FOOTNOTES:

[1] For the state of Puritanism during the Civil Wars and the Commonwealth I must refer the reader to my former Volumes. I take up the thread of the History where I dropped it, at the death of Oliver Cromwell.

[2] Cromwellian Diary, iii., Int. v. viii.

[3] Letter to Hyde, Cosin's Works, iv. 465.

[4] Proclamation for the better Encouraging of Godly Ministers, Nov. 25. In the notes of the speech of the Protector to the Officers of the Army (Thurloe, vii. 447), "Liberty of Conscience, as we are Christians," is one of the heads.

[5] Thurloe, vii. 4:4.

[6] Ludlow, ii. 618.

[7] Cromwellian Diary, iii. 1.

[8] Ibid., 10.

[9] Cromwellian Diary, iii. 13, Jan. 28.

[10] Ibid., 83, 138, Feb. 5.

[11] Cromwellian Diary, iii. 403, Feb. 21.

[12] Guizot's Richard Cromwell, &c. i. 103.

[13] Cromwellian Diary, iv. 328, April 2.

[14] Ibid., iii. 177, Feb. 9.

[15] Ibid., 448, Feb. 22; 494, Feb. 26.

[16] Cromwellian Diary, iii. 87, et seq., Feb. 7th and 9th.

[17] Guizot's Richard Cromwell and the Restoration, i. 91, March 16. No other historian has so patiently traced the steps by which the Stuarts were restored as this eminent Frenchman.

[18] Clarendon's State Papers, iii. 440, March 18.

[19] This petition to Richard followed the humble representation presented on the 6th of April.

[20] Prynne got in for a few hours, and had an angry altercation with Haselrig and Vane.

[21] Parl. Hist., iii. 1553.

[22] Of the popularity of Fleetwood amongst "Anabaptists and other sectaries," and of the importance attributed to him by lookers on, there are illustrations in the correspondence of the French ambassador,—Guizot, i. 246.

[23] Howe's Life, by Rogers, 94.

[24] Rogers, 91. Noble's Protectorate House, i. 172, 180, 176.

[25] Noticed in an article on Keble in Macmillan's Magazine for March, 1869. Baxter speaks favourably of Richard Cromwell. His wife, who died in 1676, whilst he was abroad, is spoken of as a prudent, godly, practical Christian. It appears from one of her letters, that, after the Protectorate, she "wanted some scholar or godly man to reside at Hursley, to minister spiritual consolation under her present sorrows."—Noble, i. 343.

[26] Neal (iv. 209) relates this, and thinks the story probable; but Orme, in his Life of Owen, p. 213, disputes it. Respecting what Baxter says about Owen (Life and Times, i. 101) see an Historical Account of my own Life, by Calamy, i. 378.

[27] As I am not aware of these important entries having been published by any one else I introduce them here:—

June 7th—"This day," so runs the record, "the Church received a letter from the Church at Wallingford House, desiring advice from the Church what they apprehended was needful for the Commonwealth; the Church considering it, ordered the elders to write to them, thanking them for their love and care of them; and also desiring to give the right-hand of fellowship with them; but concerning civil business the Church, as a Church, desire not to meddle with."

July 10th—"Ordered by the Church upon the receipt of a letter from the Church at Wallingford House, that Wednesday, the 13th of July, should be set apart to humble our souls before the Lord, both in regard of the sins of the nation, and also for our own sins, as also to seek the Lord for direction and assistance for the carrying on the Lord's work in the nation."

[28] This confession will be noticed in the next volume in the account given of the development of Congregationalism.

[29] MS. Yarmouth Independent Church Records, Dec. 28, 1659. As to the opinions of Independents on these questions during the Commonwealth see the former volumes of this Ecclesiastical History.

[30] Owen's Works, xix. 385–393.

[31] Hist. of the Rebellion (Oxford Edit., 1843), 855–6. The documents are without date. They are placed by Clarendon under the year 1658.

[32] Ibid., 857.

[33] Neal (iv. 195) alludes to this affair, and regards it as an artifice to get money "out of the poor King's purse." Crosby (ii. 91) speaks of the Baptists as making "overtures to the King for his restoration," but does not relate any particulars. The modern historian of the Baptists, Dr. Evans, as far as I can find, says nothing upon the subject.

[34] Lingard, xi. 156.

[35] Newcome's Autobiography, i. 117.

[36] Dated November 1st, 1659. Thurloe, vii. 771.

[37] December 14th, 1659. Ibid., 795.

[38] December 16th, 1659. Ibid., 797.

[39] Thorndike's Works, vol. ii. part i., preface.

[40] May 4. Barwick's Life, 401; Thorndike, vi. 219.

[41] Barwick's Life, 449.

[42] Barwick, 201, 218, 412. Various difficulties felt at the time by the Bishops are mentioned in the letters printed in the appendix to Barwick's Life.

[43] Barwick, 413, 424.

[44] Ibid., 517, 519, 525.

[45] 1659, Nov. 9 & 18, Dec. 9. 1660, Feb. 3.

[46] Ludlow, ii. 674.

[47] See pamphlets: The Leveller; The Rota; or, Model of a Free State; and Gallicantus seu præcursor Gallicinii Secundus.

[48] State Papers, Dom. Interreg., No. 659.

[49] See prices in Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, B. I. c. II.

[50] Guizot, ii. 62.

[51] Price says Christmas-day. Hist. of the King's Restoration, 72.

[52] Numerous illustrations of the state of feeling at the time might be culled from these and other pamphlets of the period. Some of them are printed in the Harleian Miscellany. Some are noticed and described in Kennet's Register. A large collection of them may be found in the British Museum.

[53] Price's Mystery and Method of His Majesty's Happy Restoration, 79, 80.

[54] Neal (iv. 238–242) says that when Monk had joined the Presbyterians, and the Independents saw that they were betrayed, they offered to support their friends in Parliament, and to raise four new regiments for the purpose of resisting the General's designs. He further states that Owen and Nye consulted with Whitelocke and St. John, and engaged to procure £100,000 to support the Army, if the Army would again undertake the defence of religious liberty; but he gives no authority for what he relates.

[55] Coverdale's Version.

[56] Price, 86, 87.

[57] Quoted in Guizot, ii. 122.

[58] Pepys' Diary, i. 22, Saturday, Feb. 11.

[59] Memoirs of Col. Hutchinson, 362.

[60] Milton's Ready and Easy Way, &c. Works, i. 589.

[61] Parl. Hist., iii. 1580.

[62] Baxter's Life and Times, i. 105; ii. 214.

[63] 1660, April 8. Thurloe, vii. 892. The rest of the letter is interesting, and shows how much personal feeling was mixed up in court intrigues.

[64] Life and Times, ii. 207, 215. It is curious that as the Presbyterians suspected the King, so the King suspected the Presbyterians. See letter by Kingstoun, April 8, just referred to.

[65] See Valley of Baca, a pamphlet published about that time.

[66] See a "Declaration," which is worth reading, printed in Kennet's Register, 121 (April 24), with a long list of noble signatures.

[67] All this Baxter describes with great simplicity in his Life and Times, ii. 216.

[68] See correspondence between Sharp and Douglas, in the months of March and April, Kennet's Register, 78–124.

[69] Thurloe, vii. 872, 873.

[70] April 8, Thurloe, vii. 889.

[71] April 6, Ibid., 887.

[72] Price's Mystery and Method of His Majesty's Happy Restoration, 136.

[73] See Lives of him by Gumble and by Price. Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper was a confidant of Monk, and Mrs. Lucy Hutchinson tells us that he assured her husband, even after Monk's designs became apparent, that there was no intention besides a Commonwealth, and that if the violence of the people should bring the King in, he would perish body and soul rather than see a hair of any man's head touched, or a penny of any man's estate forfeited through the quarrel. Hutchinson held Cooper "for a more execrable traytor than Monke himselfe."—Memoirs, 360.

Aubrey, putting down his recollections of what he heard at the time from Royalist agents in London, says, "I remember, in the main, that they were satisfied he no more intended or designed the King's restoration, when he came into England, or first came to London, than his horse did." Letters iii. 454. I have no doubt that, in February, Monk thought of restoring the King; but before that date I am inclined to believe he was waiting to see which way the wind blew. Whatever hypothesis may be adopted as to his intentions, it must be admitted that he acted the part of a thoroughly untruthful man. Guizot, in his life of Monk, represents him as a Royalist at heart throughout the whole of the business. Of course Monk, after he openly took the King's side, would wish to be so regarded.

[74] Ludlow's Memoirs, ii. 865.

[75] Guizot, ii. 411.

[76] See in Appendix notice of a letter in the State Paper Office referring to projected insurrections.

[77] See Journals of both Houses, 1st of May. When examining, some years ago, the papers in the House of Lords, belonging to that period, I saw the original letter from Charles, but not the Declaration.

[78] Clarendon's Hist., 904.

[79] Burnet's Hist. of his Own Time, i. 88.

[80] Kennet's Register, 129. Sharp afterwards became Archbishop Sharp.

[81] Worcester MS.

[82] Public Intelligencer, No. 20. Newcome's Diary, published by the Cheetham Society, and Life of Philip Henry, 59.

[83] Hale's reflections on the crisis may be seen in his Memoirs by Williams, 63–65.

[84] Pepys' Diary (May 15) i. 62.

[85] Kennet's Register, 146.

[86] In The Secret History of the Reign of Charles II. and James II., 1690—a book not very trustworthy—we have the original of the story, often repeated, respecting Mr. Case, "who, with the rest of the brethren coming where the King lay, and desiring to be admitted into the King's presence, were carried into the chamber next or very near to the King's closet, but told withal that the King was busy at his devotions, and that till he had done they must be contented to stay. Being thus left alone, by contrivance no doubt, and hearing a sound of groaning piety, such was the curiosity of Mr. Case, that he would needs go and lay his ear to the closet door. By heavens, how was the good old man ravished to hear the pious ejaculations that fell from the King's lips: 'Lord, since Thou art pleased to restore me to the throne of my ancestors, grant me a heart constant in the exercise and protection of thy true Protestant religion. Never may I seek the oppression of those who out of tenderness to their consciences, are not free to conform to outward and indifferent ceremonies.'"

[87] Kennet's Register under date May 20th.

[88] Barwick's Life, 270, 520.

[89] Buckingham's Works, ii. 55. See Harris's Lives, v. 52, et seq., for evidence as to his being a Papist.

[90] See what Harris has collected on this subject, v. 13 et seq.

[91] Character of Charles II., 56.

[92] "23rd. General Monk marched from London, with a gallant train of attendants to meet the King. It is said that several fanatics intermingled themselves with the troops, but were discovered, whereof three killed, and some hurt, and three taken, who do confess the design was to pistol the King. 24th. One to be put to the rack for discovery. It is said the King escaped a plot of some Frenchmen at the Hague to pistol the King in his coach, but discovered by one who was in presence once hearing them, and they suspecting him, shot him as dead, but recovering to speak, discovered their intentions. From all such or any other, God ever preserve and protect his pious Majesty!"—Worcester MS.

[93] Kennet, 160–164.

[94] Butler's Hist. Memorials of the Catholics, iii. 23.

[95] From Godly ministers in Exeter and Devonshire.—State Papers, Dom. Charles II., 1660, vol. i. 28.

[96]

—State Papers, Dom. Charles II., vol i. No. 36.

[97] (Signed) John Angier, Nathaniel Heywood, Henry Newcome, Nathaniel Baxter, and many others. Peter Aspinwall signs himself "minister of Formby, where now more people go openly to Mass than to our Church." State Papers xxiv., 29.

[98] A new Act, touching the Royal Supremacy, was passed in the Scotch Parliament, January, 1661 (See Murray's Collection of the Acts), but that does not come within the limits of our history.

[99] Stat. 26 Henry VIII. c. i., repealed 1 and 2 Philip and Mary, c. viii., ss. 12–20. That Act was repealed by 1 Elizabeth c. i., ss. 1, 2. Except in certain particulars, provision is made for the ecclesiastical Supremacy of the Crown by 1 Elizabeth c. i., ss. 16-23.—Digest of Statutes ii., 1387. The doctrine of the Royal Supremacy arose as a counter-action of the doctrine of Papal Supremacy; and nothing in its way can be more dignified and noble than the preface to the Statute 24 Henry VIII., c. 12. The conflict between Papal Supremacy and national English Independence began long before the Reformation.

[100] Charles I. in 1646, 30.

[101] Clarendon's State Papers, ii. 237.

[102] Hist. of his own Times, i. 95.

[103] Ibid. Compared with Clarendon (1220), who gives a long character of Southampton.

[104] Clarendon, 1005.

[105] Burnet, i. 97.

[106] Ibid., 96. Burnet, who knew Ashley, afterwards Lord Shaftesbury, states the last particular upon the authority of conversations with him.

[107] July 9, 16. Parl. Hist. iv. 79, 84.

[108] 12 Charles II. c. 17.—Upon the 26th of May Mr. Prynne made a report touching the quiet possession of ministers, schoolmasters, and other ecclesiastical persons, in sequestered livings, until they, on order, should be legally convicted; and two days afterwards allusion was made in a further report from the same member to several riots which had "been committed, and forcible entries made upon the possessions of divers persons, ecclesiastical and temporal;" when an order to prevent such disturbances in future was recommitted, to be put into the form of a proclamation "to be offered to the King's Majesty."—Commons' Journals, May 26th & 28th, 1660; This was for the benefit of the Presbyterians, but the current of feeling in the House was setting in the other direction.

[109] There is an account in Calamy of Abraham Wright, Incumbent of Cheavely, Cambridgeshire, being turned out of his living, because it did not appear to the Justices that he was in orders, and of his commencing an action for the recovery of his tithes: and against Mr. Deken, who had been substituted in his place, "for the making good his title to the living."—Cont. of the Account, 158, et seq.

[110] Hunter's Life of Heywood, 125.

[111] Kennet, 204.—I am indebted for the following note to the Dean of Westminster, to whom it was communicated by the Rector of Acton: "Mr. Philip Nye appears to have been made Rector of Acton soon after the Battle of Brentford, in the room of Dr. Daniel Featley (or Fairclough), who held Lambeth Rectory as well. There is a curious entry in the Register, which I append;—'April, 165—, Richard Meredith, esquire, eldest son of Sr. William Meredith...Baronet, was marryed unto Mrs. Susanne Skippon, youngest daughter of right honourable Major General Philip Skippon [Traytor] by Sr. John Thoroughgood [Knave] in the publick congregation within the Parish Church at Acton...Mr. Philip Nye at the same time praying and teaching upon that occasion.' The interpolations, 'Traytor' and 'Knave,' are, of course, by a different hand, and are always attributed by me to Dr. Bruno Ryves (one of Charles the Second's Chaplains?) who was appointed Rector of Acton at the Restoration. To the same Dr. Ryves is attributed the erasure of all 'Lord' Francis Rous' titles on a tablet in Acton Church, the said Lordship being of Cromwell's creation.

E. P."

[112] Journals of the Lords, Sept. 1.

[113] Ibid., June 4.—The Earl of Manchester was restored to the Chancellorship, and he immediately issued warrants for the restoration of ejected Heads and Fellows.

