us that an Vnder-Secretary or Clerk who drew the Patents put in what Mr. Royston reckoned up and desired and never boggled at inserting it among King Charles 's Works Now this is such an Answer that to reply to it would be as shameless as to urge it and would equally reproach the Reader for if the Doctor himself either did or could suppose or if any other Man can suppose that these two Kings did not believe that this Book was inserted among the rest nay that they could possibly believe but that it was design'd as a main and principal part which for so many years bore their Father's Name and was more known and taken notice of than any of the rest it is high time to leave disputing or to convince Men by rational Motives of Credibility and let this hereafter go for a Rule that the best way to gain belief is to propound the most incredible things in the World For if any Man who knows the state of this Matter the current Sense of this Kingdom and the general Estimation concerning the Author of that Book can believe that these two Kings did not think or could otherwise than think that it would be inserted among their Father's Works That Man may believe any thing and if he will take this for an Answer there is nothing how impossible or incredible soever but he may give his assent to So that let it be granted that Kings do not always critically examine the Transcript of their Royal Grants except they neglected their Memories and Understandings and left them also to Vnder-Secretaries and Clerks it is not possible for any Man to believe but that they knew that their Father was universally acknowledged and reputed for the Author of that Book and consequently that a Grant to Reprint his Works must of necessity include that altho it had not been particularly expressed in the Grant it self But when this excellent Book is not only particularly expressed but mentioned also with particular Characters and Marks of Recommendation to talk of Critical Inspection and of Vnder-Secretaries and Clerks is to suppose that Vnder-Secretaries and Clerks make Royal Grants and not Kings themselves However the Doctor adds What understanding Man believes all the other particular Pieces which make up the whole Volume of the King's Works to be originally penned by himself but knows many of them were prepared by his Secretaries and Council and then perused and approved of by him and so became his by adding the Royal Stamp of his Approbation and owning of them and the same was designed in this Book Very good then 1. It seems Things prepared by Secretaries and Council become the King's by his Perusal and approving them and so I hope do Letters Patents too and therefore let the Grants to Mr. Royston be drawn by what Vnder-Secretary or Clerk the Doctor pleases if they came to be the Acts of the respective Kings by their Perusal and Approbation of them then it is plain they testified their Royal Father was the Author of this Book and so the Doctor both contradicts and confutes himself 2. When the Doctor 's Hand was in I wonder he did not tell us that the Papers of Mr. Henderson to the King and the Particulars insisted on by the Parliaments Commissioners at the Treaty at Vxbridge were not originally penned by the King and which are inserted in the Volume of the King's Works And this would have been a plain Case and must needs have been granted him And what then Why then by the Doctor 's way of arguing neither the King's Papers to Mr. Henderson nor his Papers about Episcopacy were originally penned by him or that because these two Kings did not believe that these things inserted in the King's Works as relating to them which bear the Name of other Authors were not of his own penning therefore they believed that the Writing which bears his own Name was not penned by him neither altho they mention it as written by himself These are pleasant Consequences 3. Be it granted that Proclamations and such things are originally penned by Secretaries and become the King's by adding his Royal Authority what is this to Books Proclamations are really the King's Acts because they derive their Validity and Authority from Him whoever pens them But Books are quite of another nature no Royal Stamp can make a Book the King 's own which he did not pen himself And therefore these Attestations in the Royal Grants concerning the Works of the Royal Martyr are to be understood according to the nature of things that is they attest the respective parts of that Volume were his Works in that sense in which they were his Works Proclamations c. were his by adding his Authority and they were the same Acts of the King to all purposes of Law whether penned by himself or by his Secretaries But a Book in no sense can be said to be the King 's of which he is not the Author And therefore these two Kings attesting that this Book was their Royal Father's it plainly means in that sense in which a Book is said to be so and that is not by adopting it by consent and approbation but by penning and writing it And it is a pleasant Consequence indeed Proclamations