This tract was reprinted in the first number of Morgan's Phœnix Britannicus, 1641, and also in the fourth volume of the Somers Collection of Tracts, 1651.

The printers were threatened with proceedings in the Court of High Commission for printing the same without licence, and Sir Robert Cotton, who admitted the authorship, also ran some risk, as appears from the following letter of the Bishop of London (dated February 15th, 1627) to Secretary Conway, and also the examinations of the stationers and printers.

My very honorable good Lord,

May it please your Lordship, I have found a booke intituled A view of ye long life and raigne of Henry ye third, King of England, which I send your Lordship with the examinations of all that I find guilty of ye setting of it forth under ye hand of ye Register by whom before me there examinacions were taken. The parties ar in custody and I meane to proceede against them by ye High Comission for printing ye booke without licence, leaving the matter of state to your Lordship's wisdome. Sir Robert Cotton acknowledgeth he writt the booke some 15 yeares agone, but denies that he hath any knowledg of or hand in ye now printing of it. Good my Lord, give me leave uppon such occasions as this to repayre to your Lordship, whose wisdome will mutch strenthen my poore endeavors to his Majestie's service in this kind, or any other that lies in my ability and power; and so with my most humble acknowledgment of all your noble favours, I pray to God hartily to bless your Lordship, and remayne

Your Lordship's humble servant,

Geo. London.

From my House, February 15th, 1626.

Februarii 15to,
1626.

A briefe of the severall examinations taken before the Lord Bishop of London thes weeke, touching the booke entituled A veiwe of the long life and raigne of Henry the third, King of England.

Benjamin Fisher, a stationer of the City of London, acknowledgeth that he caused five hundred of those bookes to be printed, and no more; five sheets whereof were printed by one Okes a printer, and one other sheete whereof was printed by Breward Alsope and Thomas Fawcett, two other printers.

Of these books Fisher saith they have vented four hundred and twenty or thereabouts, and names some of the parties unto whom they have vented them: viz.—one hundred of them to one Peter Horson, the rest to severall stationers in the country, and that he bought the copy thereof of one Alsope a printer, and saith it was printed without licence.

This Alsope being examined where he had the copy saith he bought it of one Ferdinando Ely, a broker in bookes, and that the said Fisher sent Alsope to buy it of Ely, that he the said Alsope payd unto Ely xijd. for it, and having bought it delivered it presently unto Fisher, who caused it to be printed. Alsope he saith that he printed of that sheet delivered unto him as many as should make upp a thousand books of that sort, besides some waste sheets.

Ferdinando Ely being examined, denieth upon his oath that he ever had the copy of the said book, or that he sold it to Alsope, but afterwards uppon better remembrance saith that about two yeares since he sold a copy of a small book to the said Alsope, but what was the contents of it, or for how much money he sold it, he doth not remember.

Peter Horson being examined, confesseth that together with a letter he received an hundred of those books wanting two from the said Fisher, which letter importeth that they were printed at Dort, and that the author of them was Sir Robert Cotton, and saith it is a book well penned; he hath dispersed divers of them and nameth some of the parties unto whom.

Okes the printer saith his sonn printed part of that book whilest he Okes the father was prisoner in the Compter, and saith that as his sonn told him he printed five hundred of them and no more, and saith they were printed for Benjamin Fisher aforesaid.[41]

Ita Testor	{	Thomas	}	deputatus Registrarii
	{	Mottinshed	}	Regis.

These two sermons were preached by Roger Manwaring, D.D., before his Majesty on the 4th July and 29th July, 1627, and were afterwards published under the before mentioned title, for which Manwaring was brought to the bar of the House of Lords. On the 14th June, 1628, that House gave judgment thus:—

1.—That Dr. Manwaring shall be imprisoned during the pleasure of the House. 2.—That he be fined £1000 to the King. 3.—That he shall make such submission and acknowledgment of his offences as shall be set down by a Committee in writing both at the bar and in the House of Commons. 4.—That he shall be suspended three years from the exercise of his ministry. 5.—That he shall hereafter be disabled from any ecclesiastical dignity. 6.—That he shall be for ever disabled to preach at the Court hereafter, and 7.—That his Majesty be moved to grant a proclamation for the calling in of his books, that they may be burnt in London and both Universities.

