere more potest.   
That is to say, 
None but the man who gave the Wound,  
Achilles like, could make it sound.  But the Reports being thought at last to have somewhat in them of design, or artifice, to stave off the business, I was solicited with greater importunity to publish the foregoing Animadversions, than I was at fir●● to undertake them. The Reader notwithstanding will be no loser by this delay.  
For first, It gave me leisure and opportunity of bestowing my second thought upon the Animadversions, (adding here and there some Observations, which before were wanting.)  
And secondly, It brought into my hands the Apology o● Doctor john Cousins, Dean of Peterburrough, in answer to some passages of our present History, directed in the way of a Letter to one Mr. Warren, now deceased, with a desire to have them communicated to the Author of some Animadversions upon that History (which he was credibly informed, by what intelligence I know not●) to be then in readiness. I shall therefore do him so much right as to communicate his Papers to 〈◊〉 public view; First laying down Mr. F●●●ers word● 〈◊〉 they lie in his Hi●●ory, and then leaving Dr. Cos●ns to speak for himself. So doing, I shall keep myself from engaging upon either ●ide, and leave the Reader to judge indifferently between the p●rti●● as h● 〈◊〉 occ●sion.  

Mr. Fuller's Charge on Dr. Cousin's Lib 11. fol. 173.  
DR. Cousin's soon after was highly accused for Superstition and unjust proceedings against one Mr. Smart on this occasion; 
Superstitions cha●ged on Dr. Cousin's  The Doctor is charged to have set upon the Church of Durham, a Marble Altar with Cherubins, which cost two thousand pounds, with all the Appurtenances thereof, namely, a Cope, with the Trinity, and God the Father in the Figure of an old man, another with the Crucifix and Image of Christ, with a red Bewd and blue Cap; besides, he was accused for lighting two hundred Wax Candles about the Altar on Candl●ma● day, for forbidding any Psalms to be sung before or after Sermon, though making an Anthem to be sung of the three Kings of Colen (by the names of) Gasper, Balthasar, and Melchior, and for procuring a consecrated Knife, only to cut the Bread at the Communion.  
35. Mr. Smart a Prebendary of the Church, 
Cruel usage of Mr. Smart.  one of grave Aspect and reverend Presence sharply inveighed, in a Sermon against these Innovations, taking for his Text, I hate all those that ●old super●●itio●s Vanities, but thy Law I love.  
36. Hereupon he was kept Prisoner four Months by the High Commission of York, before any Articles were exhibited against him, and five Months before any Proctor was allowed him, hence was he carried to th● High Commission at Lamb●th, and after long trouble remanded to York, fined five hundred pounds, committed to Prison, ordered to recant, and for neglect thereof, fined again, Excommunicated, Degraded, and Deprived, his Damage (as brought in) amounting to many thousand pounds.  
37. But now Mr. Rows of the House of Commons, bringing up the Charge to the Lords against Dr. Cousins, termed Mr. Smart the Protomartyr of England in these latter days of Persecution, and large reparation was allowed to him, though he lived not long after to enjoy them.  
Now though none can excuse and defend Dr. Cousins his carriage herein, 
Dr. Cousin's Praise.  yet this must be reported to his due commendation; some years after getting over into France, he neither joined with the Church of French Protestants at Charen Town nigh Paris, nor kept any Communion with the Papists therein, but confined himself to the Church of English Protestants therein, where, by his pious living, constant praying and preaching, he reduced some Recusants to, and confirmed more Doubters in, the Protestant Religion; Many were his Encounters with Jesuits and Priests, defeating the suspicions of his Foes, and exceeding the expectation of his Friends in the success of such Disputes.   

PARISH, April 6. 1658.  
The Answer of Dr. Cousins to the Charge foregoing.  
Sir,  
I Am glad to hear from you of your safe Arrival in England: and I am to thank both you and other of my Friends, that intent to vindicate me from the Injury done, no less to Truth then to myself, by a passage in Mr. Fuller's History, which I believe he inserted there (as he doth many things besides) upon the false Reports and Informations of other men, that were loath to let an old malicious Accusation die, as it might well enough have done, if he had not kept it up still alive, and recorded it to Posterity; whereof he is so sensible already himself, that by his own Letter directed to me (more than a year since) he offered to make me amends in the next Book he write●; but he hath not done it yet. Having never been acquainted with him more than by his Books, which have many petulant, light, and indiscreet passages in them, I know not how to trust him; and therefore if the Authors of the intended Animadversions (which you mention) will be pleased to do me right, you may assure th●m there is nothing but Truth in this ensuing Relation.  
Mr. Smart, who had been Schoolmaster, and after became Prebendery of Durham, was an old man of a most froward fierce, and unpeaceable Spirit, etc. Upon a seditious Sermon which he preached in that Church, (where contrary to his duty he had neglected to preach for seven years together before) he was first questioned at Durham, from whence he was called to the High Commission Court at Lond. and afterwards at his own desire remitted to the same Court at York; where being sentenced to recant, and refusing so to do with great scorn, he was at last, upon his obstinacy degraded from his Ecclesiastical Function; and that Sentence was not long after judicially confirmed by Judge Damport at the public Assizes in Durham, where he was by public sentence also at the Common Law put out of his Prebend, and his Benefices that he formerly held in that County.  
Many years following he procured a large Maintenance for himself and his Family, to the sum of 400 l. per ann. (more worth to him then his Chu●ch-profi●s, ever were) out of the peculiar Contributions at London, and elsewhere gathered up for silenced Ministers.  
But when the Parliament began in the year 1640, upon project and hope of getting more, he preferred a Bill o● Complaint there against thirty several persons at the least, that is, against the High Commissioners at London, the same Commissioners and prebend's Residentiary at York, the Dean and Chapter of Durham, with dive●s others, whereof I was but One, though he was pleased to set my Name in the Front of them all. From all these together he expected to recover and receive a greater sum of money (for Money was his project) pretending that he had lost by them no less than thirty thousand pounds (though he was never known to be worth one.)  
After his Bill of Complaint was carried up by a Gentleman of the House of Commons to the House of Lords among the rest of those persons that were accused by him (some for Superstition, and some for Persecution) I put in my full Answer upon Oath, and declared the truth of the whole matter; whereof Mr. Fuller taketh not any notice at all, and therein dealeth most unfaithfully both with me and the Reader of his History; for that Answer of mine is upon Record, among the Rolls of Parliament, and was justified before the Lords both by myself, and by the very Witness that Mr. Smart and his Son-in-law produced there against me; whereupon his own Lawyer (Mr. Glover) openly at the Bar of that honourable House forsook him, and told him plainly, that he was ashamed of his Complaint, and could not in Conscience plead for him any longer: Mr. Smart in the mean while crying out aloud and beseeching their Lordships to appoint him another Lawyer, and to take care of his fourteen thousand pound damages, besides other demands that he had to make, which arose to a greater sum.  
But after this (which was the fifth day of pleading between u●) the Case was heard no more concerning my particular, and many of the Lords said openly, that ●r. Smar● had abused the House of Commons, with a caus●●ess Complaint against me, whereupon my Lord the Earl of Warwick, was pleased to bring me an Order of ●he Lords House, whereby I had liberty granted me to ●eturn unto my places of Charge in the University, or elsewhere, till they sent for me again, which they never ●id.  
The Answers that I gave in upon Oath, and justified ●efore their Lordships, were to this effect, all contrary 〈◊〉 Mr. Fuller's groundless reports.  
1. T●at the Communion-Table in the Church of Dur●am (which in the Bill of Complaint and M. Fuller's Hist. 〈◊〉 said to be the Marble Altar with Cherubin's) was not 〈◊〉 up by me, but by the Dean and Chapter there 〈◊〉 of Mr. Smart himself was one) many years be●●re I become Prebendary of that Church, or ever saw 〈◊〉 Country.  
2. That by the public Accounts which are there registered, it did not appear to have cost above the tenth ●●rt of what is pretended, Appurtenance● and all.  
3. That likewise the Copes used in that Church ●ere brought in thither long before my time, and when ●r. Smart th● Complainant was Prebendary there, who ●●so allowed his part (as I was ready to prove by the 〈◊〉- Book) of the money that they cost, for they cost ●t little.  
4. That as I never approved the Picture of the Tri●y, or the Image of God the Father in the Figure of 〈◊〉 old Man, or otherwise to be made or placed any ●●ere at all: So I was well assured that there were none ●●ch (nor to my knowledge or hear-say ever had been) put upon any Cope that was used there among us; One there was that had the Story of the Passion embroidered upon it, but the Cope that I used to wear when at any time I attended the Communion-Service, was of plain white Satin only without any Embroidery upon it at all.  
5. That ●hat the Bill of Complaint called the Image of Christ, with a blue Cap, and a golden Beard, (Mr. Fuller's History says it was red, and that it was set upon one of the Copes) was nothing else but the top of Bishop Ha●fields Tomb (set up in the Church under a si●e-Arch there, two hundred years before I was born) being a little Portraiture not appearing to be above ten Inches long, and hardly discernible to the eye what Figure it is, for it stands thirty Foot from the ground.  
6. That by the local Statutes of that Church (whereunto Mr. Smart was sworn, as well as myself) the Treasurer was to give Order, that the provision should every year be made of a sufficient number of Wax-light● for the Service of the Choir, during all the Winter time; which Statute I observed when I was chosen into that Office, and had order from the Dean and Chapter by Capitular Act to do it: yet upon the Communion Table they that used to light the Candles (the Sacrists, and the Virgers) never set more than two fair Candle● with a few small Sizes near to them, which they put there, of purpose that the people all about might have the better use of them, for singing the Psalms, and reading the Lessons out of the Bible's: But two hundred was a greater number than they used all the Church over, either upon Candlem●s Night or any other, and that there were no more (sometimes many less) lighted at that time, then at the like Festivals in Christmas-holydays, when the people of the City came in greater company to the Church, and therefore required a greater store of lights.  
7. That I never forbade (nor any body else that I know) the singing of the (Meeter) Psalms in the Church, which I used to sing daily there myself with other company at Morning Prayer. But upon Sundays and Holidays in the Choir, before the Sermon the Creed was sung (and sung plainly for every one to understand) as it is appointed in the Communion Book, & after the Sermon we sung a part of a Psalm, or some other Anthem taken out of the Scripture, and first signified to the people where they might find it,  
8. That so far was I from making any Anthem to be sung of the three Kings of Colen, as that I ma●e i● when I first saw it to be torn in pieces, and I my sel● cut it out of the old Song Books belonging to the Choristers School, with a Penknife that lay by, at my very first coming to reside in that College. But sure I was, that no such Anthem had been sung in the Choir, during all my time of attendance there, nor (for aught that any the eldest persons of the Church and Town could tell, or ever heard to the contrary) for fif●y or threescore years before, and more.  
9 That there was indeed an ordinary Knife I confess, provided and laid ready among other things belonging to the Administration of the Communion, for the cutting of the Bread, and divers other uses in the Church Vestry; that when the under Officers there had any occasion to use a Knife, they might not be put to go to seek one abroad. But that it was ever consecrated, or so called, otherwise then as Mr. Smart and some of his Followers had for their pleasure put that appellation upon it, I never heard, nor I believe any body ●lse that lived here among us.  
[There were divers other Articles of this nature in the Bill of Complaint, whereof Mr. Smart could not prove any one to which I gave the like Answers, as I did here to these; but Mr. Fuller's History makes no mention of them]  
10. Touching Mr. Smarts Sermon, I made answer, and submitted his censure to the prudent and religious consideration of the Lords, whether he was not justly condemned to be scandalous and seditious by his preaching thereof; and I represented many passages in it, disagreeable to the Laws of God and his Church, and repugnant to the public Statutes of Parliament.  
11. For which after we had begun ●o question him in the High Commission Court at Durham (where we endeavoured to reduce him to a better mind, and to an unity with the Church, against which he had so injuriously and intemperately declaimed;) I had no further hand or meddling with the prosecution of this ma●ter in other Courts against him, more than that I wrote (at the special instance of Judge Yeluerton) a Letter in his behalf to the Archbishop of York, and the Commissioners there, which I procured the Dean and most of the Pr●bendaries of Durham to sign and subscribe with me, earnestly entreating for him, that upon any due sense of his ●ault, he might be quietly sent back to us again, in hope that he would hereafter live in better peace and concord with us (as he promised both judge Yeluerton and us to do) than he had done before.  
12. The cruel usage and imprisonment that he suffered (whereof Mr. Fuller taketh special notice, and makes a Marginal mark at it) was, as I have been credible assured, nothing else but a fair and gentle treatment of him in an Officers House at York, to whom he was committed for a while, and paid little for it. I● is the Historians mistake here to say, he was carried ●rom York to Lambeth; for he was at his own request sent from Lambeth to York, the Fine th●t was se● up 〈◊〉 him he never paid, and by his own wilful loss of his Church-livings, he gained a larger maintenance, living at his ease and pleasure, by the contribution that he got as a suspended and silenced Preacher; though the truth was, that having had a Prebend and a Benefice many years together in the Bishopric of Durham, and being always in health, he neglected preaching so much at them both, and elsewhere besides, that he was seldom noted to preach above two Sermons in a year; who, though he demanded many thousand pound● at the Parliament, yet by Mr. Fuller's leave, the Parliament gave him none; nor ordered either myself, nor any other that he impeached ever to pay him a Groat: only upon Doctor Cars death (who had b●en put into hi● Prebend place) he was sent by the Lord's t● his Vicarage, and his Prebend again, which he had little ●●ill to take, because he ●ound but little profit in comparison of what he hoped to be had by them, in the mean while he took up divers great summ● of mon●y from some of his Partisans in London, and made them believe that the Parliament would pay them all with advantage.  
13. There is another Marginal Note in Mr. Fuller, referring▪ as he saith, to my due praise and commendation, whereof he makes one part to be▪ that I joined not with the French Protestant's at Char●nton, since. I got over hither into France: but I would that he and all the World should know it▪ I never refused to join with the Protestants either there, or any where else, in all ●hings wherein they join with the Church of England. Many of them have been here at our Church, and we have been at theirs. I have buried divers of our people at Ch●renton, and they permit us to make use of their pecu●iar and decent Sae●e●erie here in Paris for ●h●t purpose▪ which if they did not, we ●hould be forced to bury our Dead in a Di●ch. I have Baptised many of their Children at the request of their own Ministers, with whom I have good acquaintance, and find them ●o be very deserving and learned men, great Lovers ●nd Honourers of our Church, notwithstanding the loss which She hath lately received in external Mat●ers, wherein we are agreed that the Essence of true Religion doth not consist. Many of their people (and of the best sort and quality among them) have frequented our public Prayers with great reverence, and I have delivered t●e holy Communion to them, according to our own Order which they observed religiously. I have Married divers persons of good Condition among them: and I have presented some of th●ir Scholars to be ordained Deacons and Priests 〈◊〉 by our own Bishops (whereof Monsieur De Tarenne's Chaplain is one, and the Duke De la Force's Chaplain another) and the Church at Charenton approved of it) and I preached here publicly at their Ordination. Besides I have been (as often a● I had ●are time from attending our own Congregation) to pray and sing Psalms with them, and to hear both the Weekly and the Sunday Sermons at Charenton, whither two of my Children also (pensioned here in a Protestant Family at Paris) have daily repaired for that purpose with the Gentlewoman that governed them.  
All which is abundantly enough to let the World know and see here (as it doth) what a vain and rash man Mr. Fuller is in his History: wherein he hath done Injury to many more besides me, some dead and some alive, who I hope will represent his unfaithfulness in his own Country, both to himself and to others. I am only beholden to him for telling the t●u●h of me in one particular, which is, that I have by God's blessing reduced some, and preserved many others from communicating with the Papists; defending the Truth of our own Religion (as I have always done) where ever I am; and therein I pray God still to bless us and preserve us all.  
And now out of all this which I have faithfully related, I trust that those who intent their ANIMADVERSIONS upon his History, will have enough to say and insert in their own Style for the vindication of,  
SIR, Your Affectionate, & most humble SERVANT J. C.  
You know Monsieur Dallê to be one of the greatest account, and the best Deserts amongst the reformed Churchmen in France: It will not be amiss to let you know upon thi● occ●sion, what he wrote to a Scholar, a Friend of his, and an University-man in Cambridge, for these were the words in his Letter;  
Tuus Cousins, imò noster (intercedit enim nobis cum illo suavis amicitia atque familiaritas) mihi admodùm probatur. Bestiae sunt & quidem fanatici qui eum de Papismo suspectum habent, à quo vix reperias qui sit magis alienus, etc.  
Thus having laid before the Reader both the Bill and Answer, I leave him to make Judgement of it by the Rule● of Equity; remembering him of that old Saying, Videlicet▪  
Qui statuit aliquid, parte in audita altera;  
Equum licet statuerit, haud Equus fuit.  
FINIS.     

Examen Historicum: OR, A DISCOVERY AND EXAMINATION OF THE Mistakes, Falsities, and Defects, In some Modern HISTORIES. Part. II.  
Containing some Advertisements on these following HISTORIES. Viz.  
1. The complete History of Mary Queen of Scots, and her Son and Successor, King James the sixth.  
2. The History of the Reign and death of King James of Great Britain, France and Ireland, the first.  
3. The complete History of the Life and Reign of King Charles, from his Cradle to his Grave.  Terent. in Andr. Act. 1. 
Obsequium amico●, veritas caium pari●.  
LONDON. Printed for Henry Seal, and R. Royston, and are to be sold over against St. Dunstan's Church in Fleetstreet, and at the Angel in 〈…〉   

The PREFACE to the following ADVERTISEMENTS.  
THe former Animadversions, being brought to an end, I am in the next place to encounter with an easier Adversary: In whom though I find wor● enough as ●o matter of Historical Falsehoods; ●et ● find no malicious and dangerous untruths, destructive to the Church of England, or to the ●ame and ●o nor of the Prelates, or the regular Cler●● 〈◊〉 have therefore given the Tul● o● Advertisements to the second part of this Examen, that ●eing as a gentler so a ●itter term 〈…〉, which is not only to correct such 〈…〉 ●inde differing from the ●ruth, but 〈…〉 the defects of our Author in 〈…〉 which I conceive his care or 〈◊〉 might have led him to. Betwixt us both, I ●ope the R●ader will be 〈◊〉 in the tru●●●nduct of A●●●urs as th●y come b●●ore ●im. And if the Author of the three Histories which I have in hand▪ bring no less ingenuity and candour with him to the perusal of these Papers, than I did to the writing of them; there will be no need of any such scurrilous & unhandsome expressions▪ as his Post-haste Reply, etc. is most guilty of; but whether he do or not, is to me indifferent, being prepared before I undertook the business, ●o endure cheerfully all such Censures, as my desires to vindicate the injured Truth, and truly to inform the judgement of the equal Reader should expose me to.  
And herewith I shall put an end to my correcting of the Errors in other men's Writings, though I confess I might find work enough in that kind, if I were so minded; most of our late Scripturients affecting rather to be doing, then to be punctual and exact in what they do; as if they were of the same mind with the Ape●Carrier in the History of Don-Quixot, who eared not if his Comedies had as many Errors in them, as there are motes in the Sun, so he might stuff his Purse with Crowns, and get money by t●em: The small remainder of my li●e will be better spent in looking back upon those Errors which the infirmities of nature, and other humane frailties have made me subject to, that so I may redeem the time, because my former days were evil: I shall hereafter be only on the defensive side, and study my own preservation, if I shall causelessly be assaulted without provoking any by a fresh encounter; and doing no otherwise, I hope I shall be held excusable both by God and man: Viribus utendum est quas fecimus, was Caesar's resolution, when oppressed by an unjust Faction and may without offence be mine, when I shall be necessitated thereunto by an unjust Adversary.  
With the like hope I also entertain myself, in reference to some freedom which I have made use of, in laying down the conduct of such affairs, as may concern posterity to be truly informed in: For though I neither hope nor wish to live under such a Government, ubi & ●entire quae velis, & quae sentias loqui liceat, in which it may be lawful for any man to be of what Opinion he will, and as freel● to publish his Opinions; yet on the other ●ide, I hope ●t may be lawful for me, in 〈◊〉 to memory the actions of the present or preceding times, to make use of such a modest freedom, as without partiality and respect of persons, may represent the true condition of affairs in their proper colours: For I conceive it no less necessary in a just Historian, not to suppose that which he knoweth to be true (ne quid veri non audeat, as the old Rule was) than it is for him to deliver any thing which he knows to be false, or in the truth whereof he is not very well informed. The present times had reaped no benefit by the Histories of the Ages past, if the Miscarriages of great Persons, and the errors by them committed in the managery and transaction of public business, had not been represented in them; which having said, I shall no longer detain the Reader from reaping that commodity which these Advertisements may afford him; his satisfaction being the cause, and his content the recompense of these undertake.   

ADVERTISEMENTS ON 1. The complete History of MARY Queen of Scots, and of her Son and Successor King James the sixth. AND 2. The History of the Reign and Death of King James of Great Britain, France and Ireland, the first.  Enniusap. T●ll. de office▪ 
Homo qui ●rranti comiter monstrat viam,  
Quasi lumen de lumine suo acc●ndat, facit.   

ADVERTISMENTS On the Complete HISTORY OF Mary Queen of Scotland, AND King james the sixth.  
IN the Preface to the following History we are told, that on the composing of the French quarrels by King H●n●y the eighth, there followed the surrendry of Tourney, and Overtures of a match between the Dolphin and Henry's Sister.]  
To Rectify which error we are to know that betwixt ●he taking and surrendry of Tourney, there were two accords made with the French: The first between King Henry●nd ●nd Lewis the twelfth, in which it was conditioned amongst ●ther things, that the French King should marry the La●y Mary King Henry's Sister. But he deceasing within few months' aftter on the first of january, the widow Queen ●as married in May next following Anno 1515. to Charles ●andon Duke of Suffolk. The next accord, which seems 〈◊〉 be hear meant by the Historian, was made between the 〈◊〉 King Henry and King Francis the first, Anno 1518. 〈◊〉 which the surrendry of Tourney was agreed u●on, and a opitulation made for marrying the young Dolphin of ●rance with another, Mary being the daughter (and not the Sister) of King Henry, then being about two years old, which is the marriage here intended, tho●gh mis●ook in the party.  
fol. 2. james the fifth the 108. King of Scotland.] Which may come some what near the truth, allowing the succession of the Scottish Kings, 39 in number from the first Fergus to the second. But that succession being discarded by all knowing Antiquaries, King james the fifth must fall so much short of being the 108. King of the Scottish Nation. Nor can it hold exactly true as unto that number, if that succession were admitted; King james the first Monarch of great Britain, and the Grandchild of this james the fifth, pretending only to an hundred & six Predecessors in the throne of Scotland, as appears by this inscription which he somewhere used viz.  
— Nobis haec invicta tulerunt Centum Sex Proavi.  
Ibid. To palliate such potency, he procures an interview with him at Nice a Maritine Town in the Confines of Provence.] A worse mistake in place and persons than we had before. For if the interview procured was between King Henry and the Pope (as by the Grammar of the Text must be unstood) then is the Author much mistaken in the place and Persons; but if he mean it of an interview between K. H●●●y and King Francis, it is true enough as to the Persons, but not to the place. An interview there was between the two Kings at Ard●es in the Marches of Calais, far enough from the confines of Provence; and a like interview there was between King Francis and the Pope at Nice here mentioned, for enough from the borders of King Henry's Dominions, at which he neither was present nor desired to be.  
fol. 8. Prelate Bishops brought in by Palladius.] The Author speaks not this as his own opinion, but as the opinion of some of the Sco●s, who ground themselves on the Authority of B●chanan a fiery Presbyterian, and consequn●●● a professed enemy to Bishops, 
Buch. l. 5  and his words are these, Nam ad id nsque tem●us Ecclesiae, a●squ● Episcopis, per Monachos regeb●●ur: that is to say, the Church unto that time was governed by M●nks without Bishops, But Buchanan perhaps might borrow this from 〈…〉, another Writer of that Nation, and of greater Credit, who tells us this, per Sacerdotes & 〈◊〉 hos, sine Episcopis, Scoti in ●ide erudiebantar. The Scots (he said) were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and M●nks without Bishops. But I trow, teaching and governing are two several Offices. And though it may be true that some particular persons of the Scotish Nation might be entrusted in 〈◊〉 Gospel by Priests and Monks, without help of Bishops, as is said by Major; yet doth it not follow thereupon that their Churches were governed in the same manner as is said by Buchannan. And yet upon these faulty grounds it is infered by the 〈◊〉 with great joy and triumph, that in some places of the world, the government by Bishops was never received for many years together. 
Sm●●ym. p. 16.  For say they, we read that in ancient times the Scots were instructed in the Christian faith by Priests and Monks, and were without Bishops 290. years. Instructed possibly at the first without Bishops by such Priest's and Monk's as came thither out of Ireland, or the 〈◊〉 of Man, or the more Southern parts of B●itain; but not so governed when they were increased, multiplied into several Churches and Congregations. And so it is affirmed by Archbishop Spotswood, who tell●th u●●ut of 〈…〉, that anciently the Priests of Scotland, whom they then called 〈◊〉, were wont for their better government to elect some one of their number by Common suffrage to be chief and principal amongst them, 
Hist of Scotland fol. 4.  without whose knowledge and con●●nt nothing was done in any matter of importance; and that the Person so elected was called Scotorum Episcopus the Scots Bishop, or a Bishop of Scotland. By which it doth appear most plainly, first that the Prelate Bishop was not first ordained here by 〈◊〉 as the Scotish say, and secondly, that that Church was not so long a time without Bishops (if it were at all) as the English Presbyterians would fain have it.  
fol. 15. john Calvin a Fre●●hman of Aquitain. ● Not so, but a Native of Noyo●● City of Picardy, far enough from Aquitain, as is affirmed by all others which have written of him.  
The like mistake to which we find fol. 9●. where it is said, that the Lords of A●bygny take name fr●m Aubygny ● village in Aquitain Whereas indeed the Castle and Signory of Aubygny (from whence the younger house of Len●● takes their denomination) is not within the Province of Aquitam, but the Country of Berry.  
fol. 20 And therefore to strike in with his Son and 〈…〉 his Father's obsequies with magnificent Solemnly in Paul's Church.] This spoken of the Obsequies of King Henry the second of France performed by Queen 〈◊〉 with great Magnificence; not so much on the particular ground which I find here mentioned, as to preserve her Reputation, and the Reputation of this Church by such Rites and Ceremonies, with all foreign princes. To which end she did Solemnize the Obsequies of such Kings and Emperors as died during her Reign in as great pomp and splendour as she did this Kings: for before this in very Princely manner were performed solemn Obsequies for 〈◊〉 the fifth, a ri●h ●all of gold laying upon the Hearse, the Emperor's Ambassador being chief Mourner accompanied with many Princes and Peers of England▪ And after this 〈◊〉 did the like for many others, with no great difficulty to 〈◊〉 found in our comm●n Chronicles. By means whereof, 〈◊〉 did not only maintain her own Estimation, but caused th● Church of England to be looked on with greater veneration and 〈…〉 popish Princes, than it hath been since th●● leaving off 〈◊〉 due observances.  
fol. 27. And ●y compute of their own Lo●ds of the Cong●gation a hundred marks a year was then sufficient for a single Minister.] Understand not here an hundred marks sterling at the rate of 13. s. 4. d. to the Mark as the English count it, amounting to 66 l. 13. s. 4. d. in the total 〈◊〉; but an hundred Marks Skittish, each Mark containing no more than thi●teen pence half penny of our English money, which make but 5. l. 13. s. upon our account. A sorry pittance in itself, though thought enough by their good Masters for their pains in preaching.  
Fol. 53. Three of our Kings severally challenged that Trial against the French King; and by Charles of Arragon and Peter de Ta●●acone for the 〈◊〉 of Sicily.] Either the Author or the Printer is much mistaken here. The title to the Realm of Sicily was once indeed intended to be tried by Combat, not between Charles of Arragon, and Peter of Tarracone, as is here affirmed, but between Peter King of Arragon, and Charles' Earl of An●ou, pretending severally to that Kingdom. (10.) Such another mistake we have Fol. 55. Where it is said, that there were some preparations in King James his time intended between two Scotch m●n, the Lord Ree, and David Ramsey:] Whereas indeed those preparations were not made in King james, but King 〈◊〉 his time; Robert Lord Willoughby Earl of 〈◊〉, and Lord great Chamberlain of England being made Lord Constable pro tempore to decide that Controversy.  
Fol. 83. Katherine de Medici's, Pope Clement's Brothers Daughter and Mother of King Charles etc.] (11) Katherine de medicis was indeed wife to Henry the second, and mother to Charles the ninth, Fr●nch Kings, but by no means a ●●●thers daughter to Pope Clement the seventh. For first, Pope Clement being the natural son of 〈…〉 (who was killed young and unmarried) had n● brother at all. And secondly, Katherine de Medeces was Daughter of 〈◊〉 Duke of Urbin, son of Peter de Mede●es▪ and Grandson of Laurence de Medic●s, the brother of 〈◊〉 before mentioned. By which account the father of that Pope and the great Grandfather of that Queen were Brothers, and so that Queeu not Brothers' Daughter to the Pope: Of nearer ki● she was to Pope Leo the tenth, though not his Brother's Daughter neither, P●pe Leo being Brother to Peter de Medici's, this great Lady's Grandfather.  
Fol. 84. This y●●r took away James Hamilton Earl of Arran, and Duke of Castle-herauld, at Poictures a Province in France.] The name of the Province is Poictou, of which Poictires is the principal City, accounted the third City next to Paris and 〈◊〉 ●ll that Kingdom.  
And such another slight mistake we have fol. 96. where we find mention of the absence's of the Duke of Arran: Whereas indeed the chief of the hamilton's was but Earl of Arrar, as he after calls him; the Title of Duke being first conf●●'d by King Charles, upon james Marquis of H●mil●on, created Duke H●mil●on of Arran, Anno 1643.  
The like m●●nomers we have after fol. 139. Where we find mention of the History of Q. Elizabeth, writ by 〈◊〉, whereas 〈◊〉 writ no further than King Henry 8. the rest which follows, being clapped to by the publisher of it, and possibly may be no other than Camde●s Annals of that Queen, in the English Tongue: The like I frequently observe in the name of Metallan, (Metellanus he is called by their Latin Writers) whom afterward he rightly calleth by the name of 〈◊〉, fol. 149.  
Fol. 156. The Leagures, with some justice in Rebellion, elect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a degree nearer to the Crown then Navar.] Not so, but one degree at the least further off the Cardinal of 〈◊〉, (called ●harls) being the youngest Son of ●harls Duke of 〈◊〉; whereas Henry King of Navarre, was the only Son and Heir of An●ho●y the eldest Brother: So that not o●ely the King of Navarre, but the Princes of the H●use of 〈◊〉, derived from Francis Duke of Anghein, the second Brother, had the precedency in Title before this 〈◊〉▪ But being of the Catholic party, and of the Royal H●use of Bourbon, (in which the Rights of the Crown remained) and withal, a man of great Age, and small Abilities, he was set up to serve the turn, and screened the main Plot of the Leaguers from the eyes of the people.  
Fol. 161. Sir Thomas Randolph, bred a Civilian, was taken from Pembroke College in Oxford.] Not otherwise to be made good (in case he were of that House in Oxford, which is now called Pembroke College) but by Anticipation: Lavinaqueve●t Littora, as in the like case the Poet has it; that which is now called Pembroke College, was in those times called Broadgates H●ll, not changed into a College, till the latter end of the Reign of King james, and then in Honour of William Earl of Pembroke, Chancellor of that University, and in hope of some endowment from him, called Pembroke College.  
Fol. 189. The other Title was of the I●●ant of Spain] In laying down whose several Titles, the Author leaves out that which is most material, that is to say, the direct and lineal Succession of the Kings of Spain, from the Lady Katherine, Daughter of john of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster, married to Henry the third, King of Castille, and Mother to King john the second, from whom descend the Kings of Castille to this very day.  
Fol. 191. Hawkins, Drake, Baskervile, etc. Fi●e s●ne Towns in the Isle Dominica, in the West Indies.] They fired indeed some Towns in Hispan●ol●. and amongst others, that of Dominica, or St. Dom●ngo: But they attempted nothing on the Isle of Dominica, which is one of the Ch●rybes, and they had no reason; that Island being governed by a King of its own, at deadly enmity with the 〈◊〉, an● consequently, more likely to be ayded, then annoyed, by those Sea Adventurers.  
A like mistake we had before in the name of C●●m●rdin, fol. 157. That party who discovered unto Queen Elizabeth the Estate of the Customs, not being named 〈◊〉, but Carw●rdin.  
Fol. 229. Sr. Thomas Erskin created Earl of Kelly, and by degrees Knight of the Garter.] Not so: Knight of the Garter first, by the name of Thomas Viscount Fenton, (as appears by the Registers of the Order) and then Earl of Kelly. Thus afterwards we find Sr. john Danvers for Sr. Charles D●nvers, fol. 238. And john Lord Norris, for Sr. john Norris, fol. 243. And some mistakes of this nature we find in the short story of the Earl of Essex; in which it is said first, that  
Fol. 233. He was eldest son to Waltar Devereux etc. created by Queen Elizabeth Earl of Essex and Ewe.] Not so; but Earl of Essex only, as appears by Camden in his Britannia, fol, 454. If either he, or any of his Descendants have taken to themselves the Tittle of Earl's of Ewe, they take it not by virtue of this last Creation, but in right of their descent from William Bo●rchier created Earl of Ewe in Normandy by King Henry the fifth, and father of Henry Bourchier created Earl of Essex by King Edward the fourth.  
Secondly, it is said of Robert Earl of Essex the son of this Wal●er, that in 89. he went Commander in chief in the expedition into Portugal; Fol. 233. whereas indeed he went but as a Volunteer in that expedition, and had no command. And so much our Author hath acknowledged in another place, saying, that, Ambitious of common fame, he put himself to Sea, and got aboard the Fleet, conceiting that their respect to his birth and qu●li●y, would receive him their chief, but was mistaken in that honour, Fol. 155.  
Thirdly, it is said of this Earl of Essex, that he went Deputy into Ireland, Fol. 234. Whereas indeed he was not sent over into Ireland with the Title of Deputy, but by the more honourable Title of Lord Levi●enant, having power to create a Lord Deputy under him, when his occasions or the the necessities of the state should require his absence.  
Fol. 2●1. The 26. of February 1000. was born the King's third son, and Christn●● Charles at Dunferling.] The King's third son, and afterwards his Successor in the Crown of England, was not born on the 26. of February, but on the 19 of Nove●●er, as is averred by all others who have written of it, and publicly attested by the annual ringing of Bells upon that day in the City of London during the whole time of his p●wer and prosperity. The like mistake we find in the ti●e and day of the Birth of Queen Elizabeth of whom it is ●●id, Fol. 261. (25.) That she gave up the Ghost to G●d o● that day of her Birth, from whom she had it; intimating tha● she died on the Eve of the same Lady-day on which she was born. But the truth is, that she was born on the Eve of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary being the seventh day of September, and died on the Eve of the Annunciation, being the 24. of March.  
And so much for the History of the Reign of Queen Mary, and King james her Son, as to the Realm of Scotland only; both of them Crowned (as) james the fifth had also been) in their tenderest infancy. But whereas our Author tells us Fol. 8. that Q Mary 〈◊〉 the kingdom to her son, who was born a King; I can by no means yield to that. I find indeed, that our Saviour Christ was born King of the jews, and so proclaimed to be by the Angel Gabriel at the very time of his Conception. And I have read that Sapores, one of the Kings of Persia, was not only born a King, but crowned King too before his birth; for his Father dying withou●●●ue (as the story saith) left his wife with child, which child the Magis▪ having signified by their Art to be a Male, the Persian Princes caused the Crown and Royal Ornaments to be set upon his Mother's Belly; acknowledging him there by for their King and Sovaraign. But so it was not with King james, who was born on the 19 of june Anno. 1566. and Crowned King on the 24. of july (being the 5. day after his Mother's resignation of the Crown and Government) Anno. 1567.   

ADVERTISEMENTS ON THE REIGN & DEATH OF KING JAMES, Of GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE and IRELAND, the first.  
WE are now come unto the Reign of King james▪ as King of England, or rather as King of England and Scotland, under the notion of Great Britain, of whose reception, as he passed through Godmanchest●r, the Historian telleth us, that,  
Fol. 270. At Godmanchester in the County of Notthamptonshire, they presented him with 70 Teem of Horses, etc. be●●g his Tenants, and holding their Land by that Tenure.] But first, God●a●chester is not in Northampton, but in Hunti●gtonshire. And secondly, Though it be a custom for those in Godmanch●ster, to show their Bravery to the Kings of England in that rustical Pomp, yet I conceive it not to be the Tenure which they hold their Lands by: For Camden, who is very punctual in observing Tenors, mentions not this as a Tenure, but a Custom only, adding withal, that they make their boast, That they have in former time received the Kings of England, as they passed in their progress this way, with ninescore Ploughs brought forth in a rustical kind of Pomp for a gallant show: 
Camden Brit. l. 510.  If only for a gallant show, or a rustical Pomp, than not observed by them as their Tenure, or if a Tenure, not 〈◊〉 from ninescore to 70. all Tenors being ●ixt, not variable at the will of the Tenants.  
Fol. 273. This most honourable Order of the Garter, was instituted by King Edward the third, etc.] So far our Author, right enough as unto the ●ounder, and rig●● enough as to the time of the institution, which he placeth in the year, 1350. But whereas he telleth us withal, that this Order was founded by King Edward the third, 〈◊〉 John of France, and King James of Scotland, being then Prisoner's in the Tower of London, and King Henry of Castille, the Bastard expulsed, and Don Pedro restored by the Prince of Wales, called the Black Prince; in that he is very much mistaken. For first, It was David King of the Scots, not james, who had been taken Prisoner by this King's Forces, there being no james King of the Scots, in above fifty years after. Secondly, john of France was not taken Prisoner till the year 1356. nor Henry of Castille expulsed by the Prince of Wales, till ten years after, Anno 1366. By consequence, neither of those two great Actions could precede the Order: But worse is he mistaken in the Patron Saint, of whom he tells us, that,  
Fol. 273. Among sundry men of valour in ancient days, was Geo. born at Coventry in England, etc.] This, with the rest that follows, touching the Actions and Achievements of Sir George of Coventry, is borrowed from no better Author, than the doughty History of the Seven Champion's of Christendom, of all that trade in Knighthood-errant, the most empty Babble: about had our Author looked so high as the Records of the Order, the titles of Honour writ by Selden, the Catalogue of Honour, published by Mills of Canterbury, Camden's Britannia, or any other less knowing Antiquary, he might have found, that this most noble Order was not dedicated to that fabulous Knight, S●●. George of Coventry, but to the famous Saint and Soldier of Christ Jesus, St. George of Cappadocia: A Saint so universally received in all parts of Christendom, so generally attested to by the Ecclesiastical Writers of all Ages, from the time of his Martyrdom, till this day; that no one Saint in all the Calendar, (those mentioned in the holy Scriptures excepted only) can be better evidenced: Nor doth he find in Matthew Parts, that St. George fought in the air at Antioch in behalf of the English (the English having at that time no such interess in him) but that he was thought to have been seen fight in behalf of the Christians.  
Fol. 275. Earldoms without any place are likewise of two kinds, either in respect of Office, as Earl-Morshal of England, or by Birth, and so are all the King's Sons.] In the Authority and truth of this I am much unsatisfied, as never having met with any such thing in the course of my reading; and I behold it as a diminution to the Sons of Kings to be born but Earls, whereby they are put in an equal rank with the eldest sons of Dukes in England, who commonly have the Title of their Father's Earldoms. since it is plain they are born Princes, which is the highest civil Dignity next to that of Kings: It was indeed usual with the Kings of England, to bestow upon their youngest Sons some Earldom or other, until the time of Edward the third; after which time, they were invested with the Title of Dukes, as appears evidently to any who are studied in their Chronologies: But that they, or any of them, were Earls by Birth, is a new piece of learning, for which if the Historian can give me any good proof, I shall thank him for it.  
Fol. 278. Henry the eight thus cozened into some kindness, both by his own power and purse, makes Charles Emperor, and the French King his Prisoner, 1519.] Neither so, nor so: For first, though King Henry did contribute both his power and purse to the taking of the French King Prisoner, yet to the making of Charles Emperor, he contributed neither the one nor the other. And secondly, though Charles were created Emperor, Anno 1519 yet the French King was not taken Prisoner till six years after, Anno 1525.  
Fol. 31●. Oswald united the Crowns of England and Scotland, which were 〈◊〉 afterwards for many Ages.] (3●) That Oswald King of Northumberland here mentioned, was a Puissant Prince (as being the ninth Monarch of the English) I shall easily grant; but that he united the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland, is not any where found: Our Author therefore must be understood, of his uniting the two Realms of De●ra and Pernicia, (part of which last, hath for long time been accounted part of Scotland) which after his decease were again divided.  
Fol. 317. Whose Results, notwithstanding, are not to be obtruded on the S●culars, to be observed with the Authority of Laws, until they be allowed by assent of the King and both Houses.] An error far more pardonable in our present Author, to whom the concernments of the Church are not so necessary to be known or studied, then in our Church Historian, where before we had it, and which hath had a full Confutation in our Animadversions, to which, for brevity sake, I shall now refer.  
Fol. 320. Rory Duke of Solia from France.] Either the Printer or the Author are mistaken here: The Ambassador who was sent from France, was neither called Rory, nor Duke of Solia, but Marquis of Rhosney, created afterward Duke of Sully, and Lord High Treasurer of that Kingdom, by King Henry 4. A Protestant, and therefore purposely selected for that employment: Of whom it is reported in the conference at Hampton-Court, that having observed the order and gravity of our Church Service, in the Cathedral Church at C●n●erbury, he was heard to say, that if the like had been used in France, there would have been many thousands of Protestants more than were at that present.  
Fol. 329. Ce●il fo● his good Service was created Earl of Salisbury,] That is to say, (for so it must be understood) for his activity and diligence in discovering the Powder-Treason: But he was Earl of Salisbury before that Discovery, called so by the Historian himself, in the course of tha● Na●rative, and made so by King james in the M●y foregoing, at what time also, his Brother, Thomas Lord Burley was made Earl of EXCESTER.  
The like mistake I find in the advancement of Thomas Lord Buckhurst to the Earldom of Dorcet, placed by the Author, fol. 342. in the year 1605. whereas indeed he was created Earl of Dorcet in the first year of King james, March 13. Anno 1603.  
Fol. 333. The Earl of Flanders, etc. being by Storm cast upon our Coast, etc. was fain to yield to all the King's demands, in delivering up the Countess of Warwick, and other Fugitives resident in Flanders.] This story is well meant, but not rightly told, there being at that time no Earl of Flanders (commonly so called) to be cast upon the Coast of England, nor any such Woman as a Countess of Warwick, whom King Henry the seventh could be afraid of; the truth is, that the person here meant, was Philip King of Castille, Duke of Burgundy, Earl of Flanders, etc. who in his return from Spain, was driven by Tempest on the Coast of England, and being Royally Feasted by King Henry the seventh, was detained here till he had delivered into the King's hands the Earl of Suffolk, who had fled into the Nether-lands for protection, and began to work new troubles against his Sovereign: The story whereof we have at large in the History of King Henry the seventh, writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban, from fol. 222. to 225.  
Fol. 334 The fate of that Family evermore false to the crown] This spoken of the Piercies, Earls of Northumberland, too often false to the Crown, though not always so: For Henry, the second Earl of this Family, lost his life fight for King Henry the sixth, in the Battle of St. Alban, as Henry his Son and Successor also did at the Battle of ●owton: And so did Henry the fifth Earl, in the time of King Henry the seventh, for his Fidelity to that King, in a tumultuous Insurrection of the Common People; not to say any thing of his Son and Successor, who died without any imputation of such disloyalty.  
Fol. 362. Zutphen and Gelder's did of right belong to the Duk● Arnold, who being Prisoner with the last Duke of Burgundy, who died before Nancy, that Duke intruded upon his Possession, etc.] (40.) Not so, it was not Arnold Duke of Gelder's, that was Imprisoned by Charles Duke of Burgundy, but his Son Adolphus, who having most ungratiously Imprisoned his aged Father, was vanquished by Duke Charles, and by him kept Prisoner, and the old Duke restored again to his power and liberty: In a grateful acknowledgement of which favour, he made a Donation of his Estates to Duke Charles and his Heirs, to commence after his decease; though it took no effect, till Conquered under that pretence by Charles the fifth, uniting it unto the rest of his Belgic Provinces, Anno 1538.  
Fol. 423. Sir William Seymour, Grandchild to the third Son and the Heir of the Earl of Hertford, created by Henry the eighth, whose sister he married, etc. And being thus near the Crown, etc.] In this business of Sir William Seymer, now Marquis of Hertford, there are two mistakes. For first, the Earl of Hertford from whom he derived his descent, married not any of the Sisters of King Henry the eighth, he having but two Wives in all, the first, the Daughter of Filol of Woodland, from whom comes Baronet Seymer of the West; the second, Anne Daughter of Sir Edward, and Sister to Sir Michael Stanhop, from whom descends the House of Hertford, still in being: It's true, King Henry married a Sister of Sir Edward Seymer, by him created Earl of Hertford, but not é contra; the Earl of Hertford married not with a sister of his.  
Secondly, The nearness of this House to the Crown of England, came not from any such Marriage of this first Earl with that King's Sister, but from the Marriage of Edward the second Earl, with a Niece of that Kings, that is to say, with 〈◊〉, Daughter of Henry Duke of Suffolk, and of F●a●ces his Wife, one of the Daughters of Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk, and of Mary the French Queen, King 〈◊〉 Sister.  
Fol. 427. The late French King, Henry the fourth, had three Daughters, the one married to the Duke of Savoy, &c] This Marriage, both for the time and person, is mistaken also.  
First, for the time, in making it to precede the match with Spain; whereas the cross Marriages with Spain, were made in the year 1612. and this with Savoy not trans-acted till the year 1618.  
Secondly, for the Person, which he makes to be the eldest Daughter of Henry the fourth, and Elizabeth married into Spain to be the second, whereas Elizabeth was the eldest Daughter, and Christienne married into Savoy the second only: For which, consult james Howels History of Lewis the 13. fol. 13. & 42.  
Fol. 428. The story was, that his Ancestors at Plough, ●lew Malton, an High-land Rebel, and dis-comfited his Train (using no other Weapon but his Gear and Tackle.] But Camden, whom I rather credit, tells us, That this was done in a great fight against the Danes: For speaking of the Earls of Arrol. he derives the Pedigree from one Hay, a man of exceeding strength, and excellent courage; who, together with his Sons, in a dangerous Battle of Scots against the Danes, at Longcarty, caught up an Ox Yoke, and so valiantly, 
Camden in Scot fol. 42.  and fortunately withal, what with fight, and what with exhorting, reinforced the Scots at the point to shrink and recoil, that they had the day of the Danes, and the King, with the States of the Kingdom, ascribed the Victory and their own safety to his valour and prowess.  
Ibid. But to boot, he sought out a good Heir (Gup my Lady Dorothy) sole Daughter to the Lord Denny.] This spoken of Sir james Hay, afterwards Viscount Doncaster and Earl of Car●●sle, who indeed married the Daughter and sole Heir of the L. Denny of Waltham: But he is out for all that in his Gup my Lady, her name being Honora and not Dorothy, as the Author makes it. And for his second Wife, one of the Daughters of Henry Piercy, E. of Northhumberland; she was neither a Dorothy, nor an Hei●: And therefore we must look for this Gup my Lady in the House of Huntingdon, that bald Song being made on the Marriage of the Lady Dorothy Hastings, Daughter of George Earl of Huntingdon, with a Scotish Gentleman, one Sir james Steward, slain afterward at ●●●ington by Sir George Wharton (who also perished by his Sword) in a single Combat.  
Fol. 429. Amongst many others that accompanied Hays expedition, was Sir Henry Rich, Knight of the Bath, and Baron of Kensington▪] Knight of the Bath at that time, but not Baron of Kensington; this Expedition being placed by our Author in the year 1616. and Sir Henry Rich not being made Baron of Kensington till the 20 year of King james, Ann● 1622.  
Fol. 434. The chief judge thereof, is called Lordchief justice of the Common Pleas, accompanied with three or four Assistants, or Associates, who are created by Letters Patents from ●he King.] But Doctor Cowel, in his learned and laborious work, called The Interpreter, hath informed us otherwise: This justice, saith he, (speaking of the chief Justice of the King's Bench) hath no Patent under the Broad-Seal: He is made only by Writ, which is a short one to this effect: Regina johanni Popham Militi salutem: Sciatis quod constituimus 〈◊〉 I●st●ciarium nostrum Capitalem, ad Placita coram nobis ter●●nandum, durante bene placito nostro, Teste, etc. For this he citeth Crompton, a right learned Lawyer, in his Book of the jurisdiction of Courts: And what he saith of that chief Justice, the practice of these times, and the times preceding▪ hath verified in all the rest.  
Fol. 450. She being afterwards led up and down the King's Army, under oversight as a Prisoner, but showed to the people 〈◊〉 if reconciled to her Son, etc.] Not so, for after the deat● of the Marquis D'Aucre, she retired to Blois, where 〈◊〉 lived for some years under a restraint, till released by the Du●● of E●p●rnon, and prtly by force, p●rtly by treaty, restore again into power and favour with her Son, which she improv●● afterwards to an omne-regen●y, till Richeleu her great Assistant, finding himself able to stand without her, and not enduring a Competitor in the Affairs of State, mde her leave the Kingdom.  
Fol. 45●. By his first Wife he had b●t one S●n, ris●●g no higher in Honour then Knight and Baronet: Yet afterwards he had preferment to the Government of Ulster Province in Ireland.] This spoken, but mistakingly spoken of Sir George V●lliers, Father of the Duke of Buckingham, and his eldest son.  
For first, Sir George Villiers had two sons by a former Wife, that is to say, Sir William Villiers Knight and Baronet, who preferred the quiet and repose of a Country life, before that of the Court; and Sir Edward Villiers, who by a Daughter of Sir john St. john of Lidiard, in the County of Wilts, was Father of the Lord Viscount Gra●d●son, now living.  
And secondly, It was not Sir William, but Sir Edward Villiers, who had a Government in Ireland, as being by the Power and Favor of the Duke his halfa Brother, made Lord Precedent of M●nster, (not of Ulster) which he held till his death.  
And whereas it is said, fol. 466. that the D●ke twi●te● himself and his Issue, by inter-marri●ges with the best and most ●noble: If the Author, instead of his Issue, had said his ●●ndred, it had been more properly and more truly spoken: For the Duke lived not to see the Marriage of any one of his children, though a Contract had passed between his Daughter Mary and the Heir of Pembroke; but he had so disposed of h●s Female Kindred, that there were more Countesses and honourable Ladies of his Relations, then of any one Family 〈◊〉 the Land.  
Fol. 458. Henry the eighth, created Anne Bullen 〈◊〉 of Pembroke, before he married her.] The Author here ●●eaks of the Creation of Noble Women, and maketh that of ●nne Bullen to be the first in that kind, whereas indeed it as the second, if not the third. For Margaret, Daughter 〈…〉  
 
