their private discontents into open practices endeavouring to settle their Religion by the destruction of the King and the change of Government And first beginning with the Papists because first in time Fol. 5. Watson with William Clark another of his own profession having fancied a Notional Treason imparted it to George Brooks To these he after adds the Lord Cobham a Protestant the Lord Gray of Whaddon a Puritan and Sir Walter Rawleigh an able Statesman and some other Knights In the recital of which names our Author hath committed a double fault the one of omission and the other of commission A fault of omission in leaving out Sir Griffith Markham as much concerned as any of the principal actors design'd to have been Secretary of Estate had the Plot succeeded and finally arraign'd and condemn'd at Winchester as the others were His fault of commission is his calling the Lord Gray by the name of the Lord Gray of Whaddon a fault not easily to be pardon'd in so great an Herald whereas indeed though Whaddon in Buckinghamshire was part of his Estate yet Wilton in Herefordshire was his Barony and antâ—ent Seat his Ancestors being call'd LL. Gray of Wilton to difference them from the Lord Gray of Reuthen the Lord Gray of Codnor c. Having thus satisfied our Author in this particular I would gladly satisfie my self in some others concerning this Treason in which I finde so many persons of such different humors and Religions that it is very hard to think how they could either mingle their interefles or unite their counsels But discontentments make men fuel fit for any fire and discontents had been on purpose put upon some of them the more to estrange them from the King and the King from them And though I am not Oedipus enough for so dark a Sphinx yet others who have had more light into the businesses of that time have made their discontents to grow upon this occasion Sir Robert Cecil then principal Secretary to the Estate fearing the great abilities of Rawleigh and being wearied with the troublesome impertinencies of Gray and Cobham all which had joyned with him in design against the Earl of Essex their common Enemy had done their errand to Kings Iames whose counsels he desired to ingross to himself alone before his coming into England And the Plot took so good effect that when the Lord Cobham went to meet the King as he came towards London the King checked him being then Warden of the Cinqne Ports for his absence from his charge in that dangerous time The Lord Gray was not look'd upon in the Court as he had been formerly there being no longer use of his rashness and praecipitations And the better to discountenance Rawleigh who had been Captain of the Guard to Queen Elizabeth the King bestowed that Office on Sir Thomas Erskin then Vicount Fenton and Captain of his Guard in Scotland All which being publickly observ'd it was no haâ—d matter for George Brook to work upon the weak spiâ—its of Gray and Cobâ—am of which the last was his brother and the first his brothers special friend and by such Artifices as he us'd in laying before them their disgraces and shewing them a way to right themselves to draw them into the confederacy with Clark and Watson And it is possible that they not being substantive enough to stand alone might acquaint Rawleigh with the Plot whose head was able to do more then all their hands But of his actings in it or consenting to it when the paâ—ties were brought unto their Tryal there appear'd no proof but that Cobham in his confession taken before the Lords had accus'd him of it and that not only as an accessary but a principal actor But Cobham not being brought into the open Court to justifie his accusation face to face as the custom as it was thought a good argument by many that Rawleigh was not so criminal in this matter as his Enemies made him And though found guilty by the Jury on no other evidence then a branch of Cobhams confession not so much as subscribed by his hand yet all men were not satisfied in the manner of this proceeding it being then commonly affirm'd that Cobham had retracted his accusation as since it hath been said and printed that in a letter written the night before his Tryal and then sent to the Lordâ—â— he cleared Rawlâ—igh from all manner of Treasons against the King or State for which consult the Observations upon some particular Persons and passages c. printed Anno 1656. But from the practices of the Papists which have led me thus far out of my way it is now time that I proceed to the Petition of the Puritans presented to the King much about that time Fol. 7. This called the Millenary Petition And it was called so because given out to be subscribed by 〈◊〉 thousand hands though it wanted a fourth part of thiâ— number More modest now then they had been in Pâ—â—ries time when in stead of one thousand they threatnâ—â— to bring a Petition which should be presented by the hands of a hundred thousand More modest also in the style and phrase of their Petition and in the subject Mâ—â—ter of it then they had been when Martin Mar Prâ—â—â—rul'd the Rost and would be satisfied with nothing 〈◊〉 the ruine of the English Hierarchy Which notwithstanding the King thought fit to demur upon it and 〈◊〉 commended the answering of their Petition to the Uâ—â—versity of Oxford and was done accordingly The Anâ—â—â— and Petition printed not long after gave the first stopâ—â— this importunity represt more fully by the Conferâ—â—â— at Hampton-Court of which it is told us by our Authâ—â— how some of the Millenary party complained that 〈◊〉 Fol. 21. This Conference was partially set forth only 〈◊〉 Dr. Barlow Dean of Chester their professed Adversaâ—â— to the great disadvantage of their Divines If so 〈◊〉 did it come to pass that none of their Divines thâ—â— present noâ— any other in their behalf did ever manifeâ—â— the world the partialities and falsehoods of it The 〈◊〉 was printed not long after the end of the Conference publickly passing from one hand to another and neâ— convicted of any such crime as it stands charged with 〈◊〉 any one particular pâ—â—â—age to this very day Only pleas'd some of the Zealoâ—s to scatter abroad some triâ—â—ing Papers not amounting to half a sheet amongst them which tended to the holding up of their sinking Party and being brought by Dr. Barlow were by him put in Print and publisht at the end of his Book Vt deterrim comparatione gloriam sibi compararet in the words of Tacitus He could not better manifest his own abilities then by having those weak and imperfect Scribbles for a foil unto them And here before I leave this conference I must make a start to fol. 91. for rectifying a mistake of our Authors which relates unto it Where speaking of Dr. King then Bishop of London and
Bishop of Chichester as finally the two first Chapters about the Tiâ—hing of the Iews were learnedly reviewed by Mr. Nettles a Countâ—ey 〈◊〉 but excellently well skilled in Talmudical Learning In which encounters the Historian was so gall'd by Tillesly so gagg'd by Montague and stung by Nettles that he never came off in any of his undertakings with such losse of credit In the Preface to his History he had charged the Clergy with ignorance and lazinesse upbraided them with having nothing to keep up their credit but beard habit and title and that their Studies reache no further then the Breviary the Postils and the Polyanthea But now he found by these encounters that some of the ignorant and lazie Clergy were of as retired studies as himself and could not only match but overmatch him too in his own Philoâ—ogiâ— But the Governours of the Church went a shorter way and not expecting till the Book was answered by particular men resolv'd to seek for reparation of the wrong from the Author himself upon an Information to be brought against him in the High Commission Fearing the issue of the business and understanding what displeasures were conceived against him by the King and the Church he made his personal appearance in the open Court at Lambeth on the eight and twentieth day of Ianuary Annâ— 1618. where in the presence of George L. Archbishop of Canterbury Iohn L. B. of London Lancelot L. B. of Winchester Iohn L. B. of Rochester Sir Iohn Benet Sir William Bird Sir George Newman Doctors of the Laws and Thâ—mas Mothershed Notary and Register of that Couâ—t he tendred his submission and acknowledgement all of his own hand-writing in these following words My goâ— Lords I most humbly acknowledge my error whicâ— haâ—e committed in publishing the History of Tithes and especially in that I have at all by shewing any interpretation of Holy Scriptures by medling with Councels Faâ—hers or Câ—nons or by whatsoever occurs in it offered any occasion of argument against any right of Maintenance â—ure divino of the Ministers of the Gospel beseeching your Lordships to receive this ingenuous and humble acknowledgement together with the unfeigned protestation of my grief for that through it I have so incurred both his Majesties and your Lordships displeasure conceived against me in behalf of the Church of England IOHN SELDEN Which his submission and acknowledgement being received and made into an Act of Court was entred into the publick Registers thereof by this Title following viz. Officium Dominorum contra Joh. Seldeâ—â— de inter Templo London Armigerum So far our Author should have gone had he plaid the part of a good Historian but that he does his work by halfs in all Church-concernments Fol. 72. James Montague Bishop of Winchester a potent Courtier took exceptions that his Bishoprick in the marshalling of them was wronged in method as put after any whose Bishop is a Privy Counsellour The Bishop was too wise a man to take this as our Author hates it for a sufficient ground of the proceeding against Dr. Mocket who had then newly translated into the Latin tongue the Liturgy of the Church of England the 39. Articles the Book of the Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons and many Doctrinal points extracted out of the Book of Homilies All which with Bishop Iewels Apology Mr. Noels Catechism and a new Book of his own entitâ—led Politiâ— Ecclesiae Anglicanae he had caused to be Printed and bound up together A Book which might have been of great honour to the Church of England amongst forain Nations and of no lesse use and esteem at home had there not been somewhat else in it which deserved the fire then this imaginary Quarrel For by the Act of Parliament 31 H. 8. 