THE LIFE and DEATH OF King CHARLES the First WRITTEN By Dr. R. PERINCHIEF Together with ΕΙΚΩΠΒΑΣΙΛΙΚΗ REPRESENTING His Sacred Majesty IN HIS SOLITUDES and SUFFERINGS AND A VINDICATION Of the Same King CHARLES the Martyr PROVING Him to be the Author of the said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against a Memorandum of the Late Earl of Anglesey and against the Groundless Exceptions of Dr. Walker and others LONDON Printed for Joseph Hindmarsh at the Golden Ball over against the Royal Exchange 1693. A VINDICATION OF King CHARLES I. c. THIS of late is become a Controversie and hath exercised several Pens and the Province I have undertaken is to digest the whole into as plain and familiar a Method as I am able to represent the Exceptions fairly and to answer them to add to illustrate and confirm what I conceive needs it to sum up the Evidence on both sides and to compare them and to make such Remarks as plainly arise from the Respective Evidence and by that time I have done this it will I presume be very easie for the Reader to determine the Controversie and to assign the true Author of this Book and repudiate the false one and Pretender In order to this I shall in the first place consider a Memorandum said to be written by my Lord of Anglesey in a vacant Page of one of these Printed Books which is in these words MEMORANDUM King Charles the Second and the Duke of York did both in the last Session of Parliament 1675 when I shewed them in the Lords House the written Copy of this Book wherein are some Corrections written with the late King Charles the First 's own Hand assure me that this was none of the said King 's compiling but made by Doctor Gauden Bishop of Exeter which I here insert for the undeceiving others in this Point by attesting so much under my Hand Anglesey To this it hath already been answered That both the said Kings have attested the contrary by their Letters Patents to Mr. Royston granting him the sole Privilege to Print all the Works of King Charles the First Those of King Charles the Second bear Date Nov. 29. 1660 and expresly mention the Fidelity of Mr. Royston to King Charles the First and to himself and in these remarkable Words In Printing and Publishing many Messages and Papers of our said Blessed Father especicially those most excellent Discourses and Soliloquies by the Name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Those of King James bear date Febr. 22. 1685 and expresly refer to the first Edition of the King's Works 1662 in which his Majesty declares That all the Works of his Royal Father were Collected and Published Now a Man would imagine that there could not be any possible Dispute which was to be preferr'd a Publick and Authoritative Attestation of the Kings themselves or a private Memor by a third person For the immediate Question here is not Who was the Author of this Book But who was so in the Opinion and Judgment of those two Kings And I would fain know whether the Testimony of my Lord of Anglesey is a better proof of their Sence and Judgment than their own Testimony or a private obscure unattested posthumous Hand-writing a more valid Evidence than the Broad Seals And this one would think abundantly sufficient to determine this part of the Controversie that is that a Man's Word is to be taken for his own Sense and Opinion before that of his Neighbours and that high and authoritative Evidence is always to carry the Cause in opposition to that which is no Evidence at all However as clear as this is Dr. Walker hath something to say to it tho I think stranger Answers were never given in such a Case And in the first place he tells us Pag. 28. That good Manners rather than want of good Reasons restrain him from fuller answering meaning I presume that these Kings did not speak truth tho he would not say so and accordingly he says afterwards it was but conniving at a vulgar Error which it was not their interest too nicely to discover Now this Answer plainly gives up the Cause it pretends to maintain for if it was not their Interest to discover it how came they both so frankly to tell it to my Lord of Anglesey and as the Memorandum speaks they both did assure him that at was none of the said King 's Compiling and that I think is a little more than a nice Discovery even a very plain and peremptory assurance So that if this be an Answer to the Letters Patents 't is equally so to the Memorandum And the same Interest I suppose which kept it a Secret from the whole Kingdom would have kept it a Secret from my Lord of Anglesey too especially considering that it was not only far more easie but also far more honourable to have concealed a matter of Fact within their Knowledge than to have wrongfully attested it and contrary to their Knowledge under the Great Seal of England But notwithstanding that Dr. Walker in further pursuit of this scandalous Answer tells us that this is Odiosum Argumentum designed not for real proof but to involve the Answerer in some Odium or Danger and which Respondents may dismiss unreplyed to not because they cannot but because they dare not answer it Why what was the matter what Danger was there in reflecting on those two Kings had the Doctor spoke out and in express Terms declared his Mind Was he afraid to be called to account and punished for it A Man that reads this would imagine that the Doctor was a perfect Stranger in his own Country and that he wrote his Book in some remote Corner of the World But when he daily saw the vilest things spoke of those two Kings especially one of them that ever were said not only of Kings but of the worst of Men when a great part of this pass'd into the World not by stealth or connivance but under the