To my mind the walls discovered in Brampton correspond to the walls at present used in our own country, although I admit this holds true in only a rough way. Should I be assuming too much were I to say that these Brampton walls were once above ground, or at least in some cave or grotto? Their depth in the earth upon discovery might be due to gradual changes that had taken place in the topography and physiography of the neighbourhood. As to any doubt that might arise concerning the survival of the brick walls through so many centuries without wearing away and finally disappearing, I might offer as an example the artificial mounds and walls lately brought to light in North America. These were built during the Pleistocene Age. Or if the Brampton burial walls were constructed in a cave, they very probably were not submerged in earth until recent times, when the

roof of the cave fell in.

Whether the walls were built in a cave or on the surface of the ground, the important fact is that their peculiar construction, in coincidence with the method of burial in New Orleans, brings forth the idea of the topographical changes that have occurred in England. Was the region around Brampton at one time in the vicinity of a large river, or did the sea approach close thereto, making the wall method of burial compulsory? It is for those best fitted in this line of research to determine. KENNETH M. LEWIS. Short Hills, New Jersey, U.S.

THE LITERARY FRAUDS OF HENRY WALKER THE IRONMONGER.

(See 11 S. x. 441, 462, 483, 503.)

10. (a) SEVERALL SPEECHES DELIVERED CONFERENCE A

AT POWER AGAINST MENT.'

PUBLISHED on 3 Feb., 1648, nearly a whole year before the King was beheaded, and professing (inferentially) to be a report of a conference between the Lords and the Co nmons about taking action against the King, this book is the most important fraud in English history. It is usually catalogued to the esuit Father Robert Persons, or Parsons, who, or Verstegan, wrote the original book, of which this was a piracy. The original is a rare work, owing to the steps taken to suppress it when it was published. The following is the title of the

CONCERNING THE OF PARLIAMENT ΤΟ PROCEED THEIR KING FOR MISGOVERN

The origin and history of this book have been exhaustively treated by the Rev. J. H. Pollen, S.J., in a paper entitled 'The Question of Queen Elizabeth's Successor,' printed in The Month for May, 1903. Father Pollen seemed to incline to the view that its printer, Verstegan, poet and antiquary, was its author, rather than Father Persons, though I understand that he has since somewhat modified his opinion. The work is a learned one, but met, and still meets, with condemnation on all sides, both Catholic and Protestant. What is quite certain is that no controversial work ever had a stranger after-history. The full title of Walker's piracy deserves citation, if only to show how he succeeded in changing the original object of the book :

"Severall Speeches delivered at a Conference concerning the power of Parliament to proceed against their King for misgovernment.

"In which is stated :

"I. That government by blood is not by Law of Nature or divine, but only by human and positive laws of every particular Commonwealth, and may upon just causes be altered.

"II. The particular forme of monarchies and kingdomes, and the different lawes whereby they are to be obtained, holden and governed, in divers countries, according as each Commonwealth hath chosen and established.

kings, and yet how divers of them have been "III. The great reverence and respect due to lawfully chastised by their Parliaments and Commonwealths for their misgovernment, and of the good and prosperous successe that God hath commonly given to the same.

66

Princes; what interest Princes have in their IV. The lawfulnesse of proceeding against subject's goods or lives; how oathes do binde or may be broken by subjects towards their Princes, and, finally, the difference between a good King and a tyrant.

admitting to their authority & the othes [sic] "V. The coronation of Princes and manner of which they doe make in the same, unto the Commonwealth, for their good government.

Yorkshire and Parliament man, bought Doleman of Corn. Bee at the King's Arms in Little Britain and gave it to Walker.'

"Dr. Barlow's note [in the Bodleian copy] is this, in a spare leaf before the title: This base and treacherous pamphlet is, verbatim, the first part of Francis Doleman [Parsons was the man under that name] touching succession to the Crown. These nine speeches, as here they call them, are the nine chapters in Doleman. And this was printed at the charge of the Parliament, 30 pound being paid to the printer, "in perpetuam eorum infamiam." See the collection of His Majesties gracious messages for peace, p. 125, 120. The messages were collected and printed with observations upon them by Mr. Simons. The said traiterous pamphlet [' Several Speeches '] was put out by. Walker, an ironmonger (from that he came to be a cowherd) [?]. When the King came into London about the five members he threw into his coach a traiterous pamphlet, call'd "To thy tents, O Israel" (vid. Lambert Wood's History). He afterwards writ the Perfect Occurrences, and now [1649] is made a minister by the Presbyterians [?]. Mr. Darby, a

Walker was the last person the Presby. terians would have made a minister. He was preferred to benefices at Uxbridge and at Knightsbridge by the Rump (in the latter place his parishioners petitioned against him), and Cromwell gave him the living of St. Martin's Vintry. "Mr. Darby" is probably a mistake for Henry Darley. Cornelius Bee was a well-known bookseller.

On 6 May, 1648, the following book-of which the press-mark is E. 438. (19.)appeared: The King's most gracious messages for peace and a personal treaty.' The following extract is from pp. 125–7 in it :

66

They [the Parliament] pretended great enmity unto popish doctrine and tenents, and episcopacy was pull'd down out of zeale against With popery (as if that had been a friend to it). what clamours did they represent to the people Secretary Windebank's intercourse with Jesuits and popish priests. And yet these very men have permitted Mabbot (the allowed broker of all these venomous scribblings) to authorise the printing a book of Parsons the jesuite, full of the most popish and treasonable positions that ever were vented, for very good doctrine. Nay, more then this; have they not contributed 301. when, after its publication, it was told them by towards the charge of printing the same, and some that the said booke had been condemned

by Parliament in the 35 of Queen Elizabeth and that the printer thereof was drawn, hang'd and quarter'd for the same [?], and that it was then enacted that whosoever should have it in their When house should be guilty of High Treason. all this was related to some of the Committee of it? Their own consciences know all this to be Examinations, did they not stop their ears at true, and that we are able to prove it before the world. Yet these be the men, forsooth, that hate Popery.

"This popish booke that we speak of was first published anno 1594, under the name of Dolman,. and intituled A Conference about the succession of the Crowne.' It consists of two partes, whereof the first conteines the discourse of a civill lawyerHow and in what manner propinquity of blood is to be preferred. It is divided into nine chapters, all which this blessed reforming Parliament hath now published under the title of 'Severall Speeches," &c. They were all answered (as they are in the Jesuites book) by Sir John Haward [Hayward], Doctor of the Civil Law, in the year 1603, and dedicated to King James, which answer is common in booksellers' shops, still to be sold. Now there is no difference betwixt this book published by this Parliament and that of the jesuite condemned by that other an. 35 Eliz. but onely this, when the jesuit mentions the apostles he adds the word 'Saint to their names, 'S. John. S. James. S. Peter,' which the author of this new edition leaves out, and saies plain John, James and Peter. And perhaps in some places the word Parliament is put instead of the word Pope' or 'People." Nay the variation is so little that it speaks the