66 66 66 66 66 " and detestation of them, and take away that cre"dit which now they have, and daily employ, to "the danger of her majestie's estate. Being urged "to give some present teste of their loyal affection "to her majesty, which they so greatly pretend, thereby the better to incline her majesty to some compassion or regard for them; they only dis"cover thus much in generality, that there are great numbers of jesuits and priests now in England, and one of them sayeth, at the least six hundred, which have their diet and maintenance " in certain houses by turns. Their ordinary way "of repayre thither is through Scotland, and so "into the north parts. They also accuse some offi"cers of the ports, and namely, those of Gravesend, "for suffering too free passage out of England; "whence there come daily young men over, which "are presently conveyed to the colleges at Douay, "or Rome, and from thence some of them, against "their wills, into Spain; and many forced to pro"fess themselves of some order or other, when they meant it not. They also think, that this subscription before mentioned, is laboured in England, by those jesuits and priests that are there. "But being pressed to some more particular discovery, their answer is, they will reserve that, "till they see what hope there is of obtaining their "suit and Paget sayeth, he had almost been un"done by some advertisements he wrote over out "of the Low Countries, which makes him very 66 66 wary not to bereave himself of all means of living "on this side the sea with safety, till he may be "assured of a safe retreat there. C 2 There is also in this towne, one Cecill a priest, "who professeth the same intention and desire with them; and the like they affirm to be in "almost all the English gentlemen in the Low Countries, except sir William Stanley, and "Owen, and some three or four more." XXXVI. 2. Circumstances attending the Spanish Party-two Publications of their School. THE earl of Leicester had appointed sir William Stanley governor of the town of Daventer: sir William betrayed the town to count Taxis the Spanish general; and, for his reward, was appointed governor of it by the king of Spain. This circumstance excited great indignation in England. To defend it, cardinal Allen published his "Letter on "the reddition of Daventer." He asserted in it, that "the wars of the English in the Low Coun"tries were sacrilegious, the wars of an heretical prince;" that "acts done in England since the excommunication of the queen, and her deposi"tion by Pius, were evil, therefore she could denounce no war, nor could any of her subjects "serve her, as she was a rebel to the apostolic see. He expresses "a wish that the example of "sir William might be generally imitated." This publication gave great offence*. 66 66 66 66 Allen was naturally mild, and a lover of peaceful Sir William Stanley's conduct was also justified by father Persons, in his "Manifestation," (ch. iv.), a publication which we shall afterwards notice. councils; but felt strongly for the sufferings of his catholic brethren; he could not be otherwise than grateful to Philip the second, for his munificence both to him and those under his care: the college, which he had founded, depended greatly on the bounty of that monarch, and he was the principal support of other catholic establishments, in which Allen took great interest. This placed Allen in a state of dependence on Philip; Persons also, the soul of the Spanish party, had great weight with Allen. These circumstances probably influenced him on this and other occasions; sometimes, perhaps, against his own opinion and better judgment. The authors of the Biographia Britannica intimate that, towards the close of his life, he altered his sentiments, and was far from being an enemy either to his country or to queen Elizabeth*. * Some of Allen's contemporaries assert, that Persons had too great an ascendancy over him, and lament the circumstances: they assert also, that before his death Allen thought less favourably than he had done, both of Persons and the society to which Persons belonged; but for this, the writer has discovered little evidence. More says, in his History, (p. 162), that " the establishment of the college at St. Omers, " in the eyes of Allen and Barrett, the president of the college "at Douay, did not please them; they thought it like to "draw the scholars and collections designed for Douay col"lege, and more like to empty than to serve that establish"ment." Watson, (Quodlibets, 79, 80, 98), mentions that, "in those days," meaning the latter part of the life of Allen, -"the jesuits represented the cardinal as their enemy; that "he had heard Allen much complain of the jesuits' heady “and indiscrete government, and say their government was naught; and that they never would mend it, for they would 66 The other publication, which our subject now leads us to mention, was attributed to father Persons. It is intituled, "A Conference about the "next Succession to the Crown of England, had "in the year 1593, by R. Doleman. It turns on these positions;-that the claim of succession to any government, by nearness of blood, is not established by the law of nature, or by the divine law, but only by the human and positive laws of every particular commonwealth; and consequently may, upon just causes, be varied ;-that this is clear from history:-that the want of the true religion is a just cause for excluding the heir apparent ;—and that, under all circumstances, the infanta of Spain had the fairest pretensions to succeed queen Elizabeth in the throne of England. Every true whig must admire Doleman's discussions of the first point; every man of learning, and every antiquary, must be pleased with his discussion of the second: the king of Spain could not have rewarded, too munificently, his discussions of the third and fourth. This work has been attributed to cardinal Allen, "not hear advice; that while he lived, he would keep them "all down, but that, after he was dead, we should see the "scholars and they at woeful dissentions; that the cardinal, tr (who had by father Persons and other jesuits been drawn "to some odious attempts against his sovereign and country, "by withdrawing himself from those attempts), incurred the "hatred of the jesuits to that degree, that they spoke with " contempt of him ever after."-But Watson's testimony must always be heard with distrust. The same, however, is said by Dr. Champney, (Dialogue 65, 66, 78, 79). sir Francis Englefield, and father Persons: the fact seems to be, that all had some hand in it, but that Persons almost always held the pen*: he was so * See the "Answer to Memoirs of Panzani," p. 152 :--and Persons's "Manifestation of the great folly and bad spirit of "certain persons in England calling themselves Secular "Priests," ch. v. It mentions Doleman's work with affection. Persons exultingly proclaims, (Brief Apology, p. 187), that his envious brethren could not turn their hands to any one thing contained in it; and in the "Manifestation," (p. 63, 64), he gives an abridgment of it. He says, that the name of Doleman was taken by the author in the title-page, as being the work of a man of dole, that is, of sorrow, (p. 5.)— The Manifestation is written with too much bitterness; contains many hazarded accusations; and is particularly unjust to the secular clergy, in charging upon the whole body the "Important Considerations and Quodlibets of Watson;" which we have noticed before, and shall notice again. Persons himself afterwards did justice to the secular clergy. In his "Doleful Knell of Thomas Bell, 8vo. 1627, (p. 35)," he says, "that not three or two names of the secular clergy can be produced, that ever let forward, yea or ever liked that most "detestable proceeding, viz. of publishing the Quodlibets, "Important Considerations, and other things of Watson." It is observable, that, in this publication, father Persons avows, in its fullest extent, the doctrine that sovereigns forfeit their right to the allegiance of their subjects, and that subjects forfeit their right of inheritance by heresy. He cites (ch. iv.) a work in which he was charged with having said, that "difference in religion or matters of faith neither ought 66. nor could by the law of God, of nature, of nations, or custom "ever heard of, in any nation, deprive any inferior subject, (much less any sovereign), from the right of inheritance or "lawful succession by birth or blood to any thing they had a " right to otherwise."-This, he says, is a vile calumny. He declares that," he never said such a thing, that the doctrine "ascribed to him, he detests as fond, absurd, and tasting both |