Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, enriched the library of the college of Corpus Christi, with a great number of ancient and curious manuscripts.
In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Sir Thomas Bodley greatly increased the public library at Oxford, which is now called by his name. This great benefactor to the literature of his country, quitted the court, and applied himself wholly to the purchasing of books and manuscripts both at home and abroad. By these means he had the satisfaction of furnishing that library with 1294 manuscripts, which by the subsequent liberality of many great and illustrious persons, has been since increased to more than eight thousand volumes, including the manuscripts given by Tanner, Bishop of Norwich, and the valuable library bequeathed by the will of Dr. Richard Rawlinson.
Considerable augmentations were made to the libraries of the several colleges in the two universities, as also to those of our cathedral churches, the palace at Lambeth, the Inns of Court, the College of Arms, and others; catalogues of which were published at Oxford in 1697 under the title of Catalogus Manuscriptorum Angliæ et Hiberniæ.
Bodley’s great contemporary, Sir Robert Cotton, is also entitled to the gratitude of posterity for his diligence in collecting the Cottonian library; he was engaged in the pursuit of manuscripts and records upwards of forty years, during which time he spared neither trouble nor expense.
The noble manuscript library founded by Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, and greatly enriched by his son Edward, who inherited his father’s love of science, claims a distinguished place in every account which may be given of the literary treasures of antiquity in general, and of this country in particular. Posterity will ever be indebted to her grace the Duchess Dowager of Portland, for securing this inestimable treasure of learning to the public, by authority of Parliament, under the guardianship of the most distinguished persons of the realm, both for rank and abilities, whose excellent regulations have made this library, as also the Royal, Cottonian, Sloanian, and others, now deposited in the British Museum, easy of access, and consequently of real use to the philosopher, the statesman, the historian, the scholar, and the artist.[[16]]
TORTURE IN ENGLAND.[[17]]
In the reign of King Henry the Sixth, the Rack or Brake, was placed in the Tower of London, by the Duke of Exeter, when he and the Earl of Suffolk had formed the design of introducing the Civil Law into England. It was called “Exeter’s daughter,” and remained afterwards in the Tower, “where it was occasionally used as an Engine of State, more than once in the reign of Elizabeth.”
Though the use of the Rack does not appear to have been known in this country until the 26th year of Henry the Sixth, and though it was never authorized by the law, yet to borrow the expression of Mr. Justice Blackstone, it was occasionally used as an “Engine of State,” to extort confession from State Prisoners confined in the Tower, from the time of its introduction, until finally laid aside in consequence of the decision of the judges in Felton’s case. One Hawkins was tortured[[18]] in the reign of Henry the Sixth; and the case of Anne Askew,[[19]] in that of Henry the Eighth,[[20]] cannot escape the recollection of every reader of English history. The Lord Chancellor Wriothesely (I blush for the honour and humanity of an English Judge while I write his name) went to the Tower to take her examination, and upon the Lieutenant’s refusing to draw the cords tighter, drew them himself till every limb was dislocated, and her body nearly torn asunder. In Mary’s reign several persons were racked in order to extort confessions, which was upon account of Sir Thomas Wyat’s rebellion. And Barrington mentions that in Oldmixon’s History of England (p. 284,) one Simpson is said to have been tortured in 1558, and a confession extorted.
In the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth,[[21]] the Rack was used upon offenders against the State, and among others, upon Francis Throgmorton; in 1571, upon Charles Baillie an attendant upon the Bishop of Ross, Mary’s ambassador, and upon Banastre, one of the Duke of Norfolk’s servants; and Barker, another of his servants was brought to confess by extreme fear of it. In 1581, Campion, the Jesuit, was put upon the rack,[[22]] and in 1585, Thomas Morgan writes to the Queen of Scots, that he has heard D. Atslow was racked in the Tower, twice about the Earl of Arundel. This is the last instance of the actual application of torture to extort confession.
For the greater part of this reign the application of torture in the examination of State offenders seems to have been in common use, and its legality not disputed. Mr. Daines Barrington says,[[23]] that among the manuscript papers of Lord Ellesmere, is a copy of instructions to him, as Lord President of the Marches, to use the torture on the taking of some examinations at Ludlow; and Sir Edward Coke himself,[[24]] in the year 1600, (the 43d of Elizabeth’s reign) then being Attorney General, at the trials of the Earls of Essex and Southampton, boasted of the clemency of the Queen, because, though the rebellious attempts were so exceedingly heinous, yet out of her princely mercy “no person was racked, tortured, or pressed to speak any thing further than of their own accord.” And in the Countess of Shrewsbury’s case (10 James 1st) when Sir Edward was Chief Justice, in enumerating the privileges of the nobility, he mentions as one, that their bodies were not subject to torture in causa criminis læsæ majestatis. Barrington justly observes[[25]] there was a regular establishment for torture, for at his trial,[[26]] in the first year of James the first, Sir Walter Raleigh stated that Kemish had been threatened with the rack, and the keeper of the instrument sent for. Sir William Wade, who, with the Solicitor General had taken his examination, denied it, but admitted they had told him he deserved it, and Lord Howard declared, “Kemish was never on the rack, the king gave charge that no rigour should be used.”