[38] He was one of the garrison of Newark, which held out so long for Charles I., and has left a curious specimen of the wit of the time, in his controversy with a parliamentary officer, whose servant had robbed him, and taken refuge in Newark.  The following is the beginning of his answer to a demand that the fugitive should be surrendered: 

“Sixthly, Beloved,

“Is it so then, that our brother and fellow-labourer in the Gospel is start aside? then this may serve for an use of instruction, not to trust in man, nor in the son of man.  Did not Demas leave Paul? did not Onesimus run from his master Philemon? besides, this should teach us to employ our talent, and not to lay it up in a napkin.  Had it been done among the cavaliers, it had been just; then the Israelite had spoiled the Egyptian; but for Simeon to plunder Levi, that! that!  You see, sir, what use I make of the doctrine you sent me; and indeed since you change style so far as to nibble at wit, you must pardon me, if, to quit scores, I pretend a little to the gift of preaching,” etc.

Such was the wit of Cleveland.  After the complete subjugation of the royalists, he was apprehended, having in his possession a bundle of poems and satirical songs against the republicans.  He appeared before the commonwealth-general with the dignified air of one who is prepared to suffer for his principles.  He was disappointed; for the military judge, after a contemptuous glance at the papers, exclaimed to Cleveland’s accusers, “Is this all ye have against him?  Go, let the poor knave sell his ballads!” Such an acquittal was more severe than any punishment.  The conscious virtue of the loyalist would have borne the latter; but the pride of the poet could not sustain his contemptuous dismissal; and Cleveland is said to have broken his heart in consequence.—­Biographia Britannica, voce Cleveland.

[39] “He is the very Withers of the city,” says Dryden of Wild; “they have bought more editions of his works than would serve to lay under all their pies at the lord mayor’s Christmas.  When his famous poem first came out in the year 1660, I have seen them reading it in the midst of change time; nay, so vehement they were at it, that they lost their bargain by the candles’ ends; but what will you say, if he has been received amongst great persons?  I can assure you he is this day the envy of one who is lord in the art of quibbling, and who does not take it well, that any man should intrude so far into his province.”—­Vol. xv.

[40] [It may be well to note that “Gondibert” was published in 1651, ten years before the Restoration.  This does not affect the general accuracy of Scott’s remarks as to Davenant’s poetical position and his influence on Dryden, but the reader might draw a mistaken inference from those remarks as to the date of the poem.—­ED.]