This is the only passage that I can find in the account of the reign of James I given in Hume's History that mentions the burning of Arians for heresy. As should be clear from this extract, ``during this period'', means ``during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I''. Nothing in this passage suggests that King James I himself instigated the prosecutions that lead to the execution by fire of the two ``Arians'' and the ``madman'' nor even that these three executions all took place during Jame's reign. Hume does say here that James I was more tolerant than Elizabeth as regards persecution on religious grounds (then again, he could afford to be). So Bentham here seems to be putting words in the mouth of his source. Nevertheless James I did suggest---in his polemic against Vorstius---that Vorstius be burnt for heresy, and he did write a fierce polemic against the use of Tobacco, so it would seem that there is something to be said for Bentham's inference about James' attitudes. Or it is possible that Bentham had information from another source which he here attributed to Hume's History.

For, James I did have a hand in two of the cases in question: the execution by fire in the Spring of 1612 of Bartholomew Legate and David Wightman for heretical belief---these being, so far as is known, the last executions for heretical religious belief in England. (The case of the ``madman'' must have happened during Elizabeth's reign, or may perhaps be a second reference to the case of Wightman, who certainly seems to have been of questionable sanity. I can not otherwise identify it from the sources available to me.)