appearance than the pursuivants scoured city and country to find Waldegrave. He was a person specially disliked by the Archbishop, who would listen to almost any suit rather than to one in his behalf. Even the Lord Treasurer could obtain no favor for him at the hands of his Grace. Upon one

occasion, a certain man had received a bribe of five pounds to betray him, and for that purpose had led the pursuivants in disguise to the house of a tinker in Kingston. But so great was the disappointment, for the bird had flown, -that the guide was thrust into prison for having defrauded his employers.3 Waldegrave had been "so often in prison, that it seemed the prelates made a common occupation thereof.” These commitments seem to have been grounded upon mere suspicion. The object seems to have been to extort a disclosure of what he knew by the terrors of imprisonment and the threat of the rack.5 The rack he had never tasted, but at one time, at least, he received a hundred lashes.6 Previous to 1588 he had been committed, on suspicion merely, no less than six times; now for a longer, now for a shorter term. His house-apparently when he was in concealment had been repeatedly rifled by the pursuivants of his Grace and of the Bishop of London, to the great terror of his wife, the only protector of "six small children.” 8

ried Waldegrave to prison, and in this " prison "his Grace was so good unto him as to help him to an hundred marks over the shoul

4 66 Hay any Work,” &c., 65 – 68. ders.” 5 Ibid., 67.

6 Ibid., 66. I cannot otherwise interpret the words, "So they car

30.

7 Ibid., 68.

8 Ibid., 67. Martin's "Epistle,"

In 1584 he had printed "The Practice of the Prelates";1 in 1586, "The Complaint of the Commonalty of England"; 2 at another time, "A Learned Man's Judgment"; and at other times, other like tracts. By some By some means the Commissioners had gathered sufficient evidence of these his offences to warrant his prosecution under the decree of 1585. Upon conviction he had been sent to the White Lion for the term of six months designated in the fourth section of the decree. At the same time, his press, tools, and type had been utterly destroyed, although his craft-brethren, in pity to his dependent family, and to save them from absolute penury, had offered to purchase the whole at a fair value. He was also "disabled to use or exercise the art or feat of imprinting." Once convicted of offences so rank in the eyes of the Commissioners, he had felt himself even more insecure than before from personal outrage. Thus, after his release, he had found it

"4

1 Ante, Vol. II. 448.

2 For the date of this print, see a list of the Tracts composing the “Parte of a Register"; Maskell's History of the Martin Mar-prelate Controversy," 26, note (London, 1845). Dr. Bancroft, however, says that “The Complaint" was presented to Parliament in 1585. (Hicks, 262.)

3 Hay any Work for Cooper, 68; where twenty weeks is stated as the time. But I cannot think that a person so extremely obnoxious to the bishops would have suffered less than the prescribed penalty.

4 Martin's 66 Epistle," 30; compared with the Decree, in Strype's Whitgift, Appendix, p. 95.

I can

There is an utter lack of dates in Martin's statements here about Waldegrave; nor can I supply the lack from any other source. only determine that the facts must have occurred before the midsummer of 1588; from which time to 1589 Waldegrave's history is known. I have no express authority for connecting the destruction of his press with the (unknown) time of his conviction. I do it only because this was his only conviction which I find recorded, and because the demolition of his property must have followed such conviction as a matter of course.

necessary to forsake his home, to leave his destitute family with Him who heareth the young ravens, and to keep himself in concealment.1 But, as we shall soon see, his spirit had not been broken.

Thus vigorous had been the struggle between the ecclesiastical government and the Puritan Free Press. With equal vigor, and in a sterner spirit, it was about to be renewed.

By the destruction of Waldegrave's press, the Puritans had been deprived of the means of publication. To arrange for the establishment and management of another press was the object of the meeting at Fawsley.2 Sir Richard Knightley was "no sectary," and seems to have been satisfied with the constitution of the English Church. But he was interested in the cause of Church reform so far as to have the ministry purged of unlearned and "bad" men, who held almost all the livings in the kingdom. He was therefore willing to associate himself with the few ancient families in the neighborhood who espoused the Puritan cause, and particularly to aid by his protection and purse the new enterprise now projected.3

Penry, who was present at this conference, though much disliking the constitution of the Church, and especially its political element and abuses, cared but little about it in comparison with that which absorbed his soul, -the zealous propagation of the Gospel, especially in his own country of Wales. He objected to prelacy indeed, and to the prelates them

1 Martin's "Epistle," 30.

2 Waddington's Penry, 22.

3 Hargrave, VII. 30. Waddington's Penry, 21.

selves. But to them, not so much because they were prelates, and not so much because, being prelates, they enforced "superstitious and corrupt ceremonies," as because, interposing their factitious authority, they barred, especially in the land of his birth, the progress of revealed truth. It was mainly to arouse the public conscience against this crying sin that he was resolute to operate through a press independent of prelatic control. The great object of the other members of the conclave was to commend the Presbyterian form of Church government, in opposition to the Prelatic.2

Notwithstanding some conjectural assertions to the contrary, we find no evidence that any gross methods of attack upon the persons or offices of the hierarchy were contemplated by any who were present.3

The result of their deliberations may be briefly stated. It was resolved to set in operation another

1 Waddington's Penry, 22, 23. 2 Ibid.

3 Mr. Field's words, in conversation with Dr. Pearson, in 1572, have been improperly quoted as indicating a purpose to adopt that coarse, virulent, personal satire which soon issued from the press set in operation by this assembly of Puritans. (Maskell, 24.) But the very words of Mr. Field · discreetly omitted by Mr. Maskell — show the contrary; for he added, "God knoweth we meant to speak against no man's person, but their places and existing corruptions." (Ante, Vol. I. 442, 443.)

Penry, 23, 24) represents that at this meeting the question was debated whether jeering, satirical pens should, or should not, be employed against the persons of the bishops. The language which he quotes is to be found in Fuller's Church History (Book IX. p. 193). It seems to me that Fuller represents the way in which some persons justified Martin Mar-prelate after his books had appeared. But I think it is clear, that so much of what he states on the other side as is quoted by Dr. Waddington, Fuller gives as his own opinions; not as those of "the more discreet and devout

Even Dr. Waddington (Life of sort" among the Puritans.

press, and to procure Waldegrave as the masterprinter. As it was certain that the most determined search would be made so soon as a new Puritan book should appear, the care and chief management of the press were intrusted to Penry, although-and it is a and it is a point of some historic importance- he could neither monopolize its use, nor dictate what it should or should not issue.1 The press was to be free, so far, at least, as it could be without obligating the printer to set up matter against his will.

The ardent young Welshman accepted the trust, and immediately betook himself to his work; procuring a press, and securing the services of Waldegrave. About the middle of July2 he applied to Sir Richard Knightley to provide shelter for the press, that he might reprint his "Treatise and Supplication to Parliament, that beforetime was printed at Oxford." This Sir Richard "did incline an ear unto, the rather in respect of the want of learning which he knew to be in the ministry." Yet, for some unknown reason, the first reprint of this work was issued elsewhere.

There was in London a widow, Mrs. Crane, of whom we know only that she was a high-spirited, courageous woman, who could insist anywhere upon her legal rights, who befriended the Puritans, and entered heart and hand into their new enterprise. She had a country seat at Mouldsey, on the other side of the Thames, a part of which she offered for

1 Waddington's Penry, 35.

2 " About James-tide," 1588; Hargrave, VII. 30. For this date

of 1588, see below, Chap. VII. p. 297, note 2.

3 Hargrave, VII. 30.