The following is the proclamation:—

A Proclamation for the calling in and suppressing of two Sermons, preached and printed by Roger Manwaring, Doctor in Divinity, intituled Religion and Allegiance.

Whereas Roger Manwaring, Doctor in Divinity, hath lately preached two Sermons, the one upon the fourth, the other on the nine and twentieth of July last, and after caused them to bee printed, and bound up into one volume, and intituled by him Religion and Allegiance; in which sermons, although the grounds thereof were rightly laid to perswade obedience from the subjects to their sovereigne, and that for conscience sake; yet in divers passages, inferences, and applications thereof trenching upon the lawes of this land and proceedings of parliaments, whereof hee was ignorant, hee so farre erred, that hee hath drawen upon himselfe the just censure and sentence of the High Court of Parliament, by whose judgement also that booke stands condemned. Wee, taking this into our serious consideration, and beeing desirous to take away all occasions of scandall or offence, have thought fit that those sermons, in respect of those inferences and applications which hee made thereon, bee totally suppressed.

And to that purpose, wee doe hereby straitly charge and command all and every person and persons whatsoever, in whose hands any of those bookes now are, or hereafter shall be, that they foorthwith deliver, or cause the same to be delivered, to the Bishop or other ordinary of that diocese or place where hee or they at any time are, if it be not within either of our Universities; and if it bee in either of the Universities, that then he or they deliver the same to the Vicechancellour of that Universitie, to whom wee doe heereby give speciall charge and command to cause them to be utterly suppressed.

And wee doe further charge and command, that no man hereafter presume to print the sayd sermons or either of them againe, upon paine of our high displeasure, and of such further punishment, as for their presumption in that behalfe, may any way bee inflicted upon them.

Given at our Court at Whitehall, the foure and twentieth day of June, in the fourth yeere of our reigne of Great Britaine, France, and Ireland.

God save the King.

Imprinted at London by Bonham Norton and John Bill, Printers to the King's most excellent Majestie. MDCXXVIII.

On the 21st of June, Manwaring made a humble submission to the House of Lords, and after the session was over, the fine was remitted, the Doctor himself released from prison, two livings given him, and in 1636 he became Bishop of St. Davids.

This book was written by Alexander Leighton, a Scotch doctor of physic and divinity, father of the Archbishop. In this book the author calls bishops men of blood, ravens, and magpies; he declares the institution of episcopacy to be anti-christian and satanical; the Queen is a daughter of Heth, and the King is corrupted by bishops to the undoing of himself and people; and he approves of the murder of Buckingham. Language such as this could hardly have been passed over unnoticed. But it was not till June 4th, 1630, that the author was brought before the Star Chamber. There was no difficulty in pronouncing him guilty of seditious and scandalous writings; and he was sentenced to a terrible and barbarous punishment. Besides a fine of £10,000, and degradation from the ministry, he was publicly whipped in Palace Yard, made to stand two hours in the pillory, one ear was cut off, a nostril slit open, and one of his cheeks branded with the letters S.S. (Sower of Sedition.) After this he was sent off to the Fleet Prison. At the end of a week, "being not yet cured," he was brought out again, underwent a second whipping and repetition of the former atrocities, and was then consigned to prison to life, where he actually spent eleven years. In April, 1641, his sentence was reversed by the House of Commons, and he received such consolation as it could afford him, when it was decided that his former mutilation and imprisonment had been entirely illegal.