Authority of a License and in such seemed meritorious in such a case to talk of Odium and Danger and Fear is to scorn his Readers and to suppose they had all lost their Senses And therefore in plain terms the Doctor did not know how fairly to answer this and created imaginary and invisible Odiums and Dangers to get rid of an Argument he could not tell what to do with However in the next place the Doctor answers That Kings use not so critically to inspect all the minute Particulars of their general Royal Grants Meaning no doubt that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was such a minute Particular as needed great Criticalness to find it out among the rest whereas all the World knows what a mighty Figure that Book leaves among the renowned Works of that Glorious Martyr And the Truth is this Answer plainly insinuates that those two Kings knew nothing at all of this Books being inserted among the rest of their Father's Works and accordingly he tells
Evidence on that side be more in number and as credible if further there be no just exceptions to the Evidence on that side as having no personal Byass Partiality or Interest to sway them and there be just exceptions to that of the other there then can be no Dispute which will carry the Cause And this I take to be the Case here and which I conceive will plainly appear upon comparing the Evidence with respect to the Claim of King Charles and Bishop Gauden to this Book And to consider 1. The Evidence that is produc'd for Bishop Gauden's being the Author of it and that in truth is included in a very narrow compass and it is all finally resolved into one single Evidence and that Evidence is Bishop Gauden himself And this will appear upon a fair examining the respective Evidence that hath yet appeared on this side of the Question And they are these two First The Attestation of Dr. Walker And Secondly the Evidence of some Papers now in the hands of Mr. North. First The Attestation of Dr. Walker and what he says is this in short 1. That Dr. Gauden sometime before the whole was finished acquainted him with his design and shewed him the Heads of divers Chapters and some of the Discourses written of them and after some time spent in the perusal he asked his Opinion concerning it and he Dr. Walker told him he supposed it would be for the Kings Reputation but he expresly added he stuck at the Lawfulness of it and asked him how he satisfied himself so to impose upon the World To which he replyed Look on the Title 't is the Pourtraicture c. and no man draws his own Picture c. That he explained to him a Passage in the second Chapter and that he meant it of Dr. Juxton 2. That being both in London in an Afternoon Dr. Gauden a ked him to walk with him to a friend and in the going told him he was going to the Bishop of Salisbury Dr. Duppa whom he had acquainted with his design to fetch what he had left with his Lordship to be perused or to shew him what he had further written That Dr. Gauden desired him after a general Conversation to withdraw which he did and that upon return he told him that my Lord of Salisbury told him there were two Subjects more he wish'd he had thought on and propounded them the Ordinance against the Common Prayer and the denying his Majesty the attendance of his Chaplains and desired him to write two Chapters upon them which the Bishop recalled and desired him to finish what remains and leave those two to him and that Dr. Gauden did not pretend to have written those as he did to have done all the rest 3. Upon Dr. walkers asking Dr. Gauden after the King was murdered whether the King had ever seen the Book Dr. Gauden answered I know it certainly no more than you but I used my best Endeavours that he might for I delivered a Copy of it to the Marquess of Hartford when he went to the treaty at the Isle of Wight and intreated his Lordship if he could obtain any private Opportunity he would deliver it to his Majesty and humbly desire to know his Majesty's Pleasure concerning it But the violence which threatened the King hastning so fast he ventured to print it and never knew what was the issue of sending it for when the thing was done he judged it not prudent to make further noise about it by enquiry 4. Dr. Walker asking him And adds in a Parenthesis For we seldom were in private but somewhat was discoursed of this Book even to the last time I saw him after he was Lord Bishop of Worcester elect whether King Charles II. knew that he wrote it He answered I cannot positively and certainly say he doth because he was never pleased to take express notice of it to me but I take it for granted he doth for I am sure the Duke of York doth for he hath spoken of it to me and owned it as a seasonable and acceptable service and he knowing it I question not but the King also doth 5. Mrs. Gauden the Doctor 's Wife Mr. Gifford and Dr. Walker believed it as much as they could believe any thing and were as much assured of it as 't is possible they could be of any matter of fact 6. Dr. Gauden delivered to him with his own hand what was last sent up after part was printed or at least in Mr. Royston 's hand to be printed and after he had shew'd it him and sealed it up gave him caution to deliver it which he did on Saturday Decemb. 