CHAPTER VIII_A Short History of English Printing, 1476-1898

FROM 1640 TO 1700

Having at length reached what is without doubt the darkest and the most

wretched period in the history of English printing, it may be well

before passing a severe condemnation on those who represented the trade

at that time, to remind ourselves of the difficulties against which they

had to contend.

The art of printing in England had never at any time reached such a

point of excellence as in Paris under the Estiennes, in Antwerp under

Plantin, or in Venice under the Aldi. So great was the competition

between the printers, and so heavy the restrictions placed upon them,

that profit rather than beauty or workmanship was their first

consideration; and when to these drawbacks was added the general

disorganisation of trade consequent upon the outbreak of civil war, it

is not surprising that English work failed to maintain its already low

standard of excellence. Literature, other than that which chronicled

the fortunes of the opposing factions, was almost totally neglected.

Writers, even had they found printers willing to support them, would

have found no readers. On the other hand, such was the feverish anxiety

manifested in the struggle, that it was scarcely possible to publish the

Diurnals and Mercuries which contained the latest news fast enough, and

the press was unequal to the strain, although the number of printers in

London during this period was three times larger than that allowed by

the decree of 1637. Professor Arber, in his _Transcript_, says that this

increase in the number of printers was due to the removal of the gag by

the Long Parliament. There is no proof that the Long Parliament ever

intended to remove the gag; but having its hands full with other and

weightier matters it could find no time to deal with the printers, and

doubtless, in the heat of the fight, it was only too thankful to avail

itself of the pens of those who replied to the attacks of the Royalist

press. The best evidence of this is, that as soon as opportunity

offered, and in spite of the warning of the greatest literary man of

that day, who was on their own side, the Long Parliament reimposed the

gag with as much severity as the hierarchy which it had deposed.

For the publication of the news of the day, each party had its own

organs. On the side of the Parliament the principal journals were _The

Kingdoms Weekly Intelligencer_, printed and published by Nathaniel

Butter, and _Mercurius Britannicus_, edited by Marchmont Nedham; while

_Mercurius Aulicus_, edited by clever John Birkenhead, represented the

Royalists, and was ably seconded by the _Perfect Occurrences_, printed

by John Clowes and Robert Ibbitson.

These sheets, which usually consisted of from four to eight quarto

pages, contained news of the movements and actions of the opposing

armies, and the proceedings of the Parliament at Westminster, or of the

King's Council at Oxford or wherever he happened to be. They were

published sometimes twice and even three times a week. The political

pamphlets were bitter and scurrilous attacks by each party against the

other, or the hare-brained prophecies of so-called astrologers, such as

William Lilly, George Wharton, and John Gadbury. These two classes

formed more than half the printed literature of those unhappy times, and

the remainder of the output of the press was pretty well filled up with

sermons, exhortations, and other religious writings. The rapidity with

which the literature was turned out accounts for the wretched and

slipshod appearance it presents. Any old types or blocks were brought

into use, and there is evidence of blocks and initial letters which had

formed part of the stock of the printers of a century earlier being

brought to light again at this time. Unfortunately the evil did not

stop here, for careless workmanship, indifference, and want of

enterprise, are the leading characteristics of the printing trade during

the latter half of the seventeenth century. But as, even in this darkest

hour of the nation's fortunes, the soul of literature was not crushed,

and the voice of the poet could still make itself heard, so it is a

great mistake to suppose that there were no good printers during the

period covered by the Civil Wars and the Commonwealth.

Take as an example the little duodecimo entitled _Instructions for

Forreine Travell_, which came from the pen of James Howell, and was

printed by T. B., no doubt Thomas Brudnell, for Humphrey Moseley. Some

of the founts, especially the larger Roman, are very unevenly and badly

cast, but on the whole the presswork was carefully done. The same may

also be said of the folio edition of Sir R. Baker's _Chronicle_,

published in 1643. In this case we do not know who was the printer; but

the ornaments and initials lead us to suppose that it was the work of

William Stansby's successor. The prose tracts again that Milton wrote

between 1641-45 are certainly far better printed than many of their

contemporaries, and prove that Matthew Simmons, who printed most of

them, and who was one of the Commonwealth men, deserved the position he

afterwards obtained. The first collected edition of Milton's poems was

published by Humphrey Moseley in 1645. This was a small octavo, in two

parts, with separate title-pages, and a portrait of the author by

William Marshall, and came from the press of Ruth Raworth. In 1646 there

appeared _A Collection of all the Incomparable Peeces written by Sir

John Suckling and published by a freend to perpetuate his memory_. This

came from the press of Thomas Walkley, who had issued the first edition

of _Aglaura_ and the later plays of the same writer. Walkley also

printed in small octavo, for Moseley, the _Poems_ of Edmond Waller, but

his work was none of the best.

