a man amongst them which can make a shift to expresse himselfe in that language, nor one amongst an hundred that can doe it Latinely. Galleriam, Compaginem, Gardinum and the like are as usuall in their common discourse, as to drinke at three of the clock, and as familiar as their sleep. Had they bent their study that way, I perswade my self they would have been excellent good at the common lawes, their tongues so naturally falling on these words which are necessary to a declaration but amongst the rest, I took especiall notice of one Mr Gebour [?], a man of that various mixture of words, that you would have thought his tongue to have been a very Amsterdam of languages; Cras mane av brã nous irons ad magnam Galleriam, was one of his remarkable speeches when we were at Paris but here at Orleans we had them of him thick and threefold. If ever he should chance to dye in a strange place, where his countrey could not be knowne but by his tongue, it could not possibly be but that more nations would strive for him than ever did for Homer. I had before read of the confusion of Babel, in him I came acquainted with it. : William Prynne, born in 1600 at Swanswick, near Bath, graduated from Oriel College, Oxford, in 1621. Admitted a student of Lincoln's Inn, he was called to the Bar, but was early drawn into theological controversy, and during 1627-30 published The Unlovelinesse of Love-lockes, Healthes Sicknesse (against drinking of healths), and three other Puritan and anti-Arminian diatribes. In 1633 appeared his Histrio-Mastix: the Players Scourge, a bulky and scurrilous pamphlet of 1040 small quarto pages, essaying to prove that playwriting, play-acting, and play-going are unlawful and immoral, are in defiance of Scripture and the Church-fathers, and are condemned by the wisest of the heathen. The book was dedicated to the masters of Lincoln's Inn, as the one of the Inns of Court that had not permitted the acting of interludes in its halls. Several passages in the work, summarised in the index as "women-actors notorious whores,' were held to be a reflection on the virtue of Queen Henrietta Maria, who with her ladies had in the same year taken part in the performance of a play. The denunciation of magistrates who failed in the duty of suppressing theatres, and unpleasant allusions to Nero, were held to point at the king. So Prynne, arraigned in the Star Chamber, was, after a year's imprisonment, in 1634 sentenced to have his book burnt by the hangman, pay a fine of £5000, be expelled from Oxford and Lincoln's Inn, lose both his ears in the pillory, and suffer perpetual imprisonment. Three years later, for assailing Laud and the hierarchy in two more pamphlets, a fresh fine of £5000 was imposed; he was again pilloried, and was branded on both cheeks with S. L. (‘seditious libeller;' 'stigmata Laudis' in Prynne's own interpretation). He remained a prisoner till, in 1640, he was released by a warrant of the House of Commons. He acted as Laud's bitter prosecutor (1644), and in 1647 became recorder of Bath, in 1648 member for Newport in Cornwall. But opposing the Independents and Charles I.'s execution, he was one of those of whom the House was 'purged,' and was even imprisoned (1650-52). On Cromwell's death he returned to Parliament as a royalist; and after the Restoration Charles II. 'kept him quiet' by making him keeper of the Tower records. He died 24th October 1669. He wrote in all some two hundred pamphlets and books, remarkable for vehemence and violence rather than for any merit of style. He assailed with equal vehemence the tyranny of the king's government and of the Commonwealth; wrote against prelates, papists, Quakers, and Jews; and attacked with equal vigour Laud, the Puritan Goodwin, Lilburne, Milton, and the Protector. After the Restoration none was more savage against the regicides or more eager for retaliatory measures. Some of his polemical pamphlets were even couched in verse of a kind, one of these being elegantly named A Pleasant Purge for Roman Catholics. Withal he did good service as a compiler of constitutional history, his best works the Calendar of Parlia mentary Writs and his Records. See Documents relating to Prynne, edited by S. R. Gardiner (Camden Society, 1877). The principal part of the comprehensive titlepage of Prynne's famous book is as follows: Histrio-Mastix: The Players Scourge or Actors Tra gedie, Divided into Two Parts. Wherein it is largely evidenced, by divers Arguments by the concurring Authorities and Resolutions of Sundry texts of Scripture; of the whole Primitive Church, both under the Law and Gospell; of 55 Synodes and Councels; of 71 Fathers and Christian Writers, before the yeare of our Lord 1200; of above 150 foraigne and domestique Protestant and Popish Authors, since; of 40 Heathen Philosophers, Historians, Poets; of many Heathen, many Christian Nations, Republiques, Emperors, Princes, Magistrates; of sundry Apostolicall, Canonicall, Imperiall Constitutions; and of our owne English Statutes, Magistrates, Universities, Writers, Preachers. That popular Stage-playes (the very Pompes of the Divell which we renounce in Baptisme, if we beleeve the Fathers) are sinfull, heathenish, lewde, ungodly Spectacles, and most pernicious Corruptions; condemned in all ages, as