23.48 in the Evening according to direction to one Peacock Brother to Dr. Gauden 's Steward who was instructed by what hands to deliver it to Mr. Royston and in the same manner after the Impression was finish'd he received six Books by the hand of Peacock as an acknowledgment and one of them he hath still by him This is the Sum of Dr. Walker's Evidence in this matter out of which I shall at present only observe 1. That all that is material in this Evidence is resolved into the Testimony of Dr. Gauden himself viz. That Dr. Gauden acquainted him with his design that Dr. Gauden told him the Discourse of the Bishop of Salisbury that Dr. Gauden told him he did not certainly know whether King Charles I. or King Charles II. knew that he wrote it c. The Validity of which I shall consider when I come to the next Evidence that appears in this matter 2. That what seems to be otherwise is of no Validity at all nor can have any force with a rational and wise man And that because 1. It only seems to be something more but in truth it is not it is express'd indeed as if Dr. Walker had given us ocular Testimony that he had seen the Heads and some of the Discourses but this is very defective in a necessary and material point and does not come up to any strict Evidence For altho he says that Dr. Gauden shewed him the Heads of divers Chapters and some of the Discourses written of them and some time being spent in the perusal yet that which should make this a Proof that they were written by Dr. Gauden is altogether wanting and that is that they were written with Dr. Gauden's own hand This which is the only material thing there is not the least word of and which in a matter of this nature ought not nor reasonably could be omitted And I think it is plain either that Dr. Walker could say nothing to this or that he knew they were not written with Dr. Gauden's own hand if the latter the Evidence is corrupt if the former insignificant and if there be any force in this part of the Evidence it is not because Dr. Walker saw and perused the Heads and Discourses for that he might do whether Dr. Gauden wrote them or not but from
other Secret in the World but this that the divulging of it would gratifie Mr. Milton These therefore are mystical Expressions and prove nothing and the utmost that can be built upon them is Presumption and Conjecture which are far too feeble to support that which is raised upon them However if this were supposed and that such was the meaning of those Expressions it will still be resolved into the single Testimony of Dr. Gauden himself and how valid that Testimony is in this Case we shall see presently And in the mean time this plainly contradicts Dr. Walker's Evidence which is that Dr. Gauden told him that He could not positively and certainly say that King Charles the Second knew that he wrote the Book And it would look very ridiculous to present a Petition to that King and to use it as an Instance to recommend him to his Favour that in behalf of the Royal Family he had done like a King meaning he had writ the Book and at the same time not know whether that King knew he was the Author of it But of this also more presently In the mean time as to Dr. Gauden's Services and which possibly may be the Plea he made to the King he did indeed write and publish two Books the one A Protestation against the King's Death Printed for Mr. Royston 1648 and another proving the Non-obligation of the Covenant which might put him into the King's Favour and in truth it is very probable that the Protestation was the only thing Dr. Gauden was concerned in and being Printed by Mr. Royston and about the same time might be the occasion of all this Mistake and might be the Book he gave to the Marquess of Hertford c. if any such thing was ever done Among these Papers there is also said to be A Letter of Mrs. Gauden 's after the Death of her Husband to her Son Mr. John Gauden in which she speaks of the Book commonly called the King's Book and calls it the Jewel and adds that her Husband hoped to make a Fortune by it and wonders it should be doubted whether her Husband wrote it but says she has a Letter of a very great Man to clear it up There is also said to be a long Narrative of Mrs. Gauden 's Hand-writing shewing that her Husband wrote the Book and sent to her Son with the Letter This Narrative sets forth that after her Husband had wrote the Book he shewed it to the Lord Capel who approved it and was for the Printing it but wished the King might have a sight of it that an opportunity was taken to convey it to his Masesty by the Lord Marquess of Hertford when he went to the Treaty at the Isle of Wight That the Marquess after his return from thence told her Husband that he gave the Book to the King and his Majesty did well like it but was for putting it out not as his own but anothers but it being urged that Cromwell and others of the Army having got a Reputation with the People for Parts and Piety it would do best to be in the King's Name His Majesty took time to consider of it That her Husband not hearing the King's Pleasure about it and finding Dangers hastening on him he having kept a Copy by him sent it by one Mr. Simonds to the Press together with a Letter that Mr. Royston was the Printer but did not know but the King wrote it that Part was seized in the Press together with her Husband's Letter and Mr. Simonds was taken That nevertheless the Work was carried on and finished a few days after his Majesty's Death that when it was Published the Parliament was inraged and her Husband conceiving his Life and Estate in danger fled to Sir John Wentworth 's near Yarmouth intending thence to pass the Seas but Mr. Simonds falling sick and dying and her Husband not being discovered he altered his purpose and returned home That there was an Epistle first intended that the first Title was Suspiria Regalia but changed to Icon Basilice and that there were two Chapters added That the Marquess of Hertford the Lord Capel Bishop Duppa and Bishop Morley were at first the only persons privy to it That Bishop Duppa of Winchester being very sick her Husband went to the King and acquainted him that