A printer of considerable note at this time was William Dugard, who in

1644 was chosen headmaster of Merchant Taylors' School, and set up a

printing-press there. In January 1649 he printed the first edition of

the famous book _Eikon Basilike_, and followed it up by a translation of

Salmasius' _Defensio Regia_, for which the Council of State immediately

ordered his arrest, seized his presses, and wrote to the Governors of

the school, ordering them to elect a new schoolmaster, 'Mr. Dugard

having shewn himself an enemy to the state by printing seditious and

scandalous pamphlets, and therefore unfit to have charge of the

education of youths' (_Dom. S. P. Interregnum_, pp. 578-583). Sir James

Harrington, member of the Council of State, and author of _Oceana_, who

seems to have known something about Dugard, interceded with the Council

on his behalf, and at the same time persuaded him to give up the

Royalist cause. So his presses were restored to him, and henceforward he

appears to have devoted himself with equal zeal to his new masters.

He was the printer of Milton's answer to Salmasius, published by the

Council's command, of a book entitled _Mare Clausum_, also published by

authority, of the _Catechesis Ecclesiarum_, a book which the Council

found to contain dangerous opinions and ordered to be burnt, and of a

tract written by Milton's nephew, John Phillips, entitled _Responsio ad

apologiam_. His initials are also met with in many other books of that

time.

His press was furnished with a good assortment of type, and his

press-work was much above the average of that period.

Among other books that came from the London press during this troubled

time, we may single out three which have found a lasting place in

English literature. The first is Robert Herrick's _Hesperides_, printed

in the years 1647-48; the second a volume of verse, by Richard Lovelace,

entitled _Lucasta, Epodes, Odes, Sonnets, Songs_, etc., printed in 1649

by Thomas Harper; the last Izaak Walton's _Complete Angler_, which came

from the press of John Maxey in 1653. All were small octavos,

indifferently printed with poor type, and no pretensions to artistic

workmanship.

In 1649, the year of Charles I.'s execution, the Council of State, in

consequence of the number of 'scandalous and seditious pamphlets' which

were constantly appearing, in spite of all decrees and acts to the

contrary, ordered certain printers to enter into recognizances in two

sureties of £300, and their own bond for a similar amount, not to print

any such books, or allow their presses to be used for that purpose.

Accordingly, in the _Calendar of State Papers_ for the year 1649-50 (pp.

522, 523), we find a list of no less than sixty printers in London and

the two Universities who entered into such sureties. In almost every

case the address is given in full, in itself a gain, at a time when the

printer's name rarely appeared in the imprint of a book. This list has

already been printed in _Bibliographica_ (vol. ii. pp. 225-26), but as

it is of the greatest interest for the history of printing during the

remainder of the century, it is inserted here (see Appendix No. 1.).

While it does not include all the printers having presses at that time,

yet, if we remember that under the Star Chamber decree of 1637 the

number in London was strictly limited to twenty, it shows how rapid the

growth of the trade was in those twelve years. Of the original twenty,

only three seem to have survived the troubles and dangers of the Civil

Wars--Bernard Alsop, Richard Bishop, and Thomas Harper, though the

places of three more were filled by their survivors--Elizabeth Purslowe

standing in the place of her husband, Thomas Purslowe; Gertrude Dawson

succeeding her husband, John Dawson; and James Flesher or Fletcher in

the room of his father, Miles Flesher. John Gresmond and James Moxon

were type-founders, Henry Hills and John Field were appointed printers

to the State under Cromwell, and Thomas Newcomb was also largely

employed, and shared with the other two the privilege of Bible printing.

Roger Norton was the direct descendant of old John Norton, who died in

1590. Of Roycroft and Simmons we shall hear a good deal later on, as

indeed we shall of many others in this list. The only names that hardly

seem to warrant insertion in the list as printers are those of John and

Richard Royston. Although they were for many years stationers to King

Charles II., we cannot hear of any printing-presses in their possession.

With the quieter time of the Commonwealth, several notable works were

produced, though the annual output of books was much below the average

of the seven years preceding. Foremost among the publications of that

time must be placed Sir William Dugdale's _Monasticon Anglicanum_, the

first volume of which appeared in 1655.

As a monument of study and research this book will always remain a

standard work of English topography; and it was not unworthily printed.

