Peter pursued, OR Dr. HEYLIN Overtaken, Arrested, and Arraigned upon his three Appendices, 1. Respondet Petrus. 2. Answer to the Post-haste Reply. 3. Advertisements on three Histories, Of Mary Queen of Scots, King james, and King Charles. Patched together in his EXAMEN HISTORICUM, For which the Doctor is brought to Censure, By WILLIAM SANDERSON, Esq Ne quis vestrum patiatur ut alienarum rerum inspector. LONDON, Printed by Tho. Leach, 1658. The Preface. REaders of Books may be divided into three sorts, 1. for Edification, 2. for Recreation, 3. for Cavillation. But the last are the worst, who peruse writings of purpose to pick quarrels with them; which proceeds from an ignorant critical kind of pride or malignancy of Spirit, and may be compared to the Horse flesh flies, who in the end of Summer cannot see, yet by chance fall upon sound flesh, fly-blow it first, and then feed upon it. I should not apply this kind of reading to any particular person, but that Dr. Peter Heylin appears so in the Appendix to his Respondet Petrus, and in the other two Appendices to his Examen Historicum, wherein he falls upon the most frivial passages, and in a snarling petulant way. I shall here only acquaint the Reader, that Doctor Heylin hath been too hasty in the Answer of my Post-haste Reply to his Respondet Petrus, which Answer was not till now made public. Printed indeed it was, immediately after his former Appendix, but by the persuasion of his friends, I did suppress it (excepting a few private Copies) until now that I find him with another Appendix in Answer to that Reply of mine, which I here publish out of a respect to him, lest the world should think so great a Master of defence should fight with a shadow or a non ens: 'Tis worthy enough of him, how little soever the worth may be in itself. And yet in earnest I could have been content to have spared myself and the Readers pains herein, if the Doctor had been so ingenuous to have craved pardon of me, as he hath done by letter of that other person (as I am informed) with whose Histories he quarrel as he doth with mine. POST-HASTE: A REPLY TO PETER (DOCTOR HEYLIN'S) APPENDIX; TO HIS TREATISE, ENTITLED Respondet Petrus etc. BY WILLIAM SANDERSON Esq LONDON, Printed for the use of the Author. 1658. The Contents PEtrus his Preface examined; A castigation of Doctor Heylin for his ill Manners to the late Primate of all Ireland; And his scandalising Doctor Prideaux at Court in divers false Informations; With a Copy of his Answer to each; And the Protestation he was compelled unto to clear himself; The Character given by Doctor Hackwell of Doctor Heylin; Three passages replied unto and confirmed as before; With some seasonable good Cowsell to the Doctor, if he have the will to accept thereof. POST-HASTE. A Reply to Peter (Doctor Heylin) His Appendix to his Treatise, etc. THere is a Treatise come forth the other day, Entitled Respondet Petrus; or an answer of Peter Heylin to Doctor Bernard etc. And although it be very large to small purpose, yet at the 109 th'. Page, he adds an Appendix in answer to certain passages in Mr. sanderson's History of the late King Charles, relating to the Lord primate, The Articles of Ireland, and The Earl of Strafford. And (as if it were so memorable a business to be kept upon Record) he gives us punctually the day, when he began to undertake this Task, and the time of his finishing; In which I find little else true, but the confessing of his infirmities, and his unfitness to enter into disputes etc. Instead of clearing himself, he hath added more spots to his former. Indeed Petrus hath made haste; for notwithstanding the extremity of the season (as he says) and his languishing quartan-ague, he hobbled up his answers for the middle of the Term following, with as much ease, as Hogs eat Acorns, or Pigeons pick Pease. Yet he was interrupted the publishing, by the undertakers with him; a dead vacation not profitable for the vent thereof; And so it came not forth until just the first day of this Midsummer Term; By it, he hath both thriftily gotten the advantage of sale, and enforceth his adversaries to hunt dryfoot after him a whole long Summer's Vacation; contemptible Grasshoppers compared with such a son of Anak as himself; Only Petrus considers wisely, that although convicia spreta exolescunt etc. Short lived Pamphlets (with which he hath been often banged) pass away upon the breath of Rumour, but for him to be enroled upon record in the body of an History, what is it less, than for him to live defamed, and die detestable, a scorn to these times and an ignominy to all ages following? But who can help it, if a Man will make himself such? I wish he be not prophetic in it, which by this book he hath put hard for, Let him not blame me, 'tis the malefactor himself (not the judge who pronounceth justly) that is the Author of his own ruin. And thus in brief we have the Preface to his large Treatise; which I shall leave to such, whom it may concern, if they conceive it worthy of answering, for I find some learned Men are for the Negative, as if he had been in it, his self-revenger, and next door to a felo dese, rather to be pitied, than opposed. I shall only take notice of his Appendix, and show him to the Reader by that light by which he longs to be seen (wherein Petrus falls upon me) not so much answering as to show how little he deserves it. I have been a while considering, which part to take of that double Counsel of Solomon in the like case, Answer not &c. And yet answer etc. I concluded upon the latter in this Posthaste, that the Term might not want an interlude at the ending, as well as it had by his Book, at the beginning of it. And now let me meet my Petrus, who spends 17 whole Pages in the combat with me, taking in his large Frontis piece or the Contents of his Appendix, which might have well stood for the whole. So have we seen a daring coward practise on the Stage to sense with his supposed foe, when all that while it was but with his own hat and feather. How much time doth Petrus spend, to hear himself speak, imagining the Reader to be bound up to his sense and audience. Indeed I had warning heretofore not to meddle with him, and was told, that although he was blind, yet he with his helpers, could see as far into a Millstone as any other Man: And that if he should be concerned in my History (as how could he scape) he would reprint himself, and be thereby well paid for his pains. And truly I conceive it no discretion for me, to make it my business other than to dry-blow beat him, since he is not herein worthy of bleeding. For to say much were but to give him further occasion to assume fresh credit of copeing with the 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. But to be a little serious with him, 'tis no news for Doctor Heylin to be a disturber of pious and eminent Men, while they were living, of which (now he is not like to live long himself) 'tis time to think upon repenting, I shall upon this occasion only instance in his demeanonr towards Doctor Prideaux, at and after the taking of his degree in Oxford Anno 1635. Who catching at some particulars which fell from Doctor Prideaux in the discussing the questions * Doctor Heylins' desturbance of Doctor Prideaux. given by Doctor Heylin, scandalised him at Court to the late King being then at Woodstock. An Ecclesia authoritatem habeat In fidei controversiis d●terminandis, * Informat ex Arti●ul: 20. Interpretandis sacras scripturas, affirm. Decernendi ritus et ceremonias. Upon which the Doctor was compelled to make his defence; with a protestation under his hand against those false Informations given in against him; Pretending to have been cross to the Articles, and in special to the 20th, of the Church of England, branched into positions viz. 1 That the Church is Mera Chimaera. 