This book was ordered to be suppressed by a warrant from the Council, dated September 7th, 1631; but the prohibition was revoked, and all restraint upon the sale of the book removed in the following month.[42]

This book was suppressed as appears from a letter from Sir Francis Nethersole to Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, dated February 14th, 1629, wherein the writer says, "The printers have preferred a petition, alleging that of late books written against Arminians have been suppressed, especially one written by Bishop Carleton, but others written in their favour have been licensed."[43]

On April 20th, 1629, articles were exhibited by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners against the printers and publishers of these books, among whom was Michael Sparkes, stationer, who had been committed to the Fleet "for printing and publishing offensive books without license or warrant." In his answer to the articles objected against him by the Commissioners, Sparkes denies the present binding authority of the decree in the Star Chamber for regulating printing, as directly intrenching on the hereditary liberty of the subjects' persons and goods, and being contrary to Magna Charta, the Petition of Right, and other statutes. He presumed that Court would no way infringe the liberties of his Majesty's subjects, which his Majesty professed in his late declaration that he would constantly maintain. He admits that he printed "Babel no Bethel," but conceives that there was nothing contrary to the established doctrine of the Church of England therein, and that he had endured a hard imprisonment already for the same, which he hopes will excuse his further answer. He says that some part of Mr. Prynne's book was printed by Augustine Matthewes, and other part elsewhere. He conceives the book itself to be a just and necessary defence of the Church of England against the Arminians. He refuses to confess the printer that printed part of the book, and thinks the Court will not desire it, in regard that he (the printer) has done all to the glory of God, the honour of the King, the good of the Church, and the welfare of the doctrine of the Church of England and the religion established.[44]

Articles were exhibited by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners against Michael Sparke, James Bouler, Nicholas Bourne, and Henry Overton, servant of Mrs. Shefford, of London, stationers, charging them with having caused to be printed without license this "scandalous book," wherein are passages taxing not only the whole state, but also some particular bishops and persons of eminent place in the church.[45]

This book was ordered to be suppressed and prosecuted by Lord Deputy Strafford, at the direction of the King.

In this remarkable book the author speaks in such unmeasured terms of "women actors" that it was considered to be a special attack on the Queen, who had herself taken part in the performance of a pastoral at Somerset House. Therefore on February 7th, 1632/3, Mr. William Prynne, utter barrister of Lincoln's Inn, was brought to the Court of Star Chamber on the information of the Attorney General for writing this book, and at the same time were brought up Michael Sparkes and William Buckner, the one for printing and the other for licensing the same book. The book was condemned to be burnt, and Mr. Prynne was adjudged to be put from the bar and to be for ever incapable of his profession, to be expelled from the Society of Lincoln's Inn, to stand in the pillory in Westminster and Cheapside, to lose both his ears, one in each place, and with a paper on his head denoting his offence; to pay a fine of £5000 to the King, and be perpetually imprisoned. Buckner was sentenced to imprisonment according to the course of the Court, and to pay a fine of £50 to the King. Sparkes was sentenced to pay a fine of £500 to the King, and to stand in the pillory in Cheapside without touching his ears, with a paper on his head to declare his offence. The sentence against Prynne was executed the 7th and 10th days of May following.

I have not been able to meet with a copy of this book, but there is at the British Museum a volume by the same author, which may be the first edition of the one now under consideration. It is entitled "A discourse upon the Sabbath Day, wherein are handled these particulars ensuinge. 1.—That the Lord's Day is not Sabbath Day by divine institution. 2.—An exposition of the 4 commandement so farr forth as may give light unto the ensueinge discourse; and particularly here it is showne, at what time the Sabbath Day should begine and end, for the satisfaction of those who are doubtfull in this point. 3.—That the seaventh day Sabbath is not abolished. 4.—That the seaventh day Sabbath is now still in force. 5.—The author's exhortation and reasones, that nevertheless there be no rente from our church as touchinge practise. Written by Theophilus Brabourne. Printed the 23rd of Decemb., Anno Dom., 1628."

