« ПредишнаНапред »
had been mentioned before) deserves to be noticed, SECTION only as it affords a striking instance of Mr. Rose's credulity and incorrectness. The only authority he cites for the number of families influenced by the purchase of bishops' lands, is an anonymous pamphlet, preserved in the collection of Lord Somers's Tracts, of which the title itself might lead to suspicion in any dispassionate mind of the authenticity of the statements contained in it. It is “ a scandalous, libellous, and “ seditious pamphlet, entitled, The Valley of Baca, or “ the Army's Interest Pleaded, the Purchasers Seconded, “ the Danger of the Nation Demonstrated in Thirty“ four Queries, Answered, and the Present State of Af“ fairs Briefly Vindicated.” This, however, is the sole authority, on which an author, pluming himself on his official accuracy, ventures to make an assertion, which, if he had reflected for a single moment, he would at least have hesitated to give credit to. Four hundred thousand families are mentioned in that scandalous, libellous, and seditious pamphlet, to which the tract in Lord Somers's collection was the answer; and they would contain, probably, at least 1,700,000 people ; at that time composing, we may calculate, one-fourth part of the whole population of England. Unfortunately, however, for Mr. Rose's argument, the pamphlet affords no authority for his assertion, for he is speaking of the purchasing of bishops' lands, the pamphlet of the purchasers of the crown lands. But that we may
not be supposed to cavil about words, let us admit Mr. Rose has inadvertently made a mistake, and that his intention was to include the purchasers of both crown and bishops' lands; then, the book relating to the crown lands only, there must have been more than 400,000 persons influenced by the purchases of both, and Willis's Survey of the Cathedrals will enable my readers to make a loose calculation of the great number which must be added to a number already too large to be readily acknowledged to be correct. This would only make the argument more desperate. And it is clear, that Mr. Rose was not sufficiently acquainted with the facts, which he meant to press into the service, for at the conclusion of the paragraph, he mentions that great numbers of officers and soldiers had assignments for their arrears on the estates of persons forfeited for their adherence to the King; and therefore to the 400,000 families engaged by purchases of crown lands, and to those engaged by purchases of the bishops' lands, we must also add this third class of families, described by Mr, Rose as very numerous. According to this absurd calculation, there could be very few families left to support the King's cause, nor could there be any considerable remnant of those, who had suffered for it. If Mr. Rose had only taken common pains to have ascertained the fact from authentic documents, instead of relying upon the loose statement of an anonymous. party pamphlet, he would have found that persons, best. informed upon the subject, did not consider the in- SECTION fluence of the purchasers of crown or church lands, or the holders of the lands of delinquents, as forming so formidable a body. In a letter dated 20th February, 1059-60, Lord Chancellor Hyde says, “I am Clar.St. Pap. ii. s not so much frighted with the fear of those per" sons, who being possessed of the church, crown, " and delinquent's lands, will be thereby withheld from “ returning to their duty, except they might be as“ sured to retain the same. First, I do not think the “ number so very considerable of all those who are * entangled in that guilt, that their interest can conti“ nue or support the war, when the nation shall dis“ cern that there is nothing else keeps off the peace. * Secondly, they who have the greatest share in " those spoils, are persons, otherwise too irrecon** cileable, either by their guilt as King's murder“ ers, or their villainous resolutions, as Sir Arthur “ Haslerigg and others, that no overtures of that "“ kind would work upon them, but would be turned “ into reproach; and as the number of those is not " greut, so the greatness of their possessions makes " them more enemies than friends, setting all other “ guilt aside.” Nor was the value of the land, by which so many families were engaged to the parliament, so great as might be imagined, or Mr. Rose's assertion might erroneously give rise to suspect. In Ib. p.723, another letter, 6th April, 1000, from Mr. Barwick to
SECTION the Lord Chancellor; he says, “ by computation, less
“ than a year's tax would now redeem all the land “ that hath been sold of all sorts, which, upon the “ refreshment the kingdom will be sensible of at first
“ upon his majesty's return, may possibly be granted." Clar. St. Pap.ii. The arranging of the claims of those purchasers and
holders was a matter of great difficulty ; and at last a plan, consented to by Monk, was settled, though never carried into effect.
The instances of incorrect statement in Mr. Rose's work are almost as numerous as the pages he has written. Another occurs in the paragraph we have just examined: he cites Ludlow as saying, that “authority “ was given to sell the estates of the crown and the
“ church" upon certain conditions. But, in the pas. Ludt Mem. p. sage alluded to, Ludlow informs us, that authority
was given to sell the estates not of the crown and church, but those which had formerly belonged to the deans and chapters. And then further adds, that the fee farm rents of the crown were also sold, but the crown lands were assigned to pay the arrears of the soldiers, who were in arms in the year 1647. The want of accuracy in this particular instance may not materially affect the vindication of Mr. Fox, but it shews what little reliance can be had upon the statements of Mr. Rose, and how little he has studied to be cora rect.
Insults to the
Fox p. 20,
Mr. Fox says of Monk, that he acquiesced in the SECTION * insults so meanly put upon the illustrious corpse « of Blake, under whose auspices and command corpse of Blake. “ he had performed the most creditable services of “ his life.” This story, Mr. Rose says, rests on Rose, p 21. the authority of Neale's History of the Puritans, where Neale ii.p.587 we read that on the 30th of January, 1660, the bodies of Cromwell, Bradshaw, and Ireton were drawn upon hurdles to Tyburn and there hung up; and that towards
Ib. p. 619: the latter end of this year his Majesty's warrant to the dean and chapter was obtained, to take up the bodies of such persons, who had been unwarrantably buried in the chapel of Henry the Seventh, and in other chapels and places within the collegiate church of Westmins ster since 1641, and to inter them in the church-yard adjacent; and on the 12th and 14th of September about twenty bodies were taken up, and among them, he mentions, that of Blake; and these, with some others; of lesser note, were all thrown together into one pit in tarabe es it offer St. Margaret's “ church-yard, near the back-door of Hat maak krew THE “ one of the prebendaries.” Mr. Rose boldly asserts, or even a tha lamang that this account has been refuted by Grey, and also by clear evidence adduced by Bishop Kennett in his Historical Register. Not troubling the reader with the refutation by Grey, we will examine the nature of convenience
conovinent at least. this clear evidence adduced by Kennett. It is fortunate that both parties are agreed in taking Kennett for their umpire; for they both rely upon the same