2 That it teacheth and determines nothing, 3 That controversies might better be referred to the Universities than to the Church. 4 That learned men in the Universities might determine of controversies without the Bishops or acquainting them with them. To these Doctor Prideaux was fain to make answer, which to satisfy the desire of the Reader (not being heretofore published) I shall give him a transcript as followeth viz. The answer of Doctor P●ideaux to the Information given in against him by Doctor Heylin. These passages imperfectly catched at by the Informer were not positions of mine, (for I detest them, as they are laid, for impious and ridiculous) but oppositions according to my place proposed for the further clearing of the truth; to which the Respondent was to give satisfaction. And this general protestation I hope takes off all that can be laid against me, in the particulars. Notwithstanding to touch on each of them as they are laid. 1 To the First, I never said that the Church was Mera Chimaera as it is, or, hath a being, and aught to be believed; but as the Respondent by his answers made it: In which I conceived him to swerve from the Article, where his questions were taken. 2 To the Second my argument was to this purpose, Omnis actio est suppositorum, vel singularium. Ergo Ecclesi● in abstracto nihil docet, aut determinat, sed per hos aut illos Episcopos, pastors, Doctores, etc. homo non disputat sed Petrus et Johannes. 3. 4. The Third and Fourth may be well put together: my prosecution was, that the Universities are eminent parts, and Seminaries of the Church, and had better opportunity to discuss controversies, than divers other assemblies; Not by any means to determine them, but to prepare them for the determination of Ecclesiastical assemblies, of Synods, Counsels, Bishops, that have superior Authority, wherein they might do service to the Church, and those superiors not perscribe any thing unto them; As the debating of a point by learned Counsel, makes the easier passage for the Benches sentence: And this was urged only as commended, not as necessary. The Queen's Almoner was present. Informer. I am told no. Doctor Prideaux. For he departed (as they say) that were in the same seat with him, being tired, as it should seem, by the tedious preface of the * Doctor Heylin. Respondent, before the disputations began; but be it so, or otherwise, to what purpose this is interposed, I know not? Upon an occasion of mentioning the absolute decree, Informer. he broke forth into a great and long discourse, that his mouth was shut by Authority, else he would maintain that truth contra omnes, qui sunt in vivis which fetch't a great hum from the Country Ministers that were there. This Argument I confess was unexpectedly cast in by another, Doctor Prideaux. but bent (as I took) it against some what I have written in that behalf, which the Respondent, not endeavouring to clear, I was put upon it to show, in what sense I took absolutum decretum, which indeed I said, I was able to maintain against any, as my predecessors in that place had done, This was not in a long discourse, as it is suggested, but in as short a solution as is usually brought in Schools, to a doubt on the by. And from this I took off the opponents further proceeding in obedience to Authority; whereupon if a hum succeeded, it was more than I use to take notice of, it might be as well of dislike, as of Approbation, and of other Auditors as soon as Country Ministers. A Hiss I am sure was given before, when the Respondent excluded King and Parliament from being parts of the Church; But I remember whose practise it is to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had rather to bear and forbear, 〈…〉 and end with this Protestation. Protestation. THat as I believe the Catholic Church in my Creed, Doctor Prideaux Protestation. so I reverence this Church of England, wherein I had my Baptism, and whole breeding, as a most eminent member of it. To the Doctrine, and discipline of this Church, have I often hitherto subscribed, and by God's grace constantly adhered, And resolve by the same assistance, according to my ability under his Majesty's protection faithfully to maintain against the Papists or any other that shall oppose it.. The prelacy of our Reverend Bishops I have ever defended in my place, which I dare say hath been more often, and with greater pains taking than most of those have done, who have received greater encouragements f●om their Lordships: I desire nothing but the continuance of my Vocation in a peaceable cou●se, that after all my pains taking in the place of his Majesty's Professor, almost for this 18▪ years together, my * Such as proceeded Doctors under him of whom Doctor Heylin had been newly one. sons especially, be not countenanced in my declining age to vilify me, & vex me; so that I end the remainder of my time, (which likely must be short, and cannot be long) in hearty prayer for his Majesty my only Master and Patron; for the Reverend Bishops, the State, and all his Majesty's Subjects and his affairs; and continue my utmost endeavour to ●oe all faithful service to the Church wherein I live, to whose Authority I have ever, and do hereby submit myself, and Studies, to be according to Gods wo●d directed or converted. Thus was this learned and eminent Professor of divinity traduced and disturbed, let the application be the patience and disregard of the Reader, when in this book he finds the like attempted by the same person, upon the late Archbishop of Armagh. And yet, what slender account is to be made of his language that way, may appear by the Character, Doctor Hackwells Character of Doctor Heylin. which a learned person, and one of note, George Hackwell Archdeacon of Surrey and of Exeter College in Oxford, giveth of him which I have under his own hand in a letter of his to a friend; Where, speaking of Mr. Heylin (since Doctor) whom he styles, the Patron of that pretended Saint (St George,) hath these words of him, viz. In the second impression of his book where he hath occasion to speak of the Roman writers, especially the Legendaries he magn●fi●s them more, and when he mentions our men he vilefies 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. By this you may see that my adversary had good cause to disguise his name, and so would I too, were it under such an Ignominious character. This is the fourth time he hath done it. I expect in time he will make up the number of Laban's change of Jacob's wages. Here is a Proteus indeed (which he would have put upon me) Annonymus, observator, observator Rescued, rejoinder and now Petrus. 