intolerable Mischiefes to Churches, to Republickes, to the manners, mindes, and soules of men. And that the Profession of Play-poets, of Stage-players; together with the penning, acting, and frequenting of Stage-playes, are unlawfull, infamous, and misbeseeming Christians. All pretences to the contrary are here likewise fully answered; and the unlawfulnes of acting, of beholding Academicall Enterludes, briefly discussed; besides sundry other particulars concerning Dancing, Dicing, Health-drinking, &c. of which the Table will informe you. . . . By William Prynne, an VtterBarrester of Lincolnes Inne. Still in the title-page and before the imprint are a series of Latin citations, with full references, from Cyprian's De Spectaculis, Lactantius's De Vero Cultu, Chrysostom's Homilies on Matthew, and Augustine's De Civitate Dei. From 'Histrio-Mastix.'-Actvs I. Scana Prima. That all popular and common Stage-Playes, whether Comicall, Tragicall, Satyricall, Mimicall, or mixt of either, (especially as they are now composed and personated,) are such sinfull, hurtfull, and pernicious Recreations as are altogether unseemely and unlawfull unto Christians; I shall first of all evidence and proove it from their originall parents, and primary Inventors: which were no other but the very Devill himselfe ; or at least wise, Idolatrous and Voluptuous Pagans, impregnated with this infernall issue from Hell it selfe; from whence I argue in the first place thus. That which had its birth and primarie conception from the very Devil himselfe, who is all and onely evill, must needes be Sinfull, Pernicious, and altogether unseemely, yea, Unlawfull unto Christians. But Stage-Playes had their birth and primary conception from the very Devill himselfe, who is all and onely evill. Therefore they must needes bee Sinfull, Pernicious, and altogether unseemely, yea, Unlawfull unto Christians. The Minor, (which is onely liable to exception,) I shall easily make good; First, by the direct and punctuall testimony of sundry Fathers. : But now a-dayes Musicke is growne to such and so great licentiousnesse, that even at the ministration of the holy Sacrament all kinde of wanton and lewde trifling Songs, with piping of Organs, have their place and course. As for the Divine Service and Common prayer, it is so chaunted and minsed and mangled of our costly hired, curious, and nice Musitiens (not to instruct the audience withall, nor to stirre up mens mindes unto devotion, but with a whorish harmony to tickle their eares :) that it may justly seeme not to be a noyse made of men, but rather a bleating of bruite beasts; whiles the Coristers ney descant as it were a sort of Colts; others bellowe a tenour, as it were a company of Oxen others barke a counter-point, as it were a kennell of Dogs: others rore out a treble like a sort of Buls: others grunt out a base as it were a number of Hogs; so that a foule evill favoured noyse is made, but as for the wordes and sentences and the very matter it selfe, is nothing understanded at all; but the authority and power of judgement is taken away both from the minde and from the eares utterly. Erasmus Roterodamus expresseth his minde concerning the curious manner of singing used in Churches on this wise, and saith, Why doth the Church doubt to follow so worthy an Author (Paul), yea, how dare it be bold to dissent from? What other thing is heard in monasteries, in Colledges, in Temples almost generally, then a confused noyse of voyces? But in the time of Paul, there was no singing but saying onely. For the Minor, that Stage-playes unavoydably produce an intollerable mispence of much pretious time, &c., it is most apparant if we will but summe up all those dayes, those houres which are vainely spent in the composing, conning, practising, acting, beholding of every publike or private Stage-play. How many golden dayes and houres, I might say weekes, nay moneths, and I had almost said whole yeeres, doe most Play-poets spend in contriving, penning, polishing their new-invented Playes, before they ripen them for the Stage. When these their Playes are brought unto maturity, how many houres, evenings, halfe-dayes, and sometimes weekes, are spent by all the Actors (especially in solemne academicall Enterludes) in copying, in conning, in practising their parts, before they are ripe for publike action. When this is finished, how many men are vainely occupied for sundry dayes (yea sometimes yeeres) together, in building Theaters, Stages, Scenes and Scaffolds; in making theatricall Pageants, Apparitions, Attires, Visars, Garments, with such-like Stage-appurtenances, for the more commodious pompous acting and When adorning of these vaine-glorious Enterludes. all things requisite for the publike personating of these Playes are thus exactly accommodated, and the day or night approcheth when these are to be acted, how many hundreds of all sorts vainely if not ridiculously spend whole dayes, whole afternoones and nights ofttimes, in attyring themselves in their richest robes; in providing seates to heare, to see and to be seene of others; or in hearing, in beholding these vain lascivious Stage-playes, (which last some three or foure houres at the least, yea sometimes whole dayes and weekes together, as did some Roman Playes, and