Archbishop Wliitgift and the Lords of the Privy 

 Council in the Star Chamber made rules and ordi- 

 nances for i-edressing abuses in printing. ISTo 

 printing-press was to be allowed elsewhere than in 

 London (except one in each University) ; and no 

 book was to be printed untiliirst seen and perused 

 by the Archbishop of Canterbury or Bishop of 

 London ; with an exception in favour of the 

 queen's printer, and books of the common law, 

 which were to be allowed by the Chief Justices and 

 Chief Bnron, or one of them. Extensive and arbi- 

 trary powers of search for unlicensed books and 

 presses were also given to the wardens of the Sta- 

 tioners' Company. (Strype's Lifi of Archhislwp 

 Whitgift, 222. ; Records, No. XXlV.) On the 

 1st July, 1637, another decree of a similar charac- 

 ter was made by the Court of Star Chamber. 

 (Rushworth's Histoi-ical Colk'ctUnis, Part ii. p. 450.) 

 The Long Parliament, although it dissolved the 

 Star Chiimber, seems to have had no more en- 

 lightened views as respects the freedom of the 

 press than Queen Elizabeth or the Archbishops 

 Wliitgift and Laud; for on the 14th June, 1643, 

 the two Houses made an ordinance prohibiting the 

 printing of any order or declaration of either 

 House, without order of one or both Houses ; or 

 the printing or sale of any book, pamphlet, or 

 paper, unless the same were approved and licensed 

 under the hands of such persons as both or either 

 House should appoint for licensing the same. 

 (Parliamentarij History, xii. 298.) The names 

 of the licensers appointed are given in Neal's 

 History of the Puritans (ed. 1837, ii. 205.). It 

 was this ordinance which occasioned the publica- 

 tion, in or about 1644, of Milton's most noble de- 

 fence of the liberty of the press, entitled Areopu' 

 gitica ; a Speech for the Liberty of tinliceTised Print' 

 ing, To the Parliament of England. After setting 

 out certain Italian imprimaturs, he remarks : 



" These are the pretty responsorles, these are the 

 dear antiphonies that so bewitched of late our prelates 

 and their chaplains with the godly echo they made and 

 besotted, as to the gay imitation of a lordly imprimatur, 

 one from Lambeth House, another from the west end 

 of Paul's; so apishly romanising, that the word of 

 command still was sot down in Latin, as if the learned 

 grammatical pen that wrote it would cast no ink with- 

 out Latin ; or, perhaps, as they thought, because no 

 vidgar tongue was worthy to express the pure conceit 

 of an imprimatur; but rather, as I hope, for that our 

 Lnglish, the language of men ever famous and fore- 

 most in the achievements of liberty, will not easily 

 find servile letters enow to spell such a dictatory pre- 

 sumption englished." 



On the 28th September, 1647, the Lords and 

 Commons passed a still more severe ordinance, 

 which imposed pains and penalties on all persons 

 printing, publishing, selling, or uttering any book, 

 pamphlet, treatise, ballad, libel, or sheet of news, 

 without the licence of both, or either House of 



Parliament, or such persons as should be there- 

 unto authorised by one or both Houses. Offending 

 hawkers, pedlars, and ballad-singers were to be 

 whipped as common rogues. (^Parliamentary His- 

 tory, xvi. 309.) We get some insight into the 

 probable cause of this ordinance from a letter of 

 Sir Thomas Eairfiix to the Earl of Manchester, 

 dated "Putney, 20th Sept., 1647." He complains 

 of some printed pamphlets, very scandalous and 

 abusive, to the army in p.articular, and the whole 

 kingdom in general ; and expresses ids desire that 

 these, and all of the like nature, might be sup- 

 pressed for the future. In order, however, to 

 satisfy the kingdom's expectation for intelligence, 

 he advises that, till a firm peace be settled, two or 

 three sheets might be permitted to come out 

 weekly, which might be licensed ; and as Mr. 

 ]\Labbott had approved himself faithful in that 

 service of liconsmg, and likewise in the service of 

 the House and the army, he requested that he 

 might be continued in the said place of licenser. 

 (Lords' Journals, ix. 457.) Gilbert Mabbott was 

 accordingly appointed licenser of such weekly 

 papers as should be printed, but resigned the 

 situation 22nd May, 1649. (Commons Journals, 

 vi. 214.) It seems he had conscientious objections 

 to the service, for elsewhere it is recorded, under 

 the same date, " Upon Mr. Mabbott's desire and 

 reasons against licensing of books to be printed, he 

 was discharged of that imployment." (Wliitelock's 

 i(/e?«oria&,'389.) On the 20th September, 1649, 

 was passed a parliamentary ordinance prohibiting 

 printing elsewhere than in London, the two Uni- 

 versities, York, and Finsbury, without the licence 

 of the Council of State (Scobell's Ordinances, 

 Part ii. 90.); and on the 7th January, 1652-3, 

 the Parliament passed another ordinance for the 

 suppression of unlicensed and scandalous books. 

 (Scobell's Ordinances, Part ii. 231.) In 1661 a 

 bill for the regulation of printing passed the Lords, 

 but was rejected by the Commons on account of 

 the peers having inserted a clause exempting their 

 own houses from search; but in 1662 was passed 

 the statute 13 & 14 C.^.r. II. c. 33., which required 

 all books to be licensed as follows : — Law books 

 by the Lord Chancellor, or one of the Chief Jus- 

 tices, or Chief Baron ; books of history and state, 

 by one of the Secretaries of State ; of heraldry, by 

 the Earl JNIarshal, or the King-at-Arms ; of divi- 

 nity, physic, philosophy, or whatsoever other 

 science or art, by the Archbishop of Canterbury or 

 the Bishoj) of London : or if printed at either 

 University, by the chancellor thereof. The num- 

 ber of master printers (exclusive of the king's 

 printers and the printers of the Universities) was 

 to be reduced to twenty, and then vacancies were 

 to be filled up by the Archbishop of Canterbm-y and 

 Bishop of Loniion ; and printing was not to be 

 allowed elsewhere than in London, York (where 

 the Archbishop of York was to license all books), 