The preparation of the numerous plates for the illustrations, and the

setting up of so much intricate letterpress, must have been a very

onerous work. This first volume, a large and handsome folio, came from

the press of Richard Hodgkinson, and was printed in pica Roman in double

columns, with a great deal of italic and black letter intermixed. The

types were as good as any to be found in England at that time, and the

press-work was carefully done. The engravings were chiefly the work of

Hollar, aided by Edward Mascall and Daniel King, and are excellently

reproduced. The whole work occupied eighteen years in publication, the

second volume being printed by Alice Warren, the widow of Thomas Warren,

in 1661, and the third and last by Thomas Newcomb in 1673; but these

later volumes differed very little in appearance from the first, the

same method of setting and the same mixture of founts being adhered to.

Sir William Dugdale followed this up in 1656 by publishing, through the

press of Thomas Warren, his _Antiquities of Warwickshire_, a folio of

826 pages. On the title-page is seen the device of old John Wolfe, the

City printer. The dedication of this book was printed in great primer;

but the look of the text was marred by a bad fount of black letter which

did not print well. Like the _Monasticon_, this work was illustrated

with maps and portraits by Hollar and Vaughan.

Another considerable undertaking was the _Historical Collections_ of

John Rushworth, in eight folio volumes, of which the first was printed

by Newcomb in 1659, the others between 1680 and 1701.

But the great typographical achievement of the century was the Polyglott

Bible, edited by Brian Walton. It was the fourth great Bible of the kind

which had been published. The earliest was the Complutensian, printed at

Alcala in 1517, with Hebrew, Latin, Greek, and Chaldean texts. Next came

the Antwerp Polyglott, printed at the Plantin Press in 1572, which, in

addition to the texts above mentioned, gave the Syriac version. This was

followed in 1645 by the Paris Polyglott, which added Arabic and

Samaritan, was in ten folio volumes, and took seventeen years to

complete.

The London Polyglott of 1657, which exceeded all these in the number of

texts, was mainly due to the enterprise and industry of Brian Walton,

Bishop of Chester. This famous scholar and divine was born at Cleveland,

in Yorkshire, in 1600. He was educated at Cambridge, and after serving

as curate in All Hallows, in Bread Street, became rector of St. Martin's

Orgar and of St. Giles in the Fields. He was sequestered from his

living at St. Martin's during the troubles of the Revolution, and fled

to Oxford, and it was while there that he is said to have formed the

idea of the Polyglott Bible.

The first announcement of the great undertaking was made in 1652, when a

type specimen sheet, believed to be still in existence, was printed by

James Flesher or Fletcher of Little Britain, and issued with the

prospectus, which was printed by Roger Norton of Blackfriars for Timothy

Garthwaite. Walton's Polyglott was the second book printed by

subscription in England, Minsheu's _Dictionary in Eleven Languages_

having been published in this manner in 1617. The terms were £10 per

copy, or £50 for six copies. The estimated cost of the first volume was

£1500, and of succeeding volumes £1200, and such was the spirit with

which the work was taken up that £9000 was subscribed before the first

volume was put to press.

To the texts which had appeared in previous Polyglotts, Persian and

Ethiopic were added, so that in all nine languages were included in the

work--that is, Hebrew, Latin, Greek, Chaldean, Syriac, Arabic,

Samaritan, Persian, and Ethiopic--besides much additional matter in the

form of tables, lexicons, and grammars. No single book was printed in

all of these, only the Greek, Latin, Syriac, and Arabic running

throughout the work, while the Hebrew appears in the Old Testament, the

Psalms in Ethiopic, and the New Testament has, in addition to the four

principal texts, the Ethiopic and Persian.

The whole work occupied six folio volumes, measuring 16 x 10-3/4, and

was printed by Thomas Roycroft from types supplied by the four

recognised typefounders. At the commencement of the first volume is a

portrait of Walton by Bombert, followed by an elaborately engraved

title-page, the work of Wenceslaus Hollar, an architectural design

adorned with scenes from Scripture history. The second title-page was

printed in red ink, and the text was so arranged that each double page,

when open, showed all the versions of the same passage. The types used

in this work have been described in detail by Rowe Mores in his

_Dissertations upon English Founders_, and by Talbot Baines Reed in his

work upon the _Old English Letter Foundries_ (Chap. vii. pp. 164, _et

seqq._). Speaking of the English founts, the last-named writer points

out that the double pica, Roman and italic, seen in the Dedication, is

the same fount that was cut by the sixteenth-century printer, John Day,

and used by him to print the _Life of Alfred the Great_. Mr. Reed adds

that, in spite of a certain want of uniformity in the bodies, the

Ethiopic and Samaritan were especially good, and the Syriac and Arabic

boldly cut.