Fol. 4●4 And that Com●t at Ch●ists birth was 〈…〉 But first the Star which appeared at the birth of our 〈◊〉, and conducted the wise men to jerusalem, was of condition too sublime and supernatural to be called a Comet: and so resolved to be by all●learned men who have written of it.  
And secondly, had it been a Comet, it could not possibly have portended the death of Nero; there passing between the b●●th of Chr●st, and the death of that Tyrant about 〈◊〉 year●, too long a time to give unto the influences of th● strongest Comet. So that although a Comet did presage th● death of Nero, as is said by Tacitus; yet could not that Comet be the 〈◊〉 which the Scriptures speak of.  
Fol. 48● Ferdinand meets at Frankford, with the three 〈◊〉, Men●●, Colen, and Trevours; the other three Silesia▪ Moravia, and Lu●atia, failing in their persons, sent●their 〈…〉 I more admire at this gross pie●● of ignorance then at all the rest, Silesia, Moravia, and 〈…〉 incorporated with the Realm of 〈◊〉 being n●ver qualified with sending any Electors ●or th● choice of the Emperor. The three Electors which he meaneth, were the Count Palatine of the R●●ne, the Duke of Saxony, and the Marquis of Brandenburg, and they not coming in Person to the 〈◊〉 at Frackford, appeared there by their Ambassadors as at other times.  
A like mistake, but far more pardonable, o●curreth Fol. 484. Where Da●mstal is said to be a Town of Bohemia; whereas indeed it is a Town of the Land of H●ssen, the whole Territories of the Duke of Saxony being interposed betwixt this Town and the nearest parts of that Kingdom.  
Fol. 489. The Lord Marchers after the Conquest were resident upon the Confines and borders of the Welsh, and other places not subdued; men of valour, of high blood of the Normans, with the name and privileges of the Earls of Chester] That the Lord Marchers on the Borders of Wales were at first many in number as it after followeth, is a truth undoubted. But their power being contracted into fewer hands, one of them (Roger Mortimer by name) was by King Edward the third made Earl of March. The Earldom of Chester was of another foundation; conferred by William the Conqueror upon Hugh surnamed Lupus, Son to the Viscount of Auranches in Normandy, with all the Rites and Privileges of a County Palatine to him and to his Heirs for ever. So that this honour being appropriated to the Heirs of that House, was not Communicable unto any of the rest of the Marchers, nor could those Marchers claim the stile and privileges of Earls of Chester.  
Fol. 490. Sir. Edward Montague had three sons, Edward the eldest Knight of the Bath etc.] The Author here is much mistaken in the House of the Montagues.  
For first, that Edward Montague▪ who was 〈…〉 etc. was not Brother to james Bishop of Winchester, a●d Henry Earl of Manchester, but their Brother's Son, that is to say, the Son of another E●ward their eldest Brother.  
Secondly, besides that, Edward, james, and Henry, there was another Brother whom the Author names not, though he could not choose but know the man, viz. Sir Sidney Mon●●●●, one o● the Masters of the Requests to the late King 〈◊〉. Therefore to set this matter right, I am to let both him and his Readers know, that Sr. Edward Montague chief Justice ●n the time of King Edward the sixth▪ was father of another Edward who lived peaceably and nobly in his own Country. To whom succeeded a third Edw●rd, who 〈…〉 in the Wars, and gained the reputation of a good Commander▪ the elder Brother of james, Henry, and 〈◊〉 before mentioned, and the father of a fourth Ed●●●● who was made Knight of the Bath, at the Coronation 〈…〉 Anno 1●03 and afterwards created Lord 〈◊〉 of Bough●on in the nin●teenth year of that King Anno 1621. which honourable Title is now enjoyed by his Son (another Edward) Anno. 1658.  
And thirdly th●●gh ● grant that Dr. james Montag●e Bishop of Winch●ster (the second Brother of the four) was of great power and favour in the time of King james, and might have free access into the Bedchamber of that King whensoever he pleased▪ ye● that he was of the Bed chamber (as the Author saith) that i● to say, admitted formerly thereunto and one of that number, I do more than doubt.  
Fol. 506. Then comes john Howard etc. created by Richard the 〈◊〉 Duke of Northfolk, but not Earl Marshal] In this and in the ●●st that follows, touching the succession of the Earls Marshals, there a●e many mistaken.  
F●r first t●is john Lord Howard was by Richard the third ●ot only created Duke of Northfolk, but Earl Mar●●●ll also as appears by Camd●n Folly 483.  
Secondly, as well Thomas Earl of Surrey the son of this 〈◊〉, as an●th●r Thomas, the son of that Thomas, were both advanced 〈◊〉 the office of Earl Marshal as is affirmed by such as have writ the Genealogies of this noble family  
Thirdly, that Thomas Howard, whom queen Mary restored unto the Office of Earl Marshal, was not the Grandchild of Thomas M●wbray, ●ut the Grandchild of the Grandchild of the Daughter of that Thomas Mowbray, as will appear to any who shall search that Pedigree. But this perhaps may be an error of the Printer in giving us the name of Thomas Mowbray for Thomas Howard.  
Fourthly, though Robert Dev●r●ux Earl of Essex is by our Author placed next after this last Thom●s H●ward in the Office of Marshal; yet sure it is, that Georg Talbot Earl of Shrewbury came in between them, advanced unto that Dignity by Queen Elizabeth Anno 157●.  
Fol. 507. He 〈◊〉 the eminent Structure of the Library of St. john's in Cambridge where he had been Master for many years.] This spoken of Dr. William's then Bishop of Lincoln and Lord Keeper, who certainly was never Master of that College; though by his power and and party in that Society he advanced Dr. Gwin who had been his Tutor, unto that place, as is affirmed in the Church History of B●itain. Lib. 11. fol. 225. It may be Mr. Williams was at that time of the same mind with ●harles Mart●l, of whom it is affirmed that he chose rather to make a King then to be a King. Non sword regn●re, sed R●gibus 〈…〉 as the old verse hath it. Or else perhaps we may say of him as T●citus does of Mutian●s. Cui facil●us er●t 〈…〉; that is to say, that it was easier for him to procure the mastership for another, then to obtain it for himself. But howsoever it was, it seems to have been carried by strong 〈◊〉 canvas, of which Nation both the Pupil and the Scholar were, as appear by these H●xameters following, in which the four Competitors are thus laid before us.  
 
Fol. 〈◊〉 Th● 〈◊〉 of that Protestation 〈◊〉 me●● 〈…〉 Regni negotiis, but left out Quibusdam, 〈…〉 particular cases as the King 〈…〉] This spoken of a Protestation entered b●●ome of the House of Commons Anno 1621. concerning 〈◊〉 of their pretended Rights and Privileges; in which they 〈◊〉 mista●en, (and I wonder the Author did not see it) in 〈◊〉 the ve●y grounds on which they built it. For by the writ of summons the Commons were not called to consult of any thing either great of little, difficult or not difficult, whatsomever it was; but only 〈◊〉 consentiendum, & faciendum, to consent to and perform such things as by the great Council of the Realm● consisting of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, should be then ordained, as by the very ywrit itself doth at large appear. By which it seems that the Commons assembled in Parliament, were of themselves so far from being any 〈◊〉 o● that supreme Cou●t, that they were not to be counted for a part of the King's great Council. So that the foundation being 〈◊〉, the Superstructure could not stand which was built upon it. But for the Protestation which gave the first hint to those bold demands, which afterwards were made by some of the Commons, it was this that followeth.  

The Protestation of the Commons'.  
Ia●. 19 1621.  
THe Commons now assembled in Parliament, being justly occasioned thereunto, concerning 〈…〉 L●b●rties, Franchises, and Privileges 〈…〉 among others here mentioned, do 〈…〉 Protestation following: That the Liber●●● 〈…〉 Privileges, and Jurisdiction of Parliament, are the Ancient and undoubted Birthright, and inheritance of the Subjects of England, and that the arduous and urgent affairs concerning the King, State, and defence of the Realm, and of the Church of England, and the maintenance and making of Laws, and redress of mischief and grievances, which daily happen within this Realm, are proper subjects, and matter of Counsel, and debate in Parliament: And that in the handling and proceeding of those businesses, every member of Parliament hath, and of right aught to have Freedom of Speech, to propound treat, reason, and bring to conclusion the same: And that the Commons in Parliament have likewise Liberty and freedom to treat of the matters, in such order as in their judgements shall seem fittest: And that every Member of the said house hath like Freedom from all impeachment, imprisonment, and molestation, (other then by censure of the house itself) for or concerning any speaking, reasoning or declaring any matter, or matters touching the Parliament or Parliament businesses. And that if any of the said Members be complained of, and questioned for any thing done or said in Parliament, the same is to be showed to the King by the advice and assent of all the Commons assembled in Parliament▪ before the King give credence to any private Information.   
Fol. 523. Hereupon the Members became Subjects again.] This I conceive to have been spoken by the Author in the way of Irony, as in the same way of Irony, the Members of the House of Commons were sometimes called by King james the Five hundred Kings: For otherwise, our Author knows, as well as any, that the Members are as much Subjects in the time of their sitting, as they are or can be after the time of their Dissolution.  
Fol. 527. And though Tiberius beheaded Cremutius for words only.] That Cremutius Cordus was impeached in the Senate for words only, is affirmed by Tacitus: But that he was beheaded for it by Tiberius, is affirmed by none; that Author telling us, that having made his Defence in the open Senate, and returning home, Abstinenti● vitam finivit: He ended his life by a wilful abstinence from food: Nor was 〈◊〉 sentenced by the Senate to any other punishment, then that his Books should be publicly burnt, (Libros per Aediles cremandos censuere Patres) which was done accordingly, the shame & grief whereof, made him end his life as before is said.  
Fol. 528. But in a word, their great Wealth was one notable ba●● to the Popes, and the Gulf of other Orders, Hospitallers, Knights of the Rhodes, and St. John's: All these together smack this Order, and swallowed their Riches at one time; by consent of all the Princes in Christendom, where they had their Habitations.] Where were our Author's Wits when these words fell from him? Hospitallers, Knights of Rhodes, and of St. john's, all these together; and yet all these together make one Order only, as Marcus Tullius Cicero, made one only Orator: Called by these several names, for several reasons; called Hospitallers, because they had the charge of the Hospital at jerusalem, erected for relief of Pilgrims to that holy place.  
Secondly, Knights of St. john's, because founded in the Church of St. john in jerusalem, and dedicated unto him as their Patron Saint.  
Thirdly, 〈◊〉 of the Rhodes, from the settled place of their habitation (after their expulsion out of Palestin) from the year ●●09. till the year 1522. when forced to leave that Island by Sol●man the Magnificent, they retired unto the Isle of Malta, from whence now denominated.  
Folly 529. From whom Digby had knowledge of that King's Progress towards ●he North of Spain, to Lerma, a Town in Bis●ay.] That Lerm is situate towards the Northern parts of Spain, I shall readily grant; and yet not as a Town of Bis●ay, but of old Castille, situate not far from Burgos, the chief of that Province.  
So also by a like error in Topography, St. Andrews, (Saint Anderos the Spaniards call it) is made to be a part of Biscay, 〈◊〉 530. whereas indeed it is a well known Haven of the Realm of Leon and Ovi●do, neighbouring on the Sea to Bis●ay, ●ut no part thereof.  
And now we are thus fallen on the Coast of Spain, I should ●ake notice of the Procuration which is said by our Author ●o be left with the Earl of Bristol, for impowring him to Espouse the Infant●, within ten days after the Dispensation came from Rome, fol. 552.  
But hereof th●re hath so much been said by the Observator on the History of the Reign of King Charles, published by Haimon L'Strange Esq and the defence of those Observations against the Pamphleter, that nothing needs be added here on that occasion.  
Fol. 567. Indeed the Savoy Ambassador there said, That the intention of the King of Spain was, for a cross match with France for himself. ● It is not to be doubted, but that the Spaniard tried all ways, and used all Artifices to divert the Treaty of a Marriage between the Prince of Wales and a Daughter of France: But I cannot look upon it as a thing conceivable, that he should pretend to any such cross Alliance for himself, as is here alleged. He had before married the eldest Sister, who was still alive, and therefore could not pretend to the younger also: And if it was not for himself (as indeed it was not) it cannot be imagined that he could give himself any hopes of it for any of his younger Brethren; there being so vast a disproportion between the Heir apparent of England, and any younger Brother of the House of Austria▪ The Ambassador of Savoy might act something in order to the service and Designs of the Catholic King, which could not be advanced by any such suggestion as is here laid downs▪ And therefore our Author might have done very well to have spared his pains in giving us such a reason for the Interruption▪ which was made in the Treaty of this Marriage by the Agents of the King of Spain, as indeed cannot stand with reason.  
And thus far have I gone in running over the most material errors and defects of Mr. sanderson's Complete History, (as he calls it) of Mary Queen of Scotland, and King James her Son▪ the sixth of that name in Scotland, and the first in England▪ before the coming out of that large and voluminous piece, entitled, A complete History of the Life and Reign of King Charles, from his Cradle to his Grave; in the doing whereof, I proposed unto myself no other ends, than first to vindicate the truth, and next to do some right to the Author himself, whom I looked on as a man well principled, and of no ill affections to the Church or State: And having finished it with as much brevity as I could, it was intended only as an Appendix to the work precedent, though now upon the coming out of the other piece, it serves as a preamble to that, as having the precedence of it both in time and method; what moved me to the undertaking and examination of the following History, I have declared at large in the Preface unto those Advertisements which are made upon it, wherein I have carried myself, with more respect unto his person, and far less Acrimony in the Phrase and garb of my Expressions, there he hath reason to expect.  
His most unhandsome dealing with me in the Book itself; seconded by a more ridiculous manifestation of his Spleen and Passion in his post has●e Reply, etc. might well have sharpened one of a duller edge to cry quittance with him: But I consider rather what is fit for me to do, then for him to suffer, and have not yet forgot the Lesson which I learned in one of the Morals of my Aesop's Fables, where I was taught to imitate those generous Horses, Qui latrantes caviculos cum contempt● praetereunt, which said, I passed on with a quiet and pacific mind to the rest that follows.   


ADVERTISMENTS On a Book Entitled THE COMPLETE HISTORY OF THE LIFE and REIGN OF KING CHARLES' From his CRADLE to his GRAVE.  Horat. De Arte Poet: 
Nec sic incipies, ut scripsit Scythicus olim,  
Fortunam Priami c●ntabo, & nobile Bellum!  
Quid dignum tanto quaerit hic promissor hiatu?   

A SHORT SURVEY OF Mr. sanderson's long HISTORY OF THE Life and REIGN of King CHARLES. AS ALSO Of the Motives which induced the Author of these Advertisments to engage in this business.  
THere are two things as necessary to the writing Histories, as to the Composing of Orations, or any other Philosophical, Civil, or Divine discourses; that is to say, clearness of Method, and perspicuity of Language. For if the Method be irregular and inartificial, the Reader will soon find himself in a wood, in which he can neither travel with pleasure, nor stand still with profit. Or if the Language be unpleasing, or rendered less intelligible to the vulgar Reader, either by new affected words, not to be understood without the help of a Dictionary, or by obscure expressions which require a Comment; he stands deprived of that contentment which otherwise would beguile him to the end of the work, before he thinks he is half way in it. In which respect a perspicuous comeliness of words, and a regular 〈…〉  
N●r stand I singly by myself in this opinion of that H●●tory, but find it seconded by others of good 〈◊〉 and quality. A judicious and learned friend 〈◊〉 mine having read it over, gave me this judgement of ● without my seeking, and as such time as I am sure 〈◊〉 never dreamt of my engaging in this business. I 〈◊〉 spent some hours (saith he) upon his other two Histories of Ma●y Queen of Sco●s, and King 〈◊〉 her ●on, wherein though I find not many 〈◊〉 untruths, yet much stealing from 〈…〉 and Cambden, and methinks he 〈◊〉 nothing like a Historian either 〈…〉 Compo●●● 〈…〉 sentences many time 〈◊〉, and his Digre●●ons ●edious and impertiment. But this being a private Adver●●ment, and but la●ely given, could not come time enough to the ●ares of this Author (had it been so meant) that he might thereby have rectified any thing which was observed to be 〈…〉 or method. And therefore I r●fer him to a passage 〈…〉 Book entitled Observations upon some particular pe●so●s and passages in the Complete History o● Ma●y Queen of Scots etc. which I am sure came to 〈◊〉 and●, because he returned an Answer to it. The Author of which observations tells us; That his whole Book is but a rhapsody of notes and 〈◊〉 papers 〈◊〉 other men collected without either Order or Method, being exceedingly defective both in time, place ●and nominations, and written in so unseemly and disjointed a stile, that we may easily perceive he hath taken up other men's words without understanding their matter; and unless it be where he raileth on persons of Honour, (which he doth plainly and often, though sometimes very falsely) his Language is dark, harsh, and unintelligible.  
According to this last censure, the Author of this History stands not only charged with want of ●are in the digesting of his matter, and the well languag●ing of the same (as was observed in the private Letter before mentioned) but with railing on 〈◊〉 Persons of Honour without ground or truth. So that being publicly forewarned, it might have been presumed that in 〈…〉 he would have 〈◊〉 and amended whatsoever was observed to be defective in the other, or condemned in it. But some there are, who ha●e to be reform in the Psalmists Language; others, who think it an acknowledgement of their wants and weaknesses, if they persist not in the same way which before they walked in. I am so charitable to the Author of the present History, as not to rank him with the first, though I have reason to believe that he is willing to be reckoned amongst the second. We might have otherwise expected such a Reformation in those particulars as might very well have stood with ingenuity, and without disparagement. But on the contrary, the Earl of A●undel, my Lord Finch, and Sr. Francis Winde●anck, persons of eminence and Honour are brought under the Lash; two of them being unjustly condemned for professed Papists, and the third for doing somewhat, but he knows not what, which had lost his head if he had not saved it by his heels. His Method as perplexed and confused, his Language as rugged and uneven as before it was. It seems it did concern him in the point of Decorum to make the History of this King alike both in form and matter, unto those of his Ancestors, and that his picture should not be laid with better colours then the others were; facies not omnibus una— Nec diversa ●amen, as we know who says.  
I know some who affect Brevity, do many times fall into Obscurity. Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus ●io, as 〈◊〉 in his Book de Art poe ica. But in a piece of such prolixity as this is, the Author had room and scope enough to express himself clearly and intelligibly even to an ordinary Reader, which renders him the more inexcusable amongst knowing men: His History made much longer by Incorporating into it his late Majesties most excellent Meditations and Divine Discourses (those Men●is aureae 〈…〉) comprised in the Book called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or, The Portraiture of his sacred Majesty in his Sol●●udes and Sufferings, A Book which rather ought to have been preserved by its self, like Apples of Gold in P●●●ures of Silver, etc. to be engraven on Pillars of Marble, with a Pen of Diamond, then to be buried in the Grave of an obscure Writer, like a Pearl in an Oister-shell, or to be sowed like a piece of the richest purple cloth (purpureus late qui splendeat, in the Poet's expression) to such a sorry Web of homespun.  
Yet these defects might the more easily have been pardoned, if he had either been more careful in the choice of his matter, or diligent in searching for the truth of those things which he hath delivered: But on the contrary, his matter is many times taken up without care or Judgement, without consideration of the fitness or unfitness of it; as if an History, which is to be the Storehouse of time, were to be stowed with things unnecessary, unprofitable, and of no use at all: And yet his failings in the truth of that which he delivers to us, are more to be condemned, be●au●e more dangerous in themselves, and of worse consequence in respect of the Reader, than his neglect in the choice of his matter: For he that comes unto the reading of an History, comes with a co●●idence that he shall find nothing b●● the truth, though possibly the A●d it might have been presumed the rather, because 〈◊〉 was resolvend before ●and ●o to provoke the 〈◊〉 or his Altar 〈◊〉 (●e he who he will) as might 〈◊〉 him that his Errors were not like to be con●●a●d from the eyes of other, if such a provocation should be ●●●banded to his 〈…〉.  
But however he goes o●, and lays down many things for truth, which either have been proved to be false by the observator, or are contradicted by himself, or easily discernible for Errors by a vulgar Reader, not studied 〈◊〉 than 〈◊〉 Chronicle, or the weekly M●r●uries: And this he does with so great confidence, not giving th● lest acknowledgement of any Er●a●a, either ●rom the Press, or from the Pen; that if the wilful 〈…〉 an Error may ●reat● an Heresy, our Author may deserve to be enro●●● for the first Heretic in point of History: And why ●●t Heresies ●n History; as well as Heresies in Law; with which last crime john 〈◊〉 stands accused in Print by Mr. Justice German, for saying that the Jurors were Judges in point of Law, and not only ●n a matter of fact: Errare p●ss●m, Here● icus ess● 〈◊〉, was esteemed a pious resolu●ion in a Case of Divinity, and may be held for a good rule in any matter of History, Philosophy, Law or Physic, or any other Art or Faculty of what ●ort soever.  
But to reduce these several items to a 〈…〉 as in the History itself, considering the length, (I 〈◊〉 not say the tediousness) of it, there is much which deserves to be laid up in the Registers of succee●ing Ages; so there are many Errors ●it to be 〈…〉, and many unnecessary passages which might very judiciously have been spared & suffered to pass by without remembrance: His Hist. in this respect, may be compared to the French Army at the battle of Agincourt, of which it was merrily said by old Captain Gam, who took a view of it from an Hill, That there were men enough in it to be killed, enough to be taken and kept alive, and enough to be permitted to run away; or to the draw-net in the Gospel, which gathered of every kind of Fishes, out of which the good ones being culled and preserved in Vessels, the rest were only good enough to be cast aside.  
I cannot but acknowledge, that he hath done more right to the King and the Church of England, then could be expected in these times: V●inam sic semper err asset, as the learned Cardinal said of Calvin in the point of the Trinity: And had he took but any ordinary care in performing those things whereof he had been before advertised, or diligence in avoiding those Errors which he so often falls into, it might have deserved the name of a Complete History, by which he hath been pleased to call it: But coming to us as it is, it is no other than a Forest of Oaks, or a Quary of Marble, out of which materials may be hewn for a perfect Fabric; a Moles indigesta like the ancient Chaos, which being without Form itself, afforded Matter to the making of the most excellent Creatures: Or if he will, it is an History of Ore, which being purged of the Dross, and refined in the Language, may pass for currant amongst the best pieces of this kind.  
Which said in reference to the Author and the present History, I must say somewhat of myself, and my engaging in the survey and correction of it: Concerning which, the Reader may be pleased to know, that about Midsummer last, Mr. Sanderson found me out at my lodging in London, where after some ordinary Civilities passed between us, he told me that he had undertaken the History of King Charles, and that he was required by the Lord Primate of Ireland, to do him some right in the business of the Earl of Strafford, which he resolved so to do, and with such respect unto my person, that I should find no just cause to be offended at his writing: I answered, that I was resolved to have nothing to do in the Quarrels of the Observator, and therefore he might use his pleasure: I had a purpose thereupon of perusing the History, and taking notice of such Errors and Mistakes (if any such were) as possibly I might chance to meet with, and having so done, to send them to him, with my Conceptions and Corrections in a private way, that he might do himself the right of rectifying them in a short Review, and joining that Review to as many of the Books as remained unsold: And this he might have done with great advantage to the Reader, and without disparagement to himself; two as great Clerks as any of the age they lived in having done the like, viz. St. Austin in his Retra●lations, and Bellarmin in his Book of Recognitions: But when I came to that part of it, which concerned the Lord Primate and the Earl of Strafford, I saw myself so coarsely handled, and so despitefully reproached, that I found good cause to change my purpose, & not to take such care to save his credit, who had so little care of his own, and less of mine: Seipsum deserentem omnia deserunt, is an old Observation, but as true as ancient. He gives me roast-meat and besprinkles me with a little Court Holywater in the end of his Preface; but beat me with the spit, and basles me all over with gall and vinegar in that part of the History, which made me change my first purpose and intentions towards him.  
And yet I cannot choose but say, I was never at a greater conflict within myself (in any matter of this kind) then in the publishing or not publishing of these following papers. I had before justified myself against his Calumnies and charges in an Appendix to my answer to the part of Dr. 〈◊〉 Book, entitled The judgement of the late Primate etc. in which I found myself concerned, which was intended to come out in Print before Easter last. And thereupon I thought it best to stand aloof, without engaging further against this Author, in hope that I might have some satisfaction from him either public or private. But understanding that notice had been given unto him of some just cause for my dislike, & no acknowledgement or reparation following o● it▪ I conceived that it concerned me in point of Credit to let him see, that I knew as well how to offend an unjust Adversary, as to defend myself. In the pursuit whereof I have carried on the work with that sobriety in itself, and such respect unto his person, as cannot be displeasing to the Author, or any discerning friend of his, or unto any equal and impartial Reader.  
His Errors I have corrected, rectified his Mistakes, and a●ded here and there some Observations in the way of a Supplement. For which cause I have called these papers by the name of Adver●sments, that I might use such honest freedom as well in the last as in the first, as might conduce un●o the benefit of such as should p●cale to read them. Hi● History is not ma●e the wor●e, nor the sale thereof retarded by such Additionals and Correctives as are here pre●ented. Which though he may not thank me for, yet I am apt to flatter myself that I may receive some thanks from others. Howsoever I shall comfort myself with this, that I have not trespassed against good manners or the truth, the vindicating of which last, hath been the main impulsive to this undertaking. And being com●ort●d in that, I shall the better endure such censures either of pragmaticalness, or the love of revenge, which may perhaps be laid upon me by such as do not understand me. Dele●a●it tame●se Conscientia, quod est A●imi pa●ulum incredibili jucundi●ate persusum, as Lactantius hath it. With which I shut up this Survey, and proceed to the business.    