[114] Between the 25th of June, 1660, and the 2nd of March, 1661, no less than 121 Doctors of Divinity were created by the King's mandate, and 39 degrees were conferred on other faculties.—Kennet's Reg. Cooper's Cambridge, iii. 481.

[115] Kennet's Register, 293.

[116] D'Oyley's Life of Sancroft, i. 123.—A curious story about Stephen Scanderet, of Trinity College, Cambridge, is related by Calamy, Account, 655.

[117] Journals under date.

[118] Read a second time 6th July. Journals. It came to nothing.

[119] Kennet's Register, 200.

[120] "Resolved, That it be referred to the Grand Committee, to whom the Bill for Sales is committed, to receive proposals from any of the purchasers of the estates of Bishops, and other ecclesiastical persons, and from any the ecclesiastical persons themselves, or from any others; touching satisfaction to be given to the purchasers of any public lands; and, on consideration thereof, to report their opinion to the House."—Commons' Journals, August 6th, 1660.

[121] Kennet, 312.

[122] Harris, iv. 345.—"Almost all the leases of the Church estates over England were fallen in, there having been no renewal for twenty years. The leases for years were determined. And the wars had carried off so many men, that most of the leases for lives were fallen into the incumbents' hands. So that the Church estates were in them: And the fines raised by the renewing the leases rose to about a million and a half. It was an unreasonable thing to let those who were now promoted carry off so great a treasure. If the half had been applied to the buying of tithes or glebes for small Vicarages, here a foundation had been laid down for a great and effectual reformation."—Burnet, i. 186. Burnet's statements on this subject are very general. So are those made by Clarendon from his point of view. (1047.) No doubt the ecclesiastical bodies on the one side, and the tenants on the other, tried to make the best bargain they could. In the Library of Canterbury Cathedral is a curious collection of letters respecting leases, which throw light on this point. Persons plead their sufferings under the Commonwealth, and pray for the renewal of their leases on the most favourable terms. See in our next vol. (under the year 1677) notice of an Act for augmenting small incomes.

[123] Amongst the State Papers, Dom. Charles II., vol. lxxv. 69, there is an account by John Cosin, Bishop of Durham, of the true state of the present revenues of his see. They diminished £1,000 a year, through resumption of lands by Queen Elizabeth, who afterwards regranted them on a rental of £880; he lost £2,000 by taking away the Court of Ward and Liveries, the revenues of which in the County Palatine belonged to the Bishops; he prays that as the King receives £1,500 a year excise money, as given in lieu of the Court of Wards in Durham, the rental of £880, paid by the Bishops, should be remitted.

[124] Calendar Dom., 1660–1661, 218–236.

[125] Kennet, 162. The other names given by Baxter (Life and Times, ii. 229) are Wallis, Bates, Manton, Case, Ash, all of whom accepted; and Newcomen, who declined the office. Neal (iv. 263) gives the name of Woodbridge.

[126] Life and Times, ii. 229. Amongst the Baxter MSS. in Dr. Williams' library, I have seen a note, apparently relating to the period now before us. Baxter said:—The late Archbishop Ussher and he had in an hour's time agreed on the most easy terms. These words were printed. Episcopal Divines called on him to know what the terms were, i.e., Dr. Gauden, Dr. Gouldson, Dr. Helen, Dr. Bernard, &c. They expressed great delight, and were willing to make abatements necessary thereto. Some men of greater power stept in and frustrated all. Mr. Calamy thought the best way was to interest and engage the King on the matter. It was mentioned to him accordingly. Calamy consulted the London ministers, and it was agreed that Ussher's reduction should be offered as a ground of union. This was laid before the King with other proposals, but the Lord Chancellor would not allow the matter to be taken into consideration.

[127] Life and Times, ii. 230.

[128] Life and Times, ii. 232.

[129] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 232, et seq. Also in Cardwell's Conferences, 277, corrected from MS. copy amongst the Tanner MSS., Bodleian.

[130] Life and Times, ii. 278.

[131] Life and Times, ii. 241. The date of this interview is not given by Baxter.

[132] This paper is printed in Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 242–247, and in Documents relating to the Settlement of the Church of England by the Act of Uniformity of 1662, p. 27, but not in Cardwell's Conferences.

[133] Life and Times, ii. 258, 259.

[134] Ibid., 265, et seq.

[135] This no doubt had to do with the importance they attached to the ring and the sign of the cross. If any one would see the modern expression of this feeling in an intensified form, let him read Keble's Tract for the Times, No. 89, and Preface to Hooker, lxxxix.

[136] Romans xiv.

[137] In the foregoing statement I have endeavoured to put myself in the place of each party successively. My own views of the question in dispute are very decided; but they do not exactly accord with those of either party.

[138] Durham and Exeter were vacant sees at the Restoration. Cosin and Gauden had been nominated to them respectively.

[139] Baxter ii. 277. Clarendon (p. 1034) states that in the draft of the Declaration a passage occurred professing the King's use of the Prayer Book, and that "he would take it well from those who used it in their Churches that the common people might be again acquainted with the piety, gravity, and devotion of it, and which he thought would facilitate their living in good neighbourhood together." This clause Clarendon says was left out at the ministers' request, on the ground that they were resolved to do what the King wished, and to reconcile the people to the use of that form by degrees, which would have a better effect if such a passage were omitted. Then he charges Calamy with writing a letter which was intercepted and found to contain the expression of a resolve to persist in the use of the Directory, and not to admit the Common Prayer Book into their Churches. Upon turning to Baxter (ii. 263–275), and upon reading the Declaration, one finds, that all which the ministers promised to do, and all that the Declaration required of them, was not totally to lay aside the book, but to read those parts against which there could be no exception. It is incredible, looking at the ground taken throughout by the Puritan ministers, that they ever could have talked in the way Clarendon represents. As to the contents of an intercepted letter, no one who knows anything of the tricks then played will attach importance to what is said by the same historian on that subject.

[140] Baxter, ii. 259–264; also printed in Wilkins' Concilia, Cardwell's Conferences, and Documents relating to the Act of Uniformity.

[141] It is curious to find Baxter when he refused a Bishopric, proposing to Clarendon a number of names from which to choose some one, instead of himself. Baxter at this time had the reputation of being "intimate with the Lord Chancellor Hyde," and accordingly his influence was solicited on behalf of ministers in trouble. Adam Martindale tells us that when his own name was sent up to the Privy Council, Baxter, at the solicitation of a friend, spoke on his behalf to Clarendon, who "did so rattle one of the Deputy Lieutenants and so expostulate with the Earl of Derby, that Martindale was released." The account is very amusing, and shows Martindale's exultation at his enemies being outwitted in their application to the Privy Council. The story indicates, what may be gathered from several circumstances, i.e., that Clarendon at that time wished to show favour to the Presbyterians.—The Life of Adam Martindale, printed for the Cheetham Society, p. 153.

[142] Baxter, ii. 281–283.

[143] Mr. Grosart has shown this in his interesting memoir prefixed to Gilpin's Dæmonologia Sacra, p. xxxii. It is a curious fact that the same Bishopric should, within a century or so, have been offered to two Gilpins, and refused by both.

[144] Kennet, 308. There were no less than 121 Doctors of Divinity made by mandate between 25th of June, 1660, and 2nd of March, 1661.

[145] Those of them, with whom Baxter acted, were not sufficiently satisfied with the Declaration to offer formal thanks for it. Clarendon (1035) brings this as a charge against them.

[146] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 284.

[147] Nov. 9. Kennet, 307.

[148] Parl. Hist., iv. 142.

[149] Parl. Hist., iv. 152–154, and Commons' Journals, Wednesday, 28th of November.

[150] "That is the best and most Christian memory," says he, "that, as Cæsar's, forgets nothing but injuries. Let us all seriously and sadly look back, consider and bemoan one another, for what we have mutually done and suffered from each other."—Harris's Lives, iv. 385.

[151] Henchman's Sermon, entitled A Peace Offering in the Temple.

[152] Clarendon, 1034.

[153] Calendar of State Papers. Dom. Charles II. Nov. 1, 1660.

[154] Clarendon, 1035.

[155] Lister's Life of Clarendon, ii. 218.

[156] State Papers. Dom. Charles II. December 7, 1660. In a letter on the previous day he alludes to the Bill as "quashed by the violence" of its supporters.

[157] This had been Clarendon's policy from the beginning. He wrote from Breda on the 22nd April, to Dr. Barwick, in these terms: "It would be no ill expedient" "to assure them of present good preferments in the Church." "In my own opinion you should rather endeavour to win over those who being recovered will have both reputation and desire to merit from the Church, than be over solicitous to comply with the pride and passion of those who propose extravagant things." Barwick's Life, 525.

[158] Cardwell (Conferences, 256) says "the King rejoiced when he found his stratagem had succeeded." The stratagem was more the Chancellor's than the King's.

[159] Parl. Hist., iv. 67, et seq. It may here be mentioned that others besides those named in Parliament were exposed to danger. Lord Wharton, for example. The circumstance is rather curious—his eldest daughter, Elizabeth, then the wife of Lord Willoughby d'Eresby, as she was crossing the Thames, by the ferry at Lambeth, overheard the boatman mention her father's name as one of the excepted. Her husband immediately used his influence with the King on his father-in-law's behalf, and thus prevented the name from being retained in the list of exceptions. I am indebted for this anecdote to notices of Lord Wharton's Life, in Lipscombe's Hist. and Antiq. of the County of Buckingham. Lord Wharton lived at Wooburn, near Wycombe; and in the next volume I shall have to refer to this circumstance.

[160] See the Commons' Journals, May 14, June 5, 6, 7, 8, 30. The Lords' Journals, July 20, 27. Commons' Journals, Aug. 13, 17, 23, 24. Hallam gives a synopsis of these proceedings, and I have ventured to adopt one or two of his expressions.—Constitutional History, ii. 3. In the Conference on the 23rd of August, Clarendon told the Commons that His Majesty, who was duly sensible of the great wound he received on that fatal day (the day of his father's execution) when the news of it came to the Hague, bore but one part of the tragedy, for the whole world was sensible of it; and particularly instanced that a woman at the Hague, hearing of it "fell down dead with astonishment."

[161] Trial of the Regicides, 17.

[162] The Trials of Charles I., and of some of the Regicides, 330.

[163] See Brooks's Lives of the Puritans, iii., 350 & 363.

[164] See Ecclesiastical Hist., ii. (Church of the Commonwealth.)

[165] Forster's Statesmen of the Commonwealth, iii. 356.

[166] Lords' Journals, February 7th, 1661/2.

[167] For the story of the Regicides see The Trial, published at the time, and of modern publications, Noble's Regicides; Caulfield's High Court of Justice; and The Trials of Charles I. and of some of the Regicides.

[168] Commons' Journals, December 4th and 8th, 1660.

[169] Kennet observes, "Some of the hottest Divines, though great sufferers and of great names, were passed by in the designations to Bishoprics. An instance in Dr. Peter Heylyn, who in 1660, upon His Majesty's return to his kingdoms, was restored to his spiritualities, but never rose higher than Sub-dean of Westminster, which was a wonder to many and a great discontent to him and his; but the reason being manifest to those that well knew the temper of the person, I shall forbear to make mention of that matter any further. Such was the case of Dr. Sibthorpe, who had suffered very great calamities in His Majesty's cause, yet upon the return of King Charles II. he was only restored to the small preferments from which he had been violently ejected."—Register, 236.

[170] Wood's Athen. Oxon. (Bliss), iii. 613. Further notice of these Bishops will be supplied hereafter.

[171] D'Oyley's Life of Sancroft, ii. 346.

[172] Mant's History of the Church of Ireland, i. 611. Taylor preached a sermon on Episcopacy. Works, vi. 301.

[173] Keble's Life of Bishop Wilson, i. 132.

[174] Canons, 9–12, 72, 73.

[175] See also 3 Jac., 4; 21 Jac., 4.

[176] The letter is written by R. Ellsworth, "Bristol this 24th of November, 1660," and is addressed to Sir E. Nicholas. State Papers, Dom. Charles II.

[177] Rees' Nonconformity in Wales, 111. Powell speaks of himself as if charged with "preaching sedition and rebellion." The specific charges against these Welshmen do not appear. It seems to me very probable that they were accused of political disaffection.

[178] Lives of Philip, Howe, and Bunyan.

[179] It may seem strange to some that Charles II. should excite so much enthusiasm. But it must be remembered that by letters from abroad and other means, extraordinary ideas of his excellence had been diffused throughout the country. Some amusing illustrations of this are supplied in the Worcester MS.:—

"June 6th.—Mr. Prinn coming to kiss His Majesty's hands, prayed God to bless him—'and so also you, Mr. Prinn,' and smiling clapt him on the shoulder."

"6th.—It is said that Mr. Calamy, a Presbyterian, and one of the King's chaplains, desired His Majesty that he might not officiate in these canonical habits, especially in a surplice, for it was against his conscience, who answered he would not press it on him, and as he refused to do in the one, so he would spare him in the other. It is also said when His Majesty was at primal prayers in his presence-chamber, and seeing all on their knees but the Earl of Manchester, his chamberlain, who stood by him (a Presbyterian), His Majesty suddenly took a cushion, and said, 'My Lord, there is a cushion, you may now kneel;' which for shame he was glad patiently to do. O meek, O zealous, O pious prince!"

"July.—The King going to swim one night in the Thames, there were divers ladies and gentlemen looking out of the windows of Whitehall, which he beholding, sent a message that either they should shut their windows and pray for his safety, or begone out of court. O chaste and good prince!"

"Oct. 23rd.—A settling of the King's household according as the book was 6th Charles I.—wherein His Majesty declares that his officers should collect out of the same all such wholesome orders, decrees, and directions as may tend most to the planting, establishing, and countenancing of virtue and piety in his family, and to the discountenancing of all manner of disorder, debauchery, and vice in any person of what degree or quality soever."

[180] State Papers, Dom. 1661, January 11th.

[181] The entry in the Council Book, and the subsequent Proclamation, are printed in Kennet's Register, under dates January 2nd & 10th.

[182] Neal, iv. 311.

[183] Crosby, ii. 108.

[184] Sir John Maynard informed Lord Mordaunt that so many refused to swear that he did not know what to do: some because they would not swear at all; others because they would not enter into promissory obligations; others because, as the King had taken no oath to obey the laws, they would take no oath to obey the King.—State Papers, Dom. 1661, January 19th.

[185] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 301. No date is given—it is only said that the circumstance occurred at the time of Venner's insurrection.

[186] Loyal Subject's Lamentation for London's perverseness in the malignant choice of some rotten Members on Tuesday, 19th March, 1661.

[187] The Government monopoly of letter carrying was sometimes invaded; and I notice in the Minute Book of Privy Council, 1661–2, a curious order for taking into custody two persons, who obtained large quantities of letters under the pretence of conveying them to their proper destination, but who in fact threw them into the Thames, and still worse places.

