an honest plea for correction of ignorance, superstition, profane swearing, adultery, and fornication amongst the people of Wales, by better provision for faithful teaching and preaching. "These thinges," said John Penry, “I doe not set downe to disgrace my deare countrimen. I beare them another hart. My purpose is to shew that all the good politique laws in the woorld cannot wash awaie these our stains. The nitre that washeth purely, the word of the Lord, must doe it." Since the queen's accession, Cambridge alone had sent into the commonwealth 3,400 graduates: "Four hundred of these would haue been since that time well placed in Wales, whereas at this day we haue not twelue in all our country that doe discharge their duety in any good sort." Penry argued that a certain number of the preachers in Wales should be able to speak to the people in their own tongue, and this he advised to be provided for by giving Welsh livings to graduates who had gone up to the universities from Wales. He pleaded against the number of Welsh livings held by men who never came among their people: "Non-residences haue cut the throte of our Church. Some that neuer preached haue three Church liuinges. Many of our liuinges are possessed by students of either of the Vniuersities who neuer come amongst vs, vnles it be to fleece." Penry looked forward to the diffusion of the Bible in Welsh among the Welshmen. The translation of the New Testament had been finished in 1567. The translation of the Old Testament was nearly complete, and the complete Bible in Welsh was first printed in 1580. Penry's treatise was presented to the House of Commons by one of its Welsh members on the twentieth of February, 1588. The archbishop and the bishops-namely, John Aylmer, of London, and Thomas Cooper, of Winchester, with Doctor Lewin and Doctor Cosins, in the High Court of Commission, at once ordered the books, of which there were five hundred copies printed, to be seized, and Penry to be brought before their Court as a factious slanderer of her Majesty's Government. After he had been brought up, and called by the archbishop boy, knave, slanderer, he was kept in prison for thirty days, and finally discharged without any distinct hearing of the case against him. The Marprelate Contro versy: Doctor bury. The Marprelate Controversy took its beginning from a quarto book of 1,412 pages, directed chiefly against writings of Thomas Cartwright and Theodore Beza. It was entitled "A defence of the Government established in the Church of Englande for Ecclesiasticall Matters," was published in London by John Winder in 1587, and was written by Dr. John Bridges, Dean of SalisJohn Bridges had graduated at Cambridge as B.A. in 1556, when he was elected Fellow of Pembroke Hall, and became M.A. in 1560. In 1573 he wrote against two Roman Catholic books a treatise asserting "The Supremacie of Christian Princes over all Persons throughout their dominions," and he obtained the degree of D.D. from Canterbury in 1575. In 1577 he was made Dean of Salisbury. He lived on until 1618, after having been conse crated Bishop of Oxford at the beginning of the reign of James I. John To the defence by Dr. John Bridges of the government established in the Church of England for ecclesiastical matters, a first answer was published in April, 1588, by the Reverend John Udall, preacher at Kingston-on-Thames. There was no name of author or printer to this unlicensed publication, which was known by the short title of "Diotrephes," its whole name being, "The State of the Church of England laid open in a Conference between Diotrephes, a Bishop, Tertullus, a Papist, Demetrius, a Usurer, Pandochus, an Innkeeper, and Paul, a Preacher of the Word of God." John Udall, its writer, had studied in Cambridge, at Christ's College and Trinity; he commenced M.A. in 1584, was ordained, and became a much-troubled young Puritan minister at Kingston-on-Thames. He was soon called to answer for himself before Thomas Cooper, Bishop of Winchester, and William Daye, Dean of Windsor. Summoned afterwards before the Court of High Commission, he was restored to his ministry by friendly intercession of the Countess of Warwick and Sir Drue Drury, but in 1588 he was deprived of his living, and imprisoned in the "White Lion" at Southwark. In the preface to "Diotrephes," Udall explained the names of the speakers in the little dialogue 66 'Diotrephes was he of whom S. Iohn speaketh in his third Epistle, verse 9, that louing to haue the preheminence, disturbed the course of good things in the Church, and therfore sustaineth the person of a Byshopp, or Byshoply prelate. Tertullus is he of whom Luke speaketh in the 24. Acts, that was the speaker in the ambassage from Ierusalem to Fœlix the gouernor, against Paule, in the defence of ceremonies abrogated, for the ouerthrowe of the Gospel, and so representeth the papists, that maintaine their