ADVERTISEMENTS ON A BOOK Entitled A Complete HISTORY OF THE LIFE and REIGN OF KING CHARLES' From his CRADLE to his GRAVE.  
THE Author of the History which we have before us entitles it, A complete History of the Life and Reign of King Charles from his Cradle to his Grave. By which the Reader might expect a complete Account of all the passages of his life, not only from his coming to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, but from his first coming into the world; In which interval, besides the nature and condition of his education, First, under Mr. Thomas Murrey, and afterwards under the immediate care of King james his Father; he had the conduct of one of the most weighty Affairs of State that ever was managed by any prince in his father's life time. And if james Howel in writing the life of Lewis 13. thought fit to begin his History with the acts of his Daulphinage, which could afford no great variety of matter, considering he came unto the Crown at ten years of age; assuredly the first part of the life of King rash assuming of the Crown of 〈◊〉 and that it gave the Sp●niards a free pass for his Italian forces to march towards the Netherlands▪ I shall adventure to lay down the first cause of that Quarrel.  
It was about the year 1●15. that a design was put into the head of the Bishop of Spires, being an Homager and Feudatory of the Prince Elector Palat●●e, to for●●fie the Town and Castle of Vdenheim; which by ●om little help of Art, added unto the natural strength of the situation, might be made impregnable. In Order whereunto the Bishop invite● the Prince and the Princess Elizabeth his wi●e to a solemn feast: and after Dinner shows him from the top of one of the ●urrets of the Castle the prospect of the ●own and Country adjoining, telling him, that if that Town were fortified by Art as well as by nature, it w●uld be a very strong Bulwark, not only to the States of his Highness, but unto all the rest of his Neighbours in tho●e parts of Germa●y; and that he had a great desire to proceed to the acting of those thoughts, if his Highness were but plea●ed to give way unto it. The Prince considering very wisely, that he was now in his power, returned this answer, that if the fortifying of that place did startle no other jealousies in the minds of the Neighbouring Princes than it did in his, he might go on with it when he pleased; which words being taken by the Bishop for a permission and encouragement to proceed in the work, it went on accordingly. But scarce were the works half finished, when the Duke of 〈◊〉, the marquis of Baden, and other of the Neighbouring Princes amazed to see such preparations for a war in a time of peace, dispatched their Agents to the Prince, desiring to know the reason why he suffered the Bishop to entrench that place, which might in t●●e be made use of to their common 〈◊〉. The Prince made answer, that the Bishop had no permission from him, and that he would send a servant of his to 〈◊〉 the prosecution of the work, and to command the casting d●wn of that which was 〈…〉. And though he did perform this promise, yet the work went forward, the Bishop having secretly obtained licence from the Emperor, (as the Lord Paramount of all) to proceed therein. The Princes hereupon muster up their Forces, which under the command of Colonel Ob●r●ra●d, a servant of the Prince Electors, came before the Town, and sent a Trumpet to the Bishop, requiring him to give present order for the dismantling of the place, or to give them leave to do it for him: The Bishop returns no other Answer, but that they should go to such a post, where they should find a copy of the Emperors Placard, in justification of his act touching those Intrenchments: But the Soldiers, taking notice of no other authority then that which they received from their several Princes, made themselves masters of the place (the Ports and Circumvallations of it being unfinished) without any resistance; and having made all level again, disbanded, and went home to their several Countries: For this contempt of the Imperial Authority, the Prince Elector, who had the chief conduct of this Action, was cited to the Chamber of Spires, where the cause went on so fast against him, that he was at the point to be Proscribed, when the unfortunate Crown of Bohemia was offered to him, of which more hereafter.  
But through that spot, the Spaniard had free Passage with his Forces of Italy, and other parts, to pass into the Netherlands, to reduce them to obedience.] No freer passage thorough that Spot, (if so fair and large a Country may be called a Spot) than he had before; the Spanish Armies finding an uncontrolled March from the Alps to the Netherlands, without touching on any part of the lower Palatinate.  
And so it will be found by any who shall follow the tract of the Duke of Alva, conducting an Army of old Soldiers, both Horse and Foot, some Germ●n and Burgundian Forces being taken in by the way, from the Dukedom of Milan into Flanders: So that if there had not been some other reason why the Spaniards engaged themselves in the Conquest of this Country, than the opening a free passage for their Armies, to march out of Italy into the Netherl. it might have remained unconquered by them to this very day: But the truth is, that both the Emperor and the Duke of Bavaria, being wholly acted by the Counsels of the Jesuits, resolved upon some compulsory courses, to bring all Germany under the obedience of the Pope of Rome; and to that end, thought fit to begin with the Prince Elector Palatine (as appears by several Letters exemplified in the Book, entitled, Cancellaria Bavarica, as being the chief head of the Calvinian party in the Empire, and having made himself doubly obnoxious to a present proscription, which Proscription being issued out, the Execution of it was committed to the Duke of Bavaria, who was to have the upper Palatinate, together with the Electoral Dignity, the better to enable him to carry on the Design▪ and to the King of Spain, as best able to go thorough with it, who was to have the lower Palatinate wholly to himself, that his Forces might be always in readiness to carry on the War from one Prince to another, till the Emperor had made himself the absolute Master of them all.  
From Germany we pass into Scotland, where we find the busy Archbishop, (so he calls him) in a time of high discontentment, pressing a full conformity of the Kirk in Scotland, with the English Discipline: So here, and hereupon the credit of hear-say only; but in another place, where he rather acts the part of an Historian, then of one that is to speak in the Prologue, he relates it thus: King james had a Design, not once, but always after his coming into England, to reform that deformity of the Kirk of Scotland into a decent Discipline, as in the Church of England, which received Opposition and Intermissions, till the year 1616. Where at Aberdine their General Assembly of Clergy made an Act, authorising some of their Bishops to compile a form of Liturgy, or book of Common Prayer; first, for the King to approve, which was so considerately there revised and returned▪ for that Kingdom to practise, which same Service Book was now sent for by this King, and committed to some Bishops here of their own, to review, and finding the difference not much from the English, he gave command in Scotland to be read twice a day, in the King's Chapel at Holy-Rood House at E●inburgh, that the Communion should be administered in that form, & taken on their knees once a Month the Bishop to wear his Rochet, the Minister his Surplice, and so to enure the people by precedent of his own Chapel, there first, and afterwards in all parts for the public: The Scotch Bishops liked it reasonable well for the matter, but the manner of imposing it from hence upon them, was conceived somewhat too much dependency of theirs on our English Church, and therefore excepting against the Psalms, Epistles and Gospels, and other Sentences of Scripture in the English Book, being of a different Translation from that of King james, they desired a Liturgy of their own, and to alter the English answerable to that, and so peculiar to the Church of Scotland, which indeed was more like to that of King Edward the sixth, which the Papist better approved, and so was the rather permitted by the King, as to win them the better to our Church: And so had it been accustomed to the Scotish several Churches, for some years without any great regret, and now particularly proclaimed to be used in all Churches, etc. fol. 221. In all which Narrative, we find no pressing of the Book by the busy Archbishop, how busy soever he is made by the Author in the Introduction.  
None having power to carry away his nine parts, or any part, until the propri●t●ry had set out his tenth part.] Our Author speaks this of the miserable condition of the poor Scotish Husbandman, under the Lords of new erection, as they commonly called them, who on the dissolution of Abbeys, and other Religious Houses, to which almost all the Tithes in Scotland had been appropriated, engrossed them wholly to themselves: And were it no otherwise with the poor Husbandman than is here related, his condition had been miserable enough; it not being permitted unto him, in default of the parson, or his Bailyff, to set apart the Tithes, in the presence of two or three sufficient Neighbours, as with us in England: But their condition, (if I remember it aright) was far worse than this, not being suffered to carry away their own Corn, though the Tithes had been set out in convenient time, before the Impropriator had carried his, by means whereof, they were kept in a most intolerable slavery by these their Masters, who cared not many times for losing the tenth part, so they might destroy the other nine: By means whereof, the poor Peasants were compelled to run, swear, fight, to kill, and be killed too, as they were commanded. From which being freed by the Grace and goodness of King Charles, they proved notwithstanding the most base and disloyal People, that the Sun ever shined on.  
This Bishop (John Maxwell) Minister of Edinburgh, was set up by Laud, than Bishop of London, who finding him Eloquent and Factious enough, placed him a Bulwark against adverse Forces.] This Bishop, (the Bishop of Ross he meaneth) was by the King preferred to great Offices of Trust, both in Church and State: That he was Eloquent, is confessed by our Author, and that he was a learned man, appears by his judicious and elaborate Treatise, entitled. Sacro-sancta Regum Majestas, in which he hath defended the Rights and Sovereignty of Kings, against all the Cavils of the Presbyterian or Puritan Faction: But that he was also Factious, was never charged upon him, but by those who held themselves to the Assembly at Glasco; by whom he was indeed looked on as a Factious person, for acting so courageously in defence of his own Episcopal Rights, the public Orders of the Church, and the King's Authority: According to which Rule or Notion, the generality of the Bishops in all the three Kingdoms, might be called a Faction, if Tertullian had not otherwise stated it, by saying this, viz. Cum pii, cum boni coëunt, non factio dicenda est, sed Curia.  
The like unhandsome Character he gives us of Sir Archi●●● Atchison, of whom he tells us, That he was of such a● 〈…〉 (he means his first coming out of 〈…〉 to all th●se af●er-Seditions: But certainly, the pa●●y whom he speaks of, was of no such temper. For being of a ●udge in 〈◊〉, made the King's Solicitor or Procurator for the Realm of Scotland, he diver●●d the King from 〈◊〉 the intended Act of Revocation, which indeed 〈◊〉 have brought more fuel to the fire, then could be suddenly extinguished, advising rather that he should enter his Action in the Courts of justice against some of the 〈◊〉 of those who had possessed themselves of the Crown ●ands in his ●athers Minority, in which course he might hope to find good success, without noise or dange●▪ And ●f this may be called the adding of fuel to the fi●e of 〈…〉 King will find a safe way to recover his own, 〈…〉 from him by power and pride, unless he do 〈…〉 strong hand which finds no resistance: For which good service, if he were afterwards Knighted, and made second Secretary of Estate (the principal being called Lord Secretary in the stile of that Kingdom) it was no more than he had worthily deserved for his sound Advice.  
●rom the Title and the Introduction, proceed we next unto the History itself, in which the first mistake we meet with, 〈◊〉 the placing of the funeral of King james on the 14 of May, which Mr. H. L. in his History of the Reign of King Cha●ls, had 〈…〉 on the fourth, in both erroneously alike: But the 〈◊〉 of the ●ormer History hath corrected his error by the 〈…〉, and placed it rightly on the seventh, which the 〈…〉 Historian might have done also, having so thoroughly 〈…〉 all the Passages in those Observations.  
〈…〉 land had nothing but foul weather (triste & lugubre Coelum) when she was at the Sea, and the worst of foul weathers from the time of her landing to the very minute of her death▪ The like tempestuous landing is observed to have happened to the Princess Catharine daughter of Ferdinand and If bell● Kings of Spain, when she came hither to be married to Prince Arthur eldest Son to King Henry 7▪ which afterwards was looked on as a sad presage of those Cala●●ities, which happened to that pious, but unfortunate Lady in the last part of her life. And certainly such presages are neither to be rejected as superstitious, nor too much relied on as infallible; such a middle course being to be stee●'d in such conjecturals as is advised to be held in Prophetical or presaging dreams, not wilfully to be slighted, nor too much regarded.  
●ol. 6. The Parliament to be subordinate, not coordinate with the Prince etc. though King Charles unadvisedly makes himself a member of the house of Peers, which the Parliament would never acquit him. A passage which the Author likes well enough, (and hopes the Reader will do the like) as it comes from himself, but will not let it go uncensured in the Observator. It is noted in the Observations p. 62. that the King having passed away the Bishop's votes in Parliament, did after by a strange improvidence, in a Message or Declaration sent from York the 17. of june reckon himself as one of the three Estates, which being once slipped from his pen and taken up by some leading men in the Houses of ●●●●ament, it never was let fall again in the whole agitation of those Controversies which were bandied up and down between them. Our Author says the same thing though in fewer words, and yet corrects the Observator, for ta●ing notice of the King's strange improvidence in a message 〈…〉 june 17. where he reckons himself as one of the 〈…〉 member of the House of Peers. Fol. 100L. for which he 〈◊〉 to call him to a further account in 〈…〉 and so perhaps he may in a second edition of his History, there being no such thing to be found in this.  
〈◊〉 Counsels are privy and public, his Privy Council by his own 〈…〉 election●●: public, his Parliament, Peers and people.  
In these words there are two things to be enquired after, first, why the Bishops are not named as Members of this public Council, and secondly, why the people are admitted art thereof. That the Bishops are to be accounted of as necessary members of this public Council, appeareth by the 〈◊〉 writ of Summons, by which they are severally and respectively called to attend in Parliament. In which it is declared, that the King by the advice of his Privy Council, hath called a Parliament unto this end, ut cum Pralatis, 〈…〉 Reg●● Colloquium ha●eret; that he for his part might confer with the Prelat●, Peers, and great men of the Realm, and that they for their parts super dictis Negotiis tractaren● & co●●ilium suum impenderent, should debate of all such difficult matters concerning the preservation of the Church and State, as the King should recommend unto them, and give their faithful Counsel in them accordingly▪ So that the Author dealt not well with the Bishops, in excluding them from being a part of the King's public Council, and putting the people in their room, who never were beheld as members of it, till so made by our Author: the Commons being called to Parliament to no other purpose, but ad consen●iendum & faciendum, to give consent and yield obedience to all such things as by the great Council of the Kingdom (〈◊〉 communi Concilio Regni nostri) shall be then ordained.  
But if our Author say that he includes the Bishops in the name of Peers, though I allow his meaning, and am able to defend him in it; yet I must still except against his expression, because not plain and full enough to the vulgar Reader.  
Ibid. But 〈◊〉 james altered that course a● best able of any his Predecessors to speak for himself.] It was indeed the common usage of the Kings of England to speak to their people in parliament by the mouth of the Chancellors; not that they were not able to tell their own tales and express their own me●ning, but that it was held for a point of State not to descend so much beneath themselves as to play the Orators. Yet sometimes as they saw occasion they would speak their own minds in Parliament, and not trouble their Chancellors; as appears by that speech of King Henry 7. when he resolved to engage himself in a war with France, a copy whereof we have in the History of his Reign writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban, which he thus beginneth. My Lords and you the Commons; when I purposed to make a war in Britain by my Lieutenant, I made declaration thereof to you by my Chancellor. But now that I mean to make war upon France in person, I will declare it to you myself &c. Fol. 96.  
But King james thinking himself an absolute Master in the Art of speaking, and desirous that his people should think so too, in the opening of all his Parliaments, and the beginning of each Session, and many occasions on the by used no tongue but his own. Which though it might seem necessary at the opening of his first Parliament to let the Lords and Commons see how sensible he was of that Affection wherewith the whole body of the Nation had embraced his coming to the Crown; yet the continual use thereof made him seem cheaper in the eyes of the People then might stand with Majecty. Nor was this all the inconvenience which ensued upon it, for first, it put a necessity upon his son and ●●●cessor of doing the like, to whom it would otherwise have been imputed for a Defect, that he was not able, or for a Crime, as if he thought himself too great to speak to his people; and secondly, it put the Commons on a ●og of following the King's example, not only in making long speeches, but of printing them also, of which more hereafter.  
Ibid. His place being 〈…〉 of King William Rufus, where he is to 〈◊〉 totius Regni 〈◊〉. Our 〈◊〉 speaks this of the Speaker of the house 〈…〉, but he speaks without Book; the Commons no● being called to Parliament in the time of Rusus, as all our 〈…〉 agree ●oyntly. He that was called 〈◊〉 〈…〉 might be a speaker of the Parliament, though not of 〈…〉 in regard h● delivered the king's mind to the 〈◊〉 and Peers of that great Council, and theirs 〈◊〉 to him. Which office was commonly performed by the lord Chancellor of the Kingdom, who is therefore 〈◊〉 the Speaker of the house of Peers. And when the Commons had the Honour to be called to Parliaments▪ they also had their Sp●ak● to perform the same Offices betwixt the King and them, as the Lord Chancellor performed between the King and the Peers; who the●for● was (as still he is) at the King's Nomination and appointment, admitted rather then elected on that nomination by the house of Commons. It was not properly and Originally the Speakers Office to sit still in the Chair and harken to those trim Oratio●s which the Gentlemen of the House were pleased to entertain the time and themselves with all▪ but to signify to the people the Command 〈◊〉 th● King, and to present unto the King the desire of his people. It ●s from speaking not from hearing that he take● his name, though none have spoken less in tha● House since the time of King james, than the Speaker himself▪ as if he were called Speaker by that figure in Rhetoric by which Lucus is said to take its name a non lucen●●.  
Fo●. ● 〈…〉 in the Prince Elector to 〈◊〉 〈…〉 Bohemia; so no ●ustice in the House of 〈◊〉 to 〈…〉 Palatinate from him] Neither so, not so 〈…〉 Prince. Elector had no colour to accept of th● Kingdom of 〈◊〉 at our Author plainly says he had not then was i● no injustice in the House of Aust●●a to ●ade, conquer, and detain the 〈◊〉 from him, as our Author plainly says it was▪  
In the last of these two propositions the Author shall confute himself, and save me the Labour; he telling us within few lines after that, an 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉 〈…〉. Then for the first of the two propositions, I must needs tell him, that the Prince Elector had not only some colour to accept the Crown of ●●mia, but a fair one too. The kingdom of Bohemia, according to the fundamental constitutions of it, was elective merely. And though the Electo●●used constantly to keep themselves to the royal family, (except only in the case of George Pogibrachio) yet they reserved a latitude unto themselves of choosing one rather than another, many times pretermitting the eldest son of the former King, and pitching on a younger brother, and sometimes on some other more remote from the Crown. But Mathias the Emperor being childless, adopted Ferdinand of Goat's the next Heir male of the House of Austria for his Son and successor, and caused him without any formal election (as the Bohemians did pretend) to be Crowned King of that Kingdom, and put him into the actual possession of it in his own life time. But after his decease, the Bohemians rejecting Ferdinand as not lawfully chosen, elected Frederick the fifth Prince Palatine of the Rhine for their King and Sovereign, as lineally descended from Ladislaus 2. King of Poland and Bohemi●, from whom the House of Astria also do derive their Claim. ●o that his Action was not so precipitae, and his ground more justifiable in accepting that Crown, than our Author hath been pleased to make it Fol. 163. And had King james, espoused that quarrel, (as all generally did expect he would have done▪ he might with far less charges have assured the possession of that Crown, or at the least have preserved the 〈◊〉 from the hand of Ruin, than he did put himself unto by sending Ambassadors to excuse the one, and mediate the restitution of the other. In which last point I grant him to have been for some years deluded, not only by the Emperor but the K. of Spain; but that he was deluded by the Spaniards also in the business and treaty of the Match, I by no means grant, and could sufficiently prove the contrary, if it had not been already done in the Observations on the former History. But our Author hath not yet done with the Spaniard, telling us, that.  
Ibid The Crown of Spain hath enlarged her bounds these last 60. years more than the Ottoman. Not so neither. The House of Austria within sixty years from the time that our Author writ this part of the History hath been upon the losing hand, the Kingdom of Portugal with all the appendices thereof being revolted from that Crown, as also are the Countries of Catalonia, and Rousillon in the Continent of Spain itself; the lower Palatinate surrendered to its lawful Prince according to the Treaty at Munster, and many of his best Towns, if not entire provinces in the Netherlands extorted from him by the French; besides the seven united Provinces, which within the compass of that time have made themselves a free state, and are now rather confederates with that King than Subjects to him; whereas upon the other side the Ottomans within that compass of time have regained Babylon and all the Country there about from the hands of the Persians, and conquered a great part of the Isle of Candy from the State of Venice.  
Ibid. The King's Mercer infected and fled, no purple velvet to be had on the sudden, and so the colour of his Robes was changed by necessity.] This passage is brought in out of season as not relating to the Parliament but the Coronation. The Author of the former History had told us out of Mr. Prinne, that the King upon the day of his Coronation was arrayed in white Satin contrary to the custom of his Predecessors who were clothed in purple, which change although the King affected to declare the innocency of his heart, or to express that Virgin purity wherewith he came unto the marriage betwixt him and his Kingdoms; yet our Author would fain have it to be done upon necessity and not upon design or choice. How so? Because (says he) the King's Mercer being infected and fled there was no purple velvet to be had on the sudden.  
But first, though the King's Mercer was infected, and fled, yet there were other Mercers in the City who could have supplied the King with that commodity.  
Secondly, at the time of the Coronation the infection had been much abated, the Air of London being generally corrected by a very sharp winter, and most of the Citizens returned again to their former dwellings; amongst which the King's mercer might be one for any thing which our Author can assure us to the contrary.  
Thirdly, it appears by another passage in our Author himself, that there was Purple velvet enough to be had for this occasion, he telling us out of Mr. Fuller's Church History, (out of whom he borrows his description of the Coronation) that the train of the King's vest or Royal Robe consisted of six yards of purple velvet. Some purple velvet than was to be had at the Coronation, though the King's Mercer were infected and had left the City.  
And finally there was no such need that any such provision should be made on a sudden neither, there being ten months from the Kings coming to the Crown and his Coronation, and as much time for providing a few yards of purple, as for preparing all the other royal necessaries which concerned that day.  
Fol. 11. And so accounting to them the disbursement of his Land and Naval Forces with a clear and even au●●c of the charge and expense to come, they were so candid, that the La●y gave him, without Conditions, two Subsidies from Protestants, and four from Papists.] And candid they had been indeed, if on so fair an auditing of the Kings Account for all expenses, as well past as to come, they had given unto him such a present supply, as would have equalled that account toward the carrying on of the War which themselves projected, and given those two Subsidies over and above as a Testimony of their good Affections to his sacred Person: But these two Subsidies from Protestants, and four from Papists, were so short from carrying on that work, that there was nothing of ingenuity or Candour in it.  
The particular of the Kings Account stood thus, viz. 32000 l. for securing of L●eland, 47000 l. for strengthening the Forts 37000 l. for the repair of the Navy, 99000 l. upon the four English Regiments in the State's Country, 62000 l. laid out for Count Mansfield, total 287000 l. Besides which, he sent in a Demand of 200000 l. and upwards, upon the Navy, 48000 l. upon the Ordnance, 45000 l. in charges of the Land-men, 20000 l. a month to Count Mansfield, and 46000 l. to bring down the King of Denmark; the total of which latter sum amounts to 339000 l. both sums make no less than 626000 l. to which the grant of two Subsidies from Protestants, and four from Papists, hold but small proportion, especially considering to how low a pitch the Book of Subsidies was fallen.  
Our Author tells us somewhere in this present History, that in Queen Elizabeth's time a single Subsidy amounted to Ninety thousand pound, and that in these times, whereof he writes a single subsidy of four shillings in the pound, amounts but to fifty six thousand only▪ and I am able to tell our Author, that in the time of King Henry the eighth, a single Subsidy of four shillings in the pound, amounted to eight hundred thousand pound sterling, as appears by this passage in I. Stow● In which we find that the Cardinal, (he means Cardinal Wolse●) accompanied with divers Lords, both Spiritual and Temporal, acquainted the House of Commons with the King's necessity of waging war against the Emperor Charles the fifth, & thereupon required a Subsidy of 800000 l. to be raised by 4●. in the pound out of every man's Estate throughout the Kingdom; and that it was accorded by the Commons after a long and serious debate upon the matter to give two shillings in the pound, which by his calculation did amount to 400000 l. But then he is to know with all that in the raising of Subsidies in that King's time, there was not only an oath prescribed to the Assessors to give a perfect valuation of all men's estates as far as they could understand them, but an oath imposed also on the subjects who were to pay it, to bring in a true and just account of their Estates, and several penalties enjoined if they did the contrary, as of late times upon Delinquents, (as they call them) when they were admitted to compound at Goldsmiths and Haberdashers Halls; which course held also all the time of King Edward's Reign, but being intermitted in Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth's time, on good reasons of State, the Subsidies were brought so low by little and little, that before the death of the last Queen, they came not up to an hundred thousand, and sunk so sensibly in the time of King james, that they came not to above sixty thousand or thereabouts; so that although the Parliament, in the one and twentieth of that King, bestowed upon him three Subsidies and three Fifteen, when they first engaged him in this War, yet King Charles told them in his first Speech to this very Parliament, that those supplies held no Symmetry or proportion with the charge of so great an enterprise: And though the charges of the Enterprise which he was in hand with, much exceeded his Fathers (as much as the addition of a Navy of an hundred and twenty sail could amount unto) and that he pressed them earnestly at Oxford to a further grant; yet nothing more could be obtained, but that sorry pittance, sufficient only for advance money for engaging those Sea and Land Forces which he had provided, by means whereof the Expedition proved dishonourable to the King and Kingdom: Nor came these two Subsidies so clearly and so candidly from them, but that the King was fain to gratify them in two points which they mainly drove at; that 〈◊〉 to say, the granting them a public Fast to begin their Parliament, and laying some restraints on the Lord's Day, which never could be obtained from any of his Predecessors.  
For when such Fasts had first been moved in Queen Elizabeth's time, and afterwards in all the Parliaments of King james, till the 21 of his Reign; it was answered, that there were so●many ordinary Fasting-days appointed by the Laws of the Land, on which they might humble themselves before the Lord, that there was no necessity or use of any such extraordinary Fasts as they desired: Such Fasts in those times were conceived to have too much in them of Aerius, an old branded Heretic, by whom it was held forth for good Catholic Doctrine, Non celebrand▪ esse jejunia Statuta, 
Augustin de Haeres.  sed cum quisque voluerit jejunand●m. And when the Commons in the 23 of Elizabeth, finding no hopes of gaining any such Fast by the Queen's Authothority, had voted one to be solemnised at the Temple Church, for such of their own Members as could conveniently be present at it, upon notice thereof, the Queen sent a Message to them by Sir Thomas Henneage, than Vice-Chamberlain, declaring with what admiration she beheld that encroachment on her Royal Authority, in committing such an apparent innovation without her privity or pleasure first known: On the receipt of which sharp Message, the House desired Mr. Vice-Chamberlain to present their submission to the Queen, and to crave her pardon, for which Consult the Book entitled, The Freeholders' grand Inquest, pag. 57 No news of any such attempt in all the rest of her Reign, nor of any Parliament Fasts (as far as I can remember) till the 21 of King james, when they first engaged him in this War; whose example followed by King Charles, who indeed was not in a condition to dispute the point, gave such encouragement to the Commons, that no Parliament could begin without them, and gave them such an head at last, as to appoint and continue Fasts by their own Authority, not only without the King's consent, but against the very express words of his Proclamations: How well this Fast was kept by some leading Members when they had procured it, that is to say, with a good neck of Mutton and broth in the Morning, a Collation of sweet Meats between the Sermons, and a Sabbatarian Supper in the Evening; I could make known by a very memorable story, had I list and leisure: And what ill use was made of another in the Pulpits, Prayers and Sermons, of many seditious Lectures, to stir up and continue the War raised against this King, appears by his Proclamation of the fifth of October, Anno 1643. by which he endeavoured to translate the then Monthly Fast, from the second Wednesday to the second Friday in every Month, but without success: Of this indulgence of the Kings, our Author takes no notice, as he doth of the other, viz. the laying of such a restraint from Recreations on the Lord's day, as never had been known in this Kingdom since the Reformation: Concerning which, he telleth us that,  
Fol. 13. These Laws are enacted this Sessions viz against Abuses committed on Sundays etc.] Now it appeareth by the Act that the Abuses (as he calls them) which were prohibited at that time, were first the Concourse of people out of their own Parishes on the Lordsday for any sports or Pastims whatsoever; and secondly the use of Bull-baiting, Bear-baiting, Enter ludes common plays and other unlawful exercises and pastimes used by any person or persons within their own parishes. In the composure of which Act, the first clause made against the concourse of people out of their own Pavishes on that day was purposely intended for a counterbalance to the Declaration of King james about lawful sports: and was afterwards made use of by some public ministers of Justice, to suppress the Annual feasts of the dedication of Churches, commonly called and known by the name of Wakes. Such feasts of love, and entertainments of good Neighbourhood, though they drew some People out of their own Parishes, were no abuses in themselves, though so called by our Author. And as for Bull-baiting, Bear-baiting, and the rest there mentioned, they had been all prohibited by a Proclamation of King james bearing date the 7. of May, in the first year of his Reign Anno 1603. Nor were they used upon that day (for aught that I am able to call to mind) in all the time of my Boyage. So that this Parliament by interdicting those rude Sports did but actum agere, save that they gained unto themselves the reputation of more than ordinary Zeal to the day of worship, and laid the first foundation of those many Rigours which afterward they imposed upon it. For in the next Parliament of this King, they passed an Act that no Carrier with any horse or horses, no Wagon men with any waggon or wagons, nor Carmen with any Cart or Carts, nor Wain-men with any wain or wanes, nor any Drovers with Cattle should forty day's next after the end of that Session by themselves, or any others travel upon the said day, upon pain that every person or persons so offending should forfeit 20. s. for every such offence committed; and that no Butcher after the said time should kill or sell any Flesh upon that day, on the forfeiture of 6s. 8 d. toties quoties: Matters which had been moved in Parliament, in the 18 year of K. james, but without success, the Lords unanimously opposing the Bill, when sent up by the Commons, as tending to the disturbance of the Trade of the Kingdom, and some inconveniencies to the Poor: But having brought the King to a condition of denying nothing, they obtained this also of him as they had done the other, and at last became their own Carvers; imposing since the first beginning of the long Parliament, by their Orders and Ordinances, so many several restraints on that day from all kinds of lawful pleasure, and civil businesses, that greater never were imposed on the Jews by the Scribes and Pharisees, nor by some Casuits on the Papists, nor by Dr. Bound, (the first Broacher of these Sabbath-speculations in the Church of England) on his Puritan Proselytes.  
But notwithstanding these condescensions of the King to the desires of the Commons, the Commons were resolved to condescend in nothing to the desires of the King, unless as they had moved the war so they might also be made acquainted with the King's Design in the conduct of it, which point they pressed with such importunity that the King commanded M. Glanvil. to serve as Secretary to the Navy for that Expedition, that knowing all the secrets and intentions of it when he was at Sea, he might acquaint the members with it at his coming back.  
Fol. 20. For Mansel was vice-Admiral of the Narrow Seas, that's his Office, and there indeed he succeeds to the Admiral:] Our Author is as much out in this particular, as the Mariners had been in another. The Mariner's thought (if Mr. H. L. report them rightly) that Sr. Robert Mansel the then vice-Admiral had an unquestionable right to the chief conduct of that Enterprise upon the Duke's default. The Mariners in this point sailed without their compass, as is proved by the Observator. And this our Author building upon the Observator calls a Monstrous Error, although not half so Monstrous as that Error which himself committeth in making this, Sr. Robert Mansel, to be no other than the vice-Admiral of the Narrow seas and restraining his Office and Authority to those Seas alone. But had he consulted with the Sailors (as Mr. H. L. may be thought to have done) they would have told him that Sr. Robert Mansel was vice Admiral of England, and that it belonged unto his Office next under the Admiral, to see the Royal Navy kept in good reparation, the wages of the Mariners and shiprights to be duly paid, and that the ships should be provided of all things necessary for any occasional expedition. They could have told him also that there is no such Officer as a Vice-Admiral of the narrow Seas, but that those narrow Seas are commanded by two several Admirals, which hold their places from the King, and not by grant or patent from the Lord Admiral of England; and that one of these Admirals commandeth in the East and the other in the Western part● of those Seas: And finally, that at the time of his Expedition Sr. Henry Palmer was Vice-Admiral of the Eastern parts of those Seas, and a West-country Gentleman (whose name I call not now to mind) of the Western parts. Our Author may be good for land service, but we have some cause to fear by this experiment, that if he should put forth to Sea he would easily fall into Scylla by avoiding Charybdis.  
Fol. 18. This Gentleman was second Son of Thomas Cecil Earl of Exeter. etc.] Our Author speaks this of Sr. Edward Cecil, created by King Charles in the first year of his Reign Lord Cecil of Putney, and Viscount Wimbleton, and by the King made Commander General of his first Fleet against the Spaniards; concerning whom he falls into several Errors.  
For first, Sir Edward Cecil was not the second, but the third son of Thomas Earl of Exeter, the second Son being Sr. Richard Cecil of Walkerly in the County of Rutland, the Father of that David Cecil who succeeded in the Earldom of Exeter, after the death of Earl William, eldest Son of Thomas aforesaid.  
Secondly, this Sr. Edward Cecil was not of a Colonel made General of the English forces in the unhappy war of the Palatinate. He was indeed made General of the English forces in the war of Cleve, Anno 1610. the power which his Uncle Sr. Robert Cecil Earl of Salisbury had with King james advancing him to that employment. But that he was not General of the English forces in the Palatinate war, I am very confident; Sr. Horace Vere, one of a more noble extraction, and a far better Soldier being chief Commander in that service of the English forces.  
Thirdly, admitting this for true, yet could not the mis-effects of that war be charged on him or any other of the English Commanders; the English forces being inconsiderable for their number, in reference to those which were raised for that war by the Germane Princes, all of them under the Command of the marquis of O●alsback as their Generalissimo, to whose either cowardice or infidelity, the mis-effects of that war (as our Author calls them) were imputed commonly.  
And fourthly, it was not 27. years since his employment there, when he was called home to be Commander of this fleet, there being not above five years from the beginning of the war in the Palatinate and his calling home, and not above fifteen from his being made General of the English in the war of Cleveland.  
Fol. 24. Dr. Williams outed of the Seal, but kept his Bishopric of Lincoln and the Deanery of Westminster which indeed he had for his life.] Our Author is as much out in this, as in that before; for though the Deanery of Westminster was given at first to Dr. Williams for term of Life, yet when he was made Bishop of Lincoln that Deanery fell again to the King, and by the king was regranted to him to be holden in Commendam with that Bishopric. After which being made Archbishop of York, in the year 1641. he obtained it in Commendam for three years only, which term expired, he was a Suitor to the King at Oxford for a longer term, and on denial of that Suit, retired into Wales, and openly betook himself to the Parliament-party, concerning which consult our Author in the latter part of his History. Nor did he only keep the Bishopric of Lincoln, and the Deanery of Westminster, but also a Residenciaries place in the Church of Lincoln, the Prebend of Asgarve, and Parsonage of Walgrove; so that he was a whole Diocese within himself, as b'ing Parson, Prebend, Dignitary, Dean, and Bishop, and all five in one.  
Fol. 25. All settled and reposed: the Archbishop of Canterbury presented his Majesty to the Lords and Commons, East, West, North, and South, ask them if they did consent to the Coronation of K. Charles their lawful Sovereign.] Our Author takes this whole Narrative of the pomp and order of the King's Coronation, out of the Church History of Britain, endeavoured (and but endeavoured, by Mr. Fuller of Waltham● and takes it all upon his credit without so much as startling at that dangerous passage which is now before us: That Author, and this also following him, conceive the people's consent so necessary to the Coronation of the King, that it was asked no less than four times by the Archbishop of Canterbury, before he could proceed any further in that solemnity.  
But if we look into the form used in the Coronation of King Edward the sixth, we shall find it thus, viz. That being carried by 〈◊〉 noble Cour●iers in another Chair unto the four sides of the Stage, he was by the Archbishop of Canterbury declared unto the People (standing round about) both by Gods and Man's Laws, to be the right and lawful King of England, France, and Ireland, and proclaimed that day to be Crowned, Consecrated, and Anointed, unto whom he demanded whether they would obey an● serve, or not? By whom it was again with a loud●ery answered, God save the King, and ever live his Majesty.  
And in the Coronation of King james, more briefly thus; The King is showed to the people, and they are required to make acknowledgement of their Allegiance to his Majesty by the Archbishop, which they do by Acclamations: Which being so, it cannot possibly be supposed, that instead of requiring the people's obedience to the King's Authority, the Archbishop should crave their consent to his Coronation; as if the Coronation were not strong and valid, nor his succession good in Law without their consent.  
But though our Author follow Mr. Fuller in one Error, yet he corrects him in another, though in so doing he require some correction also: Master Fuller tells us, that the Kings Tra●● was held up by the Lord Compton (as belonging to the Robes and the Lord Viscount Dorchester, lib. 11. fol. 122. Mr. Sanderson knowing that there was no such man then being as a Viscount Dorchester, must play the Critic on the Text, and instead of Viscount Dorchester, gives us Viscount Doncaster, whom he makes Master of the Wardrobe, and both true alike, fol. ● 5. The Master of the Wardrobe at that time was the Earl of D●●b●gh, and the Lord Viscount Doncaster, (now Earl of Carstile) was then too young to perform any Service in this solemnity; which had he done, Mr. Fuller, who hath some dependence on him, would not have robbed him of the honour of performing that service, which none but persons of place and merit could pretend unto.  
Fol. 25. The Sermon being done, the Archbishop invested in a rich Cope, goes to the King, kneeling upon Cushions at the Communion Table, and asks his willingness to take the Oath usually taken by his Predecessors, etc.] The form and manner of which Oath, as having afforded much matter of discourse in these latter times; I will first subjoin, and afterwards observe what descants have been made upon it: The form and manner of the Oath as followeth, Sir, (says the Archbishop) will you grant and keep, and by your Oath confirm to the People of England, the Laws and Customs to them granted by the Kings of England, your Lawful and Religious Predecessors, and namely the Laws, Customs, and Franchises granted to the Clergy, by the glorious King St. Edward your Predecessor, according to the Laws of God, the true profession of the Gospel established in this Kingdom, and agreeable to the Prerogative of the Kings thereof, and the ancient Customs of this Land.  
The King answers, I grant and promise to keep them.  
Archbishop, Sir, Will you keep Peace and godly agreement entirely, (according to your power) both to God, the holy Church, the Clergy, and the People?  
Rex, I will keep it  
Archbishop, Sir, Will you (to your power) cause justice, Law, and discretion in Mercy and Truth, to be executed in all your judgements?  
Rex, I will▪  
Archbishop, Sir, Will you grant to hold and keep the Laws and rightful Customs which the Commonalty of this your Kingdom have; and will you defend and uphold them to the Honour of God, so much as in you lieth?  
Rex, I grant and promise so to do.  
Then one of the Bishops reads this admonition to the King before the People, with a loud voice, Our Lord and King, we beseech you to pardon, and to grant, and to preserve unto us, and to the Churches committed to our charge, all Canonical Privileges, and due Law and justice, and that you would protect and defend us, as every good King in his Kingdom ought to be a Protector and Defender of the Bishops, and the Churches under their Government.  
The King answereth, With a willing and devout heart I promise and grant my Pardon, and that I will preserve and maintain to you, and the Churches committed to your charge, All Canonical Privileges, and due Law and justice; and that I will be your Protector and Defender to my power, by the assistance of God, as every good King ought in his Kingdom, in right to protect and defend the Bishops, and Churches under their Government.  
Then the King ariseth, and is led to the Communion Table, where he makes a solemn Oath, in sight of all the People, to observe the premises; and laying his hand upon the Book, saith, The things which I have before promised, I shall perform and keep, So help me God, and the contents of this Book.  
Such was the Oath taken by the King at his Coronation, against which I find these two Objections.  
First, That it was not the same Oath which anciently had been taken by his Predecessors, and for the proof thereof, an Antiquated Oath was found out, and published in a Remonstrance of the Lords and Commons, bearing date the twenty sixth of May, 1642.  
And secondly, It was objected in some of the Pamphlets of that time, that the Oath was falsified by D. Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, to make it more to the King's advantage, and less to the benefit of the Subject than it had been formerly.  
For answer whereunto, the King remits the Lords and Commons to the Records of the Exchequer, by which it might be easily proved that the Oath was the very same verbatim, which had before been taken by his Predecessors, Kings and Queens of this Realm.  
And to the Pamphleteers, it is answered by Mr. H. L. the Author of the former History, That there was no variation from the old forms, but the addition of a clause to a Prayer there mentioned; and that this variation was not the solitary act of Laud alone, but of a Committee: And this (saith he) I positively assert, as minding the reformation of a vulgar Error thrown abroad in loose Pamphlets, that Bishop Laud altered the Coronation Oath; whereas the Oath itself was precisely the same, with former precedents: More candidly in this, than the Author of the present History, how great a Royalist soever he desires to be reckoned.  
Fol. 31. This necessary Message produced no other supply then this insolency from a Member, Mr. Clement Cook, It is better (says he) to die by a foreign Enemy, then to be destroyed at home.] And this seditious speech of his, was as seditiously seconded by one Dr. Turner, of whom the King complained to the House of Commons, but could find no remedy, nor was it likely that he should: He that devests himself of a Natural and Original power, to right the injuries which are done him, in hope to find relief from others, (especially from such as are parcel-guilty of the wrong) may put up all his gettings in a Semtress thimble, and yet never fill it▪ But thus King james had done before him, one Piggot, a Member of the House of Commons, had spoken disgracefully of the Scots, for their importunity in begging, and no less scornfully of the King, for his extreme profuseness in giving, adding withal, that it would never be well with England, till a Sicilian Vesper was made of the Scotish Nation: For which seditious Speech, when that King might have took the Law into his own hands, and punished him as severely by his own Authority, as he had deserved, yet he passed it over, and thought that he had done enough in giving a hint of it in a Speech made to both Houses at White-Hall, on the last of March, Anno 1607. I know (saith he) that there are many Pigot's amongst them, I mean a number of Seditious and discontented particular persons, as must be in all Commonwealths, that where they dare, may peradventure talk lewdly enough; but no Scotish man ever spoke dishonourably of England in Parliament: It being the custom of those Parliaments, that no man was to speak without leave from the Chancellor, (for the Lords and Commons made but one House in that Kingdom) and if any man do propound or utter any seditious Speeches, he is straightly interrupted and silenced by the Chancellor's Authority. This said, there was an end of that business for aught I can learn; and this gave a sufficient encouragement to the Commons in the time of King Charles, to expect the like: From whence they came at last to this resolution, not to suffer one of theirs to be questioned, till themselves had considered of his crimes: Which (as our Author truly notes) kept them close together, emboldened thus, to preserve themselves to the last, fol. 35. This Maxim as they made use of in this present Parliament, in behalf of Cook, Diggs, and Eliot, which two last had been Imprisoned by the King's command; so was it more violently and pertinaciously insisted on in the case of the five Members, Impeached of High Treason by the King's Attorney, on the fourth of january, Anno 1641. the miserable effects whereof, we still feel too sensibly.  
Fol. 40 And though the matter of the Prologue may be spared, being made up with Elegancy, yet rather than it shall be lost, you may please to read it at this length.] Our Author speaks this of the Eloquent Oration made by Sir Dudley Diggs, to usher in the Impeachment of the Duke of Buckingham, which being amplified and pressed in six tedious Speeches, by Glanvil, Pim, Selden, Wansford, Herbert, and Sherland, was Epilogued by Sir john Eliot: A vein of Oratory not to be found in the Body of the English Parliament, till the time of King james. It's true, that on the Petition of the Commons, in the beginning of each Parliament, the King was graciously pleased to indulge them a freedom of reasoning and debate upon all such points as came before them, and not to call them to account, though they delivered their opinions contrary to his sense and meaning: But than it is as true withal, that they used not to waste time in tedious Orations, nor to declaim against the proceedings of the King, and the present Government; or if they did, the Speaker held it for a part of his Office to cut them short, and to remind them of their duty, besides such after-claps as they were sure to find from an injured and incensed Sovereign.  
But of this, take along with you this short passage, as I find it in a letter written, ab ignoto, to King Charles, in this very business of the Duke, May it please your excellent Majesty to consider, That this great opposition against the Duke of Buckingham, is stirred up and maintained by such who either maliciously, or ignorantly and concurrently seek the debasing of this free Monarchy, which because they find not yet ripe to attempt against the king himself, they endeavour it through the duke's sides: These men, though agreeing in one mischief, yet are of divers sorts and humours, Viz. 1. Meddling and busy persons, who took their first hint at the beginning of King james, when the Union was treated of in Parliament: That learned King gave too much way to those popular Speeches, by the frequent proof he had of his great Abilities in that kind. Since the time of H. 6. these Parliamentary Discourses were never suffered, as being the certain Symptoms of subsequent Rebellions, Civil Wars, a●d the dethroning of our Kings: But these last twenty years, most of the Parliament Men seek to improve the reputation of their Wisdoms by these Declamations, and no honest Patriot dare oppose them, lest he incur the imputation of a Fool or a Coward in his Country's cause. But which is more, the pride they took in their own supposed Eloquence, obtained another privilege for them, that is to say, The liberty for any man to speak what he list, and as long as he list, without fear of being interrupted; whereof King james takes notice in his said Speech to both the Houses at White-Hall. Nor did they only take great delight in these tedious speeches, but at first dispersed Copies of them in writing, and afterwards caused them to be printed, that all the people might take notice of the zeal they had to the common liberty of the Nation, and the edge they head against the Court and the King's Prerogative. But to proceed.  
Fol. 47. To balance the Duke's enemies, three persons his confederates were made Barons, to compeer in the Lord's house, the Lord Mandevil, the eldest son to the Earl of Manchester, created by Patent Baron Kimbolton, Grandison Son to the created Baron Imbercourt, and Sir Dudley Carlton made Baron Tregate.] In which short passage there are as many mistakes as lines.  
For first, the Lord Mandevil was not created by Patent Lord Kimbolton, that title together with the tight of Viscount Mandevil, having been conferred upon his father by letter Patents, in the 18. year of King james Anno 1620. whom afterwards King Charles in the first year of his Reign made Earl of Manchester. The meaning of our Author is, that Sr. Edward Montague, commonly called Lord Mandevil was summoned to the Parliament by the Title of Lord Kimbolton, as is the custom in such cases when the eldest sons of Earls are called to Parliament by the stile and Title of their Father's Barony.  
Secondly, there never was any such Baron as the Baron Tregate.  
Thirdly, Sr. Dudley Carlton was not created Baron Tregat, but Baron of Imbercourt, that being the name of a Manor of his in the County of Surry.  
But fourthly, Grandison son to the created Baron Imbercourt, is either such a piece of negligence in not filling the blanks, or of ignorance in not knowing that noble Person, as is not often to be met with. And therefore to inform both our Author and his Reader also, I must let them know that William de Grand●son a noble Burgundian Lord, allied to the Emperor of Constantinople, the King of Hungary, and the Duke of Bavaria, was brought into England by Edmond Earl of Lancaster, second son to King Henry the 3. by whose bounty he was endowed with fair possessions, and, by his power advanced unto the dignity of an English Baron. The estate being much increased by the Marriage of the Daughter and Heir of the Lord Tregoz, fell by the Heir general to the Pateshuls of Ble●so in the County of Bedford, and by a Daughter of that house to the house of the Beauchamps By Margaret the daughter and Heir of Sr. john Beauchamp of Bletso, the whole estate came by Marriage to Sr. Oliver St. john, from whose eldest son descended that Sr. Oliver St. john whom Queen Elizabeth (descended from the said Margaret by john Duke of Somerset her second husband) made Lord St. john of Bletho in the first year of her Reign. From Oliver St. john the second son of the said Margaret (estated by his mother in the Manor of Lydiard Tregoz near Highworth in the County of Wilts,) descended another Oliver St. john, the second son of Sr. john St. john of Lydiard Tregoz; who having in defence of his Father's Honour killed one Captain Best, in St. George's fields near Southwark, was fain to pass over into France, where he remained until his friends about the Queen had obtained his pardon. To merit which, and to avoid the danger which might happen to him by Bests acquaintances he betook himself to the wars of Ireland; where he performed such signal service against the Rebels, that passing from one command to another, he came at last to be made Lord Deputy of Ireland, at what time he was created viscount Grandison, with reference to the first founder of the greatness of his House and family. That dignity entailed on him, and the heirs males of his body, and for want of Such Issue on the Heirs males of Sr. Edward Villers begotten on the body of Mrs. Barbara St. john, the new Viscounts Niece; according unto which remainder, that Honnurable Title is enjoyed by that branch of the house of Villers. But being the Title of Viscount Grandison was limited to the Realm of Ireland, to make him capable of a place in this present Parliament, he was created Lord Tregoz of Highworth to him and to the heirs males of his body without any remainder.  
Fol. 62. Carlton gone upon this Errand, and missing the French King at Paris, progressed a tedious journey after that Court to Nantes in Bohemia.] And here we have as great an Error in Geography, as before in Heraldry, there being no such Town as Nantes in Bohemia, or if there were, it had been too far off, and too unsafe a place for a Summer's progress. It is Nantes in Bretaigne which he means, though I am so charitable as to think this to be a mistake rather of the Printer than our Authors own. With the like charity also I behold three other mistakes, viz. the Emperor of Vienna fol. 137. and the Archdutchesse of Eugenia fol. 139. & Balfoure Caselie, for Bolsovey Castle fol 192. By which the unknowing Reader may conceive, if not otherwise satisfied, that Balfour Castle was the ancient seat of the Balfours from whence Sr. William Balfour Lieutenant of the Tower (that false and treacherous Servant to a bountiful Master) derives his pedigree; Eugenia (which was a part of that Ladies Christian name) to be the name of some Province, and Vienna (the usual place of the Emperor's residence) to be the name of an Empire. But for his last I could allege somewhat in his excuse, it being no unusual thing for Principalities and Kingdoms to take Denomination from their principal Cities. For besides the Kings of Mets Orleans and Soissons in France, we find that in the Constitutions of Howel Dha, the Kings of England are called Kings of London, the Kings of South-Wales Kings of Dynevor, and the King of North-Wales Kings of Aberfraw, each of them from the ordinary place of their habitation. For which defence if our Author will not thank me, he must thank himself. The mention of Nantes conducts me on to Count Shally's Treason against the French King, who was beheaded in that City; of which thus our Author.  
Fol. 63. The Count upon Summons before the Privy Council without more ado, was condemned and forthwith beheaded at Nantes: the Duke Momerancy then under Restraint suffered some time after.] But by his leave the Duke of Monmorency neither suffered on the account of Shalley's Treason, nor very soon after his beheading, which was in the year 1626. as our Author placeth it. For being afterwards enlarged, and joining with monsieur the King's Brother in some design against the King, or the Cardinal rather, he was defeated and took prisoner by Martial Schomberg (created afterwards Duke of Halwyn) and being delivered over to the Ministers of Justice, was condemned and beheaded at Tholouse, Anno 1633.  
Ibid. Our Wine-Merchants ships were arrested at Blay-Castle upon the Geroud returning down the River from Bordeaux Town by order of the Parliament of Roven.] That this Arrest was 〈◊〉 by Order of the Parliament of Roven] I shall hardly grant, the jurisdiction of that Parliament being confined within the Dukedom of Normandy, as that of Renes within the Dukedom of Bretaigne; neither of which, nor of any other of the inferior Parliaments, are able to do any thing Extra Sphaeram Activitatis suae, beyond their several Bounds and Limits. And therefore this Arrest must either be made by Order from the Parliament of Bordeaux, the Town and Castle of Blay, being within the jurisdiction of that Court, or of the Parliament of Paris, which being Paramount to the rest, may, and doth many times extend its power and execute its precepts over all the others.  
Fol. 92. At his death the Court was suddenly filled with Bishops, knowing by removes, preferments would follow to many, expected advancements by it.] Our Author speaks this of the death of Bishop Andrews, and of the great resort of Bishops to the Court, which ensued thereupon, making them to tarry there on the expectation of Preferment and Removes, as his death occasioned, till they were sent home by the Court Bishops, with the King's Instructions: But in this our Author is mistaken, as in other things: The Bishops were not sent home with the King's Instructions till after Christmas, Anno 1629. and Bishop Andrews died in the latter end of the year 1626. after whose death, Dr. Neil, than Bishop of Durham, being translated to the Sea of Winchester, Febr. 7. 1627. Dr. Houson, Bishop of Oxon, succeeded him in the Sea of Durham, in the beginning of the year 1628. Doctor Corbet, Dean of Christ-church, being consecrated Bishop of Oxon the 17 day of October of the same year, so that between the filling up of these Removes, and the sending the Bishop's home with the King's Instructions, there happened about 15 Months, so that the great resort of Bishops about the Court, Anno 1627. when they were sent back with the King's Instructions, was not occasioned by the expectation of such Preferments and Removes, as they might hope for on the death of Bishop 〈◊〉  
Fol. 105. In Michaelmas Term the Lady Purbeck, daughter and heir to the Lady Hatton, by her former Husband, and Wife to the Viscount Purbeck Brother to the Duke, passed the trial for adultery, etc.] Our Author is here out again in his Heraldry, the Lady Purbeck not being Daughter to the Lady Hatton by her former Husband, but by her second Husband Sr. Edward Coke, than Attorney General, and afterwards successively Chief Justice of either Bench. Yet I deny not but that she was an Heir and a rich marriage, as it after followeth. For being Daughter to Thomas Cecil Earl of Exeter, she was married by the care and providence of her Grandfather, the Lord Burleigh, to Sr. William Newport, who being the adopted son of the Lord Chancellor Hatton, succeeded in his name as well as in his Lands. In ordering of which marriage it was agreed on, that the vast Debt which the Chancellor owed unto the Crown, should be estalled to small Annual payments; and that in lieu thereof, Sr. William in defect of issue, should settle on his wife and her Heirs, by any Husband whatsoever, the Isle of Purbeck, and some other of the out parts of his Estate. By means whereof her Daughter Frances which she had by Sr. Edward Coke was heir to Corpse Castle in the Isle of Purbeck, and so much of the rest of the Lands of Hatton, as the mother (being a woman of great expense) did not sell or alien.  
Fol. 106. The King for all his former Arrears of loan, was put to it to borrow more: of the Common Council of London 120000. l. upon Mortgage on his own land of 21000. l. per an.] And here I think our Author is Mistaken also, the Citizens not lending their money upon Mortgage, but laying it out in the way of purchase. Certain I am, that many goodly Manors lying at the foot of Ponfract-Castle, and appertaining to the Crown in right of the Duchy of Lancaster, were sold outright unto the Citizens at this time; and therefore I conclude the like also of all the rest. But whether it were so or not, I cannot choose but note the sordid baseness of that City in refusing to supply their King in his great Necessities, without Sale or Mortgage; especially when the money was to have been expended in defence of the Rochellers, whose cause they seemed so much to favour.  
But for this and other refusals of this nature, the Divine vengeance overtook them within few years after; the long Parliament draining them of a Million of pounds and more, without satisfaction, for every hundred thousand pound which the King desired to borrow of them upon good security, so penny wise, and so pound foolish was that stubborn City.  
Fol. 107. Which we shall refer to the subsequent time and place fitting. But of those in their due place hereafter.] Our Author had found fault with the Observator, for saying that the King had not done well in excluding the Bishops from their Votes in Parliament; and that there was some strange improvidence in his Message from York, June 17. where he reckons himself as one of the three Estates, a Member of the House of Peers: But why he thus condemneth the Observator, we must seek elsewhere, which is a kind of Hallifax Law, to hang him first, and afterwards to put him upon his Trial: Seek than we must, and we have sought (as he commandeth) in subsequent time and place fitting, in their due place hereafter, as the phrase is varied: But neither in the latter end of the year, 1641. when the Bishops were deprived of their Votes in Parliament, nor in all the time of the Kings being at York, Anno 1642. can we find one word which relates to either of those points: In which our Author deals with the Observator, as some great Critics do with their Authors, who when they fall on any hard place in Holy Scripture, or any of the old Poets or Philosophers, which they cannot master, adjourn the explication of it to some other place, where they shall have an opportunity to consider of both Texts together: Not that they ever mean to touch upon it, but in a hope that either the Reader will be so negligent, as not to be mindful of the promise, or else so charitable, as to think it rather a forgetfulness, than an inability in the undertaker.  
Fol. 115. To these he was questioned by a Committee, and in reason ●ustly sentenced.] The party here spoken of is Doctor Manwaring, than Vicar of the Parish of St. Giles in the Fields; his Crime, the preaching of two Sermons, in which he had maintained that the King might impose Taxes and Subsidies on the Subject, without consent in Parliament, and that the people were bound to pay them under pain of Damnation; his Sentence (amongst other things) that he should be Imprisoned during the pleasure of the Parliament, pay a thousand pound Fine unto the King, and be made uncapable of all Ecclesiastical Preferments for the time to come, which heavy Sentence our Author thinks to have been very justly inflicted on him, though the Doctor spoke no more in the Pulpit, than Sergeant 〈◊〉 in Queen Elizabeth's time had spoke in Parliament: By whom it was affirmed in the Parliament of the 43 of that Queen, that He marvelled the House stood either at the granting of a Subsidy, or time of payment, when all we have is her Majesties, and she may lawfully at her pleasure take it from us, and that she had as much right to all our Lands and Goods, as to any Revenue of the Crown, and that he had precedents to prove it: For which, see the Book called, The Freeholders' grand Inquest, pag. 62. But some may better steal a Horse, than others look on, as the saying is; the Sergeant being never questioned, and the poor Doctor sentenced (and justly, as our Author makes it) to an absolute ruin, if the King had not been more merciful to him then the Commons were.  
From Dr. Manwaring, our Author proceeds to the Observator, for saying, that Doctrinal matters delivered in the Pulpit, are more proper for the cognizance of the Convocation, or the High Commission, than the House of Commons, which though it may consist most times of the wisest Men, yet it consists not many times of the greatest Clerks: For, saith he,  
Fol. 116. That the Preacher is Jure Divino, not to be censured but by themselves, smells of the Presbyter or Papist.] But Sir, by your good leave, neither the Presbyter nor the Papist stand accused by our Orthodox Writers, for not submitting themselves, their Doctrines and Opinions to the power of Parliaments, who neither have, nor can pretend to any Authority in those particulars: That which they stand accused for is, that they acknowledge not the King to be the supreme Governor over all persons in all causes, as well Ecclesiastical as Civil, within his Dominions; and consequently decline his Judgement as incompetent, when they are called to answer unto any charge which is reducible to an Ecclesiastical or Spiritual nature: How stiff the Papists are in this point, is known well enough by their refusing to take the Oath of Supremacy.  
And for the peremptoriness of the Presbyterians, take this story with you: One David Blake, at a Sermon preached at St. Andrews, in the time of King james, had cast forth divers Speeches full of spite, 
Hist. of the Church of Scor. ●. 41●. etc.  against the King, the Queen, the Lords of Council and Session, and among the rest, had called the Queen of England an Atheist, a Woman of no Religion: For which, being complained of by the English Ambassador, he was cited to appear before the King and his Council, on the tenth of November, A●no 1596. Which being made known to the Commissioners of the last general Assembly, it was concluded, that if he should submit his Doctrine to the Trial of the Council, the liberties of the Church, and Spiritual Government of the House of God, would be quite subverted, and therefore that in any case a Declinator should be used, and Protestation made against these Proceedings: This, though it was opposed by some moderate men, yet it was carried by the rest, who cried out it was the cause of God, to which they ought to stand at all hazards; & thereupon a Declinator was form to this effect▪ That howbeit the Conscience of his Innocency did uphold him sufficiently against the Calumnies of whomsoever, and that he was ready to defend the Doctrine uttered by him, whether in opening the Words, or in Application; yet seeing he was brought thither to be judged by his Majesty and Council for his Doctrine, and that his answering to the pretended Accusation, might import a prejudice to the Liberties of the Church, and be taken for an acknowledgement of his Majesty's jurisdiction in matters merely Spiritual, he was constrained in all humility to decline judicatory: Which Declinator being subscribed by the Commissioners, and delivered by Blake, he referred himself to the Presbytery as his proper judges: And being interrogated whether the King might not judge of Treason, as well as the Church did in matters of Heresy, i● said, That speeches delivered 〈◊〉 Pulpits, albert alleged to be 〈…〉, could not be judged by the King, till the Church 〈…〉 thereof What became after of this 〈…〉 may ●inde it in Archbishop spotswood's History of the Church of Scotland: Had Dr. Manwaring done thus, and the Observator justified him in it, they had both favoured of the Presbyter or Papist, there's no question of it: But being the Observator relates only to the proceedings in Parliament, and encroachments of the House of Commons, in matters Doctrinally delivered, without the least diminution of the King's Authority in Ecclesiastical Causes, there is nothing of the Presbyter or the Papist to be charged upon him; as the Historian, to create him the greater odium, would fain have it to be.  
Fol. 115. But how suddenly the Commons House 〈◊〉 upon the Lor●s liberties, excluding the words, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the very grant of the Bill of Subsidies, etc.] And to say truth, the Lords were but served in their own kind, who having so unworthily joined with the Commons, in divesting the King (from whom they derived all their Honours) of his just Prerogatives, are now assaulted by those Commons, and in danger of losing their own Rights, which by the favour of the King, or his Predecessors, were conferred upon them; which might have given them a sufficient warning, (but that there was a Spirit of Infatuation over all the Land) not to join with them any more in the like Designs against the King, whose Authority could not be diminished without the lessening of their own, nor any Plot carried on toward his Destruction, by which they would not be reduced to the same condition, with the rest of the People. But Quos Iupiter vult perdere, dementat pr●us, so it proved with them.  
Fol. 123. His body brought to York House, and after sumptuously entombed at Westminster in St. Edward's Chapel.] The Church of Westminster was indeed founded by King 〈◊〉 the Confessor, whom they called sometimes by the name of St. Edward the King; 〈◊〉 that part of it that lies between the cross Isle and the Chapel of King Henry 〈…〉 best known by the name of the Chapel of 〈◊〉 by reason of the many Kings and Queens which are there 〈◊〉, In a side Isle or enclosure whereof the Duke's body was Sumptuously interred with this glorious Epitaph which in honour of his invincible fidelity to his gracious Masters, (for I am otherwise a mere stranger to all his Selatious) I shall here Subjoin.  
P. M. S.  
Vanae multitudinis improperium hic jacet, Cujus tamen  
Hispania Prudentiam,  
Gallia Fortitudinem,  
Belgia Industriam,  
Tota Europa mirata est Magnanimitatem. Quem  
Daniae & Sweciae Reges integerrimum,  
Germaniae Transilvaniae & Nassautiae Princip: Ingenuum,  
Veneta Reipublica Philobasileia,  
Sahaudiae & Lotharingiae Duces Politicum,  
Palatinus Comes Fidelem,  
Imperator Pacificum,  
Turca Christianum,  
Papa Protestantem,  
Experti sunt. Quem  


