their yongest Sons some Earldom or other until the time of Edward the third after which time they were invested with the Title of Dukes as appears evidently to any who are studied in their Chronologies But that they or any of them were Earls by Birth is a new piece of learning for which if the Historian can give me any good proof I shall thank him for it Fol. 278. Henry the eight thus cousened into some kindness both by his own power and purse makes Charls Emperor and the French King his Prisoner 1519. Neither so nor so For first though King Henry did contribute both his power and purse to the taking of the French King Prisoner yet to the making of Charls Emperor he contributed neither the one nor the other And secondly though Charls were created Emperor Anno 1519 yet the French King was not taken Prisoner till six years after Anno 1525. Fol. 31â— Oswald united the Crowns of England and Scotland which were 〈◊〉 afterwards for many Ages 3â— That Oswald King of Northumberland here mentioned was a Puiâ—â—ant Prince as being the ninth Monarch of the English I shall easily grant but that he united the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland is not any where found Our Author therefore must be understood of his uniting the two Realms of Deâ—ra and Pernicia part of which last hath for long time been accounted part of Scotland which after his decease were again divided Fol. 317. Whose Results notwithstanding are not to be obtruded on the Sâ—culars to be obsâ—rved with the Authority of Laws until they be allowed by assent of the King and both Houses An error far more pardonable in our present Author to whom the concernments of the Church are not so necessary to be known or studied then in our Church Historian where before we had it and which hath had a full Conâ—utation in our Animadversions to which for brevity sake I shall now refer Fol. 320. Rory Duke of Solia from France Either the Printer or the Author are mistaken here The Ambassador who was sent from France was neither called Rory nor Duke of Solia but Marquess of Rhosney created afterward Duke of Sully and Lord High Treasurer of that Kingdom by King Henry 4. A Protestant and therefore purposely selected for that imployment Of whom it is reported in the conference at Hampton-Court that having observed the order and gravity of our Church Service in the Cathedral Chuâ—ch at Câ—nâ—erbury he was heard to say that if the like had been used in France there would have been many thousands of Protestants more then were at that present Fol. 329. Ceâ—il foâ— his good Service was created Earl of Salisbury That is to say for so it must be understood for his activity and diligence in discovering the Powder-Treason But he was Earl of Salisbury before that Discovery call'd so by the Historian himself in the course of thaâ— Naâ—rative and made so by King Iames in the Mâ—y foregoâ—ng at what time also his Brother Thomas Lord Burley was made Earl of EXCESTER The like mistake I finde in the advancement of Thomas Lord Buckhurst to the Earldom of Dorcet plac'd by the Author fol. 342. in the year 1605. whereas indeed he was created Earl of Dorcet in the first year of King Iames March 13. Anno 1603. Fol. 333. The Earl of Flanders c. being by Storm cast upon our Coast c. was fain to yield to all the Kings demands in delivering up the Countess of Warwick and other Fugitives resident in Flanders This story is well meant but not rightly told there being at that time no Earl of Flanders commonly so called to be cast upon the Coast of England nor any such Woman as a Countess of Warwick whom King Henry the seventh could be afraid of the truth is that the person here meant was Philip King of Castile Duke of Burgundy Earl of Flanders c. who in his return from Spain was driven by Tempest on the Coast of England and being Royally Feasted by King Henry the seventh was detained here till he had delivered into the Kings hands the Earl of Suffolk who had fled into the Nether-lands for protection and began to work new troubles against his Soveraign The story whereof we have at large in the History of King Henry the seventh writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban from fol. 222. to 225. Fol. 334 The fate of that Family evermore false to the crown This spoken of the Piercies Earls of Northumberland too often false to the Crown though not always so For Henry the second Earl of this Family lost his life fighting for King Henry the sixth in the Battle of St. Albans as Henry his Son and Successor also did at the Battle of â—owton And so did Henry the fifth Earl in the time of King Henry the seventh for his Fidelity to that King in a tumultuous Insurrection of the Common People not to say any thing of his Son and Successor who dyed without any imputation of such disloyalty Fol. 362. Zutphen and Gelders did of right belong to the Dukâ— Arnold who being Prisoner with the last Duke of Burgundy who died before Nancy that Duke intruded