yet seeme too short to many, to whom a Lecture, a Sermon, a Prayer, not halfe so long, is over tedious:) who thinke themselves well imployed all the while they are thus wasting this their pretious time (which they scarce know how to spend) upon these idle Spectacles. Adde we to this, that all our common Actors consume not onely weekes and yeeres, but even their whole lives, in learning, practising, or acting Playes, which besides nights and other seasons, engrosse every afternoone almost thorowout the yeere, to their peculiar service; as wee see by daily experience here in London; where thousands spend the moitie of the day, the weeke, the yeere in Playhouses, at least-wise far more houres then they imploy in holy duties, or in their lawfull callings. If we annex to this the time that divers waste in reading Playbookes, which some make their chiefest study, preferring them before the Bible or all pious Bookes, on which they seldome seriously cast their eyes; together with the mispent time which the discourses of Playes, either seene or read, occasion: and then summe up all this lost, this mispent time together; we shall soone discerne, we must needs acknowledge, that there are no such Helluoes, such canker-wormes, such theevish Devourers of mens most sacred (yet undervalued) time, as Stageplayes. Not to mention the over-prodigall disbursements upon Playes and Masques of late penurious times, which have beene wel-nigh as expensive as the Wars, and I dare say more chargable to many then their soules, on which the most of us bestow least cost, least time and care. How many hundreds, if not thousands, are there now among us, (to their condemnation, if not their reformation be it spoken,) who spend more, daily, weekely, monethly, if not yeerely at a Play-house to maintaine the Devils service and his instruments, then they disburse in pious uses, in reliefe of Ministers, Schollers, poore godly Christians, or maintenance of Gods service, all their life. How many assiduous Play-haunters are there who contribute more liberally, more frequently to Play-houses, then to Churches; to Stage-playes, then to Lectures; to Players, then to Preachers; to Actors, then to Poore mens Boxes? being at far greater cost to promote their owne and others just damnation, then themselves or others are to advance their owne or others salvation. How many are there, who can bee at cost to hire a Coach, a Boate, a Barge, to carry them to a Play-house every day, where they must pay deare for their admission, Seates and Boxes; who will hardly be at any cost to convey themselves to a Sermon once a weeke, a moneth, a yeere, (especially on a weeke day) at a Church far nearer to them then the Play-house; where they may have Seates, have entrance, (yea spirituall Cordials, and celestial Dainties to refresh their soules,) without any money or expence. How many are there, who according to their severall qualities spend 2d. 3d. 4d. 6d. 12d. 18d. 25. and sometimes 4 or 5 shillings at a Playhouse, day by day, if Coach-hire, Boate-hire, Tobacco, Wine, Beere, and such like vaine expences which Playes doe usually occasion, be cast into the reckoning; and that in these penurious times, who can hardly spare, who can never honestly get by their lawfull callings, halfe so much. How many prodigally consume not onely their charity, apparell, diet, bookes, and other necessaries, but even their annual Pensions, Revenues and Estates at Picke-purse Stage-playes; which are more expensive to them then all their necessary disbursements. If we summe up all the prodigall vaine expenses which Play-houses and Playes occasion every way, we shall finde them almost infinite, wel-nigh incredible, altogether intollerable in any Christian frugall state; which must needs abandon Stage-playes as the Athenians and Romans did at last even in this regard that they impoverish and quite ruine many; as the fore-quoted testimonies, with many domestique experiments, daily testifie. Edmund Calamy (1600-66), born in London, studied at Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, and became chaplain to Felton, Bishop of Ely. In 1626–36 he was lecturer at Bury St Edmunds, but resigned when the order to read the Book of Sports was enforced; in 1639 he was chosen minister of St Mary Aldermanbury, London. He had a principal share in Smectymnuus (1641), a reply to Bishop Hall's Divine Right of Episcopacy. It was so called from the initials of the names of the writersStephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstow (the 'uu' standing for the 'w' of 'William'). Calamy was much in favour with the Presbyterian party, but was, on the whole, a moderate man, and disapproved of those measures which ended in the death of the king. Having exerted himself to promote the restoration of Charles II., he received the offer of the bishopric of Coventry and Lichfield; but, after much deliberation, it was rejected. The passing of the Act of Uniformity in 1662 made him retire from his ministerial duties, and he died heart-broken by the Great Fire of London. His sermons were of a plain and practical character; and five of them, published under the title of The Godly Man's Ark, or a City of Refuge in the Day of his Distress, acquired much popularity. -His grandson, EDMUND CALAMY, D.D. (1671– 