Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900/Collier, Jeremy
COLLIER, JEREMY (1650–1726), nonjuror, son of Jeremy Collier, was born at Stow Qui, or Quire, in Cambridgeshire, on 23 Sept. 1650. His father was a divine and considerable linguist, and some time master of the free school at Ipswich in the county of Suffolk. … His mother was Elizabeth Smith of Qui in Cambridgeshire, where her family were possessed of a considerable interest. … He was educated under his father at Ipswich, from whence he was sent to Cambridge, and admitted a poor scholar of Caius College, under the tuition of Mr. John Ellys. His admission bears date 10 April 1669, in the eighteenth year of his age. He took the degree of B.A. in 1672-3, and that of M.A. in 1676, being ordained deacon on 24 Sept. of the same year by Dr. Peter Gunning, bishop of Ely, and priest on 24 Feb. 1677 by Dr. Henry Compton, bishop of London. Having entered into priest's orders he officiated for some time at the Countess Dowager of Dorset's, at Knowle in Kent, from whence he removed to a small rectory at Ampton, near St. Edmund's Bury in Suffolk, to which he was presented by James Calthorpe, esq., and instituted … 25 Sept. 1679. After he had held this benefice six years, he resigned it, and came to reside in London, in 1685, and was some little time after made lecturer at Gray's Inn. But the Revolution coming on the public exercise of his function became impracticable' (thus far, from the Biographia Britannica, was, except some dates, drawn up by Collier himself). Collier took an active part in the discussion that arose on the question of the vacancy of the throne, and Dr. Gilbert Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury [q. v.], having published his 'Enquiry into the State of Affairs' (1688), he answered it by a short pamphlet entitled 'The Desertion discuss'd in a Letter to a Country Gentleman' in which he argues that the king had sufficient grounds for apprehension, and therefore his withdrawal was not an abdication; that it was impossible for him to leave any representatives behind him; and that it was not consonant either with law or nature to pronounce the throne void under such circumstances. This pamphlet was answered by Edmund Bohun [q. v.] It gave such offence to the government that Collier was imprisoned in Newgate for some months, but was at last released without being brought to trial. In the course of the next three years he wrote several more political pamphlets on questions concerning submission to the supreme power, the character of a king de facto, the duty of churchmen with regard to those bishops who occupied the sees of nonjurors, and the like. His pamphlets are clear, brilliant, and incisive, the work of 'a great master of sarcasm, a great master of rhetoric' (Macaulay). In the autumn of 1692 information was laid before the Earl of Nottingham, then secretary of state, that Collier and another nonjuring clergyman named Newton were gone to Romney Marsh, and as this was supposed to indicate an endeavour to hold communications with the exiled king they were apprehended on 8 Nov., and after being examined by the secretary were imprisoned in the Gatehouse. No evidence was found against them, and they were accordingly admitted to bail. Before long, however, Collier felt scruples as to his conduct in giving bail, considering that this was an acknowledgment of the jurisdiction of the court, and consequently of the royal authority ; he therefore appeared before Chief-justice Holt, surrendered in discharge of his bail, and was imprisoned in the king's bench, from which he was released in about a week or ten days on the application of his friends. During this short imprisonment he wrote a defence of his conduct, which he dated from the king's bench, 23 Nov. 1692. The next year he produced a pamphlet of extraordinary bitterness, entitled 'Remarks on the London Gazette,' on the loss of English property on the coast of Spain and the defeat of the king at the battle of Landen (Macaulay, History of England, iv. 423). For some years nothing further is known of his life.