[188] Sir Thomas Browne, in a letter to his son, says—"Two Royalists gained it here (Norwich) against all opposition that could possibly be made; the voices in this number—Jaye, 1,070; Corie, 1,001; Barnham, 562; Church, 436. My Lord Richardson and Sir Ralph Hare carried it in the county without opposition."—Works, i. 8.

[189] As instances of such purging, we may mention that on the 25th of February, just before the election, orders of that kind were sent to Hull and Norwich.—State Papers, Dom., under date. Oldfield's History of the Original Constitution of Parliament, gives a very large number of instances in which members for boroughs in the seventeenth century were returned by the Corporation. For example:—Andover, votes 24; Banbury, votes 18; Bath, votes 18; Beaumaris, votes 24.

[190] County of Devon.

[191] Their former history is remembered in Hudibras:—

"Was not the King, by proclamation,

Declared a rebel o'er all the nation?

Did not the learned Glynne and Maynard,

To make good subjects traitors, sham hard?"

[192] Parl. Hist., iv. 383.

[193] Ibid., iv. 862.

[194] May 10th.—"Parliament assembled on the 8th [of May], the King went on horseback, with a magnificent equipage. After a sermon in Westminster Abbey, they went in the same order to the House of Peers, &c."—State Papers, Dom. under date.

[195] Lords' Journals, 1661, May 8th and 10th.

[196] A Diarist states that Dr. Gunning, who officiated, refused the bread to Mr. Prynne, because he did not kneel; and that Boscawen took it standing.—Lathbury's Convocation, 297.

[197] The Presbyterian Divines were Edward Reynolds, Bishop of Norwich; Dr. Tuckney, Master of St. John's College, Cambridge; Dr. Conant, Reg. Prof. Div. Oxford; Dr. Spurstow; Dr. Wallis, Sav. Prof. Geom. Oxford; Dr. Manton; Mr. Calamy; Mr. Baxter; Mr. Jackson; Mr. Case; Mr. Clarke; Mr. Newcomen.

Coadjutors:—Dr. Horton; Dr. Jacomb; Dr. Bates; Dr. Cooper; Dr. Lightfoot; Dr. Collins; Mr. Woodbridge; Mr. Rawlinson; Mr. Drake.

The Episcopal Divines were:—Accepted Frewen, Archbishop of York; Gilbert Sheldon, Bishop of London, Master of the Savoy; John Cosin, Bishop of Durham; John Warner, Bishop of Rochester; Henry King, Bishop of Chichester; Humphrey Henchman, Bishop of Sarum; George Morley, Bishop of Worcester; Robert Sanderson, Bishop of Lincoln; Benjamin Laney, Bishop of Peterborough; Bryan Walton, Bishop of Chester; Richard Sterne, Bishop of Carlisle; John Gauden, Bishop of Exeter.

With the following Coadjutors:—Dr. Earle, Dean of Westminster; Dr. Heylyn; Dr. Hacket; Dr. Barwick; Dr. Gunning; Dr. Pearson; Dr. Pierce; Dr. Sparrow; Mr. Thorndike.

No distinction is made between the two parties in the terms of the Commission.

[198] Life and Times, ii. 302–304.

[199] Life and Times, ii. 305; Kennet, 398; Cardwell Documents.

[200] Two applicants are mentioned as anxious for the office—Dr. Warmestry and Richard Braham—the latter writes to John Nicholas asking his "influence with his father to get him recommended as an additional Commissioner of the Excise, having relinquished the idea of the Mastership of the Savoy in favour of Dr. Sheldon."—State Papers, Cal. 1660–1, 16, 113.

[201] The Declaration adopted at the Savoy will be noticed in the next volume. The Independents have no authoritative standards, but a Declaration of their Faith and Order was issued by the Congregational Union of England and Wales some years ago.

[202] Kennet, 389.

[203] Clarendon, 1047.

[204] Kennet, 412, et seq.

[205] The other two, built by Henry VII., were King's College, Cambridge, and the Chapel, which bears his name at Westminster.

[206] Strype's Stow, ii. 103.

[207] See on Cosin and the other Bishops, vol. ii. of Eccles. Hist. (Church of the Commonwealth), chap. xii.

[208] Baxter, ii. 364.

[209] Hallam's Literature of Europe, iv. 179.

[210] For fuller notices of the Presbyterian Divines, who figured at the Savoy, see Eccles. Hist. (Church of the Commonwealth), chap. viii.

[211] Clarendon's Continuation, 1048. April 23rd. "This day," says the Worcester MS., "was the solemn and most glorious Coronation of Charles II., at Westminster, when did preach George Morley, Bishop of Worcester.

"This day all the trained band, horse and foot, were up in arms in several parts, to prevent insurrections and tumults of seditious fanatics and schismatics, haters of Monarchy and Episcopacy.

"This morn also, at Worcester, about break of day, was posted up in several places of the city a base, scurrilous, seditious, and facetious libel, as followeth:—

"'A seasonable memento, April 23rd, 1661.

"'This day it is sayd the king shall sweare once more,

Just contrary to what he sware before.

Great God, and can thy potent eies behold

This height of sin, and can thy vengeance hold?

Nipp thou the bud, before the bloome begins,

And save our Sovereyne from presumptious sinns.

Lett him remember, Lord, in mercy grant,

That, solemnly, he swore the Covenant.'"

"May 2nd. The King's Coronation is now over, and was attended with so many glories that the most curious beholders from foreign parts deem it inferior in magnificence to none in Europe. The people received all with loud acclamations and profuse expressions of joy. Twelve Knights of the Garter, and six of the Bath, six Earls, and six Barons, were created on the occasion."—State Papers, Cal. Dom. May 2, 1661.

[212] Baxter, ii. 342.

[213] Ibid., ii. 333. The Proctors of Convocation for the diocese of London, are elected two for each Archdeaconry, the Bishop choosing two out of the whole number—at that time ten. Baxter, speaking generally of the Convocation, states that ministers who had not received Episcopal ordination, "were in many counties denied any voice in the election of Clerks for the Convocation. By which means, and by the scruples of abundance of ministers, who thought it unlawful to have anything to do in the choosing of such a kind of assembly, the diocesan party wholly carried it in the choice." Burnet, of course dependent on reports, says: "Such care was taken in the choice and returns of the members of the Convocation, that everything went among them as was directed by Sheldon and Morley."—History of his own Times, i. 184. The author of the Conformists' Plea, p. 35, perhaps following Baxter, observes, that men were got in and kept out by undue proceedings; and "that protestations were made against all Incumbents not ordained by Bishops."

[214] Life and Times, ii. 307. Baxter is our main authority for the history of the Conference. It is to be regretted that we have no other full account.

[215] What took place at the Savoy Conference is of great importance in relation to the vestment controversy. An intelligent clergyman, the Rev. R. W. Kennison, writing in the Times, of July 6th, 1867, observes:—"In the last days of the Conference, when he (Baxter) summed up all in a few leading points, he went over again his objections to the surplice, but said not a word about the other vestments. And I have looked into every book I have been able to lay my hands on relating to that period, without being able to find one word more on the subject. There is much discussion about surplices; but copes, albs, and tunicles, are never mentioned."

[216] This resemblance is adverted to in the Conformists' Plea for Nonconformity, 22. See Eccles. Hist. (Civil Wars), 124.

[217] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 321; Cardwell's Conf., 303; Documents relating to the Act of Uniformity.

[218] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 334.

[219] State Papers, Cal. Dom., 1661, October 26.

[220] Kennet, 434.

[221] Stanley's Memorials of Westminster, 464.

[222] The following passage is found in one of Sancroft's MSS.:—"May 22nd. Precibus peractis, ordered, that each keep his place, that but one speak at once, and that without interruption; none to use long speeches; to have a constant verger."—D'Oyley's Life of Sancroft, i. 113.

[223] Kennet, 450.

[224] Lathbury's Convocation, 306; Cardwell's Synodalia, April 26th; Robinson's Review of Liturgies; Kennet's Register, 368–70. King Charles' Martyrdom was introduced into the Calendar 30th January:—and it appears, there are six churches in England, named in his honour, They are in Falmouth, Tonbridge Wells, Peak Forest, Wem, and Plymouth; in the last town there are two.—Interleaved Prayer Book, by Campion and Beamont.

[225] D'Oyley in his Life of Sancroft (i. 114) says, in 1628; Procter (262) says, in 1625 (in an Order of Fasting); and again, in 1628, Palmer remarks—that "the appellation of 'most religious and gracious King,' corresponds with those high titles of respect and veneration which the primitive Church gave to the Christian emperors and kings"; thus, in the Liturgy of Basil, it is said, "Μνήσθητι κύριε τῶν εὐσεβεστάτων καὶ πιστοτάτων ἡμῶν βασιλέων."—Origines Lit., i. 336.

[226] Cardwell's Synodalia, 687.

[227] Ibid., 645.

[228] Ibid., 649–51.

[229] The paper is not given by Baxter; it is printed in Cardwell's Conferences, 335–363.

[230] The concessions which were offered in reference to the Prayer Book will be noticed in the Appendix.

[231] The Liturgy is in Baxter's Works, vol. xv.

[232] Life by Boswell, vol. ix. 141.

[233] Life and Times, ii. 306.

[234] Life and Times, ii. 334.

[235] The document is not in Cardwell or Baxter, but it is printed in the Documentary Annals relating to the Act of Uniformity, 176.

[236] The rejoinder is neither in Baxter nor Cardwell, but it is printed at length in the Documents relating to the Act of Uniformity, 201.

[237] Baxter, ii. 336, 341.

[238] Given in Life and Times, ii. 341, but not in Cardwell's Conferences. It is included in the Documents relating to the Act of Uniformity, 346.

[239] Life and Times, ii. 346.

[240] These discussions are reported by Baxter, ii. 346. That which relates to the sinfulness of the Liturgy, is alone included in Cardwell's Conferences, 364. Both may be found in the Documents relating to the Act of Uniformity.

[241] Life and Times, ii. 359.

[242] Letter to a Friend in Vindication of Himself, &c. (1683), p. 8. See also Calamy's Abridgment, 169.

[243] See Procter on the Prayer Book, 136. Compare Sanderson's Sermons, p. 12, with Orme's Life of Baxter, p. 589, for a lively statement of arguments on each side.

[244] Baxter, ii. 357. He mixes up the two days together.

[245] Froude's History of England, vii. 75.

[246] Life and Times, ii. 363, 364. See p. 163 of this vol.

[247] Life and Times, ii. 338.

[248] Protestant Peace Maker, by Bishop Rust, 1682.

[249] Burnet, i. 180.

[250] Life and Times, ii. 364. "Aug. 13.—A facetious Divine being commended to Lord Chancellor, Sir Edward Hyde, who loved witty men, desired to converse with him: being come to him, the Chancellor asked him his name; he said Bull; he replied he never saw a bull without horns. It is true (was the answer), for the horns go with the hide."—Worcester MS.

[251] Life and Times, ii. 365.

[252] After the Act of Uniformity, Baxter shrewdly observes, "This is worthy the noting by the way, that all that I can speak with of the conforming party, do now justify only the using and obeying, and not the imposing of these things with the penalty by which they are imposed. From whence it is evident that most of their own party do now justify our cause which we maintained at the Savoy, which was against this imposition (whilst it might have been prevented), and for which such an intemperate fury hath pursued me to this very day."—Ibid., 394.

[253] Baxter observes: men on both extremes were "offended with me, and I found what enmity, charity, and peace are like to meet with in the world."—Life and Times, 380. His experience in this respect is not an uncommon one.

[254] Clarendon (1076), says the Independents, at the Restoration, had as free access to the King as the Presbyterians—"both that he might hinder any conjunction between the other factions, and because they seemed wholly to depend upon His Majesty's will and pleasure, without resorting to the Parliament, in which they had no confidence, and had rather that Episcopacy should flourish again, than that the Presbyterians should govern." Clarendon is no authority for the policy of the Congregationalists, and goes too far in the last remark. Nor does their access to Court, which I apprehend he greatly exaggerates, prove that they had anything like the political influence of the Presbyterians.

[255] He was let off by Parliament with a simple disqualification for exercising any office, ecclesiastical, military, or civil. In a petition he humbly tendered in January, 1662, we find him representing himself as a minister of forty years' standing, now become infirm, with a wife and three children unprovided for, his present maintenance depending on voluntary contributions, which if taken away would leave him penniless and ruined.—Kennet, 269, 602.

[256] Commons' Journals, May 17.

[257] Mercurius Publicus, May 30.

[258] Public Intelligencer, June 6-13.

[259] Commons' Journals, June 17, 29, July 12, 16, 19. Read first time in the Lords, July 23; after which no notice of it occurs. The Lords were less intolerant than the Commons.

[260] Clarendon's Continuation, 1070.

[261] Parl. Hist., iv. 219. We may here mention, as an illustration of the spirit for dishonouring the dead—and that too on the anti-Episcopal as well as the anti-Puritan side—that there are repeated references in the Journals of the Lords during this Session, to accusations brought against Matthew Hardy, for taking up the body of Archbishop Parker, for selling the lead wherein he was wrapped, for defacing his monument, for turning his tombstone into a table, and for burying "the bones of that worthy person under a dunghill." The delinquent was ordered to put the bones again in their old place, and to restore the monument, but he neglected "the doing of these things." At last Matthew Hardy "acknowledged his hearty sorrow," obeyed the order of the House, and was discharged on payment of fees. (Lords' Journals, 1661, July 24, Dec. 9, 13, Jan. 14, 28.

[262] See Journals. The Bill was read the first time in the House of Lords the 17th of July.

[263] See Journals and Statutes, 13 Car. ii., St. 1. cxii.

[264] Quoted in Kennet, 374.

[265] Journals, June 25.—The same Committee as I have just mentioned.

[266] Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chief Justices.

[267] Cardwell says, "It is probable, as the book is not uncommon now, that a copy of it was produced, and was not found to be sufficiently in accordance with the higher tone of ordinances, which, since the days of Elizabeth had more generally prevailed."—Cardwell's Conferences, 376. But it is more likely the reason might be that the original or MS. of the book could not be found. I have sought in vain for some information to throw light on this circumstance.

[268] See Journals under dates.

[269] Mercurius Publicus.

[270] Williams' Life of Philip Henry, 91, 92.

[271] The Cedar's sad and solemn fall.

[272] I may mention the Presbyterian Lash or Noctroft's Maid whipt—a piece of coarse and filthy satire—and an Antidote against Melancholy, made up in Pills; compounded of witty ballads, and jovial and merry catches, in which there is the song of the Hot-headed Zealot, and The Schismatic Rotundos.

[273] In none of the Nonconformist publications of that day, have I ever seen anything like the scurrility poured upon them by their opponents.

[274] Lords' Journals.

[275] Ibid.

[276] "At Court things are in a very ill condition, there being so much emulation, poverty, and the vices of drinking, swearing, and loose amours, that I know not what will be the end of it but confusion. And the clergy so high, that all people that I meet with do protest against their practice."—Pepys' Diary, 1661, August 31.

[277] The letter is dated December 25th, 1660. Endorsed by Secretary Nicholas as received October 9th, 1661.—State Papers, Dom. Charles II.

