15

Merely to drive the time away he ficken'd, Fainted,and died, nor would with ale be quicken'd; Nay," quoth he, on his fwooning bed outftretch'd,

66

"If I mayn't carry, fure I'll ne'er be fetch'd, "But vow, though the cross doctors all stood "hearers,

19

"For one carrier put down to make fix bearers."
Eafe was his chief difeafe; and, to judge right,
He died for heaviness that his cart went light:
His leifure told him that his time was come,
And lack of load made his life burdenfome, 24
That even to his last breath, (there be that fay't)
As he were prefs'd to death, he cried,More weight;
But, had his doings lafted as they were,
He had been an immortal carrier.
Obedient to the moon he spent his date
In courfe reciprocal, and had his fate
Link'd to the mutual flowing of the feas,
Yet (ftrange to think) his wain was his encreafe;
His letters are deliver'd all and gone,

Only remains this fuperfcription f.

30

+ Milton's two copies of Verfes on Hobfon are in Wit Restored in feverall Select Poems not formerly publish't, 12mo. Lond. 1658, p. 84, 85. They are preceded by a copy, from fome other pen, on the fame perfon. Milton's fecond copy appears alfo in A Banquet of Jefts, 12mo. Lond. 1640, p. 129.

"Here Hobfon lyes, who did moft truly prove
"That he could never, &c." TODD.

On the new Forcers of Confcience under the LONG PARLIAMENT.

BECAUSE you have thrown off your Prelate Lord,

And with ftiff vows renounc'd his Liturgy, To feife the widow'd whore Plurality From them whofe fin ye envied, not abhorr'd; Dare ye for this adjure the civil fword

5

Ver. 1. Because you have thrown off your Prelate Lord, &c.] In railing at establishments, Milton condemned not epifcopacy only. He thought even the fimple inftitutions of the new reformation too rigid and arbitrary for the natural freedom of confcience. He contended for that fort of individual or perfonal religion, by which every man is to be his own priest. When thefe verfes were written, which form an irregular fonnet, prefbyterianifm was triumphant: and the independents and the churchmen joined in one common complaint against a want of toleration. The church of Calvin had now its hereticks. Milton's haughty temper brooked no human controul. Even the parliamentary hierarchy was too coercive for one who acknowledged only King Jefus. His froward and refining philofophy was contented with no fpecies of carnal policy. Conformity of all forts was flavery. He was perfuaded, that the modern prefbyter was as much calculated for perfecution and oppreffion as the ancient bishop. T. WARTON.

Ver. 2. And with fiff vows renounc'd his Liturgy,] The Directory was enforced under fevere penalties in 1644. The legislature prohibited the use of the Book of Common Prayer, not only in places of publick worship, but in private families.

T. WARTON.

To force our confciences that Chrift fet free, And ride us with a claffick hierarchy

Taught ye by mere A. S. and Rotherford? Men, whofe life, learning, faith, and pure intent,

Ver. 7. And ride us with a claffick hierarchy] In the prefbyterian church now established by law, there were, among others, claffical affemblies. The kingdom of England, instead of so many diocefes, was now divided into a certain number of Provinces, made up of reprefentatives from the feveral Claffes within their respective boundaries. Every parish had a congregational or parochial prefbytery for the affairs of its own circle; these parochial prefbyteries were combined into Claffes, which chofe representatives for the provincial affembly, as did the provincial for the national. Thus, the city of London being distributed into twelve claffes, each class chose two ministers and four layelders, to represent them in a Provincial Affembly, which received appeals from the parochial and classical presbyteries, &c. These ordinances, which ascertain the age of the piece before us, took place in 1646, and 1647. See Scobell, Coll. P. i.

p. 99. 150. T. WARTON.

Ver. 8. Taught ye by mere A. S.] Doctor Newton fays, "I know not who is meant by A. S. Some book might have been published, figned by these letters, and perhaps an equivoque might also be intended." The independents were now contending for toleration. In 1643, their principal leaders published a pamphlet with this title, " An Apologeticall Narration of fome Minifters formerly exiles in the Netherlands, now members of the Affembly of Divines. Humbly fubmitted to the honourable Houfes of Parliament. By Thomas Goodwyn, Sydrack Sympfon, Philip Nye, Jer. Burroughs, and William Bridge, the authors thereof. Lond. 1643." In quarto. Their fyftem is a middle way between Brownism and prefbytery. This piece was anfwered by one A. S. the perfon intended by Milton. "Some

Obfervations and Annotations upon the Apologeticall Narration, humbly fubmitted to the honourable Houses of Parliament, the moft reverend and learned divines of the Affembly, and all the proteftant churches here in this ifland and abroad. Lond. 1644.”