1732), studied three years at Utrecht, and declining Carstares' offer of a Scotch professorship, from 1694 was a Nonconformist minister in London. His forty-one works include an Account of the Ejected Ministers (1702) and an interesting Autobiography, first published in 1829. William Chillingworth (1602-44), a famous polemic, was born at Oxford, and was distinguished as a student there. Hales and Falkland were amongst his friends. An early love of disputation, in which he possessed eminent skill, developed a sceptical temper. A Jesuit named Fisher converted him to the Church of Rome-his chief argument being the necessity of an infallible living guide in matters of faith. He then studied at the Jesuits' College at Douay; and having been, imprudently, requested to write down the reasonings that led to his conversion, he studied anew the whole controversy and became a doubting Papist.' Laud, his godfather, wrote a weighty series of letters to him; and his friends induced him to return to Oxford, where, after additional study of the points of difference, he declared in favour of the Protestant faith. His change of creed drew him into several controversies, in which he employed the arguments that were afterwards methodically stated in his famous work, entitled The Religion of the Protestants a safe way to Salvation, published in 1637. This treatise, which placed its author in the first rank of religious controversialists, is now, in spite of its following the line of argument of a now forgotten book attacking him, hailed as a model of perspicuous reasoning, and one of the ablest defences of the Protestant faith. The author maintains that the Scripture is the only rule to which appeal ought to be made in theological disputes, that no Church is infallible, and that the Apostles' Creed embraces all the necessary points of faith. The Arminian opinions of Chillingworth brought upon him the charge of latitudinarianism; and his character for orthodoxy was still further shaken by his refusal to accept of preferment on condition of subscribing the Thirtynine Articles. His scruples having at length been overcome, he was promoted, in 1638, to the chancellorship of Salisbury. During the Civil War he zealously adhered to the royal party, and even assisted as engineer at the siege of Gloucester in 1643. He died in the bishop's palace in Chichester in the succeeding year. Lord Clarendon, who was one of his intimate friends, has drawn the following character of this eminent divine: 'He was a man of so great a subtilty of understanding, and so rare a temper in debate, that, as it was impossible to provoke him into any passion, so it was very difficult to keep a man's self from being a little discomposed by his sharpness and quickness of argument, and instances in which he had a rare facility, and a great advantage over all the men I ever knew.' Writing to a Roman Catholic, in allusion to the changes of his own faith, Chillingworth says: I know a man, that of a moderate Protestant turned a Papist, and the day that he did so, was convicted in conscience that his yesterday's opinion was an error. The same man afterwards, upon better consideration, became a doubting Papist, and of a doubting Papist a confirmed Protestant. And yet this man thinks himself no more to blame for all these changes, than a traveller who, using all diligence to find the right way to some remote city, did yet mistake it, and after find his error and amend it. Nay, he stands upon his justification so far, as to maintain that his alterations, not only to you, but also from you, by God's mercy, were the most satisfactory actions to himself that ever he did, and the greatest victories that ever he obtained over himself and his affections, in those things which in this world are most precious. The following passages from his great work show a like spirit: The Bible the Religion of Protestants. Know then, sir, that when I say the religion of Protestants is in prudence to be preferred before yours, as, on the one side, I do not understand by your religion the doctrine of Bellarmine or Baroninus, or any other private man amongst you; nor the doctrine of the Sorbonne, or of the Jesuits, or of the Dominicans, or of any other particular company among you, but that wherein you all agree, or profess to agree, the doctrine of the Council of Trent;' so accordingly on the other side, by the 'religion of protestants,' I do not understand the doctrine of Luther, or Calvin, or Melancthon; nor the Confession of Augusta, or Geneva, nor the Catechism of Heidelberg, nor the Articles of the Church of England, no, nor the harmony of Protestant confessions; but that wherein they all agree, and which they all subscribe with a greater harmony, as a perfect rule of their faith and actions; that is, the BIBLE. The BIBLE, I say, the BIBLE only, is the religion of protestants! Whatsoever else they believe besides it, and the plain, irrefragable, indubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as a matter of opinion; but as matter of faith and religion, neither can they with coherence to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it of others, without most high and most schismatical presumption. I for my part, after a long and (as I verily believe and