JAMES NAYLER. 
349 
shock pious and sober minds, yet his criminality ought to have been 
estimated, not by the greatness of the titles and claims which he 
assumed, or were given him, but by the delusion and frenzy which had 
seized his brain. On this ground he was an object of pity, not of 
^idignation, and he should have been assigned over to the physician 
for a cure of his madness, and not to the executioner of public justice 
to be punished. In its cruelty this sentence bears a great resemblance 
to that passed on Dr. Leighton by the infamous court of star-chamber ; 
and it vied with it in illegality, for the house of commons is no court 
of judicature, nor has any power to inflict a punishment beyond im- 
prisonment during its session. To the honour of humanity, however, 
it ought to be mentioned, that several persons had offered petitions 
to parliament on his behalf ; but it was resolved not to read them till 
sentence had been passed. 
On the eighteenth of December, the first part of it was carried into 
execution with the greatest rigour ; but he was brought into a state 
of such extreme weakness by his cruel whipping, that, upon repeated 
applications to the parliament, his punishment was respited for one 
week. During this interval, many persons, looking upon him rather 
as a madman than guilty of wilful blasphemy, again interposed in his 
favour by a petition to parliament that the remainder of his punish- 
ment might be wholly remitted : but intolerance and vindictiveness 
resisted those solicitations. The Protector was then addressed, and 
wrote a letter to the house, which, though it occasioned some debate, 
obtained no resolution in favour of the prisoner. On this the petitioners 
presented a second address to Cromwell ; but, it is said, the influence 
of the ministers prevented its effect. Five of these reverend gentle- 
men, Caryl Manton, Nye, Grefiith, and Reynolds, went to Nayler, in 
order to bring him to an acknowledgment of his ofl'ence : but though 
in many respects excellent characters, they did not manage this inter- 
view in a manner worthy of themselves, or honourable to their memory ; 
for they would admit no friends of his, nor any neutral or impartial 
person, into the room, although requested so to do. When Nayler 
insisted that what had passed should be put to writing, and a copy 
be left with him or the jailer, they consented ; but on remarking, in 
the course of the conversation, w hen he thought that they were desir- 
ous of wresting his words, “ How soon have you forgot the works of 
the bishop, who are now found in the same, seeking to ensnare the 
innocent !” they rose up with some warmth, burnt what they had 
committed to paper, and so left him, as he said, ‘'‘with some bemoan- 
ingexpressions.” 
On the twenty-seventh of December, the remainder of Nayler s sen- 
tence was executed at the Old Exchange, Afterwards he was sent to 
Bristol, where he was publicly whipt, from the middle of Thomas- 
street, over the bridge to Broad-street; which punishment, we are told, 
he bore with wonderful patience, as he had done the former. From 
Bristol, he was brought back to Bridewell, London, where he was 
confined about two years ; during which his mind recovered from the 
frenzy which had governed it, and he fejt deep humiliation and sin- 
cere repentance on account of his past conduct. Having also, not- 
withstanding the prohibition in his sentence, found means to procure 