6. 10. the precedency of the Bishops is thus Marshalled that is to say the Archbishop of Canterbury the Archbishop of York the Bishop of London the Bishop of Durham the Bishop of Winchester the rest according to the order of their Consecrations yet so that if any of them were Secretary to the King he should take place of all those other Bishops to whom otherwise by the Order of his Consecration he had been to give it If the Doctor did mistake himself in this particular as indeed he did the fault might easily have been mended as not deserving to be expiated by so sharp a punishment The following reason touching his derogating from the Kings power in Ecclesiastical matters and adding it to the Metropolitan whose servant and Chaplain he was hath more reason in it if it had but as much truth as reason and so hath that touching the Propositions by him gathered out of the Homilies which were rather framed according to his own judgement then squared by the Rules of the Church But that which I conceive to have been the true cause why the Book was burned was that in publishing the twentieth Article concerning the Authority of the Church he totally left out the first clause of it viz. Habet Ecclesia Ritus sive Ceremonias statuendi jus in Controversus â—ides Authoritatem By means whereof the Article was apparently falsified the Churches Authority disâ—vowed and consequently a wide gap opened to dispute her power in all her Canons and Determinations of what sort soever And possible enough it is that some just offence might be taken at him for making the Fasting dayes appointed in the Liturgy of the Church of England to be commanded and observed ob Politiâ— is solum rationes for Politick Considerations only as insinuated pag. 308. whereas those Fasting-dayes were appointed in the first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth Anno 1549. with reference only to the primitive Institution of those several Fasts when no such Politick considerations were so much as thought of But whatsoever was the true cause or whether there were more then one as perhaps there was certain I am it could not be for derogating any thing from the Kings Power and enlarging that of the Archbishop in confirming the election of Bishops as our Author tels us For though the Doctor doth affirm of the Metropolitans of the Church of England pag. 308. Vt Electiones Episcoporum suae Provinciae confirment that it belongs to them to confirm the Electioâ—s of the Bishops of their several Provinces and for that purpose cites the Canon of the Councel of Nice which our Author speaks of yet afterwards he declares expresly that no such confirmation is or can be made by the Metropolitans without the Kings assent preceding Cujus 〈◊〉 electi comprobantur comprobati confirmantur confirmati consecrantur pag. 313. which very fully clears the Doctor from being a better Chaplain then he was a Subject as our Author makes him Fol. 77. At this time began the troubles in the Law-Countries about matters of Religion heightned between two opposite parties Remonstrants and Contra-Râ—monstrants their Controversies being chiefly 〈◊〉 to five points c Not at this time viz. 1618. which our
in this caâ—e came before by whose continual importunity and 〈◊〉 the breach of the Treaties followed after The King lov'd peace â—oo well to lay aside the Treaties and engage in War before he was desperate of success any other way then by that of the Sword and was assur'd both of the hands and hearts of his subjects to assist him in it And therefore ouâ— Author should have said that the King not only called together his great Councel but broke off the Treaty and not have given us here such an Hysteron Proteron as neither doth consist with reason not the truth of story ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Eleventh Book OF The Church History OF BRITAIN Containing the Reign of King Charles THis Book concludes our Authors History and my Animadverâ—â—ons And 〈◊〉 the end be 〈◊〉 unto the beginning it is like to 〈…〉 enough our Author stumbling at the Threshold 〈◊〉 â—moâ—gst superstitious people hath been 〈…〉 presage Having placed King Charles upon 〈…〉 he goes on to tell us that Fol. 117. On the fourtâ—enth 〈…〉 James his Funerals were 〈…〉 Collegiat Church at 〈…〉 but the fourth saith the 〈…〉 Reign of King Charls and 〈…〉 was on the 〈…〉 â—â—venth of May on which those solemn Obsequies were 〈…〉 Westminster Of which if he will not take my word seâ— him consult the Pamphleâ— called the 〈…〉 â—ol 6. and he shall be satisfied Our 〈…〉 muâ—â— keep time better or else we shall neveâ— know how the day goes with him Fol. 119. As for Dr. Preâ—â—on c. His party would 〈◊〉 us that he might have chose his own Mitre And 〈…〉 his party would perswade us That he had not only large parts of suâ—â—icient receipt to manage the broad 〈…〉 but that the Seal was proffered to him fol. 131. But we are not bound to believe all which is said by that party who look'd vpon the man with such a reverence as came near Idolaâ—â—y His Principles and engagements were too well known by those which governed Affairs to ventâ—â—e him â—nto any such great trust in Church or State and his activity so suspected that he would not have been long suffered to continue Preacher at Lincolns Inn. As for his intimacy with the Duke too violent to be long lasting it proceeded not from any good â—pinion which the Duke had of him but that he found how instrumental he might be to manage that prevailâ—â—g party to the Kings advantage But when it was 〈◊〉 that he had more of the Serpent in him then of the 〈◊〉 and that he was not tractable in steering the 〈◊〉 of his own Party by the Court Compass he was discountenanc'd and â—aid by as not worth the keeping He seemed the Court Mâ—reor for a while 〈◊〉 to a sâ—dden height of expectation and having 〈◊〉 and blaz'd a 〈◊〉 went out again and was as suddâ—â—nly â—oâ—gotten â—ol 119. Next day the King coming from Canterbury 〈…〉 with all solemnity she was 〈…〉 in London where a Chappel 〈…〉 her Devâ—tionâ— with a Covent 〈…〉 to the Articles of her 〈…〉 how â—ame he to be suffered to be present at 〈◊〉 in the capacity of Lord Keeper For that he did so is affirmed by our Author saying That the King took a Sâ—role of Parchment out of his bosom and gave it to the Lâ—rd 〈…〉 who read it to the Commons four sevâ—raâ— times East-West North and South fol. 123. Thirdly the Lord Keeper who read that Scrole was not the 〈◊〉 Keeper Williams but the Lord Keeper Coventry 〈◊〉 Seal being taken from the Bishop of Lincoln and 〈◊〉 to the custoâ—y of Sir Thomas Coventry in October before And therefore fourthly our Author is much ouâ— in placing both the Coronation and the following Parliament befoâ—e the change of the Lord Keeper and sending Sir Iohn Suckling to feâ—ch that Seal at the end of a Parliâ—ment in the Spring which he had brought away with him before Michaelmas Term. But as our Author was willing to keep the Bishop of Lincoln in the Deaâ—â—y of Westminster for no less then five or six years after it was confer'd on another so is he as desirous to continue him Lord Keeper for as many months after the Seal had been entrusted to another hand Fol. 122. The Earl of Arundel as Earl Marshal of 〈◊〉 and the Duke of Buckingham as Lord High Constâ—ble of England for that day went before his Majesty in that great Solemnity In this passage and the next that follows ouâ— Author shews himself as bad an Herald in marshalling a Royal shew as in stating the true time of the câ—eation of a Noble Peer Here in this place he plaâ—eth the Earl Marshal before the Constable whereas by the 〈◊〉 31 H. 8. c. 10. the Constable is to have 〈◊〉 before the Marshal Not want there Precedents to shew that the Lord High-Constable did many times direct his Mâ—ndats to the Earl Marshal as one of the Miniâ—â—ers of his Court willing and requiring him to perform such and such services as in the said Precepts were expâ—essed In the next place we are informed that Ibid. That the Kings Train being six yards long of Purple Velvet was held up by the Lord Compton and the Lord Viscount Dorcester That the Lord Compton was one of them which held up the Kings Train I shall easily grant he being then Master of the Robes and thereby châ—llenging a right to peâ—foâ—m this service But that the Lord Viscount Dorcester was the other of them I shall never grant there being no such Viscount at the time of the Coronation I cannot 〈◊〉 but that Sir Dâ—dley Carleton might be one of those which held up the Train though I am not sure of it But sure I am that Sir Dudley Carleton was not made Baron of Imber-Court till towards the latter end of the following Parliament of An. 1626 nor created Viscount Dorcester until some years after Fol. 122. The Lord Archbishop did present his Majesty to the Lords and Commons East West North South asking their mindes four several times if they did consent to the Coronation of King Charles their lawful â—overaign This is a piece of new State-doctrine never known before that the Coronation of the King and consequently his Succession to the Crown of England should depend on the consent of the Lords and Commons who were then assembled the Coronation not proceeding as he after â—elleth us till their consent was given four times by â—cclamations And this I call a piece of new State-doctrine never known before because I finde the contrary in the Coronation of our former Kings For in the form and manner of the Coronation of King Edward 6. described in the Catalogue of Honor â—et â—orth by Tho. Mills of Canterbury Anno 1610. we finde it thus The King being carried by certain Noble Courtiers in another Chair â—nto the four sides of the Stage was by the Archbishop of Canterbury declared unto the people standing round about both by Gods and mans Laws to be the right and lawâ—ul King of