'Tis well he hangs by his christian name; he hath in this presumed, beyond any Pope, who though they have assumed Paul, the fifth time, yet none hath styled himself Petrus. We have now the one half of him, we shall have the other the next, either conjunctim, or divisim, it matters not. He begins with his fancy of my being Doctor Bernard's Reserve, in clearing the whole proceedings of the Lord primate in the business of the Earl of Strafford; and in the Examination and moderation of all passages, between Mr. ● ' Estrange and him. I shall satisfy the Reader upon what occasion I undertoke it. So soon as that Anonymus of an observator on Mr. l'Estrange, 〈…〉 came to the primates hands, he was pleased to show it to me; and finding the Author so apt upon a slender occasion to bleamish him; (supposing him to be some Romish Agent whom he disdaining to Answer,) desired me in the prosecution of my History (as it lay in my way) to vindicate him, (though not long after I was told by his Bookseller, that the Author was Doctor Heylin In order thereunto he acquainted me with such passages as did concern that of the Earl of Strafford; whose commands I presently effected; intending (then) to have set it out by itself, lest the Doctor's M●lice should Gangreen by neglect. But the Lord primates decease immediately following, it was referred to my ●●ist ●y wi●h some fr●sh Notions more prop●r, wh●ch in my absence was neglected by th● Press; and at my return, they b●ing inserted have given cause of Interse●tions in the Impression, between fol. 108 and 09. With which Petrus is so much troubled, and spends his breath in a dispute with him●e●●, whether it were mine or Doctor Be●na●ds? And why so jealous, good Pet●us? Append: pa. 142. First (saith he) because Mr. Sanderson before in his Preface makes Doctor Heylin a person of some fame and great ability. That (possibly) might be my mistake a● the next in my speaking reproachfully, of him, in his: Indeed I acknowledge that Doctor Heylin deserves Characters of several kinds, as most men may discover, who consult his writings; and so Cato's, les●on learned by him long ago Convenient nulli etc. will better serve the turn to decipher him, than m●e. Secondly, (saith he) Mr. Sand●●son in his History fol. 200. informs us, that in Anno. 1635. There was a Synod held in Ireland etc. But in his foisted Argument he speaks the Contrary. Good Petrus consult some tru●friends, that will read aright to you, and you will find the several Folio's you mention, not to be any thing contrary, which are too tedious to insert in this short Castigation. Three points there are in which Petrus fancies me, Three points of mine quarrelled by Petrus. to act for Doctor Bernard. 1 The acquitting the Lord primate from the distinction of a Political and a personal conscience. And yet it is confessed by himself to have been done to my hand by Mr. howel's attestation of my history, (who was concerned in those words.) 2 The proving that the Articles of Ireland were not abrogated, & those of the Church of ●ngland inserted in their stead. And yet he hath prevented any further confirmation of either, by his own confessing of his being too much credulous in believing and inconsiderate in publishing such mistaken intelligence. Which are his own words folio 87. And I could wish that in the Errata of the next Edition of his History of the Sabbaoth (if the world be ever troubled with it again) he would Record this Ingenuity of his (being such a rarity in him) so as to retract it, and howsoever he is much offended at the Primates expressions, viz. Nor shames he to affirm as being a Notorious untruth etc. Truly with me it seems a gentle penance for so presumptuous an assertion, and pertinaciously continuing in it these many years, till he was thus convict; defaming not only a single person, but a whole Nation. 3 That the Lord primate boar no grudge to the Earl of Strafford, so as to advise the King to pass the Bill of Attainder. This (whosoever he accounts the Actor) hath been sufficiently cleared also, and needs no repetition here. For the term of Sophistry, (for which he is also much offended with the primate) he hath in the judgement of divers, made it good, throughout his book, which are so many, that they would find as much work for an observator, as he saith my History will afford him: I shall only trouble the Reader with one instance (ex ungue Leonem, by this you may judge of the rest) which is in such great Characters, that he who rides post, may read it without stopping. 'Tis folio 63. where he repeating a Quotation of the primate in the conclusion of his Letter to Doctor Twiss ● viz▪ That Gregory the great, esteemed it to be ●he doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist; wh● at his coming shall cause both the Lords day, and the Sabaoth, to be kept, or celebrated from doing any wo●ke;) Petrus, in his pretended answer, hath blindly mistaken the Copulative and, for the disunctive or (though the primate in the next words, had given him warning of that Stumble:) And so upon a false sent he runs away with the Hunt, as if it must necessarily follow from thence That it is the doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist that no manner of work be done on the Saturday or the Sunday: And from that surmise, he makes an application (of which, I leave it to others to give the sense.) What will become (saith he) of our English Sabbatarians and their Abettors, who impose as many restraints of this kind, upon Christian people, as ever were imposed on the jews, by the Scribes and pharisees? And in Conclusion he attempts to put out our Eyes also, in persuading us again; That 'tis all one to say, on the Saturday and the Sunday; as on the Saturday, or the Sunday; As if unity and division; conjunction and separation, were alike with him: And it seems by this, that his Nature is most addicted to the latter. As for that great offence taken by him in the mistake of weakness, Append: p. 195. for incredulity; and Idleness, for Inconsideration in the printing of the primates Letter: There is no such difference, either in quantity or quality; but that if he can swallow the one, (as he hath done even now) he may as easily digest the other: And it being but a copy, it might as well happen as other greater mistakes have been in my absence between the Margin and the body of that letter. Though 'tis possible for Petrus to show his guilt of Idleness, to make more work for the Press to no purpose. Which petulant brain of his, may be excused by the want of that sense, which might divert his thoughts, otherwise. And for what else remains, Append: p. ●47. concerning the Bishops whether sent for, or sent to the King? Or whether the judges were willing or unwilling to deliver their judgement against the votes of the Parliament? I refer the Reader to what hath been said in the History, too tedious to recite. As for the challengers threats with which he concludes, (hereafter) to commit a public Riot on my whole History; and therein to be made immortal, by being loud and troublesome. He that marcheth against the Ocean may no doubt take abundance of Cockle-shells Captive. I confess ingeniously, there may be mistakes in the body of so large an History, which will be amended in the next Impression, as it is suddenly intended; wherein, your oblique Information, or any civil advertisement of others will direct me: Seeing (as Petrus saith) abilities not governed by Infallibility, cannot exempt a man from being obnoxious to mistakes, with which his own Pamphlets are pestered. But spare your Intelligence in the disquisition of one particular concerning the Children of Mr. john Hambden of Buckingham Shire, which is confessed an Errata, and must be thus corrected: That he died of his wounds, and left three Sons complete Persons both of body and mind; what ere sinister Report than gave occasion of the mistake. And now (Petrus) at parting: I could find in my heart to give you a little good Counsel: Be not so wild an Ishmaelite, as to have your hand against every man, and provoking every man's hand against you. Take the advice given to your namesake: Peter, put up thy sword again into his place. Leave off this cross-grain humour, studying the injury against such Persons, as the late eminent primate, so far above you in learning and reputation, that wise men look upon your language, like the barking at the Moon; or a madman throwing up a sharp stone, which falls on his own pate. This your last Book, having made you such a Bankrupt in point of reputation with most men, that all the charitable collections of your numerous helpers, will not easily recruite you. I reverence your function, and marvel that many of your Books do so little concern it, rather to the dishonour than otherwise, and I am not at all obliged to respect your person. Your