Would have been held in high esteem with

Paul,

Muft now be nam'd and printed Hereticks

10

In quarto. The Dedication is fubfcribed A. S. The independents then retorted upon A. S. in a pamphlet called "A Reply of the two Brothers to A. S. Wherein you have Obfervations, Annotations, &c. upon the Apologeticall Narration. With a plea for liberty of confcience for the apologifts church-way against the cavils of the faid A. S. formerly called M. S. to A. S. &c. &c. Lond. 1644." In quarto. I quote from the fecond edition enlarged. There is another piece by A. S. It is called a "Reply to the fecond Return." This I have never feen. His name was never known. T. WARTON.

4

His name was well known; and a doughty champion he appears to have been in the polemicks of that time: Witnefs his effufions, entitled "Zerubbabel to Sanballat and Tobiah: or, The firft part of the Duply to M. S. alias Two Brethren, by Adam Steuart, &c. Imprim. March 17, 1644." 4°.-Again, "The fecond part of the Duply to M. S. alias Two Brethren, With a brief Epitome and Refutation of all the whole Indepen dent-Government: Moft humbly fubmitted to the Kings most excellent Majeftie, to the moft Honorable Houfes of Parliament, the most Reverend and Learned Divines of the Affembly, and all the Proteftant Churches in this island and abroad, by Adam Steuart. Imprim. Octob. 3. 1644.” 4o. In this fecond part the obfervations of the Two Brethren are stated, and the replies all commence with A. S. prefixed. Poffibly Milton ridicules this minutenefs, in here writing only "mere A. S." However, th Tracts, above stated, contain in their title-pages the name at large. See alfo "An Anfwer to a Libell intitled A coole conference betweene the clecred Reformation and the Apologeticall Narration, brought together by a Well-willer to both &c. By Adam Steuart. Lond. 1644." 4°. I have found him called, in other tracts of the time, Doctor A. Steuart, a Divine of the Church of Scotland. TODD.

. Ver. 8. Rotherford?] Samuel Rutherford, or Rutherfoord, was one of the chief commiffioners of the church of Scotland,

By fhallow Edwards and Scotch what d'ye call: But we do hope to find out all

your tricks,

who fate with the Affembly at Westminster, and who concurred in fettling the grand points of prefbyterian difcipline. He was profeffor of divinity in the univerfity of Saint Andrew's, and has left a great variety of Calvinistick tracts. He was an avowed enemy to the independents, as appears from his Disputation on pretended liberty of confcience, 1649. This was answered by John Cotton a Separatist of New England. It is hence eafy to fee, why Rotherford was an obnoxious character to Milton. Rutherford's Letters, called Joshua Redivivus, are the most genuine fpecimen I remember to have feen of the enthusiastick cant of the old Scotch divines: more particularly of the eloquence of those preachers, who opposed the hierarchy in Scotland about 1637. Their ninth edition, and what is more wonderful in an enlightened age, with a laboured Preface high in their commendation, appeared at Glafgow fo late as the year 1765. 8vo. The editor fays, that his author's "praife is already in the churches." In what church, profeffing any degree of rational religion? T. WARTON.

Ver. 12. By fhallow Edwards] It is not the Gangrena of Thomas Edwards that is here the object of Milton's refentment, as Doctor Newton and Mr. Thyer have fuppofed. Edwards had attacked Milton's favourite plan of independancy, in a pamphlet full of miferable invectives, immediately and profeffedly levelled against the Apologeticall Narration abovementioned, and entitled "Antapologia, or a full anfwer to the Apologeticall Narration, &c. Wherein is handled many of the Controverfies of these times, by T. Edwards minifter of the gofpel, Lond. 1644.” In quarto. But Edwards had fome time before published his opinions against congregational churches, "Reasons against the independent government of particular congregations: as alfo against the toleration of fuch churches to be erected in this kingdome. Together with an answer to fuch reafons as are commonly alledged for a toleration. Prefented in all humility to the honourable houfe of Commons, &c. &c. By Thomas Edwards, &c. Lond. 1641." In quarto. However, in the Gangrena, not less than in thefe two tracts, it had been his business to blacken the oppo