one of the Daughters of Charls Brandon Duke of Suffolk and of Mary the French Queen King 〈◊〉 Sister Fol. 427. The late French King Henry the fourth had three Daughters the one married to the Duke of Savoy c This Marriage both for the time and person is mistaken also First for the time in making it to precede the match with Spain whereas the cross Marriages with Spain were made in the year 1612. and this with Savoy not trans-acted till the year 1618. Secondly for the Person which he makes to be the eldest Daughter of Henry the fourth and Elizabeth married into Spain to be the second whereas Elizabeth was the eldest Daughter and Christienne married into Savoy the second onely For which consult Iames Howels History of Lewis the 13. fol. 13. 42. Fol. 428. The story was that his Ancestors at Plough â—lew Malton an High-land Rebel and dis-comfited his Train using no other Weapon but his Geer and Tackle But Camden whom I rather credit tells us That this was done in a great fight against the Danes For speaking of the Earls of Arrol he derives the Pedigree from one Hay a man of exceeding strength and excellent courage who together with his Sons in a dangerous Battle of Scots against the Danes at Longcarty caught up an Ox Yoak and so valiantly and fortunately withal what with fighting and what with exhorting re-inforced the Scots at the point to shâ—ink and recoyl that they had the day of the Danes and the King with the States of the Kingdom adscribed the Victory and their own safety to his valor and prowess Ibid. But to boot he sought out a good Heir Gup my Lady Dorothy sole Daughter to the Lord Denny This spoken of Sir Iames Hay afterwards Viscount Doncaster and Earl of Carâ—â—sle who indeed married the Daughter and sole Heir of the L. Denny of Waltham But he is out for all that in his Gup my Lady her name being Honora and not Dorothy as the Author makes it And for his second Wife one of the Daughters of Henry Piercy E. of North-Humberland she was neither a Dorothy nor an Heiâ— And therefore we must look for this Gup my Lady in the House of Huntington that bald Song being made on the Marriage of the Lady Dorothy Hastings Daughter of George Earl of Huntington with a Scotish Gentleman one Sir Iames Steward slain afterward at â—â—â—ington by Sir George Wharton who also perisht by his Sword in a single Combate Fol. 429. Amongst many others that accompanied Hays expedition was Sir Henry Rich Knight of the Bath and Baron of Kensington Knight of the Bath at that time but not Baron of Kensington this Expedition being plac'd by our Author in the year 1616. and Sir Henry Rich not being made Baron of Kensington till the 20 year of King Iames Annâ— 1622. Fol. 434. The chief Iudge thereof is called Lordchief Iustice of the Common Pleas accompanied with three or four Assistants or Associates who are created by Letters Patents from â—he King But Doctor Cowel in his learned and laborious work called The Interpreter hath informed us otherwise This Iustice saith he speaking of the chief Justice of the Kings Bench hath no Patent under the Broad-Seal He is made onely by Writ which is a short one to this effect Regina Iohanni Popham Militi salutem Sciatis quod constituimus 〈◊〉 Iâ—stâ—ciarium nostrum Capitalem ad Placita coram nobis terâ—â—nandum durante bene placito nostro Teste c. For this he citeth Crompton a right learned Lawyer in his Book of the Iurisdiction of Courts And what he saith of that chief Justice the practice of these times and the times preceding hath verified in all the rest Fol. 450. She being afterwards led up and down the Kingâ— Army under oversight as a Prisoner but shewed to the people 〈◊〉 if reconâ—iled to her Son c. Not so for after the deatâ— of the Marquess D'Aucre she retired to Blois where 〈◊〉 liv'd for some years under a restraint till released by the Duâ—â— of Eâ—pâ—rnon and prtly by force pâ—rtly by treaty restorâ— again into power and favor with her Son which she improvâ—â— afterwards to an omne-regenâ—y till Richeleu her great Assistant finding himself able to stand without her and not enduring a Competitor in the Affairs of State mde her leave the Kingdom Fol. 45â— By his first Wife he had bâ—t one Sâ—n risâ—â—g no higher in Honor then Kâ—ight and Baronet Yet afâ—erwâ—â—ds he had preferment to the Govâ—rnment of Ulster Pâ—ovince in Ireland This spoken but mistakingly spoken of Sir George Vâ—lliers Father of the Duke of Buckingham and his eldest son For first Sir George Villiers had two sons by a former Wife that is to say Sir William Villiers Knight and Baronet who preferred the quiet and repose of a Countrey life before that of the Court and Sir Edward Villiers who by a Daughter of Sir Iohn St. Iohn of Lidiard in the County of Wilts was Father of the Lord Viscount Graâ—dâ—son now living And secondly It was not Sir William but Sir Edward Villiers who had a Government in Ireland as being by the Power and Favor of the Duke his halfâ— Brother made Lord President of Mâ—nster not of Vlster which he held till his death And whereas it is said fol. 466. that the Dâ—ke twiâ—teâ— himself and his Issue by inter-marriâ—ges with the best and most â—noble If the Author instead of his Issue had said his â—â—ndred it had been more properly and more truly spoken For the Duke liv'd not to see the Marriage of any one of his châ—ldren though a Contract had passed between his Daughter Mary and the Heir of Pembroke but he had so disposed of hâ—s Female Kindred that there were more Countesses and â—onorable Ladies of his Relations then of any one Family 〈◊〉 the Land Fol. 458. Henry the eighth created Anne Bullen 〈◊〉 of Pembroke before he marryed her The Author here â—â—eaks of the Creation of Noble Women and maketh that of â—nne Bullen to be the first in that kinde whereas indeed it as the second if not the third For Margaret Daughter 〈…〉 Fol. 4â—4 And that Comâ—t at Châ—ists birth was 〈…〉 But first the Star which appeared at the birth of our 〈◊〉 and conducted the wise men to Ierusalem was of condition too â—ubâ—ime and supernatural to be called a Comet and so resolved to be by allâ—learned men who have written of it And secondly had it been a Comet it could not possibly have portended the death of Nero there passing between the bâ—â—th of Chrâ—st and the death of that Tyrant about 〈◊〉 yearâ— too long a time to give unto the influences of thâ— strongest Comet So that although a Comet did presage thâ— death of Nero as is said by Tacitus yet could not that Comet be the 〈◊〉 which the Scriptures speak of Fol. 48â— Ferdinand meets at Franckford with the three 〈◊〉 Menâ—â— Colen and Trevours the other three Silesia Moravia and Luâ—atia
Seas and a Westâ—country Gentleman whose name I call not now to minde of the Western parts Our Author may be good for land service but we have some cause to fear by this experiment that if he should put forth to Sea he would easily fall into Scylla by avoiding Charybdis Fol. 18. This Gentleman was second Son of Thomas Cecil Earl of Exeter c. Our Author speaks this of Sr. Edward Cecil created by King Charles in the first year of his Reign Lord Cecil of Putney and Viscount Wimbleton and by the King made Commander General of his first Fleet against the Spaniards concerning whom he falls into several Errours For first Sr Edward Cecil was not the second but the third son of Thomas Earl of Exeter the second Son being Sr. Richard Cecil of Walkerly in the County of Rutland the Father of that David Cecil who succeeded in the Earldom of Exeter after the death of Earl William eldest Son of Thomas aforesaid Secondly this Sr. Edward Cecil was not of a Colonel made General of the English forces in the unhappy war of the Palatinate He was indeed made General of the English forces in the war of Cleve Anno 1610. the power which his Uncle Sr. Robert Cecil Earl of Salisbury had with King Iames advancing him to that imployment But that he was not General of the English forces in the Palatinate war I am very confident Sr. Horace Vere one of a more noble extraction and a far better Souldier being chief Commander in that service of the English forces Thirdly admitting this for true yet could not the mis-effects of that war be charged on him or any other of the English Commanders the English forces being inconsiderable for their number in reference to those which were raised for that war by the German Princes all of them under the Command of the Marquesse of Oâ—alsback as their Generalissimo to whose either cowardize or infidelity the mis-effects of that war as our Author calls them were imputed commonly And fourthly it was not 27. years since his imployment there when he was called home to be Commander of this fleet there being not above five years from the beginning of the war in the Palatinate and his calling home and not above fifteen from his being made General of the English in the war of Cleveland Fol. 24. Dr. Williams outed of the Seal but kept his Bishoprick of Lincoln and the Deanry of Westminster which indeed he had for his life Our Author is as much out in this as in that before for though the Deanry of Westminster was given at first to Dr. Williams for terme of Life yet when he was made Bishop of Lincoln that Deanry fell again to the King and by the king was regranted to him to be holden in Commendam with that Bishoprick After which being made Arch-Bishop of York in the year 1641. he obtained it in Commendam for three years onely which term expired he was a Sutor to the King at Oxford for a longer term and on denial of that Suit retired into Wales and openly betook himself to the Parliament-party concerning which consult our Author in the latter part of his History Nor did he only keep the Bishoprick of Lincoln and the Deanry of Westminster but also a Residenciaries place in the Church of Lincoln the Prebend of