Anglia Archithalassum  
Cantabrigia Cancellarium  
Buckinghamia: Ducem   habuit  
Verùm siste viator, & quid ipsa Invidia Sugillare nequ●t, audi.  
Hic est ille  
Calamitosae virtutis  
Buckinghamius.  
Maritus redamatus, Pater ama●s  
Filius obsequens,  
Frater amicissimus, Affinis Beneficus,  
Amicus perpetuus,  
Dominus Benignus,  
&  
Optimus omnium servus.  
Quem  
Reges adamarunt, optimates honorarunt,  
Ecclesia deflevit,  
Vulgus Oderunt.  
Quem  
jacobus & Carolus  
Regum perspicacissimi, intimum habuerunt.  
A quibus  
Honoribus auctus, & negotiis onustus,  
Fato succubuit  
Antequam par animo periculum invenit.  
Quid jam Peregrine?  
Aenigma mundi moritur;  
Omnia fuit, nec quidquam habuit,  
Patriae parens & hostis audiit.  
Deliciae idem & querela Parliamenti.  
Quidum Papistis bellum infert, insimulatur  
Papista,  
Dum Protestantium partibus consulit,  
Occiditur à Protestante.  
Tesseram specta rerum humanarum,  
At non est quòd serio triumphet malitia,  
Interimere potuit, laedere non potuit.  
Scilicet has preces fundens expiravit,  
Tuo ego sanguine potiar (mi jesus) dum mali pascuntur meo.  
Fol. 127. But the Religious Commons must reform God's caus● before the Kings nor would they be prescribed their Consultations, but resolved to remit the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage at pleasure.] This is another new encroachment of the House of Commons, that is to say, the posting off of the King's business, and the public concernments of the State, till they had either lessened his prerogative, weakened the Authority of the Church, or advanced the interest of the people. Which resolution of not being prescribed, their Cons●ltations became at last so fixed amongst them, that when the King had frequently recommended to them his Message of the 20. of january, Anno 1641. So necessary for the settling of the peace of the Kingdom, they returned answer at the last, that it was an infringing of their Privileges to be pressed with any such Directions.  
Fol. 128. And King james commended them over to the Synod of Dort, and there asserted by suffrage of those Doctors, and were afterwards commended to the Convocation in Ireland. Our Author takes this Error from the former Historian, but takes no notice of the correction of it by the Observator though it appears by his citation in the margin, that he had consulted with those Observations in this very point. And therefore I must let him know, since otherwise he will not take notice of it, that this is a strange Hysteron Proteron, setting the Cart before the Horse as we use to phrase it. The Convocation in Ireland, by which the Articles of Lambeth were incorporated into the Articles of that Church, was holden in the Year 1615. the Synod of Dort not held till three years after anno 1618. and therefore not to D●rt first, and to Ireland afterwards. The like mistake in point of time we find in our Author fol. 134. where speaking of that wild distemper which happened in the House of Commons on the dissolving of the Parliament Anno 1628. he telleth us, That the effects of those Malignities flew over Seas, and infected the French Parliaments about this time, where that King discontinued the Assemblies of the three Estates upon far less Provocations. Whereas he lets us know from the Observator, within few lines after, that those Assemblies of the three Estates in Franc● were discontinued by King Lewis th● 13. and a new form of Assembly instituted in the place thereof Anno 1614 So that the malignity of those distempers which happened in the Parliament of England Anno 1628. could not about that time pass over the Seas and infect the French Parliaments, which had been discontinued and dissolved 14. years before.  
Fol. 133. This was ratified by the Contract of this Nation, which the Conqueror upon his admittance, had declared and confirmed in the Laws which he published.] Our Author speaks this of an hereditary Freedom which is supposed to have been in the English Nation, from paying any Tax or Tallage to the King, but by Act of Parliament. And I would fain learn so much of him as to direct me to some creditable Author, in which I may find this pretended contract between the Norman Conqueror and the English Subject, and in what Book of Statutes I may find these Laws which were published by him to that purpose. The Norman Conqueror knew his own strength too well to reign precariò, to ground his Title on his admittance by the people, or to make any such contract with them, by which he might more easily win them to that admittance. He won the Kingdom by his sword▪ and by that he kept It. 'Tis true, that the people did petition him for a Restitution of the Laws of Edward the Con●essor, in which such an immunity from extraordinary Taxes might be granted to them. But I cannot find that either he or William Rufus who succeeded, did ever part with so much of their powet as not to raise money on the Subject for their own occasions whensoever they pleased. And it is true also, that both King Hen. 1. and K. Steven, who came to the Crown by unjust or disputable Titles, did flatter the people, when they first entered on the Throne, with an hope of restoring the said Laws; but I cannot find that ever they were so good as their words, nay, I find the contrary. The first of our Kings which gave any life to those old Laws, was King Hen. 2. the first granter of the Magna Charta; which notwithstanding he kept not so exactly as to make it of any strength and consequence to bind his Heirs. But the Commons having once tasted the sweetness of it, and with the Lords in a long war against King john, from whom they extorted it by strong hand, and had it confirmed unto them at a place called Running Mead near Stanes, Anno 1215. Confirmed afterward in more peaceable times by King H●n. 3. in the Ninth year of hi● Reign. But so, that he and his Successors made bold with the Subject notwithstanding in these money matters, till the Statute de Tallagio non concedendo was passed by Edward of Carnarvan eldest Son to King Edward the third, at such time as his Father was beyond the Seas in the war of Flanders: which being disallowed by the King at his coming home, seems to have been taken off the File, to the intent it might not pass for a Law for the time to come; nor is it to be found now in the Records of the Tower amongst the Laws of that King's time, as are all the rest. But from the general position touching the hereditary freedom of the English subject from Taxes and Tallage, not granted and confirmed by Parliament, our Author passeth to such Rites and Impositions as are laid on Merchandise, of which he telleth us, that  
Ibid. Mo●●ly these upon Merchandise were taken by Parliament six ●r twelve per pound f●r time and years, as they saw cause, for defence of the Sea, and afterwards they were granted to the King for life, and so continued for divers descents:] Our Author had before told us, that the Merchant in ●ormer times usually gav● consent to such taxes, but limited to a time t● the ratification of the next following Parliament to be canceled ●r confirmed. By which it seems that the King's hands were so tied up, that without the consent of the Merchant, or Authority of the Parliament, he could impose no tax upon ●ny Merchandise either exported or imported. But certainly whatever our Author says to the contrary, the King might impose rates and taxes upon either by his sole prerogative, not troubling the Parliament in it, nor ask the leave of the Merchant whom it most concerned; Which Taxes being accustomably paid, had the name of Customs, as the Officers which received them had the name of Customers. Concerning which we find no old Statute or Act of Parliament, which did enable the King to receive them, though some there be by which the King did bind himself to a lesser rate then formerly had been laid upon some commodities: as appears by the Statute of the 14. of King Edward 3. where it is said that neither we nor our Heirs shall demand, assess, nor take, nor suffer to be taken more custom for a Sack of Wool of any English man, but half a mark only. And upon the Woolfels and Leather the old Custom. And the Sack ought to contain 26. stone, and every stone 14. pound. By which it seems that there had been both Customs and old Customs too, which the Kings of England had formerly imposed on those commodities, now by the goodness of this King abated to a lesser sum, and deduced to a certainty. The like Customs the Kings of England also had upon foreign Commodities, 〈◊〉 namely, upon that of wine, each Tun of Wine which lay before the Mast, and behind the Mast b●ing du● unto the King by C●stome; received accordingly, & sic de c●teris. But being these old Customs were found insufficient, in the times of open hostility betwixt u● and France, both to maintain the King's Port, and to enable him to guard the Seas and secure his Merchants; a Subsidy of T●nnage and Poundage imposed at a certain rate on all sorts of Merchandise was granted ●●rst by Act of Parliament to King Hen. 6. and afterward to King Edw. 4. in the 12. Year of his Reign, and finally to all the Kings successively for term of life; Never denied to any of them till the Commons' beg●n to think of lessening the Authority Royal in the first Y●ar of King Charles, whom they had engaged in a War with the King of Spain, and me●n●●o make use of the advantage by holding him to hard meats, till they had brought him to a necessity of yielding to any thing which they pleased to ask. For in the first Parliament of his Reign, they passed the Bill ●or one Year only, which for that cause was rejected in the House of Lords. In the 〈◊〉 Parliament they were too busy with the Duke to do any thing in it: And in the first Session of the third, the● drew up a Remonstrance against it, as if the King by passing 〈◊〉 Petition of Right, had parted with his Interest in that Imposition. Nor stayed they there, but in the tumultuous end of the next Session, they thundered out their A●athema's●ot ●ot only against such of the King's Ministers as should act any thing in the levying of his Subsidy of Tonnage and Poundage, but against all such as voluntarily should yield or pay th● same not being granted by Parliament, as betrayers of the Liberties of England, and enemies to this Commonwealth. And though the King received it (but not without some loss and difficulty) from the first year of his Reign to the sixteenth current; yet than the Commons being backed with a Scottish Army, resolved that he should hold it not longer but as a Tenant at will, and that but from three Months to three Months neither. And then they passed it with this clog ' which the King (as his case then stood) knew not how to shake off, viz. that it must be declared and enacted by the King's Authority, ●nd by the Authority of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament. Th●t it is and hath been the ancient Right of the Subjects of this Realm, that no Subsidy, Custom, Impost, or other charge whatsoever, ought or may be laid or imposed upon any Merchandise exported or imported by Subjects, Denizens, or Aliens, without common consent in Parliament.  
As for the Imposition raised on Currants by Queen Elizabeth, it was done, as our Author tells us to cry quits with the Venetians, who had raised the Customs of our Cl●th. And this was done, saith he, without regret or complaint, the general prosperity of the Reign overshadowing, and her power commanding, fol. 133. Here than we have an Imposition raised upon some Commodities, by the sole will an● power of the Queen, not only without Act of Parliament, but without any regret or complaint of the Merchants, as our Author tells us. And in the first he tells us true, but not so in the last. For the Merchants having feed some Members of the House of Commons to befriend them in it, it was moved that some course might be taken by the House to ease the Merchants in th●t Point. When presently M. Secretary Cecil addressing himself unto the Speaker, desired that that business might proceed no further; affirming that it was a Noli me tangere, part of the Queen's prerogative Royal, and therefore not to be disputed within those walls; adding w●●hal, that if 〈◊〉 proceeded any further, he must (as he was in duty bound) acquaint her Majesty with the matter, of whose displeasure they would quickly find themselves to be very sensible. And so the business stopped for that time, though it broke out afterwards, but little to the benefit of the Merchant, as in fine it proved. It seems by this story that the Commons challenged no such privilege in Queen Elizabeth's time, as they did afterwards in the time of King Charles, that is to say, that neither the King nor Queen was to take notice of any thing which was said or done within those Walls, until it was communicated to them by the consent of the House: For whereas the King in a Speech made to both Houses, on the 14 of December, 1641. took notice of some dispute which had been raised in that House, about the King's power in pressing Soldiers for his Wars, the Commons voted this for a breach of Privilege, and gained so far upon the Lords, that they joined together in this Declaration to his Majesty, viz. That amongst other privileges of Parliament, it was their ancient and undoubted right, that his Majesty ought not to take notice of any matter in Agitation and debate in either House of Parliament, but by their Information and Agreement: But yet as ancient as it was, the youngest man present had seen the beginning; and as undoubted as it was, the oldest man there sitting lived to see the end of it: And so much for that.  
Fol. 136. But they were all ten committed to several Prisons, and on the first of May, Attorney-General Noy sent Process out against them, to appear in the Star-Chamber, and answer his Information there.] Our Author speaks this of those ten persons who had been guilty of that most unparallelled Riot, which was committed in the House of Commons, at the dissolving of the last Parliament, at what time Mr. Noy was not Attorney-General, nor in three years after, and therefore could not send out Process, or make any Information against them, as is here affirmed: The Attorney-General was at that time Sir Robert Heath, who not long after entered the like Information against the Earls of Bedford, Somerset, and Clare, Sir Robert Cotton, Master Selden, Mr. St. john, for dispersing a Manuscript, containing sundry projects for raising money on the Subject without the help of Parliaments; as if it had been some Design of the King or his Council to enslave the Nation: Concerning which, our present Author tells us one thing, and an absent Author tells us another; That which our present Author tells us, is, That  
Fol. 140. It was contrived at Florence by Sir Robert Dudley, who descended from the Dudlies, Earls of Warwick, and so he styled himself.] That this Book of projects was contrived by Sir Robert Dudley, I am well assured; and I am well assured also, that he neither descended from the Dudlies Earls of Warwick, nor ever called himself by that Title: There were but three that held the Titles of Warwick, viz.  
john, the first Baron of that House, created Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland, by K. Edward the sixth.  
Secondly, john his eldest surviving Son, commonly called Earl of Warwick (as the custom is) after his Father was made Duke, who died without Issue.  
And thirdly, Ambrose the fourth Son of the first Io●n, created Earl of Warwick by Queen Elizabeth, Anno 1552. who deceased without Issue also; so that there was but one Dudley Earl of Warwick, from whom this Robert could descend, and from him he did, as being the base or natural Son of Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, the fifth Son of the said john Dudley Earl of Warwick, and Duke of Northumberland.  
Secondly, This Sir Robert Dudley, who contrived the Manuscript, did not style himself by the name of Earl of Warwick, that being too low a title to content his Ambition: For looking on himself as the only remaining branch of this House of the Dudlies, he took upon himself the Style of Duke of Northumberland, and was commonly called so by all sorts of People in the State of Florence: But to proceed, our Author tells us of this Manuscript of Sir Robert Dudlies, That,  
Ibid. It was a Rhapsody of several pro●ects for increase of the King's Revenue▪ and somewhat in prejudice of proceedings in Parliament; sundry copies whereof were dispersed, etc.] And so dispersed, that there were few or none who were inquisitive into matters which concerned the public, that got not ● Copy of th●se Papery: Which being found in the Study of the Earl of Strafford (as it might have been in thous●nds more) gave an occasion to E. H. an obscure fellow, composed of Ignorance and malice, to publish it in Print, with this following Title, viz. strafford's Pl●t discovered, and th● Parliament vindicated in their justice executed upon him, by the late discovery of certain Propositions delivered to his Majesty by the Earl of Strafford, a little before his trial, with this Inscription, Propositions for the bridling of Parliaments, and for the increasing of his Majesty's Revenue much more than before, etc. And so much for the harmless Errors of my present, and the malicious falsehood of my absent Author: Amongst which harmless Errors of my present (but not to be excused in any) Author, I reckon his naming of King Charles to be the Uncle of Frederick Prince Elector Palatine, fol. 143. and within few lines after, his Brother-in-law, as indeed he was, his making chalcedon to be a City in Greece, fol. 151. whereas it was a City of Bythinia in Asia minor, on the other side of the Sea: But leaving these, I proceed to matters of more moment, and of greater consequence.  
Fol. 148. And therefore draws a Pedigree of his right and title from King James the first, etc.] Our Author speaks this of the Pedigree by which the Marquis of Hamilton pretended a Right and Title to the Crown of Scotland, a Title which had so many flaws, that if all the Issue of King james the sixth were utterly extinguishe●, co●ld not serve the turn: For first, the Lady Katherine Stuart, Daughter to james the second, from whom, (and not immediately from james the first) he must fetch his pedigree, was first Married to Robert Lord Boide Earl of Arran, from whom being forcibly taken by her brother King james the third, and married in her said Husband's life time, Sir james Hamilton, the especial favourite of that King, she carried with her for her Dower the Earldom of Arran: The Children born of this Adulterous bed could pretend no Title to that Crown, if all the Issue of james the first, second and third, should have chanced to fail: And yet there was another flaw as great as this, For james▪ the Grand child of this james, having first married a Wife of one of the Noble Houses of Scotland, and afterwards considering that Cardinal Bet●n, Archbishop of St. And●ews, was the only man who managed the affairs of that Kingdom, put her away, and married a Niece or Kinswoman of the Cardinals (his first Wife still living) by whom he was the Father of john the first marquis of Hamilton, whose Grandchild james by virtue of this goodly Pedigree pretended to the Crown of Scotland.  
Fol. 149. M. Rogers in his Preface to the 39 Articles, saith, That since the suppression of Puritans by the Arch-Bishops, Parker, Grindal, and Whitgift, none will seems to be such.] That Archbishop Grindal was a suppressor of the Puritan Faction is strange to me, and so I think it is to any who are versed in the actions of those times; it being the general opinion of our Historians, that he fell into the Queen's displeasure for being a chief Patron and promoter of it. Certain it is, that he wrote a large Letter to the Queen in defence of their prophesyings, than which there could be nothing more dangerous to Church and State. Nor does M. Rogers in his Preface to the 39 Articles, tell us, that he had any hand in the suppression of the Puritans; it being affirmed by him on the contrary, that they continued multiplying their number, and growing strong; even headstrong in b●ldnesse and schism, till the dying day of this most Reverend Archbishop.  
Fol. 151. But w●y to a foreign Title, and not at as easy a rate to English, as in Ireland he had t● all Sees there?] Our Author makes a Quaery, Why the Bishop appointed by the Pope to govern his party here in England, should rather take his Title from Chalcedon in Greece, then from any one of the Episcopal Sees in this Kingdom, as well as they do in that of Ireland? In answer whereunto, though he gives us a very satisfactory reason, yet I shall add something thereunto, which perhaps may not be unworthy of the Readers knowledge. And him I would have know, that at such time as Prince ●●arles was in Spain, and the Dispensation passed in the Court of Rome, it was concluded in the Conclave, that some Bishops should be sent into England by the Name of the Bishops of Salisbury, Gloucester, Chester, Durham, & sic de caeteris; the better to manage and improve their increasing hopes; Intelligence whereof being given unto the Jesuits here in England, who feared nothing more than such a thing, one of them who formerly had free access to the Lord Keeper Williams, acquaints him with this mighty secret; assuring him that he did it for no other reason, but because he knew what a great exasperation it would give the King, and consequently how much it must incense him against the Catholics. Away with this Intelligence goes the Lord Keeper to the King, who took fire thereat as well as he, and though it was somewhat late at night, commanded him to go to the Spanish Ambassador, and to require him to send unto the King his Master to take some course that those proceedings might be stopped in the Court of Rome, or otherwise that the Treaty of the Match should advance no further. The Lord Keeper finds the Ambassador ready to send away his packets, who upon hearing of the News commanded his Carrier to stay till he had represented the whole business in a Letter to the King his Master. On the receiving of which Letter, the King imparts the whole business to the Pope's Nuncio in his Court, who presently sends hi● dispatches to the Pope, acquainting him with the great inconveniences and unavoidable dangers of this new design, which being stopped by this devise, and the Treaty of the Match ending in a Rupture not long after, the same Jesuit came again to the Lord Keeper's Lodging, and in a fair and facetious manner thanked him most humbly for the good office he had done for that Society, for breaking the bearing off which blow all the friends they bade in Rome could find no Buckler, which Story as I heard from his Lordships own mouth (with no small contentment) so seemed he to be very well pleased with the handsomeness of the trick which was put upon him.  
Fol. 162. The Germane war made by Gustavus a pretention (and but a pretention) for liberty to the oppressed Princes. Which Proposition as it stands is both true and false, with reference to the beginning, progress, and success of his war. For when he first undertook the conduct of it, on the solicitation of the Kings of England, France, and Denmark, and many of the afflicted and disinherited Princes; he cannot be supposed to entertain any other thoughts then to restore the Princes and free Cities to their former Rights, for doing whereof his Army was defrayed by the joint charges and expense of the Confederates: In order whereunto he caused the Inhabitants of all the Towns and Provinces which he had forced from the Emperor's Forces before the overthrow of Tilly at the valley of Lipsick, to take an Oath to be true unto the Liberty and Empire of Germany. And hitherto his intents were real, not pretentionall only. But after that great victory, and the reducing of all Franconia, and the lower Palatinate under his absolute command; though he continued his pretensions, yet he changed his purpose, swearing the people of all degrees and ranks, which submitted to him to be true from thenceforth to the King and Crown of Sweden. This as it first discovered his ambition of the first design which brought him over; so was it noted that his affairs never prospered after; receiving first a check from Wallenstein at the Siege of Noremberg, and not long after his death's wound and the battle of Lutzen.  
Fol. 174. And now they revive the Sabbatarian controversy which was begun five years since, Bradburn on the Sabbath day, and directed to the King.] In this Discourse about the Sabbatarian Quarrels, our Author hath mistake, himself in several particulars. The business first is not rightly limned, the coming out of Bradburns' Book being placed by him in the year 1628. whereas it was not published until five years after: But being published at that time, and directed to the King, as our Author words is, it gave the King occasion to consider of the general tendency of the Puritan doctrine in this point unto downright Iud●●sme; and thereupon to quicken the reviving of his Father's Declaration about Lawful sports, in which the signification of his pleasure beareth date the 18. of October, in the 9 year of his Reign▪ Anno 1633. A remedy which had been prescribed unseasonably to prevent, and perhaps too late to cure the disease, if Bradburns' Book had been published six years before, as our Author makes 〈◊〉.  
Our Author secondly, relating this very business of Bradburnes Book (or rather of Barbarous Books, as he calls them there, fol. 196.) must either be confessed to speak Vngrammatically, or else the coming out of these Barbarous Books must be one chief motive for setting out that Declaration by King james, Anno. 1618.  
Thirdly, This Bradbu●u was not made a Convert by the High Commission Cou●t, b●t by a private conference with some Learned Divines, to which he had submitted himself, and which by God's blessing so far prevailed with him, that he became a Converts and freely conformed himself to the Orthodoxal Doctrine of the Church of England, both concerning the Sabbath day, and likewise concerning the Lord's day. So Bishop White relates the Story in his Epistle Dedicatory before his Book to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Anno 1635.  
Fourthly, Whereas our Author tells us, fol. 175. That the Declaration was not 〈◊〉 on the Ministers to publish more proper for a Lay-Officer or a Constable; I must needs grant that the publishing of this Declaration was not pressed on the Minister by any express command of the King. But then I would fain know withal how the Bishops could take Order that publication thereof be made in all the Parish Churches of their several Dioceses, according to his 〈◊〉 will and pleasure, but by the mouth of the Ministers. The Constable and other Lay-Officers, whom our Author thinks more proper for that Employment, were not under the Bishop● command as to that particular, and therefore as he ●ad n● Authority, so he had no reason to require any such duty from them. And as for the Churchwardens, which are more liable to the power and command of the Ordinary, it happeneth many times, especially in Countrey-Villages, that they cannot read, and therefore no such publication of the King's pleasure to be laid on them. The Ministers who had take● an Oath o● Canonical Obedience to their several and respective Bishops, must consequently b● the fittest men for that Employment, implicitly intended, though not explicitly named in the Declaration.  
As many mistakes there are concerning the decay and repair of S. Paul's Church in London. For first, the high Spire was not burnt down by accident of Lightning in the time of Queen Eliz●beth, as our Author tells us, fol. 176. That vulgar Error hath been confuted long ago, and no such thing as the burning of Paul's Steeple by Lightning hath for these twenty years and more occurred in the Chronologies of our common Almanacs; that dreadful accident not happening by the hand of Heaven, but by the negligence of a Plumber, who leaving his pan of Coals there when he went to Dinner, was the sole occasion of that mischief; Secondly, The Commission for the Repair of this Church, issued in the time of King Charles, came not out in the year 1632. where our Author placeth it, but had past the Seal, and was published in Print the year before, Anno 1631. Thirdly, The Reparation of the Church began not at the West end, as our Author tells us, fol. 177. the Choir or Eastern part of the Church being fully finished, before the Western part, or the main body of the Church had been undertaken. Fourthly, The little Church called S. Gregory's, was not willingly taken down to the ground, the Parishioners opposing it very strongly, and declaring as much unwillingness as they could or durst in that particular; and five the Lord Mayor for the time then being, was not named Sir Robert 〈◊〉 (as our Author makes it) but Sir Robert Ducy, advanced by ●is majesty to the degree of a Baronet, as by the Commission doth appear; so many mistakes in so few lin●● are not easily met with in any Author but our present Hist●●rian: But we proceed.  
Fol. 179. ●he Turk● h●ve Auxiliary friendship of the 〈◊〉 Tartar Chrim, from whose Ancestors Tamburlaine proceeded. ● A Proposition strangely mixed of truth and falsehood; it being most true, that the Turks have Auxiliary Forces from the Tartar Chrim, and no less false that Tamburlaine descended from him: All who have written of that great Prince, make him the son of Og, or Zaincham, the Cham of Zagathey, a Province some thousands of miles distant from the dwellings of the Tartar-Chrim; which Og or Z●in-Ch●m was the Grandchild of another Z●in-Cham, the third great Cham of the Tartars, and he the Grandchild of Cingis the first great Cham, who laid the foundation of that mighty, and (for a time) most terrible Empire: Whereas the Chrim-Tartar, (or the Tartar-Chrim, as our Auth●r calls him) derives 〈◊〉 from Lochtan-Cham, descended from one Bathu or Roydo, a great Commander of the Tartars, who during the Reign of Hoccata the second great Cham, subdued these Countries: But this mistake I shall more easily pardon in our Author, than another of like nature touching Vladislaus King of Poland, of whom he tells us, that being the forth of that name, he succeeded his Brother Sigismond in that Kingdom: Vladislaus the f●●rth (saith he) was after the death of his Brother Sigismond, by the consent of the States preferred to the ●hro●e, fol. 182.  
In which few words, there are two things to be corrected.  
For first, Vl●disl●us who succeeded Sig●smund, was not his Brother, but his Son.  
And secondly, he succeeded not by the name of Vladislaus the fourth, but of Vlad●sl●us the seven●h.  
Add herein his making of Smolensko a Town of P●land, ibid.. which most of our Geograp●ers have placed in R●ssia, A Town wh●ch sometime; by the chance of War, or otherwise, h●th been in possession of the Pole, though properly belonging to the great Duke of Muscovy, which can no more entitle it to the name of a Polish Town, than Calais may be now said to be an English Colony, because once a Colony of the English.  
Nor does our Author spe●k more properly (I will not say more understandingly) of the Affairs of Ireland, then of those of Poland.  
For first, He tells us, fol. 185. That the Conquest of it was never perfected, till its subjection to King Charles, whereas there was no other subjection tendered by that People to King Charles, then by those of his other two Kingdoms of England and Scotland.  
Secondly, Forgetting what he had said before, he tells us, fol. 186. That Mount●oy made an end of that War in the Reign of King James; and yet he says not true in that neither: ●or the War was ended by Mountjoy at the Battle of Kingsale, by which that great Rebel, the Earl of Tirone, who had the conduct of that War, was forced to submit unto him upon condition of his Pardon, which not without great difficulty was obtained of the Queen: After whose death, the Lord Mount●oy returned into England, brought the said Earl of Tyrone with him, and presented him unto King james; who by this means reaped the fruit of that Victory, and settled Ireland upon a better foundation of Peace and Happiness, than all the Kings which had Reigned before him.  
Thirdly, There was never any such Lord Deputy of Ireland as Sir William Fitzers, mentioned within few lines after; Sir William Fitz-Williams was once Deputy there, whom I think he means.  
Nor fourthly, was Sir George Cary, whom he brings in by Head and shoulders to be the Governor of Ireland, f. 187. ever advanced unto that Honour; and our Author being as much mistaken in the name of the Man, as of his Office: Sir George Cary never had Command in Ireland, Sir George Ca●ew had, made by the Queen Lord Precedent of Mu●ster, (which place he worthily discharged) but not the Governor of that Kingdom.  
Fol. 192. The Queen was delivered of her second Son, the 13 of October, 1633. (and not upon the 14 of November▪ 1634.) he was 〈◊〉 ten days 〈…〉 James, and created Duke of York by Letters Patents, etc.] Our Author here corrects the former Historian, for making the King's second Son to be born on the 14 of 〈◊〉, and deserves himself to be corrected, for making him to be created Duke of York by Letters Patents, on 〈…〉 day after his Birth. For though he was by the King designed to be Duke of York, and that it was commanded that he should be called so accordingly; yet was he not created Duke of York by Letters Patents until ten years after, and a●ove, those Letters Patents bearing date at I●nuary●7 ●7. Anno 1643.  
The like mistake to that which he corrects in the former Historian, he falls into himself, fol. 312. whe●e he makes Henry Duke of Gloucester, the King's youngest Son, to be born on the twentieth day 〈◊〉 july, An●o 1640. whereas it appears by the Arch Bishops Breviate, that he was born on Wednesday the eighth day of that Month, being the day of the solemn Fa●t.  
And by this rule we may correct a passage in the s●o●t view of this King's life, pag. ●3. wher● he is 〈…〉 born on the seventeenth of this Month, though rightly, 〈◊〉. 46. on the eighth day of it, he is said to be b●rn up●n the eighth.  
And thus he fails, fol. 232. in making Edw●rd 〈◊〉 the only Son of George Duke of Clarence, to be Duke of Warwick, whom all our Heralds and 〈…〉 Earl of Warwick.  
The like mistake I find in the name of a Town, near unto which a great Battle was fought between the 〈◊〉 and the Swedes: The Town near which that Battle was fought, being named Norlinghen▪ a City of that part of Svevia which is called North-schw●h●n, mistakingly by 〈◊〉 Author called the Battle of Norlington: The loss of which Battle, drew after it the loss of the Palatinate, restored to the Electoral Family but the year before.  
Fol. 209. And that Story (of truth) that John of Orleans of this Family, like a second Judith, saved France from the Oppression of Strangers.] Not now to quarrel the ungrammaticalness of this passage, nor the mistake of john of Orleans for johane; I would fain know by what Authority our Author makes this john or● joan to be descended of this Illustrious Family of the Dukes of Lorrein: Most of the French, who have written the Story of her life, report her to be a poor man's daughter of Ocolieur, a Town in that Dukedom, instructed by the Earl of Dunois, (commonly called the Bastard of Orleans) to pretend to some Divine Revelations, the better to encourage that dejected Nation, and to take upon her the Conduct of the French Armies against the English, in which she sped fortunately at the first, but in the end was taken Prisoner, and burnt at Roven. Nor does the parallel between her and judish hold so well as our Author would have it, that Lady adventuring into the Tent of Holophernes, accompanied only with her Maid, this Damosel Errand never looking on the face of an Enemy, but when she was backed by the best Commanders and united Forces of the French; that Lady carrying back with her the head of her Enemy, which occasioned the total overthrow of all his A●my, this Damosel not being able to save her own Head from the power of the Conqueror; that Lady dying honourably in the Bed of Peace, and this ingloriously in a Ditch.  
Fol. 219. A severe eye had been upon the Roman Catholics, and their numerous r●sorts, etc. to the ancient Chapel at Denmark House.] An ancient Chapel questionless, of not much above twenty years' continuance, when our Author writ this part of his History, and then built for the devotions of a small Covent of Capuchins, whom the Queen had got leave ●o s●ttle there for her personal comfort.  
No Chapel anciently belonging to that House which our Author calls by the name of Denmark, but is more commonly called Somerset House; It having been observed of Edward Duke of Somerset the first Founder of it, that having pulled down one Parish Church and three Bishops houses (each of which had their several Oratories) to make room for that Palace for himself; he could not find in his heart to build a Chapel to it for the Service of God: And though some Room was afterward set apart in it for Family-duties and devotions, by the name of a Closet; yet so uncapable was that Closet of admitting any numerous resort of Catholics out of other places, that it was not able to contain the Queen's Domestics at her first coming hither. But perhaps our Author will hit it better in the affairs of Scotland, and therefore pass we on to them, where first we find That  
He makes Sir john Stewart Earl of Traquair, to succeed the Earl of Marr in the Office of Lord Treasurer of Scotland, fol. 193. Whereas it is most undoubtedly true (and acknowledged by himself in another place) that he succeeded in that Office to the Earl of Morton: the Earl of Morton being made Captain of the guard in the place of the Earl of Holland, and the Earl of Holland made Groom of the Stool upon the death of the Earl of Carlisle; His making of Sir john Hay of Scotland●o ●o be the Master of the Robes for that Kingdom, fol. 237. in stead of Master of the Rolls (Clerk-Register they call him there) I look on as a mistake of the Printer only, though such mistakes condemn our Author of no small negligence in not reviewing his own work Sheet by Sheet, as it came from the Press, and making an Errata to it, as all Authors careful of their credit have been used to do.  
Fol. 230. And because the Earl of Strathern a bold man, and had the King's ear, and deservedly too, being faithful and true; these men set on John Scot (Director of the Chancery) a busy person, to inform against his Descent:] In the story of this Earl, not only as to his Original and descent, but as to his being Earl of Menteith our Author is not to be faulted; but on the other side, not to be justified in making him to be Earl of Strathern by the power of Buckingham (that Duke being dead some years before) though by his power made Lord Precedent of the Council for the Realm of Scotland. Therefore to set this matter right, and to add something to our Author that may not be unworthy of the Readers knowledge, I am to let him understand, that after the death of David Earl of Strathern second Son to King Robert the third, this Title lay dormant in the Crown, and was denied to the Lord Dromond (created afterwards Earl of Perth) when a Suitor for it. But this Gentleman Sir William Graham Earl of Menteith descended from an Heir General of that David, a man of sound abilities and approved affections, was by the King made Lord Precedent of the Council of Scotland, as before is said; In which place he so behaved himself, and stood so stoutly in behalf of the King his Master, upon all occasions, that nothing could be done for advance of Hamiltons' designs, till he was removed from that place. In order whereunto it was put into his head by some of that Faction, that he should sue unto the King to be created Earl of Strathern, as the first and most honourable Title which belonged to his House; that his merits were so great as to assure him not to meet with a denial, and that the King could do no less then to give him some nominal reward for his real services. On these suggestions he repaired unto the Court of England, where without any great difficulty he obtained his Suit, and waited on the King the most part of his Summer's progress; no man being so openly honoured and courted by the Scottish Nation as he seemed to be. But no sooner was he gone for Scotland, but the Hamiltonians terrified the King with the dangers which he had run into by that Creation, whereby he had revived in that proud and ambitious person the Rights which his Ancestors pretended to the Crown of Scotland, as being derived from David Earl of Strathern before mentioned, the second Son of Robert the Second by his lawful Wife: that the King could not choose but see how generally the Scots slockt about him (after this Creation) when he was at the Court, and would do so much more when he was in Scotland: And finally that the proud man had already so far declared himself as to give it ou●, that the King held the Crown of him. Hereupon a Commission was speedily posted into Scotland, in which those of Hamiltons' Faction made the greatest Number) to inquire into his life and actions, and to consider of the inconveniences which might redound unto the King by his affecting this New Title: On the Return whereof, the poor Gentleman is removed from his Office, from being one of the Privy Council, and not only deprived of the Title of Earl of Strathern, but of that also of Menteith, which for a long time had remained in his Ancestors. And though he was not long after made Earl of Airth, yet this great fall did so discourage him from all public businesses, that he retired to his own house, and left the way open to the Hamiltonians, to play their own game as they listed. Faithful for all this to the King in all changes of Fortune, neither adhering to the Covenanters, nor giving the least countenance to them, when he might not only have done it with safety, but with many personal advantages which were tendered to him.  
Fol. 238. The marquis now finds this place too hot for him, and removeth to Dalkieth, without any adventuring upon the English Divine Service, formerly continually used there for twenty years in audience of the Council, Nobility, and judges.] Compare this passage with another, and we shall find that our Author hath mis-reckoned no less than fifteen years in twenty. For in the year 1633. he puts this down after the King's return from Scotland, agreeable to the truth of story in that particular. What care (saith he) King james took heretofore to rectify Religious worship in Scotland, when he returned from his last visiting of them, the like does King Charles so soon as he came home. The ●oul undecent Discipline he seeks to reform into sacred worship, and sends Articles of order to be observed only by the Dean of his private Chapel there, as in England. That Prayers be performed twice a day in the English manner. A monthly Communion to be received on their knees. He that officiates on Sunday and Holidays, to do his duty in his Surplice. No public reading of the English Liturgy in Scotland, since the year 1562. but only during the short time of King james his being there Anno 1617. therefore not read continually twenty years together, as our Author states it; But twenty years is nothing in our Authors Arithmetic. For telling us that the sufferers, viz. Dr. Bastwick, Mr. Prinne, and M. Burton obtained an order for satisfaction to be made them out of the Estates of those who imposed their punishments; that none of those Judges being left but Sir Henry Vane the Elder, it was ordered that satisfaction should be given by him to one of their Widows, and thereupon it was observed for a blessed time when a single Counsellor of State after twenty years' opinion should be sentenced by Parliament to give satisfaction for a mis-judgement, acted by a body of Counsel, fol. 867. But the punishment inflicted on those sufferers, was in the year 1637. and this order made about eight years after, Anno 1645. being but twelve years short of our Authors twenty, which is no great matter.  
Fol. 282. As for Sir John Finch Chief justice of the Common Pleas, who succeeded him (in the place of the Lord Keeper) he could not hold out so many months as he did years from being in hazard to have forfeited his head.] But first, this Gentleman was somewhat more than Sir john Finch, he being created Lord Finch of Forditch in the beginning of the April before. Secondly, If he were in any hazard, it was not for any thing he had done in the place of Lord Keeper, but only for his zeal to the King's service in the case of Ship money, or to his actings under the Earl of Holland in Forrest businesses, before he came un●o that place; neither of which could have extended to the loss of his head, though he thought not fit to trust that head to such merciless Judges. With like prudence did Sir Francis Windebank, principal Secretary of Estate, withdraw into France; of whom our Author telleth us, That he remained there to his death a professed Roman Catholic, fol. 338.  
But first, Sir Francis Windebank remained not there until his death, for he came over to the King when he was at Oxford, about the latter end of the year 1643. But finding his sufferings unregarded, and his Person neglected (as not being suffered to appear as a Member of the House of Commons, when the Parliament was summoned thither) he retired again into France to his Wife and Children.  
And secondly, He died not a professed Catholic, but continued to the last a true Son of the Church of England; reproached in his best fortunes by the name of a Papist, because preferred by the Archbishop, a faithful servant to the Queen, and a professed enemy to the Puritan Faction: For which last reason, the Earl of Arundel must be given out to be a Papist (though I have seen him often at Divine Service in the King's Chapel) and is so declared to be by our Author also; who tells us further, That finding his native Country too hot for him to hold out, he went with the Queen Mother unto Colen, fol. 428. as if the Land had been hotter for him, or his Zeal hotter than the place (had he been a Papist, as he was not) then for any other Noble Man of that Religion.  
Fol. 320. The English proposed a Cessation of Arms, but the Scots, as they would obey his Majesties command not to advance, so they could not return till they had the effects of their Errand.] And all this while I would fain know what became of the Irish Army, which had been raised in so much haste by the Earl of Strafford, with the beginning of the Spring: An Army consisting of 10000 Foot, and 1500 Horse, kept ever since in constant pay and continual Exercise, by which the King might have reduced the Scots to their due obedience, as the Earl of Strafford declared openly at the Council Table, immediately on the dissolving of the former Parliament; yet now this Army lies dormant, without acting anything thing toward the suppressing of the Scots, expressed in their invading England, their wasting the Northern parts of the Kingdom, and their bold Demands: Which Army, if it had been put over into Cumberland, (to which from the Port of Carick-Fergus in Ireland, is but a short and easy passage) they might have got upon the back of the Scots, and caught that wretched People in a pretty Pitfall; so that having the English Army before them, and the Irish behind them, they could not but be ground to powder, as between two Millstones: But there was some fatality in it, or rather some overruling providence, which so dulled our Counsels, that this Design was never thought of for aught I can learn; but sure I am that it was never put into Execution: An Army, of which the prevailing Members in both Houses stood in so much fear, that they never left troubling the King with their importunities, till they had caused him to Disband it; the Scots in the mean time nesting in the Northern Counties, and kept at most excessive charges to awe the King, and countenance their own proceedings.  
Fol. 334. The Book, whilst in loose Papers (●re it was complete) and secured into his Cabinet, and that being lost, was seized by the enemy at Naseby fight, etc.] Our Author here, upon occasion of his Majesty's most excellent Book, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (which he hath wholly Incorporated part per part in this present History) gives a very strange Pedigree of it, that being composed before Naseby fight, it was there taken with the rest of the King's Papers, and coming to his hands again, was by the King committed to the hands of one Mr. Symonds, and by him to the Press: In all which, there is nothing true but the last particular.  
For first, That Book, and the Meditations therein contained, were not composed before Naseby fight, many of them relating to subsequent Passages, which the King, without a very h●gh measure of the Spirit of Prophecy, was not able to look so far into● as if past already. Besides, that Book being called, The Portraiture of his Majesty in his Solitudes and Sufferings, must needs relate unto the times of his Solitude, and therefore could not be digested before Naseby fight, when he had been continually exercised in Camp or Counsel, and not reduced to any such Solitude as that Title intimateth.  
Secondly, These Papers were not found with the rest in the King's Cabinet; or if they were, there must be somewhat in it above a miracle that he should get them again into his hands.  
Assuredly those men who used so much diligence to suppress this Book when it was published in print, and many thousand Copies dispersed abroad, would either have burnt it in the fire, or use some other means to prevent the printing of it, to their great trouble and disadvantage.  
Thirdly, These papers were not delivered by the King to Mr. Symonds, who had no such near access to him at that time: For the truth is, that the King having not finished his Conceptions on the several Subjects therein contained, till he was ready to be carried away from Carisbrook Castle, committed those papers at the time of his going thence, to the hands of one of his trusty Servants, to be so disposed of, as might most conduce to the advancement of his Honour & Interest: By which trusty Servant (whosoever he was) those papers were committed to the care of the said Mr. Symons, who had showed himself exceeding zealous in the King's Affairs, by whom there was care taken for the publishing of them, to the infinite contentment of all those well affected Subjects who could get a ●ight of them.  
Fol. 372. The loss of his place, (viz. the City of Arras] animated the Portugueses to revolt from the Spanish Yoke, and to submit themselves to the right Heir, Duke John of Braganza.] Our Author is out of this also: For first, it was not the loss of the City of Arras, but the secret practices and solicitations of Cardinal Richelieu, which made the Portuguez to revolt.  
And secondly, if the King of Spain's Title were not good (as the best Lawyers of Portugal, in the Reign of the Cardinal King Don Henry, did affirm it was) yet could not the Duke of Braganza be the right Heir of that Kingdom; the Children of Mary Duchess of Parma, the eldest Daughter of Prince Edward, the third Son of Emmanuel, being to be preferred before the Children of Katherine Duchess of Braganza, her younger Sister: He tells next of Charles, That,  
Fol. 373. The Sovereignty of Utrick, and Duchy of Gelder's, he bought; that of William he won by Arms, with some pretence of right.] But first, the Sovereignty of Vtreckt came not to him by purchase, but was resigned by Henry of Bavaria, the then Bishop thereof, who being then warred on by the Duke of Gelder's, and driven out of the City by his own Subjects, was not able to hold it: Which resignation, notwithstanding he was fain to take the City by force▪ and to obtain a confirmation of the Grant, not only from Pope Ciement the 7. but also from the Estates of the Country.  
Secondly, he bought not the Duchy of Gelder's neither, but possessed himself of it by a mixed Title of Arms and Contract: The first Contract made between Charles the Warlike Duke of Burgundy, and Arnold of Egmond▪ Duke of Gelder's, who in regard of the great Succours which he received from him (when deprived and Imprisoned by his own ungracious son) passed over his whole Estate to him for a little money: But this alienation being made unprofitable by the death of Charles, the intrusion of Adolph, the son of Arnold, and the succession of Charles the son of Adolph, this Emperor revived the claim, and pressed Duke Charles so hotly on all sides with continual Wars, that he was forced to yield it to him, upon condition that he might enjoy it till his death, which was afterwards granted.  
Thirdly, if he had any right to the Dukedom of William, it accrued not to him by descent as King of Spain, but as a ●ief forfeited to the Empire, for want of Heirs male in the House of Sforza; which not being acknowledged by the French, who pretended from the Heir, General of the Galeazzo's, he won it by his Sword, and so disposed thereof to his Son and Successor King Philip the second, and his Heirs, by another right than that of Conquest.  
The proceeding of the short Parliament, and the surviving Convocation, have been so fully spoken of in the Observations on the former History, that nothing need be added here: But the long Parliament, which began in November following, will afford us some new matter for these Advertisements not before observed. And first we find, That  
Fol. 336. There came out an Order of the Commons House, that all Projectors, and unlawful Monopolists, that have or had ●●tely any benefit from Monopolies, or countenanced, or issued out any Warrants in favour of them, etc. shall be disabled to sit in the House.] A new piece of Authority which the Commons never exercised before, and which they had no right to now, but that they knew they were at this time in such a condition, as to venture upon any new Encroachment, without control: For anciently● and legally the Commons had no power to exclude any of their Members from their place in Parliament, either under colour of false elections, or any other pretence whatsoever: For it appears on good Record, in the 28 year of Queen Elizabeth, that the Commons in Parliament, undertaking the examination of the choosing and returning of Knights of the Shire for the County of Norfolk, were by the Queen sharply reprehended for it; that being (as she sent them word) a thing improper for them to deal in, as belonging only to the Office and Charge of the Lord Chancellor, from whom the Writs issue, and a●e returned. And if they may not exclude their Members under colour of undue Elections and false Returns, much less Authority have they to exclude any of them for acting by virtue of the Kings. Letters Patents, or doing any thing in order to his Majesty's Service: For if this power were once allowed them, they might proceed in the next place to shut out all the Lords of the Privy Council, his Counsel learned in the Laws, his Domestic Servants, together with all such as hold any Offices by his Grant and Favor; because forsooth, having dependence on the King, they could not be true unto the Interest of the Commonwealth: And by this means they might so weed out one another, that at the last they would leave none to sit amongst them, but such as should be all engaged to drive on such projects as were laid before them.  
But whereas our Author tells us in the following words, that it was Ordered also, That Mr. Speaker should issue out new Warrants for electing other Members in their places; he makes the Commons guilty of a greater encroachment than indeed they were: All that they did or could pretend to in this case, was to give order to the Speaker, that intimation might be given to his Majesty of the places vacant, and to make humble suit unto him to issue out new Writs for new Elections to those places: But the next Encroachment on the King's Authority, was far greater than this, and comes next in order.  
Fol. 360. The Bill for the Trienial Parliament, having p●ssed both Houses, was confirmed with the King's Royal Assent, Febr. 16. And then also he passed the Bill of Subsidies, fol. 361.] The Subsidies here mentioned, were intended for the relief of the Northern Counties, oppressed at once with two great Armies, who not only lived upon Free Quarter, but raised divers sums of money also for their present necessities; the one of them an Army of English, raised by the King to right himself upon the Scots; the other being an Army of Scots, who invaded the Kingdom, under colour of obtaining from the King what they had no right to: So that the King was not to have a penny of that Money, and yet the Commons would not suffer him to pass the one, till he had before hand passed the other; which the King, for the relief of his poor Subjects was content to do, and thereby put the power of calling Parliaments into the hands of Sheriffs and Constables, in case he either would not, or should not do it at each three years' end: But the nex● encroachment on the Power and Prerogative Royal was worse than this, there being a way left for the King to reserve that Power by the timely calling of a Parliament, and the dissolving of it too, if called within a shorter time than that Act had limited.  
But for the next sore, which was his passing of the Bill of Tonnage and Poundage, there was no Plaster to be found; the King being for'd (remember that the Commons had an Army of Scots at their devotion) to pass away all his Right unto it, before he could obtain it but for three Months only, as was said before: In which Bill it is to be observed, that as they deprived the King of his Right to Tonnage and Poundage, so they began then to strike at the Bishop's Rights to their Vote in Parliament: For whereas generally in all former Acts, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal were distinctly named, in this that distinction was left out, and the Bill drawn up in the name of the Lord● and Commons; which being disputed by the Bishops, as well foreseeing what the Commons intended by it, was notwithstanding carried for the Commons by the Temporal Lords, who thereby made a way for their own exclusion, when the Commons were grown as much too strong for them, as they were for the Bishops: The secular Lords knew well, that the Lords Spiritual were to have the precedence, and therefore gave them leave to go first out of the House, that they themselves might follow after as they ought to do.  
Proceed we next to the business of the Earl of Strafford, a● whose Trial our Author tells us, That  
Fol. 376. The Earl of Arundel was made Lord High Steward, and the Earl of Lindsey Lord High Constable. ● Our Author borrows this Error (as he does some others) from the former History, and makes it worse by an addition of his own.  
For first, The Earl of Lindsey was not made High Constable upon this occasion, nor did he act there in that capacities He had been made High Constable to decide the difference between the Lord Rey and David Ramsey; which being an extraordinary case was likely to be tried by battle. But in this case there was no need of any such Officer, the Trial being to be made by proofs and Evidences, the verdict to be given by the Lords of Parliament, and sentence to be pronounced by the Lord High Steward, all ● things being to be carried and transacted in due form of Law. Secondly, The Court being broken up, which was before the passing of the Bill of Attainder in the end of April, the Office of Lord High Steward expired also with it. And therefore when our Author speaks of a Request which was made unto the King in Parliament, that the Earl of Pembroke should be made Lord High Steward, in the place of the Earl of Arundel then absent, fol. 430. he either speaks of a Request which was never made, or else mistakes the Lord Steward of the King's household (which place might possibly be desired for the Earl of Pembroke not long before turned out of the Office of Lord Chamberlain) for the Lord High Steward of the Kingdom.  
And now we are fallen on his mistakes touching these great Officers, I shall add another, It being said in our Authors unfigured Sheets, that the King having signed the Bill of Attainder, sent Sir Dudley Carlton Secretary of State to acquaint him what he had finished. An error too gross and palpable for our Author to be guilty of, considering his Acquaintances in the Court and relations to it; which may persuade me to believe that these unfigured Sheets, patched in I know not how, between fol. 408. and 409. should be none of his. But whether they be his or not, certain I am that there was no Secretary at this time but Sir Henry Vane, Windebank being then in France, and his place not filled with the Lord Falkland till the Christmas after Sir Dudley Carlton, Lord Imbercourt, and Viscount Dorchester, was indeed Secretary for a while; but he died upon Ash-wednesday in the year 1631. which was more than nine years before the sending of this message, and I persuade myself the King did not raise him from the grave (as Samuel was once raised at the instance of Saul) to go on that unpleasing errand. Sir Dudley Carlton whom he means (being Brother's son unto the former) was at that time one ●f the Clerks of the Council, but never attained unto the place and honour of a principal Secretary. Our Author having brought the business of the Earl of Strafford toward a Conclusion, diverts upon the Author of the Observations on the former History, to whom he had been so much beholden for many of the most material and judicious Notes in the former part of his Book; and he chargeth thus.  
Fol. 406. I conceive it convenient in more particular to clear two mistakes of our Authors concerning the Articles of Ir●land, and the death of the Earl of Strafford, reflecting upon the late most Reverend Prelate, the Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of all Ireland, whilst he was living, and worse pursued since his decease, somewhat too sharp also upon D. Bernard.] What Fee or Salary our Author hath for this undertaking, I am no● able to determine, but if he be not well paid by them, I am sure he hath been well paid by another; who in his Answer to D. Bernard's Book entitled, The ●udgement of the late Primate of Ireland, Ac. hath fully justified the Observator against all the exceptions, which either our Author or D. Bernard, or the Lord Primate himself have made against him in these two points. Which being extrinsecall as to the matter of this History, shall not be repeated; the Reader being desired, if he want any further satisfaction, to look for it there. All I shall here observe is this, that our Author grounds himself in his whole Discourse of that business upon somewhat which he had in writing under the hand of the said Lord Primate, and more which he hath took verbatim out of the said Book of D. Bernard's, who being both parties to the Suit, ought not to be admitted for Witnesses in their own behalf. And yet our. Author having driven the matter to as good a conclusion as he could from such faulty Premises, conceives an hope, that by the ●ight of those Testimonies, he will be of more moderation, notwithstanding he hath there shown much disaffection to the Primate, in endeavouring to his utmost, to evade divers of those particulars, either in giving the worst sense of them, or turning them to other ends. But as I can sufficiently clear the Observator, from bearing any disaffection to the Lord Primates person, and the equal Reader may defend him from the imputation of giving the worst sense of any thing which he found in the Pamphlet called, The Observator observed, or turning it to other ends than was there intended; so am I no more satisfied by this tedious nothing, touching the Articles of Ireland, or the death of the Earl of Strafford, as they reflect upon the Archbishop of Armagh, than I was before. As little am I satisfied with the following passage in the last Folio of the unfigured Sheets, viz. That  
D. juxon Bishop of London resigned his Office of Treasurer of England into the hands of five Commissioners more sufficient than he could be,] Our Author might have spared these last words of disparagement and diminution, and yet have left his Proposition full and perfect. But taking them as they come before me, I must first tell him, that the Lord Bishop of London resigned not his Office of Treasurer into the hands of any Commissioners, but only into the hands of the King, who not knowing at the present how to dispose of it for his best advantage, appointed some Commissioners under the great Seal of England to discharge the same. And next I would have him tell me, what great sufficiency he found in those Commissioners, which was not to be found in the Bishop of London, how many of his debts they paid, what improvement they made of his Revenue, what stock of money they put him into toward the maintaining of the War which not long after followed. In all which particulars the Bishop of London had very faithfully performed his part (though not as to the War of England) to the great honour of the King and content of the Subject.  
But to look back upon some passages in the business of the Earl of Strafford, which are not touched at by the Observator or his alterid●m, the first we meet with is a very pretty devise of the Bishop of Lincoln, to cheat the poor Gentleman of his head by getting a return of the promise which the King is said to have made him of not consenting to his death. The sum of the story is briefly this, viz. That the King had promised the Earl of Strafford under his hand that his prerogative should sav● him, that he would never pass the Bill, nor consent to the acting of any thing to take away his life; that being satisfied in all other scruples he rested in this only, affirming that in regard of this promise he could not pass the Bill, though the Earl were guilty; the Bishop of Lincoln finding him harping on that string, assured him, that he thought that the Earl was so great a Lover of his Majesty's peace, so tender of his conscience, and the Kingdom's safety, that he would willingly acquit the King of that promise; that though the King received this intimation with a brow of anger, yet the said, Bishop in pursuance of the Earls destruction, sends a Message to him to that purpose by the Lieutenant of the Tower, or some other person whom he found attending near the place; that as the devil and he would have it the Earl received that intimation with great disdain, saying, that if that were all which bound the King, he would soon release him, and thereupon opening his Cabinet, drew out that Paper in which the King's promise was contained, and gave it to the said Lieutenant or that other person (but whether sealed or unsealed that he cannot tell) by whom it was delivered to the Bishop of Lincoln; and finally that the Bishop of Lincoln finding no other scruple to remain in the King's Conscience, but the respect he had to that promise, he put the fatal paper into the King's hands, which as it seems gave a full end to the conference and the King's perplexities.  
This is the substance of the Legend, and in all this there is nothing true, but the names of the parties mentioned in it.  
And first I would fain know from what Author he received this fiction, unless it were from say I, and say some (as his own words are) that is to say, either from himself, or from some body else, but he knew not whom. Most certainly he had it not from any of the Bishops then present, the Lord Primate affirming in the end of his first Narrative, that neither he nor the rest of his Brethren knew what was contained in that Paper; and no less certain it is that the Bishop of Lincoln was too wise to accuse himself of such a practice, if he had been really guilty of it. And then as for the thing itself. no man of reason can imagine, that the King would either make such a proviso to the Earl, or that the Earl would so far distrust his own integrity as to take it of him. If the King's knowledge of his innocence, of his signal merits, and the declaration which he made in Parliament to the Lords and Commons, that he could not pass the Bill with a good Conscience, were not sufficient to preserve him, there was no help to be expected from such Paper-promises. Such a Romance as this we find in Ibrahim the Illustrious Bassa, who is said to have obtained the like promise from Solyman the Magnificent; which notwithstanding the Mufti or Chief Priests of the Turks devised a way to discharge the Emperor of that promise, and to obtain from him an unwilling consent to the Bassa's death, as the Bishop of Lincoln is said to do for the Earl of strafford's.  
Secondly, There was no such scruple of conscience propounded to the Bishops in the morning conference as the obligation which that promise laid upon him; there being no other question propounded at that time, but whether he might in justice pass the Bill of Attainder against the Earl; To which the Bishops gave their Answer when it was again renewed in the Evening (as appears by the Lord Primates first Narrative) that if upon the Allegations on either ●ide (at the hearing whereof the King was present) he did not conceive him guilty of the crime wherewith he was charged he could not in justice condemn him; and by this answer it appears that no such scruple as the obligation of that Paper-promise had been before tendered to the Bishops.  
Thirdly, Admitting that the Bishop of Lincoln might be so bold as to make that overture to the King, forgetting a release of that promise from the Earl of Strafford, yet was he too careful of himself, too fearful of the King's everlasting displeasure, to pursue that fatal project, when he perceived his Majesty to entertain it with a brow of anger.  
Fourthly, Admitting this also, that the Bishop was so thirsty of the Earls blood, as to neglect his own safety in pursuance of it, yet cannot our Historian tell us, whether that intimation were sent by the Lieutenant of the Tower or some other person. And certainly, as the Lieutenant of the Tower was not so obscure a person, but that he might easily be known from another man; so is it most improbable that he should go on such an errand without special order from the King, or that the Earl should admit of such an intimation from any other, who was like to run on the Bishops bidding, but only from the Lieutenant himself.  
Fifthly, It cannot be believed, that the Earl should fall into such a passion when the Tale was told him, considering that he knew, that by a Letter sent unto the King on the Tuesday before, he had set the King's Conscience at liberty, most humbly beseeching him for the prevention of such mischief as might happen by his refusal to pass the Bill. So that the passing of the Bill could be no News to him, which he had reason to expect, because it was a thing so much pressed by his enemies, and so humbly and affectionately● desired by himself.  
Sixthly and finally, Though our Historian make it doubtful whether that Paper-promise were sent back sealed or unsealed, yet no man can suspect the Earl to be so imprudent in his actions, so careless of his own honour, and so untrusty to the King in so great a secret, as to send it open, by which it must needs come first to the eyes of others before it came unto the Kings. And if it were not sent unsealed, how came our Author to the knowledge that that paper contained the King's promise, as he says it did?  
But nothing more betrays the vanity and impossibility of this fiction, than the circumstance in point of time, in which this promise must be made, which must needs fall between the passing of the Bill of Attainder and the King's conference with the Bishops sent to him for the satisfaction of his Conscience by the Houses of Parliament. Our Author tells us that at the conference with the Bishops, the King being satisfied in all other scruples, started his last doubt, If in his Conscience he could not pass the Bill, although the Earl were guilty; having promised under his hand that his prerogative should save him, never to pass that Bill, nor to consent to the acting of any thing to take away his life. By which it needs must follow▪ if the Bill of Attainder was first passed (or at the least in probability to be passed) in the House of Peers, before the King had given any such promise under his hand; for the words are that the King had given him a promise under his hand, never to pass that Bill. Now that Bill was not taken into consideration in the House of Lords till Saturday the 24. of April, in which considering their own danger, and the little satisfaction they are able to give themselves; M. St john the King's Solicitor General was appointed by the House of Commons to open the Bill before their Lordships, and to give them information in it, which was done upon Thursday the nine and twentieth of the same Month. On the next day some of the Lords began to stagger in their resolutions, and to incline unto the Commons; which moved the King to declare himself before both Houses on the first of May, That he could not with a good Conscience condemn the Earl of High Treason (which he must needs do if he pass that Bill) and therefore hoped that they would not expect that from him, which neither fear, nor any other respect whatsoever should enforce him to. Other assurance than this of not passing the Bill, as the King never made the Earl, so indeed he could not; the Earl being a close Prisoner, and so narrowly watched (especially after his Majesty's said Declaration of the first of May) that no such Paper●promise under the King's hand could be sent unto him, if either the King had thought it necessary to make any such promise, or the Earl to seek it; Adeo mendaciorum natura est, ut coherere non possint, as Lactantius hath it. This point thus cleared, and the King discharged from making any such promise under his hand, there must some other way be found out to preserve the Earl by devising some means for his escape; and to this plot the King must be made a party also, our Author telling us positively, That  
Some Design there was no doubt of delivering the Earl of Strafford by escape; in order whereunto Sir William Balfour Lieutenant of the Tower must be commanded by the King to receive one Captain Billingsley with an hundred men to secure the place.] If so, how durst Balfour refuse to yield obedience to the King's command? Marry forsooth, because three good Women of Tower-street, peeping into the Earls Gallery through the Keyhole, could by the Spectacles of their eyes, discern him talking with this Captain, and by the Otoco●sticon of their ears, could hear them talk of some Design for this escape; The Sum of their Discourse being this, that a Ship of Captain Billingsleys Brothers should be in readiness, which was fallen down on purpose below in the River, that they three might be there in twelve hours, that if the Fort were but secured for three or four Months, there would come aid enough, and that there was nothing to be thought upon but an escape, and much more broken speech to that purpose. It seems the women's ears must be very long, and the tongues both of the Earl and Billingsly must be very loud; or else how could a practice of such a close and dangerous nature be so plainly heard; Assuredly by the same means by which the Zealous Brother in More, fields, discovered a dangerous plot against the Parliament, discoursed of by some who were passing by (but he knows not who they were) as he was sunning himself under an hedge. Of whom as creditable an Author as Sir William Balfour, hath told me this, That while he was contriving some Querpo-cut of Church-Government, by the help of his out-lying ears, and the Otocousticon of the Spirit, ●e discovered such a Plot against the Parliament, that Selden intends to combat Antiquity, and maintain it was a Tailor's Goose that preserved the Capitol.  
But in good earnest, I would fain know of our Author, or of Sir William Balfour, or of both together, whether the three Goodwives of Tower-street, did hear these Passages in discourse, by their eyes or their ears: Not by their Eyes, for the Eye is not the sense of hearing; nor by their Ears, for it is not said that they laid their Ears to the Keyhole, but that they peeped thorough it.  
And next I would fain know, wh●ther they peeped or harkened all at once, or one after another: If all at once, the Keyhole must be wondrous wide (as Heavenly-wide as Mopsus mouth in Sir Philip Sidney) which could admit of three pair of hearing Eyes, or of three single seeing Ears, at one time together: And if they peeped or harkened one after another, they must needs have both very quick Wits, and strong Comprehensions, that could make up so much of a set Discourse from such broken Speeches, though they within spoke never so loudly.  
Letting this pass therefore with a Risum teneatis Amici▪ we have next a more serious discovery of this Design, by the Conference which the Earl of Strafford had with Sir William Balfour, offering him but four days before his death, no less than Twenty thousand pounds, and a Marriage of his Daughter to Balfours' Son, if he would assent to his Escape: And for this also, as well as for the tale of the three Goodwives of Tower-Street, and the command of admitting Billingsley, with an hundred men, to secure the Tower; we must take Sir William's bare word (for he gave it not in upon his Oath) in the House of Commons: And what the bare word of a Scot, a perfidious Scot, and one that shortly after took up▪ Arms against his Master, will amount unto, we all know too well: Nor was the Earl so ignorant of the hatred which generally the Scotish Covenanters bore unto him, or of the condition of this man particularly, as to communicate any such design unto him, had he been so unprepared for death, as our Author makes him: And so this second Romance of Sir William Balfour, and the three Women Goodwives of Tower Street, being sent after that of the Bishop of Lincoln; we leave the Earl of strafford's business, and go on with our Author to some other.  
Fol. 418. Then follows King Henry the fourth, etc. of●larence ●larence Title to precede that of Mortimer.] That some of the Lords combined to depose this King, I shall easily grant, though not upon those grounds which our Author mingles with the Speech of one Mr. Thomas, (a Member of the House of Commons) against the Bishops: For though the Title of Clarence did precede that of the King, yet was not the King's Title derived from Mortimer, the Title of Mortimer and Clarence being one and the same.  
The Title of King Henry the fourth, came by his Father, john Duke of Lancaster, the fourth Son of King Edward the third; the title of Mortimer came by Philip the sole Daughter and Heir of Lionel Duke of Clarence, the third son of the said King Edward, and Wife to Roger Mortimer Earl of March, from whom the House of York laid their claim to the Diadem.  
But our Author is as good at the Pedigree of the House of the Beaufort's, as of that of Mortimer, telling us, That Cardinal Beaufort was not only great Uncle to King Henry the sixth, but Son to John of Gaunt, and his Brother Cardinal of York. The first two parts whereof are true, but the last as false: Cardinal Beaufort, I am sure, had no such Brother as our Author gives him (for so he must be understood, though the Grammar of the words will not bear so much sense) namely, a Cardinal of York, unless it were King Henry the fourth, whom john of Gaunt had by Blanch of Lancaster, his first Wife, john Earl of Somerset, or Thomas Duke of Excester, which two, together with this Cardinal Beaufort, he had by his last Wife Katherine Swinfort: More Sons than these, none of our Heralds or Historians give to john of Gaunt, and therefore no such Brother as a Cardinal of York to be found out any where for this Cardinal Beaufort, except only in our Author's Dreams.  