hope) impartial search of 'the true way to eternal happiness,' do profess plainly that I cannot find any rest for the sole of my foot but upon this rock only. I see plainly and with mine own eyes, that there are popes against popes, councils against councils, some fathers against others, the same fathers against themselves, a consent of fathers of one age against a consent of fathers of another age, the church of one age against the church of another age. Traditive interpretations of scripture are pretended; but there are few or none to be found: no tradition, but only of scripture, can derive itself from the fountain, but may be plainly proved either to have been brought in, in such an age after Christ, or that in such an age it was not in. In a word, there is no sufficient certainty but of scripture only for any considering man to build upon. This therefore, and this only, I have reason to believe this I will profess, according to this I will live, and for this, if there be occasion, I will not only willingly, but even gladly, lose my life, though I should be sorry that Christians should take it from me. Reason in Religion. But you that would not have men follow their reason, what would you have them follow? their passions? or pluck out their eyes, and go blindfold? No, you say; you would have them follow authority. In God's name, let them; we also would have them follow authority; for it is upon the authority of universal tradition that we would have them believe Scripture. But then, as for the authority which you would have them follow, you will let them see reason why they should follow it. And is not this to go a little about?--to leave reason for a short turn, and then to come to it again, and to do that which you condemn in others? It being indeed a plain impossibility for any man to submit his reason but to reason; for he that doth it to authority, must of necessity think himself to have greater reason to believe that authority. There is a Life by Des Maizeaux (1725), and one by Birch prefixed to his edition of the works (1742), which includes also nine sermons. Another edition was published in 1838 in 3 vols. See Tulloch's Rational Theology in England. John Gauden (1605-1662) was born at Mayland, near Maldon, in Essex ; was educated at Bury St Edmunds and St John's College, Cambridge; and on the commencement of the Civil War complied with the Presbyterian party. He received several church preferments, which he continued to hold even after the Parliament proceeded against monarchy. When the army resolved to impeach and try the king, in 1648, he published A Religious and Loyal Protestation against their purposes and proceedings, and other polemical tractates. But his grand service to the royal cause consisted in his writing Εἰκὼν Βασιλικὴ; the Pourtraicture of his Sacred Majesty in his Solitudes and Sufferings, a work which bears to be from the pen of Charles I. himself, and to contain the devout meditations of his later days. There appears to have been an intention to publish this Pourtraicture before the execution of the king, as an attempt to save his life by working on the feelings of the people; but it did not make its appearance till a day or two after His Majesty's death. The sensation which it produced in his favour was extraordinary. 'It is not easy,' says Hume, 'to conceive the general compassion excited towards the king by the publishing, at so critical a juncture, a work so full of piety, meekness, and humanity. Many have not scrupled to ascribe to that book the subsequent restoration of the royal family. Milton compares its effects to those which were wrought on the tumultuous Romans by Antony's reading to them the will of Cæsar.' So eagerly and universally was the book perused by the nation that it passed through forty-seven editions in a year. Milton, in his Eikonoclastes, alludes to the doubts which prevailed as to the authorship of the work, but at this time the real history was unknown. The first statements that it was by Gauden seem to have been made, by persons well qualified to know, as early as 1674, and rumours were plentifully current when in 1692 the book was expressly said to be Gauden's composition in a circumstantial narrative published by Gauden's former curate, Walker. Several writers then entered the field on both sides of the question; the principal defender of the king's claim being Wagstaffe, a nonjuring clergyman, who published an elaborate Vindication of King Charles the Martyr in 1693. For ten years subsequently the literary war continued; but after this there ensued a long interval of repose. When Hume wrote his History, the evidence on the two sides appeared so equally balanced that, 'with regard to the genuineness of that production, it is not easy,' says he, 'for a historian to fix any opinion which will be entirely to his own satisfaction.' In 1786, however, the scale of evidence was turned by the publication, in the third volume of the Clarendon State Papers, of some of Gauden's letters, the most important of which are six addressed by him to Lord Chancellor Clarendon after the Restoration. He there complains of the poverty of the see of Exeter, to which he had already been appointed, and urgently solicits a further reward for the important secret