it written in what is profanely called the beggar's or

vagrant's liturgy,

erb in these parts,

and which has passed into a provFrom Hell, Hull, and Halifax,

good Lord deliver us!' In this town, if a man be convict of having stolen a horse, a neat, or any such cattle, the self beast, or other of the same kind, instead of the people, shall have the end of the rope tied somewhere unto them; so that they being driven do draw out the pin whereby the offender is executed." 1

"It be a terrible punishment!"

"For so small a crime, surely. Nevertheless, if death must be inflicted, it be a mode merciful.”

"Merciful! A bloody death merciful!"

66 Troth, Helen! The head-block wherein the axe be fastened doth fall down with such a violence that if the neck of the transgressor were so big as that of a bull, it should be cut in sunder by the stroke in a twinkling, and roll from the body by a huge distance. The death is on the instant. The victim is no sufferer. Therefore it be merciful; far, far more merciful than — than — "

"Than what, John?"

“Dangling and strangling on a gibbet, Helen; which I sometimes think is in reserve for me."

The young wife shuddered involuntarily, but turned a keen, searching look of inquiry upon her husband.

"No, Helen!" said he, instantly reading her thought. "I have put my hand to the plough. Whatever fate may threaten me or you, I turn not back."

1 Holingshed, I. 312. Fuller's Worthies, III. 398.

"Now God be praised! God keep thee and me! God give us strength! O John! I would rather see thee suffer any death, and bear myself the anguish of widowhood a hundred fold, than have thee recreant to thy purpose or thy work."

CHAPTER VII.

MARTIN MAR-PRELATE.

SYNOPSIS OF THE MARTIN TRACTS. WHY SOUGHT FOR WHERE UNHEARD OF. THE SENSATION WHICH THEY PRODUCED IN ENGLAND.-PROCLAMATION AGAINST THEM. — SEIZURE OF THE PRESS. ARREST OF ITS EMPLOYEES AND PATRONS. THEIR ARRAIGNMENT AND SENTENCE. REMARKS ON MARTIN'S WRITINGS. MISREPRESENTATIONS OF THEM. THEIR AUTHORSHIP AND SPONSORS CONSIDERED. THE PURITANS DISAVOWED THEM. — DISAVOWAL OF THROGMORTON, CARTWRIGHT, PENRY, UDAL. THE PROMINENT PURITAN CLERGY DENOUNCED MARTIN UPON HIS FIRST APPEARANCE. — THE WRITER TO THIS DAY UNKNOWN.

1588, 1589.

"To the RIGHT PUISANTE AND TERRIBLE PRIESTS, my Clergy, Masters of the Confocation House,. or any other of the holy league of subscription: This work I recommend unto them with all my heart, with a desire to see them all so provided for one day as I would wish, which I promise them shall not be at all to their hurt.

"Right poisoned, persecuting, and terrible priests!

.. You are to understand that Dr. Bridges hath written in your defence a most senseless book; and I cannot very often at one breath come to a full point when I read the same. May it please you to give me leave to play the dunce for the nonce as well as he? Otherwise dealing with master doctor's book, I cannot keep decorum persona. And may it please you, if I be too absurd in any place, . . . . . to ride to Sarum and thank his Deanship for it?.....

....

They are petty popes and petty antichrists, whosoever usurp authority of pastors over them who, by the ordinance of God, are to be under no pastors. For none but Antichristian popes and popelings ever claimed this authority unto themselves, especially when it was gainsaid and accounted Antichristian, generally by the most Churches in the world... Therefore our lord bishops as John of Canterbury, Thomas of Winchester, (I will spare John of London for this time, for it may be he is at bowls, and it is pity to trouble my good brother, lest he should swear too bad,) my reverend prelate of Litchfield, with the rest of that swinish rabble, are petty antichrists, petty popes, proud prelates, intolerable · withstanders of reformation, enemies of the Gospel, and most covetous, wretched priests. . . . . . For the good-will I bear to the reverend brethren, I will speak as loud as ever I can. . . . . . Neither they nor their brood are to be tolerated in any Christian commonwealth, quoth Martin Mar-prelate. There is my judgment of you, brethren. . . . .

"Would your worship know how I can show and convince my brother Bridges to have set down flat treason? Then have at you, Dean! 1. It is treason to affirm her Majesty to be an infidel, or not to be contained in the body of the Church. 2. It is treason to say that one priest or elder may have a lawful superior authority over her Majesty. Take your spectacles then, and spell your own words, and shall find that you have affirmed either of these two points. For you affirm that a priest may have a lawful superiority over the universal body of the Church. And you dare not deny her Majesty to be

you

...

contained within the universal body of the Church. Therefore, to help you spell your conclusion, you have written treason, if you will be as good as your writing.. You will have her Majesty to be subject unto her own subject and servant. . . . . . Thus you see, brother Bridges, Martin Mar-prelate hath proved you to have deserved a cawdel of hempseed and a plaster of neckweed, as well as some of your brethren the papists..

.....

"I care not now an I leave Mass Dean's worship, and be eloquent once in my days.. ... Well, now to mine eloquence, for I can do it, I tell you. Who made the porter of his gate a dumb minister? Dumb John of London. Who abuseth her Majesty's subjects, in urging them to subscribe contrary to law? John of London. Who abuseth the High Commissioners as much as any? John of London. Who is a carnal defender of the breach of the Sabbath, in all places of his abode ? John of London. Who goeth to bowls upon the Sabbath? Dumb, duncetical John of good London hath done all this....

66

May it please you that are lord bishops to show your brother Martin how you can escape the danger of a præmunire, seeing you urge her Majesty's subjects to subscribe clean contrary to the Statute 13 Elizabeth? . . . . . Tell me, what have you to show for yourselves? Her Majesty's prerogative? Have you? Then I hope you have it under seal. No, I warrant you her Majesty is too wise for that. For it shall never be said that she ever authorized such ungodly proceedings. . . . . . Seeing you have nothing to show that it is her Majesty's will, why should any