and afterwards the metropolis of the East Angles; it will be fufficient to obferve, that our topographical Hiftorian has here collected together all that time has fpared of its uneventful hiftory, during the fucceffive governments of the Romans, Saxons, Danes, and Normans, in this ifland. He then proceeds to give a minute hiftorical account of the various ecclefiaftical and civil eftablishments that have anciently been formed, or ftill fubfift, in this place; particularly the bishopric, the various churches, priories, hofpitals, manors, together with an account of Writers that have been natives of this town, ancient coins, natural hiftory, &c. Under this laft head, very little occurs, if we except a latin Thefis on a mineral water at this place, published in 1746 by the late Dr. Manning. In an Appendix, are fubjoined copies of various original papers relating to this borough, thirty-nine in number. We fhall only extract a few particulars from the twenty-third; which contains the account of John le Forrester, Mayor of the borough, in the tenth year of Edward III. A. 1336. It is fo far curious, as it exhibits an authentic account of the value of many articles at that time; being a bill, inferted in the townbook, of the expences attending the fending two light horsemen from Thetford, to the army which was to march against the Scots that year. To two men chofen to go into the army against - For cloth, and to the taylor for making it into two For two pair of gloves, and a stick or staff For two horses For fhoeing these horses For two pair of boots for the light horfemen Paid to a lad for going with the Mayor' (to Lenn) 'to take care of the horses * To a boy for a letter at Lenn.' (viz. carrying it thither) Expences for the horfes of two light horsemen for four days before they departed. * The distance between Thetford and Lynn is about 33 miles. B.... y. ART. Jee ART. VII. An Efay towards attaining a true State of the Character and Reign of King Charles the Firft, and the Caufes of the Civil War. Extracted from and delivered in the very Words of fome of the most authentic and celebrated Hiftorians; viz. Clarendon, Whitelock, Burnet, Coke, Echard, Rapin, Tindal, Neal, &c. Printed for W. Parker, Printer of the General Advertiser. 8vo. 3 s. 6d. 1780. HIS Effay was certainly written many years fince; and, 7.416. poffibly, it may have been published before; though it : is now introduced to the world as a performance entirely new. To us indeed it is new and if it should chance to be an old thing, we hope the candid Reader will put down our total ignorance of it to its true account. This performance is almoft wholly made up of extracts from the hiftories of the feveral writers quoted in the title-page, and of others whose names can throw no great luftre on quotation, and will give but little authority to affection. In the Preface, the Collector gives a fhort account of the principal authors from whom he profeffes to derive his information respecting the character and reign of King Charles. Lord Clarendon, with great propriety, takes the lead: but in the account of this noble hiftorian, our Effayift, either from great ignorance, or great malice, hath attempted to revive a calumny, long fince refuted, refpecting the authenticity of the Hiftory of the Rebellion. This celebrated hiftory, fays the prefent Writer, lies under ftrong fufpicion, if not evident proof, of being further foftened and garbled in favour of that caufe (viz. the royal caufe) by many grofs interpolations and alterations of the Editors. One of them, the learned Mr. Smith of Chrift Church, Oxon, acknowledged upon his death-bed, that himfelf had been concerned in it. "There was (faid he-and they were fome of his laft words, of whofe truth there can be no doubt) a fine hiftory written by Lord Clarendon; but what was published under his name was only patch-work, and might as properly be called the Hiftory of and and for to his knowledge it was altered; nay, that he himself was employed by them to interpolate and alter the original." This infamous flander, thrown on the characters of three very diftinguished churchmen (viz. Dean Aldrich, Bifhop Smaldridge, and Bishop Atterbury) fo haftily caught at by the writer of the prefent Essay, was first published to the world by Oldmigonin is Preface to the History of the Stuarts. The letter which relates this precious anecdote is without a name: though Commonly called Rag Smith, or Captain Rag, on account of his flovenlinefs, owing to fottifhne fs. Rev. it it afterwards turned out to be the production of a certain + Mr. Ducket, one of the leffer heroes of Pope's Dunciad. What is more to be wondered at than the letter itself, is a circumftance which Mr. Oldmixon (whofe truth was always fuppofed to be equal to his candour and judgment!) relates concerning the time when he was fo fortunate as to receive the letter. "I have, (fays this grave hiftorian) in more than one place of my history, mentioned the great reafon there is to fufpect that the Hiftory of the Rebellion, as it was published at Oxford, was not entirely the work of the Lord Clarendon; who did indeed write a history of those times, and I doubt not a very good one: wherein, as I have been told (and I believe truly) the characters of the kings, whofe reigns are here written, were very different from what they appear in the Oxford history, and its copy, Mr. Echard's. I fpeak this by bearfay: but bearfay from a perfon fuperior to all fufpicion, and too illuftrious to be named without leave." Mr. Oldmixon goes on to prefs the matter very hard on an honourable person, and a reverend doctor, who, for aught we know, may be gentlemen in the clouds; for, entrenched behind his fingular modefty, or fomething elfe, he fecures himself by calling on no name, except the name of Mr. Smith, who had been dead near twenty years!" There is now (fays he) in the cuftody of a gentleman of diftinction both for merit and quality, a Hiftory of the Rebellion, of the first folio edition, fcored in many places by Mr. Edmund. Smith of Chrift Church, Oxon, author of that excellent tragedy Phadra and Hippolitus, who himself altered the MS. hiftory, and added what he has