are the King 's by his consent and authority whoever pens them and therefore Bocks that bear his Name are so too Well! No body knows what a strange thing Reason is when it falls into the Hands of some Men. The Doctor still adds Admit Mr. Royston had obtained a Patent for the sole Printing the Works of King David and had got it explicitly inserted all the Works of King David that is the whole Book of Psalms containing in number one hundred and fifty would it have followed hence that he who granted this Patent had published to all the World that he knew and believed that David was the real Penman of them all tho some of them were certainly written some Ages after David 's Death No truly it would not have followed nor does it follow from the Grant of these Kings to Reprint their Father's Works that therefore they believed the King was the real Penman of Mr. Henderson's Papers But by the Doctor 's good favour this would have followed that if King Solomon had granted a Patent to Collect or Print had Printing been then in use his Father's Psalms and had expresly and especially mentioned three or four as his Fathers it is plain that he must be understood to believe that these were penned by his Father Having thus dispatched Dr. Walker's Answers I have yet something farther to observe concerning this Memorandum and which seems sufficient to overthrow the Validity of it and that which I shall observe is taken from the Memorandum it self Intrinsick proof taken from things themselves is generally the most clear and convincing Frauds and Impostures are seldom managed with such art and exactness but a discerning Eye may easily discover them and in
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
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
can have any effect And the World must be very willing to be undeceived indeed if they will alter their Judgments and Opinions upon that which neither is nor ever was admitted to be any Evidence nor sufficient to determine the least matter of Controversie And therefore upon the whole if my Lord of Anglesey had made this Memorandum for his own private use it might have done well enough because the defects of it might have been supply'd by his own Memory but when it was design'd for the use of Posterity to undeceive others when he was dead to leave it so defective in all the necessary parts of Proof is irrational and unaccountable and consequently is not to be ascrib'd to a person of his Lordships Character and Judgment and great knowledge in the Laws For my Lord had he wrote this could not but know that this matter would be disputed and the Memorandum plainly implies it and that nothing less than plain and unexceptionable Proof would convince the World and at the same time to leave behind him a suspicious and inevident Memorandum which may create some Disputes but can end none is unworthy of his Lordship and ought not without manifest Proof to be father'd upon him nor indeed can be without some reflection upon his Lordships Memory And therefore 3. This was the most improbable and unlikely course that could be taken to answer those ends mentioned in the Memorandum viz to undeceive others For besides what hath been said before what a pure Method is this to correct publick Mistakes and to undeceive the World to lodge a Memorandum in a vacant page of a Book never to be seen till after his death and then also liable to a thousand Contingencies to be torn to fall into private hands to lie neglected and never see the light For I suppose his Lordship could never divine that his Study of Books would be sold by Auction and that Mr. Millington would make the Sale So that for any thing his Lordship either did or could know the World might never have been undeceiv'd and it is an extraordinary caution indeed to take pains to undeceive others and at the same time leave them in a hopeful way never to be the better for it had there been no other way such a one as this must have shifted as well as it could but when Men have Tongues in their Mouths and may clear up mistakes by living and undoubted Testimony to commit it to a bit of Paper and that also laid up in darkness and obscurity seems far from that Zeal to Truth which this Memorandum pretends to and for which end it pretends to have been written had my Lord of Anglesey think we no Friends Acquaintance or Children to have communicated this to And where I wonder is the Man who ever heard my Lord say this or any thing like it There can as I know of but one thing be said to this and that is that there might be some danger in so doing and that this tho it was not the securest yet it was the safest way But this is obviated by the Memorandum it self which plainly intimates that the two Kings made no Secret of it themselves nor injoyn'd him any Secresie but frankly and freely assur'd him which as it is worded in the Memorandum seems to express a design to have it spread and propagated and therefore if the Memorandum be true there could be no Reservedness and Caution upon that account or fear of