But it was not only for its typographic excellence that the book was

remarkable. The rapidity with which this great undertaking passed

through the press is no less astonishing. All six volumes were printed

within four years, the first appearing in September 1654, the second in

1655, the third in 1656, and the last three in 1657. Looking at the

labour involved by such an undertaking, it has been rightly described by

Mr. T. B. Reed as a lasting glory to the typography of the seventeenth

century.

Oliver Cromwell, under whose government this noble work was

accomplished, had assisted, as far as lay in his power, by permitting

the importation of the paper free of duty; and in the first editions

this assistance was gracefully acknowledged by the editor, but on the

Restoration those passages were altered or omitted to make room for

compliments to Charles II.

Amongst those who ably assisted Walton in his labours was Dr. Edmund

Castell, who prepared a _Heptaglott Lexicon_ for the better study of the

various languages used in the Polyglott. This work received the support

of all the learned men of the time, but the undertaking was the ruin of

its author, and a great part of the impression perished in the

destruction of Roycroft's premises in the Great Fire of 1666.

The Restoration brought with it little change in the conditions under

which printing was carried on in England, or in the lot of the printers

themselves. There is still preserved in the Public Record Office a

document which throws considerable light on this matter, and is believed

to have been drawn up either in 1660 or in 1661. This is a petition

signed by eleven of the leading London printers, for the incorporation

of the printers into a body distinct from the Company of Stationers, and

appended to it are the 'reasons' for the proposed change, which occupy

four or five closely written folio sheets. The men who put forward this

petition were:--

RICHARD HODGKINSON,

JOHN GRISMOND,

ROBERT IBBOTSON,

THOMAS MABB,

DA[NIEL?] MAXWELL,

THOMAS ROYCROFT,

WILLIAM GODBID,

JO[HN] STREATOR,

JAMES COTTREL,

JOHN HAYES, and

JOHN BRUDENELL;

and it was undoubtedly this band of men, some of them the biggest men in

the trade, who formed the 'Companie of Printers,' for whom in 1663 a

pamphlet was issued, entitled _A Brief Discourse concerning Printers and

Printing_. For the printed pamphlet embodies the same views put forward

in the petition, only backed up with fresh evidence and terse arguments.

The claim of the printers amounted to this, that the Company of

Stationers had become mainly a Company of Booksellers, that in order to

cheapen printing they had admitted a great many more printers than were

necessary, and from this cause arose the great quantity of 'scandalous

and seditious' books that were constantly being published. They go on to

say that the condition of the great body of printers was deplorable,

'they can hardly subsist in credit to maintain their families ... When

an ancient printer died, and his copies were exposed to sale, few or

none of the young ones were of ability to deal for them, nor indeed for

any other, so that the Booksellers have engross'd almost all.' The

petitioners show also that the Company of Stationers was grown so large

that none could be Master or Warden until he was well advanced in life,

and therefore unable to keep a vigilant eye on the trade, while a

printer did not become Master once in ten or twenty years. They argue

that the best expedient for checking these disorders and ensuring lawful

printing, would be to incorporate the printers into a distinct body, and

they advocate the registration of presses, the right of search, and the

enforcement of sureties. Finally, they claim that this plan would also

do much to improve printing as an art, as under the existing conditions

there was no encouragement to the printers to produce good work.

This petition, though it does not seem to have received any official

reply, was noticed by Sir Roger L'Estrange in the Proposals which he

laid before the House of Parliament, and which undoubtedly formed the

basis of the Act of 1662. Sir Roger L'Estrange had been an active

adherent of the Royal cause, and soon after the Restoration, on the 22nd

February 1661-2, he was granted a warrant to search for and seize

unlicensed presses and seditious books (_State Papers_, Charles II. Vol.