Asgarve and Parsonage of Walgrove so that he was a whole Diocesse within himself as bing Parson Prebend Dignitary Dean and Bishop and all five in one Fol. 25. All setled and reposed the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury presented his Majesty to the Lords and Commons East West North and South asking them if they did consent to the Coronation of K. Charles their lawful Soveraign Our Author takes this whole Narrative of the pomp and order of the Kings Coronation out of the Church History of Britain endeavoured and but endeavoured by Mr. Fuller of Walthamâ— and takes it all upon his credit without so much as startling at that dangerous passage which is now before us That Author and this also following him conceive the peoples consent so necessary to the Coronation of the King that it was askt no less then four times by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury before he could proceed any further in that solemnity But if we look into the form used in the Coronation of King Edward the sixth we shall finde it thus viz. That being carried by 〈◊〉 noble Courâ—iers in another Chair unto the four sides of the Stage he was by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury declared unto the People standing round about both by Gods and Mans Laws to be the right and lawful King of England France and Ireland and proclaimed that day to be Crowned Coâ—secrated and Anoiâ—ted unto whom he demanded whether they would obey anâ— serve or not By whom it was again with a loudâ—ery answered God save the King and ever live his Majesty And in the Coronation of King Iames more briefly thus The King is shewed to the people and they are required to make acknowledgement of their Allegiance to his Majesty by the Arch-Bishop which they do by Acclamations Which being so it cannot possibly be supposed that instead of requiring the peoples obedience to the Kings Authority the Arch-Bishop shouâ—d crave their consent to his Coronation as if the Coronation were not strong and valid nor his succession good in Law without their consent But though our Author follow Mr. Fuller in one Error yet he â—orrects him in another though in so doing he require some correction also Master Fuller tells us that the Kings Traâ—â— was held up by the Lord Compton as belonging to the Robes and the Lord Vicount Dorchester lib. 11. fol. 122. Mr. Sanderson knowing that there was no such man then being as a Viscount Dorchester must play the Critick on the Text and instead of Viscount Dorchester gives us Viscount Doncaster whom he makes Master of the Wardrobe and both true alike fol. â— 5. The Master of the Wardrobe at that time was the Earl of Dâ—â—bâ—gh and the Lord Viscount Doncaster now Earl of Carstile was then too yong to perform any Service in this solemnity which had he done Mr. Fuller who hath some dependence on him would not have robb'd him of the honor of performing that service which none but persons of place and merit could pretend unto Fol. 25. The Sermon being done the Arch-Bishop invested in a rich Cope goeâ—h to the King kneeling upon Cushions at the Communion Table and asks his willingness to take the Oath usually taken by his Predecessors c. The form and maner of w h Oath as having afforded much matter of discourse in these latter times I will first subjoyn and afterwards observe what descants have been made upon it The form and maner of the Oath as followeth Sir says the Arch-Bishop will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirm to the People of England the Laws and Customs to them granted by the Kings of England your Lawful and
of Tirone who had the conduct of that War was forced to submit unto him upon condition of his Pardon which not without great difficulty was obtain'd of the Queen After whose death the Lord Mountâ—oy returned into England brought the said Earl of Tyrone with him and presented him unto King Iames who by this means reaped the fruit of that Victory and setled Ireland upon a better foundation of Peace and Happiness then all the Kings which had Reign'd before him Thirdly There was never any such Lord Deputy of Ireland as Sir William Fitzers mentioned within few lines after Sir William Fitz-Williams was once Deputy there whom I think he means Nor â—ourthly was Sir George Cary whom he brings in by Head and shoulders to be the Governor of Ireland f. 187. ever advanced unto that Honor and our Author being as much mistaken in the name of the Man as of his Office Sir George Cary never had Command in Ireland Sir George Caâ—ew had made by the Queen Lord President of Muâ—ster which place he worthily discharg'd but not the Governor of that Kingdom Fol. 192. The Queen was delivered of her second Son the 13 of October 1633. and not upon the 14 of November 1634. he was 〈◊〉 ten days 〈…〉 James and created Duke of York by Letters Patents c. Our Author here corrects the former Historian for making the Kings second Son to be born on the 14 of 〈◊〉 and deâ—erves himself to be corrected for making him to be created Duke of York by Letters Patents on 〈…〉 day after his Birth For though he was by the King dâ—signed to be Duke of York and that it was commanded that he should be called so accordingly yet was he not created Duke of York by Letters Patents until ten years after and aâ—ove those Letters Patents bearing date at Iâ—nuaryâ—7 â—7 Anno 1643. The like mistake to that which he corrects in the former Historian he falls intâ— himâ—elf fol. 312. wheâ—e he makes Henry Duke of Glocester the Kings yongest Son to be born on the twentieth day 〈◊〉 Iuly Anâ—o 1640. whereas it appears by the Arch Bishops Breviâ—t that he was born on Wednesday the eighth day of that Moneth being the day of the solemn Faâ—t And by this rule we may correct a passâ—ge in the sâ—oâ—t view of this Kings life pag. â—3 wherâ— he is 〈…〉 born on the seventeenth of this Moneth though rightly 〈◊〉 46. on the eighth day of it he is said to be bâ—rn upâ—n the eighth And thus he fails fol. 232. in making Edwâ—rd 〈◊〉 the onely Son of George Duke of Clarence to be Duke of Warwick whom all our Heralds and 〈…〉 Earl of Warwick The like mistake I finde in the name of a Town near unto which a great Battle was fought between the 〈◊〉 and the Swedes The Town near which that Battle was fought being named Norlinghen a City of that part of Svevia which is called North-schwâ—hâ—n misâ—akingly by 〈◊〉 Author called the Battle of Norlington The loss of which Battle drew after it the loss of the Palatinate restored to the Electoral Family but the year before Fol. 209. And that Story of truth that John of Orleans of this Family like a second Judith saved France from the Oppression of Strangers Not now to quarrel the ungrammaticalness of this passage nor the mistake of Iohn of Orleans for Iohane I would fain know by what Authority our Author makes this Iohn orâ— Ioane to be descended of this Illustrious Family of the Dukes of Lorrein Most of the French who have written the Story of her life report her to be a poor mans daughter of Ocolieur a Town in that Dukedom instructed by the Earl of Dunois commonly called the Bastard of Orleans to pretend to some Divine Revelations the better to incourage that dejected Nation and to take upon her the Conduct of the French Armies against the English in which she sped fortunately at the first but in the end was taken Prisoner and burnt at Rouen Nor does the paralel between her and Iudish hold so well as our Author would have it that Lady adventuring into the Tent of Holophernes accompanied onely with her Maid this Damosel Errant never looking on the face of an Enemy but when she was backt by the best Commanders and united Forces of the French that Lady carrying back with her the head of her Enemy which occasioned the total overthrow of all his Aâ—my this Damosâ—l not being able to save her own Head from the power of the Conqueror that Lady dying honorably in the Bed of Peace and this ingloriously in a Ditch Fol. 219. A severe eye had been upon the Roman Catholicks and their numerous râ—sorts c. to the ancient Chappel at Denmark House An ancient Chappel questionless of not much above twenty years continuance when our Author writ this part of his History and then built for the devotions of a small Covent of Capuchins whom the Queen had got leave â—o sâ—ttle there for her personal comfort No Chappell anciently belonging to that House which our Authour cals by the name of Denmark but is more commonly called Somerset House It having been observed of Edward Duke of Somerset the first Founder of it that having pull'd down one Parish Church and three Bishops houses each of which had their several Oratories to make room for that Palace for himself he could not finde in his heart to build a Chappell to it for the Service of God And though some Room was afterward set apart in it for Family-duties and devotions by the name of a Closet yet so uncapable was that Closet of admitting any numerous resort of Catholiques out of other places that it was not able to contain the Queens Domesticks at her first coming hither But perhaps our Authour will hit it better in the affairs of Scotland and therefore passe we on to them where first we finde That He makes Sir Iohn Stewart Earl of Traquair to succeed the Earl of Marr in the Office of Lord Treasurer of Scotland fol. 193. Whereas it is most undoubtedly true and acknowledged by himself in another place that he succeeded in that Office to the Earl of Morton the Earl of Morton being made Captain of the guard in the place of the Earl of Holland and the Earl of Holland made Groom of the Stool upon the death of the Earl of Carlile His making of Sir Iohn Hay of Scotlandâ—o â—o be the Master of the Robes for that Kingdom fol. 237. in stead of Master of the Rolls Clerk-Register they call him there I look on as a mistake of the Printer only though such mistakes condemn our Authour of no small negligence in not reviewing his own work Sheet by Sheet as it came from the Presse and making an Errata to it as all Authours carefull of their credit have been used to do Fol. 230. And because the Earl of Strathern a bold man and had the Kings ear and deservedly too being faithfull and true these
