in a fair hand which he judged to be the King 's own and he told me when he real the King's Book in print he found in one Chapter the very same things word for word as far as he could remember with that Manuscript Paper What Chapter the King was then writing of I cannot tell neither did I ever ask my Father but if I may conjecture of it at this distance I should guess it might be that wherein he Complains of being deprived of his Chaplains for while my Father was there the Parliament sent down some Chaplains of their own to attend upon Him Thus Sir you have what I can recollect concerning this Matter Be pleas'd not only in this but in whatsoever else I can serve you to Command Your ready Servant and Faithful Friend Tho Dillingham A little before this Letter came to my hands I had another from a Learned Fellow of Trinity College in Oxford with an enclosed Paper in it taken by his own hands from the Original now in the possession of the Gentleman 's own Son Fellow of Exeter College which enclosed was this IF any one has a desire to know the True Author of a Book Entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I one of the Servants of King Charles I. in his Bed-Chamber do declare when his said Majesty was Prisoner in the Isle of Wight That I read over the above-mentioned Book which was long before the said Book was printed in his Bed-Chamber writ with his Majesties own hand with several Interlinings Moreover his Majesty King Charles I. told me Sure Levet you do design to get this Book by heart having often seen me reading of it I can Testifie also That Royston the Printer told me that he was imprison'd by Oliver Cromwel the Protector because he would not declare that King Charles I. was not the Author of the said Book Signed and Sealed Octob. 16th 1690. Wil. Levet And again understanding that one Mr. Hearne now Schoolmaster of Amesbury and formerly Amanuensis to Sr. Phillip Warwick who waited upon the King at the Isle of Wight as a Clark and Writer as did also Mr. Odert and Mr. Whitaker could give me some Account from Sr. Phillip as to this Book I went to him when he was last in London and desired to know what Assistance he could give me as to the proving the Truth of the Books being the Kings who presently with his own hand gave me this following Testimony I Robert Hearne formerly Servant to Sir Phillip Warwick do Attest That I have often heard my said Master Sir Phil. Warwick as likewise Mr. Odert and Mr. Whitaker declare That they had Transcribed Copies of the late King Charles the First 's own Copy of his Book Entituled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written with His said Majesties own hand Witness my hand In the Presence of Phil. Mist Fr. Shipton Robert Hearne I have but one thing more to take notice of as to this Matter and that is a Story of this Authors concerning Mrs. Gaudens declaring to Bish Nicholson of Gloucester upon receiving the Sacrament that her Husband wrote the Book how far this man is to be credited as to any Story he tells I leave the Reader who has looked his Book over impartially to judge but however seeing he is so fond of and so apt to pick up any thing that he thinks will serve his wicked design even to the very Mistakes of the Press as is apparent in the Words Barking and Recalled with which he makes such ridiculous Work I will give him a Rowland for his Oliver and will Answer this Story with another quite contrary to his from the same Gentlewoman There is a Reverend and Learned Minister now of London who does assure me that a Lady of good Quality told him sixteen Years agoe That being in discourse with Mrs. Gauden she told her that she had a great Concern for the Eternal State of her Husband because he pretended to be the Author of that Book when to her knowledge he never writ it the Reverend Person tells me he has forgot the Ladies Name or else he would freely have had his own mentioned but the Story it self he very well remembers and I am sure he is to be credited as much as any man that wears a Gown And thus good Reader thou hast here Sir John Brattle's Testimony for the Book in 47 Mrs. Simmondses that her Husband dyed asserting the Book to be the Kings own Dr. Meriton's declaring his putting Dr. Walker to silence with his Story of Mr. Simmonds Mr. Cliffords Account of Mr. Simmonds committing it to the Press by the King's Command together with Alteration of the Title by Dr. Jerem. Tayler and his Composing and Correcting it not from Dr. Gauden's but Mr. Odert's own Copy Mr. Long 's Letters positively declaring Dr. Gauden's confessing it to be the King 's own Book Major Huntington assuring a Non-conformist Minister that he presented some of the same Papers that made up part of the Book taken at Nazeby Fight which was three years before Dr. Walker