(Æneid, xi. 220.)' There is no copy of Virgil now in the Library amongst those which it possessed previously to 1642, which is 'exquisitely bound' as well as 'nobly printed;' it is not therefore possible to fix on the particular volume which the King consulted. A.D. 1645. A small slip of paper, carefully preserved, is the memorial of an interesting incident connected with the last days in Oxford of the Martyr-King whose history is so indissolubly united with that of the place. Amidst all the darkening anxieties which filled the three or four months preceding the surrender of himself to the Scots, King Charles appears to have snatched some leisure moments for refreshment in quiet reading. His own library was no longer his; but there was one close at hand which could more than supply it. So, to the Librarian Rous, (the friend of Milton, but whose anti-monarchical tendencies, we may be sure, had always hitherto been carefully concealed) there came, on Dec. 30, an order, 'To the Keeper of the University Library, or to his deputy,' couched in the following terms: 'Deliver unto the bearer hereof, for the present use of his Majesty, a book intituled, _Histoire universelle du Sieur D'Aubigné_, and this shall be your warrant;' and the order was one which the Vice-Chancellor had subscribed with his special authorization, 'His Majestyes use is in commaund to us. S. Fell, Vice Can.' But the Librarian had sworn to observe the Statutes which, with no respect of persons, forbad such a removal of a book; and so, on the reception of Fell's order, Rous 'goes to the King; and shews him the Statutes, which being read, the King would not have the booke, nor permit it to be taken out of the Library, saying it was fit that the will and statutes of the pious founder should be religiously observed[104].' Perhaps a little of the hitherto undeveloped Puritan spirit may have helped to enliven the conscience of the Librarian, who, had he been a Cavalier, might have possibly found something in the exceptional circumstances of the case, to excuse a violation of the rule; but, as the matter stood, it reflects, on the one hand, the highest credit both on Rous's honesty and courage, and shows him to have been fit for the place he held, while, on the other hand, the King's acquiescence in the refusal does equal credit to his good-sense and good-temper. We shall see that this occurrence formed a precedent for a like refusal to the Protector in 1654 by Rous's successor, when Cromwell showed equal good feeling and equal respect for law. [104] Bp. Barlow's Argument against Lending Books. _MS._ A.D. 1646.