A BIBLIOGRAPHICAL QUERY.
In the year 1704 was published anonymously:
"An Essay towards a Proposal for Catholic Communion; wherein above sixty of the principal controverted points, which have hitherto divided Christendom, being called over, 'tis examined how many of them may, and ought to be laid aside, and how few remain to be accommodated, for the effecting a general Peace. By a Minister of the Church of England. Sold by John Nutt, near Stationers' Hall, 1704."
This Essay has passed through several editions in London and Dublin: to that of 1801 is prefixed a
"Dedication to the Right Hon. the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and to the Hon. the House of Commons ... and the perusal of it earnestly recommended by a Lover of Christian Peace and Union and a Loyal United Briton."
It has now been in circulation for nearly a century and a half; and for want of a medium of inter-communication in olden times like "N. & Q.," its authorship has frequently been a topic of keen discussion. Mr. Oakeley, in his work, The Subject of Tract XC. historically examined, states that
"Its publication attracted at the time the notice of the Government. A warrant appears to have been issued from the Secretary of State's office for the seizure of the author's papers, and the arrest of his person, under a suspicion apparently that he was in league with the Pretender."
It is to be regretted that Mr. Oakeley has not given his authority for this statement. Mr. Goode, in his pamphlet entitled Tract XC. historically refuted, attributes it, on the authority of Dodd, to Thomas Dean, a Roman Catholic Fellow of University College, Oxford; whereas the author of The Sure Hope of Reconciliation, p. 61., thinks Mr. Goode's supposition open to exception; and as the writer styles himself "A Minister of the Church of England," he is inclined to admit his claim to the title, till stronger evidence be adduced to the contrary.
The following curious colloquy between two priests of the Roman and Anglican Churches, in the Town Hall at Guildford, in 1838, respecting the authorship of this Essay, is also worthy a Note:
"Rev. Joseph Sidden. The author of A Proposal for a Catholic Communion says——
"Rev. M. Hobart Seymour. Name! name.
"Rev. J. Sidden. I do not know his name; he appears to have been an archdeacon of the Church of England in the reign of Queen Anne. His work is on sale at Booker's.
"The Chairman. Can you name the place of which he was archdeacon?
"Rev. J. Sidden. No; but I give these as the words of a Protestant clergyman.
"Rev. M. H. Seymour. You do not know that he was a Protestant at all.
"Rev. J. Sidden. I have put the work into the hands of a Protestant clergyman, who agrees with it; and it agrees with Archbishop Bramhall. I have often tried to discover who was the author.
"Rev. M. H. Seymour. It was written perhaps by a Roman Catholic Priest.
"Rev. J. Sidden. I think not, because the Hon. and Rev. Arthur Perceval, rector of East Horsley, borrowed the book of me, and he wrote to me, that he so much approved of it, that he meant to procure a copy of it. I do not know who wrote it."—Proceedings at a Meeting of the Guildford Protestant Association, 1838, p. 20.
Now, without discussing the theological points at issue between the two parties, it is desirable that the authorship of this work, as a literary production, should be finally settled, which I am inclined to think will be the case when it is brought before the numerous readers of "N. & Q." On its first appearance it was attacked by three Nonjuring clergymen, viz. Grascome, Stephens, and Spinckes. Grascome, it appears, knew the author; but his work, Concordia Discors, I have not been able to procure. (See Life of Kettlewell, p. 328.) It is not to be found in the catalogues of the Bodleian, British Museum, or Sion College. The replies by Edward Stephens and Nathanael Spinckes are both in the Bodleian. The first edition of the original Essay, 1704, is in the British Museum, and on the title-page is written in pencil, "By Thomas Dean, a papist," and underneath, in ink, "By Nathanael Spinckes, not a Roman Catholic." The latter entry is clearly a mistake.
After some investigation, it appears to me that the authorship rests between Thomas Dean and Joshua Bassett. It is attributed to the former by Dodd (alias Tootle) in his Certamen utriusqe Ecclesiæ; but Wood, who has given some account of Dean in his Athenæ Oxon., vol. iv. p. 450. (Bliss), does not include this Essay among his other works. In the Bodleian Catalogue its authorship is attributed to Joshua Bassett, Master of Sidney College, Cambridge, of whom our biographical dictionaries are perfectly silent. Fortunately, Cole has preserved some notices of him in his MSS., vol. xx. p. 117. It appears that he was a Roman Catholic, and had mass publicly said in his college; but upon King James revoking the mandamuses in 1688, he left Cambridge and settled in London, where, says Cole, "he lived to be a very old man, and died in no very affluent circumstances, as we may well imagine." Cole notices a work by Bassett published anonymously, viz. Reason and Authority; or the Motives of a late Protestant's Reconciliation to the Catholic Church. London: 1687, 4to. With this clue, probably, some of your readers can finally settle the question.
J. Y.
Hoxton.