pretends Dr. Gauden sent it to the King Dr. Dillingham's reading some of the Book presently after the King came from Newcastle Mr. Levet's seeing and reading the Book in the Isle of Wight a great while before it was printed and Mr. Hearne's Testimony from Sir Phil. Warwick Mr. Odert and Mr. Whitaker who all attended the King in his Imprisonment as Clerks and Writers and if all these will not weigh down the vain Tattle and confident Say-so of single Dr. Walker from single Dr. Gauden then the Lord have Mercy upon us for we must needs be got to an almost Jewish State of Incredulity From which good Lord deliver us Good Reader there is one thing more to take Notice of which had almost slipt my Memory and that is this bold mans triumphing over King Charles I. upon the score of a Prayer taken out of Sir Phillip Sidney's Arcadia made to an Heathen God and as he impudently assert made use of by him in the time of his Captivity Now I must desire thee to observe the Spight as well as Falsity of this Reflection for if Dr. Gauden made this whole Book as Dr. Walker asserts and the Copy he sent to the King was never returned nor made use of in any of the Impressions then the Prayer was put in by Dr. Gauden and the King no ways concerned in it and consequently it is a Scandal founded in the greatest Malice and ill Will to the Reputation and Vertue of this Great Man but as I deny and have fully proved that Dr. Gauden was not the Author of this Book so I must acquaint thee that this Prayer which this man makes himself and his Party so prophanely merry withal was not printed in the first Edition by that Copy sent by Mr. Simmonds to the Press but was foisted in afterwards by some crafty and designing Person on purpose to expose the Book and to lessen that deserved Credit
Paulo app their transgressions are like to bring them to that confusion of the Israelites when they had no King Judg. 21. every one did what seemed good in his own eyes because they feared not the Lord Jhos 10. they said What should a King do to us The young men presumed to be wiser than the elder Isai 3. the viler sort despised the honourable Lament ult and the very serving men ruled over them I profess when I saw these things so clearly I could not blame the King to be so backward in giving his assent to the settling of our Presbyterial discipline in that Kirke for the great inconveniences that might follow thereupon to Him and his Posterity there being so many strong Corporations in that Kingdom to lead on a Popular government such a number of people that have either no or broken estates who are ready to drive on any alteration and so weak and powerless a Nobility to hinder it Multos dulcedo proedarum plures Res angustoe veb ambiguoe domi alios scelerum Conscientia stimulabat C. Tacit. And now Madam I hope those Men who have of late so boldly ventured to throw the most Sticking Dirt in the Face of this Great Prince and Patient Martyr will by Repentance give glory to God and do so no more in hopes of which I after my Prayers and Earnest Wishes for the Preservation of your Ladyship and whole Family and particularly for the long life and health of your Noble Lord to whose good Counsels and indefatigable Labours we of the Church of England owe so much do take leave of your Ladyship and subscribe my self MADAM Your Ladyship most Humble and Faithful Servant Richard Hollingworth A Further Defence OF THE KINGS Book c. Reader THis Declaration of Mr. Henderson's was communicated to me some Weeks ago by the Reverend Mr. Lamplugh Son to the late Arch-bishop of York and it had been Reprinted before now but that I understood there was an Answer coming out against my Second Defence of King Charles I. and therefore I was resolved to stay a little longer that so if there was any thing in it worth Answering I might make but one Trouble of it and at last out it came with a Title as false as the greatest part of the Book it self Namely Ludlow no Lyar which I do not doubt but thou wilt be convinced of by that time thou hast read a little further The Truth of it is the whole Book is so full of Rancour and Malice of Unmannerliness and Railing of bald and false Assertions of Slander and base Reflections that it is a Shame to and a Confutation of it self and every Leaf of it stinks in the Nostrils of all the good and sober of all the wise and unprejudic'd Readers that I have either met with or can hear of and it is a Dishonour to the Cause of the Enemies of King Charles I. to have no better a Champion to throw down the Gauntlet in its behalf and there are no men about the City cry it up but the great Enemies of Monarchy and Episcopacy let their Hypocritical Professions be what they will The Book is Dedicated to a Reverend Kinsman of mine under the Name of Wilson from Yarmouth