Fol. 419. That in Anno 37. of Henry the eighth, Letters Patents were granted to Laymen, to exercise all manner of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as the King's Officers, not the Bishops.] These are the words of Mr. Thomas in his Invective against the Bishops before mentioned, and these our Author swallows without chewing, not searching whether Mr. Thomas had rightly given the sense of that Act of Parliament or not, but telling his in his gloss upon it, That no Reason or justice are to be deduced from that King's Actions, more like an Atheist than a Christian, either Ecclesiastical or Temporal: But by the leave of good Mr. Thomas, there can be no such matter gathered from that Statute of King Henry the eighth, viz. That Letters Patents were granted to Laymen to exercise all manner of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as the King's Officers, not the Bishops: Before this time no man could be admitted to the Office of a Chancellor, Vicar-General, Commissary, or Official in any Ecclesiastical Court, or exercise any Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, except he were a single person, and in Holy Orders: To take away which curb, and thereby to give the better encouragement to Students in the Civil Laws, it was Enacted by this Statute, that all such Ecclesiastical Officers, whether made by the King's Letters Patents as in the case of Sir Thomas Cromwell, the King's Vicar General) or by any Archbishop, Bishop, or Archdeacon, within this Realm, might from thencforth lawfully execute and exercise all manner of jurisdiction, commonly called Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and all Censures and Coertions appertaining, or in any wise belonging unto the same, albeit such person or persons be Lay, married or unmarried, so that they be Doctors of the Civil Law, lawfully created and made in any University: Out of which premises, if Mr. Thomas can conclude, that such Laymen, so qualified to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, were the King's Officers, and not the Bishops; he must have some new piece of sanderson's Logic, which never was read in any of the Universities, in which those lay persons did receive the Degree of Doctors.  
Fol. 419. She was the right Heir apparent to her Brother, and the only right Issue to the Crown, begotten no donbt in lawful Matrimony.] I dare not take upon me to dispute of Titles to the Crown, but I dare take upon me to tell our Author, that there was some doubt made by the most learned men of that time, whether Queen Mary, (of whom he speaks) were begotten and born in lawful Marriage: All the Bishops in this Realm, by a public Writing under their Hands and Seals, declared the Marriage of King Henry the eighth, with Queen Mary's Mother, to be unlawful; and so did the most eminent Divines in both the Universities, as also in the Cathedrals, Monasteries, and other Conventual Bodies within this Realm: The like declared also by several Universities in France and Italy, under their public Seals: And so it was declared finally by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons assembled in ● full and free Parliament, in which it was pronounced, That the Marriage between the King and the Lady Katherine of Spain, the Relict of his Brother, was null and void: to that it seems there was some doubting in this case, though our Author makes no doubt of it at all: Nor is it very certain, neither that Queen Mary was the right Heir apparent to her Brother: For if the Law of the Crown differ not from the Law of the Land in this particular (which I leave unto our learned Lawyers) she could not be the Heir to her Brother King Edward the sixth, as being born of another Venture, and consequently his Sister by the half blood only. Now as he makes no doubt of Queen Mary's Title to the Crown, so he makes the Title of Queen Elizabeth to be subject unto some dispute, which all the Estates of the Realm convened in her first Parliament, declared in the way of Recognition, to be past disputing: But I leave these inviduous Arguments, and proceed to some other.  
Fol. 429. Doctor Wren, Bishop of Ely, and Dean of the King's Chapel, had been accused of Misdemeanours in his Diocese, amounting to Treason: And being committed to the Tower, there he hath lain ever since.] But fitst, no misdemeanours, how great soever, can amount to a Treason, nor ever was it so adjudged, but only in the Case of the Earl of Strafford.  
Secondly, There was no Evidence taken upon Oath to prove any of the misdemeanours which were charged upon him; our Author confessing, that after he had been Voted in the House of Commons unworthy and unfit to hold and exercise any Office or Dignity in Church or Commonwealth, there was no further speech of him or his Crimes.  
Thirdly, He was not committed to the Tower for any misdemeanours charged against him by those of his Diocese but for subscribing to the Protestation with the rest of the Bishops, in the end of D●cember, 1641. who were committed at the same time also.  
Fourthly, He hath not remained there ever since his commitment neither, but was discharged with the other Bishops about the end of February than next following, and about three or four Months after brought back again, Anno 1642. without any Accusation brought against him either then or since.  
Fol. 430. And then they adjourned until the twentieth of October, and a standing Committee of the House of Commons, (consisting of fifty Members) appointed, during the Recess.] Of this Committee, Mr. john Pim was the principal Man, without whom, all the rest were cyphers, of no signification: And by him there issued out an Order against Innovasions, extended, and intended also, for taking down the Rails before the Communion-Table, levelling the ground on which the said Table stood, and placing the said Table in the middle of the Church or Chancel. In which it is to be admired how eagerly this Order was pursued by the Churchwardens generally in all the Parishes of the Kingdom; notwithstanding they were told, that the Lords had never given their consent unto it, and that it would be safest for them to suspend their proceedings till the Parliament was again assembled. But so mighty was the name of Pym, that none of them durst refuse Obedience unto his Commands. Nor did the Lords ever endeavour to retrench this Order, but suffered their Authority and privilege to be torn from them piecemeal by the House of Commons; as formerly in imposing the Protestation of the third of May, so now in this great Alteration in the face of the Church.  
Fol. 432. The late Irish Army raised for the Assistance of the King's Service against the Scots, was disbanded, and all their arms brought into Dublin.] This though our Author reckoneth not amongst the grounds and reasons of the Irish Rebellion, yet was it really one of the chief encouragements to it. For when the King was pressed by the Commons in Parliament for the disbanding of that Army, a Suit was made unto him by the Ambassador of Spain, that he might have leave to List three or four thousand of them for his Master's Service in the wars. The like Suit was made also by the Ambassador of France, and the King readily condescended to their several motions, and gave order in it accordingly. But the Commons never thinking themselves safe, as long as any of that Army had a sword in his hand, never left importuning the King (whom they had then brought to the condition of denying nothing which they asked) till they had made him eat his word and revoke those Orders to his great dishonour; Which so exasperated that Army consisting of 10000 Foot and 1500 Horse, that it was no hard matter for those who had the managing of the Plot to make sure of them. And then considering, that the Scots by raising of an Army had gained from the King an Abolition of the Episcopal Order, the rescinding of his own and his Father's Acts, about the reducing of that Church to some Uniformity with this, and settled their Kirk in such a way as best pleased their own humours: why might not the Irish Papists hope, that by the help of such an Army ready raised to their hands, or easily drawn together, though dispersed at that present, they might obtain the like indulgences and grants for their Religion, Tantum Religio potuit suadere Malorum, as true on the one side as the other.  
Fol. 443. The next Morning the Upper house sent them down to the House of Commons by the Lord Marshal, Privy Seal, etc. the Lords Goring and Wilmot.] Our Author speaks this of the first Letter sent from Ireland, touching that Rebellion, but is mistaken in the last man, whom he makes to be sent down with these Letters. The Lord Wilmot at that time was no Peer of England, and therefore had no place in the English Parliaments. The honour of an English Baron being first conferred on his Son the Lord Henry Wilmot by Letters Patents bearing date 29. of june, Anno 1643. And as I am sure that the Lord Wilmot was not of that number, so I am doubtful whether the Lord Martial were or not. Our Author not long before tells us, that his Office of Lord High Steward was like to be begged from him in regard of his Absence, which is to be understood of his absence out of the Realm; and if he were then absent out of the Realm, he could not now be present in the House of Peers. Either not absent then, or not present now, is a thing past questioning.  
Fol. 462. The King returns from Scotland, magnificently ●easted by the City of London.] But while the Citizens at one end of the Town, were at their Hosanna, some of the Commons at the other end were as busy at their Crucifige, intent on hammering a Remonstrance, which they entitled, A Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdom, in which they ripped up all the actions which they had complained of in the King, and summed up all those services which they had done for the common people. The whole so framed that it served for a pair of Bellows to blow that fire which afterwards flamed out, and consumed the greatest part of the Kingdom. In the presenting whereof to the King at his coming from Scotland, though the Lords refused to join with them in it, yet was it presented to the King by some of their Members, an Order made for the publishing and dispersing of it, and the Lords brought at last to justify what they had condemned. Nor did the Citizens continue long in their good Affections: For though they gave him Roast-meat now, yet they beat him with the Spit in the Christmas following, of which our Author tells us, saying,  
Fol. 471. The loose people of the City, and the Mechanic sort of Prentices were encouraged by the Ministers and Lecturers, and other Incendiaries in tumultuous manner, to come down to Westminster, and by the way at Whitehall to be insolent in words and actions.] And insolent they were indeed both in words and actions, some of them crying out as they passed by▪ that the King was not fit to live, others that the Prince would govern better; all of them with one voice, that they would have no Porters lodge between them and the King▪ but would come at him when they pleased, using some other threatening words, as if they meant to break open the Gates: But so it happened, that some of the Officers of the King's late Army being come to the Court, some of them to receive the Arrears of their pay, and others to know the King's Commands, before they returned into the Low Countries, to their several Charges, and observing the unsufferable Insolences of this Rascal Rabble, sallied upon them with drawn swords, in which scuffle some of that tumultuous Rabble were slightly hurt, and others dangerously wounded. To these men being professed Soldiers, was the Name of Cavaliers first given, communicated afterwards to all the King's party and Adherents though never in Arms, or otherwise appearing for him then in the Loyalty of their Affections.  
Fol. 477. This fell out as many would have it, a l●●●ing case to their confusion.] How so? Because, saith he, at a conference desired by the Lords with the House of Commons, they were told by the Lord Keeper, that this Petition and Protestation of the twelve Bishops was extending to the deep entrenching upon the fundamental privileges and beings of Parliaments, etc. Upon which Declaration the Bishops were voted to be guilty of High Treason, committed first to the custody of the black rod, and from thence to the Tower. But first the Author is to know, that the Lord Keeper at that time was not altogether so rectus in Curia, as might have been wished, and therefore having received that Petition and Protestation from the hands of the King (to whom in the first place it was addressed) he communicated it privately to such of both Houses as were like to make the worst use of it; and the more to ingratiate himself with the prevalent party, he aggravated the supposed offence to the very utmost; And the supposed offence was this, that the Bishops having been frequently reviled, pursued, and violently kept from the House of Peers, protested by a Writing under their hands, That they durst not sit or Vote in the House of Peers, until his Majesty should secure them from all affronts, indignities and dangers; and therefore that all Laws, Orders, Votes, Resolutions, and Determinations should be reputed null and of none effect, which in their absence had passed or should pass in the said most Honourable House, during the time of their forced and violent absence. Which Petition and Protestation being 〈…〉 Records of Parliament, was thought to be a good 〈◊〉 of their place and right suffrage in the House of 〈◊〉 ●●●withstanding the Subsequent Act of Parliament▪ 〈◊〉 deprived them of it. But how that Protestation could amount to Treason (in the newest construction of the word) was so impossible to be proved, that they who 〈◊〉 so voted it, having served their turns by the imprisonment of the Bishops for depriving them of their place and vote in Parliament, and divesting the King of his power and prerogative in pressing Soldiers for his wars, at once released them of the imp●i●onment and accusation under which they suffered. Add hereunto that when the Members of the House of Commons were seized upon and kept in custody by the Officers of the Army, under the command of Sir Thomas Fairfax on the sixth and seventh days of December, 1647. they made a Protestation to this effect, viz. that all Acts and Ordinances, Votes and proceedings of the House of Commons made after the said sixth and seventh of December, or after to be made, during their restraint and forcible seclusion from the House and the continuance of the Army's force upon it, should be no way obligatory, but void and null to all intents and purposes whatsoever. Which protestation though it touched the Officers of the Army to the very quick, yet had they so much modesty as not to count it for high Treason. And when the Members which were left remaining in that House for the present turn, had scanned over every particular of that protestation, they only ventured so far as to Vote it to be scandalous and seditious, as tending to destroy the present visible Government; and that all that had a hand in it were unworthy of trust; for which consult Mercurius Pragmaticus, Numb. 38. By which we see that which was counted Treason in the Bishops, was not conceived to be such in these Members of the House of Commons; No more then far worse crimes than those which 〈…〉 for Treason in the Earl of Strafford, could 〈◊〉 to be Treason in the Case of the Five 〈…〉 Lord of Kimbolton. So true is that which Horace 〈…〉 Book De Arte Poetica, viz. Coecilio Plautoq●e dabit 〈…〉 Virgilio Varioque, which cannot be englished more significantly then by this old Proverb, that is to say, that 〈◊〉 better steal a Horse than others look on.  
Fol. 478 The City taking heart and hands with the House of Commons, summon a Common Council, where they debate their jealousies and fears.] The constitution of the Common Council of the City, was of great concernment at this time, and therefore it behoved the Commons (in order to the prosecution of their design) that it should be new moulded, most of the old ones laid aside, and creatures of their own elected into their places. And by their Emissaries and Agents, they prevailed so far, that on S. Thomas day, when the common-councel-men were to be chosen for every Ward, in stead of those grave, sober, and substantial men, which before they had, they chose a company of factious and indigent persons, known only by their disaffections to Monarchical and Episcopal Government. And whereas by the ancient custom of the City, the common-councel-men then elected were not admitted unto Council till the Monday after Twelfthday, when their Elections were returned and enroled by the Town-Clerk; these men well knowing how much the Design of the Commons did depend upon them, would not stay so long. And therefore when the King had appointed a Common-council to be called on the last day of December for the prevention of such tumults as had happened a few days before, they thrust themselves in amongst the rest. The like they did, when the King gave a meeting to a Common Council, appointed by him on the fifth of january, wherein he acquainted them with the reason of his proceedings against the five impeached Members, desiring that they might not have any retreat or harbour within the City. At what time Fowke one of these Common-council men, as being the Bell-wether to the rest, made a saucy and insolent speech unto the King, concerning fears and ●●●lousies, touching the Members accused, the Privileges of Parliament, and that they might not be tried but in a Parliamentary way. To which, though the King returned a very mild and gracious Answer, yet the Rabble being once inflamed by their seditious Orator, would not so be satisfied, but at his coming out of the Hall, and as he passed in his Coach thorough the Streets, there was nothing echoed in his ears but Privileges of Parliament, Privileges of Parliament. By the help and vote of these men also was that Petition framed▪ and delivered to the King on the morrow after, which follows immediately in our Author. And by the help of these men did they extort the Militia of the City out of the hands of the Mayor and Aldermen, and put it into the power of inferior persons, such as the Faction in the House of Commons might best confide in. And for their jealousies and Fears which were to be debated in the Common Council, they were of no less nature than the blowing up of the Thames to drown the City, or the beating it down about their ears by Col. Lunsford from the Tower, or the sacking it by the King and the Cavaliers. Horrible Gulleries, but such as were generally dispersed, and no less generally believed by fools, women and children.  
Fol. 482. Upon information of Troops of Horse to be gathered by the Lord Digby and Colonel Lunsford at Kingston, where the County Magazine is lodged, they order that the Sheriffs of the several Counties, etc. shall suppress all unlawful Assemblies. etc.] Most true it is, that such an order was made by the House of Commons, the better to amaze the people, and keep them in continual Fears and jealousies of the Kings proceedings. But nothing is more false, then that any Troops of Horse had been raised by the Lord Digby or Colonel Lunsford, or that they had any such design as to seize the Magazine at Kingston; which they might easily have done, had they been so minded, before it could have been prevented. But the truth is, that the King not knowing what the London Tumults might amount unto, commanded the Officers of the late Army beforementioned, to attend his pleasure, till he saw some issue of the practices which were held against him. On which command they followed him to Hampton Court, january the tenth, 1641. at his Removal from Whitehall, for avoiding such fresh Insolences, as the people in their triumphant conducting of the accused Members to the Houses of Parliament, might have put upon him. These Officers now known by the Name of Cavaliers, were lodged at Kingston, and upon them the Lord Digby, accompanied with Col. Lun●●ord in a Coach with six Horses, intended to bestow a visit; no Troops of Horse being raised by him, nor any other appearance of Horse at all, except those six only. His Majesty's Declaration of the 12. of August, hath so cleared this business, that I marvel our Author could let it pass by without Observation.  
Fol. 485. And so the breach between the King and Parliament was stitched up.] That is to say, that great breach of pretended privilege, in the Kings coming to the House of Commons to demand the five impeached Members. And yet this breach was not stitched up now, nor in a long time after. For fol. 495. we find the Parliament again at their five Members, insisted on in the preamble to the Ordinance about the Militia, fol. 498. and pressed in their Petition delivered to the King at Royston, fol. 501. and finally made one of the Propositions presented to the King at Oxford, fol. 599. So far was this breach from being stitched up in the end of january, Anno 1641. that it was not made up in the january following, at what time those Propositions were brought to Oxford. From the five Members pass we to the Militia, of which he telleth us, That  
Fol. 496. The Parliament having now the Militia, the security of the Tower and City of London, Trained Bands of the Kingdom, and all the Forces out of the King's hands.] Our Author placeth this immediately after the Kings coming back from Dover, whither he went with the Queen, and the Princess Mary, there shipped for Holland; at what time the Parliament had neither the command of the Tower, nor of the Trained Bands in the Country, or of any Forces whatsoever but their City-guards. For fol. 498. we find his Majesty sticking at it, especially as to the Militia of London, or of Towns incorporate, and after fol. 502. when they petitioned him about it, being then at Newmarket (and not as our Author saith at Royston) he answered more resolutely than before, that he would not part with it for a minute, no, not unto his Wife and Children. After which time, finding the King too well resolved not to part with such a principal flower of his prerogative, they passed an Ordinance for entituling themselves unto it, and did accordingly make use of it in the following war against the King. Nor was the Petition any thing the better welcome for the men that brought it, viz. the Earls of Pembroke and Holland, both of them sworn Servants to him, both of them of his Privy Council, both in great favour with him when he was in Prosperity, and both perfidiously forsaking him when his Fortunes changed unto the worse. Particularly our Author tells us of the Earl of Holland, That  
Fol. 501. He was raised and created to become his most secret Counsellor, the most intimate in affection, the first of his Bedchamber, his constant companion in all his Sports and Recreations.] Yet notwithstanding all these favours, this Earl as much promoted the Puritan affairs of the Court, but secretly and underhand, as his Brother the Earl of Warwick more openly and professedly did in the Country. Of which thus Viscount Conway in a Letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury, dated at Newcastle, june 8. 1640. I assure myself (saith he) that there is not any less your friend then my Lord of Holland, and I believe that at all times you ought to take heed to yourself with him, etc. My Lord of Warwick is the temporal head of the Puritans, and my Lord of Holland is their spiritual Head, or rather the one is their visible Head, the other their invisible Head: Peradventure not because he means to do either good or hurt, but because he thinks it is a Gallantry to be the principal pillar on which a whole cabal must rely.  
Fol. 511. And taking only a guard for his person of his Domestics and Neighbour Gentry, went in person the 23. of April, but contrary to his expectation the Gates were shut upon him, the Bridges drawn up, and Hotham from the Walls flatly denies him entrance.] Of this Affront (Hotham being first proclaimed Traitor under the Walls of the Town) the King complains to the Houses of Parliament, but he had more reason to complain of some about him. For in his Answer to their Petitition about the Magazine of Hull, delivered to him in the beginning of April, he had let them know, how confident he was that place (whatsoever discourse there was of private or public Instructions to the contrary) should be speedily given up, if he should require it: 
Husband● Collect. pag. 139.  Being thus forewarned, it was no wonder that they were forearmed also against his Intentions, or that he was repulsed by Hotham at his coming thither: For which good Service, as Hotham was highly magnified for the present, so he had his Wages not long after: For being suspected to hold intelligence with the Marquis of Newcastle, he was knocked down on that very place on which he stood when he refused the King admittance into the Town, sent Prisoner unto London, together with his eldest Son, and there both beheaded▪ the Son confessing, that he had deserved that untimely death for his Disloyalty to the King; the Father whining out his good affections to the Parliament, and still expecting that reprieve which was never intended.  
Fol. 512. All which (that is to say, the Kings going to Hull) being by the King a high breach of Privilege, and violation of Parliament, they think fit to clear, by voting it and Hotham justif●ea, and send a Committee of Lords and Commons to reside there, for the better securing Hull and him, April. 28.] The breach of privilege objected was, the King's endeavour to possess himself of the Town of Hull, (his own Town) and to get into his hands a Magazine of Arms and Ammunition which he had bought with his own money: To hinder which, and to justify Hotham, the Lord Fairfax, Sir Philip Stapleton, Sir Henry Cholmn●y, and Sir Hugh Cholmnly, were sent by the House of Commons as a standing Committee to reside at York: And had they come thither on no other business then what was openly pretended, it had been such an extent of Privilege (making the House of Commons as wide as the Kingdom) as never was challenged before: But they were sent on another errand, that is to say, to be as Spies on all the King's Actions, to undermine all his Proceedings, and to insinuate into the people, that all their hopes of Peace and happiness, depended on their adhering to the present Parliament: And they applied themselves to their instructions, with such open confidence, that the King had not more meetings with the Gentry of that Country, in his Palace called the Manor House, than they had with the Yeomanry and Freeholders', in the great Hall of the Deanery: All which, the King suffered very strangely, and thereby robbed himself of the opportunity of raising an Army in that County, with which he might have marched to London, took the Hen sitting on her nest before she had hatched, and possibly prevented all those Calamities which after followed.  
To omit many less mistakes, as Sheffield for Whitfield, fol. 306. and Kit the Tailor, for Ket the Tanner, fol. 540. Our Author gives unto Sir William Neve, the title of Garter-Herald, which was more than ever the King bestowed upon him; he having at that time no other title than Norroy the third King, Sir john Burroughs being then Garter-Herald, and Sir Henry St. George the second King of Arms, by the name of Clarenceux, to whom Sir William Neve succeeded in that Office, at such time as he the said Sir Henry succeeded Sir john Burroughs (who died sometime after this at Oxford) in the place of Garter: But we must now return to matters of greater consequence; and first, we encounter with the Battle of Edge-Hill, of which our Author tells us, That  
Fol. 586. The question will be who had the better.] But the Parliament put it out of question, by sending the Earl of Pembroke, the Earl of Holland, the Lord Say, the Lord Wharton, and Mr. Strode, on the 27 of October, to declare to the Lord Major, Aldermen, and Citizens, the greatness and certainty of their Victory, how God had owned his own work, their Speeches being eight in all, harping upon this String, That as the Cause had been undertaken with their Purses and with their Persons, so they would crown the work, by following it with the same zeal, love, care, nobleness, and Alacrity: And the better to keep up the Hearts of the People, the Commons voted to their General a present of 5000 l▪ which he kindly accepted, to the no small commendation of his modesty, in taking so small a reward for so great a Victory, or of their Bounty, in giving him so great a sum for being vanquished: And yet this was not all the Honour which they did him neither, a Declaration being passed by both Houses of Parliament, on the 11 of November than next following, Concerning the late valorous and acceptable Service of his Excellency Robert Earl of Essex, to remain upon Record in both Houses, for a mark of Honour to his Person, Name, and Family, and for a Monument of his singular virtue to posterity: In which they seem to imitate the Roman Senate, in the magnificent reception which they gave to Terentius Varro, after his great defeat in the Battle of Cannae, the People being commanded to go forth to meet him, and the Senate giving him public thanks, Quod de salute Reipub. non desperasset, because he despaired not of the safety of the Commonwealth: Which whether it were an Argument of their Gallantry, as Livy telleth us, or rather of their fear, as Sir Walter Raleigh is of opinion, I dispute not now? Certain I am, that by this Artifice they preserved their Reputation with the People of the City of Rome, which otherwise might have been apt to mutiny, and set open their Gates to the Victor. And to say the truth, the care of the Earl of Essex deserved all this, though his Fortune did not: For having lost the Battle, he hasted by speedy marches thither, to secure that City and the Parliament, which otherwise would not have been able to preserve themselves.  
But on the contrary, our Author lays down many solid and judicious Arguments, to prove that the King had the better of it, as no doubt he had: And for a further proof hereof, we cannot have a better evidence than an Order of the Lords and Commons, issued on the 24 of October, being the next day after the Fight, in which all the Citizens of London and Westminster, etc. were commanded to shut up their Shops, and put themselves into a readiness to defend the City and the Parliament: Which Order they had never made, if their fear of the King's sudden coming upon them with his Conquering Army, before their broken Forces could reach thither, had not put them to it: And though the King might have come sooner than he did, the taking in of Banbury, Oxford and Reading, (being all possessed in the name of the Parliament) spending much of his time; yet we find him on the 12 of day November, beating up their Quarters at Brentford, where they had lodged two of their best Regiments to stop him in his march towards London; some other of their Forces being placed at Kingston, Acton, and other Villages adjoining: In the success of which Fight, our Author tells us, That  
Fol. 594. The King took 500 Prisoners, etc. and so unfought with, marched away to oatland's, Reading, and so to Oxford.]  
By this we are given to understand, that the King retreated toward Oxford, but we are not told the reasons of it, it being improbable that he should march so far as Brentford, in his way towards Lond. without some thoughts of going further. Accordingly it was so resolved, (if my intelligence and memory do not fail me) & order given for the advancing of the Army on the morning after, which being ready to be put in Execution, News came, that at a place called Turnham-Green, not far from Brentford, both the Remainders of the Army under the command of the Earl of Essex, and the Auxiliaries of London, under the conduct of the Earl of Warwick, were in readiness to stop his march: And thereupon it was consulted, whether the King should give the charge, or that it might be thought enough in point of Honour, to have gone so far.  
On the one side it was alleged, that his Army was in good heart, by reason of their good success the day before, that the Parliament Forces consisted for the most part of raw and unexperienced Soldiers, who had never seen a War before▪ and that if this bar were once put by, his way would be open unto London, without any resistance.  
On the other side it was Objected, That the King had no other Army then this, that there was nothing more uncertain than the fortune of a Battle, and that if this Army were once broken, it would be impossible for him to raise another; which last consideration turned the Scale, that Counsel being thought most fit to be followed, which was judged most safe, id gloriosius quod tutissimum, said the old Historian.  
And as for the five hundred Prisoners which our Author speaks of, they were first moved to enter into the King's pay, and that being generally refused, they were dismissed with life and liberty, having first taken their Corporal Oaths not to serve against him: But the Houses of Parliament, being loath to lose so many good men, appointed Mr. Stephen Marshal to call them together, and to absolve them from that Oath; which he did with so much confidence and Authority, that the Pope himself could not have done it better: The King was scarce settled in Oxford, the fittest place for his Court and Counsel to reside in, When  
Fol. 597. The noble Lord Aubigny, Brother to the Duke of Richmond, died, and was buried at Oxford.] This Lord Aubigny, was the second Son of Esme Duke of Lenox, and Earl of March, succeeding his Father both in that Title and Estate, entailed originally on the second Son of the House of Lenox: he received his death's wound at Edge-Hill, but died, and was solemnly interred at Oxford, on the 13 of january than next following; the first, but not the last of that Illustrious Family, which lost his life in his King's Service. For after this, in the year 1644. the Lord john Stewart lost his life in the Battle of Cheriton, near Alresford in the county of South-Hampton: And in the year 1645. the Lord Bernard Stewart, (newly created E. of Litchfield) went the same way in the fight near C●ester: The Duke of Richmond, the constant follower of the King in all his Fortunes, never enjoying himself after the death of his Master, languishing and pining from time to time, till at length extremity of Grief cast him into a Fever, and that Fever cast him into his Grave: A rare example of a constant and invincible Loyalty, no parallel to be found unto it in the Histories of the ancient or latter Ages: Philip de ●omines, telleth us, of a Noble Family, in Flanders that generally they lost their lives in the Wars and Service of their Prince: And we find in our own Chronicles, that Edmond Duke of Summerset lost his life in the first Battle in St. Alban, Duke Henry following him, taken in the Battle of Hexam, and so beheaded; a second Duke Edmond, and the Lord john of Somerset, going the same way in the Battle near Te●xbury, all of them fight in the behalf of King Henry the sixth, and the House of Lancaster: But then they heaped not Funeral upon Funeral in so short a time, as the first three Brothers of this House; in which, as those of the House of Somerset did ●all short of them, so those of that Noble House in Flanders, fell short of the House of Somerset.  
Fol. 601. In this time the Queen in Holland now Imbarques for England, the sixteenth of February, and with contrary winds and foul Wether, was forced back again, and thereafter with much hazard anchored at Burlington Bay the nineteenth, and Lands at the Key the two and twentieth.] In this our Author tells the truth, but not the whole truth, the Queen enduring a worse Tempest on the Shore, than she did upon the Sea. Concerning which, the Queen thus writes unto the King, viz. The next night after we came unto Burlington, four of the Parliament Ships arrived without being perceived by us, and about five of the clock in the Morning, they began to ply us so fast with their Ordnance, that it made us all 〈◊〉 rise out of our Beds, and to leave the Village, (at least the Women) one of the Ships did me the favour to flank upon the House where I lay, and before I was out of my Bed, the Cannon Bullets whistled so loud about me, that all the Company pressed me earnestly to go 〈◊〉 of the House, their Cannon having totally beaten down all the neighbouring Houses, and two Cannon Bullets falling from the top to the bottom of the House where I was: So that clothed (as I could be) I went on foot some little distance out of the Town under the shelter of a ditch (like that of New-market) whither before I could get; the Canon-Bullets fell thick about us, and a Sergeant was killed within twenty paces of me. We in the end gained the Ditch, and stayed there two hours, whilst their Canon played all the time upon us; the Bullets flew for the most part over our head●, some few only grazing on the Ditch, covered us with Earth: Nor had they thus given over that disloyal violence, if the ebbing of the Sea, and some threatenings from the Admiral of Holland, who brought her over, had not sent them going.  
Fol. 603. The next day the Prince marches to Gloucester, his hasty Summons startled them at these strange turnings.] So says our Author, but he hath no Author for what he saith. The Prince marched not the next day to Gloucester, nor in many months after, having business enough to do at Cirencester where he was; upon the taking of which Town, the Soldiers Garrisoned for the Parliament in the Castles of Barkly, Sudely, and the Town of Malmsbury deserted those places, which presently the Prince possessed and made good for the King: Which done, he called before them all the Gentry of Cotsall, and such as lived upon the banks of Severn betwixt Gloucester and Bristol; who being now freed from those Garrisons which before had awed them, were easily persuaded by him to raise a Monthly contribution of 4000 pound toward the defence of the King's person, their Laws and Liberties. It was indeed generally believed, that if he had marched immediately to Gloucester, while the terror of sacking Cirencester fell first upon them, the Soldiers there would have quitted the place before he had come half way unto it. the affrightment was so general, and their haste so great, that Massey had much ado to persuade the Townsmen to keep their Houses, and the Soldiers to stand upon their Guard (as I have often heard from some of good quality in that City) till the Scouts which he sent out to discover the Motions of the Prince were returned again: But whatsoever they feared at Gloucester, the Prince had no reason to march towards it, his Army being too small, and utterly unfurnished of Canon and other necessaries for the attempting of a place of such a large circumference, so well manned and populous as that City was; Contented therefore with that honour which he had got in the gaining of Cirencester, and feeling the King's affairs in that Country, he thought it a point of higher wisdom to return towards Oxford, then hazard all again by attempting Gloucester.  
Fol. 604. The Scots Army marched Southwards, and crossed Tine, March 13.] If so, it must be in a dream, not in Action; the Scots not entering into England till December following, when the loss of Bristol, Exeter, and generally of all the West compelled the Houses of Parliament, to tempt the Scots to a second invasion of the Kingdom. And this appears most clearly by our Author himself, who tells us, fol. 615. ' That Sir William A●min was sent to Edinburgh from the Parliament to hasten the Scots Army hither, having first sworn to the Solemn League and Covenant, each to other. Before which Agreement as to the taking of the Solemn League and Covenant by all the Subjects of both Kingdoms, and the payment of Advance-Money beforehand to the Sum of an hundred thousand pounds, the Scots resolved not to stir a foot in their way towards England. They knew in what necessity their dear Brethren in England stood of their Assistance, and therefore thought it good to make ●ay while the Sun shi●●d, and husband that necessity to their best Advantage; So that there was no Marching over Tine on the 13. of March Anno 164●. where our 〈…〉 it, we must look for it in the Year next following, if we mean to find it. And finding them there, we shall find this of them.  
Fol. 669. 〈…〉 with a party of Horse to assault them in such places where they lay most open to advantage, not doubting but to give a good account of his undertake: In all which 〈◊〉 and desires, he is said to have been crossed by General 〈◊〉; an old experienced Soldier, but a Scot by Nation, whom hi● Majesty had recommended to the Marquis of Newcastle as a fit man to be consulted with in all his Erterprises, and he withal took such a fancy to the man, that he was guided wholly by him in all his Actions.  
Had this man been employed in the Kings own Army, he might have done as good Service as any other what●oever● But being in this Army to serve against the Scots, 〈◊〉 own dear Countrymen, he is said to have discouraged and dissuaded all Attempts which were offered to be made against them, giving them thereby opportunity of gaining ground upon the English, till the Marquis his retreat towards York: And those affections he is reported to have carried also with him in the Battle of Marston-Moor, near York, where he is said to have charged so faintly, that he not only lost all th●se Advantages which the Prince had gotten, but gave the Enemy my opportunity to make head again, to the loss of all; which brings into my mind the politic Conduct of Eumenes, once one of Alexander's meanest Captains, but afterwards a great Commander in Asia-minor: He had an Army compounded of the Greek and Barbarous Nations, and being to fight with Craterus, Alexander's great Favourite whilst he lived, who had an Army made up of the like Ingredients▪ he placed 〈◊〉 Asiatick Soldiers against the 〈…〉.  
Fol. 604. 〈…〉] Our Author speaks this of the Divines assembled at Westm●●ster, by an O●din. of the Lords and Commons, to be advised withal in matters which concerned Religion, for the establishing whereof, there was much pretended by them, but little done: These men, besides their four 〈◊〉 per diem, were either gratified with Lectures in and about London, or 〈◊〉 in the Universities, or the best Sequestered Benefices in the Country; holding their own preferment still, without sticking at such Pluralities in themselves, which before they had condemned in others: But though they did little work for their Wages, yet they did mo●e then our Author speaks of. Certain I am, that they rose not without 〈◊〉 their intended Directory, published in Print, and Authorized by an Ordinance of both Houses of Parliament: The ●itle of the Book runs thus, viz. A Directory for the public Worship of God, throughout the three Kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, etc. Printed at London for the Company of Stationers: The Ordinance bears Da●e on the third of January, Anno, 1644. and is thus Entitled, viz. An Ordinance of Parliament for the taking away of the Book of Common Pra●er, and for the establishing and putting in Execution of the Directory for the public Worship of God: By which we see that their intended Directory was not only finished, but also Authorized and published before they ro●e.  
Though our Author speaking again of these Divines, fol. 974. and in the year 1647. telleth us, That the Prince Elector was 〈◊〉 by the Commons to sit amongst them, for his 〈◊〉 in the Composure of the Directory, which will come out one day: The Directory was come out before, and if the Prince 〈◊〉 sat not with them till 1647. as our Author 〈◊〉 it, he must needs come too late to give them any assistance in that Composure.  
〈…〉, F●elding was questioned and committed at Oxford▪ and by a Council of War sentenced to 〈◊〉 his Head, etc.] But this I look upon as a Court Pageant, only to entertain the People, and take off their edge against the man; who certainly was a person of too much Honour, Va●or and Fidelity, to betray the Town, if he could possibly have held it: Although the King knew well enough, and knew withal how unable he was at that time to give him any ●it supplies, or to ●aise the ●iege, though it concerned him for the reputation of his Cause, to march in Person unto Reading, and show his willingness to relieve it: But so great a fear fell on all those that were in Oxford, and such a general Report there was of Fielding Treachery, that to appease their murmurs, and compose their thoughts, Fielding was called in question, and condemned to die, a Scaffold set up in the Castle Green for his Execution, and a day appointed on which he was to be Beheaded: Before which time, the Earl of Essex not advancing, and the ●it being over, the Execution was reprieved till a further time, and Fielding by degrees recovered as much estimation amongst those at Ox●ord, as formerly he had attained to in the Court or Camp: And to say truth, the fear at Oxford was not 〈◊〉, when the News came of the taking of Re●●ing, the Town being ●o unfortified on the North side of it, the King so 〈◊〉 at that time of necessary Ammunition to make good the place, that it could not possibly have been de●ended, i● 〈◊〉 had marched directly towards it, and 〈…〉  
Fol. 615. And brought to bed at Exeter of a Daughter the 16. of June, named Henrietta Maria] Not so, but Henrietta only, Maria is added by our Author, who was none of the Gossips, and therefore should not take upon him to name the child. But such Misnomers are so frequent in him, as might make a sufficient Errata at the end of his History, were there none else in it.  
Fol. 622. And so a New one was framed, engraven thereon the picture of the House of Commons and Members sitting; Reversed the Arms of England and Ireland, ●rosse and Harp pale. ● If so, this new Seal could not so properly be called the Great Seal of England, but the great Seal of the House of Commons represented in it, who are so far from being the High Court of Parliament (though were they such they could have no Authority for a Great Seal of their own) that they are not so much as Members of the Great Council. Most true it is, that the prevailing party in both Houses of Parliament conceived it necessary to have a Great Seal lying by them, as well for the dispatch of such Commissions as they well to speed in in reference to the present War, as for the sealing of such Decrees and processes as were to be issued out of the Chancery, which they still kept open. But when it came to be debated in the House of Commons, it was alleged by some sober men, that the counterfeiting of the Great Seal was made High Treason by the Statute of the 25. of King Edward the third. To which it was very learnedly replied by Sergeant wild, that they intended not to counterfeit the Old Great Seal, but to make a new one. On which ridiculous Resolution of this Learned Sergeant (whose great Ruff had as much Law in it as his little head) the design went forward; but not with any such alteration in the Impress as our Author speaks of. The Impress of this New Seal was the same with that in the old, the Feathers or Princes Arms being only added in a void place of it, to Show the difference between them; that so their Followers might distinguish between such Commands as came from his Majesty, and such as came immediately from themselves in his Majesty's Name. But whereas our Author speaks in some words foregoing of a Legislative Power which he conceives to be in the Parliament, he shows himself therein to be no better a Lawyer then M. Ser●cant. The Legislative power was only in the King himself, though legally he was restrained in the exercise of it to the consent of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament.  
Fol. 623. lin. l●. 〈…〉, the one a Cripple, the other somewhat like a Lunatic.] Our Author speaks this of the Children of M. john Hambden, one of the five Members so much talked of (the principal Member of the five, as our Author calls him) but on what ground he speaks it, as I do not know, ●o neither is it worth enquiry. And though I might leave the Children of M. Hambden under this reproach, as an undoubted sign of God's judgements on him, for being a principal Incendiary in that fire which for a long time consumed the Kingdom; yet so far do I prefer truth before private interest, that I shall do him that right in his posterity, which our Author, either out of ignorance, easiness of belief or malice, hath been pleased to deny him. And therefore the Reader is to know that the surviving children of that Gentleman, are not only of an erect and comely stature, but that they have in them all the abilities of wit and judgement, wherewith their Father was endued, though governed with a more moderate spirit, and not so troublesomely active in affairs of state.  
Fol. 626. The five and twentieth of August the Earls of Bedford and Holland went from London towards Oxford, etc. That the said two Earls came to Oxford to tender their submission to the King, is a Truth undoubted (sooner than our Author speaks of) but that they were received with favour and forgiveness, may be very well questioned; not as in reference to forgiveness (which considering the King's good nature may be ●asily granted) but in relation unto Favour. A point wherein our Author hath confuted himself, telling us, fol. 639. of the Earl of Holland, that he had but slender Reception, though he put himself in a posture of Arms with the King in the Field. And 〈◊〉 this slender Reception he complained in a Letter to the Lo●d Ierm●n after his departure, wherein he did relate, that the King did not show so much countenance to him as he had seen h●m do at the same time to some C●mmon Soldiers who had fled from the Enemy to come to him. There came to Oxford also at or about the same time the Earl of Clare, and found the like cold entertainment. It was conceived, and by some reported, that if the King had showed good countenance to these three Lords, most of the rest would have left the Parliament, and repaired unto him. But the King considered well enough, that not so much the sense of their duty, as his successes in the West, had brought them thither; and that if five or six only of the Lords should be left in Westminster, those five or six only would be thought sufficient to constitute a House▪ of Peers (as many times there were no more present) fo● the passing of any Ordinance, which the Commons should be pleased to commend unto them.  
Fol. 630. And now was the King drawn down before the Town, attended by Prince Charles, and the Duke of York, Prince Rupert, and General Ruthen, etc.] For the Kings sitting down before Gloucester, and laying a formal Siege unto it, there was given this reason, viz. that by the taking of this Town all Wales would be preserved in the King's Obedience entirely united unto E●gland, and free passage given, on all occasions and distresses to assist each other. And so far the design was not to be discommended. But on the contrary, it was said, that the King's unhappy sitting down before that Town, lost him the opportunity of marching directly towards London, and ●●attering the Faction in the Parliament; both which by reason of the affrightments which fell upon them by the taking of Bristol and other places in the West, were ready to give up themselves, even to desperation. And so much was affirmed by the Earl of Holland when he was at Oxford, assuring Sir john Heydon Lieutenant of the Ordinance (from whose mouth I have it) that the prevailing Members of both Houses were upon the point of trussing up of Bag and Baggage, but that they hoped (as some of them told him) that N. N. one of great nearness to the King, an especial confident of theirs, would prevail with him at the last to lay siege to Gloucester, and not to leave that Town at his back to infest the Country.  
Fol. 633. Two Spies sent out, long since returned from Warwick, giving them News of the March of the Earl of Essex, but was not assured, he lodging then ●nder a Cloud of disgrace, being beaten out of the West.] But certainly the Earl of Essex could not be under a cloud at that time, for being beaten out of the West; his preparing to raise the Siege of Gloucester, happening in the end of August, Anno 1643. and his being beaten in the West, not happening till the beginning of September, Anno 1644. But we must think the Houses were endued with the spirit of prophecy, and frowned upon the man beforehand, for that which was to happen to him a Twelve month after. Nor was it any fault of his that Bristol, Exeter, and so many places of importance, had been lost in the West; he having no Forces able to act any thing against the King, till the Pulpit-men in London preached him up an A●my for the Relief of Gloucester. An Army which came time enough to do the work (the siege being very slackly followed) and having done the work, were as desirous to return back to their own Houses. But see what happened by the way.  
Fol. 636. From Cirencester he marches to Chilleton, the Cavaliers facing them on Mavarn Hills.] If so, than First, The Earl of Essex must be the janus of this Age, and be presumed to have two faces, with the one looking towards London, for which he was upon his march, with the other on Malvarn Hills, where the Cavaliers faced him.  
And secondly, We must think the Cavaliers to be very Cowards that durst not face him (supposing still that he had two faces) at a nearer distance then from Malvarn Hills, distant from Cirencester thirty miles at the least, and how far from Chilleton, let them tell me who have searched the Maps. But though he makes the Cavaliers to keep out of danger, yet he brings the Queen near enough unto it, whom we find at Newle●y Fight, fol. 648. placed by him with the King on the top of an Hill to behold the battle. But herein his intelligence failed him, the Queen being at that time safe in Oxford, and the King venturing his most sacred person with the rest of his Army. Mercurius Aulicus one of his best Authors for a great part of the War, could have told him so, had he consulted him in this as in other places.  
Fol. 639. The Irish Forces coming under the command of Sir Michael Ernly, an experienced Soldier, and landing in Wales, etc.] The Forces which our Author speaks of, were not Irish but English, sent over in the beginning of the War to defend the South-parts of Ireland against the Rebels. But being forced (for the Reasons mentioned in our Author) to come to a cessation with them, four thousand of them put themselves into a body under the command of Sir Michael Ernly abovenamed, and came over into England to serve the King against the Houses of Parliament, by which they had been so unhandsomely handled. Had they been kept together in a Body, and served under their old known Commanders, there is no question to be made, but that they might have much advanced his Majesty's Service. But Prince Rupert who was all in all in the Council of War, caused them to be divided from one another, distributed them into several Regiments of his Majesty's Armies, and placed them under new Commanders, which gave the Soldier's great displeasure, and their Officers more, rendering their Service less honourable to themselves, and of small advantage to the King. Of these Officers Col. Monk was one, descended from a Daughter of Arthur Plantagenet, Viscount Lisle, the Natural Son of King Edward the fourth, who afterwards falling off to the Houses of Parliament, much advanced their affairs, defeating a great Fleet of the Hollanders, Anno 1653. and at this day Commander in chief over the English Forces in Scotland.  
Fol. 661. In all the Western Countries the Parliament had not a Soldier, but at Plymouth and Pool. ● What think we then of Lime a Sea-Town in Dorsetshire, and consequently in the West? Had there not been some Soldiers in it of the Parliament party, and good Soldiers too, it could not have held out so long against Prince M●urice; who wasted there the greatest part of the Cornish Army, which had served so fortunately under the Command of Sir Ralph Hopton, and yet could not take it. But Lime was a Sea-Town, as before was said, and Prince Maurice had only a Land●Army, which rendered the Design not more impossible than imprudent; the besieging of a Haven-Town without a Navy to prevent all relief by Sea, being like the hedging in of Cuckoo, or the drowning of a quick E●le by the Wise men of Gotham.  
Fol. 662. The marquis of Newcastle for the King went into Darbyshire, where he listed fifteen hundred Volunteers, assisted by Sir John Gell his Interest thereabouts, and Sir John Harpers.] Worse and worse still: The Earl of Newcastle assisted by Sir john Gell were brave News indeed. That Sir john Harper might do his best in it, I shall easily grant. But Sir john Gell was all along a principal stickler for the Houses of Parliament, and spent his whole stock of Interest in that Country to advance their Service. In the pursuit whereof he was observed to be one of their first Commanders, which issued out Warrants to the Tenants of the Lords and Gentry, who did adhere unto the King, to bring in their rents, and be responsal for them for the time to come to the Committee at Derby, one of which Warrants Dated in March 1642. was brought to Oxford, and is this that followeth.  
To the Constable of Acmanton.  
WHereas these unna●ur all Wars at this present are s●mented and maintained by ` Papists and Malignants, to the utter undoing of many honest men, and the ruin of the whole Commonwealth; for the better preventing of which misery, and to do the best we can to put a speedy end to these distractions according to the trust reposed in us by the Ordinance of Parliament, we think sit to command you; that presently upon receipt hereof, you give notice to all the Tenants within your Constablery named in a Schedule herewith sent you, that henceforward they pay all their Ren●s due to any of those persons, or to any other that contribute or bear Arms against the Parliament, to the Committee here at Derby, or to such other person or persons as the said Committee shall nominate. And we all promise that such of those Tenants who show their forwardness to bring in their Rents to the Committee at Derby by our Lady day next, or within four days afterwards, shall have a discharge against their Landlords of the whole rent, and shall have a fourth part aba●ed them. And those Tenants that are refractory, and come not willingly to us, shall not only be forced to pay their whole Rents, but also shall be proceeded against as malignant persons, and such as endeavour the continuance of these troubles. Given under our hands March 1642. The Names of the Persons contained in the Schedule abovementioned amount to the number of 46. viz. the Earl of Shrewsbury, the Earl of Devonshire, the Earl of Newcastle, (whom our Author makes so much befriended by Sir John Gell) the Earl of Chesterfield, the Lord Maltravers, Sir John Harper of Caulk, and Sir John Harper of Swarstone, Sir William Savill, Sir John Fitz Herbert of Norbury, Sir Edward Mosely, etc. All men of very great Estates, and therefore like to send in the more grist to the Mill at Derby. So far did Sir John Gell act for the Houses of Parliament.  
And he continued in those actings till the end of the War: After which, falling into some suspicion to have changed his Affections, he was committed to the Tower, in no small danger of his life, and came not off but with the loss of former Actings.  
Fol. 712. This, no question, caused their General Essex early the next day to quit his glorious Command, and in a small Boat to shift away by Water.] If that were it which caused him to shift away in a small Boat, he must needs play the part of a Cowardly Soldier, whilst every one of the Soldiers stood ready to act the part of a brave Commander: And therefore it is probable that there was somewhat more in it then a Consideration of the straits he was driven unto by the King, which he might easily have prevented, by keeping himself in the more open Country of Devonshire, where he might have had Elbow room enough on both sides, and a Country rich enough to furnish him with all sorts of Provisions: His Army was every way equal to the Kings, if not superior, he drawing after him no fewer than 50 Brass Pieces of Ord●ances, and 700 Carriages; and it appears by the number of Arms delivered up by Composition, amounting to 8000 in all, that his Foot could not consist of less than ten or twelve thousand: And for his Horse, no fewer than 2500 made a clear escape▪ So that he might have kept the Field, and put the King to it in a Battle, if there had not been somewhat more in it then our Author speaks of. It was therefore thought by some knowing men which understood the state of Affairs, that knowing his Horse were gone off without any danger, and that his Foot might save themselves by a Composition, he was willing to keep the Seas even as before was intimated: For partly being discouraged from pursuing the War by his first success at Edge-Hill, and partly coming to know more of the Intentions of such as managed the design, than had been first imparted to him, he beg●n to grow more cold in carrying things on unto the utmost, then before he was. Upon which ground, as he had neglected the opportunity of marching directly towards Oxford, when he had removed the King's Forces out of Reading; so on the defeat of Waller at Landsdown, he writ unto the Houses to send Petitions to the King for Peace, as appears by this History, fol. 625. For which coldness of his, so plainly manifested, it was not only moved by Vassal in the House of Commons, that he should lay down his Command, but many jeers were put upon him, and some infamous Pictures made of him to his great dishonour: Considering therefore, that on the defeat of Prince Rupert at Marston-Moor, all the North parts were like to be regained to the Houses of Parliament; he was willing to let the King remain as absolute in the West, as they were like to be in the North, which since he could not do with Honour, by harkening to the King's fair proffer, seconded by a Letter from all the chief Officers of his Army, he cast himself into such necessities, as might give him some colour to shift for himself, and leave his Foot to some Agreement with the King: No way but this, (as he conceived) to bring the leading Members of both Houses unto such a Temper, as might induce them to meet the King half way in the Road to peace; and if this could not do it, the coming on of Winter might perhaps cool them into some conditions which the King might be as willing to hearken to as they to offer. This I remember to be the sum of such Discourses as were made at that time in and about the Court, by men of the best knowledge and understanding in the state of businesses; but whether they hit upon the right string or not, I am not able to affirm. This I am able to aff●rm, that cur Author is mistaken in telling us that the Earl of Essex did quit his glorious Command upon this occasion. For afterwards we find him in his glorious Command at the fight near Newberry, and he continued in it till the Spring next following; when by the Ordinance of self-denial, and the new modelling of the Army under the Command of Sir Thom●s Fairfax he was quitted of it. All that he did at this time was to quit his Army, for which the Houses of Parliament cried quits with him, as before is said.  
Fol. 714. The King regains Monmouth, and returns to Oxford, the 23 of November.] That Monmouth was regained for the King, is undoubtedly true, but that it was regained by the King, is undoubtedly false. Our Author in some lines before, had left him at Hungerford, in the County of Berks, and now he brings him thorough the air to the taking of Monmouth: But the truth is, that Monmouth having been betrayed to Massey, than Governor of Gloucester, by Major Kyrl, a Garrison of 600 Soldiers was put into it; who having a Design to surprise Chepstow, left the Town so naked, that the Lord Charles Somerset (one of the younger Sons of the Marquis of Worcester) taking with him 150 Horse from Ragland-Castle, and assisted by some Foot from the Neighbouring Garrisons which held for the King, fell on the Town on Tuesday morning, the 19 of November, Anno 1644. and makes himself master of the place, before our brave Adventurers at Chepstow heard any thing of it.  
Fol. 719. Next Morning, July 2. the Prince advances after them, resolving to give them Battle by Noon, etc.] The Battle hear meant, is that of Marston-Moor near York, between Prince Rupert for the King, the Earls of Manchester and Leven, (better known by the name of Colonel Lesly) and the Lord Ferdinando Fairfax, commanding over their several Forces for the Houses of Parliament.  
Concerning which, our Author tells us, That at first Prince Rupert got the Ground, that those in the main Battle were so hard put to it, that they ●ell on the Reserve, of Scots which were behind them; that the right Wing of the Enemy's Horse being as hard put to it by the Prince's left Wing, committed the like Disorder on the Lord Fairfax his Foot, and the Scotch Reserves, and were pursued very fiercely by their Conquerors▪ and finally, that no Horse being sent to make good the Ground, which those who followed the Chase had left, the broken Army of the Enemy rallied again, and got the better of the day▪ But the Gentlemen of York 〈◊〉 who lived near the place, tell us more than this, viz., That Prince Rup●rt had not only got ground at the first, and 〈◊〉 the right Wing of the Enemy's Horse, but so disordered the main Battle, that he postest himself of the Canon, the three Generals ret●●●ing out of the field with more haste then Honor. And so the News came flying to Oxford, reported in divers places by such of the enemy's Soldiers as had fled out of the field, and at Oxford it was entertained with Bells and Bonfires, and the shooting off of all the Ordnance about the Town.  
But Prince Rupert better knowing how to get then pursue Advantages, and his soldier's busy upon Pillage, gave opportunity to Colonel Cromwell, who commanded the Earl of Manchesters' Horse, and who only had made a fair retreat in the heat of the fight, to put new life into the Battle, and having put the broken Foot into some good order, first gave a check unto the Prince, and after pressing hard upon him, tu●n'd the whole fortune of the Day: For which good service, Cromwell is cried up by his party to be● the Saviour of three Kingdoms, of which the Scots who had done very well that Day, and bore the greatest part of the brunt, did afterwards very much complain in a Pamphlet of theirs, which they call 〈◊〉 Man●●est: How faintly General King carried himself in this Battle, hath been shown already, and what became afterwards of Prince Rupert, how he squandered away his great Body of Horse, the surrendry of York, and what e●●e happened in that Country after this Fight, is referred to our Author. I only add that I have heard from some Gentlemen of that County, who had command to bu●y the dead, that they found no fewer than the Bodies of Eight thousand Men, w●●ch had been killed in that Fight, the greatest number which were slain in any one Battle in 〈…〉  
Fol. 802. To Blackington- House, where Colonel Windebank kept a Garrison for the King.] But by his leave, Windebank never kept a Garrison at Blechington (not Blackington) House, but only was commanded to remain there with a party of Horse, and a few Foot-soldiers, the better to keep open the Markets till Woodstock House was fortified and made fit to be garrisoned. So far was Blechington House from being held like a Garrison, that it had not so much about it as a wooden Pale. And when Major Windebank (the second Son of Sir Francis Windebank) had cut down two Trees to make Pallisadoes for defence of the place, upon complaint made by the Lady Coghil to Col. William Legg then Governor of Oxford, he was commanded to restore them. Which notwithstanding he was called before a Court of War, for giving up an undefenced place, which was impossible to be made good; and partly by the eager pursuit of Col. Legg (whose Contributions were diminished by Windebanks quartering in that House) and some back friend which he and his Father had at Court, he was condemned to be shot to death (his Father's Services and Sufferings being quite forgotten) which death he suffered on Saturday the 1. of May, with much Christian courage.  
Fol. 719. And having leave to go to the King, they cause him etc. But the King knew their minds not to engage for him, and so they returned.] It may be collected from these words that this message was a matter of Lip● business only, the Ambassadors not having instructions to engage their Superiors for him, nor the King any opinion of the reality of their intentions toward him. But in the process of the business we shall find it otherwise.  
For first, Our Author tells us, that they were both 〈◊〉 Knights and Barons by the King, fol. 804. Not both made Knights and Barons, I am sure of that, but the one of them a Baron, and the other a Knight Baronet, that is to say, john de Remsworth of U●recht, des●●●ded from the Noble Family De Reed in Cleveland, created 〈…〉 by Letters Patents bearing date the 24. of March Anno 1644. and William de Boreel created Baronet on the 22. of March in the same year.  
And secondly, This appears more plainly by a Letter of Complaint sent from our New States in England to the old States of Holland; In which they tell them how their Ministers had abused their Trust to their prejudice▪ showing themselves rather interessed persons then public Agents, no● satisfied to reproach them to their faces, but to glory in it. Certainly ne●ther had the King conferred those Honours on the Ambassadors, nor the Houses complained so much against them; if they had been sent hither to no other end but to settle Trade, and to see how the Game went, which our Author makes the only reason of their coming. And tho●gh the King obtained not such helps from the ●tates of the Netherlands, as their Ambassadors had engaged for, yet so much he effected by their mediation, that the Houses had not such Assistances from those parts as they had before, a matter of no small advantage to the King's affairs.  
Fol. 806. Whilst Rupert and Maurice with the Hors●e, and some select Foot, fetched off the King from Oxford.] By which words the Reader cannot but conclude that Oxford was in no small danger, and the King's person in as much, which must necess●tate the two Princes with all their Horse, and a select number of Foot to fetch him off. But at that time there was no Enemy near the one, nor any danger appearing toward the other. The King was at that time in a gallant Condition, and had drawn his Soldiers out of their Winter Garrisons, ready to march into the field; attending only till the other part of his Army which was employed about Glocestershire was in readiness also. News whereof being brought unto him, he went out of Oxford, accompanied by the sa●d two Princes in a more glorious and magnificent manner then ever formerly. The precise time whe●e of being noted by George Wherton a professed Astrologer, he erected a Scheme according to the Rules of Art. And finding the Houses well disposed, and the Aspects of the Planets and Constellations to be very favourable, he prognosticated that this expedition should prove very fortunate to the King, his Successes glorious, and his return to Oxford as magnificent as h● going out. Which being published in Print▪ and disproved by the sad events which followed, gave great occasion unto Lily, Culpepper, and others of that faculty to deride him for it; Men every way as faulty in that kind themselves, as he had been unfortunate in his predictions. Witness those terrible presagings which they gave us of the Eclipse, happening in the end of March 1652. to the great terror of of poor people, but without any visible effects. But above all things, witness that Observation of M. Culpepper, in the end of his Dotages on the Months of February foregoing, in which he signifieth, that if the Emperor died that month, we must remember who told us of it. But for all his great insight into the Stars, the Emperor neither died that month nor in six years after. Thus Augur ridet Augurem, as the Proverb is: the people in the mean time being deceived and abused by both whilst they make sport with one another.  
Gloucester Association in much want received three hundred and forty Auxiliaries from the Grand Garrison, Newport panel▪ o●t of Buckinghamshire.] No such grand Garrison neither, as to be worthy of that name. A Garrison had been form there for the King, at the request of Sir Lewis Dives, the better to secure his Rents and Tenants in Bedfordshire▪ But b●ing found to be too far off to receive Relief, if any distress should fall upon it, the Ordnance and Soldiers were removed to towcester, seven miles from Northampton, to restrain the insolences of that Garrison, but at the opening of the S●●rng brought back to Oxford, and mingled with the rest of the Army. On which deserting of newport-pagnel by the King's King's Soldiers, ● Garrison was put into it for the Houses of Parliament, till the King's Soldiers were removed to Towcester, to counterbalance which, this Garrison had been made at Newport, of which there being then no longer use, and Gloucester standing in need of supply, the Ordnance being drawn off, and the Works slighted, the men were sent away to Gloucester▪ And these were the three hundred and forty Auxiliaries which were sent from the grand Garrison of Newport Pagnel, the Town being small, and consequently not capable of receiving any great number of Soldiers, or to give those Soldiers the name of so grand a Garrison.  
Fol. 809. About five a Clock in the morning, June 13. the King drew off from Burrough Hill towards harbour and Pomfrait. ● He might as well have said that the King drew toward 〈◊〉 and Orkney in the North of Scotland, as that he drew ●oward harbour and Pomfrait, both lying Northward from the place of his remove. For though it would be thought by any ordinary Reader who is not well studied in the Maps, that harbour and Pomfrait towards which the King is said to remove, did lie very near to one another▪ yet harbour and Pomfrait are at least eighty miles asunder; the one a Town of Leicestershire remarkable for a great Fair of Horse and ●attle, the other a Town of great Note in Yorkshire, renowned for a fair and ancient Castle; which being anciently part of the possessions of the Lacy's Earls of Lincoln, by Marriage and Capitulation descended on the Earls of Lancaster, and is now part of that great Duchy.  
Fol. 811. Naseby the fatal battle to the King and his party. ● Fatal indeed whether we look upon the Antecedents or the Consequents of it. For if we look on the Antecedents, there could be nothing but some unavoidable fatality in it, that the King having taken Leices●er, and thereby put his affairs into a more hopeful way (as he writ to the Queen) then th●y had been in at any time since the Rebellion; should come back to Daventry, and there spend eight or ten days without doing any thing. If it be said, that he returned back upon the noise that Oxford was besieged by Fairfax, his staying so long at Daventry, was not the way to raise that siege. Nor was the Town in any such danger (but that the Ladies wanted fresh Butter for their Pease) as to bring him back from the pursuit of his Successes; and thereby to give time to Cromwell, without whom Fairfax could do little to come with 600 fresh Horse to the rest of the Army. And yet being come, they had not made so fast after the King as to resolve on ●ighting with him when they did, if they had not Intercepted a Letter the night before, sent from Col. ●oring to the King, in which he signified that he was upon his march towards him, desiring his Majesty to keep at a distance, and not to engage with the Enemy till he came to him. For which intelligence I am beholding to Hugh Peter, who in one of his thanksgiving Sermons hath informed me in it. Upon the reading of this Letter, it was concluded to fall on with the first opportunity, before these new supplies should be added to the rest of the King's Forces. And it was as fatal in the Consequents as it had been in the Antecedents; neither the King no● his party being able after that time to make any considerable opposition, but losing battle after battle, and place after place, till there was nothing left to lose but their Lives or Liberties.  
Ibid. The King's Coaches, his Cabinet of Letters and Pa●pers.] In the loss of his Coaches there was no great matter, nor so much in the loss of his Cabinet of Letters and Papers, as his Enemies did conceive it was: A Cabinet▪ in which were many Letters and Paper, most of them written to the Queen; but they, together with the rest, published in Print by Order of the Houses of Parliament. The Design was to render the King odious in the sight of the People, by giving licence to the Queen to promise some favours for the Catholic party here in England, if she could obtain any succour for him from the Catholics there: But they lost more by it then they got.  
For first, They drew a general obloquy on themselves, by publishing the secret passages betwixt Man and Wife, contrary to the rules of Humanity and common honesty.  
And secondly, They gave the People such a representation of the King's Abilities, his Piety, Prudence, and deep foresight into Affairs, as raised him to an high degree of Estimation with all sorts of men; as Mr. Pryn had done before of the Archbishop of Canterbury, in printing the Breviat of his Life, though intended otherwise. An error which the Houses were soon sensible of, and thereupon gave Order that in the publishing of the great Volume of Ordinances, etc. by Edward Husbands, in which were many passages also betwixt them and the King, these intercepted Letters should be left out; though the Letters in the Lord Digbies Cabinet which was taken at Sherburn were printed there among the rest. So wise are men upon the post fact, when it is too late.  
Fol. 826. But the same night at the very noise of the Kings coming from Worcester, they prepared for flight, and the next morning not a Scot to be seen, felt, or heard of; they were all fled.] The Scots had lain before Hereford from the 30. of july to the first of September, and had so well entrenched themselves that there was no fear of being beaten up by the King, who since the fatal blow at Naseby had never been the Master of such Forces as to give Battle to the Scots, and much less to assault them in their Trenches. So that the noise of the coming of the King's Forces from Worcester, might be the pretence, but it could not be the real cause of his hasty raising of the Siege. Lesly (unworthily made Earl of Leven at the Kings being in Sco●land, An. 1641.) had received Letter after Letter out of Scotland, touching the successes of Montrosse. And now there comes the lamentable News of the taking of Edinburg, and consequently the loss of all, if he hasted not towards their Relief. On the receiving of which Letters he was willing to take the noise of the Kings coming from Worcester, with all his Forces for an occasion to be gone; and being gone marched directly Northwards till he came near enough to Scotland to dispatch David Lesly with all his Horse, and without any noise to set upon the marquis of Montrosse at the first opportunity; By reason of whose sudden coming, and coming with no less than 6000 Horse, the Noble marquis by the treachery of the Earls of Ro●burgh and Traquair (who were acquainted with the plot) the marquis was almost surprised, and the greatest part of his Forces routed, himself escaping with the rest, and making an orderly ma●ch to the North-parts of Scotland; where he continued in some strength till he was commanded by the King to lay down his Commission and dis●and his Forces. I add here only by the way, that the Sco●s had pretty well scoured the Country who came in but with two thousand Horse, and had now raised them to six thousand, besides such as they had lost in the course of the War.  
Fol. 828. Nor would they budg● from the North parts, though they are called Southwards for the Kingdom's security and service.] But just before we found the Scots at the Siege of Hereford, a City beyond the Severn, on the borders of Wales; and here we find th●m so fast r●ve●ed in the Northern ●ounties, that they would not budge a foot Southwards for the Kingdom's safety Reconcile these differences he that can, for my part I dare not undertake it. The like irreconcileablenesse I find within few lines after, in which he tel●eth us▪ that being entreated to march to the Siege of N●wark, they sta●ed not long there, but marched in a pet Northwards to Newcastle, where they stuck till they got the King into their clutches, sold him, and so went home again.  
But first, If the Scots marched towards Newark (whether upon entreaty or not is not much material) they must needs budge Southward; the whole County of York, and part of Nottinghamshire lying between Newark and the Scots Quarters.  
Secondly, The Scots did not go from Newark in such a pet as to leave the Siege, for aftewards we find fol. 892. that L●sly only went away in a p●t, but left his Army there to attend the continuance of the Siege till the Town was taken.  
 
