logical discussion, as to the proper observance of the Lord's Day, there are very few who will deny to James the real credit which he deserved on this occasion. Surely that monarch stands high among the thrones of the earth, who willingly turns from his own pomps and vanities to the sufferings and discomforts of the poor and unprotected; and who readily encounters obloquy and discontent in order to throw a gleam of sunshine on the broad shadows of human wretchedness." 66 "One act of James's life can never be sufficiently commended. During the progresses made through his kingdom, he had noticed the pernicious effects which a punctual observance of the Sabbath was producing on the health and happiness of the lower classes of his subjects. With the certainty that religious bigotry would be everywhere arrayed against him, he issued a proclamation that, after Divine Service, his subjects should be allowed to indulge in all legitimate sports and amusements. Without entering into any theoNow this is a very well-expressed and eloquent commonplace in favour of royal clemency, but it is surely far too strong for the occasion. In many dioceses the proclamation was not read. Some of the ministers would not read it. "6 They lost all for fear, they were so terrified with it. Many of the most sound and orthodox belief," says Heylin, were compelled to abandon their livings, rather than to submit to it." And where it was carried into effect, it produced many grave abuses, and was attended with much scandal. It was preaching the Gospel in a fool's coat. One thing is quite certain, that if the seventh day may be devoted to sports and pastimes, and the other six be engrossed by labour and toil, the improvement of piety and the cultivation of feelings of religion and duty will find little room for their growth. The difficult point is to make the practical division between recreation and revelry; much is wisely left by our present law to the moral judgment and conscientious feelings of the community; and in matters like these, the law may safely wait for the guidance of opinion; if we may judge of King James's countrymen by their practice, we must say that they do not appear to feel the grievance of their old restraints, or to avail themselves of the more tolerant decree of the new law.* At p. 126 we find a well-written chapter on the character of Anne of Denmark. Mr. Jesse, p. 130, says, Anue was a bigoted Catholic, a fact not generally dwelt upon by historians. It is strange that H. Walpole should have been long ignorant of this important circumstance. Speaking of the Bacon papers he says, "There is one most extraordinary passage entirely overlooked, and yet of great consequence to explain the misfortunes into which her descendants afterwards fell. The Pope sends her beads and reliques, and thanks her for not communicating with heretics at her coronation." Sully, however, was not only acquainted with the fact, but evidently dreaded her influence as regarded the predominancy of the Spanish interest, and the advancement of the Roman Catholic religion; but hear what Bishop Williams the Lord Keeper said to the French ambassador on the demand for a liberal toleration of the Roman priests, who were to accompany Henrietta: "You urge such a moveable favour might be done to gratify the sweet Madame, our intended Princess, upon the marriage. whether I did wisely or well for my happiness in leaving these tranquil and delightful studies for the din of politics-the clangor Tubarum-and the troubles of a statesman's life." He was one of the few men who could join the two lives; but, indeed, our greatest statesmen have been also our best scholars, as Pitt, Fox, Wellesley, Windham, Grenville, Canning, &c. * Compare on this subject, Wilson's Life of James, p. 105; Heylin's Life of Laud, pp. 17, 77, 78, 135, 257, 295, 309. The games allowed were " dancing, archery, leaping, vaulting, May-games, Whitsun-ales, morris-dances, setting up May-poles." The petition for these came from the people of Lancashire. Yet Calvin was opposed to the "gross and carnal superstition of the Sabbatarians."—See Institut. 2. c. 8. § 34. my Lord! you are driven by blind mariners upon a rock. If this could be granted by the King, which you contend for, and were effected, sweet lady, she would be brought in the curses of this nation, and would repent the day she drew the offence of the whole land upon her head. Let me say, on the husband's part, what your countryman Ausonius says, for the wife, sæpe in conjugiis fit noxia, si nimia est dos.' If the Prince should make a jointure to his wife out of the tears and sorrows of his people, it were the worst bargain that ever he made. His Majesty's consort of happy memory, Queen Anne, did not altogether accord with our Church; indeed the diversity between us and the Lutherans, among whom she was bred, is as little as between scarlet and crimson; the colours are almost of the same dip; but she carried it so prudently, that she gave no notice of any dissension. Neither ever did demand to have a chaplain about her of the Lutheran ordination. This was a precedent for the most illustrious Madam to follow," &c.