ordinary temper And so much was the King startled when he heard of the giving up of that City with the Fort and Castle and that too in so short a time that he posted away a Messenger to the Lords at Oxford to displace Col. Legg a well known Creature of Prince Ruperts from the Government of that City and Garison and to put it into the hands of Sir Thomas Glenham which was accordingly done and done unto the great contentment of all the Kings party except that Prince and his Dependents But Legg was sweetned not long after by being made one of the Grooms of his Majesties Bed-chamber a place of less command but of greater trust Fol. 891. And now the Parliament consider of a Term or Titleâ— to be given to the Commissioners intrusted with their Great Seal and are to be called Conservators of the Common-wealth of England Not so with reference either to the time or the thing it self For first The Commissioners of the Great Seal were never called the Conservators fo the Common-wealth of England And Secondly If they ever had been called so it was not now that is to say when the Kings Seals were broken in the House of Peers which was not long after Midsummer in the year 1646. But the truth is that on the 30 of Ianuary 1648. being the day of the Kings most deplorable death the Commons caused an Act or Order to be printed in which it was declared that from thenceforth in stead of the Kings Name in all Commissions Decrees Processes and Indictments the â—â—tle of Custodes Libertatis Angliae or the Keepers of the Liberties of England as it was afterwards englished when all Legall Instruments were ordered to be made up in the English-Tongue should be alwaies used But who these Keepers of the Liberties were was a thing much questioned some thought the Commissioners for the great Seal were intended by it whom our Authour by a mistake of the Title cals here the Conservators of the Common-wealth others conceiv'd that it related to the Councel of State but neither rightly For the truth is that there were never any such men to whom this Title was appliable in one sense or other it being onely a Second Notion like Genus and Species in the Schools a new devised term of State-craft to express that trust which never was invested in the persons of any men either more or fewer Fol. 892. â—o then the eldest Son and the yongest Daughter are with the Quâ—â—n in France the two Dukes of York and Glocester with the Princess Elizabeth at St. James 's The Prince in the Weâ—t with his Army â— This is more strange then all the rest that the Kings eldest Son should be with his Mother in France and yet that the Prince at the same time should be with his Army in the West of England I always thought till I saw so good Authority to the contrary that the Prince and the Kings eldest Son had been but one person But finding it otherwise resolved I would fain know which of the Kings Sonâ— is the Prince if the eldest be not It cannot be the second or third for they are here called both onely by the name of Dukes and made distinct persons from the Prince And therefore we must needs believe that the Kings eldest Son Christned by the name of Charls-Iames who dyed at Greâ—nwich almost as soon as he was born Anno 1629. was raised up from the dead by some honest French Conjurer to keep company with the yong Princess Henrietta who might converse with hâ—m as a Play-Fellow without any terror as not being able to distinguish him from a Baby of Clouts That he and all that did adhere unto him should be safe in their Persons Honors andâ—â—onsciences in the Scotish Army and that they would really and effectually joyn with him and with such as would come in unto him and joyn with them for his preservation and should employ their Armies and Forces to assist him to his Kingdomâ— in the recovery of his â—ust Rights But on the contrary these jugling and perfidious 〈◊〉 declare in a Letter to their Commissioners at London by them to be communicated to the Houses of Parliament that there had been no Treaty nor apitulation betwixt his Mâ—â—esty and them nor any in their names c. On the receit of which Letters the Houses Order him to be sent to Warwick Castle But Lesâ—ly who had been us'd to buying and selling in the time of his Pedlâ—ry was loth to lose the benefit of so rich a Commodity and thereupon removes him in such post-haste that on the eighth of May we finde him at Southwel and at Newcastle on the tenth places above an hundred Miles distant from one another and he resolv'd before-hand how to dispose of him when he had him there â—o Scotland he never meant to carry him though some hopes were given of it at the first for not onely Lesly himself but the rest of the Covenanters in the Army were loth to admit of any Competitor in the Government of that Kingdom which they had ingrossed whoâ—y to themselves but the 〈◊〉 in an Assembly of theirs declare expresly against his coming to live amongst them as appears fol 〈◊〉 So that there was no other way left to dispose of his person but to â—ell him to the Houses of Parliament though at the first they made 〈◊〉 of it and would be thought to stand upon Terms or Honor The Eaâ—l of Lowdon who lov'd to hear himsâ—lf speak more â—hen â—ny man living in some Speâ—ches made beâ—ore â—he Houses protested strongly against the dâ—livery of their Kings Person into their Power 〈◊〉 what in 〈◊〉 â—â—amy would lie upon them and the whole Nation â—f 〈◊〉 â—hould to 〈◊〉 But this was but a coâ—y of their Countenance onely 〈◊〉 â—â—vice to raise the Marâ—eâ— and make is â—uch money 〈…〉 as they could At last they came to this Agreement that for the sum of Two hundred thousand pounds they should deliver him to such Commissioners as the Houses should Authorize to receive him of them which was done accordingly For Fol. 939. The Commissioners for receiving the Person of the King came to Newcastle Iune 22. c. Not on the 22 of Iune I am sure of that the Commodity to be bought and sold was of greater value and the Scots too cunning to part with it till they had raised the price of it as high as they could The driving of this Bargain took up all the time betwixt the Kings being carried to Newcastle and the middle of the Winter then next following so that the King might be delivered to these Commissioners that is to say from Prison to Prison on the 22 day of Ianuary but of Iune he could not And here it will not be amiss to consider what loss or benefit redounded to those Merchants which traded in the buying and selling of this precious Commodity And first The Scots not long before their breaking out
al ove one hundred in number forcibly sâ—â—ze upon violently kept out of and driven from the House by the Officers and Souldiers of the Army under Thomas Lord Fairfax c. And thirdly We finde after this that Sir Iohn Temple Sir Martin Lumley Câ—l Booth M. Waller M. Middleton and others were turned back by such Souldiers as were appointed to keep a strict guard at the doors of the House So that the whole number of those who weâ—e imprisoned and kept under restraint or otherwise were debarred and turned back from doing their service in the House waâ— reckoned to amount to an hundred and fourty which comes to thrice as many as the 40 or 50 which our Author speaks of But to proceed the Officers of the Army having thus made themselves Masters of the House of Commons thought fit to make themselves Masters of the City also To which end they ordered two Regiments of Foot and some Troops of Horse to take up Quarters in Pauls Church and Black-fryers on Friday the 8. of the same moneth and on the â—unday following sent diverse Souldriers to be quartered in the Houses of private Citizens which notwithstanding such was their tender care not to give any diâ—turbance to them that lbid Not to fâ—ighten the City the General writes to my Lord Mayor that he had sâ—nt Col. Dean to seize the Treasuries of Haberdashers Goldsmiths and Weavers Halls where they seize on 20000.l that by the Monies he may pay his Armies Arrears The Authour whom our Historian followeth in all these late traverses of State relates this businesse more distinctly and inteâ—ligently then we finde it here viz. That two Regiments of Foot and some Troops of Horse took up Quarters in Pauls and Black-frier and seized upon 20000. l in Weavers Hall which they promised to repay when the Lord Mayor and Common Councell please to bring in the Arrears due from the City They secured likewise the Treasures of Haberdashers and Goldsmiths Hall Here we have first a seizure of the 20000. l in Weavars Hall for the use of 〈◊〉 Army and a securing of the Treasures in the other two that they might not be employed against it The 20000 l. which they found in the first was the remainder of the 200000 l. which was voted to be brought in thither for the raising of a New Presbyterian Army under the command of the Lord Willoughby of Parhâ—â— as Lord Generall and Sir Iohn Maynard as Lieutenant Generall to reduce that Army to conformity which had so successively served under the command of Sir Thomas Fairfax But the other two being hard names and not very easie of digestion require somewhat which may make them lighter to the understanding of the vulgar Reader Concerning which we are to know that severall Ordinances were made by the Lords and Commons for sequestring the Estates of all such who had adhered unto the King whom to distinguish them from their own party they called Delinquents and a severe couâ—se was taken in those sequestrations as well in reference to their personall as reall Estates to make them the more considerable in the purse of the Houseâ— But finding no such great profit to come in that way when every Cook who had the dressing of that dish had lickt his fingers as they did expect they were contented to admit them to a Composition These Compositions to be managâ—d at Goldsmiths Hall by a select Committee consisting of severall Members of the House of Commons and some of the most pragmaticall and stiff sort of Citizens the parties to compound had 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. or 7. years purchase according as they either offered themselves voluntarily or came in upon Articlâ—s or were forced to submit to mercy What infinite summes of money were brought in by these compositions he that list to see may finde them both in the severall Items and the summa toâ—â—alâ—s in their printed Tables And yet the payment of these Sums was the least part of the grievance compared unto those heavy clogs which were laid on their Consciences For first No man was admitted to treat with the Committee at Goldsmiths Hall till unlesse he was priviledged and exempt by Articles he had brought a Certificate that he had taken the Negative Oath either before the Committee for the Militia of London or some Committee in the Countrey where he had his â—welling And by this oath he was to swear that he would neither directly nor indirectly adhere unto or wilâ—â—â—gly assist the King in that War or in that cause against the Parliament nor any Forces raised without the consent of the two Houses of Parliament in thâ—t cause or War for which consult the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons bearing date April 5. 