no warrant can
be found in Chaucer's Poem, or any where else. Dryden wished to write
something that would gall the clergy who had taken the oaths, and
therefore attributed to a Roman Catholic priest of the fourteenth
century a superstition which originated among the Anglican priests of
the seventeenth century.]

[Footnote 459: See the defence of the profession which the Right
Reverend Father in God John Lake, Lord Bishop of Chichester, made upon
his deathbed concerning passive obedience and the new oaths. 1690.]

[Footnote 460: London Gazette, June 30. 1689; Narcissus Luttrell's
Diary. "The eminentest men," says Luttrell.]

[Footnote 461: See in Kettlewell's Life, iii. 72., the retractation
drawn by him for a clergyman who had taken the oaths, and who afterwards
repented of having done so.]

[Footnote 462: See the account of Dr. Dove's conduct in Clarendon's
Diary, and the account of Dr. Marsh's conduct in the Life of
Kettlewell.]

[Footnote 463: The Anatomy of a Jacobite Tory, 1690.]

[Footnote 464: Dialogue between a Whig and a Tory.]

[Footnote 465: Narcissus Luttrell's Diary, Nov. 1697, Feb. 1692.]

[Footnote 466: Life of Kettlewell, iii. 4.]

[Footnote 467: See Turner's Letter to Sancroft, dated on Ascension Day,
1689. The original is among the Tanner MSS. in the Bodleian Library. But
the letter will be found with much other curious matter in the Life of
Ken by a Layman, lately published. See also the Life of Kettlewell, iii.
95.; and Ken's letter to Burnet, dated Oct. 5. 1689, in Hawkins's Life
of Ken. "I am sure," Lady Russell wrote to Dr. Fitzwilliam, "the Bishop
of Bath and Wells excited others to comply, when he could not bring
himself to do so, but rejoiced when others did." Ken declared that he
had advised nobody to take the oaths, and that his practice had been to
remit those who asked his advice to their own studies and prayers. Lady
Russell's assertion and Ken's denial will be found to come nearly to
the same thing, when we make those allowances which ought to be made
for situation and feeling, even in weighing the testimony of the most
veracious witnesses. Ken, having at last determined to cast in his lot
with the nonjurors, naturally tried to vindicate his consistency as far
as he honestly could. Lady Russell, wishing to induce her friend to take
the oaths, naturally made as munch of Ken's disposition to compliance as
she honestly could. She went too far in using the word "excited." On the
o