When, in 1696, Sir John Friend and Sir William Parkyns were condemned to death for their share in the assassination plot, Collier attended them in Newgate, and when they were drawn to Tyburn on 3 April he and two other nonjuring clergymen named Cook and Snatt were allowed to minister to them at the place of execution. Prayers were read, and then the three clergymen, laying their hands on the heads of the dying men, pronounced over them the form of absolution contained in the Service for the Visitation of the Sick. A somewhat similar scene had taken place at the execution of John Ashton [q. v.] in January 1690-1, and it has been supposed, from certain words used by Collier with reference to this occasion, that he was one of the ministers who absolved him (Lathbury). The sentence referred to, however, seems rather to imply that this was not the case, for Collier is there quoting what was done at Ashton's death as a precedent for his own conduct (State Trials, xiii. 420). The ceremony at the execution of Friend and Parkyns caused considerable scandal. Tories as well as whigs blamed the priests, for as no public confession had been made, the absolution seemed to show that they did not consider the attempt to assassinate William as sinful. As Collier was fully determined not to give bail for his appearance, he concealed himself. On Monday, 6 April, his lodgings were entered at midnight and several of his papers were seized ; on the 9th he published a 'Defence of the Absolution;' and on the following day the two archbishops and twelve bishops who were then in London put forth a 'Declaration ' condemning the action of the three clergymen as 'an open affront to the laws both of church and state,' and 'as insolent and unprecedented in the manner and altogether irregular in the thing.' To this Collier replied on the 25th, arguing that the absolution was defensible in manner, the imposition of hands being the general practice of the ancient church, that the exercise of the absolving power was allowed to priests and enjoined in the office of ordination, and that the thing itself and the occasion were equally justified. On 2 July Cook and Snatt were found guilty upon an indictment for absolving traitors, and were shortly afterwards released. Collier refused to deliver himself up and was outlawed, an incapacity under which he remained during the rest of his life. As the pamphlets he put forth on this matter have no printer's name, it is probable that he remained in concealment during the rest of the year. It was not long, however, before he was allowed to return to his ordinary life ; and though he occasionally signed himself J. Smith in after life, he perhaps did so rather to prevent his literary correspondence being traced to himself than from any fear of legal consequences, though with him literary and political matters were so often the same thing that it is impossible to speak with certainty. In the course of 1697 he seems to have published the first volume of his essays, some of which had already appeared both in a separate form and in a smaller collection. The most famous of these, 'Upon the Office of a Chaplain,' which has a special value from the fact that the author had himself held such a position, was intended to excite self-respect in those who were thus employed, and to cause them to be regarded by others in a manner more becoming their profession. Collier maintains that a chaplain was no servant, branching off on his favourite topic, the independence that rightly pertains to the church, and that, whatever expectations of preferment a chaplain might have, they could not justify either imperiousness in the employer or servility in the employed. The essay is of considerable historical value with reference to the light it throws on the condition of a large class of the stipendiary clergy.
Collier's greatest achievement, his attack on the corruptions of the stage, began with the publication of his 'Short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage' in March 1697-8. While this pamphlet attacks the English dramatists generally, it deals most sharply with contemporary writers, and especially with their latest works. It appeared at a time when the immorality of the theatre had reached its utmost pitch, when ladies, if they could not resist going to see a new play, went in masks, and when it was generally recognised that a play could scarcely please the public unless it was grossly indecent. Collier's mode of dealing was unsparing and courageous. Full of righteous indignation he delivers his blows, if perhaps with something less than the cool skill which generally marks his attacks, still with a force and vigour that were equally effective. He was hindered by no fear and by no respect of persons. Dryden and Congreve receive no more deference than D'Urfey. In spite, however, of the passion, the scorn, and the sarcasm he displays, he does not even here throw off the pedantry of the learned controversialist. He begins by a comparison of the immodesty of the contemporary stage with the better examples set by the Greeks and Romans, and quotes the opinions of some modern writers on the degeneracy of the drama. He then proceeds to the charge of profaneness, which he supports by a number of specific instances. The next part contains an indignant remonstrance against the abuse and ridicule of the clergy, a favourite subject with the dramatists of the Restoration. He then points out the encouragement to immorality offered by the stage, and cites many passages of particular plays, such, for example, as Dryden's ' Amphitryon,' Vanbrugh's ' Relapse, or Virtue in Danger,' and D'Urfey's ' Don Quixote,' and ends by setting