The Life of John Bunyan [56]
St Jo Chernocke Wm Daniels
T Browne W ffoster
Gaius Squire"
There would be little delay in the execution of the warrant.
John Bunyan was a marked man and an old offender, who, on his
arrest, would be immediately committed for trial. Once more, then,
Bunyan became a prisoner, and that, there can be little doubt, in
his old quarters in the Bedford gaol. Errors die hard, and those
by whom they have been once accepted find it difficult to give them
up. The long-standing tradition of Bunyan's twelve years'
imprisonment in the little lock-up-house on the Ouse bridge, having
been scattered to the winds by the logic of fact and common sense,
those to whom the story is dear, including the latest and ablest of
his biographers, Dr. Brown, see in this second brief imprisonment a
way to rehabilitate it. Probability pointing to this imprisonment
as the time of the composition of "The Pilgrim's Progress," they
hold that on this occasion Bunyan was committed to the bridge-gaol,
and that he there wrote his immortal work, though they fail to
bring forward any satisfactory reasons for the change of the place
of his confinement. The circumstances, however, being the same,
there can be no reasonable ground for questioning that, as before,
Bunyan was imprisoned in the county gaol.
This last imprisonment of Bunyan's lasted only half as many months
as his former imprisonment had lasted years. At the end of six
months he was again a free man. His release was due to the good
officers of Owen, Cromwell's celebrated chaplain, with Barlow,
Bishop of Lincoln. The suspicion which hung over this intervention
from its being erroneously attributed to his release in 1672, three
years before Barlow became a bishop, has been dispelled by the
recently discovered warrant. The dates and circumstances are now
found to tally. The warrant for Bunyan's apprehension bears date
March 4, 1675. On the 14th of the following May the supple and
time-serving Barlow, after long and eager waiting for a mitre, was
elected to the see of Lincoln vacated by the death of Bishop
Fuller, and consecrated on the 27th of June. Barlow, a man of very
dubious churchmanship, who had succeeded in keeping his university
appointments undisturbed all through the Commonwealth, and who was
yet among the first with effusive loyalty to welcome the
restoration of monarchy, had been Owen's tutor at Oxford, and
continued to maintain friendly relations with him. As bishop of
the diocese to which Bedfordshire then, and long after, belonged,
Barlow had the power, by the then existing law, of releasing a
prisoner for nonconformity on a bond given by two persons that he
would conform within half a year. A friend of Bunyan's, probably
Ichabod Chauncey, obtained a letter from Owen to the bishop
requesting him to employ this prerogative in Bunyan's behalf.
Barlow with hollow complaisance expressed his particular kindness
for Dr. Owen, and his desire to deny him nothing he could legally
grant. He would even strain a point to serve him. But he had only
just been made a bishop, and what was asked was a new thing to him.
He desired a little time to consider of it. If he could do it,
Owen might be assured of his readiness to oblige him. A second
application at the end of a fortnight found this readiness much
cooled. It was true that on inquiry he found he might do it; but
the times were critical, and he had many enemies. It would be
safer for him not to take the initiative. Let them apply to the
Lord Chancellor, and get him to issue an order for him to release
Bunyan on the customary bond. Then he would do what Owen asked.
It was vain to tell Barlow that the way he suggested was
chargeable, and Bunyan poor. Vain also to remind him that there
was no point to be strained. He had satisfied himself that he
might do the thing legally. It was hoped he would remember his
promise.
T Browne W ffoster
Gaius Squire"
There would be little delay in the execution of the warrant.
John Bunyan was a marked man and an old offender, who, on his
arrest, would be immediately committed for trial. Once more, then,
Bunyan became a prisoner, and that, there can be little doubt, in
his old quarters in the Bedford gaol. Errors die hard, and those
by whom they have been once accepted find it difficult to give them
up. The long-standing tradition of Bunyan's twelve years'
imprisonment in the little lock-up-house on the Ouse bridge, having
been scattered to the winds by the logic of fact and common sense,
those to whom the story is dear, including the latest and ablest of
his biographers, Dr. Brown, see in this second brief imprisonment a
way to rehabilitate it. Probability pointing to this imprisonment
as the time of the composition of "The Pilgrim's Progress," they
hold that on this occasion Bunyan was committed to the bridge-gaol,
and that he there wrote his immortal work, though they fail to
bring forward any satisfactory reasons for the change of the place
of his confinement. The circumstances, however, being the same,
there can be no reasonable ground for questioning that, as before,
Bunyan was imprisoned in the county gaol.
This last imprisonment of Bunyan's lasted only half as many months
as his former imprisonment had lasted years. At the end of six
months he was again a free man. His release was due to the good
officers of Owen, Cromwell's celebrated chaplain, with Barlow,
Bishop of Lincoln. The suspicion which hung over this intervention
from its being erroneously attributed to his release in 1672, three
years before Barlow became a bishop, has been dispelled by the
recently discovered warrant. The dates and circumstances are now
found to tally. The warrant for Bunyan's apprehension bears date
March 4, 1675. On the 14th of the following May the supple and
time-serving Barlow, after long and eager waiting for a mitre, was
elected to the see of Lincoln vacated by the death of Bishop
Fuller, and consecrated on the 27th of June. Barlow, a man of very
dubious churchmanship, who had succeeded in keeping his university
appointments undisturbed all through the Commonwealth, and who was
yet among the first with effusive loyalty to welcome the
restoration of monarchy, had been Owen's tutor at Oxford, and
continued to maintain friendly relations with him. As bishop of
the diocese to which Bedfordshire then, and long after, belonged,
Barlow had the power, by the then existing law, of releasing a
prisoner for nonconformity on a bond given by two persons that he
would conform within half a year. A friend of Bunyan's, probably
Ichabod Chauncey, obtained a letter from Owen to the bishop
requesting him to employ this prerogative in Bunyan's behalf.
Barlow with hollow complaisance expressed his particular kindness
for Dr. Owen, and his desire to deny him nothing he could legally
grant. He would even strain a point to serve him. But he had only
just been made a bishop, and what was asked was a new thing to him.
He desired a little time to consider of it. If he could do it,
Owen might be assured of his readiness to oblige him. A second
application at the end of a fortnight found this readiness much
cooled. It was true that on inquiry he found he might do it; but
the times were critical, and he had many enemies. It would be
safer for him not to take the initiative. Let them apply to the
Lord Chancellor, and get him to issue an order for him to release
Bunyan on the customary bond. Then he would do what Owen asked.
It was vain to tell Barlow that the way he suggested was
chargeable, and Bunyan poor. Vain also to remind him that there
was no point to be strained. He had satisfied himself that he
might do the thing legally. It was hoped he would remember his
promise.