[1] When our literary history was only partially cultivated, the
readers of Hooker were often disturbed amidst the profound reasonings
of "The Ecclesiastical Polity," by frequent references to volumes and
pages of T. C. The editors of Hooker had thrown no light on these
mysterious initials. Contemporaries are not apt to mortify themselves
by recollecting that what is familiar to them may be forgotten by the
succeeding age. Sir John Hawkins, a literary antiquary, drew up a
memoir which explains these initials as those of Thomas Cartwright,
and has correctly arranged the numerous tracts of the whole
controversy. But Hawkins having consigned this accurate catalogue to
"The Antiquarian Repertory," it could be little known; and Beloe, in
his "Anecdotes of Literature," vol. i., transcribing the entire
memoir of Hawkins, _verbatim_, without the slightest acknowledgment,
obtains a credit for original research. Beloe is referred to for this
_authentic_ information by Burnet, in his "Specimens of English
Prose-Writers."
[2] Both these papers of Travers and Hooker are preserved in Hooker's
Works. Many curious points are discussed by Hooker with admirable
reasoning. The divinity of Hooker, who is the firm advocate of legal
authority, is enlightened and tolerant; while Travers, who advocated
unrestrained personal freedom, is in his divinity narrow and
merciless. He sees only "the Elect," and he casts human nature into
the flames of eternity.
[3] "A studious and cynical person, who never expected or desired
more than his small preferment. He was a great admirer of Richard
Hooker, and collected some of his small treatises."--_Athenae
Oxonienses._
[4] Anthony Wood has said it contained all the eight books, (followed
by General Dictionary and Biographia Britannica,) and accused Gauden
of pretending to publish three books for the first time in 1662.
[5] "Ecclesiastical Polity," book First.