Lives of the Founders of the British Museum, Part 1 of 2: With Notices of Its Chief Augmentors and Other Benefactors, 1570-1870.Edwards, Edward
History
Lives of the Founders of the British Museum, Part 1 of 2: With Notices of Its Chief Augmentors and Other Benefactors, 1570-1870.
Edwards, Edward
Book collectors -- Great Britain; British Museum
On this point, it is my wish to leave the reader to form his own
estimate of probabilities. _Probabilities_, only, are attainable;
and I have no side to take, in any attempt to weigh them. But it may
be well to ask the reader’s attention to a passage in the Diary of a
contemporary of Sir R. Cotton, a man of high character, and one who
sat by Cotton’s side in Parliament, fighting with him for the
liberties of England, during many years; one who is also remarkable
for speaking about the faults of his friends with abundant candour.
‘Sir Robert Cotton, being highly esteemed by the Earl of
Somerset, ... _was acquainted with this murder [of Overbury] by him,
a little before it now came to light_, and had advised him what he
took to be the best course for his safety.’ This passage occurs in
the private diary of Sir Symonds D’Ewes—‘a man,’ says a great
writer, ‘of somewhat Grandisonian ways,’ a man of ‘scrupulous
Puritan integrity, of high flown conscientiousness, ... ambitious to
be the pink of Christian country gentlemen,’ (Carlyle’s _Essays_,
iv, 297.) This ‘scrupulous Puritan’ knew all that was current about
the terrible ‘Great Oyer of Poisoning,’ as Sir Edward Coke called
it. He lived in familiar intercourse with Cotton, and regarded their
long acquaintance as an honour to himself; whilst speaking freely
about certain social habits and limitations—neither Grandisonian or
Puritanic—on Cotton’s part, as precluding their intercourse from
ripening into that close friendship which such a man as D’Ewes could
form only with men likeminded with himself on the highest interests
of humanity. Is it not easy to infer—and is not the inference also
inevitable—that by the fact of Somerset ‘acquainting Cotton with the
murder of Overbury a little before’ it became public, and advising
him as to ‘the course for his safety,’ D’Ewes understood such a
communication and such advice as are entirely compatible with
Somerset’s innocence of his wife’s crime?
Footnote 11:
Such is the title in _Cottoni Posthuma_. In MS. Harl. 180—apparently
given by Cotton himself to Sir S. D’Ewes—the title is ‘_A
Declaration against the Matche_,’ &c. In that copy, this note occurs
at the end, in Sir Symonds’ hand:—‘Thus far only, as Sir Robert
Cotton himself told me, he proceeded; leaving the rest to be
added ... according to the relation ... declared before the greater
part of both Houses by ... the Duke of Buckingham.’—_MS. Harl._ 180,
fol. 169.
Footnote 12:
There is another MS. of this speech, _in Sir John Eliot’s hand_, in
the library at Port Eliot. See Forster’s _Life of Eliot_, Vol. I, p.
413.
Footnote 13:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account