 
 
Secondly, he did not force the Town by firing one of the ●●ates, but had it surrendered to him by Composition; the Capitulations being made on the Sunday night, and his Sould●er entering into it on the Monday morning.  
Thirdly, the Soldiers of the Garrison were not forced by him into the Castle, who had time enough all that night to retire into it▪ or otherwise to leave the Town, as all the Horse and many of the Foot had leave to do.  
And fourthly, there was no such difficulty in the business, a● to bring God upon the Stage in the taking either of the Town or Castle, which the Governor (Sir William Ogle wa● resolved beforehand not to hold out long. He had bragged 〈◊〉 times, that he had so stored that Castle with Victuals, Arme● and Ammunition, that he durst bid defiance for six 〈◊〉 to all the Armies in England. But when the news ●am● o● the taking of 〈◊〉 and Bridgewa●er, he changed his 〈◊〉 af●rming frequently that it could be no dishonour to affirmed expressly (being desired to show the truth in this particular) that there were about 80. Women in it at that time when the House was stormed. So that our Author in this point was extremely out, as much as the difference can amount to between a Company of 80. and one single person. The words to be explained are these, viz. a Godly Divine Protestant, for protection mixed with some Popish Priest's Profession; Which words have neither sense nor Grammar, as they be before us, and therefore must be taught to speak English before the ordinary Reader can understand them. And if the words were put into proper and Grammatical English, we must read them thus, viz. A Godly Protestant Divine mixed for protection with some Priests of the Popish profession. Which being the Grammar of the words, will give a Logical dispute about the party to whom the Character is given. I think our Author would not have it understood of D. Griffiths Daughter (who though a very virtuous and godly Gentlewoman) cannot be called a Godly Protestant Divine, in the common notion of the phrase; and yet the current of the words does import no less. For it is said, that there was but one woman amongst so many men: D Griffiths Daughter a Godly Protestant Divine, etc. Nor can it properly be understood of D. Griffith, though a Godly Protestant Divine, the following words depending on those before D. Griffiths Daughter, and not relating literally and grammatically to the Doctor himself. Had the tenor of the words run thus, The Daughter of D. Griffith a Godly Protestant Divine, the adjunct of a Go●ly Protestant Divine must have related to the Father, but as they he before us it relates to the daughter; With what propriety of speech or sense let the Reader judge, and make himself as merry at it as he pleaseth.  
Fol. 836. For Digby was sometimes Secretary of State.] And so he was at this time also, when he was discomfited at Sherburn in Yorkshire, when he lost that Cabinet and those Letters which our Author speaks of. He had been made principal Secretary of Estate in the place of the Lord Falkland, about the beginning of October, Anno 1643. And continued in that office till his Majesty's death; though by reason of the King's restraint and his own enforced absence, he was not able to act any thing in it, as neither could M. Secretary Nicholas; who notwithstanding neither lost the Office nor name of Secretary. I trow Sir Francis Walsingham, or Sir Robert Cec●l were not the less Secretaries of Estare to Queen Elizabeth because she employed them sometimes in foreign Embassies; nor was Digby sometimes only, but at that time Secretary of Estate, when he took upon him the Command of a Body of Horse in his Master's Service.  
Fol. 871. And the West being cleared Fairfax returns back again to the Siege of Bristol.] The west so far from being cleared, that except Bridgewater in Somersetshire, and Sherburn- Castle in Dorsetshire, little or nothing was done in order to it. The Counties of Devon and Cornwall still remained untouched, in which the Prince had not only a considerable Army under brave Commanders, but many strong Towns and Garrisons well stored with Soldiers; so as at this siege of Bristol it was conceived that two great Errors were committed, the first by Fairfax in sitting down before a Town in which were so many able men well armed and commanded by the General of his Majesty's Forces; and leaving an Army at his back, which might have charged him in the Rear, while those within sallied out upon him, and assailed him in the very front.  
The second Error was in Rupe●t, in that being General of the King's Forces, he shut himself up within a Town, when it had been more proper for him to have been abroad, gathering together the King's old Soldiers, and raising new from several places, by which he might have put himself into a Condition to raise the Siege. But Fairfax knew well what he did, making no doubt to have the Town delivered to him before the Prince could be informed of the danger in which it was. For the delivery of which City so strongly fortified, so well manned, so furnished with all sorts of necessary provisions, Prince Rupert incurred the suspicion of Disloyalty both with the King and all his party. He had before sent certain Letters to the King, in which he pressed him (somewhat beyond good manners) to come to a speedy conclusion with his Parliament, without relating either to point of honour or conscience; with which the King seemed more displeased as appeareth by his answer to him, fol. 841. then was agreeable unto his ordinary temper. And so much was the King startled when he heard of the giving up of that City with the Fort and Castle, and that too in so short a time, that he posted away a Messenger to the Lords at Oxford to displace Col. Legg (a well known Creature of Prince rupert's) from the Government of that City and Garrison, and to put it into the hands of Sir Thomas Glenham; which was accordingly done, and done unto the great contentment of all the King's party, except that Prince and his Dependants. But Legg was sweetened not long after by being made one of the Grooms of his Majesty's Bedchamber, a place of less command, but of greater trust.  
Fol. 891. And now the Parliament consider of a Term or Title● to be given to the Commissioners entrusted with their Great Seal, and are to be called Conservators of the Commonwealth of England.] Not so, with reference either to the time or the thing itself.  
For first, The Commissioners of the Great Seal were never called the Conservators foe the Commonwealth of England.  
And Secondly, If they ever had been called so, it was not now, that is to say, when the King's Seals were broken in the House of Peers, which was not long after Midsummer, in the year 1646. But the truth is, that on the 30 of january 1648. being the day of the Kings most deplorable death, the Commons caused an Act or Order to be printed, in which it was declared that from thenceforth in stead of the King's Name in all Commissions, Decrees, Processes, and Indictments, the ●●tle of Custodes Libertatis Angliae, or the Keepers of the Liberties of England, as it was afterwards englished (when all Legal Instruments were ordered to be made up in the English-Tongue) should be always used. But who these Keepers of the Liberties were, was a thing much questioned, some thought the Commissioners for the great Seal were intended by it, whom our Author by a mistake of the Title calls here the Conservators of the Commonwealth; others conceived that it related to the Council of State, but neither rightly: For the truth is, that there were never any such men to whom this Title was appliable in one sense or other▪ it being only a Second Notion, like Genus and Species in the Schools, a new devised term of State-craft to express that trust which never was invested in the persons of any men, either more or fewer.  
Fol. 892. ●o then the eldest Son, and the youngest Daughter, are with the Qu●●n in France; the two Dukes of York and Gloucester, with the Princess Elizabeth at St. James 's: The Prince in the We●t with his Army. ● This is more strange than all the rest, that the King's eldest Son should be with his Mother in France, and yet that the Prince at the same time should be with his Army in the West of England: I always thought, till I saw so good Authority to the contrary, that the Prince and the King's eldest Son had been but one person: But finding it otherwise resolved, I would fain know which of the Kings Son● is the Prince, if the eldest be not: It cannot be the second, or third, for they are here called both only by the name of Dukes, and made distinct persons from the Prince: And therefore we must needs believe that the King's eldest Son, Christened by the name of Charls-Iames, who died at Gre●nwich, almost as soon as he was born, Anno 1629. was raised up from the dead by some honest French Conjurer, to keep company with the young Princess Henrietta, who might converse with h●m as a Playfellow, without any terror, as not being able to distinguish him from a Baby of Clouts; That he, and all that did adhere unto him, should be safe in their Persons, Honours and●●onsciences, in the Scotish Army, and that they would really and effectually join with him, and with such as would come in unto him and join with them for his preservation, and should employ their Armies and Forces to assist him to his Kingdoms, in the recovery of his ●ust Rights: But on the contrary, these juggling and perfidious 〈◊〉, declare in a Letter to their Commissioners at London, by them to be communicated to the Houses of Parliament, that there had been no Treaty nor (apitulation betwixt his M●●esty and them, nor any in their names, etc. On the receipt of which Letters, the Houses Order him to be sent to Warwick Castle▪ But Les●ly, who had been used to buying and selling in the time of his Pedlary, was loath to lose the benefit of so rich a Commodity; and thereupon removes him in such post-haste, that on the eighth of May we find him at Southwel, and at Newcastle on the tenth, places above an hundred Miles distant from one another; and he resolved beforehand how to dispose of him when he had him there: ●o Scotland he never meant to carry him, though some hopes were given of it at the first; for not only Lesly himself, but the rest of the Covenanters in the Army, were loath to admit of any Competitor in the Government of that Kingdom, which they had engrossed who●y to themselves; but the 〈◊〉 in an Assembly of theirs, declare expressly against his coming to live amongst them, as appears, fol▪ 〈◊〉 So that there was no other way left to dispose of his person, but to ●ell him to the Houses of Parliament, though at the first they made 〈◊〉 of it, and would be thought to stand upon Terms or Honour▪ The Earl of Lowdon, who loved to hear himself speak more ●hen ●ny man living, in some Spe●ches made be●ore ●he Houses, protested strongly against the delivery of their King's Person into their Power, 〈◊〉 what in 〈◊〉 ●●amy would lie upon them and the whole Nation, ●f 〈◊〉 ●hould to 〈◊〉. But this was but a co●y of their Countenance only, 〈◊〉 ●●vice to raise the Mar●e●, and make is ●uch money 〈…〉 as they could. At last they came to this Agreement, that for the sum of Two hundred thousand pounds, they should deliver him to such Commissioners as the Houses should Authorise to receive him of them, which was done accordingly. For  
Fol. 939. The Commissioners for receiving the Person of the King, came to Newcastle, june 22. etc.] Not on the 22 of june, I am sure of that, the Commodity to be bought and sold was of greater value, and the Scots too cunning to part with it, till they had raised the price of it as high as they could: The driving of this Bargain took up all the time betwixt the Kings being carried to Newcastle, and the middle of the Winter than next following, so that the King might be delivered to these Commissioners (that is to say, from Prison to Prison) on the 22 day of january, but of june he could not.  
And here it will not be amiss to consider what loss or benefit redounded to those Merchants which traded in the buying and selling of this precious Commodity.  
And first, The Scots not long before their breaking out against their King, had in the Court two Lords High Stewards, and two Grooms of the Stool successively one after another: And at their taking up of Arms, they had a Master of the Horse, a Captain of the Guard, a Keeper of the privy Purse, seven Grooms of eight, in his Majesty's Bedchamber, and an equal number, at the least, of Gentlemen Ushers, Quarter-Waiters, Cupbearers, Carvers, Sewers, and other Officers attending daily at the Table: I speak not here of those which had places in the Stables, or below the Stairs; or of the Servants of those Lords and Gentlemen, which either lived about the Court, or had Offices in it: All which together, made up so considerable a number, that the Court might well be called an Academy of the Scots Nation, in which so many of all sorts had their Breeding, Maintenance, and Preferment: Abroad they had a Lieutenant of the Tower, a Fortress of the most consequence in all the Kingdom; and a Master-●unner of the Navy, an Office of as great a trust as the other; and more of those Monopolies, Suits, and Patents, which were conceived to be most grievous to the Subject, than all the English of the Court. In the Church they had two Deaneries, divers Prebendaries, and so many Excclesiastical Benefices, as equalled all the Revenue of the Kirk of Scotland: All which they lost, like Aesop's Dog catching after a shadow: For what else were those empty hopes of engrossing to themselves all the Bishop's Lands, and participating equally with both Houses in the Government of this Kingdom (which drew them into England the second time) but an airy shadow? And yet by catching at that shadow, they lost all those Advantages which before they had, both in Court and Country; and that not only for the present, but in all probability for the times to come. The Presbyterians laid their Heads and Hands together to embroil the Realm, out of a confidence, that having alienated the greatest part of the Tribes from the House of David, they might advance the golden Calves foe their Presbyteries in Dan and Bethel, and all other places whatsoever within this Land: And for the maintenance thereof, they had devoured in conceit all Chapter Lands, and parceled them amongst themselves into Augmentations: But no sooner had they driven this Bargain, but a Vote passed for selling those Lands, towards the payment of the Debts of the Commonwealth. Nor have they lived to see their dear Presbytery settled, or their Lay-Elders entertained in any one Parish of the Kingdom; for the advancement whereof, the Scots were first encouraged to begin at home, and afterwards to pursue their work by invading England.  
Others there were who laboured for nothing more than the raising of a New Commonwealth out of the Ruins of the old Monarchy, which Plot had been a carrying on from the first coming of this King to the Crown, till they had gotten him into their hands; these being like the Husbandmen in Saint Matthews Gospel, who said among themselves, this is the Heir▪ come let us kill him, and let us seize on his Inheritance, Matth. 21. 38. A Commonwealth which they had so modelled in their Brains, that neither Sir Thomas Moor Utopia, nor the Lord Verulam's new Atlantis, nor Plato's Platform, nor any of the old Ideas, were equal to it; the Honours and Offices whereof they had distributed amongst themselves, and their own Dependants: And in pursuance of this project, they had no sooner brought the King to the end they aimed at, but they pass an Act, (for so they called it) prohibiting the Proclaiming of any Person to be King of England, etc. That done, they passed another for the abolishing the Kingly Office in England, etc. dated the 17 of March, One thousand six hundred forty eight. A third, for declaring and a constituting the People of England to be a Commonwealth and Free State, dated May 19 1649 which last they solemnly proclaimed by their Heralds and Sergeants, in the most frequented parts of London, and made themselves a new Great Seal, with the Arms and Impress of their new Commonwealth engraven on it. And yet these men that had the purse of all the Kingdom at command, and Armies raised for defence of their Authority, within the space of six years were turned out of all: And this was done so easily, and with so little noise, that the loss of that exorbitant Power did not cost so much as a broken Head, or a Bloody Nose, in purchasing whereof, they had wasted so many Millions of Treasure, and more than an Hundred thousand Lives: So that all reckonings being cast up, it will appear, that all were losers by the Bargain, as it happens commonly to such men as love to traffic in the buying and selling of prohibited Commodities, and thereby make themselves obnoxious to all such forfeitures, as the severity of the Laws, and the King Displeasure▪ shall impose upon them.  
How he was carried by those Commissioners to Holdenby●House ●House, and from thence by a party of Horse to the Headquarters of the Army, our Author hath informed us in the course of this History▪ But being there, he tells us, that he was permitted to give a meeting to his Children.  
Fol. 995. And accordingly they met at Maidstone, where they dined together. Well bouled Vincent! as our Author knows who says in another place: He gives us the Copy of a Letter in the very same fol. from the King to the Duke of York, dated at Casam, july 4. 1647. in which he declares his hope that the Duke might be permitted with his Brother and Sister, to come to some place betwixt that and London, where he might see them; adding withal, that rather than h● might not see them, he would be content they should come to some convenient place to dine, and go back at night: So then, the place for this joyful meeting must be some convenient Town or other betwixt Casam and London: But Casam is a Village of Berkshire, distant about thirty Miles from London, Westward; and Maidstone, one of the chief Town● of Kent, is distant about thirty Miles from London, towards the East; so that London may be truly said to be in the middle betwixt Maidstone and Casam, but Maidstone by no means to be in any position betwixt Casam and London: Perhaps our Author in this place mistakes Maidstone for Madenhith, from Reading ten, and from London two and twenty miles distant, and then he may do well to mend it in his second Edition.  
And then he may correct also another passage about Judge jenkin's, whom fol. 836. he makes to be taken Prisoner in the City of Hereford; and fol. 976. at Castle in Wales. So strangely does he forget himself, that one might think this History had several Authors, and was not written nor digested by any one man.  
Fol. 96●. Nay, did not Heraclius the Greek Emperor, call for aid of the● Rakehell rabble of Scythians to assist him against the Saracens. ● I believe he did not: For as I remember not to have read, that he called in any of the Scy●hick Nations to assist him against the Saracens, so there was no reason why he should: The Saracens in his time had neither extended their Conquests, nor wasted his Empire so far Northwards, as to necessitate him to invite any such Rakehell Rabble of Scythians to oppose their proceedings: By doing whereof, he must needs expose as great a part of his Dominio●s to the spoil of the Scythians, as had been wasted, (and in part conquered) by the Saracens.  
I read indeed, That Cosroses, one of the Kings of Persia, the better to annoy Her●●lius, in those parts of the Empire which were dearest to him, hired a compounded Army of S●laves, Avares, Gepid●, and others, neighbouring near unto them, to invade Thrace, and lay siege unto Constantinople, the Imperial Seat; to curb whose Insolences, and restrain their further progress into the heart of that Country, Heraclius hired another Army, compounded of the like Scythick Nations, which in those days passed under the common name of the Chasnari, and it was very wisely done: For by that means he did not only waste those Barbarous Nations (all of them being his very bad Neighbours) in warring one against another, but reserved his own Subjects for some other occasions: And as it was done wisely, so was it done as lawfully also, there being no Law of God or Man which prohibits Princes, when they are either invaded by a foreign Enemy, or overlaid by their own Subjects, to have recourse to such helps as are nearest to them, or most like to give them their Assistance. Which point our Author prosecutes to a very good purpose, though he mistake himself in the instance before laid down.  
The Irish were then upon the point of calling the French unto their aid, under pretence that their own King was not able to protect them against the Forces of those men who had confiscated their Estates, and were resolved upon their final extermination: And had the King upon the first rising of the Scots, poured in an Army of the Danes to waste their Country, and fall upon them at their backs, (as Heraclius poured in the C●snari upon the Selaves, Avares, and the rest of that Rabble) he had done his work, and he had done it with half the charge, (but with more security) than the bare ostentation of bringing an English Army to the Borders of Scotland, did amount unto: Which as he might have done with less charges, so I am sure he might have done it with far more security: The Danes being Lutherans, fear nothing more than the growth of the Calvinian party, and therefore would have fought with the greater Zeal and the fiercer Courage, on the very merit of the cause; And having no confederacies or correspondencies with the Scots, in order to Liberty or Religion, as the Scots had with too many of the people of England, the King might have relied upon them with a greater confidence, than he could do on a mixed Body of his own, in which the Puritan party being more pragmatical, might have distempered all the rest: Such aids were offered him by his Uncle of Denmark, when the two Houses had first armed his people against him: But he refused them then for fear of justifying a Calumny which cunningly had been cast upon him, of admitting Foreign Nations into the Kingdom, to suppress the Liberties of the people, and to change their Laws: Afterwards when he sought for them, than the could not have them, the Houses no less cunning, hiring the Swedes to pick a Quarrel with the Danes, the better to divert that King from giving assistance to his Nephew in his greatest needs. But the consideration of this mistake in my Author about the Scythians, hath engaged me further in this point than I meant to have been. I go on again.  
Fol. 1002. But the Members were not well at ease, unl●sse some settlement were made for them by Orders and Ordinances, etc. ● Nor were they at ease till they had made the like settlement for some others beside themselves. Some sequestered Divines, conceiving that all things were agreed on between the King and the Army, had unadvisedly put themselves into their Benefices, and outed such of the Presbyterians as had been placed in them by the Committee for Plandered Ministers, or the Committees in the Country. And on the other side divers Land-holders' in the Country conceiving that those Ministers who had been put into other men's livings could not sue in any Court of Law for the Tithes and Profits of those Churches for want of a Legal Title to them, did then more resolutely than ever refuse to make payment of the same. For remedy of which two mischiefs the Independent Members having setl●d themselves by Orders and Ordinances, concur with the Presbyterian Members, to settle their Brethren of the Clergy in a better condition than before. And to that end they first obtained an Ordinance dated the 9 of August Anno 1647. in which it is declared, That every Minister put, or which shall be put into any Parsonage, Rectory, Vicarage, or Ecclesiastical Living, by way of Sequestration or otherwise, by both or either the Houses of Parliament, or by any Committee or other person or persons by Authority of any Ordinance or Order of Parliament, shall and may s●e for the Recovery of his Tithes, Rents and other duties, by virtue of the said Ordinance in as full and ample manner to all intents and purposes; as any other Minister or other person whatsoever.  
This being obtained to keep in awe the Landholders for the time to come, they obtained another Ordinance dated the 23▪ of the same Month for keeping the poor sequestered Clergy in a far greater awe than the others were, by which i● was Ordered and Ordained: That all Sheriffs, Mayors, Bailiffs, Justices of the Peace, Deputy Lieutenants, and Committees of Parliament in the several Counties, Cities, and places within this Kingdom, do forthwith apprehend, or cause to be apprehended all such Minister as by authority of Parliament have been put out of any Church or Chapel within this Kingdom, or any other person or persons who have entered upon any such Church or Chapel, or gained the possession of such Parsonage Houses, ●ithes, and profits thereunto belonging, or have obstructed the payment of Tithes and other profits due by the Parishioners to the said Ministers there placed by Authority of Parliament, or Sequestrators appointed, where no Ministers are settled to receive the same, and all such persons as have been Aiders, Abettors, or Assisters in the Premises, and commit them to prison, there to remain until such satisfaction be made unto the several Ministers placed by the said Authority of Parliament for his or their damages sustained, as to the said Sheriffs, Mayors, etc. shall appear to be just, etc.  
So little got the Sequestered Clergy by their Petition and Address to Sir Thomas Fa●rf●x, that their condition was made worse by it then it was before, in that the Acts of the Committees in the Country as well as that at London, were confirmed by Ordinance. For though the General and the Army passed a Declaration upon this Petition on the 22. of july, That the Estates of all persons, of what rank or condition soever, whether r●all or personal, under any Sequestration, howsoever or to whomsoever disposed, shall remain in the hands of the Tenants, Parishioners, or any other persons from whom they are legally due, until the General peace be settled, and then to be restored and accounted for to those to whom they shall be justly and legally due; yet on their piecing with the Presbyterian Members in the House of Commons, they did nothing in it but left the poor Clergy as before, if not in a worse condition than they found them.  
Fol. 929. His Funeral Herse remaining in Westminster Abbey Church▪ a spectacle for the people, some bold Maligna●; on the 27. of November at night most shamefully handlea his Effigies. That is to say, by breaking off his head, disfiguring the face, tearing away his Sword and Spurs, and renting down his Arms and Escutcheons, as it after followeth. That such an outrage was committed on the Hearse of the Earl of Ess●x, is most notoriously true; and that it was committed by some bold Malignant (that is to say, some person disaffected to that Earl) is as true as that▪ But who that bold Malignant was, whether of the Royal party, or any other who maligned his Estate and Honour, our Author should have done well to have told more clearly, and note to have left him under the general notion of a bold Malignant, by which name those of the King's party were most commonly branded. It seems by our Author that they were no poor knaves who made this defacement, considering they left all behind them silk and velvet to boot. And it is more than probable that the Nobility and Gentry who made up the greatest and most considerable number of the Royal Party, were such as had too much sense of Honour to injure and deface the monument of a Noble man, whom they had never otherwise beheld then as an honourable Enemy in the course of the Wars. The conduct of which war, when he first undertook for the Houses of Parliament, they published a Resolution in a Declaration of theirs, August 4. 1642. that they would live and die with him in pursuit of that quarrel; But afterwards finding that he did not prosecute the war with so much ●●●ernesse and passion as by some desired, he was not only ●●●posed to the public scorn by scandalous jeers, Pictures, ●nd Pamphlets, while he was in the head of his command, ●ut finally divested of all that power which he had in the Army, and reduced to the Estate of a private person▪ And whether some of those who had so reproachfully treated him when he was alive, might not commit this outrage on his Essigies when he was deceased, I leave to be considered by ●he equal and impartial Reader  
●ol. 1056. M. Palmer made D. of Physic at Oxford] The making of new Doctors was one of the first works of the ●arl of Pembroke, at his Visitation of the University of Oxford, that so they might enter on their intended Headships with the greater honour. But Palmer the designed Warden ●or All soul● was not at that time to be made a Doctor. He 〈◊〉 taken that Degree before in Cambridge; and by the name 〈◊〉 Palmer I find him in a Reference from the Commit●●●● of Plundered Ministers to settle a difference betwixt a 〈◊〉 Incumbent and the intruding Minister, about tho fifths. Incorporated he might be at Oxford (as the custom is) but not then made or created Doctor, as our Author would have it. That which comes next touching the ejecting of many of the Commons of Christ-Church gives us two mistakes; whereof I conceive the one to be the Printers, and the other our Authors. The mistake of the Printer is the putting down of the Common of Christ-Church for the (anons of Christ-Church, unless perhaps the meaning be that the old Canons were put out of Commons▪ that the new ones might have the fuller Diet when they came into their places. The mistake of our Author is in saying that many of the Canons of Christ-Church were ejected, whereas they were all of them ejected, not a man excepted; the Earl of Pembroke being so impartial in the executing of his Office, that he would not spare D. Hammond though he were his Godson. And though D. john Wall, partly by the mediation of Friends, but chiefly by his humble submission to the power of the Visitors, was again admitted into the number of the Canons▪ yet was he ejected with the rest, and came not into his own place at this new admission, but into the place of some of the other Canons, to show that he stood not on his old Right but this new Admission. The Earl of Pembroke having done the business which he came about, returns to the Parliament, was first thanked for his wonderful wisdom, and then they Vote,  
That all such Masters, Fellows, and Officers there as refused to submit to the power, should be expelled the University.] According to which Vote, a general purge was given to all the Colleges in the same, working upon them more or less, as they found the humours more or less Malignant; on none so strongly as on Christ-Church and M●gdal●ne●ollege ●ollege, in which last they descended so low as to the Choristers, and lower than that also to the very Cook. And yet the storm fell not so heavy on those at Oxford, as the Earl of Manchesters' Visitation had done at Cambridge; For he not only cut off the heads, and skinned the Fellows and Scholars of most Colleges, but in Queen's College cut off all the members from the head to the heel, leaving not one of the old Foundation to keep possession for the new Comers; as if the House itself, and all the lands belonging to it had been designed to an Escheat, as a forfeited and dissolved Corporation; or like a Wrecca Mar●● to be seized on by the Lord Paramount of the shore adjoining, as having no living creature in it to preserve the possession of it for the proper owner. But the Scholars at Oxford howsoever made themselves merry with their misfortunes, publishing some unhappy Papers, and amongst them a Speech made by the Earl of Pembroke (with some additions of their own) which afterwards drew on two or three others of the same strain, though on other occasions to the great manifestation and applause of his wonderful wisdom.  
Fol. 1034. Yet not long after some one so well affected to the King's Service, that whilst he is a Prisoner, takes upon him the King's Cause, and published an Answer such as it is, which we submit to censure.] And being submitted unto Censure, I conceive it deserves not such a diminution or disparagement, as to call it an Answer such as it is. The Answer I never saw before, and cannot now possibly conjecture at the Author of it. But upon the best judgement which I am able to make, I conceive it to be so full, so punctual and satisfactory, that our Author, calling all the Doctors of his own making to his assistance is not able to mend it.  
Fol. 1068. Some of these mutinied against each other, and in the dissension a rumour was raised there of a Design to impoyson the King, etc.] Our Historian makes very slight of this matter, disparaging both the Informer and the Information. The Informer he disparageth by telling us, that he was but an ordinary man, though Osburn himself in a Letter to the Earl of Manchester takes on himself the Title of Gentleman, which is as much as our Author (though he take upon himself the name of an Esquire) can pretend unto. The Information and the Evidence which was brought to prove it, he censures to be disagreeing in itself, and irregular in Law, of which more anon. In the mean time take here the whole Information word for word, as Osburn published it in print, as well for his own justification as the satisfaction of all loyal and well-affected Subjects.  
But not to leave your Lordship unsatisfied with this general account, the Intelligence I speak of concerning his design, I received from Captain R●lfe, a person very intimate with the Governor, privy to all Counsels, and one that is very high in the esteem of the Army; he (my Lord) informed me, that to his knowledge the Governor had received several Letters from the Army, intimating they desired the King might by any means be removed out of the way either by p●●son or otherwise: And that another time the same person persuaded me to join with him in a design to remove the King out of that Castle to a place of more secrecy, proffering to take an Oath with me, and to do it without the Governors' privity, who (he said) would not consent for losing the allowance of the House. His pretence for this attempt was that the King was in too public a place, from whence he might be ●escued, but if he might be conveyed into some place of Secrecy, he said, we might dispose of his person upon all occasions as we thought fit; and this he was confident we could effect, without the Governors' privity.  
This Narrative he enclosed in a Letter to the Lord Wharton, dated Iu●e 1. 1648. But finding that the Lord Wharton had done nothing in it, the better (as he conceived) to give those time that were concerned in it to think of some stratagem to evade the discovery; He enclosed it in another Letter to the Earl of Manchester, by whom it was communicated to the House of Peers on the 19 of june. But they in stead of sending for him to make good the Information on his corporal Oath, as he earnestly desired in the said Letters, committed both him and Rolfe to prison, there to remain till the next Assizes for the County of Southampton, and not the Southampton Assize, as our Author makes it. At what time M. Sergeant wild, a man for the nonce (as we poor Country folks use to say) was sent to manage the proceedings; who so cunningly entangled the evidence, and so learnedly laid the Law before the Jurors, that Rolfe was acquitted, and Osburn left under the disgrace of a false Informer. But the best is (I should rather have said the worst) though M. Ser●eant could find no Law to condemn Rolfe for an attempt to poison the King; he could find Law enough within few months after to condemn and execute Captain Burleigh, for an intent to free him from the hands of those, who were suspected to have no good intentions towards him, as it after proved.  
Fol. 1069. The Earl of Holland is sent Prisoner to Warwick Castle, where he continued until his Arraignment and execution at Westminster the 9 of March. ● Of this Earl we have said somewhat already, enough to show with what disloyalty and ingratitude he forsook the King his Master in the time of his greatest need: To which I shall add nothing now but this general Note, viz. that none of those, who had proved disloyal to the King, or acted openly against him in the Wars, or otherwise had ever so much blessing from Heaven as to prevail in any thing which they undertook either for the re-establishment of his person or the re-stauration of his posterity, witness in the first place Sir john Hotham, accursed in his mother's belly, as himself confessed in an intercepted Letter brought to Oxford, witness the fruitless attempts of Lougnern, powel, and Poier, not only in Pembrokeshire, but other Counties of Southwales, which they had made themselves Masters of in order to his Majesty's Service, witness the unfortunate expedition of marquis Hamilion (of which more anon) and the unseasonable rising of the Earl of Holland, of whom now we speak; witness the frequent miscarriages of the Lord Willoughby of Parham (a man whom the King had courted to Loyalty beyond all example) in his attempt to head a New Army against the old, to employ some part of the King's Navy against the rest, and to make good the Barbador in despite of the Houses: I take no notice ●ere of the miscarriages of such who had at first declared against him in set Speeches in the Houses of Parliament, none of which prospered, either in their persons or their actings, when they returned to their own duty, and endeavoured the Advancement of the King's Affairs. And that I may not contain may self within England only, or be thought perhaps to partial in this Observation, we have the Examples of the Lord Inchequin in Ireland, and of the gallant Marquis of Montross in Scotland: Of which the first, (for the actings of the other are known well enough) was one of the first, if not the very first of all, who openly read any Protestation at the Market-Cross in Edinburgh against the King's Proceedings in the Book of Common Prayer, and other subsequent Actions, which concerned the happiness of that Kingdom.  
Fol. 1071. The Estates of Scotland had form a Committee of Danger, who had of themselves Voted to raise Forty thousand Men. ● But the Vote was bigger than the Army, though the Army were much bigger than our Author makes it, by whose calculation, it amounts not to above Ten thousand five hundred men, besides such additional Forces as were expected out of England and Ireland: An Army gallantly appointed both for Horse and Arms, which they had plundered out of England in the long time of their Service there for both Houses of Parliament, the like being never set so out by that people since they were a Nation: And it was big enough also to do more than it did, had it been under a more fortunate Commander than the Marquis of Hamilton, who brought from Scotland a greater Enemy within him, than he was like to find in England: And possibly that inward Enemy might spur him on to a swift destruction, by rendering him impatient of tarrying the coming of Monroe, an old experienced Commander, with his three thousand old and experienced Scots, trained up for five or six years then last passed in the Wars of Ireland: By whose assistance, it is possible enough, that he might not have lost his first Battle, & not long after his Head, which was took from him on the same day with the Earl of Hollands: But God owed him and that Nation both shame and punishment, for all their treacheries and Rebellions against their King▪ and now he doth begin to pay them, continuing payment after payment, till they had lost the Command of their own Country, and being reduced unto the form of a Province under the Commonwealth of England, live in as great a Vassalage under their new Masters, as a conquered Nation could expect or be subject to.  
Fol. 1078. This while the Prince was put aboard the revolted Ships, etc. and with him his Brother the Duke of York, etc. the Earls of Brentford and Ruthen, the Lord Cu●pepper, etc.] In the recital of which names, we find two Earls, that is to say, the Earls of Brentford and Ruthen, which are not to be found in any Records amongst our Heralds in either Kingdom: Had he said General Ruthen Earl of Brentford, he had hit it right. And that both he and his Reader also may the better understand the Risings and Honours of this Man, I shall sum them thus: Having served some time in the Wars of Gustavus Adolphus King of Sweden, he was Knighted by him in his Camp before Darsaw, a Town of Pomerella, (commonly counted part of Prussia) and belonging to the King of Poland, Anno 1627. at what time the said King received the Order of the Garter, with which he was invested by Mr. Peter Young, one of his Majesty's Gentlemen Ushers, and Mr. Henry St. George, one of the Heralds at Arms, whom he also Kinghted. In the long course of the Germane Wars, this Colonel Sir Patrick Ruthen, obtained such a Command as gave him the title of a General, and by that title he attended in a gallant Equipage on the Earl of Morton, then riding in great pomp towards Windsor, to be installed Knight of the Garter. At the first breaking out of the Scots Rebellion, he was made a Baron of that Kingdom, and Governor of the Castle of Edinburgh, which he defended very bravely, till the Springs which fed his Well were broken and diverted by continual Batteries. Not long after he was made Earl of Forth, and on the death of the Earl of Lindsey, was made Lord General of his Majesty's Army; and finally, created Earl of Brentford by Letters Patents, dated the 27 of May, Anno 1644. with reference to the good Service which he had done in that Town for the fi●st hanselling of his Office: So than we have an Earl of Brentford, but no Earl of Ruthen, either as joined in the same Person, or distinct in two: Not much unlike is that which follows.  
Ibid. His Commissions to his Commanders were thus styled, Charles Prince of great Britain, Duke of Cornwall and Albany.] Here have we two distinct Titles conferred upon one Person, in which I do very much suspect our Author's Intelligence: For though the Prince might Legally style himself Duke of Cornwall, yet I cannot easily believe that he took upon himself the Title of Duke of Albany. He was Duke of Cornwall from his Birth, as all the eldest Sons of the Kings of England have also been since the Reign of King Edward the third, who on the death of his Uncle, john of Eltham, E. of Cornwall, invested his eldest Son Edw. the Black Prince into the Dukedom of Cornwall, by a Coronet on his head, a ring on his finger, and a silver Verge in his hand: Since which time, (as our learned Camden hath observed) the King of England's eldest Son is reputed Duke of Cornwall by Birth, and by virtue of a special Act, the first day of his Nativity is presumed and taken to be of full▪ and perfect age, so that on that day he may sue for his Livery of the said Dukedom, and aught by right to obtain the same, as well as if he had been one and twenty years old: And he hath his Royalties in certain Actions, and Stannery Matters, in Wracks at Sea, Customs, etc. yea, and Divers Officers or Ministers assigned unto him for these or such like matters: And as for the Title of Duke of albany, King Charles, as the second Son of Scotland, received it from King james his Father, and therefore was not like to give it from his second Son; the eldest Son of Scotland being Duke of Rothsay from his Birth, but none of them Dukes of Albany, (for aught ever I could understand) either by Birth or by Creation.  
Fol. 1094. And so the dignity of Arch-Bishops to fall, Episcopal jurisdiction also.] Our Author concludes this, from the general words of the Kings Answer, related to in the words foregoing; viz. That whatsoever in Episcopacy did appear not to have clearly proceeded from Divine Institution, he gives way to be totally abolished. But granting that the Dignity of Arch-Bishops was to fall by this Concession, yet the same cannot be affirmed of the Episcopal jurisdiction, which hath as good Authority in the holy Scripture as the calling itself: For it appears by holy Scripture, that unto Timothy the first Bishop of Eph●sus, St. Paul committed the power of Ordination, where he requires him to lay hands hastily on no man, 1 Tim. 5 22 And unto Titus the first Bishop of Crete, the like Authority for ordaining Presbyters (or Elders, as our English reads it) in every City, Tit. 1. v. 5. Next he commands them to take care for the ordering of God's public Service, viz. That Supplications, Prayers, Intercessions, and giving of Thanks be made for all men, 1 Tim. 2. 1. which words relate not to the private Devotions of particular persons, but to the Divine Service of the Church, as it is affirmed, not only by St▪ Chrysostom, Theophylact, and O●cumenius, amongst the Ancients, and by Estius for the Church of Rome, but also by Calvin for the Protestant or Reformed Churches. Next, he requires them to take care, that such as painfully labour in the Word and Doctrine, receive the honour or recompense which is due unto them, 1 Tim. 5. 17. as also to censure and put to silence all such Presbyters as preached any strange Doctrine, contrary unto that which they had received from the Apostles, 1 Tim 1. 3. And if that failed of the effect, and that from Preaching Heterodoxies, or strange Doctrines, they went on to Heresies, then to proceed to Admonition, and from thence (if no amendment followed) to a rejection from his place, and deprivation from his Function, 1 Tit. 3. 10. as both the Fathers and late Writers understand the Text. Finally, for correction in point of Manners, as well in the Presbyter as the people, St. Paul commits it wholly to the care of his Bishop; where he adviseth Timothy, not to receive an Accus●ation against a Presbyter (or Minister of the Gospel) but before two or three Witnesses: but if they be convicted, then to rebuke them before all that others also may fear, 1 Tim. 5. 19, 20. And on the other side, he invests him with the like Authority upon those of the La●ty, of what age or sex soever they were; old men to be handled gently, not openly to be rebuked, but entreated as Fathers, 1 Tim. 5. 1. the like fair usage to be had towards the Elder Women, also v. 2. The younger men and Women to be dealt withal more freely, but as Brethren and Sisters, v. 1, 2. A more ample jurisdiction than this, as the Bishops of England did neither exercise nor challenge, so for all this they had Authority in holy Scripture; those points of jurisdiction not being given to Timothy and Titus only, but to all Bishops in their persons, as generally is agreed by the ancient Writers.  
So then Episcopal jurisdiction fell not by this concession, though somewhat more might fall by it then his Majesty meant. That the Dignity of Archbishops was to fall by it, is confessed on all sides; and that the King made the like concession for the abolishing of Deans and Chapters (though not here mentioned by our Author) is acknowledged also▪ And thereupon it must needs follow (which I marvel the Learned Lawyers then about the King did not apprehend) that the Episcopal Function was to die with the Bishops which were then alive, no new ones to be made or consecrated after those concessions. For by the Laws of this Land, after the death of any Bishop, his Majesty is to send out his Writ of Cong● d'Eslier to the Dean and Chapter of that place to elect another. Which election being made, signified under the Chapters Seal, and confirmed by the Royal assent; the King is to send out his mandat to the Archbishop of the Province, to proceed to Consecration or Confirmation, as the case may vary. And thereupon it must needs be, that when the Church comes unto such a condition that there is no Dean and Chapter to elect, and no Archbishop to consecrate and confirm the person elected, there can be legally and regularly no succession of Bishops. I speak not this with reference to unavoidable Necessities, when a Church is not in a capacity of acting according to the ancient Canons an established Laws; but of the failing of Episcopal Succession, according to the Laws of this Land, if those concessions had once passed into Acts of Parliament.  
Fol. 1099. The Headquarters were at Windsor, where the Army conclude the large Remonstrance, commended by the General's Latter, and brought up to the Parliament by half a dozen Officers. But by the heads of that Remonstrance, as they stand collected in our Author it will appear, that he is mistaken in the place, though not in the Pamphlet That terrible Remonstrance (terrible in the consequents and effect thereof) came not from Windsor but S. Alban, as appears by the printed Title of it, viz. A Remonstrance of his Excellency Thomas Lord Fairfax, Lord General of the Parliaments Forces, and of the General Council of Officers held at S. Alban the 16. of November, 1648. Presented to the Commons assembled in Parliament the 20. instant, and tendered to the consideration of the whole Kingdom. Which Remonstrance was no sooner showed unto his Majesty, then being in the Isle of Wigh●, but presently he saw what he was to trust unto, and did accordingly prepare himself with all Christian confidence. For that he had those apprehensions both of his own near approaching dangers, and of their designs, appeareth by the ●ad farewell which he took of the Lords at Newport, when they came to take their leaves of him at the end of this Treaty, whom he thus bespoke, viz. My Lords, You are come to take your leave of me, and I believe we shall scarce ever see each other again, but Gods will be done, I thank God, I have made my peace with him, and shall without fear undergo what he shall be pleased to suffer men to do unto me. My Lords, you cannot but know that in my fall and ruane you see your own, and that also near to you; I pray God 〈◊〉 you better Friends than I have found. I am fully informed of the whole carriage of the Plot against me and mine, and nothing so much afflicts me as the sense and s●el●●g I have of the sufferings of my Subjects, and the miseries that h●ng over my three Kingdoms, drawn upon them by those, wh● (upon pretences of good) violently pursue th●ir own Interests and ends. And so accordingly it proved, the honour o● the peers, and the prosperity of the people suffering a very great (if not a total) Eclipse for want of that light wherewith he shined upon them both, in the time of his glories. But before the day of this sad parting the Treaty going forwards in the Isle of Wight, his Majesty's Concessions were esteemed so fair and favourable to the public Interest, that it was voted by a 〈◊〉 or party in the House of Commons, that they were 〈…〉 of the Kingdom, 12●. Voting in the affirmative, and 84. only in the Negative; Which Vote● gave s●ch offence to those who had composed this Remonstrance, that within two days after viz. Wednesday the 6. of D●cem●●r  
 