any Displeasure from the King or his Royal Brother Now indeed it must be owned that to rectifie Mistakes and to set the World right is a generous and charitable Undertaking but at the same time to neglect the direct and unexceptionable means to do this without reason and necessity and to perform it in the dark and expose it to manifest hazard and uncertainty and after all to leave it without Date or Witness so as in no degree to amount to a competent Evidence in plain terms is to deceive others instead of undeceiving them and in truth the Memorandum is a Contradiction to itself the End of it is express'd to be to undeceive others and yet the Memorandum it self is the most unlikely course that could be taken to accomplish that End and especially when there were several others far better at hand Upon all which Accounts I do conclude that this Memorandum was not made by my Lord of Anglesey but by some other hand to deceive and impose upon the World And certain I am that whosoever insists upon this Memorandum is bound to do these two things 1 To prove that this was my Lord of Anglesey's Hand-writing And 2. To give a satisfactory Reason why my Lord of Anglesey forbore to declare this by Word of mouth which the Memorandum intimates was so openly and freely and without any Reserve declared to him and when it was by a thousand degrees more fit to answer the ends express'd in the Memorandum And this hath not yet been attempted and I presume can never fairly be done And to this I add 4. That there is no Appearance nor so much as Presumption that the two Royal Brothers ever said this to any other Person This I confess is a Negative but I shall leave it with all the World whether if this was their constant and standing judgment it is by any means probable that they would not one time or other have declared the same to some other Persons when they had done it with such openness and unreservedness to my Lord of Anglesey and consequently that we should have heard of it from some other quarter and in some better manner than by such a blind Memorandum I have now done with this Memorandum and do conceive That I have vindicated the Memory of King Charles I. and his Right to this Book from any Exceptions that can be taken from thence I shall therefore proceed to some further evidence to convince the unbyass'd and unprejudiced that that glorious Martyr actually was and that no other could be the Author of it Now whereas Evidence is of two Kinds external which relates to outward Testimony and internal which is drawn from the thing it self both these are plain in the Case and will sufficiently clear up the point before us 1. External Evidence i. e. the Testimony of other credible Witnesses to the truth of it But that I may deal fairly I shall sum up the evidence on both sides and then leave it to the Readers Judgment only I must premise that King Charles I. being in possession and for so many years reputed and acknowledged for the Author of this Book whatsoever is offered to defeat his title to it ought to be very plain clear and satisfactory and to overballance the contrary Evidence in point of Credibility and Sufficiency For an Equality of Evidence can never do it because Possession preponderates and will weigh down on that side where all other circumstances are equal But if the
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
Words of some of them Vpon which I must also confess that I concluded they were originally from the King but others have drawn a contrary Argument from the King 's correcting the Papers yet I put this under my hand that the Major told me that he did suppose them originally from that learned Prince Which is the totum that can be intimated from Sir Your humble Servant Richard Duke In this Testimony of Mr. Duke these things are to be cleared 1. That there is a difference between this account and that of Sir William Dugdale's But notwithstanding both their Evidence are very consistent and by no means contradictory Sir William Dugdale says that Major Huntintdon through the favour of Fairfax restored to him the Manuscript after Navesby Fight Mr. Duke only says that the Major saw them lying on the Table c. which the Major might very well do and yet before that restore them to the King from General Fairfax which as Mr. Duke says nothing of so neither doth what he says any ways contradict so that Mr. Duke's Evidence is not contrary to Sir William's but a Supplement to it and a further account of the Major's Knowledge of this matter He testifies indeed more than Sir William but by no means interferes with him So likewise when Sir William says it was at Hampton Court this is easily reconcil'd because Mr. Duke speaks diffidently that it was at Holmby-House as he remembers but is not positive but it might be some other place as these Expressions plainly denote 2. The next thing is that Mr. Duke does not say in express terms that those Meditations which the Major saw lying upon the Table several Mornings and the King correct them that those were the same that were printed