To the class of Cambridge theologians probably belongs John Moore, consecrated Bishop of Norwich in 1691, who is described as enjoying Burnet’s confidence, and as being consulted by him in the composition of his works. But Moore was one of a considerable number who gain a reputation among friends for ability to do what they never accomplish; since, according to one of his eulogists, “the world had reason to expect from him many excellent and useful works,” had not episcopal duties prevented their being composed. He was also one of a still greater number in whom the love of books weakens regard for the rights of property; for according to a critic less friendly to his reputation, Moore indulged an “avarice in that respect,” which “carried him a step beyond the sin of coveting.” His library numbered 30,000 volumes, and was bought, after his death, by George I., as a present to the University of Cambridge.[373] Cumberland, made Bishop of Peterborough in 1691, wrote in reply to Hobbes, a Latin treatise, _On the Laws of Nature_, mentioned in a former volume, and of him his great grandson Richard says, “He had no pretension to quick and brilliant talents; but his mind was fitted for elaborate and profound researches, as his works more fully testify.”[374] He is known to posterity, and that with faded light, simply as a philosopher of the Cambridge stamp, and has left no proofs of pre-eminence in episcopal efficiency; but we may conclude that he was devoted to his office from the anecdote, that, when in his old age his friends recommended retirement and rest, he said, “I will do my duty as long as I can; I had better _wear_ out than _rust_ out.”[375] [Sidenote: 1688–1702.] Something similar may be said of Fowler, an active opponent of James’ Declaration, promoted to the See of Gloucester in 1690, whose exposition of Latitudinarian theology has been described in the _Church of the Restoration_. His broad views of Christianity, and his opposition to Popery, recommended him to a Bishopric. He is spoken of as a very respectable, but not very eminent, Prelate; and what is curious in connection with his rationalism, he was credited with a faith in the existence of witches and fairies, “whom he dreaded as much as the lady upon the seven hills, and all the scarlet train.”[376]