The exposure of the fraud is in Remarkable Passages in the Life of W. Kiffin, 29.

In that age of sham plots the fabrication of letters was common, of which Captain Yarrington published an exposure in 1681. See Calamy's Abridgment, 178. In the Record Office, under date, 1661, November 16th, in a letter from Sir John Packington to Sec. Nicholas, Yarrington and Sparry are mentioned as disowning certain intercepted letters.

[278] Commons' Journals, January 10.

[279] Though the Lower House at York sent proxies to the Canterbury Synod, we find the members had some discussion of their own. Dr. Samwayes, Proctor for the clergy of Chester and Richmond, proposed some queries, beginning with the question, "Whether, in case any alterations in the Liturgy should be decided on, a public declaration should not be made, stating that the grounds of such change are different from those pretended by schismatics?" The last inquiries he suggested were, "Whether those who persist in holding possession unjustly gotten in the late rebellion be meet communicants? and whether some addition ought not to be made to the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance excluding all evasions?" The spirit of the proposals and the temper of some in the Northern Convocation may be easily inferred from these specimens.—Joyce's Sacred Synods, 712.

[280] Royal letters were issued to the province of York relative to reviewing the Prayer Book.

[281] State Papers, Dom. Charles II., vol. xliii. Entry Book, vi. p. 7.

[282] Palmer says, Origines, Lit. i. p. vi. preface, "The great majority of our formularies are actually translated from Latin and Greek rituals, which have been used for at least fourteen or fifteen hundred years in the Christian Church; and there is scarcely a portion of our Prayer Book which cannot in some way be traced to ancient offices."

[283] He had succeeded Calvin as pastor at Strasburg, and was obliged afterwards to seek refuge in England with some of his flock. They settled at Glastonbury and turned a part of the Abbey into a worsted manufactory, by grant from the Duke of Somerset. In 1552, Pullain published an order of service in Latin, and dedicated it to Edward VI.

[284] It has been ascribed to Hilary of Poictiers, to Nicetius of Trèves, and to Hilary of Arles.

[285] In the Sarum Breviary it is appointed to be sung at Prime, after the psalms and before the prayers.

[286] The title of this book is very extended. It was first published in German. The Latin copy, a very fine one, used by Cranmer, printed 1555, is in the library of Chichester Cathedral. An English translation, printed 1547, runs thus: "A simple and religious consultation of us, Hermann, by the grace of God, Archbishop of Cologne, and Prince Elector, etc." Hermann was assisted in his book by Melancthon and Bucer, who largely used in their contributions, Luther's service for Brandenburg and Nuremberg; and in Hermann's book may be found the ground work of the forty-two Articles contained in Edward's second Prayer Book. They present a close resemblance to the Augsburg Confession. The influence of Luther on the English Prayer Book is traceable here.—Hook's Archbishops, second series, ii. 289.

[287] See King Edward's Liturgies (Parker Society), 89 and 280; also compare p. 283, and Elizabeth's Liturgies (Parker Society), p. 198.

I have adopted Procter's History as an authority throughout.

[288] The old Gallic form ran thus: "Domine Deus Omnipotens, famulos tuos, quos jussisti renasci ex aqua et Spiritu Sancto, conserva in eis baptismum sanctum quod acceperunt," etc.—Palmer, ii. 195.

[289] See Joyce's Sacred Synods, 714.

[290] Cardwell's Synodalia, 653.

[291] Conferences, 371.

[292] "In its original shape it is supposed to have been longer, and to have brought into one prayer the petitions for the King, Royal Family, Clergy, etc., which are scattered through several collects. The Convocation, however, retained the collects, and therefore threw out the corresponding clauses in this general prayer without altering the word finally, which seems to be needlessly introduced in so short a form."—Procter, 262.

[293] The services for January 30, and May 29, were not in the Book sent to Parliament.

[294] See remarks of editor in Cosin's Works, v. p. xxi.

[295] Sess. xl. Kennet, 576. Calamy states that when Dr. Allen urged Sheldon to meet the scruples of the Dissenters, he told him there was no need to trouble himself about that, they had resolved upon their measures.

[296] Pell was a singular character, with a continental reputation, and had been sent by Cromwell as envoy to the Protestant Swiss Cantons. After his return to England, at the Restoration, he took Holy Orders and became Chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury. A deanery was thought of for the illustrious scholar, "but being not a person of activity, as others who mind not learning are, could never rise higher than a Rector. The truth is, he was a shiftless man as to worldly affairs, and his tenants and relations dealt so unkindly by him, that they cozened him of the profits of his parsonage and kept him so indigent, that he wanted necessaries, even paper and ink to his dying day." Pell was "once or twice cast into prison for debt," and was at last buried by charity.—Kennet's Register, 575. These are curious biographical associations gathering round the Calendar in the Prayer Book.

[297] The Rehearsal Transposed, 500.

[298] Thorndike's Works, vi. 233–235.

[299] The Bishops' form was: "Unanimi assensu et consensu in hanc formam redegimus, recepimus et approbavimus, eidemque subscripsimus."—Kennet, 584.

[300] A statement of the object and nature of the alterations as given by the revisors themselves, may be found in the preface to the Prayer Book of 1662.

[301] Stanley.

[302] Strype's Annals of the Reformation, vol. ii. part 1, 105.

[303] These facts are brought together in the Edinburgh Review, vol. cxv., and are presented in Dean Stanley's letter to the Bishop of London, 1863.

[304] Cardwell's Conferences, 372. Cardwell has fallen into an error in speaking of Walton as Bishop of Chester, in March, 1662. He died November 29th, 1661. Ferne was consecrated Bishop of Chester in February, 1662.

[305] Synodalia, 668.

[306] The book was republished in 1850, by Cardwell. It reflects the doctrinal opinions of the period, and is most decidedly Calvinistic—p. 21. It subjects heretics, including persons not believing in predestination, to the punishment of the civil magistrate—"ad extremum ad civiles magistratus ablegetur puniendus," p. 25.

[307] Published in 1690, under the title of Bishop Overall's Convocation Book. It was printed from a copy belonging to Overall.

[308] Thorndike considered that a Church which could not excommunicate was no Church, and he pleaded for the revival of the discipline of penance.

[309] Leighton told Burnet, "he was much struck with the feasting and jollity of that day. It had not such an appearance of seriousness or piety as became the new modelling of a Church."—Own Times, i. 140.

[310] Evelyn's Diary.

[311] A letter by Henchman, Bishop of Salisbury, State Papers, Dom. Charles II., 1661, October 17th, gives a long account of the trouble and vexation he met with in striving to bring his diocese into order. He says, addressing Secretary Nicholas: "At Wallingford, one Pinckney, at Malmesbury, one Gowan (?) are busy turbulent men, I cannot with any skill or power that I have, form these places into good order. In some private villages irregular and schismatical men do mischief; I take particular account of them, and know who in my whole diocese conform not, which I shall report when I attend on your Honour."

[312] State Papers. Entry Book. February 24th. See also Journals under dates.

[313] Journals, March 3, 1662.

[314] Lords' Journals, February 27, March 5, 6, and 7.

[315] There is a letter from Gauden, Bishop of Exeter, to the Earl of Bristol concerning charity to Quakers, and indulgence to all sober Dissenters, dated May Day, 1662, amongst the Gibson MSS., vol. ii. 177. Lambeth Library.

[316] State Papers, March 31, 1662.

[317] The amendments are gathered from papers in the House of Lords, copies of which I have been permitted to obtain, and from a comparison of the Journals with the Act as published.

[318] Clarendon's Continuation, 1077–1079.

[319] April 6th.

[320] I give a literal copy of a draft of amendment found among the Papers of the House of Lords, connected with the Act, showing the fruitless attempts made to modify the abjuration of the Covenant—

"I, A. B., doe declare That I hold that there lyes no obligation upon mee or any other person from the oath commonly called the Solemn League and Covenant

Rejected.otherwise than in such things only whereunto I or any other person other than what I or they were otherwise legally oblig'd unto before
were legally and expressly obliged before the taking of y^e s^d Covenant,
the taking of the Covenant,
and that the same was in itselfe an unlawfull oath," &c.

[321] A comparison of Clarendon's history with the Journals of the two Houses, shows that in almost every paragraph of his narration there are inaccuracies. It would require too much space to point them out. I have abridged his report of the speeches delivered, but with much misgiving as to its correctness; probably, however, the general tenor of the debate was as the Chancellor represents; and in the arguments for the Bill perhaps he gives his own orations.

[322] Clarendon intimates that the former part of the declaration respecting war against the King was most obnoxious to the Presbyterian Lords, yet that they durst not oppose it, because the principle of non-resistance had already been recognized in the Corporation Act. He adds, that they who were most solicitous that the House should concur in this addition, "had field-room enough to expatiate upon the gross iniquity of the Covenant."

[323] On the 7th of April "the Lord Bishop of Worcester" (appointed to Winchester upon the death of Duppa on March 26th) "offered to the consideration of this House an explanation in a paper, of the vote of this House on Saturday last, concerning the words in the Act of Uniformity which declared against the Solemn League and Covenant, which he first opened, and afterwards, by permission of the House read." The question was raised, Whether a debate on the paper was against the orders of the House? and resolved in the negative, whereupon it was ordered, that the paper should be taken into consideration the next morning. A memorandum is entered in connection with this minute, "That, before the putting of the aforesaid question, these Lords, whose names are subscribed, desired leave to enter their dissents if the question was carried in the negative." No names, however, are subscribed. The day following, the House examined the paper which had been brought in for an explanation of the clause in the Act of Uniformity concerning the Covenant; and, after a long debate, the paper was laid aside.—Journals.

[324] The Lords appointed were the Duke of Buckingham, the Earl of Bristol, the Earl of Anglesey, the Bishop of Worcester, the Bishop of Exeter, the Bishop of Hereford, and the Lords Wharton, Mohun, Lucas, and Holles. The Earl of Anglesey reported the next day, "that the Committee have considered of a proviso, that such persons as are put out of their livings by virtue of the Act of Uniformity, may have such allowances out of their livings for their subsistence as His Majesty shall think fit." After some debate a few alterations were made, and it was resolved that the "proviso, with the alterations, shall stand in the Bill." The Lords having read the Bill a third time, April 9, resolved "to send for a Conference with the House of Commons to-morrow morning, and communicate this Bill with the alterations and amendments to them." The next day they gave direction "to deliver the Book wherein the alterations are made, out of which the other Book was fairly written."

[325] Commons, April 10, 14, and 16.

[326] By 96 to 90.—Journals, April 16.

[327] Ibid.

[328] Dr. Southey in his History of the Church, ii. 467, observes, The ejected "were careful not to remember that the same day, and for the same reason (because the tithes were commonly due at Michaelmas), had been appointed for the former ejectment, when four times as many of the loyal clergy were deprived for fidelity to their sovereign." To say nothing of the latter part, a subject I have fully discussed in a former volume, I would notice Mr. Hallam's question—"Where has Dr. Southey found his precedent?" Not any one Parliamentary ordinance in Husband's collection mentions St. Bartholomew's Day. Dr. Southey has, no doubt, followed Walker in his Sufferings of the Clergy, who makes the statement without any authority. Yet see quotation from Farewell Sermons in this volume, p. 278.

[329] Noticed in conferences with the Lords, May 7.

[330] Commons' Journal, April 21.

[331] Ibid., April 22.

[332] Ibid., April 26. The numbers were 94 to 87. It is curious to notice Hallam's correction of Neal. Referring to the division on the 26th of April, he says, "This may perhaps have given rise to a mistake we find in Neal, that the Act of Uniformity only passed by 186 to 180. There was no division at all upon the Bill, except that I have mentioned."—Constitutional History, ii. 37. Neal is undoubtedly incorrect, for there was no division on the Bill as a whole; but, Mr. Hallam is also mistaken, for as to parts of the Bill there were at least four divisions, according to the Journals. The neglect of the Journals, more or less, by all historians, has been one main cause of the inaccurate and confused accounts found in the best of them.

[333] Lords' Journals, May 7.

[334] Lords' Journals, May 8. Cardwell's Synodalia, 672.

[335] There is an anecdote touching the same rubric related by Kennet (643). "Archbishop Tenison told me, by his bedside, on Monday, February 12, 1710, that the Convocation Book, intended to be the copy confirmed by the Act of Uniformity, had a rash blunder in the rubric after baptism which should have run 'It is certain, by God's word, that children which are baptized dying before they commit actual sin, are undoubtedly saved.' But the words 'which are baptized' were left out till, Sir Cyril Wyche coming to see the Lord Chancellor Hyde, found the Book brought home by His Lordship, and lying in his parlour window, even after it had passed the two Houses, and happening to cast his eye upon that place, told the Lord Chancellor of that gross omission, who supplied it with his own hand." No sign of this particular error occurs in the authorized text attached to the Act. Probably Tenison had heard a story of the alteration which I have noticed, and related it inaccurately.

[336] The entry in the Lords' Journals runs thus—"Whereas it was signified by the House of Commons, at the Conference yesterday, 'that they found one mistake in the rubric of baptism, which they conceived was a mistake of the writer [persons] being put instead of [children,] the Lord Bishop of Durham acquainted the House that himself, and the Lord Bishop of St. Asaph, and the Lord Bishop of Carlisle, had authority from the Convocation to mend the said word, averring it was only a mistake of the scribe; and accordingly they came to the Clerks' table, and amended the same!" This was on the 8th of May, but on the previous 21st of April the rectification of the error is recorded in the proceedings of Convocation.—Synodalia, 670. That the Commons detected the clerical error in the copy of the Book which they had received and examined, as noticed in their Journals, the 16th of April; and that they called the attention of the Lords to it, appears from a loose paper in the House of Lords, in which it is said—"That the Lords be made acquainted that this House hath observed a mistake in the rubric after public baptism of infants [persons] being inserted instead of [children,] which they take to be but vitium scriptoris, and desire the Lords will consider of a way how the same may be amended."

[337] An account of these books will be found in the Appendix to the next volume.

[338] Lords' Journals, May 19.

[339] It is evident from the 13th of Elizabeth, cap. xii., "An Act for the Ministers of the Church to be of Sound Religion," that a particular form of ordination was not then requisite for ministration in the Establishment. The words of the Act are, "That every person under the degree of a Bishop, which doth or shall pretend to be a priest or minister of God's holy word and sacraments by reason of any other form of institution, consecration, or ordering, than the form set forth by Parliament, in the time of the late King of most worthy memory King Edward VI., or now used in the reign of our most gracious Sovereign Lady before the Feast of the Nativity of Christ next following, shall, in the presence of the Bishop or guardian of the spiritualities of some one diocese where he hath or shall have ecclesiastical living, declare his assent and subscribe to all the Articles of Religion," &c. This was the law till 1662.

[340] It is not meant that these men actually performed the work of revision, but they were the guiding spirits of the Church; therefore the character of the Book issued at the different periods may be considered as reflecting their opinions.

[341] I have already noticed that the Puritans, in their exceptions against the Prayer Book, at the Savoy Conference, urged on their opponents the comprehensive policy of the Reformers.—Baxter, ii. 317; Cardwell's Conferences, 305.

