One cause of the rumour lay doubtless in the known enmity between BUCKINGHAM and the great antiquary. This enmity, on one occasion, brought Ben JONSON into peril. Ben was fond of visiting Cotton House. He liked the master, and he liked the table; and he was wont to meet at it men with whom he could exchange genial talk. On one such occasion, just a year before the Florence pamphlet incident, some verses went round the table at Cotton House, with the dessert. They began, ‘_Enjoy thy bondage_,’ and ended with the words ‘_England’s ransom here doth lie_.’ Only two months had then passed since BUCKINGHAM’S assassination, and these verses were, or were supposed to be, addressed to FELTON. We can now imagine more than one reason why such lines may have been curiously glanced at, over Sir Robert’s table, without assuming that there was any triumphing over a fallen enemy; still less any approval of murder. But there seems to have been present one guest too many. [Sidenote: _Domestic Corresp. Charles I_, vol. cxix, § 33.] Some informer told the story at Whitehall, and JONSON found himself accused of being the author of the obnoxious verses. He cleared himself; but not, it seems, without some difficulty and annoyance. The release from immediate restraint of the prisoner of November ’29 was no concession to any prompting of CHARLES’ own better nature. Fortunately for Sir Robert COTTON, his companions in the offence were peers. Their fellow-peers shewed, quietly but significantly, that continued restraint would need to be preceded by some open declaration of its cause. During the course of the proceedings which followed their release it was asserted—I do not know by whom—that not only had the ‘_Proposition_’ been copied, but that an ‘_Answer_’ to it had been either written, or drafted. And that the reply, like the original tract, would be found in Sir Robert’s library. This somewhat inexplicable circumstance in the story is nowhere mentioned, I think, except in a Minute of the Privy Council. The Minute runs thus:— ‘A Warrant directed to Thomas MEWTAS, Esq. ... and Laurence WHITAKER, Esq. [Clerks of Council] autorising them to accompanie Sir Robert COTTON, Knight, to his house and assist him in searching amongst the papers in his studie or elsewhere, for certaine notes or draughtes for an answer to a “_Proposicion_” pretended to be made “_for His Majesties Service_” touching the securing of His Estate, and also to seeke diligently amongst his papers, and lykewise the trunkes and chambers of Mr. JAMES, and [of] FLOOD, Sir Robert COTTON’S servant, as well for anie such notes, as also for coppies of the said “_Proposicion_,” and for other wrytings, of that nature, which may import prejudice to the government and His Majestie’s service.’ [Sidenote: _Council Registers, Charles I_; vol. 5, pp. 493, 495. 1629. Nov. 10. Whitehall. (C. O.).] The new search, it seems, had not the desired, or any important, result.