li. No. 6). A list is still extant of books which he had seized at the

office of John Hayes, one of the signatories of the above petition. So

that although the office of Surveyor of the Press was not officially

created until 1663, it is clear from the issue of the warrant, and also

from the fact of L'Estrange having been directed to draw up proposals

for the regulation of the Press, that he was acting in that capacity

more than a twelvemonth earlier. His proposals were, in 1663, printed in

pamphlet form with the title, _Considerations and Proposals in order to

the Regulation of the Press_, and were dedicated to the King, and also

to the House of Lords; and they contain much that is interesting. He

states that hundreds of thousands of seditious papers had been allowed

to go abroad since the King's return, and that there had been printed

ten or twelve impressions of _Farewell Sermons_, to the number of thirty

thousand, since the Act of Uniformity, adding that the very persons

who had the care of the Press (_i.e._ the Company of Stationers) had

connived at its abuse. In support of this statement he pointed out that

Presbyterian pamphlets were rarely suppressed, that rich offenders were

passed over, and scarcely any of those who were caught were ever brought

to justice. He gives the number of printers then at work in London as

sixty, the number of apprentices about a hundred and sixty, besides a

large number of journeymen; and he proposed at once to reduce the number

of printers to twenty, with a corresponding reduction of apprentices and

journeymen. As this would throw a large number of men out of work, he

further proposed a scheme for the relief of necessitous and

supernumerary printers. He calculated that the twelve impressions of the

_Farewell Sermons_, allowing a thousand copies to each impression, had

yielded a profit, 'beside the charge of paper and printing,' of £3300,

and he advised that this sum should be levied as a fine upon those

booksellers who had sold the book, and be placed to a fund for the

benefit of the suppressed printers, the balance of the sum required to

be levied on other seditious publications!

[Illustration: SIR ROGER L'ESTRANGE.]

In this pamphlet L'Estrange gave the titles of most of the pamphlets to

which he objected, with brief extracts from them, and the names of the

printers and publishers, amongst whom were Thomas Brewster, Giles

Calvert, Simon Dover, and one other, whose name is not mentioned, but

who is referred to as holding a highly profitable office. The reference

may be to Thomas Newcomb.

At pages 26 and 27 L'Estrange notices the petition of certain of the

printers to be incorporated as a separate body. He says 'that it were a

hard matter to pick out twenty master printers, who are both free of the

trade, of ability to manage it, and of integrity to be entrusted with

it, most of the honester sort being impoverished by the late times, and

the great business of the press being engross'd by Oliver's creatures.'

He admits that the Company of Stationers and Booksellers are largely

responsible for the great increase of presses, being anxious to have

their books printed as cheaply as possible, but thinks that there would

be as much abuse of power among incorporated printers as among the

Company of Stationers.

The Act of 1662, which was mainly based on L'Estrange's report, was in a

large measure a re-enactment of the Star Chamber decree of 1637. The

number of printers in London was limited to twenty, the type-founders to

four, and the other clauses of the earlier decree were reinforced, but

with one notable concession. Hitherto printing outside London had been

restricted to the two Universities, but in the new Act the city of York

was expressly mentioned as a place where printing might be carried on.

This new Act was enforced for a time with greater severity than the old

one, and under it, for the first time in English history, a printer

suffered the penalty of death for the liberty of the press.

The story of the trial and condemnation of John Twyn is told in vol. 6

of Cobbett's _State Trials_, and was also published in pamphlet form

with the title, _An exact narrative of the Tryal and condemnation of

John Twyn, for Printing and Dispersing of a Treasonable Book, With the

Tryals of Thomas Brewster, bookseller, Simon Dover, printer, Nathan

Brooks, bookseller ... in the Old Bayly, London, the 20th and 22nd

February 166-3/4_.

John Twyn was a small printer in Cloth Fair, and his crime was that of

printing a pamphlet entitled _A Treatise of the Execution of Justice_,

in which, as it was alleged, there were several passages aimed at the

King's life and the overthrow of the Government. It was further stated

by the prosecution that the pamphlet was part of a plot for a general

rebellion that was to have taken effect on the 12th October 1662. The

chief witnesses against Twyn were Joseph Walker, his apprentice, Sir

Roger L'Estrange, and Thomas Mabb, a printer. Their evidence went to

show that Twyn had two presses; that he composed part of the book,

printed some of the sheets, and corrected the proofs, the work being

done secretly at night-time. On entering the premises it was found that

the forme of type had been broken up, only one corner of it remaining

standing, and that the printed sheets had been hurriedly thrown down

some stairs. In defence Twyn declared that he had received the copy from

Widow Calvert's maid, and had received 40s. on account, with more to

follow on completion, and he stoutly asserted that he did not know the

nature of the work. The jury, amongst whom were Richard Royston and

Simon Waterson, booksellers, and James Fletcher and Thomas Roycroft,

printers, returned a verdict of Guilty, and Twyn was condemned to death

and executed at Tyburn.

