Somerset House were blown up on purpose to
save that house; and all men, both in city and
suburbs, carried away their goods all day and
night by carts, which were not to be had but
at most inhumane prices. Your lordship's
servant in Queen Street made a shift to put some
of your best chairs and fine goods into your
rich coach, and sent for my horses to draw them
to Kensington, where they now are."

The writer gives Charles the Second credit
for spirit and courage on this occasion. Very
likely, ardent loyalty coloured the picture;
but let us give the king the benefit of it so
far as it goes: "'Tis fit your lordship should
know all that is left, both of city and
suburbs, is acknowledged (under God) to be
wholly due to the king and the Duke of York,*
who, when the citizens had abandoned all
further care of the place, and were intent
chiefly upon the preservation of their goods,
undertook the work themselves, and, with
incredible magnanimity, rode up and down,
giving orders for blowing up of houses with
gunpowder, to make void spaces for the fire to
die in, and standing still to see their orders
executed, exposing their persons to the very
flames themselves and the ruins of buildings
ready to fall upon them, and sometimes
labouring with their own hands to give example to
others, for which the people do now pay them,
as they ought to do, all possible reverence and
admiration. The king proceeds to relieve daily
all the poor people with infinite quantities of
bread and cheese."

A very terrible state of feeling agitated the
public mind at the time, arising from doubts
concerning the cause of the Great Fire.
Multitudes of persons insisted on believing that the
catastrophe was the result of design, not accident.
The writer of the letter alludes to this subject in
the following sensible way: "Without doubt
there was nothing of plot or design in all this,
though the people would fain think it
otherwise. Some lay it upon the French or Dutch,
and are ready to knock them all on the head
wheresoever they meet them; others upon the
fanatics, because it broke out so near the third
of September, their so celebrated day of
triumph;† others upon the Papists, because
some of them are now said to be accused.
All the stories of making and casting of
fire-balls are found to be fictitious when
traced home; for that which was said to be
thrown upon Dorset House was a firebrand
[burning billet] seen by the Duke of York
upon the Thames to be blown thither; and
upon notice thereof given by his royal highness,
was for that time quenched. But there could
be no plot without some time to form it in;
and making so many parties to it, we must
needs have had some kind of intelligence of it.
Besides, no rising follows it, nor any one
appears anywhere to second such a design.
Above all, there hath been no attempt upon
the king or duke's person, which easily might
have been executed."

* Afterwards James the Second.

†  The parliamentarians won the battle of Dunbar on
the third of Septmber, 1650, and the battle of
Worcester on the third of September, 1651.

The suspicions connected with the Great
Fire form a chapter very little known except
to those who have read the political pamphlets
of that day. William Lilly, the astrologer,
was much mixed up with the discussion: he
having been one of the persons examined by a
parliamentary committee touching the cause of
the dire calamity. There can be very little doubt
that Lilly was a crafty knave, who traded on the
credulity of those around him. He had, during
many years, been applied to for his aid,
by persons who, in reference to birth and
education, ought to have been superior to such
follies. On one occasion, the authorities of
Westminster Abbey requested him to try, by
means of the "Mosaical rods" (divining rods)
whether or not there was valuable treasure
hidden beneath the abbey. During the
struggles between Charles the First and his
parliament, both parties had applied to Lilly the
Royalists to tell them whether the king ought
to sign the propositions of the parliament, the
Parliamentarians to furnish them with "perfect
knowledge of the chieftest concerns of France."
Such a man was pretty sure to make a harvest
out of such clients. For six-and-thirty years,
continuously, Lilly published an almanac, the
predictions of which were sought for with so
much avidity that he amassed considerable
wealth. Like the Vicar of Bray, he changed
his opinions to suit the changes in public affairs,
and seems fully to have deserved the character
given to him by Dr. Nash, of being a "time-
serving rascal."

A committee of the House of Commons was
appointed on the twenty-fifth of September, to
collect evidence bearing on the subject of the
Fire. The Report of the Proceedings* is very
curious, showing that the members of the
committee were ready to receive any evidence,
however trivial or doubtful, which might tend
to show that the Fire had been the work of
incendiaries. Let us cull a few specimens.

* The Report of sir Robert brook, chairman to the
committee that was appointed by the House of
Commons to inquire into the firing of the City of London.

"Mr. Light, of Ratcliff, having some
discourse with Mr. Longhorn of the Middle
Temple, barrister (reputed a zealous
papist), about February, 1665, after some
discourse in disputation about religion, he took
him by the hand and said to him, ' You
expect great things in 'sixty-six, and think
that Rome will be destroyed; but what if it
be London?'"

"Miss Elizabeth Styles informs: That in
April last, in an eager discourse she had with
a French servant of Sir Vere Fane, he hastily
replied: 'You English maids will like the
Frenchmen better when there is not a house
left between Temple Bar and London Bridge.'
To which she answered, 'I hope your eyes will
never see that.' He replied, 'This will come
to pass between June and October.'"