604

The Originality of Milton's Portrait afcertained.

father's picture, does not prove that the might not have been ftill more ftruck with the likeness of the miniature. One is at a loss to know upon what ground it is affumed (by a perfon who never faw the picture or the print), that, if Faithorne's be like, the miniature is not like; and ftill lefs can it be conceived why he thinks that "the likeness in Sir Joshua's picture cannot be a ftriking likeness of Milton, whatever it may be of Selden." How came Selden into his head? Here fome fufpicion arises that he has feen the picture and the print, a circumstance which he choofes to conceal, as the comment by Sir Joshua on the print wou'd have prevented the parade of his criticism.

The opinion of Sir Joshua Reynolds, in matters relating to his own profeffion, certainly ought to have fome weight. He is not likely to be wanting in that skill to which every other artist pretends, namely, to form fome judgement of the likenefs of a picture without knowing the original. It appears that Sir Joshua told Warton, that he was perfectly fure that "the picture in his poffeffion was a ftriking likeness, and that an idea of Milton's countenance cannot be got from any of the other pictures." Without being an artift, it is eafily perceived that the pic ture of Faithorne does not poffefs that individuality of countenance which is in the miniature.

There is fomething very perverfe in be lieving that an ordinary, common-place portrait, painted by an engraver for the purpose of making a print from it, fhould be preferred, or be fuppofed to be more like, than the beft picture of the first miniature painter, perhaps, that ever lived. Cooper poffeffed all the correctnefs, precifion, and all the attention to peculia rity of expreffion, which we admire in Vandyke; whereas Faithorne imitated, as well as he could, the lax and vicious manner then introduced by Sir Peter Lely, who, though upon the whole an ingenious artist, ftands in the first rank of what the painters call mannerifts. We may add, in regard to Faithorne, that, however he might be diftinguished among his contemporaries, and fince by the curious in old prints, his merit as an engraver (and much lefs as a painter), were he now living, would not raise him above the rank of the common herd of artifts. It does not appear that Deborah Milton, when Faithorne's picture was fhewn to her, faid any thing to confirm us in the opinion of its being fo ex

[July,

tremely like: fhe exclaimed, “O, Lord! that is the picture of my father." She probably had feen the picture before, and it is even probable that she was prefent when it was painted; and, when the faw it again, the immediately recognized it, as fhe would have done her father's watch, buckles, or any other appendage to his perfon.

There is no doubt but that Milton fat to Faithorne for that crayon picture; the diftinguishing features are the fame as in the miniature; the fame large eyelid, the fame fhaped nofe and mouth, and the fame long line which reaches from the noftril to below the corners of the mouth, and the fame head of hair; but if the effect and expreflion of the whole together fhould be, as in fact it is, different in the two pictures, it cannot, I fhould think, be difficult for us to determine on which fide our faith ought to incline, even though neither poffeffed any strong marks of identity.

All the objections that have been made by your correfpondent, I hope, have been answered, and fome, perhaps, which the reader will think were fcarcely worthy of an anfwer. There is no occafion to take notice of objections which are made in order to be confuted, namely, the pains the Critick takes to obviate a fuppofition which nobody ever fuppofed, that the writer of the memorandum on the back might, by mistake, write ber death inftead of his death. This is to raife conjectures in order to triumph in their confutation!

Mr. Tyrwhitt, to whom the miniature was fhewn at the Archbishop of York's Table, and whofe fkill in matters of this kind is univerfally acknowledged, fcouted the queftion which was there put to him, Whether he thought the manufcript was a late fabrication? "The orthography, as well as the colour of the ink, fhews it to have been written about a hundred years fince." He then remarked the mistake of the writer in fuppofing that Deborah Milton was dead at the time he wrote; and, though your correfpondent thinks that this millake is a fufficient reafon for calling the whole a palpable fiction, we may realonably oppofe Mr. Trwhitt's opinion to that of your anonymous correfpondent, of whom we may lay, if he had pottetfed a greater fhare of critical fagacity, he would have remarked, that even the miltake of fuppofing Deborah Milton to be dead when he wrote fhews it to be not what he calls it, a fiction. A man who deals in fic

606

Vindication of Bishop Robert Ferrar.

formed Church, even after the expiration of more than 160 years; fo abominably and alarmingly permanent have been their diabolical prejudices and inveteracy !