The charge against Simon Dover was of printing the pamphlet entitled

_The Speeches of some of the late King's Justices_, which we have

already seen that Roger L'Estrange had seized in John Hayes' premises,

while Thomas Brewster was accused of causing this and another pamphlet,

entitled _The Phœnix of the Solemn League and Covenant_, to be

printed. In defence, Thomas Brewster declared that booksellers did not

read the books they sold; so long as they could earn a penny they were

satisfied--an argument that had been used more than a century before by

old Robert Copland as an excuse for indifferent printing. Both Dover

and Brewster were condemned to pay a fine of 100 marks, to stand in the

pillory, and to remain prisoners during the King's pleasure. Sir Roger

L'Estrange, as a reward for his services, was appointed Surveyor of the

Press, with permission to publish a news-sheet of his own, and liberty

to harass the printers as much as possible.

But far greater calamities than the malice of Sir Roger L'Estrange could

devise fell upon the printing trade by the outbreak of the Plague in

1665, and the subsequent Fire of London. In a letter written by

L'Estrange to Lord Arlington, and dated 16th October 1665, he stated

that eighty of the printers had died of the Plague (_Cal. of S. P._

1665-6, p. 20), in which total he evidently included workmen as well as

masters. The loss occasioned by the stoppage of trade and flight of the

citizens must have been enormous, and yet it may have been slight in

comparison to that occasioned by the Great Fire. Curiously enough,

however, there are very few records showing the effect of this second

disaster upon the printing trade. We find a petition by Christopher

Barker, the King's printer, to be allowed to import paper free of charge

in consequence of his loss by the Fire, and the same indulgence is

granted to the Stationers' Company as a body and the Universities; but

there are no notes of individual losses, and only one or two references

to MSS. that were destroyed in it. There is, however, one very eloquent

testimony to the ruin it caused in this, as in other trades. The

coercive Act of 1662, which had been renewed with unfailing regularity

from session to session down to the year 1665, was not renewed during

the remainder of the reign of Charles II. On the 24th of July 1668 a

return was made of all the printing-houses in London, which shows at a

glance who had survived and who had suffered by that terrible calamity

(see Appendix II.).

Comparing this list with that of 1649, we find that no inconsiderable

number of the printers there mentioned had survived the thinning-out

process, as well as imprisonment, death, and fire. In fact, only eight

London printers were actually ruined by the Fire, and among them we find

both John Hayes and John Brudenell, and also Alice Warren.

But another paper, written in the same year, and preserved in the same

volume of State Papers,[13] is even more interesting, for it shows the

position of every man in the trade. This is headed--

_A Survey of the Printing Presses with the names and numbers of

Apprentices, Officers, and Workemen belonging to every particular press.

Taken 29 July 1668_. (See Appendix III.).

From this we learn that the largest employer in the trade at that time

was James Fletcher, who kept five presses, and employed thirteen workmen

and two apprentices. Next to him came Thomas Newcomb, with three presses

and a proof press, twelve workmen and one apprentice; John Maycocke,

with three presses, ten workmen and three apprentices; and then

Roycroft, with four presses, ten workmen and two apprentices; while at

the other end of the scale was Thomas Leach, with one press, not his

own, and one workman.

Whether L'Estrange carried out his threat of prosecuting the three men

who had set up since the Act, we do not know, but this is certain, that

one of their number, John Darby, continued to work for many years after

this, and was the printer of Andrew Marvell's _Rehearsal Transposed_,

and a good deal else that galled the Government very much. In fact, the

Act of 1662 was openly ignored, and new men set up presses every year.

But of all this work it is almost impossible to trace what was done by

individual printers. The bulk of the publications of the time bore the

bookseller's name only, and it is very rarely indeed that the printer is

revealed. Newcomb had the printing of the _Gazette_, and also printed

most of Dryden's works that were published by Herringman; while

Roycroft, we know, was employed by all those who wanted the best

possible work, such men as John Ogilby, for instance, for whom he

printed several works. Milton's _Paradise Lost_ came from the press of

Peter Parker; but the printer of Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_ is

unknown to us.

As it happens, there is not much lost by remaining in ignorance on this

point. For no change whatever took place in the character of printing as

a trade during the second half of the seventeenth century. There were

only three foundries of note in London during that time, and none of

them is considered to have produced anything particularly good. Indeed,

one has only to glance at even the best work of that time to see how

wretchedly the majority of the type was cast. The first of the three was

the celebrated Joseph Moxon, who, in 1659, added type-founding to his

other callings of mathematician and hydrographer. Having spent some

years in Holland, he was very much enamoured of the Dutch types, and in

1676 he wrote a book entitled _Regulæ Trium Ordinum Literarum

Typographicarum_, in which he endeavoured to prove that each letter

should be cast in exact mathematical proportion, and illustrated his

theory by several letters cast in that manner. Similar theories had been

propounded in earlier days by Albert Durer and the French printer,

Geoffrey Tory, but no improvement in printing ever resulted from them.

