he had received, and the third to Salmasius; that the book was in every body's hands, and there had been four editions in a few months besides the English one'; that a Dutch translation was handed about, and a French one was expected. And afterwards he writes from Venice, that Holstenius had lent him Milton's Latin poems; that they were nothing, compared with the elegance of his Apology; that he had offended frequently against prosody, and here was a great opening for Salmasius's criticism: but as to Milton's having been a catamite in Italy, he says, that it was a mere calumny; on the contrary he was disliked by the Italians, for the severity of his manners, and for the freedom of his discourses against popery. And in others of his letters to Vossius and to J. Fr. Gronovius from Holland, Heinsius mentions how angry Salmasius was with him for commending Milton's book, and says that Graswinkelius had written something against Milton, which was to have been printed by Elzevir, but it was suppressed by public authority.

Dr. Joseph Warton also cites the following passages in N. Heinsius's Letters, inserted in Burman's Sylloge, tom. iii. p. 270. He says, in a Letter to Gronovius; "Miser iste Senecio (Sal"masius) prorsus delirat et in"sanit: Misit duas in hanc ur"bem (Amstelod.) epistolas, ra"biei sycophanticæ non inanes, "quibus omne se virus in me "conversurum minatur, quod "Miltoni scriptum probari a me intelligat. Ego vero dixi et "dicam prorsus, malam a Mil"tono causam tam bene actam, "quam Regis infelicissimi cau

sam pessime egit Scribonius."Inter Regicidas si locum nihi "dat, at omni procul dubio da"turus, videbis brevi pro meritis "ornatum depexum." In a letter from Is. Vossius to Heinsius, are the following words, iii. 620. "Ex animo gaudet Salmasius, "Librum Miltoni Lutetiæ pub"lice a Carnifice esse combustum "--interim hoc scio fatum esse "bonorum librorum, ut hoc modo "vel pereant vel periclitentur." Dr. Symmons extracts one or two curious passages beside these. See his Life of Milton, p. 396, 397. E.

The first reply that appeared was published in 1651, and entitled an Apology for the King and people &c. Apologia pro rege et populo Anglicano contra Johannis Polypragmatici (alias Miltoni Angli) Defensionem destructivam regis et populi Anglicani. It is not known, who was the author of this piece. Some attributed it to one Janus a lawyer of Gray's-Inn, and others to Dr. John Bramhall, who was then Bishop of Derry, and was made Primate of Ireland after the Restoration: but it is utterly improbable, that so mean a performance, written in such barbarous Latin, and so full of solecisms, should come from the hands of a prelate of such distinguished abilities and learning. But whoever was the author of it, Milton did not think it worth his while to animadvert upon it himself, but employed the younger of his nephews to answer it; but he supervised and corrected the answer so much before it went to the press, that it may in a manner be called his own. It came forth in 1652 under this title, Johannis Philippi Angli Responsio ad Apologiam anonymi củjusdam tenebrionis pro rege et populo Anglicano infantissimam; and it is printed with Milton's works; and throughout the whole Mr. Philips treats Bishop Bramhall with great severity as the author of the Apology, thinking probably that so considerable an adversary would make the answer more considerable".

Sir Robert Filmer likewise published some animadversions upon Milton's Defence of the people, in a piece printed in 1652, and entitled Observations concerning the original of government, upon Mr. Hobbes's Leviathan, Mr. Milton against Salmasius, and Hugo Grotius de Jure belli: but I do not find that Milton or any of his friends took any notice of it; but Milton's quarrel was afterwards sufficiently avenged by Mr. Locke, who wrote against Sir Robert Filmer's principles of government, more I suppose in condescension to the prejudices of the age, than out of any regard to the weight or importance of Filmer's arguments'.'

It is probable that Milton, when he was first made Latin Secretary, removed from his house in High Holborn to be nearer Whitehall: and for some time he had lodgings at one Thomson's, next door to the Bullhead tavern at Charing-Cross, opening into SpringGarden, till the apartment, appointed for him in Scotland-Yard, could be got ready for his reception. He then removed thither; and there his third child, a son, was born and named John, who through the ill usage or bad constitution of the nurse died an infant. His own health too was greatly impaired; and for the benefit of the air, he removed from his apartment in Scotland-Yard to a house in Petty-France Westminster, which was next door to Lord Scudamore's, and opened

into St. James's Park; and there he remained eight years, from the year 1652 till within a few weeks of the King's restoration. In this house he had not been settled long, before his first wife died in childbed; and his condition requiring some care and attendance, he was easily induced after a proper interval of time to marry a second, who was Catharine daughter of Captain Woodcock of Hackney: and she too died in childbed within a year after their marriage, and her child, who was a daughter, died in a month after her; and her husband has done honour to her memory in one of his sonnets k.

Two or three years before this second marriage he had totally lost his sight'. And his enemies triumphed in his blindness, and imputed ic as a judgment upon him for writing against the King: but his sight had been decaying several years before, through his close application to study, and the frequent head-aches to which he had been subject from his childhood, and his continual tampering with physic, which perhaps was more pernicious than all the rest; and he himself has informed us in his second Defence, that when he was appointed by authority to write his Defence of the people against Salmasius, he had almost lost the sight of one eye, and the physicians declared to him, that if he undertook that work, he would also lose the sight of

k "Mrs. Catharine Milton, "wife to John Milton, Esq. "buried Feb. 10, 1657." Bp. Kennet's MS. collections for St. Margaret's Parish, Westminster. See Mr. Malcolm's Hist. of London, 4to. vol. iv. p. 128. Todd.

Probably early in 1652; as Dr. Symmons has concluded from Milton's being upbraided with his blindness in the "Regii "Sanguinis clamor," published in 1652. E.

the other: but he was nothing discouraged, and chose rather to lose both his eyes, than desert what he thought his duty. It was the sight of his left eye that he lost first: and at the desire of his friend Leonard Philaras, the Duke of Parma's minister at Paris, he sent him a particular account of his case, and of the manner of his growing blind, for him to consult Thevenot the physician, who was reckoned famous in cases of the eyes. The letter is the fifteenth of his familiar epistles, is dated September 28, 1654, and is thus translated by: Mr. Richardson.

"Since you advise me not to fling away all hopes of "recovering my sight, for that you have a friend at Paris, Thevenot the physician, particularly famous " for the eyes, whom you offer to consult in my behalf if you receive from me an account by which he may

66

judge of the causes and symptoms of my disease, I "will do what you advise me to, that I may not seem "to refuse any assistance that is offered, perhaps from "God.

"I think it is about ten years, more or less, since I "began to perceive that my eye-sight grew weak and "dim, and at the same time my spleen and bowels to "be oppressed and troubled with flatus; and in the "morning when I began to read, according to custom, my eyes grew painful immediately, and to refuse reading, but were refreshed after a moderate exercise "of the body. A certain iris began to surround the light of the candle if I looked at it; soon after which, "on the left part of the left eye, (for that was some

66

66

66

years sooner clouded,) a mist arose which hid every