[342] Clarendon's Continuation, 1078.

[343] This illustration was suggested to me by a distinguished Divine of the Church of England.

[344] He speaks (1079) of the Upper House expunging some parts of that subscription which had been annexed to the Bill. I find no trace of this.

[345] It is curious that in one particular, uniformity exists beyond the direction of the Prayer Book.

Lathbury says: "Both by rubrical and canonical authority, the table may be placed in the body of the Church or in the chancel."—Hist. of Con., 303. Yet the practice is to place it near the wall at the east end.

[346] Essays. On Unity and Of Church Controversies.

[347] Forster, iii., 209–240; Own Time, i. 164.

[348] Noble's Regicides, ii. 31.

[349] Orme's Life of Baxter, 454.

[350] Isaiah xvi. 4.

[351] Holmes' Annals of America, and Orme's Life of Baxter, 454.

Sir Walter Scott has adopted the romantic story of the Indian War in his Peveril of the Peak, but he has confounded Whalley with Gough. Cooper has also used the story in one of his novels.

[352] The Book was so hastily printed, that the proofs were not carefully compared with the written copy attached to the Act. At Chichester there are two of these uncorrected copies. The third or sealed copy is the one which passed through the hands of the Commissioners, and is altered by their pens. The alterations are found to be chiefly corrections of errors arising from a hasty copying of the MS. Book for the press.

There does not appear to have been much care taken with the reprints, even after the "Sealed Books" were distributed. An edition dated 1669, perpetuates most of the errors of the printed copy of 1662. For this information I am indebted to the kindness of the Rev. Dr. Swainson. See further on this subject in Appendix.

[353] Own Times, i. 185.

[354] Life of Philip Henry, 100. See also Calamy's Defence of Moderate Nonconformists, vol. ii. 357.

[355] Sir Edward Coke, in his Institutes, part ii., says that the "word Ordinary signifieth a Bishop, or he, or they, that have ordinary jurisdiction, and is derived ab ordine."

[356] Dated the 17th of August, 1662. Kennets Historical Register, 743.

[357] In this form—"Ego A. B. prætensas meas ordinationis literas, a quibusdam Presbyteris olim obtentas iam penitus renuncio, et demitto pro vanis," &c.—Life of P. Henry, 97.

[358] Life, 98, et seq.

[359] Ibid., 11.

[360] Stanford's Life of Alleine, 199; Calamy's Account, 558.

[361] Rogers' Life of Howe, 105, 118.

[362] "Some of the hungry expectants were bold enough to anticipate the period of ejection, relying on the Incumbents' ultimately failing to qualify: and that even the chicanery of the law was used to prevent their recovery of profits which had actually accrued during their incumbency. Mr. Meadows (Incumbent of Ousden), had as his patron one of kindred opinions, who sympathized with his own feelings; and, accordingly, it appears by his accounts, that he was allowed to receive the year's revenue up to Michaelmas, 1662."—Suffolk Bartholomeans, by Taylor, 49.

[363] Calamy's Account, 557; Continuation, 336.

[364] Calamy's Continuation, 143.

[365] State Papers, May 14th.

[366] State Papers, 1661–2.

[367] Truth and Loyalty Vindicated, 1662.

[368] Harl. Misc., vii. If the author of this tract was not a Romanist he had strong Romanist sympathies.

[369] A Compleat Collection of Farewell Sermons, 142; Pepys' Diary, i. 313.

[370] Farewell Sermons, 115.

[371] Patrick MSS. xliv. 11.

[372] Stanford's Joseph Alleine, 200.

[373] Calamy speaks of his holding this living in conjunction with Kingston.—Account, 279.

[374] Farewell Sermons, 447.

[375] State Papers, August 22, 1662.

[376] Fox's Journal, ii. 7.

[377] "The eight years, from the death of Angélique Arnauld, in 1661, to the peace of the Church in 1669, were the agony of Port Royal."—Beard's Port Royal, i. 344.

[378] Farewell Sermons, etc., 174, 187.

[379] Palmer's Nonconformist Memorial, i. 366.

[380] "A liberal attention to the convenience of the late Incumbent must have been shown by Mr. Meadows's successor, as we find so late as July 8, 1665, 'a note of things yet left at the parsonage.'" Mr. Meadows was Incumbent of Ousden, Suffolk. Suffolk Bartholomeans, by Taylor, 50.

[381] October, 1662, Wilkins' Concilia, iv. 577.

[382] Baxter informs us that he had resolved not to meddle in such business any more, but says in the margin, "If I should at length recite the story of this business, and what peremptory promises they had, and how all was turned to their rebuke and scorn, it would more increase the reader's astonishment."—Life and Times, ii. 429.

[383] Newcome notices the petition in his Diary, as if an unsuccessful attempt had been made to present it before the 28th. "August 28.—I was sent for to the ministers to Mr. Greene's. We perused Mr. Heyricke's letter, whereby we understand that last Lord's Day was a very sad and doleful day in London, in that ministers preached not; none but Mr. Blackmore, Mr. Crofton, and Dr. Manton between the Tower and Westminster, the Bishops having provided readers or preachers for every place. And the ministers in the dark waited with their petition on Monday, and could not get it delivered, and came away more dissatisfied than they went; and what the issue of all this will be the Lord only knows. I rose afore seven; we despatched duty. And the ministers came in again, and we discoursed of matters, and got things done about the petitions. Mr. Alsley dined with me and Mr. Haworth, we having a venison pasty. After dinner, Mr. James Lightbourne was with me an hour or more. I wrote letters to London, and then went to bowls; but, as if it was not a time for me to take recreation in, I had no freedom of spirit by a little accident about Mr. Constantine."—Newcome's Diary, 115.

The following entry indicates the interference of the King with the operation of the Act:—"Nov., 1662.—The King to the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church, Oxford. They are to forbear execution of any sentence against Thomas Severne, for not having subscribed to the Act of Uniformity before his Bishop, though presented doing so before the University, until the will of Parliament in such cases is more distinctly known."—Ent. Book x. 7. Cal. Dom., 1661–1662, 578.

[384] Clarendon's Continuation, 1081–1082.

[385] It is difficult to harmonize satisfactorily the accounts of conferences and councils given by Burnet, Clarendon, and Bishop Parker. The former two speak of the conferences occurring before St. Bartholomew's Day. The last of these authorities gives a petition from the ministers presented on the 27th, and a debate upon it in Council on the 28th, agreeing, to a considerable extent, with Clarendon's statements. Clarendon says nothing of a petition and a Council after St. Bartholomew's Day, but leaves us to conclude all thought of indulgence was dropped beforehand. In this respect we know he is wrong, probably the matter of indulgence was frequently debated in Council. Compare Clarendon, 1081; Burnet, i. 191; with Parker in Kennet's Register, 753.

[386] These illustrations are gathered from the newspapers of the day.

[387] State Papers. This letter is dated March 2, 1663. It is anonymous; the reason for ascribing it to Hook will appear further on.

[388] Joseph Alleine's Life, by Stanford, 204. There is a glowing account in the Mercurius Publicus, of an Episcopal service at St. Mary's, on the 25th, when the church was so full that people fainted with heat, and "the Mayor and Aldermen were all in their formalities, and not a man in all the church had his hat on, either at service or sermon."

[389] Ashmole's Order of the Garter, 176.

[390] Tour in Derbyshire, 1662. Browne's Works, i. 30. "At Buxton," he says, "we had the luck to meet with a sermon, which we could not have done in half-a-year before, by relation. I think there is a true Chapel of Ease indeed here, for they hardly ever go to Church," p. 34. Calamy gives the name of Mr. John Jackson as ejected from Buxton, but supplies no account of him.—Account, 204.

[391] They occur at the end of the list for each county.

[392] See Ryle's account of Gurnal, prefixed to the new edition of his works.

[393] State Papers. Dom., 1663, March 2. Letter from William Hook.

[394] For instances, see Palmer, i. 223, ii. 71.

[395] Appendix to Second Report of the Royal Commission on Ritual, p. 616. The articles of the Bishops there printed are from the collection in the Bodleian Library.

[396] Appendix to second report of the Royal Commission on Ritual, pp. 601, 602.

[397] Ibid., 607, 611.

[398] Ibid., 619.

[399] They are published in the same Appendix, 624, et seq.

[400] The authorities for these statements are Calamy's Account and Continuation, Kennet's Register, Hunter's Life of Heywood, and Aspland's History of Nonconformity in Duckinfield. I could add more instances. No doubt there were several which cannot now be ascertained.

[401] Irenicum, republished in 1662.

[402] Lord King's Life of Locke, 7, 8, 9.

[403] State Papers, Cal. Dom. Sept. 14 and Sept. 29, 1662.

[404] Ibid., Oct. 31, 1662.

[405] This reported number should be borne in mind in connection with others already stated.

[406] State Papers, Cal., Dom., 1661–1662, 531, 567, 594.

[407] Cal. Dom., 1662, Jan. 31.

[408] Ibid., 1662, Oct. 10, Nov. 24.

[409] The following illustrations of the extent of persecution in the autumn of 1662 are extracted from State Papers under date:—

"Committed by Sir J. Robinson, Knt. and Bart., Lord Mayor, being taken at an unlawful assembly, and denying to take the Oath of Allegiance, dated 2nd November, 1662." [Names given. All males.]

"Committed by Sir R. Browne, Knt. and Bart., for being unlawfully assembled together contrary to the laws, etc., the same day." [Other names.]

"Anabaptists and Quakers, taken at unlawful meetings, and committed by the Court, for refusing to take the Oath of Allegiance, and some of them fined."

[Eleven names, all males.]

"Committed by His Grace, the Duke of Albemarle, General of His Majesty's forces, for assembling unlawfully together, contrary to a late Act of Parliament, 28th October, 1662."

[Sixty-three names, all males, six under the heading "Quakers.">[

"Committed 3rd November, 1662, for refusing to take the Oath of Allegiance."

[Three males.]

"Committed for being at a private meeting in Wheeler's Street, dated 9th November, 1662."

[Three names.]

"Committed for being at an unlawful assembly in Spitalfields; dated 16th November, 1662."

[Three names.]

"Committed by John Smith, Esq., being taken in the house of the said Mary Winch, upon pretence of a religious worship, and own no King but King Jesus and own themselves to be Fifth Monarchy men. Dated 23rd November, 1662."

These extracts have appeared in the Baptist Magazine. In others the names of females occur.

[410] Kennet, 849.

[411] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 430.

[412] History of his Own Time, i. 193.

[413] See on this subject, Burnet's History of his Own Time, i. 194; Lingard, xi. 220; and Butler's Memoirs, iii. 44.

[414] See the Lords' Journals, February 23, 25, 27, 28. "After St. Bartholomew's Day, the Dissenters, seeing both Court and Parliament was so much set against them, had much consultation together what to do. Many were for going over to Holland, and settling there with their ministers; others proposed New England, and the other plantations."—Burnet, i. 193.

[415] Clarendon cannot be relieved from a charge of duplicity in this business.

[416] See Lister's Life of Clarendon, iii. 232, compared with Clarendon's Continuation, 1129. The story is there wrongly dated. So it is in Parl. Hist., iv. 311.

[417] Continuation, 1131.

[418] Under date April 21, 1663, there is a petition from Samuel Wilson, who was seized in the Downs for ignorantly receiving a seditious letter from Hook, a minister, which came wrapped up in a bundle of books. This person, Mrs. Green, in the Calendar of State Papers, 1663, suggests, is the writer of the remarkable letter here referred to. No doubt of it. The letter is dated March 2, 1663, addressed to Mr. Davenport, who was colleague with Hook at New Haven, in New England. On Hook's return from America to England he became a minister at Exmouth, and afterwards Master of the Savoy and Chaplain to Cromwell.—Palmer's Nonconformist Memorial.

[419] This writer attributes depression in trade to the Act of Uniformity, and blames the Presbyterians for being ready to meet the Prelates half way, and swallow the Liturgy.

[420] Baxter's Life and Times, ii. 433.

[421] See Commons' Journals, 1663, February 27, March 16.

[422] Parl. Hist., iv. 263–5.

[423] The Bill against Papists was committed March 17th; that against Dissenters May 23rd. Several debates, amendments, and divisions took place. At the beginning of July the Bills were carried up to the Lords. The Bill against Sectaries was committed by the Upper House, July 22nd, and there the matter ended. Parliament was prorogued on the 27th.

[424] Lords' Journals, July 25, 27.

[425] Lords' Journals, July 27, 1663. A curious incident occurred during their sittings. The Bill for the better observance of the Sabbath was lost off the table, and could not be found. The like had never occurred before, and "every Lord was called by name, and those present did make their purgation, and the assistants likewise did particularly clear themselves." It was the last day of the session. The Bills to receive the Royal assent had been taken out of a bag, and opened on the table; but this Bill disappeared, and consequently did not receive le Roy le veult.

[426] Walton's Lives, 424–427. He had left a list of ministers under his eye designed for discipline, but when he saw death approaching, he burnt the paper, and said he would die in peace.—Conformists' Plea for Nonconformity, 35.

[427] Works, vi. 443.

[428] 31st August, 1663. Evelyn's Diary, i. 399.

[429] State Papers, Dom., Charles II., June 20, Sept. 22, Oct. 12. I may add that a very affecting illustration of the sufferings of an ejected minister through trial and imprisonment for preaching in some retired place after the Act of Uniformity, is to be found in Stanford's Joseph Alleine, chapters x. and xi.

[430] State Papers, Nov. 9, Dec. 31.

[431] Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson, 391.

[432] Anderson's Hist. of the Colonial Church, ii. 286.

[433] Ibid., 316-318.

[434] Anderson's Hist. of the Colonial Church, ii. 342.

[435] The letters in the State Paper Office, from which all these particulars are taken, are abridged in the Calendar for 1663. Any one wishing to investigate the subject should study these letters in connection with Drake's Eboracum and Whitaker's Loidis and Elmete.

[436] Amongst the papers which belonged to the Secretary of State, and which are now preserved in the Record Office, is an informer's notebook belonging to this period. As it is a curiosity, and as it contains allusions to well-known characters, I will give a few extracts in the Appendix.

[437] These are all local traditions.

[438] Aspland's History of the Old Nonconformists in Duckinfield. Like stories are told of Bradley Wood near Newton Abbot, and of Collier's Wood in Gloucestershire. Places of worship erected or publicly used during times of indulgence or connivance, will be noticed in the next Volume.

[439] Life of Owen by Orme.

[440] Nelson's Life of Bull, 253. Other examples of the ejected having married rich wives may be found in Kennet, 910. John Tombes writing to Williamson, mentions a book on the anvil entitled, Theocratia, or a Treatise of the Kingdom of God, to show that no claim of coercive jurisdiction, either inferior or co-ordinate to the King, is warranted by any ecclesiastical rulers, or by any office or power in the kingdom of Christ in its militant state.... The Bishop of Winchester, he goes on to say, has put him in hopes of a brotherhood at the Savoy. Also has had hope from the Lord Keeper of a place at Rochester in Bishop Warner's Hospital.—State Papers, 1668, May 8. Tombes was a Baptist and therefore could not hold a living, but in other respects he seems to have been a Conformist.