Moxon's foundry was fitted with a large assortment of letter, but his

work, judging from the examples left to us, was certainly not up to the

theory which he put forward, and he is best remembered for his useful

work on printing, which formed the second part of his _Mechanick

Exercises_, and was published in 1683. In this he showed an intimate

knowledge of every branch of printing and type-founding, and his book is

still a standard work on both these subjects. Moxon retired from

business some years before his death, and was succeeded in 1683 by

Joseph and Robert Andrews, who, in addition to Moxon's founts, had a

large assortment of others. Their foundry was particularly rich in Roman

and Italic, and the learned founts, and they also had matrices of

Anglo-Saxon and Irish. But their work was not by any means good.

The third of these letter foundries was that of James and Thomas Grover

in Angel Alley, Aldersgate Street, who after Moxon's retirement shared

with Andrews the whole of the English trade. The most notable founts in

their possession were, a pica and longprimer Roman, from the Royal Press

at Blackfriars, Day's double pica Roman and Italic, and two good founts

of black letter, reputed to have formed part of the stock of Wynkyn de

Worde. They also had the English Samaritan matrices from which the type

for Walton's Polyglott in 1657 had been cast.

Among the types belonging to this foundry was one which, in the

inventory, was returned as New Coptic, but which was in reality a Greek

uncial fount, cut for the specimen of the _Codex Alexandrinus_ which

Patrick Young proposed to print, but did not live to accomplish. The

specimen was printed in 1643 and consisted of the first chapter of

Genesis. It is supposed that this fount remained unknown, under the

title of New Coptic, until 1758, when the Grover foundry passed into the

hands of John James. On the death of Thomas Grover, the foundry remained

in possession of his daughters, who endeavoured to sell it, but without

success, and it remained locked up for many years in the premises of

Richard Nutt, a printer, until 1758 (Reed, _Old English Letter

Foundries_, p. 205).

After a lapse of twenty years, the Act of 1662 was renewed by the first

parliament of James II. (1685) for a period of seven years, and at the

expiration of that time, _i.e._ in 1692, it was renewed for another

twelvemonth, after which we hear no more of it. There is no evidence

that it had been very strictly enforced during its short revival; in

fact it is clear, from the number of presses found in various parts of

the country during the last five and twenty years of the century, that

it had remained practically a dead letter from the time of the Great

Fire.

[Illustration: FIG. 32.--'Fell' Types.]

The troubles of the Civil War had suspended for a time all progress in

printing at Oxford. But on the Restoration it made even greater advances

than it had done at an earlier period of its history. Archbishop Laud

had a worthy successor in Dr. John Fell, who in 1667 enriched the

University by a gift of a complete type-foundry, consisting of punches,

matrices, and founts of Roman, Italic, Orientals, 'Saxons,' and black

letter, besides moulds and other necessary appliances for the production

of type. Dr. Fell also introduced a skilled letter-founder from Holland.

For a couple of years the foundry and printing office were carried on in

private premises hired by Fell, but upon the completion of the

Sheldonian Theatre the printing office was removed to the basement of

that building, the first book bearing the Theatre imprint being _An Ode

in praise of the Theatre and its Founder_, printed in 1669.

Another scholarly benefactor, Francis Junius, presented the University

in 1677 with a splendid collection of type, consisting of Runic, Gothic,

'Saxon,' 'Islandic,' Danish, and 'Swedish,' as well as founts of Roman,

Italic, and other sorts. By the kindness of Mr. Horace Hart, the

Controller of the Clarendon Press, we are able to give here examples of

several of the founts, both of Fell and Junius, in most cases from

surviving specimens of the types themselves.

[Illustration: FIG. 33.--'Fell' Types.]

Very little use seems to have been made of these gifts before the

commencement of the succeeding century. The first Bible printed at

Oxford was that of 1674, and no important editions of the classics

issued from the University press of this period.

It was left to Cambridge to issue the best works of this class, for

which that University borrowed the Oxford types, having no type-foundry

of its own. These editions, chiefly in quarto, came from the press of

Thomas Buck, who had succeeded Roger Daniel as printer to the

University. Buck was in turn succeeded by John Field, who turned out

some very creditable work, notably the folio Bible of 1660. John Hayes,

the next of the Cambridge printers, issued some notable books, such as

Robertson's _Thesaurus_,1676, 4to, and Barnes's _History of Edward

III._, 1688, 4to, but the bulk of the work that came from the Cambridge

press at this date was of a theological character, and was none too well

printed.