he was the Author of the Book and for the truth thereof appealed to Bishop Duppa his Majesty's Tutor who was yet living and made an Apology for Printing it without his Majesty's Father's Order or his but pleaded the Circumstance of Time and the King's Danger that his Majesty told her Hurband That till then he never knew that he wrote it but thought it was his Father's yet wondered how he could have time and ob served that it was wrote like a Scholar as well as like a King and said if it bad been published sooner it might have saved his Father's life that at the same time the King gave him a Promise of the Bishoprick of Winchester That he afterwards acquainted the Duke of York that he was the Author c. This is the Sum of the Evidence that is Collected from these Papers And from hence I have these things to observe 1. That this is all finally resolved into the single Testimony of Dr. Gauden himself and of what Consideration that ought to be in the Case before us will appear from these Particulars 1. A Man 's own Evidence in his own Cause labours under very great Prejudices and as the Wisdom of all Lands exclude a Man from bearing witness for himself so such Testimony can never be admitted to conclude and determine a Matter in Controversie in these two Cases 1. When there is another Claim and Pretender in possession of the thing in controversie in such a Case a Man 's own single Testimony signifies nothing nor is of any Validity The Book bears the Name of King Charles and hath for many years been acknowledged to be his and if Dr. Gauden should have said That he was the Author and not the King it would not be sufficient to defeat the King's Title nor to advance his own Because a Man 's own Testimony is incompetent to determine the Controversie between two Rival Authors on the one side there is the Authority of the Book it self which in every Line owns it self to be the King 's as speaking in his Name and the general Reputation of the World consequent upon that On the other is only the affirmation of another Pretender who would claim it for his own upon his own Evidence For let this Evidence pass through never so many Channels it is one and the same Evidence still if one Man tells a hundred that he did such a thing and they all testifie that he said so there are indeed a hundred Witnesses that he said it but there is but one that he did and that is himself if therefore Dr. Gauden acquainted the King the Duke of York my Lord
together that no end can warrant and nothing can parallel And now if a Man had acted in such a manner methinks he should have but little stomach to own it or if he did in the same breath he convicts himself of Falshood and lays a Bar to his own Testimony for 't is obvious that if a Man in such Circumstances can father his own Book upon the King he may with the same truth and justice lay claim to the King's Book and the pretence of Good Ends does not alter the Case for no doubt a good Bishoprick may be thought a Good End too and he that thinks the King's Honor will justifie the acting deceitfully for him may as well think his own Honor may justifie the same measure for acting for himself And what I wonder is such a Testimony worth in this Case when the Testimony it self plainly declares that he first abused the World in giving them a Book for the King 's which was not his and afterwards abused the King in taking great pains to assume it to himself And the truth is this Evidence such as it is confronts it self for if Dr. Gauden was the Publisher of this Book as these Papers represent then he gave as publick an Evidence as was possible that the King was the Author of it and as much as any Man does who sets his Name to his own Works And if he told Mrs. Gauden Dr. Walker or any other that he himself was the Author then he told them one thing and the whole Kingdom another which at last makes a fine Evidence of it and very fit to determine the Controversie which in the very Case contradicts it self and it is impossible to reconcile Dr. Gauden the Publisher to Dr. Gauden the private Relater I must confess I am heartily sorry and afflicted that I have said thus much concerning Bishop Gauden considering both his Character and Station in the Church and that he hath been long since dead But those who have been so earnest to assert his Right to this Book are to be thanked for it for it is the very Character they have given him and the very means they have used to prove his Title And if the Memory of King Charles the First must stand in competition with the Memory of Dr. Ganden I think there needs no Apology for doing Right to that King's Memory tho it should reflect on Bishop Gauden or a greater Subject than he But this I have said only in supposition that Dr. Gauden did in truth own himself to be the Author But that which follows I hope will clear him from that Imputation how severe soever those who plead his Cause have been to his Memory And that is 2. The second thing I have to observe from these Papers of Mrs. Gauden which is that they do in direct Terms and in notorious Instances contradict the Testimony of Dr. Walker And to make this very plain I shall set them opposite to one another in two Columns Doctor Walker pag. 5. Dr. Gauden some time after the King was murdered upon my asking hm whether He the King had ever seen the Book gave me this Answer I know it certainly no more than you but I used my best Endeavours that he might for I delivered a Copy of it to the Marquess of Hartford when he went to the Treaty at the Isle of Wight and intreated his Lordship if he could obtain any private opportunity he would deliver it to his Majesty and humbly desire to know his Majesty's Pleasure concerning it