In 1634 Brabourne was cited before the Court of High Commission for writing this book, and in his answer he confessed to have composed and caused to be printed beyond sea five hundred copies of the same, in which he was alleged to have broached "erroneous heretical and judaical opinions." Being admonished to renounce his opinions, he acknowledged himself to be a Sabbatharian, and as much bound to keep the Saturday's Sabbath as the Jews were before the coming of Christ. The Court pronounced him a Jew, a heretic and schismatic, and adjudged him worthy to be severely punished. He was ordered to be deprived of all his ecclesiastical livings and dignities, and to be deposed and degraded from his holy orders and function in the university, pronounced excommunicate, fined £1000, condemned in expenses, ordered to make a public submission conceptis verbis at such times and places as the Court should appoint, and remanded back to prison until the Court advise on some other course for delivering him over to the secular power if he persisted in his opinions.

This book, "though professing to be directed against the Church of Rome, 'tis more than manifest," Laud says, "that it was purposely written and divulged against the Bishops and Church of England." For this Bastwick was cited before the High Commission Court, when thirty seven articles were charged against him. He was acquitted of all the charges except one, and that was his maintaining bishops and priests to be the same order of ministers, or, as he expressed it himself, "Impingitur horrendum crimen quod infulis et apicibus jus divinum negaverim, quod Episcopi et Presbyteri paritatem asseruerim." For this he was condemned to pay a fine of £1000, to be excommunicated, to be debarred from the practise of his profession, his book to be burnt, and he himself to pay the costs and remain in prison till he recanted; and "that is," he says, "till domesday in the afternoone."

The first mentioned book was directed against Noye, the Attorney General, who, it was made out, was visited with a judgment from heaven whilst laughing at Prynne as he stood in the pillory. For writing and publishing these books, the latter of which was styled "a pernicious damnable scurrilous invective and libel," an information was exhibited in the Star Chamber against the author, and on the 14th June, 1637, he was sentenced to lose his ears in the Palace Yard at Westminster, to be fined £5000 to the King, and to perpetual imprisonment. He was also condemned to be stigmatized in the cheeks with two letters, S. and L., for a seditious libeller; and on the 30th June, the sentence was carried out with barbarous cruelty, but at the beginning of the Long Parliament Prynne was liberated.

In March, 1637, articles were objected by the Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical against James Hannum, of St. Clement Danes, London, wax chandler, for selling this book, as well as Bastwick's Apologeticus. He was required, by virtue of his oath, to set down how many of the said books he had uttered, vented, or sold, and of whom he had them and to whom he sold them. He was also charged with knowing that these books were never licensed to be printed or sold, but were printed by stealth by some friend of his. Also that one or more of the said books was lately taken in his house.[46]

This was written by Bastwick, while he was in confinement in the Gate House Prison, in answer to a book by Thomas Chowney, a Sussex gentleman, who maintained that the Church of Rome was a true church, and had not erred in fundamentals. For writing and publishing this book, as well as the Litany (presently described), an information was exhibited in the Star Chamber against Bastwick, and on June 14th, 1637, he was sentenced to lose his ears in the Palace Yard at Westminster, to be fined £5000 to his Majesty and to perpetual imprisonment. He was confined in the castle or fort of the Isles of Scilly, but was liberated by the Long Parliament.

Burton was born at Birsall in Yorkshire in 1579. He was educated at St. John's College, Cambridge, and became Rector of St. Matthew's, Friday Street about 1626. He had been Clerk of the Closet to Prince Henry, and afterwards to Prince Charles; a position in which he was not continued when Charles became King. In this bitter disappointment he produced the books now under consideration, for which he was prosecuted in the Star Chamber, and sentenced to lose his ears in the Palace Yard at Westminster, to be fined £5000 to the King, and to perpetual imprisonment. He was confined in the Isle of Guernsey, but was liberated at the beginning of the Long Parliament.

