A.D. 1654.
'April last, 1654, my Lord Protector sent his letter to Mr. Vice-Chancellor to borrow a MS. (Joh. de Muris) for the Portugal Ambassador. A copy of the Statute was sent (but not the book), which when his Highness had read, he was satisfy'd, and commended the prudence of the Founder, who had made the place so sacred[108].'
Cromwell's gift of MSS. See under 1629.
[108] Barlow's Argument against Lending Books out.
A.D. 1654–1659.
The death of John Selden occurred on Nov. 30[109]. By his will the Library became possessed at once of his collection of Oriental and Greek MSS., together with a few Latin MSS. specially designated, as well as of such of his Talmudical and Rabbinical books as were not already to be found there. It has generally been supposed that no part of his library was received before the year 1659, and that none at all was actually bequeathed by Selden. The account usually given (taken from Burnet's Life of Sir M. Hales, p. 156[110]) is that Selden was so offended with the University for refusing the loan of a MS., except upon a bond for £1000, that he revoked that part of his will which left his library to the Bodleian, and put it entirely at the free disposal of his executors, and that they, when five years had passed, during which the Society of the Inner Temple (to whom it was first offered) had taken no steps to provide a building for its reception, conceiving themselves to be executors not of Selden's passion but of his will, sent it in 1659 to its original destination[111]. But it is clear from Selden's will (as printed by Wilkins in his Works, vol. i. p. lv.) that the books mentioned above were really bequeathed by him to Oxford; a line or two appears to be somehow omitted, by which the sense of the passage is lost, and in consequence of which the name of the Library does not appear, but there is a general reference to it both in the specification of such Hebrew books as are 'not already in the Library,' and in the mention of the 'said Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars' of the University (although no previous mention of them occurs); while all other books not thus conveyed are left to the disposal of his executors. But a letter from Langbaine to Pococke, written from London only three days after Selden's death, furnishes proof positive; for there the former writes, as executor, that all the Oriental MSS., with such Rabbinical and Talmudical printed books as were not already in the Library, and the Greek MSS. not otherwise disposed of, are left to Oxford[112]. And in the Annual Accounts, under the year 1655, we find the following entries:—
| Pro vectura codicum MSS. a Londino Oxoniam | £0 | 9s. |
| D. Langbaine pro expensis cum Londinum petiit, libros a Seldeno legatos repetiturus | 5 | 0 |
| D. Ed. Pococke eodem tempore in rem eandem Londinum misso. | 7 | 0 |
It is clear, therefore, that a portion of Selden's collection came to the Library by his bequest immediately after his death. And the reason why the whole was not bequeathed is certainly not correctly stated by Burnet, nor even by Wood, who says that he had been informed that it was because the borrowing of certain MSS. had been refused. For the Convocation Register shows that a grace was passed in Convocation, on Aug. 29, 1654, which sanctioned the giving leave to Selden to have MSS. from the collections of Barocci, Roe, and Digby (these donors having either expressed an opinion, or distinctly stipulated, that the rigour of the Library Statutes should sometimes be relaxed), provided he did not have more than three at a time, and that he gave bond in £100 (not £1000) for the return of each of them within a year[113]. Had these conditions been really the cause of Selden's taking offence, his executors would hardly have stipulated, as they actually did, in their own conditions of gift, that no book from his collection should hereafter be lent to any person upon any condition whatsoever. But there is certainly some obscurity hanging over the matter, which probably may be dispersed by further investigation. The writer of the sketch of the history of the Bodleian prefixed to Bernard's Cat. MSS., after quoting Wood's account, only says, when barely more than forty years had elapsed, that he will not venture to speak rashly about the case of the lending of books; as if it were already forgotten how the facts stood. On the proposal to lend being first mooted, Barlow, the Librarian, drew up a paper on the general question, in which he opposed it both on the grounds of Statute and expediency; the original MS. of which still exists in the Library. Selden was at first mentioned in this paper by name, with distinct reference to his application; but the name was subsequently crossed out wherever it thus occurred, and the subject treated without any personal reference[114]. In this paper the Librarian objects to the proposal, firstly, on the ground of precedent, since, though the University had power, with the joint consent of the Chancellor, Heads of Houses, and Convocation, to lend books, yet it had never thought fit to do so, except with regard to Lord Pembroke's MSS.; secondly, on the ground that if the rule were once broken, it would be impossible to refuse any person, without incurring great odium, while the gratifying all applicants would disperse into private hands the books intended for the public. He then proceeds as follows:—
'3. Suppose 3 bookes at a time be sent to any private man, 'tis true he is furnish'd, but 'tis manifestly to the prejudice of the Publick, the University wanting those books while he has them; so that if any forreigner coming hither from abroad desire to see them, or any at home desire to use them, both are disappointed, to the diminution of the honour of the University, in the one, and the benefit it might have by those books, in the other. And therefore it seems more agreeable to reason and the public good (and the declared will and precept of our prudent and pious Founder[115]) not to lend any books out of the Library; for by not lending, private persons only want the use of those books which are another's, whereas by lending, the University wants the use of those books which are her own. Sure no prudent man can think it fit to gratify particular persons with the publick detriment.
'4. The Library is a magazine which the pious Founder hath fix'd in a publick place for a publick use; and though his charity to private persons is such that he will hinder none (who is justly qualify'd and worthy) to come to it, yet his charity to the publick is such that he would not have it ambulatory, to goe to any private person. And sure 'tis more rational that Mahomet should go to the mountaine, than that the mountaine should come to Mahomet.
'5. Lending of books makes them lyable to many casualties, as, I. absolute losse, either 1. in via, by the carrier's negligence, or violence offer'd him, or, 2. in termino, they may be lost by the person that borrows them; for (presuming the person noble, and carefull for their preservation, yet) his house may be burn'd, or (by robbers) broken open (as Mr. Selden's unhappily was not long since): or, (in case they scape these casualties) they may be spoyl'd in the carriage, as by sad experience we find, for above 60 or 100 leaves of a Greek MS.[116] lent out of Archiva Pembrochiana to Mr. Pat. Younge were irrecoverably defaced. Now what has happen'd heretofore may happen hereafter; and therefore to