But the Violence which threatened the King hastening so fast he ventured to Print it and never knew what was the Issue of sending it for when the thing was done he judged it not prudent to make further noise about it by inquiry Mrs. Gauden pag. 37. An Opportunity was taken to convey the Book to his Majesty by the Lord Marquess of Hartford when he went to the Treaty at the Isle of Wight that the Marquess after his return told her Husband that he gave the Book to the King and his Majesty did well like it but was for putting it out not as his own but as anothers But it being urged that Cromwel and others of the Army having got a great Reputation with the People for Parts and Piety it would do best to be in the King's Name His Majesty took time to consider of it Dr. Walker pag. 5. I asking him for we seldom were in private but somewhat was discoursed of this Book even to the last time I saw him after he was Lord Bishop of Worcester elect whether that King Charles the Segnd knew that he wrote it he gave me this Answer I can not positively and certainly say he doth because he was never pleased to take express notice of it to me but I take it for granted he doth for I am sure the Duke of York doth for he hath spoken of it to me and own'd it as a seasonable and acceptable service and he knowing it I question not but the King also doth Mrs. Gauden pag. 38. Bishop Duppa of Winchester being very sick her Hushand went to the King and acquainted him that he was the Author of the Book and for the truth thereof appealed to Bishop Duppa his Majesty's Tutor who was yet living and made an Apology for printing it without his Majesty's Father's order or his but pleaded the circumstances of time and the Kings danger That his Majesty told her Husband that till then he never knew that he wrote it but thought it was his Fathers and wondred how he could have time and observed it was wrote like a Scholars as well as like a King and said that if it had been published sooner it might have sav'd his Fathers Life That at the same time the King gave him a Promise of the Bishoprick of Winchester That he afterwards acquainted the Duke of York c. That her Husband then told his Highness that the King promised him the Bishoprick of Winchester and that his Highness assured him of his favour And now what an admirable Harmony and Agreement have we here Such Evidence must needs be credited they are so consistent with one another in their Stories In Dr. Walker's Evidence Dr. Gauden did not certainly know and no more than Dr. Walker himself whether King Charles I. had ever seen the Book But in Mrs. Gauden's Evidence the Marquess of Hartford told him that he gave the Book to the King In Dr. Walker's he never knew what was the Issue of sending it But in Mrs. Gauden's that the King liked it well but was for putting it out not as his own c. In Dr. Walkers when the thing was done he judg'd it not prudent to make further noise about it by enquiry Nor need he as Mrs. Gauden represents it when the Marquess had told him already and by such a remarkable circumstance That Cromwell c. having got a great reputation with the People for Parts and Piety it would do best
these former Words that Dr. Gauden acquainted him with his Design And I take it to be very observable that of that Evidence which hath yet appeared there is not the least said that comes up to this point that the original Manuscript was written by Dr. Gauden's own hand which to me is a plain Evidence that it was never written by him for if such a thing had been Dr. Walker living as he says in Dr. Gauden's House and being made so privy to it and as he says perusing the Heads and some of the Discourses and Mrs. Gauden the Evidence of whose Papers I shall consider presently must needs have known it and I shall leave it to any considering man what value is to be put on such Evidence in such Circumstances which pretends to prove that one Person is the Author of a Book in opposition to another more generally reputed Author and at the same time never offers to prove that that Book was written by himself or by his immediate dictating and direction This sure is the direct Proof and if it could be had ought to have been produced and the World must be very easie and credulous if they will take the main point upon trust and be put off with general Stories instead of that in which the Proof does consist Is it possible for any man to believe that Mrs. Gauden did not know her Husbands Hand or that Dr. Walker did not know it Or further that Dr. Walker being so early acquainted with the Secret should not know of the Progress made in that Work from time to time or be able upon Perusal to discover some Interlinings or Alterations made by Dr. Gauden's own Hand In short did any man ever see Dr. Gauden write it or proceed with it or add to and amend it These and more we have as Evidence for King Charles's being the Author and it is a pleasant business indeed that this plain and direct Evidence must be confionted by Collections and Inferences and hold Asseverations without any manner of Proof to the direct matter in Controversie But this I shall further consider when I come to compare the Evidence on both sides In the mean time 2. This Evidence Dr. Walker hath contradicted himself in another Testimony of his in the hands of Dr. Goodal and given March 23. 