1645. And secondly It was Ordered by the said Lords and Commons on the 1. of November 1645. That the Committee of Goldsmiths Hall should have power to tender the Solemn League and Covenant to all persons that come out of the Kings Quarâ—â—â—s to that Committee to compound and to secure such as should refuse to take it until they had conformed thereunto And by that Covenant they were bound to endeavour the extirpation of Popery and Prelacy that is Church-government by Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. and to defend the Kings Person and Authority no otherwise then in order to the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms And if the party to compound were a Romane Catholick there was an Oath of Abjuration to be taken also before any such Sequestration could be taken off if once laid upon him By which he was to swear That he abjured and renounced the Popes Supremacy that he beleeved not there was any Transubstantiation nor Purgatory nor any worship to be given to the consecrated Host Crucifix or Images and that salvation could not be merited by works renouncing and abjuring all Doctrines in defence of thâ—se points To such a miserable necessity had they brought many of that party that they thought if safer as they use to say to trust God with their souls then such unmercifull men with their Lives Fortunes and Estates And yet this was not thought to be a sufficient punishment to them but they must first passe through Hâ—berdashers Hall which is the last of my hard words before they could be free of the Goldsmiths And in that Hall they were to pay the fifth and twentieth parts of their Estates as well real as personall in present money all men being brought within the power of the Committee not only who were called Delinquents but such as had not voluntarily contributed to the Parliament in any place whatsoever as appears by the Order of the Commons bearing date August 25. 1646. By which last clause more Grist was brought unto that Mill then can be easily imagined their Agents being very eager in that pursuit So that it was accounted a great benefit as indeed it was to them who came in upon the Articles of
Discourse with the Bishop of Winchester And for the Narrative the Doctor whom I have talked with in this business doth not shame to say that he borrowed it from that great Treasury of Academical Antiquities Mr. Brian Twine whose learned Works stanâ— good against all Opponents and that he found the passage justified by Sir Isaack Wake in his Rex Platonicus Two Persons of too great wit and judgement to relate a matter of this nature on no better gâ—ound then common 〈◊〉 talk and that too spoke in merriment by Sir Henry Savil. Assuredly Sir Henry Savil was too great a Zealot for that University and too much a friend to Mr. Wake who was Fellow of the same Colledge with him to have his Table-talk and discourses of merriment to be put upon Record as grounds and arguments for such men to build on in that weighty Controversie And therefore when our Author tells us what he was told by Mr. Hubbard Mr. Hubbard by Mr. Barlow Mr. Barlow by Mr. Bust and Mr. Bust by Sir Henry Savil it brings into my minde the like Pedegree of as true a Story even that of Mother Miso in Sir Philip Sidney telling the young Ladies an old Tale which a good old woman told her which an old wise man told her which a great learned Clerk told him and gave it him in writing and there she had it in her Prayer-book as here our Author hath found this on the end of his Creed Not much unlike to which is that which I finde in the Poet Quae Phoebo Pater omnipotens mihi Phoebus Apollo Praedixit vobis Furiarum ego maxima pandâ— That is to say What Iove told Phoebus Phoebus told to me And I the chief of Furies tell to thee But to proceed Fol. 190. This was that Nevil who for Extraction Estate Alliance Dependents Wisdom Valour Success and popularity was superior to any English Subject since the Conquest Our Author speaks this of that Richard Nevil who was first Earl of Warwick in right of Anne his Wife Sister and Heir of Henry Beauchamp the last of that Family and after Earl of Salisbury by descent from his Father a potent and popular man indeed but yet not in all or in any of those respects to be match'd with Henry of Bullenbrook son to Iohn of Gaunt whom our Author must needs grant to have lived since the time of the Conquest Which Henry after the death of his Father was Duke of Lancaster and Hereford Earl of Leicester Lincoln and Darby c. and Lord High Steward of England Possessed by the donation of King Henry the third of the County Palatin of Lancaster the forfeited Estates of Simon de Montfort Earl of Leicester Robert de Ferrars Earl of Darby and Iohn Lord of Monmouth by the compact made between Thomas Earl of Lancaster and Alice his Wife of the Honor of Pomfret the whole Estate of the Earl of Lincoln and a great part of the Estates of the Earl of Salisbury of the goodly Tertitories of Ogmore and Kidwelly in Wales in right of his descent from the Chaworths of the Honor and Castle of Hartford by the grant of King Edward the third and of the Honor of Tickhill in Yorkshire by the donation of King Richard the second and finally of a Moity of the vast Estate of Humphry de Bohun Earl of Hereford Essex and Northampton in right of his Wife So royal in his Extraction that he was Grandchilde unto one King Cousin german to another Father and Grandfather to two more So popular when a private person and that too in the life of his Father that he was able to raise and head an Army against Richard the Second with which he discomfited the Kings Forces under the command of the Duke of Ireland so fortunate in his successes that he not only had the better in the battail mentioned but came off with Honor and Renown in the War of Africk and finally obtained the Crown of England And this I trow renders him much Superior to our Authors Nevil whom he exceeded also in this particular that he dyed in his bed and left his Estates unto his Son But having got the Crown by the murther of his Predecessor it stay'd but two descents in his Line being unfortunately lost by King Henry the sixth of whom being taken and imprisoned by those of the Yorkish Faction our Author telleth us Fol. 190. That States-men do admire how blind the Policy of that Age was in keeping King Henry alive there being no such sure Prison as a Grave for a Captive King whose life though in restraint is a fair mark for the full Aim of mal-contents to practise his enlargement Our Author might have spâ—r'd this Doctrine so frequently in practise amongst the wordly Politicians of all times and ages that there is more need of a Bridle to hold them in then a Sput to quicken them Parce precor stimulis fortiùs utere loris had been a wholesom Caveat there had any friend of his been by to have advis'd him of it The muâ—thering of depos'd and Captive Princes though too often practised never found Advocates to plead for it and mâ—â—h less Preachers to preach for it until these latter times First made a Maxim of State in the School of Machiavel who lays it down for an Aphorism in point of policy viz. that great Persons must not at all be touched or if they be must be made sure from taking Revenge inculcated afterwards by the Lord Gray who being sent by King Iames to intercede for the life of his Mother did undeâ—-hand solicit her death and whispered nothing so much in Queen Elizabeths ears as Mortua non mordet if the Scots Queen were once dead she would never bite But never prest so home never so punctually apply'd to the case of Kings as here I finde it by our Author of whom it cannot be â—ffirm'd that he speaks in this case the senâ—e of others but positively and plainly doth declare his own No such Divinity pâ—each'd in the Schools of Ignatius though fitter for the Pen of a Mariana then of a Divine or Minister of the Church of England Which whether it passed from him before oâ— since the last sad accident of this nature it comes all to one this being like a two-hand-sword made to strike on both â—â—des and if it come too late for instruction will serve abundantly howsoever for the justification Another note we have within two leaves after as derogatory to the Honor of the late Archbishop as this is dangerous to the Estate of all Soveraign Princes if once they chance to happen into the hands of their Enemies But of this our Author will give me an occasion to speak more in another place and then he shall hear further from me Now to go on Fol. 197. The Duke requested of King Richard the Earldom of Hereford and Hereditary Constableship of England Not so it was not the Earldom that is