upon his Possession c. 40. Not so it was not Arnold Duke of Gelders that was Imprisoned by Charls Duke of Burgundy but his Son Adolphus who having most ungratiously Imprison'd his aged Father was vanquished by Duke Charls and by him kept Prisoner and the old Duke restored again to his power and liberty In a grateful acknowledgement of which favor he made a Donation of his Estates to Duke Charls and his Heirs to commence after his decease though it took no effect till Conquered under that pretence by Charls the fifth uniting it unto the rest of his Belgick Provinces Anno 1538. Fol. 423. Sir William Seymour Grandchilde to the third Son and the Heir of the Earl of Hertford created by Henry the eighth whose sister he marryed c. And being thus near the Crown c. In this business of Sir William Seymer now Marquess of Hertford there are two mistakes For first the Earl of Hertford from whom he derived his discent married not any of the Sisters of King Henry the eighth he having but two Wives in all the first the Daughter of Filol of Woodland from whom comes Baronet Seymer of the West the second Anne Daughter of Sir Edward and Sister to Sir Michael Stanhop from whom discends the House of Hertford still in being It s true King Henry married a Sister of Sir Edward Seymer by him created Earl of Hertford but not é contra the Earl of Hertford married not with a sister of his Secondly The nearness of this House to the Crown of England came not from any such Marriage of this first Earl with that Kings Sister but from the Marriage of Edward the second Earl with a Neece of that Kings that is to say with 〈◊〉 Daughter of Henry Duke of Suffolk and of Fâ—aâ—ces his Wife
thereof in the main body of it not far from a little dore which openeth into one of the Prebends houses This I can say on certain knowledge being casually invited to his Funeral when I thought not of it though since his Statua hath been set up in the other place which our Author speaks of Fol. 153. The Right to the Crown lay not in this Henry but in Edmund Mortimer Earl of March descended by his Mother Philippa from Lionel Duke of Clarence elder son to Edward the third I shall not now dispute the Title of the House of Lancaster though I think it no hard matter to defend it and much less shall I venture on the other controversie viz. whether a King may Legally be depos'd as is insinuated by our Author in the words foregoing But I dare grapple with him in a point of Heraldry though I finde him better studied in it then in matter of History And certainly our Author is here out in his own dear Element Edmund Mortimer Earl of March not being the Son but Husband of the Lady Philippa Daughter of Lionel Duke of Clarence and Mother of Roger Mortimer Earl of March whom Richard the second to despite the House of Lancaster declared Heir apparent to the Kingdom of England 'T is true this Edmond was the son of another Philippa that is to say of Philip Montacute wife of a former Roger Earl of March one of the founders of the Garter So that in whomsoever the best Title lay if lay not in this Edmond Mortimer as our Author makes it 〈◊〉 154. This is one of the clearest distinguishing 〈…〉 the Temporaâ—â— and Spiritual Lordsâ— that 〈…〉 be tryed per pares by their Peers being 〈…〉 Noâ— shall I here dispute the point 〈…〉 may not challenge to be tryed by his 〈…〉 wheâ—â—er the Bishops were not Barons and 〈◊〉 of the Realm Our Author intimates that they were not but I think they were and this I think on the authority of the learned Selden in whom we finde that at a Parliament at Northampton 〈◊〉 Henry the 2. the Bishops thus challenge their own â—ee age viz. Non sedemus hiâ— Episcopi sed Barones Nos â—â—â—â—nes vâ—s Barones Pares hiâ— sumus that is to 〈◊〉 We 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 as Bishops only but as Barons We are Barons and you are Barons here we sit as Peers Which last is also 〈…〉 in terminis by the words of a Statuâ—e 〈◊〉 Act of Parliament wherein the Bishops are acknowledged to â—e Peers of the Land And for further proof heâ— eoâ— Ihon â—tratford Archbishop of Canterbury if I remember it aright being fallen into the displeâ—sure of King Edward the third and denyed entrance into the House of 〈◊〉 made his Protest that he was Primus 〈◊〉 Regni the 〈◊〉 Peer of the Realm and therefoâ—e not to be 〈…〉 from his place and Suffrage But of this Argument enough iâ— not too much as the case now stands 〈…〉 thing to consider what they have 〈…〉 what they are at this preâ—ent 〈…〉 Reign theâ—e paâ—â— an Act of Paâ—liament by which it was enacted That the Countrey of Wales should be stand and continue for ever from thenceforth incorpoâ—aâ—ed united and annexed to and with this Realm of England And that all and singular person and persons born and to be born in the said principality countrey or dominion of Wales shall have inâ—oy and inhe â—it all and singular Freedoms Liberties Rights Priviledges and Lawes within this Realm and