The first mentioned book, the "Letany" was at first only shown to a few friends in manuscript, but afterwards it came to be printed in this way. John Lilburne, afterwards a Lieutenant Colonel in the Parliamentary army, and who behaved with such gallantry at Marston Moor, was introduced to Dr. Bastwick in 1637, and was so much pleased at hearing the Letany, that having a little ready money at command, he undertook to get it printed in Holland. Bastwick was at first averse to this, as he distrusted a friend of Lilburne's who would have to assist in disposing of the impression. His scruples however were overcome, and the Letany, together with the "Answer to the Information of Sir John Bancks, Kt., Atturney Universalle," committed to the press. The first edition realized a handsome profit; but Archbishop Laud got scent of the publication, laid hold upon the disperser, and made him confess who was the chief actor in the affair. Accordingly when Lilburne landed with another impression, he was seized along with his cargo, and the books burnt by the hands of the common hangman. Lilburne, and Wharton, (who dispersed the books) were further cited to the Star Chamber, and on February 13th, 1638, sentenced to be remanded to the Fleet, there to remain till they conformed themselves to the order of the Court, and to pay £500 apiece to his Majesty's use; and before their enlargements out of the Fleet, to become bound with good sureties for their good behaviour. Lilburne was to be whipped through the streets from the Fleet to the Pillory at Westminster, and together with Wharton to be set in the said Pillory, and from thence returned to the Fleet, there to remain. This sentence was carried into execution on April 18th, 1638, and the same day the Court passed the following further sentence upon Lilburne "for uttering sundry scandalous speeches, and scattering divers copies of seditious books among the people," while he was in the pillory, that he should be laid alone with irons on his hands and legs in the wards of the Fleet where the basest and meanest sort of prisoners were used to be put, and that the Warden of the Fleet take special care to hinder the resort of any persons whatsoever to him; and particularly that he be not supplied with money from any friend, and that all letters, writings, and books brought to him be seized and delivered to their Lordships; and all persons visiting him to be reported to the Board. However, in November, 1640, on petitioning Parliament he was liberated.

This masque is said to have been suppressed from the statement on the title page of it being acted on a Sunday, and the clamour it excited.

For writing these books Pocklington was deprived of all his livings, dignities, and preferments, and prohibited the King's Court. These proceedings were instituted against him at the instigation of Archbishop Williams. On February 10th, 1641, the House of Lords ordered that these two books should be publicly burnt in the City of London and the two Universities by the common hangman; and on March 10th, the House ordered the Sheriffs of London and the Vice-Chancellors of both the Universities forthwith to take care and see the order of the house carried into execution.[47]

This is a translation of the "Praxis Spiritualis, sive Introductio ad vitam devotam," by the celebrated Catholic divine, St. Francis de Sales. Archbishop Laud in writing to his Vice-Chancellor in 1637, speaks thus of the book, "There was an English translation of a book of devotion, written by Sales, Bishop of Geneva, and intitled Praxis Spiritualis, &c., licensed by Dr. Haywood, then my chaplain, about the latter end of November last; but before it passed his hands, he first struck out divers things wherein it varied from the doctrine of our Church, and so passed it. But by the practice of one Burrowes (who is now found to be a Roman Catholic) those passages struck out by Dr. Haywood were interlined afterwards, and were printed according to Burrowes's falsifications. The book being thus printed, gave great and just offence, especially to myself, who upon the first hearing of it, gave present order to seize upon all the copies, and to burn them publicly in Smithfield. Eleven or twelve hundred copies were seized and burnt accordingly."[48]

The following is the proclamation for suppressing the book:—

"By the King.

"A proclamation for calling in a book entituled An Introduction to a Devout Life; and that the same be publikely burnt.