travail hath been much earthy, at which you began, had you continued that journey, you might have amended your own errors. What is otherwise (as the observations of the Lords day, or of Persons of piety, who were and are for it) you have been in a continual combat against both. Your own friends conceive you unfortunate, to the disturbance of the Church in each; For my part, so soon as I find you reform, I shall contribute my endeavours, that your credit, now out of joint, may be set right again. Your own Pen that broke you must repair you, though as yet I am among the number of those that therein despair. And as you have been a mish Clergy) that ever was guilty of it. He began it whilst the Primate was living, and prosecuted it after his death, with all the violence that might be expected from an Enemy. As to the quotations he makes out of his own several undigested Pamphlets to excuse himself, they have only this sense, viz. If the Scandal he had raised on the Primate were but silently received (and so believed) he would be quiet. His laying aside of that Argument is of no value, unless he had revoked it. Page 208.] As to that Page, I say again, what the two Honourable Persons mentioned by me have given under their hands, and so attested, and also offer their Oaths therein, is enough to satisfy all unbiased Persons. And for his Author he ●ow boasts o●, (yet names none) If he be a wise man, he will not be willing to appear against the Primats own Declaration, and those other Testimonies, besides the Improbability so fully showed heretofore: If he be not wise, 'tis not much material. But I have done with it. Ibid.] He confesseth, that james Howel (to whose bare Name, he might have added the Title due to him, being of better repute than Peter Heylin) hath quitted that distinction of a personal and political Conscience by his Attestation of my History, wherein I have mentioned it, and is clear enough expressed: But that Peter hath a trick when he is at a loss to make a large circumlocution about the sense, only to amuse the Reader; the thing is apparent by his own words, wherein he was so conscious to himself, as that he had not the face here to repeat them, which are these, If the Historian did say any thing of it, it is expunged by Mr. Howel, whom it only concerns, when he had perused his History, and passed his approbation of it, (Petrus Resp. pa. 144.) so that his presumptuous conclusion is but a shadow, and will vanish with any intelligent Reader. Page 209.] For the abrogating of the Articles of Ireland; No rational unbias●ed Reader but may be satisfied in the Doctor's Misinformation of that passage; and if he had not a brow that could not blush, he would not have touched any more on that string: but seeing he will not own any Ingenuity in the clear acknowledgement of his mistake, let him die in it; I suppose few or none live in that opinion with him. Two pages following are spent in masking and unmasking himself, with so much tergiversation, that I let them pass; only in page 210. I find him most galled with that testimony which Doctor Prydeaux and Doctor Hackwell give of him, and instead of healing the wound, he hath made it more wide, and is therein found indeed his own self Revenger. As concerning Dr. Prydeaux (page 211.) first he professeth himself to have been his Enemy in that business, in that he saith page 212. If he had been called to the Hearing of it before the late King, it is not probable Dr. Prydeaux had gone off so clearly with those evasions▪ 2. He acknowledgeth page 113. That the paper published was of Dr. Prydeaux own penning, and given by him amongst his friends. 3. In page 214. That he opposed Dr. Prydeaux in his Lectures De visibilitate Ecclesiae, and (affecting a singularity) went a different way from him and other Tractates, in and about that time 4. He useth those of the Waldenses and Wickliffists, (as he styles them) very coarsely, calling them scattered Conventicles, charging them with Heterodoxes in Religion, who, I have heard and read, suffered very much under the tyranny of the See of Rome. 5. He highly magnifies the Writers of the Church of Rome, and in special Bellarmine for his cordial and stout maintenance of some fundamental points of Faith, comparing him with any of the Divines or learned men of the Reformed Churches, entituling him Nobilissimus Cardinalis, and so much himself confesseth; but by another Witness, I have been told, that he did also then, and at other such times, accumulate divers others, not only the like, but greater Titles. 6. He confesseth (page 215.) that upon this, Dr. Prydeaux censured him in the Schools for a Papist, and one of Bellarmine's Disciples. For my part, I cannot but subscribe to so learned a Testimony: and if it be so, it were better for him to appear the same, than thus to disguise himself to the dishonour of our profession. This whole Relation speaks little or nothing to the Doctor's reputation; Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee. What he tells us immediately after, of his two Sermons at Woodstock, and of the commendation given him by some of the Court, as they must be his own Flatterers, so it appears they were no judicious wise men by the overmuch latitude in it, (ibid.) as if in those two Sermons he had done more against Popery, than all the Sermons Dr. Prydeaux had preached in his life time; as it was an absurd, ridiculous rant, so it is worse becoming his own pen to be the Trumpet thereof. And how it agrees with his haesitation, whether the Religion of Popery be I dolatrous and superstitious? (as he doth in his Examen Historicum of Mr. Fuller's History) I leave it unto any man to judge, I am sure in it he strays from the Homilies of the Church of England, who do fully determine it. And what that Error was which he preached in a Sermon at Westminster, for which the Dean publicly rebuked him in the Pulpit, saying, Sir no more of that, and persisting therein he struck the Pulpit with his staff, saying, No more of that I say, I leave to his own memory, it being very likely to be a kin to this. And whereas he saith (page 216.) that he maintained this position, that the Church could not err, unless he have some unknown reserve, I know no point concludes him more, to be what Dr. Prydeaux apprehended him, and so I begin to think I was not at first much mistaken in conceiving of that Anonimous Observator (Peter Heylin) who began to write to the disparagement of the late Primate, to have been some Agent of the See of Rome. Nay, as if he had not injured himself sufficiently, he goes on to tell us, (page 217.) of the opposition he made to Dr. Prydeaux, and of his judgement in the questions propounded, and of a check given to Dr. Prydeaux by the late Archbishop of Canterbury. To what end is all this? is it, or can it be any reputation for him thus to thwart Dr. Prydeaux? will he put his in the same scale with him? Well, as we know Dr. Prydeaux was an eminent and a pious person, so it appears Dr. Heylin was a Disturber of him, and hath in this very Book of his Examen Historicum confirmed it sufficiently, in the abuse of Mr. Thomas Fuller, one of better reputation than himself; and therein (sooth for to say) I cannot but commend him, he always aims at high and worthy persons, not spending his Bolt (soon shot) upon such as are of mean▪ esteem. We have his own Confession, and so the Crime is no new one, (as he saith) but an old one, with which seeing he hath charged himself, what need we any further Witness? He comes off but poorly from the Hiss, and is as much mistaken in his confident conclusion; this whole Relation with all prudent men making very much for the ho●our of Dr. Prydeaux, and Peter Doctors own disreputation. And so I leave him in the dirt with