the end of the year 1592. Mr. Fuller* says, he was a learned man, and of a blameless life, powerful in prayer, and no less profitable than painful in preaching. He was decently interred in the church-yard of St. George, Southwark, nor far from the grave of bishop Bonner, being honered with the attendance of great numbers of the London ministers, who visited him in prison, and now wept over the remains of a man, who, after a long and severe trial of his faith and patience, died for the testimony of a good conscience, and stands upon record as a monument of the oppression and cruelty of the government under which he suffered. Though the moderate puritans publicly disowned the libels above-mentioned, and condemned the spirit with which they were written, they were nevertheless brought into trouble for their associations. Among others, the Rev. Mr. Cartwright, father of the puritans, and master of the new hospital at Warwick, was suspended by his diocesan, and summoned before the high commissioners, who committed him to the Fleet with his brethren, Mr. Egerton, Fen, Wight, Farmer, Lord, Snape, King, Rushbrooke, Wig. gins, Littleton, Field, Royde, Payne, Proudlove, and Jewel. At their first appearance the commissioners asked them, where they held their associations or assemblies, and how often? Who were present, and what matters were treated of? Who corrected or set forth the book of discipline, and who had subscribed or submitted to it? Whether in a christian monarchy the King is supreme governor of the church? or, Whether he is under the government of pastors, doctors, and such like? Whether it be lawful for a sovereign prince to ordain ceremonies, and make orders for the church? Whether the ecclesiastical government es tablished in England be lawful, and allowed by the word of GOD? Whether the sacraments ministered according to the book of common prayer, are godly and rightly ministered? &c. Mr. Cartwright's answer to these interrogatories was said by the civilians to be sufficient; upon which they exhibited thirty-one articles against him, September 1st, 1590, and required him to answer them upon oath. *B. ix. p. 222, + Life of Whitgift, p. 373. The first twenty-four articles charge him with renouncing his episcopal orders, by being re-ordained beyond sea, with interrupting the peace, and breaking the orders of the church since he came home; and with knowing the authors or printers of Martin Mar-Prelate. Art. 25. Charges him with penning, or procuring to be penned, the book of discipline; and with recommending the practice of it. Art. 26. Charges him with being present at sundry pretended synods, classes or conferences of ministers in divers counties. Art. 27.-That at such synods they subscribed the book of discipline, and promised to govern themselves by it as far as they could. Art. 28. Charges him with setting up particular conferences in several shires, which were to receive the determinations of the general assembly, and put them in practice. Art. 29, 30, and 31. Mention some rules and orders of their synods; as, that the members should bring testimonials from their several classes; that they should subscribe the book of discipline; that no books should be printed but by consent; that they should be subject to the censures of the brethren both for doctrine and life; and that if any should be sent abroad upon public service at the meeting of parliament, their charges should be bore, &c. Mr. Cartwright offered to clear himself of some of these articles upon oath, and to give his reasons for not answering the rest, but if this would not satisfy, he was determined to submit to the punishment the commissioners should award,* [which was imprisonment in the Fleet;] praying the lord treasurer to make some provision for the poor people of Warwick who had no minister. The rest of Cartwright's brethren refusing the OATH for the same reasons, viz. Because they would not accuse themselves, nor bring their friends into trouble, were committed to divers prisons. But the archbishop, by advice of the treasurer, was not present at the commitment of his old adversary. On the 13th of May, 1591, they were brought before the star-chamber,† which was a court made up of certain Life of Whitgift, p. 361. Life of Whitgift, p. 338. noblemen, bishops, judges, and counsellors, of the Queen's nomination, to the number of twenty or thirty, with her majesty at their head, who is the sole judge when present, the other members being only to give their opinion to their sovereign by way of advice, which he [or she] disallows at their pleasure; but in the absence of the sovereign the determination is by a majority, the lord chancellor or keeper having a casting vote. The determinations of this court (says Mr. Rushworth) were not by the verdict of a jury, nor according to any statute law of the land, but according to the King [or Queen's] royal will and pleasure, and yet they were made as binding to the subject as an act of parliament. In the reign of King Henry VII. the practice of that court was thought to intrench upon the common law, though it seldom did any business; but in the latter end of this, and during the two next reigns, the court sat constantly, and was so unmerciful in its censures and punishments, that the whole nation cried aloud against it as a mark of the vilest slavery. Lord Clarendon says, "There were very few persons of quality in those times that had not 'suffered, or been perplexed by the weight and fear of its 6 censures and judgments; for having extended their juris'diction from riots, perjuries, and the most notorious mis'demeanors, to an asserting of all proclamations, and or'ders of state, to the vindicating illegal commissioners and 'grants of monopolies, no man could hope to be any longer free from the inquisition of that court, than he resolved 'to submit to those and the like extraordinary courses." 