378 
NOTES AND QUERIES. 
[No. 24. 
to which he also probably refers in the opening of 
his Preface to the Life of Monk : — 
«JT have heretofore published something of a like 
nature with the following sheets, though in another 
language, wherein several things, through want of 
better information, were imperfectly described.” 
4. It appears, from Skinner’s letter, that his 
original intention was to write a Life in Latin. 
Webster edited the Life which we have, from a 
copy in English found in the study of Mr. Owen, 
late curate at Bocking in Essex, and supposed to 
be in Skinner’s handwriting; and he had seen 
another copy, agreeing literally with the former, 
which had been transcribed by Shelton, formerly 
rector of St. James’s in Colchester; and which, 
after Mr. Shelton’s death, became the property of 
Mr. Great, an apothecary in Colchester. (Webster 
published in 1723.) 
Now, Query, as these may have been copies of 
a translation, can any Colchester reader help to 
settle affirmatively or negatively the question of a 
Latin Life of Monk by Skinner ? 
I add two other Queries :— 
It appears from a passage in the Life (p. 333.), 
that Skinner appended, or intended to append, a 
collection of papers : — 
“As appears from His Majesty’s royal grant or 
warrant to him (Sir John Grenville), which we have 
transcribed from the original, and have added in the 
collection at the end of this history.” 
Webster says he never could get any account of | 
this collection of papers. Can Colchester now 
produce any information about them ? 
_ Can any of your readers give any information 
about those papers of the second Duke of Albe- 
marle, and of Grenville, Earl of Bath, to which 
Skinner had access? ‘Lord Bath’s papers were 
probably afterwards in the hands of his nephew 
Lord Lansdowne, who vindicated Monk in answer 
to Burnet. W. D. Curistis. 
CUNNINGHAM'’S LIVES OF EMINENT ENGLISHMEN.— 
WHITGIFT AND CARTWRIGHT. 
In a modern publication, entitled Lives of 
Eminent Englishmen, edited by G. G. Cunning- 
ham, 8 vols. 8vo. Glasgow, 1840, we meet with a 
memoir of Archbishop Whitgift, which contains 
the following paragraph : — 
«While Whitgift was footing to an archbishopric, 
poor Cartwright was consigned to poverty and exile ; 
and at length died in obscurity and wretchedness. 
How pleasant would it have been to say that none of 
his sufferings were inflicted by his great antagonist, 
but that he was treated by him with a generous mag- 
nanimity! Instead of this, Whitgift followed him 
through life with inflexible animosity.”— Cunning- 
ham’s Lives, li. 212. 
Mr. Cunningham gives no authorities for these 
statements; but I will furnish him with my autho- 
rities for the contradiction of them. 
“« After some years (writes Walton, in his Life of 
Hooker), the Doctor [ Whitgift] being preferred to the 
see, first of Worcester and then of Canterbury, Mr. 
Cartwright, after his share of trouble and imprison- 
ment (for setting up new presbyteries in divers places 
against the established order), having received from 
the Archbishop many personal favours, retired him- 
self to a more private living, which was at Warwick, 
where he became master of an hospital, and lived 
quietly and grew rich; . . . the Archbishop surviving 
him but one year, each ending his days in perfect charity 
with the other.” 
To the same effect is the statement in Strype, 
which I borrow from Dr. Zouch’s second edition 
of Walton’s Lives, p.217.:— 
“ Thomas Cartwright, the Archbishop’s old antago- 
nist, was alive in 1601, and grew rich at his hospital 
at Warwick, preaching at the chapel there, saith my 
author, very temperately, according to the promise 
made by him to the Archbishop; which mildness of 
his some ascribed to his old age and more experience. 
But the latter end of next year he deceased, And 
now, at the end of Cartwright’s life, to take our leave 
of him with a fairer character, it is remarkable what a 
noble and learned man, Sir H. Yelverton, writes of 
some of his last words —‘ that he seriously lamented the 
unnecessary troubles he had caused in the Church, by the 
schism he had been the great fomenter of, and wished to 
begin his life again, that he might testify to the world the 
dislike he had of -his former ways ;’ and in this opinion 
he died.” 
I find it stated, moreover, on the authority of 
Sir G. Paul’s Life of Whitgift, that Cartwright 
acknowledged the generosity of Whitgift, and ad- 
mitted “his bond of duty to the Archbishop to be 
so much the straiter, as it was without any desert 
of his own.” — Carwithen’s History of the Church 
of England, i. 527. 2nd edit. 
Lest this should not suffice to convict Mr. Cun- 
ningham of error, I will adduce two extracts from 
The Life of Master Thomas Cartwright, written 
by the Presbyterian Sa. Clarke, in 1651, and ap- 
pended to his Martyrologie. 
« About the same time [viz. 1580], the Earl of Lei- 
cester preferred him [Cartwright] to be master of his 
hospital at Warwick, which place was worth to him 
about one hundred pounds.”— Clarke, p. 370. 
« For riches, he sought them not; yea, he rejected 
many opportunities whereby he might have enriched 
himself. His usual manner was, when he had good 
sums of gold sent him, to take only one piece, Jest he 
should seem to slight his friend’s kindness, and to send 
back the rest with a thankful acknowledgment of their 
love and his acceptance of it; professing that, for that 
condition wherein God had set him, he was as well 
furnished as they for their high and great places.” —Ib. 
p- 372. 
So much for the “poverty,” the ‘‘ wretchedness,” 