which he hath bespattered himself sufficiently. Page ●19.] As for that misplacing of the words by the Printet, viz. Dr. Hackwell Archdeacon of Surrey and of Exeter College, for Dr. Hackwell of Exeter College, and Archdeacon of Surrey, was not so worthy his Discourse as thus to spend six lines about it. Now, as for Dr. Hackwells certificate of him (p. 220) it had been his wisest way to have let that die also; first, the return he makes (p. 222.) to the diminution of Dr. Hackwells' abilities, charging him with weakness in penning of his book, & affirming his own tale of St. George and the Dragon far excelling him in the Answers, these are not to be heeded, being only his own testimony, and will be as little effectual to the injuring of the same and worth of that person, as what he hitherto vented, hath been to the late Primate or Dr. Prydeaux. For his language (p. 223.) of Dr. Reynolds & Dr. Hackwell (both eminent professors of the Protestant Religion) and the rest of that gang (those are his words) a Jesuit would have said little more; But still 'tis like himself, as in the words thereafter following he hath the like again, which I disdain to repeat. And as to his magnifying the Roman writers, the Legendaries, he does not deny it, but defends himself in it. These being the Premises, the Conclusion, (which he only denies) must undoubtedly follow, of Dr. Hackwells' cen●ure of him, viz. That his words will hardly pass for a commendation or a slander. And in (p. 224.) as to my saying that he hath made good that term of Sophistry ●hrough●ut his Bo●k, he accuseth himself of it, in the repetition of my words by halfs, or disjointed: A●●for the rules of Grammar (which he would have the world know he hath not forgot) besides, that he descends too much from himself, to make so long a narrative about it (better becoming some Country Pedagogue) I am sure they are better sense, than what his Comment thereon doth give them; for in a word this is all, I having spoken of a Sophistry of his (in his book) immediately before, I added, which indeed are so many, is not this clear enough to be understood? viz. which Sophistries are ●o many? Yet Peter would have it amended into a calmer word, viz. Errors, but they plainly relate to Sophist●i●s; which I th●ught fit to instance in one of his (p. 225.) where he maintaineth a Copulat: ve and a Disjunctive t● b● all one, and that which himself here confesseth, viz. that it is not material, in which se●se they be used, differeth little from it. And so we have an end of him, though (p. 226.) he goes out like the snuff of a candle, with an ill ●ent of some unsavoury language against Dr. Hackwell, not much to be valued; only let me tell him, as to his reputation, which he here at last much boasts of, to have been with the generality of this Nation, certainly he hath looked on himself with some Multiplying Glass, for I can witness, that with the Court and Parliament, Clergy and Commonalty, he had the least of respect, and as much of the general hatred as any of his profession; he being indeed of such an harsh disposition, that few persons could consort with him: And so he continued during the Court and Parliament, as appears by the speech of a worthy Member, Sir Benjamin Ruddier, 7 Novemb. Anno 1640. After he had traced the proceedings of some of the Clergy, very much to their rebuke, he complains about dancing upon Sundays, that they would fain be at some thing that were like the Mass that will not bite, a muzzled Religion; they would evaporate and dispirit the power and vigour of Religion, by drawing it out into solemn specious formalities, into obsolete antiquated Ceremonies new furbished up. And Mr. Speaker (said he) this is the good work in hand which Dr. Heylin hath so often celebrated in his bold Pamphlets. All his Acts and Actions are so full of mixtures, Involutions and complications, as there is nothing clear, nothing sincere in any of his proceedings, etc. and much more, which I forbear. 'Tis true, this Dr. Heylin was entertained by some persons, a fit bold Agent to be made use of in the opposing of such whom they pleased should be affronted, and that for promotion (of which yet, they did not think him much worthy) he would adventure upon the broaching any thing for several ends, and this is his Character. I shall only add this, that it had been very undecent in me to have dealt thus with any other of his profession, which I very much reverence in them; but he hath made himself so cheap and contemptible, by his often personal biting and scandalising eminent men, that he is held fit thus to be handled, he having been, and is, the Bou●efeau of the age that disturbs all men; And as to myself, for his further threats, I have learned to despise them. Then in his very winding up of the bottom of his Appendix, a Note (as he calls it) overslipt him concerning the Affairs of Oxon. Not at all relating to this difference, yet he directs the Reader to Folio () blank; but where, ●r in what Book, or of what Author, by Name or Title, he doth not express, only he mentioneth Mr. Fuller, and Mr. Sanderson: Some Crotchet it seems, was in his pate, which neither he, nor his Agent understood, and therefore we have it imperfect. And so having prosecuted him thus far by pursuit, I shall now bring him from his Arrest, unto his Arraignment. The Arraignment OF Dr. PETER HEYLINS' ADVERTISEMENT; ON The three Histories Marry Queen of Scots, King james, & King Charles Vindicated, By the Author WILLIAM SANDERSON, Esq LONDON, Printed by Tho. Leach, 1658. The Preface. DId not my Judgement tell me, that Peter Heylin, Dr. of Divinity, his Advertisements were not the results of the wisest so●t of Readers, I should willingly acquiesce in this difference: for as I have reason to think that there are a Judicious party numerous enough on my side; so have I humility sufficient to confess, that I may in some things be subject to mistake (with which I am assured, his writings do abound) But yet, I cannot allow him such a completeness, and ine●●ability in his Examen, as to exclude myself from a Vindication, or to swallow such large and hard Morsels before I chew them; the passage of his Gou●et hath been observed, that Mountains of Errors have gone down with him, without reg●et. For my ●elf, I am resolved, that nothing of passion, petulancy, or desire to contradict, or vanity to clear myself, shall have any bias upon my Judgement, to make me gratify my will, which reason and reputation doth not command me to observe. And truly (as I was desired by some friends) I could perhaps be content to take this as his last potion, at this time, for once and no more; but then, it is like he means to prescribe such others, as a diet or me to feed upon, without observing of a mean, or resolving of an end. And indeed concerning this Grand Examiner of other men's writings (this altar Possevi●us, whose office he usurps) if any man were at leisure to Advertise his mistakes, Errors, and idle passages, in some of his, especially h●s Geography, Countries, Rivers, Nations and Names never in being; His whole History of Saint George and the Dragon sufficiently de●ected by learned men, not to mention all his erroneous opinions in his writings, he would find work enough, and should have done well to amend his own mistakes, before he had meddled with others, and to have brushed his own Coat, which in many places is ●o foul, that needs a Rubber to clean it▪ But I forbear any more, and come to the matter. The Arraignment. THis Grand Censor is so far ingenuous, as to afford us a Preface to his Advertisement on the History of the Queen of Scots and King james, and there he tells us, That he having made an end of his Ecclesiastical Animadversions, he enters upon matters civil, Historical 