and what can we expect but Falsehood when he begins at this rate For my Kinsman assures me there is no man of that Name in Yarmouth but an ordinary Saylor and I hope the World will believe the Talent of such a Man lyes otherwaies than to write such Letters The short is the whole Book as appears by the Stile the Air and Scurrility of it all is writ by one and the same Pen and as so I shall Answer him The Party now so hotly engaged against Monarchy and Episcopacy which they strike at thro' the sides of King Charles I. I know are very much enraged at my Defence of King Charles's Holy and Divine Book and therefore take all Courses to buoy up Dr. Walkers Credit and to lessen or else to attempt to prove false the Authorities I have named and to how good purposes this Answerer has done it I now come to shew I tell the World pag. 7. of my Defence the Intercourse betwixt Sir John Brattle and my self about that Book and that he assur'd me that he helped his Father in 47 to Methodize the Papers that so far as they were then drawn up by the King that made up the greatest part of that Book all writ with the Kings own hand and I also assert That Sir John has owned the same since not only to my self but many others of my Friends To which he Replies That Sir John who he agrees with me is a very worthy Person never told me nor any other Person that the Papers he spoke of were writ with the King 's own hand and though the stress of the Evidence does not lye in that for if they were writ in 47 Dr. Gauden's Claim is out of doors for Dr. Walker acknowledges they were not sent to the King till the Treaty in 48 and that Treaty too upon which the Troubles came so fast upon the King which was about a year after yet for all that I do venture to tell him that what he asserts of Sir John Brattle is false and Sir John sent me word that he was a Damnable Lyar and is pleas'd with great Resentment and Indignation to declare he never told any man any such thing and that what he told me and my Friends as to the Kings hand is all true and therefore he must be a Knight of the Post that will venture to give his Oath for such a thing which indeed I shall not wonder at considering what sort of Men there are in the world and what designs are carrying on by that sort of Men at this time The next thing I assert is the Account of Mrs. Simmonds whom he owns to appear a good and discreet Woman and in earnest he saies he is assured her Reverend Husband was so too which I am glad to hear from him for then I am sure he would not dye with a Lye in his mouth and if he did not I know what Dr. Walker did I say Mrs. Simmonds told me her Husband declared to the last the Book to be the Kings Did she deny this to his Friend that waited upon her Not a word of it in his Letter only I concealed the whole Truth because I did not say he dyed of the Small-Pox which I never asked her nor she never told me and whether he did or no it was not material to my business in hand nor casts any Reflection upon what I say unless a Man cannot confess a Truth when he lies a dying of the Small-Pox Risum teneatis I but Mrs. Simmonds says she never heard of her Husbands being in a Shepherds Habit and therefore Mr. Clifford's Evidence is quite ruin'd certainly now Reader take Notice This is but a Circumstance in Mr. Clifford's Account and no doubt is
true notwithstanding Mrs. Simmonds Ignorance of it for we all know all Men do not think fit in Undertakings of such danger and difficulties as this was of Printing and Correcting a Book of this nature to make their Wives acquainted with every thing they do in order to save themselves but what is this to Mr. Clifford's Evidence As to Mr. Odert's Transcribing of it and they printing it by his Copy and no other which as Mr. Milbourn the Printer has since assured me came all at once to them which wholly spoyls that Assertion of Dr. Walker's of bringing some of the last sheets to the Press by Dr. Gauden's Order Further What is this to Dr. Jerem. Tayler's getting leave by Letter of the King to change the Title from the Royal Plea with which they printed the first sheet into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Reasons Mr. Clifford in this Narrative asserts which wholly routs Dr. Gauden's Excuse to Dr. Walker when he thought he could not with a good Conscience write such a Book in the KING's Name and he Answered Look upon the Title who draws his own Picture These Accounts of Mr. Clifford ought to have been disproved by this Answerer or else the Evidence is as clear as the Sun at Noon and so I do not doubt will continue notwithstanding all this foolish barking at it but it is common when Men want Reason they fall to little and contemptible Cavils as our Author has here done Another thing I name for the weaking Dr. Walker's