1690. Where among others are these Words Dr. Walker and Mr. Gifford were both privy to these Affairs living together in the Bishops House though the Doctor is uncertain whether he ever read this Book in Manuscript or only saw it with its Title of the Chapters which plainly crosses and thwarts his Evidence in his printed Book in which he expresly attests that Dr. Gauden shew'd him the Heads of divers Chapters and that is not all but it follows and some of the Discourses written of them and if it had ended here the Evidence might have agreed well enough but it still follows and after some time spent in the Perusal so that it seems Dr. Walker had read some of the Discourses at least and that not transiently but after some time spent in the Perusal And in further Confirmation of this the Doctor adds And I perfectly remember that in the second Chapter which is of the Death of the Earl of Strafford there being these Words which now in the Printed Book of the first Edition are p. 8. l. 18 19 20. He only hath been least vext by them who counselled me not to consent against the Vote of my own Conscience And which he says Dr. Gauden told him he meant it of Bishop Juxton so that here we have Dr. Walker not only perfectly remembring the subject matter of that Chapter but also an intire Sentence and a particular Explication relating to it And this sure is not very consistent with his being uncertain whether he ever read this Book in Manuscript or only saw it with its Title of the Chapters I need not reflect upon this every man knows that when an Evidence interferes with himself and contradicts his own Testimony it renders the whole suspicious and is a prejudice to all he delivers in that Cause and all I shall remark is that Dr Walker's Memory hath fail'd him in that very Case wherein a good Memory is especially needful And to shew the Reader what weight there is to be laid upon Dr. Walker's Memory or Confidence he tells us p. 8. I am as sure as I can be of any thing that Dr. Gauden made the extract out of this Book called Apothegmata Carolina And yet he is perfectly and notoriously mistaken for as Mr. Long says p. 8. not he but Dr. Hooker was the Collector and Publisher who is now or lately was living in White Lyon Court against Virginia street in Wapping The next Evidence in the behalf of Bishop Gauden is taken out of some Papers said to be in the Hands of Mr. Arthur North Merchant living on Tower-Hill which Papers are said to be sent by Mrs. Gauden the Bishop's Wife to her Son Mr. John Gauden after his death they came into the Hands of Mr. Charles Gauden and after his death to Mr. North. A Summary of which is Printed in Pag. 35. seq of a Pamphlet intituled Truth brought to Light c. and according to that Print I shall briefly set down what seems the most to concern this Cause Amongst these Papers there is said to be a Letter from the Bishop to the Lord Chancellor Hyde dated December 28. 1661 and a Copy of a Petition to the King written by the Bishop's own Hand In which he declares what Hazards c. and what he had done for comforting and incouraging the King's Friends c. And that what was done like a King should have a King-like Retribution c. Another Letter there is to the Duke of York dated Jan. 17. 1661 urging his great Services c. As also a Letter from the Lord Chancellor Hyde to the Bishop of the Chancellor's Hand-writing dated March 13. 1661 imparting the Receit of several Letters from him that he was uneasie under the Bishop's importunity And towards the Close hath this Expression The Particular you mention has indeed been imparted to me as a Secret I am sorry I ever knew it and when it ceases to be a Secret it will please none but Mr. Milton Now by all these Expressions the Services the Bishop urges the doing like a King and the Secret that will please none but Mr. Milton at the end of my Lord Chancellor's Letter it is expected that we should understand the Writing and being the Author of this Book But what necessity is there for that Were there no Services that Dr. Gauden had done besides or at least that he might plead whether he had done them or not was it not possible for Dr. Gauden to have or pretended to have done like a King i. e. freely and magnificently as that Scripture-Expression means in the Case of Araunah but this single Instance And was there no
those Divine Meditations were seized by the Enemy with other Papers of Concern being inclosed in a Cabinet reserved for that purpose and that by the Benignity of the Conqueror or Divine Providence rather it was recovered above all expectance and returned to his Majesty's Hand and which infinitely cheered him And further Pag. 22. That a Person of high Command in that Army gave this Censure of it saying It was an handsome Piece of Hipocrisie There are several other observable Passages in this Author too long to transcribe And I heartily wish we could recover the Author's Name In the mean time the Testimony which he gives does so agree with the thing it self and so concur in some Particulars with the other Evidence before-mentioned particularly the seizing the King's Book so much of it as was then done at Naseby-Fight and the Recovery of it again and the great Joy the King had on the receiving it that they plainly corroborate each other and there can be no possible reason to doubt the Truth and Sincerity of such Evidence which at divers times and upon several Occasions give the same Testimony and in the same Cirstances These are some of the Evidences which prove King Charles the First to be the sole Author of this Book and which I conceive are so plain full and clear that it is impossible to avoid the Force of them or without great obstinacy not to be convinced by them For I think there is very little need to bestow much pains in comparing the Evidence on both sides and to shew which preponderates and ought to determine us in a matter of this Nature On the one side we have but one single Evidence if we have that to the direct Matter and that is the Person himself about whom is the Controversie and him also under the presumption