〈◊〉 in those Histories. Yet he confesseth, in most men's opinions he might be better employed, for I cannot herein find (saves he) any malicious or dangerous untruths destructive to the Church of England, or to the same and honour of Prelates, or the regular Clergy; And in the conclusion of the Advertisement (p. 28.) he says, he must do right to the Author himself, whom he looks upon, as a man well principalled, and of no ill affection to the Church or State. I am obliged to his severe Advertisement for this truth of the first, and to his favour for the last; but not for his Aspersions upon me presently following, against my Expressions in my former Post-haste Reply, which he is pleased now again (as before) to term Scurrilous; and yet what cause have I to complain, when in his said Preface to th●se Advertisements, he compar●s most of our Scrip●uri●nts (as ●e sti●es them) (Ecclesiastical or Civil) with the Ape-Carrier in the History of Don Quixot, who cared not if his Comedies had as many Errors, as there are motes in the Sun, so he might get money by them? Well bouled Peter! But ●ere his Amanuensis, or Clerk, Reader, made bold to beg his Master's Animadversion, whether Don Quixot were a Poet and made plays, or a Scripturient Ecclesiastical, or Civil, because he is quoted comparative with such Writers? Neither so nor so (said the Doctor) he was a warlike Champion, such another as St. George; Then (said his Man) you being Testis ●emporum, and your Treatise being styled Examen Histori●um, let him be called St. Don, or the ot●er Do● Geo●ge, both alike Champions, and alike fit to be Recorded. But in earnest, the Doctor pro●esseth, that hereafter he resolves to lo●k back upon his own Errors, and to redeem the time, b●cause h●s ●ormer days were evil, and in this resolu●ion it were ●appy for him to acquiesce, for which I sh●ll put ●im into my Pater N●ster, but never in my Creed. Thus mu●● with his preamble Preface. T●e Doctors first Advertisement upon which he reads a Lecture, is taken out of my Introduction, a mistake he says, naming [Folio 1. Marry, King Henry's Sister] for his daughter (page the first.) An oversight of the Composer, the Copy was true, and there being no Errata (in my absence) annexed either to this, or the other Histories, with which he quarrels; the Readers Judgement may amend such oversights with his pen, and never be beholding to a Doctor of Divinities Advertisments. Fol. 2. [That King james the fifth, was the 108th. King of Scotland.] It may come near the truth (says the Doctor) for King james the sixth, pretended to be but the 106th. King, & quotes an old verse, Nobis haec invicta tulerunt Centum sex Proavi, p. 2.) But there were two Kings Sovereignty's questionable, and never adjudged. The next is [Fol. ●. that the Pope excommunicates King H. 8. and interdicts his dominions, and moves the Emperor and French King to be his Enemies, to palliate such potency he procures an interview with them, at Nice in the confines of Provence,] The Doctor confesseth that this interview was between the French King and the Pope at Nice, but far enough (says he) from the borders of King Henry's Dominions, at which Henry was not present, p. 2.) Nor do I say, he was; Nor did I mention the word Dominions in reference to the place of Interview, but to the Pope's malice of Interdiction. These Advertisements refer to the Introduction of the History, and now follows the History itself. [Fol. 8. Prelate Bishops brought in by Paladius] but the Doctor cunningly leaves out that which follows [having had (by their favour) (said I) Priests and Monks before.] He allows of this as of my opinion, and the consent of some of the Scots, taken (he says) from Buchanan a fiery Presbyterian, and consequently a professed Enemy to Bishops, p. 3.) and ravelling into a long discourse with this distinction, that Priests and Monks might instruct the people, but not Governed without the help of Bishops; and therefore he asserts, that Prelate Bishops were not first brought in by Paladius, as the Scots say, nor was that Church so long a time without Bishops, as the English Presbyterians would have it, p. 4.) but as my History is not properly concerned in that difference, nor do I consent to his opinion, and so it is but ipse dixit Petrus. [Fol. 15. john Calvin a Frenchman of Aq●itane] Not so (says he) but of Picardy, p. 4.) some Authors disagree say I: Nor is it much material, no more than the nex●, to which he skips, fol. 91. [Fol. 91. The Lords of Aubigny take name from the village so called in Aquitane] he says in the County of Berry, p. 4. (it may be so.) [Fol. 20. And therefore to strike in with his Son and Successor she kept his Father's obsequies, with Magnificent solemnities in St. Paul's Church London,] the obsequies of the French King Henry 2. performed by Queen Elizabet●: Not so much (says the Doctor) on that ground, but to preserve her own Religion, the honour of our Church with Papist Princes, p. 4.) We may agree in this too, it might be for both; yet the political State interest (confederacy) is the usual ground, and more obvious to the civil affairs, rather than to the Ecclesiastical. [Fol. 27. An hundred Marks a year was then sufficient for a single Minister] Understand not (says he) a Mark 13 s. 4 d. English, but 13 d. ob. Scotish, p. 4.) and so he goes on, as to supply the pretended defects of my Expression, by his Arithmetical observation, how much those different marks English and Scotish amount unto: so that the Reader may imagine, it was my narrow opinion [that so little, was sufficient for a Minister] but my discourse is full enough and satisfactory; for speaking of the baldness of the Scots first Ministry, and [their supplications (say I) for their maintenance, being as yet at the will of the people, a reasonable pittance was thought sufficient contribution, etc. for by compute of their own Lords of the Congregation, 100 Marks a year, was then sufficient for a single Minister, viz. five old Pieces.] the very words of the Record; And lest any Reader should be mistaken herein, the Margin hath these Notes, very small, a Scotish Mark is but 13 d. ob. sterling; an old piece 22 s. in gold. But I am almost weary to answer the Examinors' Advertisements so mean, and yet so many, as I fear may tire the Reader outright, yet he makes haste, and skips on, to fol. 53. [Fol. 53. Claimed by Charles of Arragon, and Peter de Taracene, for the Isle of ●icile,] Having occasion to discourse of Trials of right by Combat, I mention examples, and amongst others, these Challenges. He says no; It was once intended between Peter King of Arragon and Charles Earl of Anjou, p. 5.) True too, say I, they were two several Combats, several persons, at several times; I say [claimed] he says intended, for neither of them ●ought. The like he marks at fol. 55. [there were some preparations in King james time intended, between Rey and Ramsy,] Not so (says the Doctor) but in King Charles time, p. 5.) Certainly say I, an oversight of the Composer, for in my History of King Charles, I mention that whole Trial very particularly, and therefore this Advertisement so obvious, needs no reproach on me. [Fol. 83. Katherine de Medicis, Pope Clement's Brothers daughter,] he says she was not, and ravels into her Pedigree to prove his Assertion, p. 5.) But then take altogether, I said [that I may not omit the horrid Massacre throughout all France, upon the Persons of the reformed Religion, called by the Adversaries Hugonotes; the History is so horrid, and the more uncertain in particulars, because the Papists piece it out with some excuses: but the truth was written by one Ernest Varamond of Freezeland then living, An. 15●●.] And because I would not be suspected to adulterate the story, I