forth the opinions of pagans, of the state, and of the church concerning the stage. The chief defect in the work is that the author goes too far and detects allusions where none were intended, especially in treating the charge of profaneness. He also commits the mistake of attributing to the corrupting influence of the stage the social immorality that was really due to other causes, and that may more truly be said to have found expression in the contemporary drama than to have arisen from it. That he is wholly lacking in artistic taste would scarcely be worth notice were it not that in addition to scourging dramatists for their sins against morality, he corrects them for what he considers their literary shortcomings. Writing throughout at boiling-point he makes little distinction between offences of diverse magnitude, and being perpetually indignant has no suspicion of anything ridiculous in his expressions, even though his jealousy for the reverence due to religion leads him to blame Dryden for writing lightly of Mahomet and scornfully of Apis. Despite some faults, however, the 'Short View' is a noble protest against evil. It had a marvellous success. Even before it appeared there were some faint signs of an impending reaction (Beljame, Histoire du Public et des Hommes de Lettres au Dix-huitième Siècle, p. 244), and its readers found that it gave distinctness and expression to feelings of which they had hitherto scarcely been conscious. Much, too, that had passed almost unnoticed in a play, assumed its true character when it appeared as a part of a mass of obscenity, and people were shocked at remembering that such things had given them pleasure. Collier had public opinion on his side. Men of the stricter sort were especially delighted, and, enraged as they had been at his conduct in the matter of the absolution, many of them considered that this pamphlet atoned even for that crime. Several of the wealthy among them sent him money ; one presbyterian, for example, Sir Owen Buckingham, an alderman of London and M.P. for Reading, sending him twenty guineas (Oldmixion, History of England, p. 192). The king, who never took much pleasure in the theatre, is said to have shown his approval by granting him a nolle prosequi, thereby stopping all proceedings against him (Cibbe, Apology for his own Life, p. 158) ; he renewed an order previously issued against 'plays contrary to religion and good manners,' using in it the very words of the title of the 'Short View,' and further warned the master of the revels to be strict in licensing new plays. The authors did not remain silent under other's attack. Dryden indeed declined the conflict, and confessed that he had been to blame. In the preface to his ' Fables,' though writing somewhat bitterly of the uncivil, and as he thought not altogether fair, treatment he had received, and making some excuses for himself, he nevertheless says, 'If he [Collier] be my enemy, let him triumph. If he be my friend, as I have given him no personal occasion to be otherwise, he will be glad of my repentance.' And in his epilogue to Fletcher's 'Pilgrim,' while marking a defect in Collier's pamphlet, he acknowledges the justice of his censure—
Perhaps the Parson stretched a point too far,
When with our theatre he waged a war.
He tells you that this very moral age
Received the first infection from the Stage;
But sure a banisht Court, with lewdness fraught,
The seeds of open vice, returning, brought.
Congreve did not follow the example of his master ; he wrote an angry reply to the 'Short View,' full of abuse, but wanting alike in wisdom and in wit. Vanbrugh had little better success, though he pointed out a flaw or two in his great adversary's pamphlet. Both were answered in crushing style by Collier, 'for contest was his delight ; he was not to be frighted from his purpose or his prey' (Johnson, Lives of the Poets, Works, x. 192). The wretched D'Urfey tried to retaliate in a song and a preface. Others followed Dennis, Drake, Filmer, and a crowd of small and some anonymous writers. Collier renewed his attack, and, in spite of all the efforts of the poets, remained the victor. Even Congreve and Vanbrugh acknowledged their defeat, for, conscious of the change in public opinion, they cut out some coarse expressions in their plays, the one making some alterations in the 'Double Dealer,' which in 1698 was advertised to be acted 'with several expressions omitted,' the other in the 'Provoked Wife' (Beljame). Collier's pamphlet ushered in a new era in dramatic literature. Gibber remarks that 'his calling dramatick writers to this strict account had a very wholesome effect on those who writ after this time.' The courage implied in this attack can scarcely be over-estimated. Although he was a writer of no special mark, he dared to array against himself the most fashionable authors of the day, the whole band of wits who provided the favourite amusement of the upper classes of society. Champion as he was of the Stuart cause, he did not shrink from making war upon habits closely connected with the Restoration and advocating sentiments that were especially agreeable to the presbyterians. And at the very time when he thus deliberately offended a large and powerful body of men, and ran the risk of being jeered at as a false friend to the cause for which he had suffered so much, he was in disgrace with the government, an actual outlaw, and was blamed by all except violent Jacobites for his imprudent conduct two years before. (A list of works on Collier's attack on the stage is given below ; for full treatment of the whole subject see M. Beljame's admirable Histoire du Public et des Homines de Lettres en Angleterre).