of Advantage and Interest And on the other we have several credible and unexceptionable and disinterested Witnesses who neither had nor could have any personal Advantage from the Evidence they give On the one side we have two Witnesses giving their Testimony by Hearsay and Report that they heard the pretended Author say so c. on the other we have far more for weight and number declaring their proper knowledge of the Matter of Fact On the one side neither of the two Witnesses come home to the direct Matter or positively assert they saw Dr. Gauden write it or dictate it or saw it in his own Hand-writing or any thing like it But on the other the direct contrary some attesting they saw the King writing some part of it others saw it in his own Hand-writing and which they knew and one that he had the original Manuscript it self in possession and given him by the King On the one side we have one of the two Witnesses contradicting himself and both contradicting each other in very important parts of their Evidence On the other all agreeing not only in the main Fact but in several Circumstances and in all the material Branches of their respective Testimony And now if Evidence must carry it and I know no reason to the contrary it is plain that all the Advantage is on the King's side and there is no manner of comparison between them And sure 't is very easie to judge on which side the Right lies when plain positive direct and unexceptionable Proof is opposed only by intangled indirect contradictious Evidence full of Inconsistency I have now done with the first thing proposed the external Evidence proving the King to be the Author and proceed to the next viz. 2. The intrinsick Evidence which arises from the Book it self and if all the Testimony for King Charles's being the Author was set aside this would be abundantly sufficient to determine the Matter and would far over-balance all that has been said in behalf of Dr. Ganden and ten times as much more The Truth is the Book discovers its own Author and there is not a Line nor a Sentence but plainly owns the King's Hand and as plainly confutes all the pretences for Dr. Gauden But this is a copious Argument and to manage it fully would require a larger Book than that in Controversie And therefore I shall confine my self and speak briefly to these Particulars 1. The General Stile 2. The Historical Part of it 3. Some Particulars of the Subject Matter of it 1. The General Stile By this I do not only mean the Phrase and Expression but together with that the manner of Management and to this I add the great Weight of the Matter all these are very great and Majestick not only like a King but like that very King to whom they are ascribed and let any Man compare this Book with other the Works of this glorious Martyr and he cannot but see the same generous and free Expression the same Clearness of Reason the same Greatness of Mind in short the same Majesty throughout But for the Works of Dr. Gauden there is nothing in the World more unlike a luscious Stile stuffed with gawdy Metaphors and fancy far more Expression than Matter a sort of noisy and Romantic Eloquence These are the Ornaments of Dr. Gauden's Writings and differ as much from the Gravity and Majesty of the King's Book as Tawdriness does from a Genteel and Accomplish'd Dress The Truth is of all the Authors of that Age there is scarcely any Writings are more light and thin than those of Dr. Gauden and let any Man compare the best of Dr. Gauden's Writings with this Book and do it with Judgment and Discretion and I dare say he will be perfectly cured and he can no more believe that Dr. Gauden was the Author of it than he can believe that the King's Picture at Whitehall and that upon a Sign-Post were both drawn by the same Hand I know Mr. Walker talks fine things of a Man's changing his Stile and differing from himself P. 25. But when all the Pieces put out in a Man 's own Name shall be loose forc'd stiff and elaborate and one single one put out in the Name of another incomparably great and excellent This is such a Change as I believe no Man is capable of and no Man can give account for The Force of this therefore does not lie only in the difference of Stile and Expression but in that total Disparity that is between them in every thing for tho a Man may vary his Stile which yet Dr. Gauden by the several Subjects he hath writ on hath given no reason to think that he had a Talent that way yet he cannot be Master of better and finer Thoughts when he pleases or it he could to be sure we should see something of them or at least something like them in the Works which wear his Name and by which he design'd to communicate himself to the present Age and his Memory to Posterity Let a Man therefore who hath any Understanding in these things compare this admirable Book with the genuine
Works of Dr. Gauden his Sermons his Speech in the Lords House against the Quakers and his other Tracts and then let him believe they have all the same Author if he can This is so clear and convincing that nothing ought nothing can deseat it but the most plain and invincible Proofs He that says that Dr. Gauden is the Author of the King's Book lies only under this one Disadvantage that he says what is incredible in the nature of things and according to the common Rules of judging And if ever he expects to convince reasonable Men he must produce such Evidence so clear full and without Exception and of such undoubted Veracity and Authority as Men may resign up their Judgments and Reasons to the Testimony In short there was in that Age and in the Reign of that Pious Prince many Great and Learned Men in all Faculties and without any disparagement to him or