caused it to be printed in another Letter or Character, (as it is usual when an Author recites another's words) so than it was not fo● me to alter those words (Brother's Daughter) not being mine ●wn, but the Authors; Nor was it then, or is it now, necessary for me to examine the nearness of her relation, with which the Doctor troubles the Reader. Another monstrous mistake [fol. 89. Poictour] for Poictou, p. 6.) the letter r. added by the Composer, and overslipt by the Corrector. Another worse, a word mistaken [fol. 96. Duke] for Earl, p. 6.) what need Mr. Doctor Advertise this, when the next line mentions him Earl of Arran, and so throughout the Paragraph, and forty times before, and after? Another, where I pray? Marry in fol. 149. a misname [Mettallan] whom afterwards is named Maitland, p. 6.) I do so, from his name Metallanus, where the Latin writers mention him; and Maitland the Scotish writers call him, and here the Riddle is resolved. Yet another, ten folioes before, viz. fol. 139. [Fol. 139. History of Queen Elizabeth writ by Martin] he says Martin writ no farther than King Henry 8, the rest possibly is clapped too by the Publisher of that History, being Camden's Annals of that Queen, p. 6.) If the Doctor be not mistaken in his possibly, yet I am right, to entitle the whole History to Martin, whose name is to the Title page as the Author, be the Publisher whomsoever the Doctor can find out. [Fol. 156. The Leaguers for some Justice in their Rebellion elect Cardinal Bourbon, a degree nearer the Crown than Navarr,] No says the Doctor, not so near, p. 6.) and spends half a page to prove it, when in truth the word (as) is wanting, as a degree nearer, that is, the Rebels would have him to be so believed, to countenance their siding with him. [Fol. 161. Sir Thomas Randolph bred a Civilian, taken from Pembroke College in Oxon,] Not so says he; how then say I? That which is called Pembroke College, was in that time called Broadgates, p. 7.) a pretty quibble. Nay then the Doctor is out also, for Sir Thomas Randolph was not bred a Civilian, taken from Pembroke College in Oxon, nor from Broadgates say I, Tom Randolph was indeed, but Sir Thomas Randolph was made Knight some years after at Whitehall. Or thus, julius Caesar came out of France into England. Not so neither; but came out of Gallia into Brittany. Or thus, Dr. Peter Heylin was a poor Scholar in Magdalene College in Oxon. Not so says he, tell truth say I, Peter Heylin indeed was, but Dr. Peter Heylin was never a poor Scholar there; O Sir, I cry your Doctorship mercy, the jesuit that taught distinctions, was but a Dunce to you Doctor. [Fol. 189. The other Title was of the Infant of Spain] he says that I leave out the most material Title (viz. that is to say) from the Daughter of john a Gaunt D●ke of Lancaster, p. 7.) dear Mr. Doctor, how prove you this, viz. that is to say, the most material Titlo? However, I do not leave it out, for speaking of the treasonable designs against the right succession of Queen Elizabeth, and her lawful Heir, mentioning several Titles in Dolemans' Book devised by the Jesuit Parsons; [The other Title (say I) was of the Infant of Spain, and therein they use their Catholic Doctrine to make it up with monstrous lies. First from Constance daughter to the Conqueror, etc. (though our Chronicles agree, that she died without issue.) Secondly, From Elynor daughter to Henry 2. married to Alphonsus' King of Castille. Thirdly, And descends from Blanch his daughter. Fourthly From Beatrice daughter of Henry 3. of England. Fifthly, From the Portugal family of john a Gaunt Duke of Lancaster.] Herein I express but what the Jesuit Parsons published falsely and maliciously to the prejudice of Queen Elizabeth and her lawful descendent; and the fifth Title from john a Gaunt answers the Doctor's Advertisement, and is not left out; but why Mr. Doctor should join with the jesuit, and assist him with one most material Title, when none but Traitors could justly approve of any Material or lawful T●tle but that of King james of Scotland, doth somewhat discover himself? [Fol. 191. Hawkins, Drake, Baskervile fire some Towns in the lsle of Dominica,] they fired (says he) some Towns in Hispaniola, and that Town of Dominica, but not on the Isle, p. 7.) You are misinformed (Geographer) that Town is named Do●i●go, and not Dominica; but I say again, they fired Towns in the Isle of Dominica▪ one of the Charybes, and although you say that those Islands had enmity with the Spaniard, it is no absolute reason, but that they may deserve hostility and firing by ill usage of Strangers, which they did to the English, thinking them Pirates; for so says the Pamphlet of that voyage, published at their return, an. 1597. which I can produce. How now? Hook here, look back about 40 Folioes; it seems his Clerk Amanuensis overpassed this, of great consequence, another Misnomer [Fol. 157. Carmardin] for Carw●rdin, p. 7) Nay then the Doctor must excuse me if I tell his mistake, this Gentleman was near Kinsman to my Father, he discovered the Estate of the Customs to Queen Elizabeth, he was conversant in my Father's Family, I have seen him sign his name very often, and can produce his letters (Carmardin.) [Fol. 229. Sir Thomas Erskin created Earl of Kelly, and by degrees Knight of the Garter,] No (says he) first of the Garter, and then Earl, p. 8.) [Fol. 238. Sir john Danvers,] for Sir Cha●ls, p. 8.) O● Sir, you are mistaken, his name was Sir john, and not Sir Charles. Fol. 293. The Lor● Norris,] for Sir john Norris (says he, p. 8.) Nay then we must be overtroubled with the Doctor, for I said [that the Deputy of Ireland erects Mount Norris there▪ in memory of that gallant john Lord Norris, under w●om he first exercised Arms.] 'Tis true, that when he first exxercised Arms, the ot●er was but Sir [Fol. 261. Queen Elizabeth gave up the Ghost to God, on that day of her birth from whom she had it.] Not so (says he) for she was born on the Eve of the Nativity, but died on the Eve of the Annunciation, p. 9) But I say again, that she was born and died on the Eves of the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary. Another monstrous mistake, and then the Doctor will have done as to this History, but we must fetch a freak backward, whither think you? 253. folioes, even to fol. 8. which escaped his helpers, but he will have it in. [Fol. 8. Queen Marry of Scotland left her Kingdom to her Son, who was born a King] Not so (says he) King james was born in june, and crowned in July, p. 9) 'Tis true too: He was born in june, an. 1566. and styled King at his birth, but because his Mother was compelled to quit the Regency to her Sons Guardians, and they to make her Resignation the more sure, crowned him afterwards. And we know that Coronation is but the ceremony of succession, King's successive, are by birth so before Coronation. And King james in one of his speeches tells the Parliament of England, that he was not to be taught by them, he being an old King, as ancient as his birthday. And these are all the mistakes, and every one, that this Doctor of Divinity can find out to Advertise. And thus have we been harrased, this History suffering under censure in terms positive by his Preface, but how proved in his Examinations of 262 large folioes, and how criminal, we submit to the Readers judgement: And truly in my own conscience I stand justified for a faithful Historian, excusable in those particulars, which he hath marked for grand Errors: when in so great a body, he is not able to find out any other blemish. And yet these Histories have been heretofore pitifully observed by Anonymous, his Agent, whom he patronizeth, and which I answered, and now but the same again; And his Advertisements on the History of King Charles, not