HIS ANCESTOR, PROVOST OF KING'S. 15 good preservation, states that he was born-Antiquâ stirpe et honesto loco in agro Dorsettiensi.' The MS. memoir before me, in the bishop's handwriting, gives proof that this first Provost Copleston was an author as well as a scholar; nor do I think it will be a tedious diversion if I produce it here. 'On the 29th May, 1661, he preached a sermon at the cathedral church of Exeter, which he afterwards published, entitled, Moses next to God and Aaron next to Moses subordinate and subservient. In the title-page he is styled 'John Copleston, M.A., sometime Fellow of King's College in Cambridge, now Vicar of Broad Clyste, Devon, and Prebend of St. Peter's, Exon.' 'The sermon is a good argument on the divine institution of government. One passage is peculiarly animated, which I will transcribe. After having reasoned at some length upon the absurdity and inconsistency of founding government on social compact, he proceeds : Away, then, with that irreligious and dangerous tenet, so frequent in the mouths and pens of some men in these days, that all power is from the people, interpreting, I know not by what authority, Dei Minister, the people's servant; that magistrates, yea, even the supreme magistrate, is trusted by the people, and if he be not faithful, that is, if he satisfie not their giddy humours (which, in prudence and conscience, he is bound not to do), then they may assert their native rights, and re-assume the trust reposed in him. Thus does this pernicious error pretend to a law of nature for the violation of all the laws, both of God and man. A doctrine big with rebellion and confusion, whose teeming womb never brings forth any other issue but blood and fire, and pillars of smoak.'' Doubtless, with all due respect for his loyal ancestor, but yet with a little quiet satire, the bishop adds, after giving this extract—'What share this sermon had in his promotion I know not, but on the 26th June, 1669, he was admitted canon.' Further on, the future Provost of Oriel records the honours of his ancestor in these words:-' He was elected provost of his College by the unanimous suffrage of the Society on the 24th August, 1681, and continued there till his death, August 24, 1689, having presided over the College exactly eight years, and (if his epitaph is to be credited) with the greatest prudence and dignity.' I gather from the interesting family relic, of which a fac-simile is here given, that this last expression of the epitaph is intended to be more than ordinarily significant. In what degree the Provost of King's was related to the distinguished personage whose autograph lies before me, I have not been able to discover; but a 'kinsman,' in any sense, of Monk, duke of Albemarle, was no doubt a right worshipful person in his day. A silver-gilt cup, presented to this Dr. Copleston, as vice-chancellor of Cambridge, by King Charles II., is still preserved in the family. It seems, from the specimens given in the Bishop's MS. memoir, and which are also to be found, I believe, in the Musa Cantabrigienses of that date, that the Provost of King's wrote Latin verses as well as sermons; but I shall not withhold any special gratification from my readers though I produce none of them. It is quite certain that if his descendant, the Provost of Oriel, had not, as an GENEALOGICAL RESEARCHES. 17 undergraduate, written much better, he would not have gained his university prize. With the following amusing extract I will close my notice-perhaps already too extended-of Mr. Copleston's ancestral record: 'The next occasion on which he appeared in print among the academical versifiers was the death of King Charles the Second, and the accession of King James, when the University of Cambridge lamented and rejoiced most dutifully in the same breath. The title of the volume composed on this occasion was 'Mæstissimæ ac lætissimæ Academiæ Cant: Affectus, Decedente Carolo II., Succedente Jacobo II. Regibus Augustissimis Serenissimis, Clementissimis.'' Such was Mr. Copleston's scrupulous exactness in his genealogical researches, that much as he desired to arrive at the conclusion, he would not, upon grounds of probability only, link on the first name in his scheme to the last name of the Dorsetshire branch of Copleston, as given in the Herald's Visitation for 1623, but contents himself with saying 'That he (i. e. the first Copleston upon his scheme) was connected with the main family some way or other I have no doubt, as well from the tradition of the family, the same spelling of the name, the bearing of the same coat of arms, as from the circumstance that I am morally certain none of the name ever existed who were not descended from that family.' Upon the authority of the antiquarian, Lyson,* * See his Britannia, cc. 174 and 175. C |