to his Memory in all respects for superior to D. Gauden And yet I believe any Man who will carefully and with attention peruse this Book and impartially judge when he hath done he will conclude that no Subject the King had was able to write this Book and none less qualified for it than Dr. Gauden 2. The Historical Part of it And here I shall not need to observe that this excellent Book contains the most remarkable Passages of State from 41 to the middle of 48 and that not only the outward Shell or the meer Facts but the secret Springs by which they were moved here we have the Rise and Growth of the several Factions the Steps that they made the Intrigues they managed with most wise and judicious Remarks upon them which plainly denote the Author to be an excellent Statesman of a clear and penetrating Judgment and well vers'd in the Affairs he wrote on especially if we add these Matters personally relating to the King which considering his various Fortunes and Removes and particularly after Navesby-Fight and his Removal to the Scots and from thence to Holmeby I question whether any one single Man in England could have given not only such an Account but any clear Account at all The Mystery of his going to the Scots is plainly laid open in that Chapter of his leaving Oxford and going to the Scots wherein are his Majesty's Reasons for so doing And in the next Chapter are as plainly insinuated the Proposals that were made to him of Sacrilege and the Attempts made upon him to gain his Consent against his Conscience c. The Truth is all the Meditations are weav'd into a Form of Devotion and so they do admirably express the Piety and Goodness of the Compiler but they are withal Historical and give the best Account of the Mystery of Iniquity that then reigned together with a more exact Judgment concerning the several Particulars than is yet extant in any other Book All which do very well agree with the Character of King Charles the First But how to reconcile them to Dr. Gauden's Character is I think an insuperable-Difficulty For as to his Faculty at History and how judicious a Compiler he was we have as far as I know but one single Instance and that is the Life of Mr. Hooker wrote by him and prefix'd to one Edition of the Ecclesiastical Polity and which to say no more is certainly the most injudicious History of a Man's Life that ever was written There are so many palpable Mistakes and Falshoods so very little to any purpose of History so lean jejune and empty Accounts of the Man whose Life he undertook that it plainly betrays a Defect in every necessary Qualification of an Historian and it is written without Care or Diligence or Judgment But I had rather leave this to the Readers own Eyes than extend it further and if he please to compare this Book and that Life together let him judge for himself and if after that he can possibly believe they have both one and the same Author he is abandoned to the utmost degree of Easiness and Credulity and may believe any thing in the World 3. Some Particulars of the Subject Matter And these I shall mention are such things as could only be known to the King himself and consequently could have no Author but him As 1. His secret Intentions 2. The Matters of his own Conscience 1. His secret Intentions These are expressed all over the Book I shall only select two or three Passages which contain not only his secret Intentions but his Appeals to Heaven for the Truth of them In the Chapter on the Insolency of the Tumults God who is my sole Judge is my Witness in Heaven that I never had any Thoughts of going from my House at White-Hall if I coud have had but any reasonable fair Quarter And in that Chapter Vpon his Retirement from Westminster I may in the Truth and Vprightness of my Heart protest before God and Men that I never willfully opposed or denied any thing that was in a fair way c. And again in the Prayer Thou knowest O Lord how unwilling I was to desert that place in which thou hast set me and whereto the Affairs of my Kingdom at present did call me And upon the Listing and Raising of Armies God knows I had not so much as any hopes of an Army in my thoughts And upon the Troubles and Rebellion in Ireland If I have desired or delighted in the woful days of my Kingdom 's Calamities if I have not earnestly studied and faithfully endeavoured the preventing and composing of these Bloody Distractions then let thy Hand be against me and my Father's House And many others of the like nature and which I think I shall not need to make any Remarks upon only desire the Reader to tell me whether he thinks these are the Expressions of King Charles or of Dr. Gauden or whether he can believe that Dr. Gauden durst make such Appeals and Imprecations upon Fictions and Forgeries If he does believe that Dr. Gauden durst do this I am certain he can believe nothing that Dr. Gauden asserts nor can he believe Dr. Gauden if he should appeal to Heaven and imprecate the Divine Vengeance concerning the Truth of his being the Author of this Book For he that can appeal and imprecate upon one Forgery may do so upon a hundred 2. The next thing I have to observe is a Matter relating to the King's Conscience and of a high Nature 'T is in the Case of the Earl of Strafford where the King plainly charges himself as guilty of his Blood by giving his Consent to that Bill which took away his Life In that Chapter upon the Earl of Strafford 's Death the King saith He preferred the outward Peace of his Kingdoms before that inward exactness of Conscience before God And adds I am so far from excusing or denying that Compliance on my part for plenary Consent it was not to his Destruction whom in my Judgment I thought not by any