One moft extraordinary infance of this inceffant, implacable perfecution, is the brutal and unjustifiable treatment which at various periods has been fhewn to the manes of the worthy and pious, but infulted prelate, Robert Ferrar, once Bifhop of St. David's, and one of the Right Reverend Martyrs during the bigoted reign of Queen Mary. In defi ance of the particular and impartial account of the violent and fanguinary proceedings againft, and the full juftification of, this righteous man, in Fox's celebrated Acts and Monuments, feveral venomous pens have been barbaroufly exercised in traducing and blasting his facred memory. That pliant and fimoniacal prelate Bishop Godwin, 1616, began the attack; though by him this Martyr is ftyled "learned and pious; a man undoubtedly good and holy, but rigid, and in his remper fomewhat uncourteous`;" which Godwin declares to have been in Ferrar an hereditary difpofition; yet without taking notice of this venerable Bishop's noble defcent from thofe heroic champions of liberty, the Ferrars Earls of Derby, whofe great eftates, owing to their generous ftruggles in the public caufe, were at length feized, and applied to build up that of the Lancaltrian Duchv. Bishop Godwin candidly owns, that Robert Ferrar, in the reign of Edward VI. was perfecuted as a partizan of the Great Duke of Somerset his patron, without branding him with the infamy with which fucceeding scribes (on no other grounds than what Fox has honeftly exhibited) have moft fpirefully afperfed his character. Godwin infers, that, if Bishop Ferrar had accommodated himfelt, and yielded to the times, he might have efcaped his bloody perfecutors; but, a ftranger to flattery and diffimulation, he irritated the cruel nature of Gardiner.

Next to Godwin was the quaint, partial, Papiflical Anthony Wood, fabricator of the Athena Oxonienfes; which book, for the bate libels in it, was burnt by a public decree, and himself expelled from Oxford. See Kenner's Hiftory of England, 1693. In the Biographical Dictionary, vol. XII. 8vo. Wood is thus reprefented: "His narrownefs of mind, and furious prejudices, are unpardonable; his fcandal holds forth no example

66

[July,

but his own depraved mind." In Bishop Barlow's Remains it is faid of Wood: Many bad charaers are caft on good men-nay, our first Reformers are made fanaticks;" allo," Wood was too favourable to Papiits."

Bishop Kennet fays, "Of the Jacobites, and even of Papifts, Wood has always fpoken the most favourable things." Therefore this despicable writer thould have been here unnoticed, but for two cogent realons. Firs, an enlarged edition of Wood's Athena is juft at this time coming abroad. If the learned editor fhould unhappily adopt the miferable prejudices contained in that work, it may be fatal to his performance; but, from fome perfonal reafons, 1 entertain a more liberal opinion of that erudite Librarian: yet in a voluminous compilation, and for want of particular information, fome former errors may efcape uncorrected. He is therefore hereby refpe&ifully defired, concerning Bifhop Ferrar, to have recourfe to the original magazine of intelligence in Fox's Martyrology. He will there fee, that the charges fet on foot against that worthy Prelate, prefently on his tranflation from Sodor and Man, merely as the Duke of Somerfet's partizan, are moftly of a very frivolous nature; and that the others are as groundless as virulent, and all of them fully and fatisfactorily anfwered: contrary to the falfe and injurious affertions of the noted Dr. Browne Willis, in his borrowed account of St. David's Cathedral; which, as it is likely foon to be enlarged upon, is my fecond reafon for fpeaking of Wood's Athena, as from thence Browne Willis (whofe kidney is as difcoverable in his commendations of Archbishop Laud, as in his impertinence refpecting Bishop Ferrar) profetles principally to have deduced his viper-like accufations, and judiciary condemnation, of this great prelate ;whom Bishop Godwin, a whole century before, declared to have been learned, pious, good, and holy, but a strenuous opponent of Popery: and this too (by Willis) juft after the Proteftant fucceffion; though probably in an account moft hopefully prepared before, notwithftanding its paffing the prefs a little after, the rebellion of 1715. But Willis has clofed his detellable accufation with fome dogmatical words of Bifhe P Burnet, whole account. (vol. II. p 218.) is this: " Ferrar, a rafh, indifcreet man, drew on himfelf the diflike of the Prebendaries. Alany articles were objected