* It appears that a comet did this Queen the honour of appearing previous to her death, which forms the subject of a poem in Greek Iambics in the Parerga of Alexander Gill, (Milton's schoolmaster) p. 5, and which closes thus, ΑΝΝΗΣ θανόυσης, πεῖρα δεικνυέι, ὅτι As regards the subject of Prince Henry's death, Mr. Jesse has, with his usual good judgment, expressed his disbelief that it was owing to poison. To any one who calmly and dispassionately reads the account of his previous illness, his time of life peculiarly susceptible of constitutional changes, his imprudent conduct after the malady had displayed itself, in long journeys on horseback and violent exercise, and, perhaps, the unskilful treatment of his physicians (for the knowledge of medicine was at that time most imperfect), these causes will appear to him quite sufficient to account for the fatal termination of the complaint, and the death of this accomplished prince and hopeful heir of England's crown. ‡ Isaac Casaubon was in England at the time, and in his learned and interesting correspondence, there are several allusions to Prince Henry's illness and death, but not the most distant hint is given of its having been produced by the dreadful crime alluded to. As these letters have, so far as we know, never been brought into English history, we shall extract one or two passages, especially as they tend strongly to confirm the favourable opinion entertained of Henry's opening life, and afford an additional testimony to the value of his character. Ereptus erat morte inopinatâ, (nam morbus contemnabatur) princeps illustrissimus bonis piisque omnibus charissimus, See Hacket's Life of Abp. Williams, fol. p. 221. †There are several poems on different members of the royal family in this little volume of Gill's. Milton, in his Eleg. Tert. v. 9, has this couplet, "Tunc memini clarique ducis, fratrisque verendi, Intempestivis ossa cremata rogis." These two chiefs were the counts Mansfield, and Brunswick; Gill mentions them also together in his epitaph on C. Tilly. "Quem nec Mansfeltus, quem nec Brunnonius heros, Arma nec annorum quem domuêre decem." T. Warton might have cited this passage from Gill when he explained the allusion of Milton. Mr. Keightley says there can be no doubt of the real cause of Henry's death, viz. a fever. V. History, vol. ii. p. 294. A medical friend whom we have consulted, says, the description of the symptoms answer to those which accompany phthisis. regni hujus spes longe maxima. Puto te, cum hic eras (Casaubon is writing to his friend Jacobus Capellus) vultum illius contemplatum esse ut recordari etiamnum queas. Non potes igitur ignorare quæ esset de illo principe expectatio omnium qui viderant. Studia et mores cum vultu consentiebant. Præcipue autem rous Ocoσeßeis in spem erigebat magnam, pietas singularis quæ in illo eminebat. Audivi pro concione affirmantem ministrum ante annum, institutionem Calvini tantá diligentiá fuisse ipsi lectum ut pæne totam memoriá teneret, quod eo erat notabilius, quia, Pallade relicta, Martem assidue colebat." In another letter to Michael Piccart, he dwells on Prince Henry's respect and dutiful conduct to his father, a point of no little importance in the question. "Scito, mi Piccarte, iis virtutibus Tóv μaKapírny fuisse præditum, ut satis certiori jacturâ non possit, quam respublica Christiana (non enim dicam hoc regnum) in ejus morte fecit. Nemo illum serio contemplatus est, qui spem ingentem de eo non conce perit; ad res gerendas factus a natura videbatur, et in morte apparuit consilia illum voluisse omnino annis majora.. Pietas et reverentia kaι évdiáberos σTоpyn voin erga optimum parentem in factis dictisque omnibus eminebant. Quæ paucissimorum principum laus est, ut serii sint, et rerum curæ attendant, illi erat eμovrov, ut si cui unquam fuit," &c. How could poison, we may say, pass such lips as these, and still retain its venom ? Πῶς τευ τοῖς χέιλεσσι ποτέδραμε, κ' ουκ' ἐγλυκάνθη.