entry on the fly-leaf of one of the Latin originals, describes it, printed in 'a black, rude, Gothick, letter.' The Preface, contained in both editions, but not by Travers, is designed to recommend the volume in the strongest manner to the attention of the religious world. It is said by Baker to have been written by Cartwright. This edition of the English translation is described by Baker (u. 8.) as 'admodum rarus'; and it is remarkable that Anthony Wood does not appear to have seen either the Latin or the English edition of 15741, and that Strype was ignorant of the latter. In his Life of Whitgift (1 345) he says, after referring to the Latin edition,-‘And afterwards it was put into English (having been originally written in Latin) for the more general use.' There seems little doubt that in speaking of the English edition as a subsequent rather than a contemporaneous publication, he had the following in his mind:

A ful and Plaine Declaration of Ecclesiastical Discipline out of the Word of God, and of the Declining of the Church of England from the same, At Geneva. M.D.LXXX.

This edition requires again to be distinguished from that published four years later: A Butery and Plaine Declaration, &c. of Discipline. printed by Robt. Waldegrave. Lond. 1584- this last being different

book with a different title.

In 1581 there appeared also another edition of the Latin version, of which Bancroft gives the following account:-The year ensuing, 1584, the seven and twentieth of her Maiesty, out started this booke, with great glory at the parliament time: and forthwith the present government of the Church, with all the orders, lawes, and ceremonies thereof, was to be cut off at one blow, and this new booke or platformo must needes be established. But it prenailed not. Shortly after that parlia ment, the saide booko and platforme was found amongst themselves to have something amisso in it. And the correcting of it was referred to Traverse. Which work by him performed, came out againe about tho year 1586, when there was another parliament in the nine and twentieth of ner maiesties reign. But it was then (as I suppose) scuered from the saide booke of common praier, and become an entire work of itself.' A Surray of the Pretended Holy Discipline, &c., (1593), p. 66.

Of the translation printed at Cambridge (supra, p. 304) we have no trace; but in contravention of Whitgift's statement that it was the same as that which Travers 'set forth in Latin' (supra, p. 304), we have the following assertion by Bancroft, who, it is to be observed, expressly refers to the 'translator in Cambridge' (Surray, p. 237):-'But you must remember that I doe referre you to his Latine booke, and not to the English translation of it.... The translator of Traverses book hath quite omitted the wordes which I have alleadged, and all the rest that leadeth to that purpose, cuen scuenteene lines together'. (Ibid. p. 225.)

1 Wood-Bliss, Fasti, i. 205.

"The "Sacred Discipline," says Mr Dexter, 'among others, laid down these especial points: that lawful church government can be gathered only from the Holy Scriptures; that there can be but one right church order and form; that in every particular church there ought to be a presbytery of elders, by whom "all things are directed that belong to the state of their church;" and that all particular churches "ought to obey the opinion of moro churches with whom they communicate.” There might be here nothing radically inconsistent with the civil government of England, but in putting it into the power of the Consistory to decide what its religion and its worship shall be, a fatal blow was struck at the Queen's supremacy.' Dexter, Congregationalism of the last Three Hundred Years, p. 55.

In 1644, Travers' Disciplina was published as A Directory of Government, &c, and may from that time be regarded as an authoritative exposition of the l'uritan conception of Church discipline.

(D) 313.

'NORTII' and 'SOUTH.'

The above terms, as employed in connexion with fellowship and scholarship elections, nequired in the seventeenth century a somewhat different meaning to that which belonged to them in an earlier period.

In the former statutes of Peterhouse was one made in the time of Warkworth (master 1473-1500) whereby it was enacted that one-half of the fellows should be natives of one or other of the following northern dioceses,-York, Durham, Lichfield, Coventry, Carlisle,-or of that portion of the diocese of Lincoln represented by the counties of Lincoln and Leicester; and the other half, natives of the remaining part of the diocese of Lincoln, or of one or other of the southern dioceses (Documents, 11 54 and 66).

In 1515, it was further enacted that there should at no time be more than two fellows or two scholars from any one county (Ibid, 11 55).

In 1626, the 'scholars' and students petitioned the Crown that the former statute might be rescinded, as dictated by a desire to favour 'that part of England' (the diocese of Durham) ‘of which Dr Warkworth (the first maker of it) was.' 'The statute,' say the petitioners, 'pretends to remove from men the inordinate love of their private countries, as a fault by which goodnes and learning is much wronged. But it is so partially contrived, that it argues a most inordinate affection in the authors of it, and in all succession is cause of much wrong to virtue and good literature; for of 41 counties in England, that statute lays not 13 upon the one halfe of the Societic, but burthens the other halfe with above twice as many, as is above set downe.' (Ibid. 11 99 and 98.)

