Lucasta [5]
fifty and eight,<2.19> having before been accounted by all those that well knew him to have been a person well versed in the Greek<2.20> and Latin<2.21> poets, in music, whether practical or theoretical, instrumental or vocal, and in other things befitting a gentleman. Some of the said persons have also added, in my hearing, that his common discourse was not only significant and witty, but incomparably graceful, which drew respect from all men and women. Many other things I could now say of him, relating either to his most generous mind in his prosperity, or dejected estate in his worst state of poverty, but for brevity's sake I shall now pass them by. At the end of his Posthume Poems are several elegies written on him by eminent poets of that time, wherein you may see his just character."
Such is Wood's account; it is to be regretted that that writer did not supply the additional information, which he tantalizes us by saying that he possessed, and could have published, had he not been afraid of being tedious. His love of brevity is, in this case, most provoking.
As might be expected, the Journals of Parliament cast additional light on the personal connexion of Lovelace with the Kentish Petition of 1642, which was for the GENERAL redress of existing grievances, not, as the editor of the VERNEY PAPERS seems to have considered, merely for the adjustment of certain points relative to the Militia. Parliamentary literature has not a very strong fascination for the editors of old authors, and the biographers of Lovelace have uniformly overlooked the mine of information which lies in the LORDS' AND COMMONS' JOURNALS. The subject was apparently introduced, for the first time, into Parliament on the 28th March, 1642, when a conference of both Houses took place, respecting "a petition from Kent, which, praying for a Restoration of the Bishops, Liturgy and Common Prayer, and other constitutional measures, was voted seditious and against privilege and the peace of the kingdom;" on the same occasion, Lord Bristol and Mr. Justice Mallett were committed to the Tower for having in their possession a copy of the document. On the 7th April it was ordered by both Houses, that the Kentish Petition should be burned by the hands of the common hangman.
On the 28th April, the Commons acquainted the Upper House, by Mr. Oliver Cromwell, "that a great meeting was to be held next day on Blackheath, to back the rejected Kentish Petition."<2.22>
Two days later, a strange scene occurred at Westminster. Let the Commons' Journals tell the story in their own language:--
"30 April, 1642. The House being informed that divers gentlemen of the county of Kent were at the door, that desired to present a petition to the House;
"They were called in, presented their Petition, and withdrew.
"And their Petition was read, and appeared to be the same that was formerly burnt, by order of both Houses, by the hands of the common hangman. Captain LEIGH reports that, being at the Quarter Sessions held at MAIDSTONE, he observed certain passages which he delivered in writing.
"Captain Lovelace, who presented the Petition, was called in; and Mr. Speaker was commanded to ask him, from whose hand he had this Petition, and who gave him warrant to present it.
"'Mr. GEO. CHUTE delivered him [he replied] the Petition the next day after the Assizes.'
"'The gentlemen [he continued], that were assembled at BLACKHEATH, commanded him to deliver it.'
"[The Speaker then inquired] whether he knew that the like was burnt by the order of this House, and that some were here questioned for the business.
"'He understood a general rumour, that some gentlemen were questioned.
"'He had heard a fortnight since, that the like Petition was burned by the hand of the common hangman.
"'He knew nothing of the bundle of printed petitions.'
"He likewise said, 'that there was a petition at the Quarter Sessions, disavowed by all the Justices there, which he tore.'
"Sir William Boteler was likewise called in, [and] asked when he was at Yorke.
"[He]
Such is Wood's account; it is to be regretted that that writer did not supply the additional information, which he tantalizes us by saying that he possessed, and could have published, had he not been afraid of being tedious. His love of brevity is, in this case, most provoking.
As might be expected, the Journals of Parliament cast additional light on the personal connexion of Lovelace with the Kentish Petition of 1642, which was for the GENERAL redress of existing grievances, not, as the editor of the VERNEY PAPERS seems to have considered, merely for the adjustment of certain points relative to the Militia. Parliamentary literature has not a very strong fascination for the editors of old authors, and the biographers of Lovelace have uniformly overlooked the mine of information which lies in the LORDS' AND COMMONS' JOURNALS. The subject was apparently introduced, for the first time, into Parliament on the 28th March, 1642, when a conference of both Houses took place, respecting "a petition from Kent, which, praying for a Restoration of the Bishops, Liturgy and Common Prayer, and other constitutional measures, was voted seditious and against privilege and the peace of the kingdom;" on the same occasion, Lord Bristol and Mr. Justice Mallett were committed to the Tower for having in their possession a copy of the document. On the 7th April it was ordered by both Houses, that the Kentish Petition should be burned by the hands of the common hangman.
On the 28th April, the Commons acquainted the Upper House, by Mr. Oliver Cromwell, "that a great meeting was to be held next day on Blackheath, to back the rejected Kentish Petition."<2.22>
Two days later, a strange scene occurred at Westminster. Let the Commons' Journals tell the story in their own language:--
"30 April, 1642. The House being informed that divers gentlemen of the county of Kent were at the door, that desired to present a petition to the House;
"They were called in, presented their Petition, and withdrew.
"And their Petition was read, and appeared to be the same that was formerly burnt, by order of both Houses, by the hands of the common hangman. Captain LEIGH reports that, being at the Quarter Sessions held at MAIDSTONE, he observed certain passages which he delivered in writing.
"Captain Lovelace, who presented the Petition, was called in; and Mr. Speaker was commanded to ask him, from whose hand he had this Petition, and who gave him warrant to present it.
"'Mr. GEO. CHUTE delivered him [he replied] the Petition the next day after the Assizes.'
"'The gentlemen [he continued], that were assembled at BLACKHEATH, commanded him to deliver it.'
"[The Speaker then inquired] whether he knew that the like was burnt by the order of this House, and that some were here questioned for the business.
"'He understood a general rumour, that some gentlemen were questioned.
"'He had heard a fortnight since, that the like Petition was burned by the hand of the common hangman.
"'He knew nothing of the bundle of printed petitions.'
"He likewise said, 'that there was a petition at the Quarter Sessions, disavowed by all the Justices there, which he tore.'
"Sir William Boteler was likewise called in, [and] asked when he was at Yorke.
"[He]