During the reign of Anne several attempts were made to induce Collier to take the oaths and return to the national church. He refused to do so, and continued to minister to a separate congregation of nonjurors. While the controversy of the stage was still going on, he put forth the first two volumes of his 'Historical Dictionary,' founded on, and in great part translated from, the work of L. Moreri. Although many of the original articles, especially those on church matters, are learned, the book as a whole did not satisfy the requirements of scholars, and was pronounced inaccurate (Hearne, Collections, i. 38). The labour of production must have been very great. In 1708 he published the first folio volume of his 'Ecclesiastical History,' which comes down to the reign of Henry VII. Hearne, who seems hitherto to have had a small opinion of his scholarship, did not expect much from it ; he afterwards notes that he was mistaken (ib. 316). It is a work of great learning, the first of its kind that had appeared, save Fuller's 'Church History,' and, in spite of the advance of historical scholarship, it has not lost its value. Besides a narrative of events, it contains several dissertations, largely taken from other writers, on subjects of ecclesiastical importance. It recognises the necessity of basing history on original authorities by giving copious and minute references ; and though Collier's peculiar views on church questions may be discerned in his treatment of certain points, his representation of facts is honest and impartial. Collier now judged it well 'to breathe a little after a folio' (Preface to Essays, iii). Nevertheless he did not abstain from literary work. It is curious to find him writing to Atkins the publisher on 1 Dec. 1710 with reference to the advertisement of some book of his that was forthcoming (which of his books this was does not appear), and warning him to frame it so as not to give 'an expectation of a quarrelling humour.' This letter is signed 'J. Smith' (Addit. MS. 4275). Collier did not remain without matter for controversy, for the second volume of his ' History,' which deals with the Reformation and puritan periods, was attacked with some asperity by Bishop Nicholson, and with greater judgment by Bishops Burnet and Kennet, and was defended by the author. Towards the end of the reign Collier appears to have officiated in a room up two pairs of stairs in Broad Street, London, and about this time to have had Thomas Carte [q. v.], the historian, as his assistant. In 1712 he was invited by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, through Nelson and Higden, to write a treatise on the abuse of music, for distribution to organists and music-teachers, to dissuade them from teaching their pupils lewd songs and from composing music to profane ballads. As, however, he was then hard at work on the second volume of his ' History,' he declined the offer (Secretan, Life of Nelson, p. 69). On the death of Wagstaffe in this year the separation of the nonjurors from the national church seemed as though it would before long come to an end, for Hickes was now the only surviving bishop. With the help, however, of two Scottish bishops, he consecrated Collier and two others to the episcopal office in 1713. After the death of Hickes in 1715, Collier became the foremost man of the nonjuring body. He was fully determined to maintain the separation, and in 1716 he and his colleagues consecrated Henry Gandy and Thomas Brett [q. v.] He had agreed with Hickes in preferring the communion office of the first prayer-book of Edward VI (1649) to the revision of 1552, and in 1717 urged the restoration of certain prayers and directions contained in it. The four points for which he chiefly contended the usages as they were called—were the mixture of water with the wine used in the communion, the restoration of the petition for the faithful departed, of the prayer for the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the elements, and of the oblatory prayer. A vigorous controversy