* Isaac Casaubon seems to have been most deeply grieved by the death of the prince, and to have poured out his sorrows for the loss which he sustained, to almost all his friends. To J. Rutgersius, that he could not answer his letters before, he excuses himself," Animo ad scribendum vacuo non sum, quem totum occupat dolor Oavμacròs öσos a morte illustr. Principis Walliæ, quem mors inopinata nobis ante diem tertium ademit. Desiderabunt amissum Principem omnes, qui virtutes illius ct pietatem admirandam norant. Amisit enim Anglia Principem, de cujus præstantiâ quicquid dixero, minus erit. Certabant in eo corporis et animi dotes. Nemo illum vidit prudens, quin imperio natam indolem sit admiratus. In juvenili ætate nihil cernnens juvenile, pietas singularis, amor et reverentia erga patrem non affectata; ceterarum maximarum virtutum concursus etiam hostis amorem poterunt elicere. Nunc tantus Princeps vi mortis confectus jacet." To Daniel Heinsius he says, speaking of Prince Henry, "Corpus ita firmum, ut longævitatem merito illi sponderes, hic tantus Princeps paucorum dierum morbo terris ereptus est." So perished one, who was singularly accomplished In his account of Thomas Sackville, Earl of Dorset, Mr. Jesse has hardly done justice to his poetical genius. He says (p. 231), singularly scarce within the century after it was written, Shakspeare's glorious plays and Jonson's exquisite masques having annihilated common genius. Dryden and Oldham, in the succeeding age, amused themselves with ridiculing Dorset's dramatic efforts, which, however, it is proved they could never have read, for each Moschi Idyll. iii. v. 111. "He wrote several poems, besides being, with Thomas Norton, the joint author of Gorboduc, the first respectable tragedy in the English language. It was acted by the Gentlemen of the Inner Temple before the Queen, at Whitehall, on 18th Jan. 1561. This play, notwithstanding its acknowledged merit, was *See "Broad Stone of Honor," p. 406. + See Casauboni Epistolæ, ed. Almeloveen, folio, p. 506-9, et ed. Grævii, 4to. p. 940, 956. GENT, MAG, VOL. XIII. R of them speaks of Gorboduc as a woman. This tragedy is reprinted in the last edition of Dodsley's Old Plays. Pope was a great admirer of Lord Dorset's muse, and does credit to the purity of his style, and that freedom from bombast which was the great fault of our early tragic writers. He styles him the best poet between Chaucer and Spenser." * Now, on this passage we have to observe, firstly, that Mr. Jesse should not have passed over M. Sackville's Induction, in the "Mirror of Magistrates," without most honourable mention of it; for truly, as Dr. Drake observed, "Sackville stands pre-eminent and apart; the author of a poem which, for strength and distinctness of imagery, is almost unrivalled." * Let us hear the opinion, also, of a judicious and acute critic: "The Induction," says Mr. Hallam,+" displays best Sackville's poetical genius: it is like much earlier poetry, a representation of allegorical personages, but with a fertility of imagination, vividness of description, and strength of language, which not only leave his predecessors far behind, but may fairly be compared with some of the most poetical passages of Spenser. * Sackville is far above the frigid eloquence of Surrey; and in the first days of the virgin reign, is the herald of that splendour in which it was to close." Of Gorboduc the same critic observes," the characters are clearly drawn and consistently sustained, the political maxims grave and profound, the language not glowing or passionate, but vigorous; and, upon the whole, it is evidently the work of a powerful mind, though in a less poetical mood than was displayed in the Induction to the Mirror of Magistrates," &c. Mr. Jesse's account of Dryden's and Oldham's Mistake is taken from Spence's Preface (p. vii.), who mentions also one of A. Wood, who says this play was written in old English rhyme. Pope printed an edition of this tragedy in 1736, to which Spence wrote a preface; but it is an edition of no value, being printed from the republication of a spurious copy, published without consent of the author. In the same imperfect manner it appeared in Dodsley's Old Plays, but corrected by Reed. § Coxeter intended to give a more correct edition, with Sackville's other poetical works, his life and a glossary. With regard to the dates of the genuine and surreptitious editions, there seems some uncertainty. Percy, in his Reliques, (vol. i. p. 134,) says, “This play seems to have been first printed under the name of Gorboduc, then under that of Ferrex and Porrex in 1569, and again under Gorboduc, 1590." Ames calls the first ed. 4to.; Langbaine, 8vo.; Tanner, 12mo.-See Ames, p. 316. The Biog. Dramatica says" Ferrex and Porrex, T. 8vo. no date. It had before been surreptitiously printed under the title of Gorboduc, black letter.