Assertion that Dr. Gauden was the Author of that Excellent Book of the King 's is what passed betwixt Dr. Meriton and Dr. Walker at the late Lord Mayors Sir Tho. Pilkington's I say Dr. Meriton told me that he put Dr. Walker to silence with the Story of Mr. Simmonds lending Dr. Gauden the Book and Dr. Gauden's transcribing it and so returning it to Mr. Simmonds again and that Mr. Marryot stood by heard the debate and did justifie Dr. Meriton's Conquest of Dr. Walker And what says my Adversary to this Why here he claps his Wings and Crows and says I have committed two Mistakes that the Discourse was not at dinner but after dinner and that Dr. Meriton began the discourse with Dr. Walker and not Dr. Walker with Dr. Meriton and by these two things he vainly fancies he has invalidated the whole Testimony Now suppose I did mistake as to these two petty Circumstances which I am pretty well assur'd I did not for Dr. Meriton told the story as occasioned by meeting together at my Lord Mayors dinner and did not as far as I can remember descend to such Minute particulars Pray good Reader What is this to the story it self namely The affirming he did so silence Dr. Walker that he had not a Word to say for himself Which is so true and will be upon just occasion attested by others as well as my self that I do here in the face of the World challenge Dr. Meriton or Mr. Marryot to deny one syllable of the substance of it either as to the one his telling his success in the dispute and the other justifying of it as really true The next thing I produce against Dr. Walker is Mr. Long 's Evidence and his attesting in two Letters to Dr. Goodall that Dr. Gauden did affirm to him that he was fully convinced that the Book was entirely the King 's own Work and what says my Answerer to this stabbing Evidence For for truly it is and I am sure gives the Faction a great deal of Vexation and foaming Rage why truly the Reply to this is very diverting Mr. Long writ the Vox Cleri and Mr. Long is against Free Prayer and Comprehension c. and what then is Mr. Long not to be believ'd because of his Opinion as to these things Has Mr. Long by any art of Immorality Sedition or Rebellion wholly forfeited his Credit or Reputation so that his Word is not to be taken No Reader upon a just Enquiry I find him to be a grave learned serious and pious Divine in that esteem amongst his Brethren that I will venture again to say That it is no disparagement to Dr. walker's Memory to assert that his Testimony is to be heeded and believed before Dr. Walker's and I am not willing to be provoked because the one of them is dead to give my Reasons for it There are two things more I give the World an Account of in my Defence of this Great Mans being the Author of that Book which were too hot for my Adversaries fingers and therefore he durst not touch them The one is Major Huntington's Story told from his own mouth by a Non-conformist-Minister to my self Namely That some of those Papers that were part of that Book were taken at Nazeby kept by General Fairfax and obtained from him by the Major and afterwards by him presented to the King and here I challenge him or any Man to deny the Truth of this Story and that because that Non-conformist-Minister is of such esteem and credit in London that I am sure they will blush to deny what he asserts if I should name him which I am ready to do when called by Authority The other Story is about Dr. Dillingham's asserting That he saw and read part of this Book of the King 's and that long before Dr. Gauden pretended to send it to the King Now know Reader that this Account was given me by a Reverend and Learned Minister in London as well as he could remember it and therefore that we might have a more full and satisfactory Relation of it I got him to write to Dr. Dillingham's Son a Minister and to desire him to let us know what Communications his Father had made to him about this Matter who civilly returned this ensuing Answer which I am sure will not be unpleasing to all those who are Friends to Truth and Justice I Have heard of that Controversie you mention and have now in my hands Dr. Hollingworth's Book wherein there is something said concerning my Fathers bearing Witness to the Truth of King Charles being the Author of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though there might be something added to that Relation as to the time and place when and where he was a Eye-witness of it An Account whereof as near as I can remember from what I have had from his own mouth is as follows While the King was at Holmeby my Father went from Cambridge to wait upon this Earl of Montague's Father who was then with the King there while the King was at Dinner one of the Bed-Chamber shewed my Father the King's Closet wherein was his Library and Papers while he was there he that came with him was accidentally called away when my Father seeing a Black Box on the Table that was lock'd but not very close spyed a corner of a Paper hanging out and took the boldness to draw it so far out as that he could read several Sentences it was newly written