ensued, part of the nonjurors holding with Collier and part being against him. He and his allies went so far as to pronounce the ' usages ' essential, and were therefore called 'essentialists.' In 1718 they published a new communion office, chiefly no doubt the work of Collier, which was brought into use at the Easter of that year ; communion with those who held to the Common Prayer-book was forbidden, and a fresh schism took place. Collier was accused of holding Romish views, an accusation that Burnet had already brought against him with reference to his 'History.' As, however, the new communion office expressly declares against 'praying the dead out of purgatory' and any approach to a belief in the corporal presence, it would be more correct to describe him as advocating certain usages of the church of Rome while refusing to assent to its doctrines (Lathbury, Life of Collier ; History of the Non-jurors). Meanwhile Collier took an active part in an attempt to form a union with the Eastern church. The idea originated with a visit to England made by the Archbishop of Thebais, and a long correspondence with the court of Russia ensued, in which Collier sometimes signs himself as ' Jeremias, Primus Anglo-Britanniae Episcopus.' The matter dropped in 1725. In 1722 he again joined in consecrating a bishop. He employed Samuel Jebb as his librarian; but during the last few years of his life produced comparatively little literary work, for, as he grew old, his health, which had generally been strong, was much enfeebled by frequent and violent attacks of the stone. He died on 26 April 1726, in the seventy-sixth year of his age, and was buried in the churchyard of St. Pancras, London.
Collier published : 1. 'The Difference between the Present and Future State of our Bodies consider'd in a Sermon,' London, 1686, 4to. 2. 'The Comparison between Giving and Receiving . . . stated in a Sermon preached at Whitehall, 19 April 1687.' 3. ' The Office of a Chaplain,' 1688, 4to (Cole), see 17. 4. 'The Desertion discuss'd in a Letter to a Country Gentleman,' 1688, 4to ; also in 'The History of the Desertion,' with 'An Answer to a piece call'd The Desertion discuss'd ... [by E. Bohun],' 1689, 4to ; 1705, fol. ; and in ' Collection of State Tracts,' vol. i. 1705, fol. 5. 'Translation of 9th, 10th, llth, and 12th books of Sleidan's [J. Philippson] Commentaries,' 1689,4to. 6. ' Vmdicise Juris Regni, or Remarks upon a paper entituled An Inquiry into the Measure of Submission . . . ' [by Dr. Burnet], 1689, 4to. 7. 'Animadversions upon the Modern Explanation of ... a King de facto,' 1689, 4to. 8. 'A Caution against Inconsistency, or the Connection between Praying and Swearing, in relation to the Civil Powers,' 1690, 4to ; 1703, 8vo. 9. ' A Dialogue concerning the Times between Philobelgus and Sempronius,' 1690, 4to. 10. 'To the Right Hon. the Lords and the Gentlemen convened at Westminster,' October 1690, half-sheet (a petition for an inquiry into the birth of the Prince of Wales). 11. ' Dr. Sherlock's Case of Allegiance considered, with some Remarks upon his Vindication,' 1691, 4to. 12. 'A brief Essay concerning the Independency of Church Power,' 1692, 4to. 13. 'The case of giving bail to a pretended authority examined,' dated from the king's bench, 23 Nov. 1692, the preface bearing date December, and a 'Letter to Sir J. Holt,' 30 Nov. 1692, 4to. 14. 'A Reply to some Remarks upon "The case" . . . ,' dated April 1693, 4to. 15. ' A Persuasive to Consideration tendered to the Royalists, particularly those of the Church of England,' 1693, 4to ; 1716, 8vo (Cole), on which see Macaulay's opinion, ' History of England,' iii. 459. 16. ' Remarks upon the " London Gazette " relating to the Streights Fleet and the Battle of Landen in Flanders,' 1693, 4to, ' Somers Tracts ' (1814), xi. 462. 17. 'Miscellanies in Five Essays,' 1694, 8vo (Cole), afterwards in Part I. of 'Essays on Moral Subjects.' 18. ' A Defence of the Absolution given to Sir W. Perkins,' 1696, 4to (Cole). 19. 