[441] Kennet, 905, 906, 908.

[442] Life by Rogers, 130, 140.

[443] Palmer's Nonconformist Memorial, i. 352.

[444] Life and Times, iii. 142.

[445] Palmer, ii. 503.

[446] Wilkins' Concilia, iv. 580.

[447] See Commons' Journals, April 27, 28; May 12, 14, 16.

[448] 16 Car. II., cap. iv.

[449] Hist., 1115.

[450] State Papers, Dom. Charles II., 1664, June 20.

[451] Ibid., June 24.

[452] State Papers, 1664, Sept. 30, Nov. 18, Sept. 5, June 2.

[453] Broadmead Records (Hanserd Knollys Society), 76.

[454] State Papers, 1665, July 3 and 15.

[455] Clarendon, 1130.

[456] Eccles. Hist., ii. 89.

[457] Cardwell's Synodalia, ii. 680, et seq.

[458] Collier, ii. 893.

[459] Parry's Parliaments and Councils, 551.

[460] Dated July 7, 1665; Wilkins' Concilia, iv. 582. Note in Cardwell's Documentary Annals, ii. 321.

[461] In Notes and Queries may be found a curious and interesting collection of predictions of the Plague and Fire of London. See Choice Notes—History, 236. "In delving among what may be termed the popular religious literature of the latter end of the Commonwealth, and early part of the reign of Charles, we become aware of the existence of a kind of nightmare, which the public of that age were evidently labouring under—a strong and vivid impression that some terrible calamity was impending over the metropolis."

[462] State Papers, Dom. Charles II. London, August 14, 1665. See also November 11.

[463] Thucydides, ii. 54.

[464] Dom. Charles II., 1665, July 6. It is interesting to observe that, as in late visitations of cholera, sanitary regulations were adopted. Amongst other things it may be noticed that the Bishop of London would not consecrate any ground unless a perpetuity of the same might be first obtained—graves were dug deep, and churchyards were covered with lime.—Calendar, 1665–6, Pref. xiii.

[465] Dom. Charles II., 1665, August 15.

[466] Ibid., July 22.

[467] Dom. Charles II., August 19.

[468] "It is said, my Lord of London hath sent to those pastors that have quitted their flocks, by reason of these times, that if they return not speedily, others will be put into their places."—Ellis' Letters, vol. iv.

[469] Neal, iv. 403. The returns dated 1665 from Exeter, St. David's, and Bristol, are among the Tenison MSS. (Lambeth); also the Bishop of Exeter's (Seth Ward's) certificate of the hospitals, and almshouses, pluralists, lecturers, schoolmasters, physicians, and Nonconformists in his diocese.

[470] Wilkins' Concilia, iv. 583.

[471] Autobiography of Patrick, Bishop of Ely, 52.

[472] His book, entitled God's Terrible Voice in the City, presents some most graphic accounts of the effects of the pestilence.

[473] Feb. 4, 1666. Many affecting particulars relative to the Plague may be found in the notes of this prince of diarists.

[474] Blomefield's Hist. of Norwich, i. 410.

[475] Life of Owen Stockton, 1681, p. 39.

[476] The story of Mompesson is fully told in Histories of Derbyshire. Most of what is known has been collected in a little work on the History of Eyam, by Mr. Wood, a resident in the village.

[477] For an account of Stanley and of Shaw, see Calamy.

[478] Burnet's Hist., i. 224.

[479] Collier, ii. 893.

[480] Clarendon, in his speech, at the opening of the Parliament in Oxford, spoke of the horrid murderers of his late Royal master being received into the secret counsels of Holland; and of other infamous persons, admitted to a share in the conduct of their affairs. Some persons, he said, had wantonly put themselves on board the enemy's fleet, "purely out of appetite and delight to rebel against their King."—Parl. Hist. iv. 326.

Burnet says that Algernon Sidney and others proposed to the United Provinces that they should invade England.—Hist. i. 226.

Sir G. Downing, writing to Clarendon (Lister's Life, iii. 144), remarks: "It is not to be believed what numbers of dissatisfied persons come daily out of England into this country. They have settled at Rotterdam, an Independent, an Anabaptist, and Quaker Church, and do hire the best house, and have great bills of exchange come over from England."

[481] July 7, 1665. Wilkins, iv. 582. See page 331 of this vol.

[482] 17 Car. ii. cap. 2.

[483] An anonymous correspondent writes on November 24, 1665 (State Papers), to Lord Arlington, that "all are amazed at the late Act against Nonconformity, judging it against the law of nature, and therefore void, but that the Presbyterians will defeat its design, for some of the chief incline to take the oath."

[484] Eccles. Hist., i. 500.

[485] He was present on each occasion of the Bill being read, Oct. 26, 27, and 30. See Lords' Journals.

[486] Eccles. Hist., ii. 112.

[487] Burnet, i. 224.

[488] Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 3.

[489] Parl. Hist., iv. 328.

[490] Ralph's Hist. of England. "The providence by which it was thrown out was very remarkable, for Mr. Peregrine Bertie, being newly chosen, was that morning introduced into the house by his brother, the now Earl of Lindsey, and Sir Thomas Osborne, now Lord Treasurer, who all three gave their votes against the Bill, and the numbers were so even upon that division that their three voices carried the question against it."—Locke's Letter from a Person of Quality.

[491] He was not made Lord Keeper until 1667.

[492] Neal, iv. 401, says it was moved that the word unlawfully might be inserted in the oath, before the word endeavour, but all was rejected. He refers for authority to Baxter, iii. 15, (it should be 13) but I find nothing there to that effect. If it was as Neal states, it is difficult to understand how Bates could have argued as he did.

[493] This account is given by Bates himself.—Baxter's Life, iii. 14.

[494] For those who took the oath see Baxter, iii. 13. See also Calamy's Abridgment, note 312.

[495] Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 13. His inquiries respecting the oath went far beyond the meaning of the word endeavour.

[496] Hunter's Life of Heywood, 173.

[497] Life of Philip Henry, 108.

[498] For his character by Burnet see Hist. of his Own Time, i. 100.

[499] The following story is given in a letter written just after the Duke's duel with the Earl of Shrewsbury. If the story be true, it is one of evanescent religious impression, or of unparalleled hypocrisy:—"The Duke of Buckingham is become a most eminent convert from all the vanities he hath been reported to have been addicted to; hath had a solemn day of prayer for the completing and confirming the great work upon him. Dr. Owen, and others of the like persuasion (Independents), were the carriers on of the work. He is said to keep correspondence with the chief of those parties. He grows more and more in favour and power."—Hunter's Life of Heywood, 198.

[500] February 28, Cal. Dom., 1665–66, pref. xxx.

[501] In the Record Office—besides many other papers under the year 1665 respecting plots in Yorkshire—there is a long one extending to eighteen pages, full of minute particulars on the subject, dated December 24th, entitled Information given to Mr. Sheriff.

[502] James' Life of Louis XIV., ii. 143.

[503] State Papers, Cal. 1665–66, pref. xix.-xxv. Historians have given inaccurate or incomplete accounts of these naval battles. Ample materials for a full description are afforded in these documents.

[504] Essay on Dramatic Poesie.

[505] State Papers, Dom. Cal., 1666-67, pref. xxvii.

[506] The booksellers near St. Paul's conveyed their property to the crypt for safety, but it was destroyed. The loss in books was estimated at £150,000.—Harl. Misc. vii. 330.

[507] Autobiography of William Taswell, D.D. Camden Miscellany, vol. ii. A bridge at Westminster, extending across the river, was not erected until the year 1738—opened 1750. By Westminster Bridge is here meant either a landing pier or a bridge over a creek.

[508] Compiled from Strype's Stow, Pepys, Evelyn, Baxter, Harl. Misc., vii., State Papers, 1666-7 (see Calendar), and Notes and Queries.

[509] State Papers, Dom. Charles II., Cal. 1666-67, pref. xii., xix.

[510] Commons' Journal, October 26, 1666.

[511] State Papers, Cal. 1666-67, pref. xiii.

[512] Life, ii. 396; iii. 165.

[513] Hist. of his Own Times, i. 270.

[514] Life and Times, iii. 162.

[515] Ibid., iii. 19.

[516] Burnet, i. 270.

[517] State Papers, Cal. 1666-7, Pref. xix.-xxiii., and references.

[518] Dom. Charles II. 1666, Dec. 3. Richard Browne to Williamson. Same date, John Allen to Williamson.

[519] Dr. Basire to Williamson, 1666, Dec. 17.

[520] State Papers, Dom. Charles II., 1666, Dec. 14. A further allusion is made to these strange people in a letter by Sanderson to Williamson, Feb. 5, 1667, in which, also, reference is made to Mr. Cocks, steward to Lady Vane, at Raby Castle, as a very dangerous person. There is likewise a previous letter on the same subject (1666, Nov. 6.) In another paper, attached to that of Feb. 5, allusions occur to persons of quality as engaged in plots. "They will try to get up Richard Cromwell as the only one who has a right to rule."

[521] State Papers. Letter by John Rushworth, 1667, June 15.

[522] "Chester, a stronghold of Nonconformity, was much perplexed. Some said we were asleep, or should have fortified ourselves, knowing the enemy near. All concluded there was treachery in the business, and hoped the contrivers would receive the reward due to those who betray King and country." Sir Geoffry Shakerley to Williamson, Chester, June 19, 1667.—State Papers.

"At Yarmouth the Presbyterian party raised the cry of treachery because there had been an attempt to leave the place in charge of Major Markham, who was disliked as being a Papist; and because the trained bands had been sent for to Newmarket, and none others sent in their room, and, therefore the town left defenceless."—June 21, 1667.

[523] State Papers. Same date.

[524] The peace with Holland, which was proclaimed August 24th, 1667, was very popular. At Weymouth "it, as it were, raised the dead to life, and made them rich in thought, though their purses are empty. At Lynn the bells have hardly lain still since the news of peace."—State Papers, Cal., 1667–8, pref. lv.

[525] Of the disgrace of Lord Chancellor Clarendon, the notes in the State Papers, as Mrs. Green says, are "provokingly few and unimportant."

[526] Hallam's Constit. Hist., ii. 69.

[527] Baxter, iii. 26. Holles the Presbyterian protested against the banishment of Clarendon—Hallam, ii. 69. The fall of Clarendon comes but incidentally within the range of this history. For a legal and constitutional view of his impeachment, I must refer the reader to Mr. Hallam, and Lord Campbell. In the Life of James II. edited by Clarke, vol. i. 431, it is stated that the Presbyterian party made overtures to Clarendon, to stand by him, if he would stand by himself, and join with the Duke in opposing his enemies; hoping thereby to separate the Duke from his brother, and to "bring low the regal authority." This is a very improbable story.

[528] Clarendon's State Papers, iii. Sup. xxxviii. Lister's Life of Clarendon, ii. 483.

[529] Historical Inquiries respecting the character of Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon, by the Hon. George Agar Ellis, has just come in my way. He paints the Chancellor in very dark colours indeed: but adds nothing to the facts of his history as given by popular historians. I cannot adopt all Mr. Ellis' condemnatory conclusions.

[530] One great blot on Cecil's character was the perjury involved in his signing the Device of Edward VI. To say he signed as a witness is a subterfuge.

The following passage on Nonconformity from Clarendon's pen is equally deficient in charity and wisdom:—"Their faction is their religion: nor are those combinations ever entered into upon real and substantial motives of conscience, how erroneous soever, but consist of many glutinous materials, of will, and humour, and folly, and knavery, and ambition, and malice, which make men inseparably cling together, till they have satisfaction in all their pretences, or till they are absolutely broken and subdued, which may always be more easily done than the other."—Life of Clarendon by Lister, ii. 121.

[531] State Papers, Dom., under dates.

[532] Discourse on the Religion of England, 1667.

[533] Wood's Athen. Ox., iii. 1264.

[534] "It is said that an Act is preparing by some of the House for the dispensing with the Act of Uniformity, which is clearly against the Bishops' government,—another for the punishment of such as have been the occasions of misfortunes befallen this land—as also against those that counselled the dividing the fleet: so that all that find themselves guilty do make interest in the Parliament House. Some have recourse to the Presbyterian party, which they would not do if they were not brought to the utmost extremity."—State Papers, News Letter, Sept. 2/12, 1667.

[535] It is printed in Thorndike's Works, v. 302.

[536] Pepys, Jan. 20 and 31, 1668.

[537] Ibid., 5th Feb.

[538] The part taken by Hale is described in his Life, by Burnet.

[539] Made Bishop in 1675. Barlow's conduct as Bishop did not accord with the liberality which he showed at this period. See in the next volume a notice of his conduct in 1684.

[540] It is stated by Burnet, Hist. i. 259, that Tillotson and Stillingfleet took part in the scheme, but Baxter does not say so, though he alludes to them as friendly to the scheme of 1675. Perhaps Burnet confounded the two attempts.

[541] He did not publish what he wrote, but it is inserted in the Oxford Edition of his works, v. 309–344.

[542] Pepys' Diary, Feb. 10, 1668.

[543] Parl. Hist., iv. 404.

[544] Birch, as we have seen, informed Pepys that the King was for toleration, but the Bishops were against it. The great difficulty was about tolerating Papists.

[545] Pepys' Diary, Feb. 28, 1668.

[546] Life of Philip Henry, 112.

[547] Parl. Hist., iv. 413.

[548] Ibid., 414–422. These speakers were Colonel Sandys, Sir John Earnly, Sir W. Hickman, Mr. Ratcliffe, Sir Walter Yonge, Sir J. Littleton, Sir John Birkenhead, and Mr. Seymour.

[549] Constitutional History, ii. 70.

[550] Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 37.

[551] Concilia, iv. 588. The returns are found among the Tenison MSS., Lambeth, No. 639. They include accounts of Conventicles in the dioceses of Canterbury, Chichester, Ely, Exeter, Llandaff, Lichfield and Coventry, Lincoln, London, Norwich, Winchester, Worcester, York, Chester, Carlisle, and St. Asaph. There were returns from some dioceses in 1665.

[552] Sheldon complained that he could not obtain the returns that he wanted. Lambeth MSS., August 16, 1669.

[553] Own Times, i. 258. "He told me he had a chaplain, that was a very honest man, but a very great blockhead, to whom he had given a living in Suffolk, that was full of that sort of people. He had gone about among them from house to house, though he could not imagine what he could say to them, for he said he was a very silly fellow; but that he believed his nonsense suited their nonsense, for he had brought them all to church; and in reward of his diligence, he had given him a bishopric in Ireland." Burnet gives the other report on the authority of a letter written by Sir Robert Murray. I may observe here, that party writers on both sides treat Burnet according to their prejudices; the one party believing implicitly everything he says to the disadvantage of the Church; the other party rejecting his evidence on this subject as utterly worthless. It appears to me that,—remembering Burnet's gossiping habits, and that he was a strong party man, and also noticing that he often tells his stories in a loose way, and, like Clarendon, writes down his recollections long after the time when the incidents he records had occurred—we ought to read him with great care, and not place implicit reliance upon his unsupported testimony. Yet, on the whole, Burnet appears to me to have been an honest man. His character will come under review in a future volume of this history, should I be permitted to complete it.