"Whereas a book entituled An Introduction to a Devout Life, was lately printed by Nicholas Oakes of London, and many of them published and dispersed throughout the realme, the copy of which book being brought to the Chaplaine of the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury for licence and allowance, was by him, upon diligent perusall, in sundry places expunged and purged of divers passages therein tending to Popery. Neverthelesse, the same book, after it was so amended and allowed to be printed, was corrupted and falsified by the translator and stationer, who between them inserted again the same Popish and unsound passages; and the stationer is now apprehended, and the translator sought for, to be proceeded against according to justice. His Majesty, out of his pious and constant care to uphold and maintain the religion professed in the Church of England in its purity, without error or corruption, doth therefore hereby declare his royall will and pleasure to be, and doth straitly charge and command all persons, of what degree, quality, or condition soever, to whose hands any of the said bookes are or shall come, that without delay they deliver or send them to the Bishop or Chancellor of the Diocesse, whom his Majestie requireth to cause the same to be publikely burnt, as such of them as have beene already seized on have been by His Majestie's expresse command; and to this His Majestie's royall pleasure, he requireth all his loving subjects to yeeld all due conformity and obedience, as they will avoid the censure of high contempt.

"Given at our Court at Whitehall, the fourteenth day of May in the thirteenth yeare of our reigne.

"God save the King.

"Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the King's most excellent Majestie; and by the Assignes of John Bill. 1637."

In this book it was contained that the Papists should fish in troubled waters while the King was at war with the Scots, with prayers in it for the holy martyrs that suffered in the Fleet sent against the heretics in England, 1639. It is undoubtedly the same work as is entitled "Jubileum sive speculum Jesuiticum opera et studio I.L.W.O.P.," of which there is a reprint in the British Museum dated 1643. On the 14th November, 1640, Thomas Chude and John Clay were called in before the House of Commons to testify touching this book, when Chude declared he had one in his custody; he had it from a woman at Redriffe, wife to H. Goodwell, a cobbler, whose wife was a Papist; he delivered the book the same day he had it to the Sheriff of London, Sheriff Warner.[49]

By a proclamation of March 30th, 1640, "against libellous and seditious pamphlets and discourses sent from Scotland," this tract was prohibited on account of its containing "many most notorious falsehoods and scandals to the dishonour of His Majesty's proceedings with his subjects in Scotland."

On April 6th, 1641, it was ordered by the House of Commons that enquiry should be made after the printer and venter of this speech, and that all diligence was to be used in suppressing the same.[50] A copy exists in the British Museum Library.

On August 24th, 1641, it was resolved by the House of Commons that Richard Heren should be sent for as a delinquent by the Sergeant at Arms for printing this pamphlet; and also that Thomas Bray, an Oxon scholar, who turned the pamphlet out of poetry into prose should also be sent for as a delinquent.[51]

A copy is preserved in the British Museum Library. It commences thus:—

"Two of the zealous Tribe being inspired, as they tearmed it, and having a greater parcell of the spirit than at other times, after a great deal of chat, now concerning this thing, and now concerning that thing, at last drew themselves as far as the New Canons, where they read, but yet you must not thinke that it was without rubbes and jarres, but comming to the Sixth Canon that ended with Et cætera, at the very sight of which he swelled as much as Goliah with his weaver's beam, and thus began to break forth in these or the like tearmes.

"Roger. I that have behaved my selfe so well, that now I am in sincerity elected a Zealous Brother, I that having my worth seen am for it rewarded with twenty Nobles per annum, besides what I collect every year from our Female Charity, considering with myselfe what a vile and indiscreet thing these new Oathes and Canons are, I am even wrapt besides my selfe, and with this very word, or letter, or syllable, or whatsoever it is, I must and will dissect it.

"Ralph. Why brother Roger? Art thou of so shallow capacity as thou makest thyselfe to be? Have patience pray, and rather finde fault with the Printer than with the thing printed, or rather with him which set the Printer on worke than with the Printer himselfe, these times are corrupted, for why? corrupt men have ruled us here in this Land.

"Here could Roger hold no longer, but like to a Beardog, he yawnes, and barkes, and bawles, saying,

"Roger. In sincerity brother Ralph, thou doest not know what an urging this is to me, see what a vile mishapen monster it is, this Et cætera, God blesse us! is a Limbe of the Devill;" &c., &c.

