LIFE

OF

BISHOP LEIGHTON.

Patris perdigni filius non degener.

THERE is no species of history more instructive and more pleasing than Biography, when it is faithfully and correctly composed. The lives of individuals, whether they have been distinguished by rank, by talent, by official situation; or their course been marked with deep and various incidents, are always perused with eagerness. Curiosity is gratified, and we may be much instructed, by the account both of bad men, and of good. The former are beacons set up for warning, though the memorial of the great majority has deservedly perished. The latter are way-marks for leading us in the right path, and show practically how we should walk in it. If they lived in difficult and trying times; if they discovered solicitude for the welfare of the church, and of the world; if they

a

were eminent for learning, for piety and christian tempers, for holy zeal, and scriptural candour,-greater interest is excited, and more instruction may be expected. The memory of the wise and good, especially of those who served God in the gospel of his Son, is blessed; should be preserved, and be exhibited for the improvement of the living. When the progenitors of such men have also been honourably distinguished by their faith and patience, their courage and usefulness, we feel ourselves uncommonly interested in their history. The sacred scriptures, which abound in biography, delineate characters of this kind, often in bold and rapid sketches, sometimes in minute and accurate detail. It will be difficult to find, in any age, a father more patient, and a son more pious, than Dr. Alexander Leighton, and his son ROBERT, whose life we now propose to exhibit in a new form.

Dr. Alexander Leighton, our author's father, was a Scots minister, and was settled in London, in the reign of Charles the First; about the time when archbishop Laud, that superstitious and cruel persecutor, had nearly attained the height of his power. Dr. Leighton gave plain and faithful testimony from the pulpit and the press, against the violent measures of

.

the court, which were prompted chiefly by the queen, a bigotted papist; and against the conduct and character of the bishops under the influence of Laud. One book especially provoked the resentment of the court and clergy. It was entitled, "Sion's Plea against Prelacy," and the writer's spirit being stirred within him, and being naturally of a warm temper, he had used great freedom of speech, and thrown out expressions rather too severe, and somewhat acrimonious. The Dr. was apprehended, February, 1630, by a warrant from the High Commission, an odious and oppressive court, which took cognizance of alledged heresy; and without the form of trial was committed to Newgate. There he was clapt in irons, thrust into a dungeon, without a bed or fire; and repeated attempts were made to poison him. He languished in that situation for many weeks, and was brought to the very gates of death; partly by close confinement in such a place, partly by poisonous food secretly administered, but which the strength of his constitution overcame. While Dr. Leighton was yet dangerously ill, he was cited before the Star Chamber, another unjust and merciless tribunal which professed to punish sedition; and, after a mock trial received a sentence suitable to the spirit of that court, and the temper of the times.

The court adjudged, that he should pay a fine of ten thousand pounds; be deprived of the ministerial office; be set on the pillory twice, once in Westminster, and again in Cheapside; be publicly whipped; have his ears cut off, and both nostrils slit; be branded on the cheek with the letters, S. S. "A Sower of Sedition ;" and finally, that he should be committed to the Fleet prison for life. While the court was pronouncing this barbarous sentence, Bishop Laud pulled off his cap with a malicious smile, and at the close gave God thanks; so hardened was his heart against the common feelings of humanity.

In hopes of Dr. Leighton's submission the execution of the sentence was delayed for several months. But, he chose rather to suffer pain and ignominy, than to act inconsistently with truth and a good conscience. The horrid sentence was executed, November, 1630, most rigorously and with punctuality, in the midst of frost and snow. As, according to the terms of the sentence, he was to be publicly exposed and punished twice, the second part of it, after the short interval of seven days, the innocent sufferer's back and face being yet excoriated and disfigured, was inflicted with unrelenting severity. Many of the spectators, and