in the King's name But it is plainly imply'd for Mr. Duke says that from the Major's account to him he conceiv'd they were originally from the King and is positive that the Major told him that he supposed them originally from the King that is plainly the Meditations in Controversie for the Word originally here can refer to nothing else but to another Pretender And the saying that others have drawn a contrary Argument from the Kings correcting the Papers yet further proves it So that as Mr. Duke did not so it is plain the Major himself did not mean any other Papers than the original Manuscript of the King's Book or of some part of it which he saw lie on the Table and the King correcting it The Sum therefore is that the Testimony of Major Huntington as it is represented by Mr. Duke is contradictory to the same represented by Dr. Walker and the Validity of the respective Testimony must depend on the Credit of the respective Witnesses And how much Dr. Walker's Testimony is to be rely'd on in this Case I have shewn already and Mr. Duke's Testimony is confirm'd by another Mr. Cave Beck in a Letter to Dr. Hollingworth attesting That Major Huntington at Ipswich assured him that so much of the said Book as contained his Majesty's Meditations before Navesby Fight Dr. Holl. Charact. of King Charles I. p. 27 was taken in the King's Cabinet and that Sir Thomas Fairfax deliver'd the said Papers unto him and ordered him to carry them to the King and also told him that when he deliver'd them to the King his Majesty appeared very joyful and said he esteemed them more than all the Jewels he had lost in the Cabinet 2. The next Evidence is that of Mr. Herbert afterwards Sir Thomas Herbert who not only saw it as Sir William Dugdale says but moreover had the original Manuscript given him by the King and which was wrote by the King 's own hand This hath never yet appeared publickly to the World and therefore I shall set it down at large as it was transmitted to me by the Reverend Mr. Cudworth Rector of Barmbrough in Yorkshire and attested by several worthy and learned Persons in these Words In a Manuscript Book in Folio of Sir Thomas Herbert's well bound fairly written and consisting of 83 Pages and by him called Carolina Threnodia having the Picture of King Charles I. in the Front and beginning thus SIR By yours of the 22d of August last I find you have received my former Letters of the 1st and 13th of May 1678. And seeing it is your farther desire I should recollect what I can well remember upon that sad Subject more at large I am willing to satisfie you therein so far forth as my Memory will assist Some short Notes of Occurrences I then took which in this long Interval of time and several Removes of my Family are either lost or so mislaid at present I cannot find which renders this Narrative not so methodical nor so large as otherwise I should and probably by you may be expected Nor would I trouble you much with what any other has writ but in a summary way give you some Court Passages which I observed during the two last years of his Majesty's Life and Reign being the time of his Solitudes and Sufferings In pag. 21. Nevertheless both times be carefully observed his usual times set apart for private Devotion and for writing Mr. Harrington and Mr. Herbert continued waiting on his Majesty as Grooms in the Bedchamber he also gave Mr. Herbert the Charge of his Books of which the King had a Catalogue and from time to time had brought unto him such as from time to time he was pleased to call for The sacred Scripture was the Book he most delighted in read often in Bishop Andrew's Sermons Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity Dr. Hammond's Works Villalpandus upon Ezekiel c. Sandy's Paraphrase upon King David's Psalms Herbert's divine Poems and also recreated himself in reading Godfrey of Bulloigne writ in Italian by Torquato Tasso and done into English Heroick Verse by Mr. Fairfax A Poem his Majesty much commended as he did Ariosto by Sir John Harrington a factious Poet much esteem'd of by Prince Henry his Master Spencer's Fairy Queen and the like for alleviating his Spirits after serious Studies And at this time it was as is presumed he composed his Book called Suspiria Regalia publish'd soon after his Death and intitled The King's Portraicture in his Solitudes and Sufferings Which Manuscript Mr. Herbert found among those Books his Majesty was graciously pleased to give him those excepted which he bequeathed to his Children hereafter mentioned in regard Mr. Herbert tho he did not see the King write that Book his Majesty being always private when he writ and these his Servants never coming into the Bedchamber when the King was private until he call'd yet comparing it with his Hand-writing in other things he found it so very like as induces his belief that it was his own having seen much of the King's Writings before And to instance particulars in that his Majesty's Translation of Dr. Sanderson the late Bishop of Lincoln's Book de juramentis a like Title concerning Oaths all of