The history of other provincial presses of this period is very meagre.

Mr. Allnutt, to whose valuable papers in the second volume of

_Bibliographica_ I am indebted for the following notes, expresses the

belief that in several cases local knowledge would show that presses

were at work some years earlier than the dates he has given.

[Illustration: FIG. 34.--'Junius' Types.]

At the time of the Civil War, Robert Barker, the King's printer, had in

1639 been commanded to attend His Majesty in his march against the

Scots, and printed several proclamations, news-sheets, etc., at

Newcastle-on-Tyne in that year. He is next found at York, where some

thirty-nine different sheets, etc., have been traced from his press, and

in 1642 a second press was at work in the same city, that of Stephen

Bulkeley. When York fell into the hands of the Parliament, Bulkeley's

press was silent for a while, and his place was taken by Thomas Broad,

who printed there from 1644 to 1660, and was succeeded by his widow,

Alice, who disappears in 1667. After the Restoration, Bulkeley again set

up his press at York, where he continued down to 1680. Barker in 1642

had been summoned to attend the King at Nottingham, but no specimen of

his work bearing that imprint is known, and the next heard of him is at

Bristol, some time in 1643, Mr. Allnutt mentioning ten pieces from his

press at this place.

In 1645 Thomas Fuller issued in small duodecimo, a collection of pious

thoughts, which he aptly termed _Good Thoughts in Bad Times_, and in the

Dedication to it expressly stated that it was 'the first fruits of the

Exeter presse.' There was no printer's name in the volume, and no other

work printed in Exeter at that time is known. In 1688, however, another

press was started there, and printed several political broadsides

relative to the Prince of Orange. A new start was made in 1698, when a

small pamphlet was printed in this city.

Stephen Bulkeley, the York printer, appears to have gone from that city

to Newcastle in 1646, and continued printing there until 1652. He then

removed to Gateshead, where he remained until after the Restoration,

subsequently returning to Newcastle, and so back to York. No more is

heard of printing in Newcastle until the opening of the eighteenth

century.

A press was established in Bristol in the year 1695 and in Plymouth and

Shrewsbury in the year 1696.

In America the progress of printing was very slow throughout the

seventeenth century. Until 1660, Samuel Green, at Cambridge,

Massachusetts, remained the only printer in the colony. But in that year

the Corporation for the propagation of the Gospel in New England among

the Indians sent over from London another press, a large supply of good

letter, and a printer named Marmaduke Johnson, for the purpose of

printing an edition of the Bible in the Indian tongue. This press was

set up in the same building as that in which Green was already at work,

and the two printers seem to have worked together at the production of

the Bible, which appeared in quarto form in 1663, the New Testament

having been published two years earlier. Johnson died in the year 1675,

but Samuel Green continued to print until 1702. After his death the

press at Cambridge was silent for some years.

In 1675 a press was established at Boston by John Foster, a graduate of

Harvard College, under a licence from the College. Besides the official

work of the colony and theological literature, he printed several

pamphlets on the war between the English and the Indians. He died in

1681, when he was succeeded by Samuel Green, junior, who continued

printing there until 1690. In the following year three printers' names

are found in the imprints of books: R. Pierce, Benjamin Harris, and John

Allen. Benjamin Harris is afterwards called 'Printer to his Excellency,

the Governor and Council,' but in 1693 Harris removed from 'over against

the Old Meeting House,' to 'the Bible over against the Blew Anchor,' and

another printer, Bartholomew Green, seems to have shared with him the

official work.

Pennsylvania was the next of the colonies to establish a press; its

first printer, William Bradford, setting up there in 1685, in which year

he printed _Kalendarium Pennsilvaniense, or, America's Messinger, Being

an Almanack for the Year of Grace 1686_.

In 1688 Bradford issued proposals for printing a large Bible (Hildeburn,

_Issues of the Pennsylvania Press_, vol. i. p. 9), but they came to

nothing. In 1692 he printed several pamphlets for George Keith, the

leader of the schism among the Quakers, and for this he was imprisoned.

On his release he removed to New York. A press was also set up in

Virginia in 1682, but was suppressed, and no printing allowed there

until 1729. The name of the printer is not known, but is believed to

have been William Nuthead, who set up a press in Maryland in 1689 with a