Brooks - BX9338 .B7 1813 v2

154 LIVES OF THE PURITANS. someof thecharges upon his oath; but because he thought it wrong to accuse himself, or to bring his friends into trouble, Ile refused to answer the rest : and if this would not give satisfaction to his spiritual judges, hewas resolved to submit to whatever punishment they might be disposed to inflict upon him. He was, accordingly, sent to the Fleet ; but by the advice of the treasurer, the archbishop, his old adversary, was not present at his commitment. During the following month, Mr. Cartwright appeared twice before the high commission ; when the above oath was again required of him, but he still refused to take it, because, in his opinion, it was contrary both to the laws of God and the realm. Yet, he was still willing to answer part of the charges upon his oath, and would give them reasons for refusing the rest.. But his judges remaining inflexible, he was sent back to prison, where he continued a long time. Mr. Cartwright was not alone in these sufferings. The rest of his brethren were at thesame time called before the same tribunal ; and refusing the oath, for the same reasons, were committed to various prisons, where they remained several years. May 13, 1591, Mr. Cartwright and his brethren were brought before the star-chamber, where they were treated with much abuse, for refUsing the above oath. And when Counsellor Fuller stood up to plead in behalf of the pri- soners, he was commanded to be silent; and told, that far less crimes than theirs had been punished with the gallies or perpetual banishment, the latter of which, the attorney- general thought proper for them, provided it was to some remote place from whence they might not return.+ From the star-chamber, they were sent back to the high commis- sion, where Bancroft and others had a long and warm dispute with Mr. Cartwright about the oath.$ Bishop Aylmer, on this occasion, threw out several reproaches against Mr. Cartwright, still requiring himto take the oath.§ The attorney-general did the same; and declared how dangerous a thing it was, that men, upon the conceit of Strype'sWhitgift, p. 337, 338. + Ibid. p. 360, 361. t Ibid. p. 362-366. -Strype's Aylmer, p. 310-319. Oneof the reproaches w hich Aylmer cast upon Cartwright, was, that he had deceived the privy council, by informing them that he was afflicted with thegout and sciatica, when that was not the case. Cartwright, how- ever, proved by a written testimonial from his physician, that this accusa- tion was false: but the Archbishop of Canterbury afterwards took this testimonial from Mrs. Cartwright, and refused to restore it again.-Bing. Briton. vol. iii. p. 286. Edit. 1778.