yielding up every thing to craving cour tiers. But the fall of his patron put a ftp to his unworthy measures; and he was defervedly imprifoned, even in Edward VI's reign, by the Precentor and other Canons, for his dishonesty, &c. where he continued the remaining part of that reign: and on Queen Mary's acceffion, being adjudged an beretick, he was filenced and degraded; and, having no friends to intercede for him, was, &c. -as may be feen at large in Fox's Book of Martyrs, where are given no less than fifty-fix articles exhibited against him, with his anfwers, though infuficient IIntolerable would this account be at any time; but execrable, juft after the Hanoverian fucceffion; juft after the defeat of Jacobitical rebellion; when Proteftant principles were in their meridian glory, and Papal Antichrift had juft received a critical blow. This was a period when we would fuppofe that not even Papiftical fpleen could have dared in invidious and moft cenforious terms to accufe a Proteftant Prelate, who died in fupport of the Reformation, in the first place of being a married man, and a promoter of that Reformation, who readily refigned his priory (like a hundred others) to fovereign power. Next he is alledged to have been a most fervile tool of courtiers; though, on the contrary, it is known that he was incapable of adulation; fee Godwin, Burnet, &c. : and that he was a miferable dilapidator, though. he even got the temporalities restored to that fee. But his patron's fall put a ftop to his unworthy measures." Where is the proof of thofe unworthy measures and difhonefty, on account of which Willis prefumes to decide that this good Prelate was defervedly imprifoned; nay more, he was adjudged "sa heretick."

to him; fome, as if he had incurred a pramunire for acting in his courts in his own name, not in the King's; fome, for neglecting his charge; and fome for little indecencies, as going Arangely ba bited, travelling on foot, whistling impertinently with many other things, which, if true, fhewed in him much weaknefs and folly. The beaviest articles he denied yet he was kept in prifon; and commiffioners, fent into Wales, took many depofitions against him. In prifon till Queen Mary's time, he was then kept in on account of his belief. But his fuffering afterwards for his confcience (when Morgan, his chief accufer before, being then his Judge, condemned him for herefy, and made room for him felf to be a Bishop, by burning bim) did much turn people's cenfures from bim upon his fucceffor." But Burnet afferts that he was rafb and indifcreet, without any fpecimen; and mentions lit. tle indecencies, which, if true, were in ftances of folly,-but never examines if they were true or not. The most hei nous of these indecencies, that incurred burning alive, were whifling (Burnet adds, impertinently), walking on foot, and in a firange babit. It seems the Bifhop was once obferved to cherup to his infant fon, a capital crime with thofe who infift on clerical celibacy; and, on the fudden appearance of a feal in Milford Haven, the prelate, in furprize, was enormously guilty of crying-Whew! He also was unfortunately fond of walking; and there being then nothing like turnpike-roads in Wales, walking was often abfolutely neceffary in the crofs roads to various parishes; and that without pomp or pontificals. It is fufficient that the great charges against him, fuch as the neglect of duty and the matter of the pramunire, were denied, and (mau- Ahah! thou bigot! that even by thy gre Willis) unproved, as may be feen at cruel filence doft matfacre over again full in Fox. What then can we think a glorious martyr, plainly fubfcribing to of the following infamous affinating this heretical guilt, even in a Proteftant relation in Browne Willis, who (of him- reign! which indeed is a noble proof of felf) has faid little in his book but this its toleration, in oppofition to Papistical invective, and Laud's encomium! Ro- perfecution. Whether the good Bithop ber: Ferrar, a married man, born at Ha- anfwers to the articles exhibited against lifax in Yorkshire, and at the time of him, I too refer to Fox's Martyrs every the diffolution of the priory of Noftell candid reader. No Proteftant will con (which he, being a promoter of the Receive that Bishop Ferrar would have formation, readily yielded up into the King's hands, and obtained a falary of 100l. per annum) fucceeded, by the intereft of the Duke of Somerfet, to this fee [of St. David's], and had the temporalities restored, July 1, 1548; where he became a most miferable dilapidator,

yielded to declare his lawful wife a harlot,-his lawful iffue, baftards,—or the Pope's power to indulge criminals in their crimes. But all hope of restoring this Antichriftian traffick in Britain was finally deftroyed at the decifive battle of Culleden: Proteftant principles are tri

umphant;

608 Bp. Ferrar's Family.-Concife Account of Widworthy. [July,

WYDWORTHIE (the ancient the Monday after St. Matthew's day. It