But first, I would fain know why those imprisoned Members are said to be all of the old st●mp, considering 〈…〉 those who were kept under custody in the Queen's 〈…〉 and the Court of Wards, there was not one man who e●ther had not served in the War against the King▪ or otherwise declare his disaffection to the authorised Liturgy and Government of the Church of England, as appears by the Catalogue of their names in 〈…〉, N●m▪ 36. 37.  
And s●condly, I would fain know why he restrains the number to 40 or 50 when the imprisoned and secluded Members were three times as many. The imprisoning or secluding of so small a number would not serve the turn; Non gaudet tenuisanguine tanta sitis, as the Poet hath it.  
For first, the Officers of the Army no sooner understood how the Votes had passed for the King's concessions, but they sent a Paper to the Commons, requiring that the Members impeached in the Year 1647. and Major General Brown (who they say invited in the Scots might be secured and brought to justice; and that the 90 odd Members who refused to vote against the late Scottish Engagement, and all those that voted the recalling the Votes of Non-addresses, and voted ●or the Treaty, and concurred in yesterday Votes, etc. may be suspended the House. And such a general purge as this, must either work upon more than 40 or 50. or el●eit had done nothing in order to the end intended.  
Secondly, ●t appears by these words of the protestation of the imprisoned Members bearing date the 12. of De●ember, that they were then above an hundred in number, v●z. We the Knights, Citizens, ●nd Burgesses of the Common●●● 〈◊〉 of Parliament (all ove one hundred in number) forcibly s●●ze▪ upon violently kept out of and driven from the House by the Officers and Soldiers of the Army under Thomas Lord Fairfax, etc.  
And thirdly, We find after this that Sir john Temple, Sir Martin Lumley, C●l. Booth, M. Waller, M. Middleton, and others were turned back by such Soldiers as were appointed to keep a strict guard at the doors of the House. So that the whole number of those who we●e imprisoned and kept under restraint, or otherwise were debarred and turned back from doing their service in the House, wa● reckoned to amount to an hundred and forty, which comes to thrice as many as the 40 or 50 which our Author speaks of. But to proceed, the Officers of the Army having thus made themselves Masters of the House of Commons, thought fit to make themselves Masters of the City also. To which end they ordered two Regiments of Foot and some Troops of Horse to take up Quarters in Paul's Church and Blackfriars on Friday the 8. of the same month; and on the ●unday following sent divers Souldriers to be quartered in the Houses of private Citizens, which notwithstanding such was their tender care not to give any disturbance to them, that  
lbid. Not to frighten the City, the General writes to my Lord Mayor, that he had s●nt Col. Dean to seize the Treasuries of Haberdashers, Goldsmiths, and Weavers, Halls (where they seize on 20000.l.) that by the moneys he may pay his Armies Arrears.] The Author whom our Historian followeth in all these late traverses of State, relates this business more distinctly and intelligently than we find it here, viz. That two Regiments of Foot and some Troops of Horse took up Quarters in Paul's and Black-frier, and seized upon 20000. l in Weavers Hall, which they promised to repay when the Lord Mayor and Common Council please to bring in the Arrears due from the City. They secured likewise the Treasures of Haberdashers and Goldsmiths Hall. Here we have first a seizure of the 20000. l in Weavars Hall for the use of 〈◊〉 Army, and a securing of the Treasures in the other two, that they might not be employed against it. The 20000 l. which they found in the first was the remainder of the 200000 l. which was voted to be brought in thither, for the raising of a New Presbyterian Army, under the command of the Lord Willoughby of Parh●● as Lord General, and Sir john Maynard as Lieutenant General, to reduce that Army to conformity, which had so successively served under the command of Sir Thomas Fairfax. But the other two being hard names and not very easy of digestion, require somewhat which may make them lighter to the understanding of the vulgar Reader.  
Concerning which we are to know, that several Ordinances were made by the Lords and Commons for sequestering the Estates of all such who had adhered unto the King, whom (to distinguish them from their own party) they called Delinquents; and a severe cou●se was taken in those sequestrations as well in reference to their personal as real Estates; to make them the more considerable in the purse of the House●. But finding no such great profit to come in that way (when every Cook who had the dressing of that dish had licked his fingers) as they did expect, they were contented to admit them to a Composition. These Compositions to be managed at Goldsmith's Hall, by a select Committee consisting of several Members of the House of Commons, and some of the most pragmatical and stiff sort of Citizens, the parties to compound had 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. or 7. years' purchase according as they either offered themselves voluntarily, or came in upon Articles, or were forced to submit to mercy. What infinite sums of money were brought in by these compositions, he that list to see, may find them both in the several Items and the summa to●●al●s in their printed Tables. And yet the payment of these Sums was the least part of the grievance compared unto those heavy clogs which were laid on their Consciences.  
For first, No man was admitted to treat with the Committee at Goldsmith's Hall, till (unless he was privileged and exempt by Articles) he had brought a Certificate that he had taken the Negative Oath either before the Committee for the Militia of London, or some Committee in the Country where he had his ●welling. And by this oath he was to swear, that he would neither directly nor indirectly adhere unto, or willingly assist the King in that War, or in that cause against the Parliament, nor any Forces raised without the consent of the two Houses of Parliament in th●t cause or War; for which consult the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons bearing date April 5. 1645.  
And secondly, It was Ordered by the said Lords and Commons on the 1. of November 1645. That the Committee of Goldsmith's Hall should have power to tender the Solemn League and Covenant to all persons that come out of the King's Quar●●●s to that Committee to compound, and to secure such as should refuse to take it until they had conformed thereunto. And by that Covenant they were bound to endeavour the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy (that is, Church-government by Arch-Bishops and Bishops, etc. and to defend the King's Person and Authority, no otherwise then in order to the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms. And if the party to compound were a Roman Catholic there was an Oath of Abjuration to be taken also before any such Sequestration could be taken off, if once laid upon him. By which he was to swear, That he abjured and renounced the Pope's Supremacy, that he believed not there was any Transubstantiation, nor Purgatory, nor any worship to be given to the consecrated Host, Crucifix, or Images, and that salvation could not be merited by works, renouncing and abjuring all Doctrines in defence of th●se points. To such a miserable necessity had they brought many of that party, that they thought if safer (as they use to say) to trust God with their souls, than such unmerciful men with their Lives, Fortunes, and Estates.  
And yet this was not thought to be a sufficient punishment to them, but they must first pass through Haberdasher's Hall (which is the last of my hard words) before they could be free of the Goldsmiths. And in that Hall, they were to pay the fifth and twentieth parts of their Estates as well real as personal in present money; all men being brought within the power of the Committee, not only who were called Delinquents, but such as had not voluntarily contributed to the Parliament in any place whatsoever, as appears by the Order of the Commons bearing date August 25. 1646. By which last clause more Grist was brought unto that Mill, then can be easily imagined; their Agents being very eager in that pursuit. So that it was accounted a great benefit, as indeed it was, to them who came in upon the Articles of Oxford, Farington, Wallinford, Exeter, and some other places, not only that they were discharged from the payment of the fifth and twentieth parts of their Estates at Haberdasher's Hall, and admitted to compound at Goldsmith's Hall for two years' purchase; but that they were exempted also from all Oaths an● Engagements, and consequently from that accursed Covenant, and that Negative Oath, by which the Consciences of so many distressed men had been most miserably entangled.  
Fol. 1138. Thus fell Charles, and thus all Britain with him. ● And by this fall there fell so general an Oppression on the Spirits of all sorts of people, that the generality of those who played the principal parts in this sad Tragedy, became ashamed of their actings in it. The Scots who played the parts of judas, and sold their natural King and most bountiful Master for a piece of money, when they saw he was like to be condemned, repent, saying, that they had sinned in betraying innocent blood. For in their Letter to the Prince dated August the 10. they do acknowledge in plain words, that nothing did more wound and afflict them then his Majesty's sad condition and Restraint. But yet we find not that they came to such a degree of compunction, as to bring back the money for which they had sold him, and to cast it down before the chief Priests and Elders, as judas did. Or if they had there had been no such purchase to be made with it, as was made with that; both Kingdoms having been already an Aceldama, or Field of blood. The Presbyterians of both sorts as well the Members of the House as those of the Assembly, and their confederates in the City, who personated the chief Priests and Elders amongst the Jews, had armed a great multitude with swords and staves (as well the Soldiers as the Clubmen) for his apprehension. They reviled him in most shameful manner▪ and spit upon him all that filth which could be supposed to proceed from such foul stomaches, They buffeted him and smote him with the palms of their hands, assaulting him with all the Act, of violent hostility; and having pas●●d a Vote amongst themselves, they put him over to be sentenced and condemned by Pontius Pilate. But when the worm of conscience began to bite them, some of them laboured before hand by their Protestations to acquit themselves, and to redeem the King from that inevitable danger into which they had thrown him Others more●ou●ly clamored both from the Pulpit and the Press, crying out that they were innocent from the blood of that just per●on, and casting all the guilt and obloquy of it on the Independents The Independents who sat as ●udges on the Bench, and pla●d the part of Pontius Pilate, alleged that they had nothing to do with him, but as they were pushed forward by the unresistible importunity of the Priests and Elders. And these men also took water and washed their hands before the multitude, affirming positively that the KING had been murdered long since by the Presbyterians, as appears by M. Mil●ons Book called Iconoclaste●; where the case is stated and determined for the Independents; and therefore as Pil●ue did not say of Christ our Saviour, when he brought him before the people, Behold the 〈◊〉, but only Ecce homo, or Behold the m●n; So might the Independents say, when they brought the King before the people to receive the heavy sentence of death, Behold the man, the man whom these of the Presbytery had before 〈◊〉. But it was neither shame nor sorrow which could recall him from the dead. All the favour which they now could show h●m was, that some good 〈◊〉 of A●imathea, who had begged his body, were permitted to burr it, not ●n a Tomb where never man had l●in before, but as it happened in the same Vault with King Hen. ●. and Queen ●●ne S●ymor. And yet it proved but an half favour neither, as the matter was carried, the Governor of the place not suffering him to be interred according to the Form prescribed in the Book of Common-Prayer, whereof he had been a most constant Observer to the very last.  
And here I am to leave our Author, who hath brought this great King to the grave, though he hath not followed him to it from the Cradle, as the Title promised. And here I shall leave him to consult that passage in Horac●, against he puts forth next to Sea on the like Adventures, which stands thus recommended to him in the Book 〈…〉 
Sumite materiam vestris qui scribitis aequam  
Viribus, & versate diu quid ferre recusent,  
Quid valeant humeri; cui lecta potenter erit res  
Nec sacundia deseret hunc nec lucidus Ordo.   
Which may be englished to this purpose.  
Elect such matter you that love to write,  
As with your Bark may bear an equal Sail;  
For he which on such Subjects doth indite,  
Of Phrase, and Method fit, shall never fail.   