service which he had performed to the royal cause. Some of these letters, containing allusions to the circumstance, had formerly been printed, though in a less authentic form; but now for the first time appeared one, dated the 13th of March 1661, in which he explicitly grounds his claim to additional remuneration, 'not on what was known to the world under my name, but what goes under the late blessed king's name, the Eikon or Portraiture of his Majesty in his Solitudes and Sufferings. This book and figure,' he adds, 'was wholly and only my invention, making, and design; in order to vindicate the king's wisdom, honour, and piety.' He professed to have begun it in 1647, and to have submitted a MS. copy to the king in the Isle of Wight. Clarendon seems to have spoken in the last year of his life as if he did not admit Gauden's authorship; but in his History of the Rebellion, undertaken at the desire of Charles I. and avowedly intended as a vindication of the royal character and cause, he maintains the most rigid silence with respect to the Eikon Basilike. The troublesome solicitations of Gauden were so effectual as to lead to his promotion, in 1662, to the bishopric of Worcester; a dignity, however, which he did not long enjoy, for he died in the same year. The controversy as to the authorship of the Eikon Basilike is by some still decided in favour of the king. Such was the conclusion arrived at in a work published in 1824 by Dr Wordsworth, Master of Trinity College; Southey took the same view, which was energetically maintained in Mr E. J. L. Scott's edition of the Eikon (1880). But the arguments of Malcolm Laing, Todd, Sir James Mackintosh, Hallam, Lingard, and most historians down to Green accept Gauden's claim (acquiesced in by many of his royalist contemporaries) to be considered the author. Doble in the Academy for May and June 1883 makes out a strong case for Gauden's authorship. Internal evidence supports Gauden's claim ; the style is much too measured and rhetorical for that of Charles, who was a careless, confused, and inexact writer. There is A Bibliography of the King's Book by Edward Almack (1896). The Eikon thus reflects on the events of the Civil War: The various successes of this unhappy war have at least afforded me variety of good meditations. Sometimes God was pleased to try me with victory, by worsting my enemies, that I might know how with moderation and thanks to own and use his power, who is only the true Lord of Hosts, able when he pleases to represse the confidence of those that fought against me with so great advantages for power and number. From small beginnings on my part, he let me see that I was not wholly forsaken by my people's love or his protection. Other times God was pleased to exercise my patience, and teach me not to trust in the arm of flesh, but in the living God. My sins sometimes prevailed against the justice of my cause; and those that were with me wanted not matter and occasion for his just chastisement both of them and me. Nor were my enemies lesse punished by that prosperity, which hardened them to continue that injustice by open hostility, which was begun by most riotous and unparliamentary tumults. There is no doubt but personall and private sins may ofttimes overbalance the justice of public engagements; nor doth God account every gallant man (in the world's esteeme) a fit instrument to assert in the way of war a righteous cause. The more men are prone to arrogate to their own skill, valour, and strength, the lesse doth God ordinarily work by them for his own glory. I am sure the event or successe can never state the justice of any cause, nor the peace of men's consciences, nor the eternal fate of their soules. Those with me had (I think) clearly and undoubtedly for their justification the Word of God and the laws of the land, together with their own oathes; all requiring obedience to my just commands; but to none other under heaven without me, or against me, in the point of raising armes. Those on the other side are forced to flie to the shifts of some pretended fears, and wild fundamentals of state (as they call them) which actually overthrow the present fabrick both of church and state; being such imaginary reasons for self-defence as are most impertinent for those men to alledge, who, being my subjects, were manifestly the first assaulters of me and the lawes: first by unsuppressed tumults, after by listed forces. The same allegations they use, will fit any faction that hath but power and confidence enough to second with the sword all their demands against the present lawes and governours, which can never be such as some side or other will not find fault with, so as to urge what they call a reformation of them to a rebellion against them. Some parasitick preachers have dared to call those martyrs who died fighting against me, the lawes, their oathes, and the religion established. Arthur Wilson (1595-1652), born at Yarmouth, became secretary to Robert, Earl of Essex, afterwards Parliamentary general in the Civil Wars, whom he accompanied on his Continental campaigns (1620-25); and in 1633, after two years' study at Oxford, entered the service of the second Earl of Warwick, colonial adventurer and Parliamentary admiral. Wilson too was hostile to the |