'A further Vindication of the Absolution . . . ,' 21 April 1696, 4to ; also in Howell's 'State Trials,' xiii. 451. 20. 'A Reply to the Absolution of a Penitent . . . ,' 20 May 1696. 21. ' An Answer to the Animadversions on Two Pamphlets lately published,' 1 July 1696. These form together fifty pages, without title-page or printer's name. 22. 'The Case of the Two Absolvers that were tried at the King's Bench Bar,' 1696, ' Somers Tracts ' (1814), ix. 541. 23. 'Essays upon several Moral Subjects,' 1697, 8vo, in two parts ; part i. (see 17) includes 'The Duties of a Chaplain,' and a sixth essay ; part ii. has seventeen short essays. (Cole's entry, 'Miscellanies. Essays upon Moral Subjects, two parts, 1695,' is probably taken from a volume containing the first part (see No. 17) printed with title-page, with the second series added. Unless this is so, then the production of the ' Essays ' in two parts mentioned in the foregoing biography should be put two years earlier.) The chronology adopted in the biographical part of the article is that in the article in the 'Biographia Britannica,' by Campbell, and no better authority could be desired, see art. in Kippis's ' Biographia.' Other editions, 5th, 1703; 6th, 1722 ; 7th, 1722. ' Essays/ vol. ii., or third part, 1705, 1720; vol. iii., or fourth part, 1709, all 8vo. Also 'Essay on Gaming,' in a dialogue, 1713, 8vo. A collected edition. 1722, 8vo.
The pamphlets on the stage. 24. 'A short View of the Immorality and Profaneness of the English Stage, together with the Sense of Antiquity upon this Argument,' 1698, 8vo ; 3rd edition, 1698 (Beljame) ; 4th, 1699 ; ' La Critique du Theatre Anglois comparé au Theatre d'Athenes, de Rome, et de France . . . ' [translated by Du Courbeville], Paris, 1715 (Beljame). 25. 'A Defence of the Short View of the Profaneness and Immorality . . . being a Reply to Mr. Congreve's Amendments . . . and to the Vindication of the Author of the Relapse,' 1699, 8vo. 26. ' A Second Defence of the Short View . . . being a Reply to a Book intituled "The Ancient and Modern Stages surveyed"' [by J. Drake], 1700, 8vo. 27. ' Mr. Collier's Dissuasive from the Play-house in a Letter to a Person of Quality, occasioned by the late Calamity of the Tempest,' 1703, 8vo, republished together with 'A Letter by another Hand relating to the Irregularities charged upon the Stage,' 1704, 8vo. 28. 'A Letter to a Lady concerning the New Playhouse,' 1706, 8vo. 29. 'A Further Vindication of the Short View . . . in which the Objections of a Defence of Plays [by Filmer] are consider'd/ 1708, 8vo. Collected edition, ' A Short View . . . with Defences to Answers . . . ,' 5th edit., with portrait, 1730; reprinted without portrait and with new title-page, 1738. For references and replies, see Scott's ' Dryden ' (ed. Saintsbury), viii. 502, xi. 243 ; Congreve's 'Amendments of Mr. Collier's False and Imperfect Citations from the "Old Bachelor," " Double Dealer" ... by the Author of those Plays,' 1698, 8vo ; Vanbrugh's ' A Short Vindication of the Relapse . . . from Immorality and Profaneness/ 1698, 8vo ; D'Urfey's ' The Campaigners, with a familiar preface by a late Reformer of the Stage/ 1698, 4to ; Dennis's ' The Usefulness of the Stage, occasioned by a late Book,' 1698, 8vo ; Fihner's ' A Defence of Dramatick Poetry, being a Review of Mr. Collier's Vindication . . . ,' 1698, 8vo ; ' A Further Defence . . . being the Second Part of a Review . . . ,' 1698, 8vo ; 'A Defence of Plays, or the Stage vindicated . . . ,' 1707, 8vo ; also anonymous, ' The Stage condemned and the Encouragement given to the Immoralities and Profaneness of the Theatre by the English Schools, Universities, and Pulpits censured . . . The Arguments . . . against Mr. Collier considered,' 1698, 8vo ; 'A Vindication of the Stage, with the Usefulness and Advantages of Dramatick Representations, in answer to Mr. Collier's late Book ... In a Letter to a Friend . . . ,' 1698, 4to ; 'Some Thoughts concerning the Stage in a Letter to a Lady/ 1704, 8vo ; 'A Representation of the Impiety and Immorality of the English Stage . . . ,' 1704, 4to.