other the Kings Dominions as other the Kings Subjects naturally boâ—n within the same have and injoy and inheâ—â—it And thirdly between the time which our Author speaks of being the 14 year of King Henry the fourth and the making of this Act by King Henry the eighth there passed boâ—e an hundâ—ed and twenty years which intimates a longer time then some years after as out Author words it Fol. 168. I will not complain of the dearness of this Univeâ—sity where seventeen weeks cost me more then seventeen years in Cambridge even all that I had The oâ—dinary and unwary Reâ—der might collect from hence that Oxford is a chargeable place and that all commodities there are exceeding dear but that our Author lets him know that it was on some occasion of distâ—â—bance By which it seems our Author doth 〈◊〉 to the time of the War when men from all 〈◊〉 did repair to Oxford not as a University but a place of safety and the fear Royall of the King at 〈◊〉 time notwithstanding all provisions were so plenâ—â—ull and at such cheap rates as no man had reason to complain of the 〈◊〉 of them No better argument of the 〈◊〉 of the soil and richness of the 〈◊〉 in which Oxford standeth then that the 〈…〉 on the accession of such 〈…〉 at that 〈◊〉 and on that occasion 〈◊〉 Author therefoâ—e 〈◊〉 be thought to relate unto somewhat else then is here expâ—essed and possibly may be that his being at Oxford at that time 〈◊〉 him within the compass of Delinquency and consequently of Sequestration And 〈…〉 hath 〈…〉 son to complain of the Vniversity or the dearness of it but rather of himself for coming to a place so chargeable and destructive to him He might have tarryed where he was for I never heard that he was sent foâ— and then this great complaint against the dearness of that Vniversity would have found no place Fol. 175. Surely what Charles the fifth is said to have said of the City of Florence that it is pity 〈◊〉 should be seen save only on holy-dayes c. Our Author is somewhat out in this in fachering that saying on Charles the fifth Emperor and King of Spain which Boterus and all other Authors ascribe to Charles Archduke of Austria that is to say to Charles of Inspruch one of the younger sons of the Emperor Ferdinand the first and consequently Nephew to Charles the fifth Not is oâ—r Author very right in taking Aquensis for Aix in Provence Fol. 178. Especially â—aith he if as I take it by Aquensis Aix be meantâ— scited in the fâ—rthermost parts of Provence though even now the English power in France was a waning For first the English never had any power in Provence no interest at all therein nor pretentions to it as neither had the French Kings in the times our Author speaks of Provence in thoâ—e dayes was independent of that Crown an absolute Estate and held immediately of the Empire as being a part and member of the Realm of Burgundy and in the actual possession of the Dukes of â—njou on the expiring of which House by the last will and Testament of Duke Rene the second it was bequeathed to Lewis the eleventh of France by him and his successors to be enjoyed upon the death of Charles Earl of Maine as it was accordingly And secondly that Bernard whom the Latine cals Episcopus Aquensis is very ill taken by our Author to be Bishop of Aix He was indeed Bishop of Acqus or
was I from making any Aâ—theme to be sung of the three Kings of Colen as that I maâ—e iâ— when I first saw it to be torn in pieces and I my selâ— cut it out of the old Song Books belonging to the Choristers School with a Penknife that lay by at my very first coming to reside in that Colledge But sure I was that no such Antheme had been sung in the Qâ—ire during all my time of attendance there nor for ought that any the eldest persons of the Church and Town could tell or ever heard to the contrary for fifâ—y or threescore years before and more 9. That there was indeed an ordinary Knife I confess provided and laid ready among other things belonging to the Administration of the Communion for the cutting of the Bread and divers other uses in the Church Vestry that when the under Officers there had any occasion to use a Knife they might not be put to go to seek one abroad But that it was ever consecrated or so called otherwise then as Mr. Smart and some of his Followers had for their pleasure put that appellâ—tion upon it I never heard nor I believe any body â—lse that lived here among us There were divers other Articles of this nature in the Bill of Complaint whereof Mr. Smart could not prove any one to which I gave the like Answers as I did here to these but Mr. Fullers History makes no mention of them 10. Touching Mr. Smarts Sermon I made answer and submitted his censure to the prudent and religious consideration of the Lords whether he was not justly condemned to be scandalous and seditious by his preaching thereof and I represented many passages in it disagreeable to the Laws of God and his Church and repugnant to the publick Statutes of