[554] Life and Times, iii. 46.

[555] Lords' Journals, March 26. Referring to a Royal journey at this period, Dalrymple says:—"It was intended that the King and the Duke should have gone to Dover together; but by an accident, Charles went alone. For all the Conventicles were to be shut up in London upon the ensuing Sunday, and the Duke was left behind to guard the City against riots, which were dreaded upon that occasion."—Dalrymple's Memoirs, vol. i. 31.

[556] 22 Car. II. cap. i. It appears from a letter written by Colbert to Louis XIV. that Charles had a political end in view in connection with the Act. "The King designs to make the last Act of Parliament against the meetings of the sectaries be observed; and he hopes that their disobedience will give him the easier means of increasing the force of his troops and coming speedily to the end he proposes." 6th June, 1670.—Dalrymple's Memoirs, vol. iii., App. 60.

[557] See Wilkins Concilia, iv. 589.

[558] See Popes Life of Ward, 67, 69.

[559] Calamy, ii. 333.

[560] The trial is given in State Trials; and in Sewel's History of Quakers, ii. 195 et seq. There is a draft letter in the State Paper Office. Entry Book, June 29th, 1670, addressed to Reynolds, Bishop of Norwich, and another in the Lambeth Library, dated July 6th (No. DCLXXIV. No. 24), which when brought together and compared show how the Act of Uniformity was evaded, and how combined efforts were made after the second Conventicle Act had passed to bring the Church of England into correspondence with the laws. The letters relate to a case of irregularity at Bury St. Edmunds, when fanatics were said to make use of the Church.

[561] State Papers. Letter from James Douch, June 10, 1671.

[562] North calls it "a double-visaged Ministry, half Papist and half Fanatic." Lives, i. 178.

[563] Lauderdale had once made a great profession of religion. On the 14th of December, 1658, he wrote to Baxter saying, "I wish I knew any were fit to translate your books. I am sure they would take hugely abroad, and I think it were not amiss to begin with the Call to the Unconverted."—Baxter MS., Dr. Williams' Library.

[564] Clarendon says of Arlington that he knew no more of English affairs than of those of China, and believed France the best pattern in the world.—Life, 1095. I cannot enter into the political history of the Cabal. I would only repeat what Earl Russell says: there were two methods adopted of dealing with France—a sham treaty, and a secret negotiation. The part taken by the Cabal in this was not equal. Clifford and Arlington, the two Catholics, conducted the latter; Buckingham managed the former, to which Lauderdale gave a ready, Ashley a reluctant, consent. Clifford and Arlington were alone in the King's confidence.—Life of Lord William Russell, 50.

To Clifford, not to Shaftesbury, as is commonly supposed, belongs the disgrace of shutting the Exchequer. Evelyn settles the question.—Diary, March 12, 1672.

[565] Lords' Journal, Feb. 11, 1674.

[566] The measure was, in Council, moved and seconded by Clifford and Ashley.—Lingard, xii. 10.

[567] The catechism, says Cardwell (Documentary Annals, ii. 337) was probably Dean Nowel's small catechism, which was printed originally in 1570, and was generally used in schools down to the time of Strype.—See his Life of Parker, ii. 18.

[568] Burnet, i. 307.

[569] It is dated March 15, and is printed in Bunyan's Works, iii., Introduction, 21.

[570] Parl. Hist., iv. 515.

[571] "An answer unto certain objections formed against the proceedings of His Majesty to suspend the laws against Conventicles by His declaration, March 15, 1672."—State Papers, Dom. 1673, bundle 190, fol. 164.

[572] These were the Bishop of Durham's queries.—Cosin's Works, iv. 384.

[573] Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 99. Life of Philip Henry, 128.

[574] A short treatise on the lawfulness of the Oath of Supremacy and the power of the King in ecclesiastical affairs, by Philip Nye, was published in 1683. Nye died in 1672, and when this treatise was written does not appear on the title page. He ascribes to the magistrate, power "to send out preachers, to urge and constrain men to hear.... A coercive power of this nature is placed in no other hand but his." It is strange indeed to find an Independent writing thus. After exalting the civil power, and enforcing the duty of submitting to Royal Supremacy, the author, in a postscript, speaks of His Majesty's most gracious Declaration; and seemingly, without any idea that it could be inconsistent to accept the indulgence, maintains that there is nothing in the opinions of Independents that "should render us, in any sort, incapable of receiving the fruit and benefit of the King's majesty's favour and indulgence, promised to tender consciences." Probably Nye wrote this piece just about the time when the indulgence was issued—seven months before his death. Nye's tract (with many others, which I have found very instructive) is preserved in Dr. Williams' Library.

[575] Burnet, i. 308.

[576] Orme's Life of Owen, 272.

[577] Wilson's Hist. of Dissenting Churches, iii. 187.

[578] Bunyan's license is given in Offor's preface to Bunyan's Works. Numbers of entries from the Register, and copies of applications and licenses have been printed in local histories of Dissent. The original documents are preserved in the Record Office.

[579] State Papers, 1672.

[580] Hist. of his Own Time, i. 308.

[581] Life of Calamy, ii. 469, 470. I do not observe that Mr. Orme, in his Life of Owen, notices this statement.

In the volume published by the Camden Society entitled Moneys received and paid for secret services of Charles II. and James II., it appears that a physician who was in the confidence of the Presbyterian party, and who often represented them, was in the pay of the Court. For this reference, and other valuable suggestions on the subject, I am indebted to the Rev. R. B. Aspland.

[582] It is stated that the usual fees to certain officers in connection with this business were in some cases remitted.

[583] The particulars respecting Carver and Moore are taken from letters by Ellis Hookes written to the wife of George Fox, dated January, 1670, and preserved in the Records of the Quakers' Meeting House, Devonshire Square. The letters, or the substance of them, with entries in the Council Books, are given by Mr. Offor, in his introduction to the Pilgrim's Progress.

I have rested on the authority of so accurate a copyist without inspecting the originals. The statement, often repeated, that Bunyan owed his liberty to Bishop Barlow is quite a mistake.

[584] Parl. Hist. iv. 503, 506. The following letter in the State Paper Office, Dom. Charles II., is curious:—

"Yesterday morning we had a very fair choice for a burgess, and Sir Edward Spragg hath carried the day by 40 votes; but if my father and the rest of the Jurates and Common Councilmen had not thought to have made about 50 freemen the day before the election, the fanatic party had been too much for us; but we hope we have done them down to all intents and purposes; but still they threaten to have the Jurates up to London, for making those freemen the day before the election.

"Lawson Carlile.

Dover, February 2, 1673."

[585] The Country party consisted chiefly of Lords Russell and Cavendish, Sir W. Coventry, Colonel Birch, Mr. Powle, and Mr. Littleton. Lee and Garroway were suspected characters. Marvel says:

"Till Lee and Garroway shall bribes reject."

[586] Wilson's Life of Defoe, i. 58.

[587] Parl. Hist., iv. 517–526.

[588] Journals, February 10, 1672/3.

[589] Parl. Hist., iv. 527–533. Colbert, writing to Louis XIV., 9th of March, 1673, says, "The Chancellor, the Treasurer, and the Dukes of Buckingham and Lauderdale are of opinion to maintain this Declaration of the King, their master, in favour of the Nonconformists; and that if the Parliament persist in their remonstrances, as it is not doubted they will, to dissolve it, and call another. They do not even want good reasons to support their opinion. My Lord Arlington, who at present is single in his sentiments, says, that the King his master, ought not to do it."—Dalrymple's Memoirs, iii. 89.

[590] On the 18th of February the House resolved to go into Committee on the following day.

[591] Parl. Hist., iv. 535–542. Kennet, Rapin, Burnet, and Neal give very unsatisfactory accounts of the debate. Burnet's account is inaccurate.

[592] The Commonwealth's-man, Colonel Birch, spoke on the subject, but it does not appear that he advocated any broad measure of religious liberty.

[593] Parl. Hist., iv. 552–553. The Journals under date contain the Resolutions.

[594] There are remarks on this Bill written by Mr. John Humphrey in Baxter's Life, iii. 144.

[595] Parl. Hist., iv. 571–574.

[596] Parliament was adjourned on the 29th of March, to the 20th of October; then prorogued to the 27th, and again on the 4th of November to the 7th of January, 1674.

[597] Parl. Hist. iv. 553–6.

[598] Lingard (xii. 27) states the fact on the authority of the French Ambassador (Dalrymple, ii. App. 90), and the motives on the authority of Marvell, i. 494.

[599] Parl. Hist. iv. 561, March 12.

[600] Lord Campbell's Lives of the Lord Chancellors, iv. 181.

[601] Burnet, i. 348.

[602] Life of Calamy, i. 102.

[603] Journals, Feb. 24, March 8. After the Declaration had been withdrawn the old licenses gave much trouble. "The present favour which I beg of you is, your sense about Conventicles and meetings, for I am in the Commission of Peace for the University and Town of Cambridge, and am threatened by some busy informers with the penalty of £100, which you know the Act enjoins, if I grant not warrants upon complaint against them. Now I beseech you to write by the first post, or let Mr. Ball, or some of your people write to me what you know to be His Majesty's sense in this particular, whether we should grant warrants to suppress them, they having license to preach and meet."—State Papers, April 5, 1673. Mr. Carr to Sir J. Williamson.

The mayor of Weymouth wrote to Sir J. Williamson (Nov. 21, 1674), informing him that certain persons accused of keeping a Conventicle had pleaded His Majesty's "License and Warrant." He asks for direction how "to manage this affair."

[604] Dalrymple (Memoirs, iii. 92) remarks: "Charles' Declaration of Indulgence has been commonly imputed to the intrigues of France with Charles for the purpose of serving the interest of Popery. But Colbert's despatches show that France had not the least hand in it, that it was a scheme of Buckingham and Shaftesbury to gain the Dissenters, and that France was the cause of Charles' recalling it." The letters printed in Dalrymple indicate that Buckingham and Shaftesbury had strongly supported the Declaration, and show further that Charles wished Louis XIV. to believe that to please him he withdrew it. "He assured me," says Colbert, "that your Majesty's sentiments had always more power over him than all the reasonings of his most faithful Ministers." March 20, 1673.

[605] "All Sectaries," says Reresby (Memoirs, 174), "now publicly repaired to their meetings and Conventicles, nor could all the laws afterwards, and the most rigorous execution of them, ever suppress these Separatists, or bring them to due conformity."

[606] Where Owen's Church met has been regarded as uncertain, but the returns made in 1667 to Sheldon's inquiries specify the place of meeting at that time as White's Alley.

[607] Afterwards Lord Haversham.

[608] See Anecdotes of Mrs. Bendish in Noble's Memoirs of the Protectoral House of Cromwell, ii. 329.

[609] Life, by Sir H. Ashurst, 27.

[610] Ibid., 100.

[611] He wished to be made a Justice of the Peace; but his appointment was opposed by Sir John Petties, a moderate Churchman, who remarks in a letter dated January 4, 1674–5—there are a "sort of men in this kingdom so hot and fiery, so active and inexperienced, who labour much in those things which tend to the disquiet of the kingdom (of whom we have a great share in our county), and are almost as dangerous as the other two sorts of Dissenters (Romanists and Nonconformists), for by their indiscreet and hot endeavours, instead of suppressing those Dissenters, I dare say that they (though unwittingly and unwillingly) give them the greatest animation and increase."

[612] There are numerous letters belonging to this period in the State Paper Office, written by Bowen. Letters dated 1675, Jan. 15; Feb. 17, 19, 24, furnish what I have said, and a great deal more. It appears from the following extract, as well as from a former one, that Nonconformists did not always meekly submit to their oppressors. In reading the letter, however, it must be remembered that an enemy writes it. "John Faucet had disturbed the Presbyterians at worship in the Granary—and, in consequence, was violently assaulted, beaten, and trodden upon by several rude persons, and in great danger of his life."

(Norwich, Dec. 11, 1674, Thomas Corie.)

A similar complaint is made by Bowen of the treatment of a constable who disturbed a meeting at Yarmouth.

[613] Sheldon sent letters to the Bishops of his province making fresh inquiries about Dissenters.—Neal, iv. 467.

[614] Neal, iv. 464.

[615] Baxter spent an immense amount of subtle casuistry upon the subject of the declaration, and actually put such a forced meaning upon it, that he said there was nothing in it to be refused!—Life and Times, iii. 168.

[616] Parl. Hist., iv. 714. See Locke's Letter, Ibid., Appendix, xlvii.; Calamy's Life, i. 79.

[617] Life and Times, iii. 109.

[618] Life and Times, 156.

[619] Ibid., 110, 131.

[620] Ibid., 156. For notices of Morley's character, see p. 477 of this volume.

[621] The well-known letter of Tillotson to Baxter is an interesting record of the result of their well-meant endeavours:—"I took the first opportunity," he says, "after you were with us, to speak to the Bishop of Salisbury, who promised to keep the matter private, and only to acquaint the Bishop of Chester with it in order to a meeting; but, upon some general discourse, I plainly perceived several things could not be obtained. However, he promised to appoint a time of meeting, but I have not heard from him since. I am unwilling my name should be used in this matter; not but that I do most heartily desire an accommodation, and shall always endeavour it, but I am sure it will be a prejudice to me, and signify nothing to the effecting of the thing, which as circumstances are, cannot pass in either House without the concurrence of a considerable part of the Bishops, and the countenance of His Majesty, which at present I see little reason to expect." Dated April 11, 1675. Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 157.

[622] Parl. Hist., iv. 741.

[623] State Papers, November 8.

[624] State Papers, 1676. Bowen to Williamson. February 21.

[625] State Papers, 1676, July 7, 10. The following is a specimen of the kind of stories which this man sent up to London:—"Last night the three informers that have put by our meetings here were amongst several of the passengers in a passage-boat going for Norwich, where they were no sooner placed but some of our Independents called out to the passengers and told them they had informing rogues amongst them, and surely they would not take such rascals with them; upon which the passengers began to leave the boat. So the boatmen, to keep their passengers, turned the informers out upon the key [quay]—where, when they were landed, they began to throw stones at them, but making their escape, they came to my house, upon which I went down to the key [quay], and there learned who some of them were, and gave the informers their names, who are since bound over to the sessions." State Papers, 1676, July 12.

[626] State Papers, October 9.

[627] Harl. Misc., viii. 7. Lives of the Norths, i. 316, et seq., see Notes. Knight's Popular Hist., iv. 326.

[628] Wood, iv. 226.

[629] Owen writes very guardedly in reply to Parker's doctrine of the magistrates' power.—Works, xxi. 209, et seq.

[630] Life and Times, iii. 42.

[631] Anthony Wood. There is plenty of satire in the two books by Marvell; the second is more cutting than the first, but it is sometimes coarser, and on the whole wearisome to modern readers.

