The twenty printers appointed by this decree were the subject of much investigation by Sir John Lamb, whose numerous notes and lists concerning them, as reprinted in the third volume of Professor Arber's transcripts from documents at the Record Office, are an invaluable acquisition to the history of the English press. It will be seen that four of the chief offenders of the previous ten or eleven years, namely William Jones, Nicholas Okes, Augustine Mathewes, and Robert or Richard Raworth, were absolutely excluded, their places being taken by Marmaduke Parsons, Thomas Paine, and a new man, Thomas Purslowe, probably the son of Widow Purslowe. Conscious perhaps that their positions were in jeopardy, all four petitioned the Archbishop to be placed among the number, but in vain, and another man who was excluded at the same time was John Norton, a descendant of a long family of printers of that name, and who had served his apprenticeship in the King's printing-house. Only one of those who had at times come before the High Commission Court was pardoned, and allowed to retain his place. This was Bernard Alsop.

The clause requiring all reprints to be licensed caused a good deal of murmuring, as did also that which forbade haberdashers, and others who were not legitimate booksellers, to sell books.

The small number of type-founders allowed to the trade has also been a subject of much comment by writers on this subject; but judging from the evidence of Arthur Nicholls, one of the four appointed, the number was quite sufficient. Nicholls was the founder of the Greek type used in the new office of Blackfriars, and his experience was certainly not likely to encourage other men to set up in the same trade. At the time when he was appointed one of the four founders under the decree, he could not make a living by his trade, and though he does not expressly state the fact, his evidence seems to imply that English printers at that time obtained most of their type from abroad, and it is beyond question that they had long since ceased to cast their own letter.

Drastic as this decree was, it practically remained a dead letter, for the reason that in the troublous times that followed within the next five years, the Government had their hands full in other directions, and were obliged to let the printers alone.

Between this date and the year 1640, there was very little either of interest or value that came from the English press. The memory of rare Ben Jonson induced Henry Seile, of the Tiger's Head in Fleet Street, to publish in 1638 a quarto with the title Jonsonus Virbius: or the Memory of Ben Jonson. Revived by the friends of the Muses, and among the contributors were Lord Falkland, Sir John Beaumont the younger, Sir Thomas Hawkins, Henry King, Edmund Waller, Shackerley Marmion, and several others. The printer's initials are given as E. P., but these do not suit any of those who were authorised under the decree of the year before, and they may refer to Elizabeth Purslowe. That there was a considerable number of persons who, in spite of the Puritan tendencies of the age, loved a good play, is clearly seen from the number turned out during the years 1638, 1639, and 1640 by Thomas Nabbes, Henry Glapthorne, James Shirley, and Richard Brome. These of course were mostly quartos, very poorly printed, and chiefly from the presses of Richard Oulton, John Okes, and Thomas Cotes. Of collected works, there came out in small octavo form the Poems of Thomas Carew from the press of John Dawson in 1640, and a collection of Shakespeare's Poems from the press of Thomas Cotes in the same year. There were also published in 1640 from the press of Richard Bishop, who had succeeded to the business of William Stansby, Selden's De Jure Naturali et Gentium juxta disciplinam Ebræorum, in folio, and William Somner's Antiquities of Canterbury, one of the earliest and best of the contributions to county bibliography.

Having now brought the record of the London press down to the time when it became engulphed in the chaos of civil war, it is time to turn to the University presses of Oxford and Cambridge.

Since the year 1585, these were the only provincial presses allowed by law, and removed as they were from the turmoil of conflicting parties, and the severity of trade competition, in which the London printers lived, their work showed more uniformity of excellence, and on the whole surpassed that of the London printers.

Down to the year 1617 Oxford appears to have had but one printer, John Barnes; but in that year we find two at work, John Lichfield and William Wrench, the latter giving place the following year to James Short. In 1624 the two Oxford printers were John Lichfield and William Turner—the second, as we have seen, being notorious as the printer of unlicensed pamphlets for Michael Sparke the London publisher; but in spite of this we find him holding his position until 1640, though in the meantime John Lichfield had been succeeded in business by his son, Leonard. In the introduction to his bibliography of the Oxford Press, Mr. Falconer Madan has given a list of the most important books printed at Oxford between 1585 and 1640, which we venture to reprint here with a few additions:—

As we have noted, the University of Cambridge had after a long struggle established its claim to print editions of the Scriptures and other works, and like its sister University turned out some of the best work of that period.