ct. 16, 1656:_--Long ago,
in the time of King Charles, two brothers, James and Patrick Hays,
being the lawful heirs of their brother Alexander, who had died
intestate in Hamburg, had obtained a decree in their favour in the
Hamburg Court, assigning them all the said Alexander's property,
except dower for his widow. From that day to this, however, chiefly
by the influence of Albert van Eizen, a man of consequence in
Hamburg, they have been kept out of their rights. They are in
extreme poverty and have applied to the Protector. As he considers
it the first duty of his Protectorate to look after such cases, he
writes this letter. It is to request the Hamburg Senate to see that
the two brothers have the full benefit of the old decision of the
Court. Further delay has been threatened, he hears, in the form of
an appeal to the Chamber of Spires. That such an appeal is illegal
will appear by the signed opinions of English lawyers which he
forwards. "But, if entreaty is of no avail, it will be necessary,
and that by the common right of nations, to resort to measures of
retaliation." His Highness hopes this may be avoided by the
prudence of the Senate.

(XCV.) TO LOUIS XIV. OF FRANCE, _Nov. 1656:_--No answer has
yet been received to his Highness's former letter, of May 14, on
the subject of the claim of Sir John Dethicke, then Lord Mayor of
London, and his partner William Wakefield, on account of the
capture of a ship of theirs in 1649 by a pirate acting for Charles
Stuart, and the insolent detention of the same by M. L'Estrades,
the French Governor of Dunkirk (see the Letter, ante p. 253).
Perhaps the delay had arisen from the fact that M. L'Estrades was
then away with the army in Flanders; but "now he is living in Paris
itself, or rather fluttering about with impunity in city and court
enriched with the spoils of our people." His Highness now
imperatively demands immediate and strict attention to the matter.
It is one of positive obligation by the Treaty; and the honour and
good faith of His French Majesty are directly concerned.--It is a
curious coincidence that within a day or two of the writing of this
strong letter by Milton in behalf of Sir John Dethicke, that knight
should have solemnised Milton's marriage with Katharine Woodcock.
Nov. 12 was the date of the marriage; and, as Dethicke is spoken of
in this letter as no longer in his Mayoralty, it m