Collier also published: 30. 'The Great Historical, Geographical, Genealogical, and Poetical Dictionary,' vols. i. and ii. 1701 and 1705 ; vol. iii., or 'A Supplement,' 1705, reprinted 1727; vol. iv., or 'An Appendix,' 1721, fol. 31. 'The Emperor M. Aurelius Antoninus, his conversation with himself,' together with other pieces, translated, 1701, 1708, 1726, 8vo. 32. Preface to S. Parker's translation of Cicero's ' De Finibus,' 1702, 1812, and one or two other prefaces, an advertisement, &c., see 'Biog. Brit.' and Nichols's 'Lit. Anecd.' 33. ' An Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain ... to the end of the Reign of Charles II,' vol. i. 1708, vol. ii. 1714, fol. ; a new edition with Life ... by F. Barham, 9 vols. 8vo, 1840 ; a new edition, 9 vols. 8vo, with Life, by T. Lathbury (the best), 1852. In connection with the 'History' 34. 'An Answer to some Exceptions in Bishop Burnet's Third Part of the "History of the Reformation"... with a Reply to ... Bishop Nicholson,' 1715, fol. (Cole). 35. 'Some Remarks on Dr. Kennet's Second and Third Letters . . . ,' 1717, fol., and as ' Some Considerations . . . ,'8vo. These pamphlets may be read conveniently in vol. ix. of Lathbury's edition of the 'Ecclesiastical History.' 36. 'Reasons for restoring some Prayers and Directions as they stand in the Communion Service of the First English Reformed Liturgy . . . ,' 1717, 8vo, 1718. 37. 'A Defence of the Reasons . . . being an Answer to a book entituled "No Reason for Restoring . . . ," ' 1718, 8vo. 38. ' A Vindication of the Reasons and Defence . . . ,' part i. 1718, part ii. 1719, 8vo. 39. 'A Further Defence, being an Answer to a Reply to the Vindication . . . ,' 1719. These tracts were published in a collected form without title-pages in 1736. 40. Possibly in conjunction with others 'A Communion Office, taken partly from Primitive Liturgies and partly from the First English Reformed Common Prayer-book,' 1718, 8vo. 41. 'Several [twelve] Discourses upon Practical Subjects, 1725, 8vo, some of these also published separately. 42. ' God not the Author of Evil, being an additional sermon . . . ,' 1726, 8vo.
[Biog. Brit, i., ii. 1407; Lathbury's Life of Collier, prefixed to Ecclesiastical History, ix.; Lathbury's History of the Nonjurors; Rapin's History of England, ed. Tindal, iii. 325; Luttrell's Brief Kelation, ii. 451, iv. 427; Pepys's Diary, ii. 341; State Trials (Howell), xiii. 406, 451; Oldmixon's History of England, p. 192; Macaulay's History of England, i. 330, 332, iii. 459, iv. 425, 681; Macaulay's Dramatists of the Restoration; Genest's History of the Stage, ii. 123; Cibber's Apology for his Life (1 740), p. 158; Beljame's Histoire du Public et des Homines de Lettres, p. 244; Secretan's Life of Nelson, pp. 69, 117; Nichols's Lit. Anecd. ii. 473, iv. 178; Brit. Mus. Cat.; Addit. MS. 4275; Cole's Athenae Cantab., Addit. MS. 5865.]