in his conscience, that Charles was so guilty a king, as that it was necessary for the public good to bring him to condign punishment, he ought not to have entered into any measures for the re-establishing him on the throne.

But Ireton is not the only regicide for whom the doctor volunteers his formidable pen. He very generously takes the president of the pretended high court of justice, the inhuman Bradshaw, under his protection. It is rather extraordinary after this, that any of the sanguinary crew should have been exempted from his act of grace, particularly the "illustrious usurper," as the doctor stiles Cromwell, who was obsequiously courted and servilely flattered by Milton.

But the insolent Bradshaw, the object of the great poet's admiration, becomes a particular favourite with our biographer, who lavishes upon him the following panegyric, which, however, is introduced by a sneaking sort of apology.

"Of Bradshaw, branded and blackened as he has been," says Dr. Symmons, "by the violence of party, it may almost be imprudent to hazard a favourable opinion. After an interval, however, of a century and a half the truth may surely be spoken, even of the judge whose office it was to pass sentence upon Charles Stuart: and another age, at some distance from those peculiar circumstances which have unhappily tainted the present with passion and prejudice, will do ample justice, as I doubt not, to a man who was mistaken indeed, and placed in an unfortunate situation, but whose radical and vital principle was public virtue; who would have been honoured in the purest times of Grecian and Roman patriotism, and whose high-souled and consistent independence refused, on more than one occasion, to submit to the will of an imperious and irresistible usurper," (p. 263.)

The introduction and conclusion of this encomium do not well agree; for if the doctor be so proud of his acquaintance, and really thinks that Bradshaw was that "high-souled and virtuous character which he represents him," there was no occasion for setting out with an apology for entertaining this "favourable opinion of him," This testimony to character, however, will hardly be admitted upon the doctor's ipse dixit without some better evidence. That Bradshaw refused on more than one occasion to submit to Cromwell may be true, but if this be the sole proof of bis consistent virtue, it amounts to

nothing.

nothing. Partners as they were in villainy, Bradshaw could not be well supposed readily to submit to Cromwell's usurp ation. He undoubtedly conceived his own importance to be greater, he having sat as judge upon his sovereign. In Dr. Symmons's opinions consistency is every thing; and though he seems to admit, that Bradshaw was mistaken, he yet not only apologizes for his conduct, but he exalts that conduct into the purest patriotism. By the same tule he might have undertaken the defence of almost every conspirator in every age. There are errors which are innocent; but if Bradshaw was under an error, or mistaken in the part which he took against his king, he was eriminal, for ignorance of the line of duty cannot, upon any principle of common sense, be admitted as an excuse for the commission of a crime. But Bradshaw it seems was "placed in an unfortunate situation," and according to what his advocate would insinuate, he was under the necessity of passing sentence upon the king by virtue of his "office as judge." By what authority was he placed in that " unfortunate situation?" and by what law was he guided in the trial itself, or in the sentence which he presumed to pronounce? Was Bradshaw ignorant of the law of the land? was he ignorant of the common principle of justice, that every man is to have a fair trial by his peers? Here all were judges, and all were the avowed enemies of the unfortunate monarch: the mockery of a trial, therefore, was an additional insult upon humanity, when it was evident from the very circumstance itself, and the tragedy which closed it, that the king's death was predetermined. Bradshaw knew this; he was prepared to pass sentence of death upon the king; he knew that he possessed no legitimate authority for the place which he held; and therefore the cold-blooded villain endeavoured to draw from Charles some acknowlegement of the jurisdiction of the court. The repeated attempts which were made to induce the King to relax in his opposition to the authority by which he was arraigned, were so many acts of conscious guilt and meanness, mixed with deliberate cruelty and consummate treachery, so that it is impossible to vindicate Bradshaw, or any other of the regicides, upon any fair and equitable principle.

What Lord Clarendon has said of Bradshaw, will I believe have its weight with most readers of judgment, though from the bias of Dr. Symmons, it is not to be ex

pected

pected that his Lordship is any thing like a favourite with him.

