extensive enterprise; in these particulars, perhaps, the Roman do not
much surpass the English worthies: but what a difference, when the
discourse, conduct, conversation, and private as well as public behavior
of both are inspected! Compare only one circumstance, and consider its
consequences. The leisure of those noble ancients was totally employed
in the study of Grecian eloquence and philosophy; in the cultivation of
polite letters and civilized society: the whole discourse and language
of the moderns were polluted with mysterious jargon, and full of the
lowest and most vulgar hypocrisy.

The laws, as they stood at present, protected the church but they
exposed the Catholics to the utmost rage of the Puritans; and these
unhappy religionists, so obnoxious to the prevailing sect, could not
hope to remain long unmolested. The voluntary contribution, which they
had made, in order to assist the king in his war against the Scottish
Covenanters, was inquired into, and represented as the greatest
enormity.[*] By an address from the commons, all officers of that
religion were removed from the army, and application was made to the
king for seizing two thirds of the lands of recusants; a proportion to
which by law he was entitled, but which he had always allowed them to
possess upon easy compositions. The execution of the severe and bloody
laws against priests was insisted on; and one Goodman, a Jesuit, who
was found in prison, was condemned to a capital punishment. Charles,
however, agreeably to his usual principles, scrupled to sign the warrant
for his execution; and the commons expressed great resentment on the
occasion.[**] There remains a singular petition of Goodman, begging to
be hanged, rather than prove a source of contention between the king and
his people.[***]

* Rush, vol. v. p. 160.

** Rush. vol. v. p. 158, 159. Nalson, vol. i. p. 739.

*** Rush. vol. v. p. 166. Nalson, vol. i. p. 749.

He escaped with his life; but it seems more probable, that he was
overlooked amidst affairs of greater consequence, than that such
unrelenting hatred would be softened by any consideration of his courage
and generosity.

For some years Con, a Scotchman, afterwards Rosetti, an Italian, had
openly resided at London, and frequented the court, as vested with a
commission from the pope. The queen's zeal, and her authority with her
husband, had been the cause of this imprudence, so offensive to the
nation.[*] But