AN APPENDIX TO THE ADVERTISEMENTS ON Mr. sanderson's HISTORIES. In Answer to some PASSAGES In a scurrilous PAMPHLET CALLED A Post-Haste, A Reply, etc.  Ovid. Metam. Lib. 1. 
— pudet haec opprobria nobi●,  
Et dici potuisse, & non potuisse ref●lli.   

AN APPENDIX To the former ADVERTISEMENTS, In answer to some PASSAGES In a scurrilous PAMPHLET CALLED The Post-haste Reply, etc.  
WHen I first heard of Mr. sanderson's Post-haste Reply, etc. and had caused the same to be read over, It was not in my thoughts to descend so much beneath myself, as to make any Answer to it; such scurrilous Pamphlets dying soon, when there is less notice taken of them: Patience and contempt (& tulere ista & reliquere, as we know who did) are commonly the most approved remedies against all such Calumnies, as for the most part do proceed from a petulant malice: But being there is in it some matter of charge and Crimination, I have been advised by some friends to acquit myself of the least, otherwise I might be thought to confess myself guilty of the crimes objected, and wrong my innocence by an obstinate and affected silence: I have therefore yielded so far unto their desires, as to return an Answer to so much of the Pamphlet as contains matter of accusation, which I shall ●ever from the rest, leaving the rif-raf and scurrilities of it (which make up the greatest part of that two penny trifles, either unto some further consideration, or to none at all.  
But first I must remove a doubt, which otherwise may trouble the Gent● whom I am to deal with, who possible may think himself to be over-matched, not in regard of any difference in such personal abilities as either of us may pretend to, but in relation to those many hands which are joined against him in this quarrel, for if it were too much for Hercules to contend with two, ne Hercules contra duos, as the proverb hath it) good reason hath he to complain of being pressed and put to it by so many Helpers as he is pleased to join unto me: He tells me indifinitely of my Helpers, page 5. of the charitable Collections of my numerous Helpers, pag. 23. Helpers import a plural number, and numerous Helpers signify a multitude; and who can stand against so many when they join together? But I would not have my Squire affright himself with these needless terrors: my helpers are but few in number, though many in virtue and effect; for though I cannot say that I have many helpers, yet I cannot but confess in all humble gratitude, that I have one great Helper, which is instar omnium, even the Lord my God: Aurilium meum a domino, my help cometh even from the Lord which hath made heaven and earth, as the Psalmist hath it. And I can say with the like humble acknowledgements of God's mercies to me, as jacob did, when he was asked about the quick dispatch which he had made in preparing savery meat for his aged Father: Voluntas Dei suit ut tam cito● occurre●et mihi quod volebam, Gen. 27. 20. It is God's goodness, and his only, that I am able to do what I do: And as for any humane helpers, as the French Cour●iers use to say of King Lewis the XI. That all his Council rid upon one Horse, because he relied upon his own Judgement and Abilities only: So may I very truly say, That one poor Hackney-horse will carry all my Helpers used, be they never so numerous. The greatest help which I have had, (since it pleased God to make my own ●ight unuseful to me, as to writing and reading) hath come from one whom I had entertained for my Clerk or Amanuensis, who though he reasonably well understood both Greek and Latin, yet had he no further Education in the way of Learning, than what he brought with him from the School, A poor Country School: And though I have no other helps at the present but a raw young fellow, who knows no Greek, and understands but little Latin, yet I doubt not but I shall be able to do as much reason to my Squire, as he hath reason to expect at my hands: My stock of Learning, though but small, hath been so well husbanded, that I am still able to wind and turn it to the vindication of the truth● never reputed such a Bankrupt (till I was made such by my Squire) as to need such a charitable Collection to set me up again, as is by him ascribed to my numerous helpers.  
Thus singly armed and simply seconded, I proceed to the examination of those personal charges, which defect he is pleased to lay upon me; and first he tells us how gladly Dr. Heylyn would take occasion to assume fresh credit of copeing with ●he deceased now at rest, whom he hath endeavoured to disturb even the most Reverend Name and living Fame, of that approved Learned Prelate, the late Archbishop of Armagh, Primate of all Ireland, pag. 5. And still he might have been at rest, without any disturbance either unto his Reverend Name or Living Fame, if Dr. Barn●●d first, and afterwards Squire Sanderson, had not rated him out of his Grave, and brought him back upon the Stage from which he had made his Exit with so many Plaudites: And being brought back upon the Stage, hath given occasion to much discourse about his advising or not advising the King, to consent unto the Earl of Stra●●ords death; and his distinction of a personal and political conscience, either to prepare the King to give way unto it, or to confirm him in the justice and necessity of it when the deed was done: Both these have been severally charged on the Observator by Dr. Barnard and his Partakers, Pag. 18. and both of them severally disclaimed by him, both in the Book called the Observator rescued, pag. 296, 297, 349. and in the Appendix to the Book called Respond Petrus, etc. p. 143, 144, and 152. Nay, so far was the Observator of his al●er idem, from disturbing the reverend Name & living Fame of that learned Prelate, that in the Book called Extra●e●s v●pulans, he declares himself unwilling to revive that question: Whether the Lord Primate had any sharp tooth against the Lord Lieutenant or not, in regard the parties were both dead, and all displeasures buried in the same grave with them, page 292. And in the Book called Respondit Petrus, he affirms expressly, That having laid the Lord Primate down again in the Bed of Peace, he would not raise him from it by a new disturbance; and that having laid aside that invidious argument, he was resolved upon no provocation whatsoever to take it up again, pag. 124. Had not this promise tied me up, I could have made such use of these provocations, as to have told the Doctor and his Squire to boot, that the Lord Primate did advise the King to sign that destructive Bill, by which that Fountain of Blood was opened, which hath never been fully shut up again since that ebolishion, for which I have my Author ready, and my witness too.  
And as for the distinction of a political and a personal conscience ascribed to the Lord Primate by the Author of the Vocal Forest, as Mr. Sanderson in his History saith nothing to acquit him of it, so neither doth the Squire affect to act any thing in it (if he speaks sense enough to be understood) in this Post-Haste Pamphlet; for having told us that Petrus fancied him to act for Dr. Barnard, in acquitting the Lord Primate from the distinction of a political and a personal conscience, page 18. he adds, That it is confessed by himself (the selfsame Pe●rus) to have been done to his hand by Mr. Howels attestation of his History, who was concerned in those words: In which passage, if there be any sense in it, it must needs be this, that it appeareth by the attestation which james Howell gave unto his History, that he had acted nothing toward the discharge of the Lord Primate, from the fatal distinction which D. Bernard had ascribed in his Funeral Sermon to the Vocal Forest; So that the Respondent may conclude as before he did, pag. 144. of the said Appendix, that as well the error of that distinction as the fatal application of it must be left at the Lord Prim●te● door, as neither being removed by D. Bernard himself, or by any of his undertakers.  
The next Charge hath relation to the Lord Primate also in reference to the Articles of the Church of Ireland, which he will by no means grant to be abrogated, an● those of England settled (inserted in his own word) in the place thereof 
d p. 17  How so? Because the Respondent hath prevented any further confirmation of either, by his own confessing of his being too much credulous in believing, and inconsiderate in publishing such mist than intelligence, 
e Ibid.  which are his own words, fol. 87. And his own words they are indeed, but neither spoken nor applied, as the Squire would have it, who must be thought to be in very great Post-haste, when he read them over. For if the Squire had marked it well, he might have found that the Responde●t did not confess himself to be guilty of publishing any mistaken intelligence, in saying that the Articles of Ireland were abrogated, and those or England settled in the place thereof, but for saying that this alteration was confirmed in the Parliament of that Kingdom, Anno 1634. were as it was not done in Parliament but in Convocation; For which mistake (as the Res●ondent hath observed in the place before-cited;) though it be only in the circumstance not in the substance of the Fact▪ he stands accused by the Lord Primate of no less than 〈◊〉, and that by M. S●nderson is thought to be but a gentle penance for so presumptuous an assertion 
f Ibid. : An 〈◊〉 which hath no presumption in it, if you mark it well. For if it can be proved (as the Respondent answereth in his Appendix, pag. 88) that the Articles of Ireland were called in, and those of England were received in their place; then, whether it were done by Parliament or Convocation is not much material. And for the proof of this, that the Articles of Ireland were repealed, and the Articles of the Church of England (as in the way of a super-induction) were settled in the place thereof: there hath been so much offered in the Book called The Observator Rescued, and in that called The Respondit Petrus, as may satisfy any rational and impartial Reader. So that the Squire might very well have saved the labour of taxing the Respondent for want of ingenuity (which he makes to be a great rarity in him 
g ibid. ) and much more in defaming a whole Nation 
h p. 18. , with a matter of truth, in saying the Articles of the Church of England were not only approved but revived in the Church of Ireland, and consequently by that reception they were virtually at the least, if not also formally substituted in the place thereof; Against which, though the Lord Primate have said something, he hath proved just nothing, and both the Doctor and the Squire prove as little as he, And here again I do desire, that this reverend Prelate may not have his Name tossed like a Tennis ball between two Rackets, but that he may be suffered to rest with quiet in his grave for the time to come, Et placida compost●●, morte quies●a●, as the Poet hath it. But were the Respondent guilty of no other crime then by trespassing on the reverend name and living ●ame of this deceased but learned Prelate, (to show his malice to the dead) there had not needed any thing to be added to his justification. The Panm●phleter will not suffer him to go ●ff so quietly, and therefore tells us, that it is no news for D. Heylin to be a disturber of pious and 〈◊〉 men while they are living. 
i p. 5. . It seems by this that D. Heylyn is a man of a troublesome nature, neither in charity with the dead, no● at peace with the living, I specially if they come under the name and notion of emi●nent and pious men. but though it be no news in the judgement of Squire Sanderson, yet I can confidently say, that it is Novum crimen, & any hoc tempus in auditum, a crime which never was charged before upon D. Heylin, who hath hitherto appeared an Advocate for the dead and living, as often as they have come under the unjust censures of some modern Writers. And this the former Observations together with these Animadversions and Advertisements (when he hath any grounds of truth to proceed upon) do most clearly evidence. Against which Declaration, the Squire is able to instance only in one particular, whereas indeed he hath but one particular 
k Ibid  to make instance in; his instancing in no more but that particular being not so much an argument of his super-abundant charity towards the Respondent, as of his little store of matter wherewithal to charge him. And yet this one and only instance touching D. Prideaux hath so little truth in it, that it is only one degree removed from a s●ander. For first (omitting that D. Heylin took his degree An. 1633. and not in 1635. as the Pamphleter makes it, the said Doctor never scandalised him at Court to the late King being then at Woodstock 
l p. 6. : the said Doctor never making any such information to the King against D. Prideaux, either at Woodstock or elsewhere. Secondly, The said Doctor never made any such information to any other person or persons (if every thing which is delivered in the way of discourse may not be brought within the compass of an information) by whom it might be carried to his Majesty's ear. And for the proof hereof, since I cannot raise men from the dead to bear witness to it, I shall only say,  
First, That the Squire himself doth seem to give no credit to that Paper, For if he did, it would have found some place in that part of his History where it might properly have been inserted, as well as he hath told us of the whole Story of some bustles in Oxon, Anno 1631. occasioned by M. thorn of Bal●ol College, and M. Ford 〈◊〉 Magdaline Hall, in which D. Prideaux was concerned, and for which he received a check from the King at Woodstock; In relating whereof though the name of D. Prideaux be not mentioned but couched only under the general name of other of their partakers who received a check; yet M. F●ller (from whom he borrowed the whole relation) is more punctual in it, and reports it thus, viz.  
1. The Preachers complained of were expelled the Vniuers●y.  
2. The Proctors were deprived of their places for accepting their appeal.  
3. D. Prideaux and D. Wilkinson were throughly checked for engaging in their behalf. The former of these two Doctors ingen●●●●● 〈◊〉 to the King, that Nemo motalium omnib●s ho●is sapit, which wrought more on his Majesty's affectio●s 〈◊〉 if he had harangued it with a long Oration in his own 〈◊〉. Church-Hist. lib. 11. fol. 141. 142. The Respondent hereupon inferreth, That if M, Sanderson had then given so much credit to that paper (in publishing whereof he ascribeth so much merit to himself) as he now seems to do, he would have given it some place in his History, to show with what credit D▪ Prideaux came off from that ●econd encounter at Woodstock, and what discredit the Respondent got by his false Information.  
And secondly, The Respondent saith, that he was then one of his Majesty's Chaplains in ordinary for the Month of August, preaching before him at O●t lands on Sunday the 18 of that Month, and officiating the Divine Service of the Church in the great Hall of Woodstock-Mannor on the Sunday following, during which interval either upon the Thursday or Friday this business of D. Prideaux was in agitation; to which there is no question but he had been called, if he had been so much concerned in the information as the Pamphlet makes him. And if he had been called to i●, it is not probable that the Doctor had gone off so clearly with those eva●●ns, which he had put upon the Articles in charge against him, or with those touches on the by, which are given to the Defendant in the Doctor's Answer, supposing that the Paper exemplified in the Pamphlet (never before published 
m p. 7. ) (as the Author tells us) contain the substance and effect of that which he delivered to the King for his justification, as indeed it doth not. For the truth is that this Paper was digested by D. Prideaux as soon as he returned to Oxon, copied out and dispersed abroad by some of his own party and persuasions, to keep up the credit of the cause. And though at first it carried the same Title which the Pamphlet gives it, viz. The Answer of D. Prideaux to the Information given in against him by D. Heylin 
n Ibid. ; yet afterwards upon a melius inquirendum he was otherwise persuaded of it, and commonly imputed it to one of Trinity College, whom he conceived to have no good affections to him.  
And here I might conclude this point touching the traducing and disturbing of D. Prideaux, did I not find that by the unseasonable publishing of that Antiquated and forgotten Paper, the Respondent had not been disturbed and traduced in a far courser manner than he was, the Doctor had those passions and infirmities which are incident to other men of less ability, and having twice before exposed the Respondent to some disadvantages in the point of same and reputation, he was the more easily inclined to pursue his blow, and render him obnoxious (as much as possibly he could) to the public censure: The story whereof I shall lay down upon this occasion, and hope that I may safely do it without the imputation of affecting the fresh credit of coping with the deceased, or purposing any wrong at all unto the reverend name and living fame of that Learned man, Proximas egom●t sum mihi●, as the Proverb hath it, my own credit is more dear to me then another man's. And where I may defend myself with truth and honesty, I have no reason to betray both my name and fame by a guilty silence.  
Know then that on that 24. day of April Anno 1627. I answered in the Divinity Schools at Oxon upon these two Questions, viz.  
An Ecclesia unquam f●erit invisibilis, And  
2. An Ecclesia possit errare; Both which I determined in the Negative. And in the stating of the first I fell upon a different way from that of D. Prideaux in his Lecture de visibilitate Ecclesiae, and other Tractates of and about that time, in which the visibility of the Protestant Church (and consequently of the renowned Church of England, was no otherwise proved, then by looking for it into the scattered conventicles of the Berengarians in Italy, the Waldenses in France, the Wicklifists in England, & the H●ssites in Bohemia, which manner of proceeding not being liked by the Respondent, as that which utterly discontinued that succession in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, which the Church of England claimeth from the very Apostles; he rather chose to look for a continual visible Church in Asia, Aethiopia, Greece, Italy, yea, and Rome itself, as also in all the Western Provinces then subject to the power of the Popes thereof; And for the proof whereof he showed,  
First, That the Church of England received no succession of doctrine, or government from any of the scattered Conventicles before remembered.  
Secondly, That the Wicklifsists together (which the rest before remembered) held many Heterodoxes in Religion, as different from the established doctrine of the Church of England, as any point which was maintained at that time in the Church of Rome.  
And thirdly, That the Learned Writers of that Church, & Bellarmine himself amongst them have stood up as cordially and stoutly in maintenance of some fundamental Points of the Christian Faith against the Socinians, Anabaptists, Anti-Trinitarians, and other Heretics of these last ages, as any of the Divines and other learned men of the Protestant Churches; Which point I closed with these words, viz. utinam, quod ipse de Calvino ●ic semper errasset nobilissimus Cardinalis, and this so much displeased the Doctor, that as soon as the Respondent had ended his determination, he fell most heavily upon him, calling him by the odious names of Papicola, Bellarminianus, Pontificius, and I wot not what, and bitterly complaining to the younger part of his Audients (to whom he made the greatest part of his addresses) of the unprofitable pains he had took amongst them; if Bellarmine, whom he laboured to decry for so many years, should now be honoured with the Title of Nobilissimus; The like he also did (tantaene animis caelestibus irae?) at another time when the Respondent changed his Copy, and acted the part of the Prior Opponent, loding the poor young man with so many reproaches that he was branded for a Papist before he understood what Popery was. And because this report should not get footing in the Court before him, in his first Sermon preached before the King, which was in November next following, on the words joh 4. viz▪ Our Fathers worshipped on this mountain, he so declared himself against some errors and corruptions in the Church of Rome, that he showed him to be far enough from any inclinations to the Romish Religion, as afterwards in the Year 1638. when that clamour was revived again, he gave such satisfaction in his third and fourth Sermon upon the Parable of the Tares, that some of the Court (who before had been otherwise persuaded of him) did not stick to say, That he had done more towards the subversion of Popery in those two Sermons, than D. P●ideaux had done in all the Sermons which he had ever preached in his life.  
But to proceed, the Respondent leaving Oxon within few years after, the heat of these reproaches began to cool, 〈◊〉 he had reason to conceive that the Doctor's 〈◊〉 might in so long a tract of time as from 1627. to 16 〈…〉 cooled also, but it happened otherwise, For the 〈…〉 being to answer for his degree of Doctor in the 〈…〉 insisted then on the Authority of the Church 〈…〉 he had done on the infallibility and visibility of it. His Questions these, viz.  
An Eccle●ia habeat authoritatem in determinandis ●idei controversies?  
2. Interpretandi Scripturas.  
3. Discernendi ritus & ceremonias. All which he held in the Affirmative, according to the plain and positive doctrine of the Church of England, in the 20. Article, which runs thus interminis viz, habet Ecclesiae ritas sive ceremonias statuendi●us, & in ●idei controvers●●s authoritatem, etc. but the Doctor was as little pleased with these Questions, and the Respondent stating of them, as he was with the former. And therefore to create to the Respondent the greater odium, he openly declared that the Respondent had falsified the public Doctrine of the Church, and charged the Article with that sentence, viz. Habet Ecclesia ritus sive Ceremonias, etc. which was not to be found in the whole body of it; And for the proof thereof he read the Article out of a Book which lay before him beginning thus, Non licet Ecclesia quicquam instituere quod verbo Dei scripto adversetur, etc. To which the Res●ondent readily answered, that he perceived by the bigness of the Book which lay on the Doctor's Cushion, that he had read that Article out of the Harmony of Confessions, published at Geneva, Anno 1612. which therein followed the Edition of the Articles in the time of King Edward the sixth, Anno 1552. in which that sentence was not found; but that it was otherwise in the Articles agreed on in the Convocation, Anno 156●. to which most of us had subscribed in our several places, but the Doctor still persisting upon that point, and the Respondent seeing some unsatisfiedness in the greatest part of the Auditory, he called on one M. Westly (who formerly had been his Chamber-Fellow in Magdalen● College) to step to the next Booksellers Shop for a Book of Articles: Which being observed by the Doctor, he declared himself very willing to decline any further prosecution of t●at particular, and to go on directly to the Disputation. But the Respondent was resolved to proceed no further, Vsque dum liberaverit animam suam ab ist a calumnia, as his own words were, till he had freed himself from that odious Calumny, but it was not long before the coming of the Book had put an end to that Controversy, out of which the Respondent read the Article in the English Tongue, in his verbis, viz. The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of faith, etc. which done he delivered the Book to one of the standers by, who desired it of him, the Book passing from one hand to another till all men were satisfied. And at this point of time it was, that the Queen's Almoner left the Schools, professing afterwards that he could see no hope of a fair Disputation from so foul a beginning, and not as being tired with the tedious Preface of the Respondent before the Disputations begun, which whether it were tedious or impertinent or not, may perhaps be seen hereafter upon this occasion.)  
But to proceed, upon the breaking of this blow, the Doctor fell on roundly to his Argumentation, and in the heat thereof insisted upon those extravagant expressions (without any such qualification of them as is found in the Paper) which made the matter of the Information which is now before us, and for which, if he received any check from the King at Woodstock, it is no more than what he had received at the same place but two years before, as afore is said. Which notwithstanding the Book of Articles was printed the next Year at Oxon in the Latin tongue, according to the Copy in the said Harmony of Confessions, or to a corrupt Edition of them, Anno 1571. in which that clause had been omitted, to the great animation of the Puritan party, who then began afresh to call in question the Authority of the Church in the points aforesaid: For which, as D. Prideaux (by whose encouragement it was supposed to have been done) received a third check from the Archbishop of Canterbury then Chancellor of that University; So the Printers were constrained to re-print the Book or that part of it at the least, according to the genuine and ancient Copies.  
And here I should have parted with D. Prideaux, but that there is somewhat in the Paper (as it is now published to the world by M. Sanderson) which is thought fit to have an answer though not held worthy of that honour when it was secretly dispersed in scattered Copies. The Paper tells us of a Hisse which is supposed to have been given (and makes the Doctor sure that such a Hiss was given, When the Respondent excluded King and Parliament from being parts of the Church 
p 29. . But first, The Respondent is as sure that he never excluded King and Parliament from being parts of the Church, that is to say of the diffusive body of it, but denied them to be members of the Convocation, that is to say, the Church of England represented in a national Council, to which the power of decreeing Rites and Ceremonies, and the Authority of determining Controversies in faith as well as to other Assemblies of that nature, is ascribed by the Articles: Which as it did deserve no Hiss, so the Respondent is assured no such hiss was given when those words were spoken. If any hiss were given at all, as perhaps there was, it might be rather when the Doctor went about to prove that it was not the Convocation but the High Court of Parliament which had the power of ordering matters in the Church, in making Canons, ordaining Ceremonies, and determining Controversies in Religion, and could find out no other medium to make it good but the Authority of Sir Ed. Cook (a learned but mere common Lawyer) in one of the Books of his Reports. An Argument (if by that name it may be called) which the Respondent thought not fit to gratify with a better answer than Non credendum esse quoquo extra artem suam. Immediately whereupon the Doctor gave place to the next Opponent, which put an end unto the heats of that Disputation: In which if the Doctor did affirm that the Church was Mera Chimaera 
p. 6. , as it seems he did, what other plaster soever he might find to salve that sore, I am sure he could not charge it on the insufficiency of the Respondents answers, who kept himself too close to the Chur●h-Representative, consisting of Arch-Bishops, Bishops, and other of the Clergy in their several Counsels, to be beaten from it by any argument which the Doctor had produced against him.  
And thus we have a full relation of the differences between D Prideaux and the Respondent, forgotten long ago by those whom it most concerned, and now unseasonably revived; revived as little to the honour of the reverend name and living fame of that learned Doctor, as D. Bernard's publishing the Lord Primates Letters (never intended for the Press) hath been unto the honour of that emi●nent and pious Prelate. But the Squire will not so give over, he hath another piece in store, which must now be printed, though written as long since as any of the Lord Primates Letters, or the Doctor's Paper, and must be printed now to show what slender account is to be made of his (that is to say the Respondents) language that ways 
r p. 12. , in reference namely, to such eminent persons as he had to deal with. For this he is beholden to some friend or other, who helped him to the sight of a Letter writ by D. Ha●well in the year 1633. in which speaking of M. Heylyn (since Doctor) whom he styles, The Parton of that pretended Saint George, he hath these words of him, viz 
s p. 13. .  
In the second Impression of his Book where he hath occasion to speak of the Roman Writers, especially the Legendaries, he magnifies them more, and when he mentions our men he vilifies them more, than he did in his first Edition, But the matter is not much what he saith of one or the other, the condition of the man being such as his word hardly passeth either for commendation or a slander. Never was man so haunted with apparitions (simulacra modis volitantia miris) as the present Respondent, this being the third ghost which hath been raised to disturb his quiet. But being he is conjured up, we must lay him down again as well as we can. First, passing by the Squire's Absurdity, in making D. Hackwell to be archdeacon of Surrey, and of Exeter College at if he had been Archdeacon of Exeter College as well as of Surrey, but such ungrammaticall expressions are no rarities in him, and so let it go. But concerning D. Hackwell of Exeter College, and Archdeacon of Surrey, the Reader may be pleased to know that in the year 1630. the Respondent set himself about the Asserting of the History of the famous Saint and Soldier S. George of Cappado●●● the Patron-Saint, in the estimation of those times of the Renowned Order of the Garter. In prosecution of which Argument he was encountered with two contrary Opinions, the one of them headed by M. Calvin, who made S. Geo●ge to be a Fiction, a No●ens, a mere Chimaera, the other set up by D. Reynolds, who made him to be the very same with George the Arian, once Patriarch of Alexandria, a bloody tyrant, and a great persecutor of the Orthodox Christians. Amongst the Followers of whic● last, he brings in D. Hackwell for one in these words following, viz.  
In the next place, take the assent of D. Hackwell in his examination of the common error touching the decay of nature: The first whole Chapter of which work is employed in this, That there are many of those Opinions which are commonly received, both in ordinary speech, and in the Writings of learned men, which notwithstanding are by others manifestly convinced of falsehood, or at least wise suspected justly of it. And in particular, In History Ecclesiastical (saith he) it is commonly received, that S. George was an holy Martyr, and that he conquered the Dragon, whereas D. Reynolds proves him to have been both a wicked man and an Arian, by the testimony of Epiphanius, A●hanasius, and Gregory Nazianzen. And B●●onius himself in plain terms affirmeth, Apparet totam illum de acts Georgii ●abulam, fuisse commentum Arian●rum. It appears that the whole story of S. George is nothing else but a forgery of the Aliens; Yet was he received (as we know) as a canonised Saint, through Christendom, and to be the Patron both of our Nat●o●, and of the most honourable Order of Knighthood in the world; Which being all that had been said of D. Hackwell in the first Edition of that Book (and more ther● was not spoken of him in the second neither) it is a wonder what should move the good old man unto such a pet, as to speak so disgracefully of one who had never wronged him, and had been always held as free from that odious crime of ●●●ndering others, as D. Hackwell showeth himself to be guilty of it.  
For so it was that D. Hackwell finding himself concerned (but no otherwise concerned then as before) in the first Edition bestirred himself in making a confutation of that Book, and having finished it, commended it to the perusal of D. Prideaux (whom he knew to be none of the Respondents best friends) to be by him approved of and so passed to the Press, but it passed through so many hands before it could come unto the Press, that at last it came to the Respondents, who found himself therein more uncivilly handled, then either by the Squire himself, or any of those numerous Libelers, which exercised the patience of the state for 7. years together: D. Hackwell neither treating him with that ingenuity which became a Scholar, nor that Charity which became a Christian. But on the reading of the Book, the Respondent found his Arguments and Allegations, though many in number, to have been summed up by M. Pryn in his Hist●yomastix. which he had formerly perused, and without taking notice of either adversary returned so full an answer to them, that he heard no more from M. Pryn as to that particular. Not heard he any thing further from D. Hackwell upon that Argument, more than the noise of some such Letters as M. Sanderson hath met with, purposely spread abroad (as D. Pri●e●ux his Paper was at the same time also) to disgrace the Respondent, and ●●ep on foot those animosities which they had against him. But 〈…〉 as we read in 〈◊〉 D. H●ckw●ll having thus wronged the Respondent, conceived he had not satisfied his desired ●eveng●, if he could not crush him at the last: And therefore at su●h time as the Respondent was under the displeasure of the house of Commons, on the complaint of M. Pryn (which was about the beginning of the late long Parliament) he published a Discourse against him in answer to some passages in the Book Entitled, An idotum Lincolniense, etc. which he entitled by the name of A Dissertation with D. Heylyn. Whether th● Euch●rist be a sacrifice properly so termed, and that a●●●rding ●o the Doctrine and practice of the Ch●r●h of England. One of which Books being brought to the R●spondent as soon as it was come from the press, he found it no such knotty piece, but that it might have been easily el●ft asunder without wedge or beetle, and had returned an answer to it, if some of D. Hackwell● Friends seeing how weakly it was penned, and how unseasonably it was published, had not took order to suppress it; And they suppressed it with such care and friendly diligence, that within three or four days after the first coming of it out, there was not a book of them to be had for love or money. The Narrative being thus laid down, the Respondent is to make an answer to the charges in D. Hackwels' Letter, as he hath done before to those in D. Prideaux his Paper.  
For first, he saith, that in his book of Saint George, he no where vili●ies any of the eminent Divines or other of the Pro●estant and Reformed Churches (our men as D. Hackwell calls them) unless to differ in opinion from them be a vilifying of them And if it be, then D. Hackwell may as well be said to vilify Calvin, Chemnitius, Chamier, Tilenus, Perkin●, Boys, and Crakanthorpe, beside many others, both of the foreign Churches, and the Church of England, who make S. George to be a fiction, a Nonens or a mere Chimaera, from whom he differeth in opinion in making him to be a wicked man, and an Arian, and therefore not a fiction nor a mere C●ymaera. Assuredly the Respondent can see no reason why he might not as well differ in this particular from D. Reynolds, D. Hackwell, and the ●est of that G●ng as they from Calvin, and Chemnitius, and the 〈…〉 ●heir ●ollowers; or as all of them differed in that p●int 〈◊〉 ●ha●●hich D. Hackwell hath ●on●est to have 〈…〉 received in Ecclesiastical History. touching S. Geor●●, being a man and an holy Martyr.  
And secondly, ●he Respondent●aith ●aith, that as he H●ckwell●hould ●hould rat●er have said our Masters, so he magn fies 〈◊〉 Roman Writers, especially, ●he legendaries, that is to say, by concurring with them in some ●oints of S. George History, in which he finds them seconded by the testimonies of more approved Writers then themselves. And if at any time he speaketh favourably of any of the Legendaries, as sometimes he doth (and for the credit of the cause he was bound to do) he did it not in his own words, and speaking his own sense of them only, but in the words and sense of such ancient and modern Authors as are of most unquestioned credit amongst the Learned: Thus speaking of Simeon Metaphrastes he tells us what a high esteem was had of him in the Greek Min●logies, and what high commendation had been given him by Michael Psellus a man of great Learning in those times; and speaking of jacobus de Voragine, he lets the Reader know what had been said of him by johanno Gerrard, Voscius, a man of too great parts for D. Hackwell to contend with, & sic de c●teris; But whereas D. Hackwell tells his friend in that Letter that the condition of the man that is to say, the Respondent) was such as his word hardly passeth either for commendation or a slander; The Respondent thereunto replies. that he looks no otherwise on those words then as the extravagances of a proud and passionate weakness. The Respondent stood at that time in as good a condition for reputation and esteem with the generality of the Nation, as D. Hackwell could pretend too; and would not have refused an encounter with him upon any argument, either at the sharp or at the smooth, as the Pamphleter words it. I am sorry to have said thus much, but the indignity of the provocation hath enforced me to it, for which D. Hackwells Friend is to thank M. Sand●rson, o● condemn himself, in publishing those passages in cold blout (five and twenty years after they were written) which escaped the Doctor in his heats. And so I leave my three great Names (those Magni nominis Vmbras in the Poet's Language) with a Tria sunt omnia, not looking for a Tria sequun●ur tria, though the Squire should once again play the School boy, and rather fall upon small games than none at all.  
But the Pamphleter will not leave the Respondent so. The Lord Primate in a Letter to an Honourable friend had accused him of Sophistry, and the Pamphleter is resolved to make good the charge, assuring us, That in the judgement of divers he made it good throughout his book 
u p. 18. ▪ and divers they may be, though they be but two, Squire Sanderson and D. Bernard, which are so many (so it follows) that they would find as much work for an Observator, as he saith my History will afford him. Never was Lilies head so broken as it is by this Squire, who is so far from keeping the Rules of Grammar, that he hath forgotten his very Accidence, he would not else give us two Adjectives, viz. which and many, which he knows cannot stand by themselves without another word to be added to them for showing of their sense or signification; Substantive I am sure there is none to own them, and therefore we must take his meaning by his gaping only; Which though it be not wide enough to speak out, doth import thus much, That the Errors in the Book called Respondent Petrus, are so great and many, that they would find as much work for an Observator, as the Pamphleteers History. It seems that the Respondent Helpers being many in number (for he calls them by the Name of his Numerous helpers) and all of them as subject unto error as the Squire himself, each of them hath committed one mistake at the least which will afford as much matter for an Observator as the History doth, what work the History hath found for an Observator hath been seen by this time; And if ther● 〈◊〉 so many in the Book called Respondet Petrus, as he 〈◊〉 there are, why hath not he or D Bernard presented them to the view of the world in so long a time? But yet w●ll fare the Author for his wonderful cha●ity, who though he meet with many errors and mistakes throughout the book (for such Helper on) yet is pleased to satisfy himself with instancing in one, but such a one in such gre●t Characters that he who rides Post (the Squire is always in 〈…〉) may read it without stopping 
u p. 18. .  
Parturiunt montes. You have showed us the mountain, gentle Sir, but pray you, Where is the mouse? Marry, says he, we find it pag. 63. where he rep●●ing a quotation of th● Lord Primate (in the end of his Letter to D. Twisse) ●orr●wed from Gregory the Great, he had blindly mistaken the copulative And for the Disjunctive Or 
x p. 19 . Had it been so, a man of any ordinary candour would have looked upon it as an error rather of the Press then the Pen. B●t the Squire who hath a quicker sight, quam aut ●q●ila 〈◊〉 serpens Epidaurius in the Poet's Language, hath in this shown himself more blind than he makes the Respondent, for in pag. 63. which the Pamphleter citys, we find the whole passage to be thus, viz.  
The next Authority is taken from Greg●ry the Gre●t, who telleth us, that it is the Doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist, qui veniens, diem Dominicum & Sabbatum ab omni opere faciet custodiri, who at his coming shall cause both the Lords day and the Sabbath to be kept or celebrated without doing any manner of work. Now let the S●uire●who ●who can see further into a millstone 
y p. 5.  then the R●spondent and his Helpers are affirmed to do) resolve me when he next sets out, whether the word & in S. G●egory be turned into▪ or by the R●spondent; and if it be not, as it is not, what is become of that mistake so gross, and written in such gre●t characters that any one who rides Post may read it. Our Squi●e for this deserves the Spurs, and to be made a Knight of the advice than the nature of the offence required. What followed upon this Appeal we are informed by both our Authors: In the relating of which story from the first to the last M. S●n●●rson hath dealt more ingenuously than the 〈…〉  
For fi●●t, M. Sa●ders●n telleth us, that the occasion of the Discontents which increased at Oxon, An. 1631. arose from t●is, ●iz. Many 〈◊〉 that the Renovations reducing 〈…〉 times, was now no less than Innovation, 〈…〉 in their Pulpits and 〈◊〉. But M. Ful●er, according to his wont manner of reporting all things favourably for the Puritan party, will have the occasion to be this, viz. That many conceived that Innovations (〈◊〉 by others for Renovations, and now 〈…〉 in the Primitive times) were multiplied in 〈…〉 whereat they in their Sermons 〈…〉 into (what was interpreted) bitter invectives. Lib. 11. Fol. 141. which puts a great difference in the Case, seeming to justify the Offenders, in that which was reputed (and but reputed) to be bitter Invectives, and to condemn the Church for multiplying Innovations in the Service of God.  
Secondly, M. Sanderson tells us , That their very Texts ga●● just cause of offence and mutiny, and many such reflecting upo● the most eminent in the (●urch, and violating the King's Declaration for the depressing of Armini●● Controversies. But M. F●ller must needs mince the matter. And though he tell us That their Texts gave s●me (and but some) offence, and that they had some tart reflection on some eminent persons in the Church, adds next, that they are apprehended to violate the King's Declaration: Not that the King's Declaration for 〈…〉 (as his own words are) had been viol●t●● by them, but that it was apprehended so to 〈…〉 might be better Scholars than Lawyers, yet Law and Learning must submit when power is pleased to interpose, which intimates that the Archbishop carried this business by the hand of power, against Law and Learning. Finally M. Sanders●n subjoyning the death of Archbishop Harsnet to the end of the differences in Oxon, hath told us of him, that he was a discreet assertor of these necessary and useful Ceremonies: M. Fuller relating the same story hath told us only that he was a zealous assertor of Ceremonies, but whether useful or unuseful, necessary or unnecessary, he determineth not: which shows more candour in the State then the Church-Historian, so farewell to both.    

Errata on the Advertisements.  
PAge 30. line 13. for quaint r. texit. p 34. l. 17. for by the History r. by the Author of the History. p. 36. l. 29. for fancies not. r. facies non. r. facies non. p. 40. l. 27. for of o'er r. in ore. p. 41. l. 3. for midsummer last, r. Midsummer 1657. p. 70. l. 30. for D. Lawd Archbishop of Canterbury, r. D. Lawd then Bishop of S. David's, and afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury. p. 75. l. 15. for Bleth or. Bl●so. p. 78. l. 12. for 1627. r. 1629. p. 84. l. 16. for Nassautiae, r. Nassoni●. p. 94. l. 7. for but three, r. but three of the Dudl●ys, p. 98. l. 14. for at the valley r. at the battle. p. 98. l. ●2. for of the fi●●st●. of his changing of the first design. p. 106. l. 10. for Willain, r. Milan. p. 120. l. 12. for proviso. promise's. p. 15●. l. 29. fo● seas r. s●ales. p. 163. l. ult. for Toucester, r. from T●ucester▪ p. 1●9. l. 11. for the first, r. the last. p. 205. l. 2. for the ●east, r. them, lest.