The meaning of this latter observation appears to have been, that the petitioners held it to be unfair that the twelve counties of Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmoreland, Durham, York, Lancaster, Lincoln, Chester, Derby, Stafford, Warwick, and Leicester (notwithstanding their much greater area) should be entitled to as many fellowships as all the other English counties, together with those of Wales. In 1629, their petition received a favorable response and the following distribution of counties as 'northern' and 'southern' was assigned, twenty-six In each :

It was at the same time laid down that if, at any time, a Scotchman [sce APPEND. (E)] or any other foreigner were admitted to a fellowship by royal dispensation, the first so admitted should be assigned a northern fellowship, the second a southern, and so on alternately. It was also enacted that there might be, at the same time, four fellows from each of the counties of Cambridge and Middlesex', and as Peterhouse had at this time only fourteen fellowships, it was thus, of course, rendered practicable to make the southern element predominant. It will bo observed, also, that in the above two lists, Huntingdon, Norfolk, Northampton, Rutland, and Worcester are all northern counties. In

1 The relaxation of the statute having reference to the number from each county seems to have been made in other instances in the reign of Charles I.: 'Denique divus Carolus

relaxationem statuti sexti, de numero sociorum ex uno comitatu eligendcrum, indulsit.' Shermanni Hist. Coll. Jesu, p. 29.

the older divisions, whether that according to the dioceses, or with the Tront roughly taken as the line of separation, these counties were in the southern division. In the early statutes of St John's (1545), known as those of Henry vin this latter division is thus defined: "Statuimus autem et ordinamus ut, universo sociorum numero in duas acquales partes diviso, tantum media pars et non plures e novem trans Trentam comitatibus, videlicet, Dunelmiae, Northumbriae, Westmeriae, Combriae, Eboraci, Richmondine, Lancastrine, Derbiae, Notingamino assumantur, ceteri socii o reliqua Anglia eligantur.' (Early Statuten of St. Johoin College, ed. Mayor, p. 49). In the same statute, it was enacted that not more than two were to be elected from any one county.

At one time, all Wales counted but as one county, a fact that affords additional explanation of the strong sympathy which appears to have existed between the different members of the little Welsh community in the university. Iacket tells us of archbishop Williams that he was 'much welcomed to Cambridge by the Old Britons of North Wales, who praised him mightily in all places of the university, for they are god at that,' he adds, 'to them of their own lineage. Scrinia Reserata, p. 7.

Generally speaking, these restrictions continued in force down to a comparatively recent dato at all the colleges excepting King's and Trinity. But King's laboured under a still more detrimental restriction; and the latter foundation alone represented catholicity in this respect Dyer, writing in 1821, says 'What is it which gives Trinity College that superiority which it challenges over the other colleges at Cambridge... It has neither propriety-fellowship, nor county-fellowship.' Supplement to the History of Cambridge, p. 23; see also supra, Appendix (A), p. 607.

(E) pp. 362, 516.

FOREIGNERS AT THE UNIVERSITIES.

With the exception of the special proviso in the early statutes of Pembroke (vol. 1 237, n. 1, 239), there does not appear to have been any prae-Reformation statute which threw open our Cambridge colleges to students without some restriction as to nationality. The following is the extract referred to on p. 362 n. 2, from the original statutes of Queen's College, Oxford:

'Sicut Universitas Oxoniae, juxta sui nominis designationem, universos suscipit undecunque ad ipsam causa studii confluentes, sic et aula praedicta nulli genti vel bene meritae nationi sinum claulat subsidii; ut quam universalis sit scholarium ipsius Universitatis recollectio, ipsorum assumendorum ad aulam praemissam sit tam generalis electio.

John Young, dean of Westminster, was a Scotchman, being a son of

Sir Peter Young, the diplomatist and tutor to James I. See S. Clarke's Lives (1651), pp. 487, 490; (1677), pp. 87, 89; Heylyn, Cyprianus Anglicanus (1671), p. 60; Birch, Court and Times Charles the First, 1 155.

James was not a little annoyed to find that he was unable to break through the obstacle presented by the restrictions of college statutes, in conferring upon his countrymen the benefits of royal nominations to vacant fellowships. On 9 Dec. 1609, Sir Thomas Lake addressed a letter to the chancellors of Oxford and Cambridge, informing them that his Majesty was 'much troubled' at the reluctance of the universities to admit 'Scotchmen', and desiring them to concert measures for a visitation for the purpose of revoking the 'hostile statutes.' At Cambridge, the authorities would seem to have gone to work somewhat reluctantly; but, after an interval of rather more than a year, we find Fogg Newton, the vice-chancellor, forwarding the following 'note' from King's College, in which the result of their deliberations and the reasons which led to it are plainly set forth:

Concerning the admittance of Scottish students into the several colledges of Cambridge, the Heades of Houses have answered by their letters to their honorable Chancellor:

'First, that they cannot admit them into their foundations, eyther as fellowes or scollers, because it is contrary to their local statutes, as appeares by the speciall branches of the same statutes sent up in writing, which forbid that election be made of any borne out of the realme of England.

'Again, they cannot otherwise maintaine them out of any allowance of their colledges, both because their foundations are already full, which makes their expenses equall to their revenues, as also for that the distribution and ordering of every colledg receiptes and rentes is not in the disposition of the maisters alone, but is respectively referred by their statutes to the consent of the major part of the fellowes also, who (they feare) will be adverse and backward to any such good purpose as this, because whatsoever is this way to be allowed must of necessity be defalked from them.'

See State Papers (Dom.) James the First, L no. 43; LXI no. 17.