a watchful Eye on the Proceedings and Actions of those who come thither from abroad on what pretext soever and so herewith I rest White-Hall March the 16th 1640. Your Lordships most Humble Servant Henry Vane Dr. Ker Dean of Ardagh his Deposition concerning the Calumny thrown upon King Charles the Martyr for giving a Commission to the Rebels in Ireland I John Ker Dean of Ardagh having occasionally discoursed with the Right Honourable George Lord Viscount Lanesborrough concerning the late Rebellion of Ireland and his Lordship at that time having desired to certifie the said Discourse under my Hand and Seal do declare as followeth That I was present in Court when the Rebel Sir Phelim Oneal was brought to his Tryal in Dublin and that he was Tryed in that Court which is now the High Court of Chancery and that his Judges were Judge Donelan afterwards Sir James Donelan Sir Edward Bolton Knight sometimes Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer Dungan then called Judge Dungan and another Judge whose name I do not now remember And that amongst other Witnesses then brought in against him there was one Joseph Travers Clerk and one Mr. Michael Harrison if I mistake not his Christian name and that I heard several Robberies and Murthers proved against him the said Sir Phelim he having nothing material to plead in his own defence And that the said Judge whose name I remember not as abovesaid Examined the said Sir Phelim about a Commission that the said Sir Phelim should have had from Charles Stuart as the said Judge then called the late King for levying the said War That the said Sir Phelim made Answer That he never had any such Commission and that it was proved then in Court by the Testimony of the said Joseph Travers and others that the said Sir Phelim had such a Commission and did in the beginning of the said Irish Rebellion sâ—… the same unto the said Joseph and several others then in Courts Vpon which the said Sir Phelim confessed that when he surprised the Castle of Charle-mount and the Lord Caulfield that he Ordered the said Mr. Harrison and another Gentleman whose name I now do not remember to cut off the King 's broad Seal from a Patent of the said Lord's they then found in Charle-mount and to affix it to a Commission which he the said Sir Phelim had ordered to be drawn up And that the said Mr. Harrison did in the face of the whole Court confess that by the said Sir Phelim's order he did stitch the Silk Cord or Label of that Seal with Silk of the Colours of the said Label and so fixed the Label and Seal to the said Commission and that the said Sir Edward Bolton and Judge Donelan urging the said Sir Phelim to declare why he did so deceive the People He did Answer That no Man could blame him to use all means whatsoever to promote that Cause he had so far ingaged in And that upon the second day of his Tryal some of the said Judges told him that if he could produce any material proof that he had such a Commission from the said Charles Stuart to declare and prove it before Sentence should pass against him and that he the said Sir Phelim should be restored to his Estate and Liberty But he answered That he could prove no such thing nevertheless they gave him time to consider of it till the next day which was the third and last day of his Tryal Vpon which day the said Sir Phelim being brought into the Court and urged again he declared again that he never could prove any such thing as a Commission from the King And added that there were several Outrages committed by Officers and others his aiders and abettors in the management of that War contrary to his Intention and which now pressed his Conscience very much and that he could not in Conscience had to them the unjust Calmniating the King though he had been frequently solieâ—ted thereunto by fair Promises and great Rewards while he was in Prison And proceeding further in this discourse that immediately he was stopt before he had ended what he had further to say the sentence of death was pronounced against him And I do further declare That I was present and very near to the said Sir Phelim when he was upon the Ladder at his Execution and that one Marshal Peake and another Marshal before the said Sir Phelim was cast came riding towards the place in great haste and called aloud stop a little and having passed through the throng of the spectators and guards one of them whispered a prety while with the said Sir Phelim and that the said Sir Phelim answered