Parliament 11. For which after we had begun â—o question him in the High Commission Court at Durham where we endeavoured to reduce him to a better mind and to an unity with the Church against which he had so injuriously and intemperatly declaimed I had no further hand or meddling with the prosecution of this maâ—ter in other Courts against him more then that I wrote at the speciall instance of Judge Yelverton a Letter in his behalf to the Archbishop of York and the Commissioners there which I procured the Dean and most of the Prâ—bendaries of Durham to sign and subscribe with me earnestly intreating for him that upon any due sence of his â—ault he might be quietly sent back to us again in hope that he would hereafter live in better peace and concord with us as he promised both judge Yelverton and us to do then he had done before 12. The cruell usage and imprisonment that he suffered whereof Mr. Fuller taketh speciall notice and makes a Marginall mark at it was as I have been credible assured nothing else but a faire and gentle treatment of him in an Officers House at York to whom he was committed for a while and paid little for it Iâ— is the Historians mistake here to say he was carryed â—rom York to Lambeth for he was at his own request sent from Lambeth to York the Fine thâ—t was seâ— up 〈◊〉 him he never paid and by his own wilfull loss of his Church-livings he gained a larger maintenance living at his ease and pleasure by the contribution that he got as a suspended and silenc'd Pâ—eacher though the truth was that having had a Prebend and a Benefice many years together in the Bishoprick of Durham and being alwaies in health he neglected preaching so much at them both and elsewhere besides that he was seldom noted to preach above two Sermons in a year who though he demanded many thousand poundâ— at the Parliament yet by Mr. Fullers leave the Parliament gave him none nor ordered either my self nor any other that he impeacht ever to pay him a Groat only upon Doctor Carrs death who had bâ—en put into hiâ— Prebend place he was sent by the Lords tâ— his Vicâ—rage and his Prebend again which he had little â—â—ill to take because he â—ound but little profit in comparisoâ— of what he hoped to be had by them in the mean while he took up divers great summâ— of monâ—y from some of his Partisans in London and made them believe that the Parliament would pay them all with advantage 13. There is another Marginall Note in Mr. Fuller referring as he saith to my due praise and commendation whereof he makes one part to be that I joyned not with the French Proâ—estants at Charâ—nton since I got over hither into France but I would that he and all the World should know it I never refused to joyn with the Protestants either there or any where else in all â—hings wherein they joyn with the Church of England Many of them have been here at our Church and we have been at theirs I have buried divers of our peopâ—e at Châ—renton and they pâ—rmit us to make use of their pecuâ—iar and decent Saeâ—eâ—erie here in Paris for â—hâ—t purpose which if they did not we â—hould be â—orced to bury our Dead in a Diâ—ch I have Baptized many of their Children at the request of their own Ministers with whom I have good acquaintance and find them â—o be very deserving and learned men great Lovers â—nd Honoureâ—s of our Church notwithstanding the loss which She hath lately received in externall Matâ—ers wherein we are agreed that the Essence of true Religion doth not consist Many of their people and of the best sort and quality among them have frequented our publick Prayers with great reverence and I have delivered tâ—e holy Communion to them according to our own Order which they observed religiously I have Married divers persons of good Condition among them and I have presented some of thâ—ir Sâ—hâ—llars to be ordained Deacons and Priests 〈◊〉 by our own Bishops whereof Monsieur De Tarenne's Chaplain is one and the Duke De la Force's Chaplain another and the Church at Charenton apâ—â—â—ved of it and I preached here publickly at their Ordination Besides I have been as often aâ— I had â—are time from attending our own Congregation to pray and sing Psalmes with them and to heare both the Weekly and the Sunday Sermons at Charenton whither two of my Children also pensioned here in a Protestant Family at Paris have daily repaired for that purpose with the Gentlewoman that governed them All which is abundantly enough to let the World know and see here as it doth what a vain and rash man Mr. Fuller is in his History wherein he hath done Injury to many more besides me some dead and some alive who I hope will represent his unfaithfulness in his own Country both to himself and to others I am only beholden to him for telling the tâ—uâ—h of me in one particular which is that I have by Gods blessing reduced some and preserved many others from communicating with the Papists defending the Truth of our own Religion as I have