more nor less than petty unnecessary Cavils, the Composers, Correctors, or Printers escapes, which an ordinary Reader may amend. And by comparison we may observe the Errors of his petty Apendix, which I have not heretofore noted, viz. Querit, for texit; not, for non; of o'er, for in o'er; Midsummer last, for Midsummer 1657; Archbishop of Canterbury, for Bishop of St. David's; Blesh, for Bl●●soe; anno 1627., for 1629; Nassantiae, for Nassoniae; but three, for three Dudlyes'; at the Valley, for the Battle; of the first, for his changing of the first design; Willam, for Milan; Proviso, for promise; Seas, for Scales; the first, for the last; the least, for them last; and many more, his pages not half way figured, and yet see how he bestrides me, if my feet but slip; and so I leave him. I am therefore at a stand with myself, if I shall need to trace him any farther in my pursuit after his scent, which leaves so foul a favour, ere I overtake him in the end; He being hereby brought and arraigned sufficiently enough, (I conceive;) or leave him to the Judgement of the wiser sort, who have good cause to blame me for exercising their patience with these unnecessary Cavils (the Remains are no other than such like) which render him ridiculous to the Reader, and may mark me for a fool, if I follow him any farther for the present, having some occasions of business, that better concern me, at this time. Unless for some satisfaction to the Reader, it may be convenient for me to Anatomise his Preface only, or short Survey (twelve pages) to his Advertisements on the History of King Charles. And therein his grave censure of that whole History at a clap, being no less than 1150 large Folioes. So that (says he) no sense can be picked out of it, but by circumstance and conjecture only, which defects (he tells us) he had observed in the Histories of Queen Mary of Scotland, and her Son King James, published without the name of any Author, but now laid claim to by the History of King Charles, p. 34.) His nonsense is thus to be understood, viz. That he would have observed the same defects in the former Histories, had he known them to be sanderson's, but they were published without the name of any Author, till now, that they are laid claim to by the Author of the History of King Charles; this he would seem to say. But in earnest, this his first Advertisement is so false, as that I expected his craving pardon of the gentle Reader in his numerous Errata, annexed to this his petty Pamphlet, by which Errata he appeears to have conned over his Advertisements for to be published complete, and yet therein I find not this untruth amended. A wonder to me, that none could read to him the Author's name William Sanderson, in words at length, subscribed, not only to the Title pages of those Histories, but also to this of King Charles. And then, to confirm his bold Censure of the defects in the former (of Queen Mary & King james) he refers us to a Learned judicious friend of his, but shames to name him: Nor is it necessary, he being belike of the Doctor's gang, and may not be known. And also he refers u● to the Observations upon Persons and Passages, in the Histories of the Queen of Scots and King James, p. 35.) Indeed these Observations were published without a name or literal mark, & were sentenced of all the Readers to be mean and scurrilous, Yet the Author of those Histories William Sanderson by name, vouchsafed to give Answer to that Libel. And as concerning that Answer, the Doctor meeting me in the street at London, his own invitation and his guide, conducted me into a Lane, and through a narrow passage or Entry up to his Chamber, where he begged of me my Answer to that Libel, which I sent him; and I profess to all the world I cannot of myself find out that place: So than his Tale, p. 41. of my finding him out at his Lodging, and what he insists thereon, is most untrue; But hereby it appears, that the Doctor could not be ignorant of the Author of that Answer, and of those Histories, and ever since, the Libeler is not known, and it is like he being conscientious of his Crime, d●rst never reply thereto, nor hath any Person owned it, till now that Doctor Peter He●lin, the Grand Examiner and Surveyor General, takes upon him to be suspected that Libeler, and quotes the Libel verbatim, to strengthen his impertinent Advertisements, with malicious calumnies to boot, on the whole bodies of those Histories, so that if the Doctor cannot clear himself of being the Pa●er of that Libel, he now appears plainly to be the Patron; and yet I must remember what I mentioned before of him, concerning those two Histories of the Queen of Scots and King james, viz. I cannot herein (says the Doctor) find any malicious or dangerous untruths destructive to the Church of England, or to the fame and honour of Prelates, or the Regular Clergy. Which Histories are divided into several volumes, and according to the many years Reign of these Sovereigns, and their times of Action, must therefore necessarily be very large, viz. that of the Queen of Scots and her Son, etc. 262 large Folioes; the other of King james, 338. Folioes. and this of King Charles, no less than 1150. Folioes. Yet we find them in a word rubbed over by the Doctor, with the stains of a p●●u●ent Censure; and yet again, this self same Doctor concludes in few words, and to render himself reproachful, for what he had spoken before or shall say hereafter, he avers, But to reduce these Items to a summa totalis as ●o the Histories, considering their length, there is much which deserves to be laid up in the Registers of succeeding ages, p. 39) And as to the History of King Charles. I cannot but acknowledge (says he) that he hath done more right to the King and the Church of England, than could be expected in th●se times, V●inam sic semper errasset, p. 40.) so saith Doctor Peter Heylin, Testis Temporum, the grand Examinor of all Scripturients by his Examen Historicum; but as others have censured him (Dr. Hackwell by name) so say I, The condition of the Man being such, as his words hardly pass for a commendation or a slander, his testimony as to the truth is not valuable, for, or against any Man, or any writing. And at the casting up of his Preface or Survey, concerning himself, an●●is engaging against me, he says, that I have beat him with the Spit, and basted him all over with gall and vinegar, the occasion of our quarrelling, p. 42. ● but I answer, that as to the truth of our difference, I have before in my Post-haste Reply, very faithfully and ingenuously set down the occasion to be otherwise, and need not here to be repeated, it being summed up to my hand in his writings, viz. his own pragm●●icalnesse and love of revenge. And this with modesty I may aver (whatever his malice can imagine to the contrary) that these Histories sell well, holding up their first good price, and thereby are valued in the commodious and profitable vent, with the general acceptation of those that pay for them, an argument sufficient against Dr. Heylins' Censure. But what occasion he intends forthwith to devise, of quarrelling with other Authors, we must expect some formal reasons no doubt. He being about (as we are informed) to Animadvertise on the large volumes and elaborate work of Mr. Fox his Books of Martyrs, for the Doctor could never endure those stories. And that being soon dispatched, than we are to be assured of his Advertisements on Sir Walter Raughleys' large History of the World. And afterwards he resolves to publish a set form of Apology in excuse of his own works. And in fine (as the best at last) he will examine himself, because (as he saith of himself) his former days have been evil, which all good men wish to be amended. And so Good Night Peter. The End.