in the hearing of several hundreds of People of whom my self was one I thank the Lieutenant General for his intended mercy but I declare good People before God and his Holy Angels and all of you that hear me that I never had any Commission from the King for what I have done in Levying or Prosecution of this War and do heartily beg your Prayers all good Catholicks and Christians that God may be merciful unto me and forgive me my sins More of his Speech I could not hear which continued not long the Guards beating off those that stood near the place of Execution All that I have written as above I declare to be true and am ready if thereunto required upon my Corporal Oath to attest the truth of every particular of it And in Testimony thereof do hereunto Subscribe my Hand and affix my Seal this 28th day of February 1681. John Ker Locus Sigilli And now Reader having vindicated the Honour Piety and all other Vertues of this Great Prince from the Death-bed Declaration of one that was once his greatest Enemy having cleared the Truth of his Book beyond Contradiction having proved the Counterfeit Ludlow a great Lyar and also defended the King from the base and false Imputation of the Irish Rebellion I have no more to say than only to tell thee That if the present Faction cannot employ a more modest and mannerly Champion than this man is I have done for I do not love to be put to the trouble so often of raking in sinks and stinking dunghils and if he wants employment and will be Scribling again I desire him gravely and seriously without railing and buffooning to Answer these following Quaeries I. Whether King Charles I. dyed by the hands of Justice or was actually Murdered II. Whether those that abet his Death now are not vertually as guilty of it as his Judges were III. Whether they that vindicate that Death can be true and steady Subjects to King William and Queen Mary IV. Whether this mans and others asserting the Justice of the War against the King and crying up his Death be not to prepare the People to do the same thing against and upon others when Time and Opportunity shall serve V. Whether he is to be believed in any thing he says and does not deserve a Pillory that tells so horrid a Lye as that the King sent to Sir William Balfour to cut off the Lord Lowdens Head by Nine of the Clock next Morning without any Process of Law VI. Whether he does not deserve a severe Censure that belyes my Lord Strafford with Words spoke at the Cabinet-Council notwithstanding the Marquess Hamilton Earl of Northumberland Lord Treasurer and Lord Cottingten upon their Honours declared being present at the same Council they heard no such Words VII Whether they are not great Fools or designing K that believe any thing this Libeller writes against King Charles the First VIII Whether he hath not done me a greater Honour than ever I could expect or can deserve to belye defame and abuse me with the same Pen he has abus'd King Charles the First and that purely for His sake Lastly Whether that Holy and Renowned Martyr Arch-Bishop Cranmer and that stout Reformer Martin Luther would not appear worse Men than this Scribler has made King Charles I. if we should believe nothing of them but what their grand Enemies the Priests and Jesuites have writ against them After I had finished the Defence of the King's Book I received this Letter from a Reverend Minister of Ipswich in Suffolk which deserves to be taken Notice of SIR SOME years after the Kings Tryal Major Huntington at Ipswich assured me That so much of the said Book as contained His Majesties Meditations before Naseby Fight was taken in the Kings Cabinet and that Sir Thomas Fairfax delivered the said Papers unto him and ordered him to carry them to the King and the Major affirmed that he read them over before he delivered them and that they were the same for Matter and Form with those Meditations in the Printed Book and that he was much affected with them and from that time became a Proselyte to the Royal Cause He also told me That when he delivered them to the King His Majesty appeared very joyful at the receiving of them and said he esteemed them more than all the Jewels he had lost in the Cabinet Also I remember when I waited upon my Lord Vicount Hereford into Holland who was sent by the Parliament with other Lords to bring home King Charles II. my Lord sent me to Dr. Earl then at the Hague to request his Knowledge whether the King was Author of the said Book the Dr. told me as sure as he knew himself to be the Translator of it into Latin so certain he was King Charles was the Author of the Original in English For my part I am apt to believe no Person was able to frame that Book but a Suffering King and no Suffering King but King Charles the Martyr Your Humble Servant Cave Becke FINIS