Design 'T is 〈◊〉 the stomack of the Scots were sharp set still crying Give give but never satisfied King Iames as bounâ—â—ful and open handed towards them as they could desire But neitheâ— were they to impudent as to crave nor the King to impotent as to give a whole Bishopâ—ick 〈◊〉 onâ—e especially so rich a Bishoprick as this of Durham But the truth is that George Hume Earl of Dunbar Lord Treasurer of Scotland and highly favour'd by the King having procur'd a grant of all the batable grounds as they then called them upon the Borders of both Kingdoms began to cast his eye upon Norham-Castle and the Lands about it belonging to the See of Durham conceiving it a fit place to command the rest But being a well principled man and a great Minister of that Kings in restoring the Episcopal Government to the Church of Scotland he acquainted Bishop Bancroft with his desires who knowing what great use might be made of him for the good of this Church and being sure enough of the consent of Dr. Matthews then Bishop of Durham he thus ordered the business Whereas the Revenue of Norham-Castle and the lands adjoyning were valued at one hundred twenty pounds per annum in the Bishops Rental it was agreed that the Earl should procure of the King an abatement of sixscore pounds yearly out of the annual pension of a thousand pound which had been said upon that Bishoprick by Queen Elizabeth as before is said Secondly that he should obtain from the King for the said Dr. Matthews and his Successors a restitution of his House in the Strand called Durham-House with the Gardens Stables and Tenements thereto appertaining which had been alienated from that Bishoprick ever since the dissolving of it by King Edward the sixth Thirdly that in consideration hereof Bishop Matthews should make a grant of Norham-Castle and the Countrey adjoyning in Feefarm to the King by him immediately to be convey'd to the Earl of Dunbar And fourthly that his own 〈◊〉 being thus serv'd the said Earl should joyn with Bishop Bancroft and his friends for obtaining from the King an Act of Parliament whereby both he and his successors should be made uncapable of any the like Grants and Alienations for the time to come which as it was the 〈◊〉 Markeâ— that ever Toby Matthews was at so was it the best bargain which was ever driven for the Church of England so â—ar from swallowing up that Bishoprick that it was the only means to save that and preserve the rest And yet perhaps the credible information which our Author speaks of might not relate unto the Bisâ—oprick but the Deaâ—ry of Durham bestowed by that King being then not well studied in the Composition of the Church of England on Sir Adam Newton a Courtier prevalent enough as having been Tutor to Prince Henry the Kings eldest Son And possible it is that the Scots might have kept it in their hands from one generation to another if Dr. Hunt not otherwise to be remembred had not bought him out of it and put himself into the place Fol. 59. And as about this time some perchance overvaluâ—d the Geneva Notes out of that especial love they bare to the Authors and place whence it proceeded so on the other side some without cause did slight or rather without charity did slander the same â— I trow our Author will not take upon him to condemn all those who approve not of the Genevian Notes upon the Bible or to appear an Advocate for them though he tells us not many lines before that they were printed thirty times over with the general liking of the people I hope he will not do the first for King Iames his sake who in the Conference at Hampton-Court did first declare that of all the Translations of the Bible into the English Tongue that of Geneva was the worst and secondly that the Notes upon it were partial untrue seditious and savouring too much of dangerous and traiterous conceits For pâ—oof whereof his Majesty instanced in two places the one on Exod. 1. vers 19. where disobedience to Kings is allowed of the other in â— Chron. 8. 15 16. where Asa is taxed for deposing his Mothâ—r only and not killing her A Note wheâ—eof the Scottish Presbyterians made special use not only deposing Mary their lawful Queen from the Regal Thâ—one but prosecuting â—er openly and under hand till they had took away her life These instances our Author in his Summary of that Conference hath passed over in silence as loath to have such blemishes appear in the Genevians or their Annotations And I hope also that he will not advocate for the rest For let him tell me what he thinks of that on the second of St. Matthews Gospel v. 12. viz Promise ought not to be kept where Gods honour and preaching of his truth is hindered or else it ought not to be broken What a wide gap think we doth this open to the breach of all Promises Oaths Covenants Contracts and Agreements not only betwixt man and man but between Kings and their Subjects Whâ—t Rebel ever took up Arms without some pretences of that nature What Tumults and Rebellions have been rais'd in all parts of Christendom in England Scotland Ireland France the Netherlands Germany and indeed where not under colour that Gods honour and the preaching of the truth is hindered If this once pass for good sound Doctrine neither the King nor any of his good Subjects in what Realm â—oever can live in safety Gods Honour and the preaching 〈◊〉 his Truth are two such pretences as will make void all Laws elude all Oathes and thrust our all Covenants and Agreements be they what they will Neâ—â— I would have our Author tell me what he thinks of this Note on the ninth of the Revelation ver 3. where the 〈◊〉 which came out of the smoak are said to be 〈◊〉 teachers Hereticks and worldly subtil â—relates with 〈◊〉 Fâ—iers Cardinals Patriarchs Archbishops Bishops 〈◊〉 Batchelors and Masters Does not this note 〈◊〉 fasten the name of Locusts on all the Cleâ—â—y of 〈◊〉 Realm that is to say Archbishops Bishops and all 〈◊〉 as are graduated in the University by the name of Doctors Batchelors and Masters And doth it not as plainly yoak them with Fâ—iers Monkâ— and Cardinals pâ—incipal instruments in all times to advance the Popecom I know the words which follow after are alleadged by some to take off the envy of this Note viz. who forsake Christ to maintain false doctrines But the enumeration of so many particulars makes not the Note the lets invidious the said explication notwithstanding because the Note had been as perfect and significant had it gone thus in generals only that is to say by Locusts here are meant false Teachers Hereticks and other worldly subtil men that seduced the people perswading them to foâ—sake Christ to maintain false Doctrine But the Genevians who account Archbishops and Bishops to be limbs of the Pope
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
failing in their persons sentâ—their 〈…〉 I more admire at this gross pieâ—â— of ignorance then at all the rest Silesia Moravia and 〈…〉 incorporated with the Realm of 〈◊〉 being nâ—ver qualified with sending any Electors â—or thâ— choice of the Emperour The three Electors which he meaneth were the Count Palatine of the Râ—â—ne the Duke of Saxony and the Marquess of Brandenburg and they not coming in Person to the 〈◊〉 at Frackford appeared there by their Embassadors as at other times A like mistake but far more pardonâ—ble oâ—curreth Fol. 484. Where Daâ—mstal is said to be a Town of Bohemia whereas indeed it is a Town of the Land of Hâ—ssen the whole Territories of the Duke of Saxony being interposed betwixt this Town and the nearest parts of that Kingdom Fol. 489. The Lord Marchers after the Conquest were reâ—ident upon the Confines and borders of the Welch and other places not subdued men of valour of high blood of the Normans with the name and priviledges of the Earls of Chester That the Lord Marchers on the Borders of Wales were at first many in number as it after followeth is a truth undoubted But their power being contracted into fewer hands one of them Roger Mortimer by name was by King Edward the third made Earl of March The Earldome of Chester was of another foundation conferrd by William the Conqueror upon Hugh sirnamed Lupus Son to the Viscount of Auranches in Normandy with all the Rites and Privileges of a County Palatine to him and to his Heires for ever So that this honour being appropriated to the Heirs of that House was not Communicable unto any of the rest of the Marchers nor could those Marchers claim the stile and privileges of Earles of Chester Fol. 490. Sir Edward Montague had three sons Edward the eldest Knight of the Bath c. The Author here is much mistaken in the House of the Montagues For first that Edward Montague who was 〈…〉 c. was not Brother to Iames Bishop of Winchester aâ—d Henry Earl of Manchester but their Brothers Son that is to say the Son of another Eâ—ward their eldest Brother Secondly besides that Edward Iames and Henry there was another Brother whom the Author names not though he could not chuse but know the man viz. Sir Sidney Monâ—â—â—â— one oâ— the Masters of the Requests to the late King 〈◊〉 Theâ—â—fore to set this matter right I am to let both him and his Reaâ—ers know that Sr. Edward Montague chief Justice â—n the time of King Edward the sixth was father of another Edward who lived peaceably and nobly in his own Country To whom succeeded a third Edwâ—rd who 〈…〉 in the Wars and gained the reputation of a good Commaâ—der the elder Brother of Iames Henry and 〈◊〉 before mentioned and the father of a fourth Edâ—â—â—â— who was made Knight of the Bath at the Coronâ—tion 〈…〉 Anno 1â—03 and afterwards created Lord 〈◊〉 of Boughâ—on in the ninâ—teenth year of that King Anno 1621. which honourable Title is now enjoyed by his Son anotheâ— Edward Anno. 1658. And thirdly thâ—â—gh â— grant that Dr. Iames Montagâ—e Bishop of Winchâ—ster the second Brother of the four was of great power and favour in the time of King Iames and might have free accesse into the Bed-chamber of that King whensoever he pleased yeâ— that he was of the Bed chamber as the Author saith that iâ— to say admitted formerly