||" The circumstances connected with the death of Overbury are as mysterious as they are most interesting. That there was some dreadfully disgraceful secret, in which James was intimately connected, in this affair, * See also Warton's Hist. of Eng. Poetry, vol. iii. p. 209; Censura Literaria, vol. iii. p. i. 149; Warton on Spenser, ii. p. 108. + See Hallam's Intr. to the Literature of Europe, vol. ii. p. 304. Warton does not believe that Sackville had the assistance of Norton in this tragedy; but Mr. Collier supports Norton's claim to the three first acts, which would much reduce Sackville's glory. See Ann. ii. 481, and Warton's Eng. Poetry, iv. 194. § See Atterbury's Works, vol. ii. p. 37. See Pope's Letters, ed. Curl, vol. i. p. 98, on this play. On the subject of this play the following books may be consulted: Walpole's Noble Authors, i. p. 330; Anderson's Br. Poets, i. p. 651; Headley's Specimens, i. p. 7, xiii.; Steevens' Shaksp. iii. p. 409; Dodsley's Plays, 2d. ed. vol. i. p. 101; Hazlitt's Letters on Dram. Literature, p. 40-46; and Quarterly Review, No. xcii. p. 500. Nor should Campbell's Specimens of Engl. Poets be overlooked for a character of this noble poet. Vol. ii. p. 137, he says, "the Induction resembles a bold and gloomy landscape, on which the sun never shines." we have no doubt; but we dare not even hint our opinion. We find from Mr. Jesse (p. 265) that the late Charles Fox entertained a project of inquiring into the circumstances of Somerset's crime. In a letter to Lord Lauderdale he writes-"I recollect that the impression on my mind was, that there was more reason than is generally allowed for suspecting that Prince Henry was poisoned by Somerset, and that the King knew of it after the fact." Mr. Jesse has brought together and arranged the facts and arguments of this most intricate and perplexed question with fulness and impartiality. It is a very dark page of history, and contains in itself a memorable instance of retributive justice, and of guilty passions proving their own tormentors.* There is a note, unnoticed by Mr. Jesse, on the mysterious subject of Sir T. Overbury, in Mr. Hallam's Constitutional History (vol. i. p. 479-81.) The threats and insolence of Somerset, and the terror of the King, show some secret not known. Compare Carte's History, vol. iv. p. 33-4; Winwood, vol. iii. p. 410; Somers' Tracts, vol. ii. Sir C. Cornwallis; Welden's Memoirs, p. 115; Archæologia, vol. xviii. 4; Bacon's Works, vol. ii. p. 514, 4to. Mr. Hallam rejects the murder of Prince Henry, but does not suggest any other cause. Now supposing, in accordance with his opinion, this cause removed, it is necessary to seek another; we ask, therefore, could it concern any design on the Queen? It is singular that in this King's history there are two cir cumstances, both connected with the greatest crimes-the murder of Overbury and the Gowrie conspiracy-that seem to baffle all explanation. But we will make a few miscellaneous extracts from our notes on this subject." It does not appear quite clearly how the murder of Overbury was first discovered. The account generally believed is, that some letters fell into Winwood's hands when resident in Holland, which satisfied him that Overbury had been murdered, and induced him to prosecute an inquiry." (See Nott's ed. of Lord Surrey, vol. i. p. 484.) "D'Ewes says that Overbury had been charged with having proposed to poison Prince Henry, and that himself having perished by poison was considered as a judgment upon him from Heaven." (Ibid. p. 487.) We find in Sir George Radcliffe's Letters (p. 105) the following passage: "There hath been a great adoe about the poisoninge of a gentleman in the Tower; one is hanged, another fled, some examined, and divers imprisoned, but small certainty is yet knowne. It is confidently reported that the Earle of Somerset is sent to the Tower yesterday night." There is still another conjecture which we venture to propose, believing, as we do, that the field of history is still open, and that the truth has not been discovered: Supposing that Mr. Harris's supposition is not received, (v. Life of James I.) of the fear the King had of crimes being divulged, which we cannot even hint at without shame; supposing all connected with Prince Henry's death removed from the historical canvas; supposing, lastly, that we should, without sufficient cause have hinted at some designs against the Queen; then, and not till then, we venture to suggest whether the King might not have been privy to a design which appears to have been formed, of taking away Lord See a fine poetical passage in Val. Flaccus (Argon. iii. 387,) where the spirits of those who have died by a violent and unjust death are allowed to pass from Tartarus again to earth, and one of the Furies sent as their companion, to torment and affright their murderers. Comes una sororum Additur, et pariter terras atque æquora lustrant. † See on this subject Nichols's Progresses of James I. and Mr. Chamberlain's Letters, part i. p. 45, &c. |