VI. CATLIN'S NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS, Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs, and VIII. FRANCIS'S DISCOURSE ON NATURAL HISTORY, A Discourse delivered upon the Opening of the THE NEW YORK REVIEW. No. XX. APRIL, 1842. ART. I. The Life of Archbishop Laud. By CHARLES WEBB LE BAS, M. A., Professor in the East India College, Herts, and late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. London: 1836. AMONG the mightiest dramas which the world has ever witnessed, may surely be classed that revolution which, in England, for a time prostrated the power of the Stuarts, hewed the throne down to a block, and subjected the Church to be trampled on by a party which hated its time-honored services. If we regard the high motives enlisted in this contest, the principles which were at stake, and the momentous consequences depending on its result, we must feel that it will be invested with a still increasing interest, as long as the English language shall continue to be spoken. Nearly two centuries have now elapsed since these events took place. Six generations, too, have passed away since these busy actors "lived and moved and had their being," and we now know them only as their deeds are written on the page of history. It is surely time, therefore, that we form our estimate of these changes, unbiased by any whispers of prejudice. Yet the reality is far different. We question much whether this generation is, on the whole, more competent to form an impartial verdict, than were those whose fathers had fought for the king at Newbury, or those who rejoiced when the man Charles Stuart," (as they contemptuously called him,) died in front of his palace at Whitehall. We still read those histories which favor our previous views, and seldom seek in the cotemporaneous records of that day to discover on which side was the truth, when, for the sake of principle, a nation was divided, and old friends parted to meet no more, except on the field of battle under opposing banners. And the same diversity of opinion prevails with regard to the leaders in those scenes. Cromwell is eulogized on the one side as a saint and statesman, while he is stigmatized on the other as a fanatic and a buffoon. So it is too with all the minor actors. The characters of Strafford and of Vane are to this day subjects of discussion, as they perhaps always will be. The monarchist of these times can scarcely admit that there was anything good. in the ranks of the Puritans, while the dissenter sneers at the idea of any religion existing among the adherents of the king. That intolerant tory, Dr. Johnson, could not yield his tribute of praise, even to the divine genius of Milton, and declared that the admiration expressed for him was nothing but cant. When he sat down to write the life of the poet, he was looking, not at the bard, but at the secretary of Cromwell. He forgot the author of Paradise Lost and those noble sonnets which shall live, long as the language in which they are written, and he remembered only the bigoted politician who denounced the prelacy and justified the execution of Charles. It is to a test equally, unfair that Archbishop Laud has usually been subjected, and by a similar standard have his claims to greatness been tried. His name has indeed been a party one, even down to this day. Holding the highest office in the English Church when the hour of her trial came, believers in the same faith with himself have sympathized in his sufferings and often felt themselves bound to defend his whole career. While on the other side of the water he has enjoyed the honor of being canonized by the Oxford divines, a late publication in our own country speaks of him as "England's best friend and bishop, her martyr Laud." Were we to believe all we read, we should come to the conclusion that he was, even in this life, a striking instance of a The Origin and Compilation of the Prayer Book. Philadelphia, 1841. 1842.] Not properly a Party Question. 259 just man made perfect. As a set-off, however, against this extravagant praise, the Edinburgh Review pronounces him to have been only "a lower kind of St. Dominic, differing from the fierce and gloomy enthusiast who founded the Inquisition, as we may imagine the familiar imp of a spiteful witch to differ from an archangel of darkness."* Now, in these conflicting statements, which is the truth? We answer, neither. The truth, as is usual in such cases, is probably midway between these two extremes. Laud was not a great man, neither was he in all respects a contemptible one. His character, as we might expect, was mixed. While we can detect, we think, but few of the attributes of greatness, we can at the same time find some traits to excite our admiration. And it is not from any one history that we must draw our conclusions. Divers witnesses must be summoned to the bar. We must take both sides, and investigate their statements. With Clarendon, Burnet, Heylin, Evelyn, and Laud's own diary before us, we may sift out facts enough to enable us to decide on his true position in the scale of intellectual and moral greatness. It is thus that we intend, in this article, to examine his life and character, availing ourselves of the writings alike of his friends and enemies. We shall endeavor to discharge this duty fairly and honestly, unbiased, if possible, by prejudice. At this day and in this land, we have no interest either in unduly exalting the merits of Laud or in depreciating his worth. It should cease with us to be a party question. As churchmen, we do not feel ourselves obliged to reverence the intellect of the archbishop, any more than as advocates of the system of inductive reasoning, we would contend for the judicial purity of Bacon, or, as believers in the laws of gravitation, feel a necessity laid upon us to subscribe to Newton's interpretation of the Apocalypse. The two things are widely and entirely different. It would be tedious to mention the lives of Laud, with which the world has for two centuries been favored. They have multiplied from the fact, that his history furnishes a capital text from which to write a party work. Prynne, whose days seem to have been devoted to the task of hunting the archbishops down, discoursed most voluminously about him, even during his life. Of course, the paring of his ears, * Art. Review of Nugent's Life of Hampden, 1831. some years before, under Laud's directions, added infinitely to the zeal and energy with which he wrote. The earliest regular biography of this prelate, is that by Heylin, his personal friend and admirer, who saw every thing through the medium of his own enthusiastic feelings. He was therefore about as competent to detect Laud's faults, as Prynne was to understand his virtues. The latest life is the eloquent work of Mr. Le Bas, which we have placed at the head of this article. While it displays a more moderate tone, and a greater discrimination than most of those which have preceded it, we can still detect throughout it, the prejudices of an English churchman. William Laud was born in 1573. His family, though humble, was still respectable, and by no means answered the descriptions of his enemies, who not perceiving that if his origin was lowly, greater credit was due to him for his elevation, endeavored to disparage him, by representing his parentage, as" contemptibly mean and sordid." This want of elevated birth was however the source of ceaseless vexation to the archbishop in after years, when he was called to mingle with the noble of the land. Dr. Heylin gives one instance of this weakness in Laud, which fell under his own observation. Finding him one day in his garden at Lambeth, with signs of unusual commotion in his countenance, he inquired the cause of his agitation. Laud, in reply, produced a printed libel, in which he was described, "as being of so base a parentage, as if he had been raked out of a dung-hill." The answer of Heylin was, we think, more fanciful than consoling. He reminded the primate, that "Pope Sextus V., as stout a pope as ever wore the triple crown, but a poor man's son, did use familiarly to say, in contempt of such libels as were frequently made against him, that he was born of an illustrious house, (domo natus illustri,) because the sunbeams passing through the broken walls and ragged roof, illustrated every corner of the homely cottage in which he was born."t His childhood and youth present little worthy of note, except that he enjoyed the best advantages of education, and we are told, even then " was esteemed a very forward, confident, and zealous person." In these traits, however, it may truly be said, "the boy was father of the man." Having taken his degrees at Oxford, he was appointed reader in |