"When Bradshaw was first nominated," says Clarendon," he seemed much surprised, and very resolute to refuse it; which he did in such a manner, and so much enlarging upon his own want of abilities to undergo so important a charge, that it was very evident he had expected to be put to that apology. And when he was pressed with more importunity than could have been used by chance, he required time to consider of it,' and said, he would then give his final answer;' which he did the next day; and with great humility accepted the office, which he administered with all the pride, impudence, and superciliousness imaginable. He was presently invested in great state, and many officers, and a guard assigned for the security of his person, and the Dean's house at Westminster given to him for ever, for his residence and habitation, and a good sum of money, about five thousand pounds, was appointed to be presently paid to him, to put himself in such an equipage and way of living, as the dignity of the office which he held would require. And now the Lord President of the High Court of Justice, seemed to be the greatest magistrate in England. And though it was not thought seasonable to make any such declaration, yet some of those whose opinions grew quickly to ordinances, upon several occasions declared,' that they believed that office wasnot to be looked upon as necessary pro hac vice only, but for continuance; and that he who executed it, deserved to have an ample and a liberal estate conferred upon him for ever:' which sudden mutation and exaltation of fortune, could not but make a great impression upon a vulgar spirit, accustomed to no excesses, and acquainted only with a very moderate fortune*."

Another well-informed writer of that period informs us, that Bradshaw was rewarded for his crime with Summer Hill, a seat of the Earl of St. Alban's, valued at one thousand pounds a year. So much for the" consistent independence" of this "high-souled patriot," the friend of Milton and the subject of Dr. Symmons's praiset.

It is deserving of remark, that what the doctor professes

Walker's History of Independency, part ii. p. 258. The broadbrimmed hat which Bradshaw wore on this occasion, was well guarded with iron, and is now in the Ashmolean Museum at Óxford.

admire

to admire in the regicides, namely, their firmness and consistency, he condemns in the unfortunate Charles. What in the murderers was Roman or Grecian virtue, (for by the bye the Doctor has not gone quite so far as to name it Christian virtue,) was in the victim fatal obstinacy. The resolution of Charles in refusing to sacrifice his principles, and the principles of the constitution, in his negociations with the parliamentary commissioners, is censured with unqualified severity; though, if I mistake not, there is more to be admired in this determined regard to conscience on the part of the captive, trodden-down, and insulted monarch, than there is in the supposed inflexibility and "high-souled independence" of his savage per

secutors.

In my next letter I shall proceed to a fuller vindication of the "royal Martyr," for such I shall still esteem him notwithstanding all that is said to blacken his me mory in the new "Life of Milton."

I am, Sir, &c.

J. W.

ON MR. POULTER'S SERMONS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S

SIR,

MAGAZINE.

HEN an author lays his sentiments before the public, he becomes answerable to the public if those sentiments are erroneous and qualified to mislead. This responsibility particularly attaches to such persons as undertake to be guides and regulators of the public opinion; and most especially in the important concerns of Religion. Admitting this principle, you will require no apology for the following letter.

Religion

In your Magazine for April, is a Review of two Sermons by the Rev. Edmund Poulter, preached in the cathedral at Winchester on the General Thanksgiving, December 5, 1805; and on the general Fast, February 26, 1806. Speaking of the former sermon, you remark how ill the language of adulation and indefinite praise suits with the pulpit; and having passed a severe but just censure on many of the thanksgiving sermons, you judge Mr. Poulter in particular reprehensible for his language on the occasion. And you conclude your animadversions on the Sermons, by some remarks honourable to you both as an independent Author and a Christian.

"To the second discourse," you proceed to say," we have not the same objections as lie, justly in our opinion, against the first; though even in this the preacher enters too much into particular politics."

Soon after I had seen the above criticism, the sermons fell into my hands. I read the former of them with a perfect concurrence with your opinion as far as it went. On beginning the latter, I was prepared by you to expect a discourse too political for my notions of pulpit decorum, but at the same time I looked for nothing which should "overstep the sacred boundaries of Religious Faith."

That I may not be tedious by dwelling on inferior objections, I will confine myself to one passage, in which I found myself most miserably disappointed. The preacher having referred to his former portrait of Lord Nelson, and having added a full length of Mr. Pitt, and a slight sketch of Lord Cornwallis, proceeds to group the three characters in the following picture: " Having been the several luminaries of their respective spheres, and collectively forming a bright constellation of worth fit for Heaven, to which they are removed, may their light still continue to shine on earth, to be a light to lighten the nations, and the glory of thy people, Britain! And as our trust in the mercy of God is, that by their past merits they are themselves saved for ever, may their bright future example, followed by us, tend to preserve us here temporally, till we shall be saved elsewhere eternally, by that gracious God, to whom alone we look both for safety here and salvation hereafter !"

With the style of this panegyric, (faulty enough to be sure) I have nothing to do critically. My business is with, the manner and matter of it as connected with Religion. Vol. XI. Churchm. Mag. Oct. 1806. LI In