there marked, as he confeffed with fome of his laft words before his death. Thefe alterations, written with his own hand, and to be feen by any one that knows it, may be published on another occafion, with a farther account of this discovery. "In the mean time, for the fatisfaction of the Public, I infert a letter entire, which I received fince the last paragraph was written." Could any thing be more opportune? In a moment the point was brought to a decifive iffue! In one paragraph the hiftorian was fpeculating on hearfay. In the other, he was enabled to determine on pofitive evidence. Conjecture was reduced to certainty of a fudden. Surely there was fomething like conjuration in this! But Dr. Johnfon hath given us the beft account of this matter; and we will tranfcribe what he hath faid on the subject, from his Remarks on the Life and Character of Smith, in his late admired edition of the English Poets. + One of the authors of a most contemptible thing against Pope, entitled, Homerides, by Sir Iliad Doggrel. Rev. "Having "Having formed his plan, and collected his materials, for a new tragedy (viz. of Lady Jane Grey) he declared that a few. months would complete his defign: and that he might pursue his work with fewer avocations, he was, in June 1710, invited by Mr. George Ducket to his houfe at Gartham in Wiltfhire. Here he found fuch opportunities of indulgence as did not much forward his fludies, and particularly fome ftrong ale, too delicious to be refifted. He ate and drank till he found himself plethoric: and then, refolving to cure himself by evacuation, he wrote to an apothecary in the neighbourhood a prefcription of a purge, fo forcible that the apothecary thought it his duty to delay it till he had given notice of its danger. Smith, not pleased with the contradiction of a shopman, and boastful of his own knowledge, treated the notice with rude contempt, and swallowed his own medicine, which, in July 1710, brought him to the grave. He was buried at Gartham. "Many years afterwards Ducket communicated to Oldmixon the hiftorian, an account pretended to have been received from Smith, that Clarendon's Hiftory was, in its publication, corrupted by Aldrich, Smallridge, and Atterbury, and that Smith was employed to forge and infert the alterations. "The story was published triumphantly by Oldmixon, and may be fuppofed to have been eagerly received: but its progrefs was foon checked; for finding its way into the Journal of Trevoux, it fell under the eye of Atterbury, then an exile in France, who immediately denied the charge, with this remarkable particular, that he never in his whole life had once spoken to Smith:-his company being, as must be inferred (viz. from his abandoned morals, and grofs licentioufnefs) not accepted by those who attended to their characters. "The charge was afterwards very diligently refuted by Dr. Burton of Eaton; a man eminent for literature, and, though not of the fame party with Aldrich and Atterbury, too ftudious of truth to leave them burthened with a falfe charge. The teftimonies which he hath collected have convinced mankind that either Smith or Ducket were guilty of wilful and malicious falfehood. This controverfy brought into view those parts of Smith's life, which, with more honour to his name might have been concealed." Let all thefe circumftances be put together, and, we think, it will appear evident to every candid perfon, that the pretended difcovery of which Oldmixon vaunted fo freely, even in the title-page of his hiftory, was, in fact, nothing but an im-' Smith died in the year 1710, and Oldmixon's History was published in 1730. Rev. 2 posture, pofture, invented folely for the purpose of detracting from the credit of Lord Clarendon's Hiftory, and fixing a foul opprobrium on fome diftinguished characters of the church, whofe great talents had excited the envy of the adverfe party. As for the ftrefs laid on Smith's dying declaration, it now appears that there was no foundation for the folemnity with wch it is introduced. Ducket, in his letter, fimply fays, that Smith made him a vifit about June 1710, and continued at his house about fix weeks, and died there.' One would imagine, from the serious manner in which the writer of this Effay expreffes himself, that Smith had made a formal discovery of the villany in which he had borne a part, with two Bifhops and a Dean, from an honeft impulse of confcience at the moment when he thought he was foon to appear before the great Judge of all, to give an account of himself and his actions. This was by no means the cafe. There is not the flightest hint of such an awful process of confeffion, even in Ducket's letter; and, from Dr. Johnfon's account (which he had from the best authority) we learn that his death was too fudden and unexpected to admit of thofe particular enumerations of forged and interpolated paffages, which Oldmixon, and this Writer after him, would fain make their readers believe were furreptitiously foifted into Lord Clarendon's History. We are obliged, both from truth and candour, to make these free remarks on this flagrant mifreprefentation of a circumftance, that, having undergone the most rigorous fcrutiny, had been long fince brought to a decided iffue, by the mutual suffrages of the moft oppofite parties. The principal defign of this Effay is to fix the blackest ftigma of guilt and infamy on the character and principles of King Charles. From the cradle to the fcaffold he is exhibited in the moft odious point of view, and loaded with every foul accufation that can difgrace humanity, and bring royalty itself into contempt. The Author endeavours to fupport his allegations by producing a number of extracts from a variety of hiftorians. The design is invidious, and the execution of it is conducted on a partial and illiberal plan. King Charles is no favourite character of ours :-far, very far from it! But he was not the abhorred tyrant, the merciless perfecutor, the invidious hypocrite, the perjured villain, he is here reported to be. In detached views, and by partial quotations, he may be fo reprefented; but this is not giving us the TRUE idea of the general character of King Charles. B...k. We |