[632] This tract is printed in Somers' Collection, iii. 329, 388. My own judgment of it agrees with Mr. Hallam's:—"It is not written with extraordinary ability; but it is very candid and well designed, though conceding so much as to scandalize his brethren."—Const. Hist. ii. 93.

Marvell, in his Mr. Smirke on the Divine in Mode, speaks of the work as having been originally printed only for members of Parliament, and not published, but that a printer got hold of it, and "surreptitiously" multiplied copies without the author's knowledge. Yet the published edition, though commencing with the words, "An humble petition to the Right Honourable the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled," contains an address "to the reader" at the beginning, and another to the Nonconformists at the end.

[633] Mr. Smirke, or the Divine in Mode. By Andrew Marvell.

[634] Marvell's Mr. Smirke, which was an answer to Turner's animadversions.—Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 175. Three other books, bearing the title of Naked Truth, headed respectively the second, third, and fourth parts, were published afterwards, but not by Bishop Croft.

[635] Numerous letters in the Record Office show the prevalence in 1667 of rumours respecting the King's design to bring in Popery. For example:—

"Fanatics in the North, being disappointed of assistance from abroad by the peace set up, then rest on their friends' behalf, that the King is a Papist, and intends to set up the Popish religion, and have so far possessed not only fanatics, but several of the ignorant common people with this opinion, that it is publicly discoursed among them, that they will rise in arms for defence of religion, and oppose the King and the Popish party. They persuade their disciples that their friends in the South are ready to appear in arms for defence of religion, and oppose the King and the Popish party."—Sir P. Musgrave to Williamson, Aug. 22, 1667. Cal. 409.

[636] Life of James II., i. 441. Dalrymple's Memoirs, i. 70; iii. 1–68. The treaty is printed in Lingard, xi. 364. Rarely has anything in diplomacy been so unprincipled and shameful as Article II. of this document. Charles' pretexts were religious, his object political.

[637] See letters in Phenix, i. 566. Calamy's Life, i. 119.

[638] G. P. R. James' Life of Louis XIV., ii. 171.

[639] Evelyn, ii. 88.

[640] Harris' Charles II., ii. 81.

[641] Lingard, xi. 356. April 10, 1671. Wednesday. "This evening her royal highness' body was privately conveyed from St. James' Palace, where she died, to Westminster, where, till things could be put in order, [she] was deposited in state in the painted chamber; and about nine in the evening she was most solemnly attended to the Abbey by her own, the King's, the Queen's, and the Duke's servants. A vast train of the nobility, gentry, and many members of Parliament, in their blacks, guarded by two companies of foot, and finally interred in the royal vault of Henry VII.'s chapel. The ceremony [was] performed by the Bishop of Rochester, the Dean of Westminster Cathedral, to the extreme grief and disconsolation of all present. The Court, on this occasion, are entered into solemn mourning, in which 'tis thought they may continue for some months."—State Papers.

[642] Wood, Ath. Ox., ii. 614. The article on Woodhead is copious and interesting.

[643] Chalmer's Biographical Dictionary.

[644] Butler's English Catholics, iv. 425.

[645] This account of the working of Roman Catholicism in England is taken from the MSS. Travels of Cosmo, the third Grand Duke of Tuscany, (1669), printed in Appendix to Butler's English Cath., iii. 513.

[646] Five editions of Pascal were published between 1658 and 1688. The Protestant Almanack for 1668 is a disgraceful publication.

[647] State Papers, Dom. 1667, Sept. 6. (Cal.)

[648] State Papers, Dom., 1667. October 28 (Cal.).

[649] The following letter is addressed to Sir Joseph Williamson, Whitehall.—"Worthy Sir,—This day came the proclamation against Papists to Nottingham, being the last assize day. It was received with so much joy that bells and bonfires rung and flamed at that rate as they never did since His Majesty's restoration. The fanatics contended with the conformists who should show most zeal in expressing their joy for His Majesty's great grace. You may believe without swearing that neither this news, nor what the King did in the house last Saturday, was unwelcome to, Sir,

"Your most humble Servant,

"P. Whalley.

"Martij 15, 1672.

"If one of your clerks would take notice on't in the next Gazette, it would gratify the whole corporation."—State Papers, Dom. Chas. II.

[650] State Papers, Dom. Chas. II. Letter from W. Aston, 1676, April 3.

[651] State Papers, June 6, Nov. 10–13.

[652] State Papers, 1674, Jan. 20. Connected with this communication are papers containing drafts of advice for suppressing Popery. The Bishops of Canterbury, Durham, Winchester, Salisbury, Peterborough, Rochester, Chichester, and Chester, reply "that they observe with sorrow the growth of profaneness, Romanism, and Dissent;" "that they do not think any new laws are necessary for the purpose, but only the removal of such obstructions as have hitherto hindered the execution of them." What those obstructions were, the authors of this conclusion do not specify. There is another paper in the same bundle, recommending the Attorney-General to bestir himself in the matter, and that letters should be written to the Justices of the Peace; that there be a new general proclamation; that constables and churchwardens should be enjoined to search for suspected persons; and that the orders against priests, Popish seminaries, and resort of Papists to Court, should be fixed at the Court Gate, St. James's, and Somerset House.

[653] This is Reresby's own account. Ralph follows him, but in the imperfect reports of the debates in the Parl. Hist. (iv. 780), the statement in the House is said to have been made by Mr. Russel.

[654] Lingard, xii. 72.

[655] State Papers, Dom. Charles II., 1676, Oct. 27.

[656] Glanvill's Zealous and Impartial Protestant, p. 46. This and other instances of exaggeration are given in The Happy Future State of England, p. 140. It should be stated that the author of this last work endeavours to make out the Roman Catholics to have been as few as possible. The population of England, and the relative proportion of different classes of religionists, will be noticed in a subsequent chapter.

[657] "The debate or arguments for dissolving this present Parliament," 1675. Written by the Earl of Shaftesbury. Parl. Hist., IV. lxxviii.

[658] Campbell's Lives, iv. 185.

[659] Parl. Hist., iv. 801.

[660] Life of James II., i. 505. Parl. Hist., iv. 814, 824.

[661] State Papers, April, 1677.

[662] Lingard, xii. 96, 97. The Resolutions on which these Bills were founded are contained in the Lords' Journals, 1677, February 21 & 22.

[663] March 20, Parl. Hist., iv. 853–7. The same History (iv. 858) takes notice on the 29th of March of Marvell's boxing Sir Philip Harcourt's ear for stumbling on his foot.

[664] Parl. Hist. iv. 862. Journals, 1677, April 4.

[665] Ibid., 863. Lords' Journals, April 13; May 26.

[666] Lords' Journals, April 12, 13, 14.

[667] The Act now noticed should be considered in connection with what is said in a preceding part of this History, p. 96.

[668] Commons' Journals, April 29.

[669] Parl. Hist., iv. 980.

[670] June 12. Parl. Hist., iv. 990.

[671] Hist. of his Own Time, i. 177.

[672] Hook's Archbishops. Second series, i. 173.

[673] Hammond, in 1654, speaks of Sheldon's being "very good company." Letter in Harl. MSS., 21, printed in Ecclesiastic, April, 1853.

[674] See Pepys' account of a dinner party at Lambeth, Diary, May 14th, 1669. He tells disgraceful stories about Sheldon which were current at the time; and, it should be remembered, that although Sheldon at length rebuked Charles for his intimacy with Lady Castlemaine, it does not appear that he had before broken silence as to the shameful libertinism of the Court.

[675] Wood says (Ath. Ox., iv. 855) that Sheldon was not installed at Canterbury, and never visited it during the time that he was Archbishop; nor did he visit Oxford all the time he was Chancellor.

[676] The expression is Milman's, in reference to another character.

[677] In these sketches, I include all the notable members of the Episcopal body down to the Revolution—but, though I anticipate the period embraced in our subsequent narrative, the seven Bishops are omitted, as they will require particular notice hereafter.

[678] Aubrey's Letters, iii. 574.

[679] Pope's Life of Ward, 57. This book abounds in amusing anecdotes.

[680] There is in the Lambeth Library, in addition to the returns made to Sheldon, an account of the number and proportions of Popish recusants, obstinate Separatists, and Conformists, inhabitants of Wiltshire, and Berkshire, under the immediate jurisdiction of the Bishop of Sarum, by Seth Ward, 1676. See as to Ward, Baxter's Life and Times, iii. 86.

[681] Seth Ward told Aubrey a queer story respecting a theological opponent. "One Mr. Hagger, a gentleman, and good mathematician, was well acquainted with Mr. Th. Hariot, and was wont to say, that he did not like (or valued it not) the old story of the creation of the world. He could not believe the old position, he would say, ex nihilo nihil fit. But, said Mr. Hagger, a nahitú killed him at last; for in the top of his nose came a little red speck (exceeding small), which grew bigger and bigger, and at last killed him. I suppose it was that which the chirurgeons call a noli me tangere." Letters, iii. 368.

[682] Burnet, i. 590.

[683] Morley's Treatises. Sermon before the King, p. 38.

[684] He had unfairly preached against Baxter, and blazed abroad his marriage with all the odium he could cast upon it. Life and Times, ii. 375, 384. I have noticed Baxter's opinion of Morley, and the conduct of the latter, on p. 439 of this volume.

[685] Life and Times, iii. 84. The spirit of Morley is manifested in the following passage, speaking of Kidderminster—"The truth is, that Mr. Baxter was never either parson, vicar, or curate there, or anywhere else in my diocese—for he never came in by the door—that is, by any legal right, or lawful admission into that sheep-fold, but climbed up some other way, namely, by violence and intrusion, and therefore, by Christ's own inference, he was a thief and a robber."—The Bishop of Winchester's Vindication, p. 2. At the time of writing the letter, Morley was Bishop of Worcester, which diocese included Kidderminster.

Salmon, in his Lives of the English Bishops, p. 346, says of Morley, "His strength is attributed to keeping up his College custom of rising at five in the morning, sitting without a fire, and going to his bed cold. He did indeed exceed in severity to himself, eating but once a day, and not going to bed till eleven."

[686] Fuller, in his Worthies, i. 483, retracts some things which he had advanced against Cosin in his Church History, and observes, "It must be confessed, that a sort of fond people surmised, as if he had once been declining to the Popish persuasion. Thus the dim-sighted complain of the darkness of the room, when, alas, the fault is in their own eyes; and the lame of the unevenness of the floor, when, indeed, it lieth in their unsound legs."

[687] Ibid., 484.

[688] Life of Richard Gilpin, prefixed to his Demonologia Sacra, xxxv. Also, I find in the Record Office, a letter from "John Bishop of Durham" to Williamson, sending "the complaint received from Newcastle about the seditious meetings of the Congregation of Saints." The letter is dated November 23rd, 1668. The complaint refers to a public meeting on the 1st of November, in Barber Surgeon's Hall, of 500 of the Congregation of Saints, headed and led by Gilpin, notoriously known to be disaffected to the Government. It is stated, that he caused the 149th Psalm to be sung—and a treasonable construction is put upon the words. Three persons are named in connection with Gilpin—Durant, Leaver, and Pringle.—November 23.

[689] Conformist's Plea, 35. There is a letter in the Record Office (Sanderson to Williamson, 1667, Sept. 19), complaining of the laxity of the Bishop of Durham, in not convicting John Cock, a notorious Nonconformist—agent for Lady Vane, at Raby Castle, who was brought before him.

[690] Basire, 89.

[691] Life, by Plume.

[692] Salmon says "the expense was £20,000, of which the Chapter contributed £1,000. The rest was his own, or procured by him of other pious persons."—Lives, 296.

[693] Life, by Plume. See Coleridge on Hacket's Sermons—Remains, iii. 175.

[694] See notice of Wilkins, in Pope's Life of Seth Ward.

[695] Newcome, in his Diary, says—"November 22, 1672. I received the sad news of the death of the learned, worthy, pious, and peaceable Bishop of Chester, Dr. John Wilkins; he was my worthy friend." John Angier, the Nonconformist minister at Denton, speaks of his removal as a great loss.—Heywood's Life of Angier, 86. Martindale (Autobiography, 196) also refers to the Bishop's moderation, and adds—"But the Archbishop of York, by his visitation, took all power out of his hands for a year, soon after which this honest Bishop Wilkins died." I may be permitted to add that the good Bishop was a wit. In reference to his idea of the possibility of a passage to the moon, the Duchess of Newcastle said to him, "Doctor, where am I to find a place for waiting in the way up to that planet?" "Madam," replied he, "of all other people in the world, I never expected that question from you, who have built so many castles in the air, that you may be every night at one of your own."—Stanley's Memorials of Westminster, 234.

[696] Preached at the Guildhall Chapel, London, 1672, p. 46.

[697] Own Time, i. 187.

[698] Wood, Athen. Ox. iii. 969.

[699] Wood's Athen. Ox., iii. 1085.

[700] Norwich, April 13, 1670. Lambeth Library, Tenison MSS. 674.

[701] Athen. Oxon. iv. 309–317. There is a letter from Croft amongst the State Papers (Dec. 30, 1678), relative to his Library, &c.

[702] Hist. 42.

[703] He lay in state in a room under the Regent House. Over the hearse was spread the coat of the King or Herald-at-arms, of crimson satin, richly embroidered with gold. At the head of the hearse was standing the Bishop's mitre, which was silver-gilt, the cap, or inpart whereof, was crimson satin or silk; the mitre was plain, saving some little flower wrought in the middle on each side thereof, and on the top of each a little cross of about an inch in length and breadth. On one side of the top of the hearse lay along the Bishop's crosier of silver, somewhat in likeness to a shepherd's crook of about an ell long, and in thickness round above two inches and a half.—Ald. Newton's Diary, quoted in Annals of Cambridge, by Cooper, iii. 522.

[704] Conformist's Plea, 85.

[705] He allowed a considerable annuity to Dr. Tuckney, whom in the Professorship of Divinity at Cambridge, and the Mastership of St. John's College, he succeeded after the Restoration.

[706] Hist. of his Own Time, i. 181. Temple, in his Memoirs, says, "My election in the University proceeded with the most general concurrence that could be there, and without any difficulties I could observe from that side (the Duke of Monmouth's) those which were raised coming from the Bishop of Ely, who owned the opposing me, from the chapter of religion, in my Observations on the Netherlands, which gave him an opinion that mine was for such a toleration of religion as is there described to be in Holland."—Temple's Works, i. 433.

[707] Fuller's Worthies, ii. 421.

[708] Athenæ Oxonienses, iii. 717.

[709] Conformists' Plea, 35.

[710] Nelson's Life of Bishop Bull, 206.

[711] Life and Times, ii. 363.

[712] Athen. Oxon., iii. 1195.

[713] Ibid., 940. Bliss says he was Canon of York.

[714] The letter is written by Dr. Lampleugh, January 12, 1675. State Papers, Dom. Charles II.

[715] Le Neve, part ii. 238.

[716] The letter is dated, Ely House, October 9, 1643. Le Neve's Lives of the Bishops, pt. ii. 247.

[717] See anecdote of Sterne in Baxter, ii. 338, quoted in the account of the Savoy Conference in this History.

[718] