[Footnote 023: _Letters from and to Sir Dudley Carleton, during his Embassy in Holland, from January 1615-16[**Modern presentation.] to December 1620. London, 1757, p. 84_,--Sir Dudley Carleton's Letters abound with harsh expressions respecting Grotius. The Editor of this correspondence has inserted (p. 415) a letter from Grotius to Dr. Lancelot Andrews, written from the Castle at Louvestein. "This letter," says the Editor, "which was never printed before, deserves a place here, not only for its elegance and spirit, and its connection with the subject of the work, but likewise in justice to the memory of the great writer, as it contains his own justification of his conduct, which may be compared with the less favourable accounts of it in the preceding letters of Sir Dudley Carleton. The original is extant among the manuscripts in the library of the late Sir Hans Sloane, bart. now part of the British Museum."--"Utinam," says Grotius in this letter, "D. Carleton mihi esset plus æquior; cui mitigando propinqui mei operam dant. Sed partium, studia mire homines obcæcant."] [Footnote 024: The history of this Synod, and of the whole controversy upon Arminianism, is contained in Brand's _History of the Reformation_: the account of the synod in these pages, is principally extracted from the French abridgment of that work, in 3 volumes 8vo. The Calvinian representation of the Arminian doctrines, and the proceedings of the synod, may be seen in the late Mr. Scott's _Articles of the Synod of Dort_, to which he has prefixed the History of the Events which _made way for that Synod_: it is severely censured by Mr. James Nichols, in his _Calvinism and Arminianism compared_. Introd. cxlii. The Abridgment of Brand's History, was translated into the English language and published in 1724-25[**Modern presentation.] by _M. de la Roche_. He concludes his Preface to it by observing, that "No good man can read the work without abhorring arbitrary power, and all manner of persecution." The persecution of the Scottish Non-conformists by the Episcopalians, and the persecution of the Remonstrants by the Contra-Remonstrants, were attended with this enormity, that, in most other instances, when one denomination of christians has persecuted another, it has been on the ground that the errors of the sufferers were impious, and led the maintainers of them to eternal perdition, and therefore rendered these wholesome severities, as the persecutors term them, a salutary infliction. But, when the Protestant Episcopalian persecuted the Scottish Non-conformist, or the Contra-Remonstrant persecuted the Remonstrant, he persecuted a Christian who agreed with him in all which he himself deemed to be substantial articles of faith, and differed from him only about rites and opinions, which he himself allowed to be indifferent.--See Mr. Neale's just remark, Vol. II. ch. vi.]