thereunto and one of that number I do more then doubt Fol. 506. Then comes Iohn Howard c. created by Richard the 〈◊〉 Duke of Northfolk but not Earle Marshal In this and in the â—â—st that follows touching the succession of the Earls Mâ—rshâ—â—ls there aâ—e many mistaken Fâ—r first tâ—is Iohn Lord Howard was by Richard the third â—ot onely created Duke of North-folk but Earl Marâ—â—â—ll also as appears by Camdâ—n Fol 483. Secondly as well Thomas Earl of Surrey the son of this 〈◊〉 as anâ—thâ—r Thomas the son of that Thomas were both advanâ—â—d 〈◊〉 the â—ffice of Earl Marshal as is affirmed by such as have writ the Genealogies of this noble family Thirdly that Thomas Howard whom queen Mary restored unto the Office of Earl Marshâ—l was not the Grand-câ—ilde of Thomas Mâ—wbray â—ut the Grand-child of the Grand-child of the Daughter of that Thomas Mowbray as will appear to any who shall search that Pedigree But this perhaps may be an error of the Printer in giving us the name of Thomas Mowbray for Thomas Howard Fourthly though Robert Devâ—râ—ux Earle of Essex is by our Author placed next after this last Thomâ—s Hâ—ward in the Office of Marshal yet sure it is that Georg Talbot Earl of Shrewbury came in between them advanc'd unto that Dignity by Queen Elizabeth Anno 157â— Fol. 507. He 〈◊〉 the emineâ—t Struâ—ture of the Library of St. Iohns in Cambridge where he had been Master for many years This spoken of Dr. Williams then Bishop of Lincoln and Lord Keeper who certainly was never Master of that Colledge though by his power and and party in that Society he advanced Dr. Gwin who had been his Tutor unto that place as is affirmed in the Church History of Bâ—itain Lib. 11. fol. 225. It may be Mr. Williams was at that time of the same minde with â—harles Martâ—l of whom it is affirmed that he chose rather to make a King then to be a King Non â—word regnâ—re sed Râ—gibus 〈…〉 as the old verse hath it Or else perhaps we may say of him as Tâ—citus does of Mutianâ—s Cui facilâ—us erâ—t 〈…〉 that is to say that it was easier for him to procure the mastership for another then to obtain it for himsâ—lf But howsoever it was it seemes to have been carried by strong 〈◊〉 canvas of which Nation both the Pupil and the Scholer were as appeareth by these Hâ—xameters following in which the four Competitors are thus laid before us Fol. 〈◊〉 Th◠〈◊〉 of that Protestation 〈◊〉 meâ—◠〈…〉 Regni negotiis but left out Quibusdam 〈…〉 particular cases as the King 〈…〉 This spoken of a Protestation entred bâ—â—ome of the House of Commons Anno 1621. concerning 〈◊〉 of their pretended Rights and Privileges in which they 〈◊〉 mistaâ—en and I wonder the Author did not see it in 〈◊〉 the veâ—y grounds on which they built it For by the writ of summons the Commons were not called to consult of any thing either great of little difficult or not difficult whatsoâ—â—ver it was but onely 〈◊〉 consentiendum faciendum to consent to and perfoâ—m such things as by the great Councel of the Realmâ— consisting of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal should be then ordained as by the very â—writ it self doth at large appear By which it seems that the Commons assembled in Parliament were of themselves so far from being any 〈◊〉 oâ— that supreme Couâ—t that they were not to be counted for a part of the Kings great Councel So that the foundaâ—ion being 〈◊〉 the Superstructure could not stand which was built upon
consent to the acting of any thing to take away his life By which it needs must follow if the Bill of Attainder was first passed or at the least in probability to be passed in the House of Peers before the King had given any such promise under his hand for the words are that the King had given him a promise under his hand never to passe that Bill Now that Bill was not taken into consideration in the House of Lords till Saturday the 24. of April in which considering their own danger and the little satisfaction they are able to give themselves M. St Iohn the Kings Sollicitor Generall was appointed by the House of Commons to open the Bill before their Lordships and to give them information in it which was done upon Thursday the nine and twentieth of the same Moneth On the next day some of the Lords began to stagger in their resolutions and to incline unto the Commons which moved the King to declare himself before both Houses on the first of May That he could not with a good Consciâ—nce condemn the Earl of High Treason which he must needs do if he passe that Bill and therefore hoped that they would not expect that from him which neither fear nor any other respect whatsoever should enforce him to Other assurance then this of not passing the Bill as the King never made the Earl so indeed he could not the Earl being a close Prisoner and so narrowly watcht especially after his Majesties said Declaration of the first of May that no such Paperâ—promise under the Kings hand could be sent unto him if either the King had thought it necessary to make any such promise or the Earl to seek it Adeo mendaciorum natura est ut coherere non possint as Lactantius hath it This point thus cleared and the King discharged from making any such promise under his hand there must some other way be found out to preserve the Earl by devising some means for his escape and to this plot the King must be made a party also our Authour telling us positively That Some Designe there was no doubt of delivering the Earl of Strafford by escape in order whereunto Sir William Balfour Lieutenant of the Tower must be commanded by the King to receive one Captain Billingsley with an hundred men to secure the place If so how durst Balfour refuse to yeeld obedience to the Kings command Marry forfooth because three good Women of Tower-street peeping into the Earls Gallery through the Key-hole could by the Spectacles of their eyes discern him talking with this Captain and by the Otocoâ—sticon of their ears could hear them talk of some Desigâ—e for this escape The Summe of their Discourse being this that a Ship of Captain Billingsleys Brothers should be in readinesse which was fallen down on purpose below in the River that they three might be there in twelve hours that if the Fort were but secur'd for three or four Moneths there would come aid enough and that there was nothing to be thought upon but an escape and much more broken speech to that purpose It seems the womens ears must be very long and the tongues both of the Earl and Billingsly must be very loud or else how could a practise of such a close and dangerous nature be so plainly heard Assuredly by the same means by which the Zealous Brother in More fields discovered a dangerous plot against the Parliament discoursed of by some who were passing by but he knows not who they were as he was sunning himself under an hedge Of whom as creditable an Authour as Sir William Balfour hath told me this That while he was contriving some Querpo-cut of Church-Government by the help of his out-lying ears and the Otocousticon of the Spirit â—e discovered such a Plot against the Parliament that Selden intends to combat Antiquity and maintain it was a Taylors Goose that preserved the Capitol But in good earnest I would fain know of our Author or of Sir William Balfour or of both together whether the three Good-Wives of Tower-street did hear these Passages in discourse by their eyes or their ears Not by their Eyes for the Eye is not the sense of hearing nor by their Ears for it is not said that they laid their Ears to the Key-hole but that they peeped thorow it And next I would fain know whâ—ther they peep'd or hearkned all at once or one after another If all at once the Key-hole must be wondrous wide as Heavenly-wide as Mopsus mouth in Sir Philip Sidney which could admit of three pair of hearing Eyes or of three single seeing Ears at one time together And if they peep'd or hearkned one after another they must needs have both very quick Wits and strong Comprehensions that could make up so much of a set Discourse from such broken Speeches though they within spake never so loudly Letting this pass therefore with a Risum teneatis Amici we have next a more serious discovery of this Design by the Conference which the Earl of Strafford had with Sir William Balfour offering him but four days before his death no less then Twenty thousand pounds and a Marriage of his Daughter to Balfours Son if he would assent to his Escape And for this also as well as for the tale of the three Good-Wives of Tower-Street and the command of admitting Billingsley with an hundred men to secure the Tower we must take Sir Williams bare word for he gave it not in upon his Oath in the House of Commons And what the bare word of a Scot a perfidious Scot and one that shortly after took up Arms against his Master will amount unto we all know too well Nor was the Earl so ignorant of the hatred which generally the Scotish Covenanters bare unto him or of the condition of this man particularly as to communicate any such design unto him had he been so unprepar'd for death as our Author makes him And so this second Romance of Sir William Balfour and the three Women Good-Wives of Tower Street being sent after that of the Bishop of Lincoln we leave the Earl of Straffords business and go on with our Author to some other Fol. 418. Then follows King Henry the fourth c. ofâ—larence â—larence Title to precede that of Mortimer That some of the Lords combined to depose this King I shall easily grant though not upon those grounds which our Author mingles with the Speech of one Mr. Thomas a Member of the House of Commons against the Bishops For though the Title of Clarence did precede that of the King yet was not the Kings Title derived from Mortimer the Title of Mortimer and Clarence being one and the same The Title of King Henry the fourth came by his Father Iohn Duke of Lancaster the fourth Son of King Edward the third the title of Mortimer came by Philip the sole Daughter and Heir of Lionel Duke of Clarence the third son of the said King Edward