traish to the rooting out of true religion. Demetrius is he of whom mention is made in Actes 19, that was enemie to Paule, because he liued by an vnlawful trade, and for that cause doth play the part of an vserer. Paule was the defender, you know, of the Gospel in sinceritie, and he whose pen the holy Ghost did vse to expresse the discipline of the church most clerely, and therefore speaketh for the ministers of our time that stand for reformation. Pandochus is an Inn-keeper in Greeke, and it is as much as to saye, a receiuer of all and a soother of euery man for his gaine." Diotrephes, the Bishop, and Tertullus are on the way back from a mission to Edinburgh and St. Andrews, in which they have sped ill. They stop at an inn, and talk there in friendly fashion with the Usurer and the Innkeeper, but think no good of Paul, the Puritan, who is also staying there. Paul vexes the customers with grace before and after meat, and vexes the innkeeper by exhortations to temperance that greatly reduce the consumption of his wine. Diotrephes and Tertullus send for Paul, inquire of him touching his opinions, and argue against them. They part from him, talk together, then invite him again next morning at breakfasttime, when Tertullus eats no eggs because it is a fast day. Diotrephes and Tertullus are represented as good friends, although before the world Diotrephes must seem to frown alike on Puritan and Roman Catholic. When both are sent to prison, the Pope's friends have the best rooms and the Puritans the stinking cells. The pamphlet is religious in aim, and, though lively, is as temperate as it well could be, considering that the author meant to speak his mind. For he seriously looked upon bishops as stinking in the nostrils of both God and man, "especially in these three last years of their tyrannie”—that is to say, since Whitgift became active. "Away," says Diotrephes, "thou rayling hypocrite, I will talke with thee no longer. If I catche thee in London I will make thee kiss the Clinke for this geare." To which Paul answers: "Indeede the Clynke, Gate-house, White-lyon and the Fleet have bin your onely argumentes whereby you haue proued your cause these many yeeres, but you shall preuaile no longer, for your wickednesse is made manifest vnto all men, which God will shortly repaye into your owne bosomes seuenfolde; but pray to God to giue you repentance, that those things hapen not vnto you." In May or June, 1588, there was a list of twenty-five who had been imprisoned--most of them for reading the Scriptures in a private house on Sunday, or having them so read, instead of going to the church. Some were imprisoned for refusing to take an official oath. Two of them had lain in prison nineteen months. One, who had a wife and six children depending on him for support, had been imprisoned fifteen months for not taking an oath before the Bishop of London. Another, with a wife and eight children, imprisoned for hearing the Bible read in a friend's house on Sunday, died in prison. Two aged widows and a man of sixty-six, who had a wife and children, being sent to Newgate for the same offence, all the three died there of gaol fever. One, sent to Bridewell, was there beaten with cudgels, “for refusinge to heare the Preyst of that house." The Secret John Penry left prison with his zeal intensified. He secretly bought a printing press and a supply of foreign type, and he allied himself with Robert Waldegrave, a fearless Puritan member of the Press. Stationers' Company. Waldegrave had been deprived of his licence because he had printed for Puritans. He saved under his cloak a box of foreign type when his own press was seized-that was on the thirteenth of May, 1588-and when his types also were melted, because he had printed Udall's "Diotrephes." The secret press, with Waldegrave to manage it, was first set up in the country house of Mistress Crane, at East Moulsey. So battle was prepared, and there were many eager for the fray. They were devout, but mostly young and rash of speech. Udall's "Demonstration of Discipline." John Udall promptly followed up "Diotrephes" with "A Demonstration of the truth of that Discipline which Christ hath prescribed in his Word for the gouernment of His Church in all times and places until the end of the world." This was printed secretly by Waldegrave in Mistress Crane's house at East Moulsey, and issued before the middle of November, 1588, together with a pamphlet in which the reasonings of Doctor John Bridges were replied to, and the name Martin Marprelate was first adopted as that of the author of books against Prelacy that issued from the secret press. Udall's "Demonstration of Discipline" is valuable as a record of opinion; for its purpose was to give to the people within the compass of a short pamphlet a compact statement of the argument against Church Government by Prelacy, and in maintenance of the Divine |