6 When Cartwright and his brethren appeared before the court, Mr. Attorney General inveighed bitterly against them for refusing the oath, and when Mr. Fuller, counsel for the prisoners, stood up to answer, he was commanded silence, and told, that far less crimes than theirs had been punished with the gallies or perpetual banishment, which latter he thought proper for them, provided it was in some remote place from whence they might not return.† From the Starchamber they were remitted back to the high commission, * Hist. Gr. Rebellion, vol. i. 8v. p. 68, &c. + Life of Whitgift, p. 360. where Bancroft had a long argument with Cartwright about the oath; from thence they were returned again to the Star-chamber, and a bill was exhibited against them with twenty articles ;* in answer to which they maintain, that their associations were very useful, and not forbidden by any law of the realm; that they exercised no jurisdiction, nor moved any sedition, nor transacted any affairs in them, but with a due regard to their duty to their prince, and to the peace of the church; that they had agreed upon some regulations to render their ministry more edifying, but all was voluntary, and in breach of no law; and as for the oath, they refused it not in contempt of the court, but as contrary to the laws of GOD and nature. But this answer not being satisfactory, they were remanded to prison, where they continued two years without any further process, or being admitted to bail; in the mean time King James of Scotland interceded for them, in a letter to the Queen, dated June 12th, 1591, in which he requests her majesty to shew favor to Mr. Cartwright and his brethren, because of their great learning and faithful travels in the gospel. Cartwright himself petitioned for his liberty, as being afflicted with excessive pains of the gout and sciatica, which were much increased by lying in a cold prison; he wrote a most humble and pious letter to the Lady Russel, and another to the lord treasurer, beseeching them to procure his enlargement with the Queen, though it were upon bond, expressing a very great concern that her majesty should be so highly offended with him, since he had printed no books for thirteen years past, that could give the least uneasiness; since he had declared his dislike of Martin Mar. Prelate; and that he never had a finger in any of the books under that name, nor in any other satyrical pamphlets; and further, that in the course of his ministry for five years past at Warwick he had avoided all controversy. Dr. Goad, Dr. Whitaker, and two others of the university, wrote an excellent letters to the treasurer in favor of the prisoners, beseeching his lordship that they might not be * Ibid. b. iv. rec. 4. VOL. I. 64 Life of Aylmer, p. 321. § Life of Whitgift, p. 370. more hardly dealt with than papists; but this not prevailing, after six months they petitioned the lords of the council [Dec. 4th, 1591] to be enlarged upon bail, and wrote to the treasurer to second it, assuring his lordship of their loyalty to the Queen, and peaceable behavior in the church. "We doubt not (say they) but your lordship is sensible, that a "year's imprisonment and more which we have suffered, 'must strike deeper into our healths, considering our edu'cation, than a number of years to men of a different occupation. Your lordship knows, that many papists who deny the Queen's supremacy have been enlarged, whereas we have all sworn to it; and if the government require, are 'ready to take the oath again." This was signed by They also applied to the archbishop, who refused to consent to their enlargement, unless they would under their hands declare the church of England to be a true church, and the whole order of public prayers, &c. consonant to the word of GOD, and renounce for the future all their assemblies, classes and synods; which they declined. These applications proving ineffectual, they resolved at last to address the Queen herself, for which purpose they drew up a declaration, containing a full answer to the several charges brought against them.* It was not till some time after this that Mr. Cartwright was released,† upon promise of his quiet and peaceable behavior, and restored to his hospital in Warwick, where he continued without further disturbance the rest of his days; but many of his brethren continued under suspension * See the Appendix, No. V. It should be observed here, that Mr. Cartwright was indebted for his liberty to the services of archbishop Whitgift, who had been his old acquaintance at Trinity college, and had a respect for his abilities, and it was also said, "feared the success in so tough a conflict." Fuller's Church History, b. ix. p. 204. |