And it concludes thus:—

"Well, these two Zealous Brothers had dranke so long together that they played the beasts, like a couple of drunken rogues, &c., and then they must needs quarrell, and make themselves and Religion in them to be scoffed egregiously, and indeed it is an ancient proverbe, When theeves fall out, true men come by their goods.

"It chanced that Roger gave Ralph some words in his drinke, which did not very well please him, which made Ralph break out beyond the bounds of modesty, and told him that he was a dissembling knave, and that he could prove him so, for said Ralph, Is it not the part of a knave to carry another man's wife so far as Banbury in Oxfordshire, and there to live with her, and keep her as your owne wife? fie, fie, for shame.

"Nay, said Roger, hic-up, if you go to that, hic-up, you are as arrant a knave as my selfe, hic-up, for do you remember, you Slave you, how you wisht your wife in the Low Countries, to say, that you were her brother, because she was fair, and that it might be said that you imitated Abraham, when he was a good man, whereas thou art a stinking Rogue.

"Thus they brawled, and scolded, and scolded, and brawled, till they fell asleep, in which pickle I left them."

On June 3rd, 1641, the House of Commons referred to the Committee concerning printing, the consideration of the printing of this book, and they were to report to the House what they thought fit to be done therein; and to send for the printer thereof, and the parties who conceived themselves to be prejudiced by that false copy.[52]

A copy is preserved in the British Museum Library.

On July 12th, 1641, the House of Commons ordered that the printing of this pamphlet be referred to the Committee for printing, where Sir Edward Dering had the chair; and on the 18th November following, it was further ordered that Alsop the printer should be summoned to attend and answer such matters as should be objected against him concerning the printing of this pamphlet, and that some course was to be considered for preventing inordinate printing for the future.[53]

On August 20th, 1641, the House of Commons referred to the Committee concerning printing to enquire who printed this letter, and to take some course and propound it to the House for preventing the inordinate licence of printing. On enquiry it was found that Thomas Symonds was the printer, and it was resolved that he should be sent for as a delinquent for printing this letter without any order of Parliament, after that he was acquainted with the order of the House inhibiting the printing of anything concerning the proceedings of that House.[54]

A copy is preserved in the British Museum Library.

A pamphlet of five pages, of which there is a copy in the British Museum Library. On the title page is a rough woodcut representing two men fighting a duel.

On November 24th, 1641, the House of Commons ordered that the Committee for printing should enquire after the printing of this book.[55]

On December 20th, 1641, the House of Commons resolved that Walker should be sent for as a delinquent by the Sergeant at Arms for being author of this pamphlet; and the printing of this and other books by the same author was referred to the Committee for printing.[56]

On January 31st, 1641/2, the House of Commons referred this book to the Committee for printing, to enquire out the author and the printer thereof.[57] It has an engraved frontispiece wherein is represented an "Altare," upon which an offering is consuming in fire, "Ignis sacer;" above the offering is "Sancto nomini caro sacra." An eagle grasps at part of the offering, "offam rapit Aquila carbone adhærente;" another eagle hovers above, with a second portion, "Portat ad pullos in nido," and flying towards a nest, "Aquilæ nidus," which is in the branches of a tree. On the trunk of the tree is "Ardet carbone nidus quo perit soboles impiæ genitricis." An Eye is visible in clouds, inscribed "Vidit offensus Oculus supremi;" also a clenched fist, above which is "Percutit extensa manus supremi." Rays proceed from the eye downwards over the altar and its adjuncts, and are respectively inscribed "Advertit peccatorem in progrediendo," "Aspicit peccatorem in peccando," "Acceptat sacrificia peccatorem condonando," and "Accipit peccatorem sacrificia comburendo." A ray is directed to the nest, and inscribed "Animadvertit in peccatorem posteros plectendo." The old British Museum Catalogue ascribes the authorship of this tract to Mr. Ephraim Udall.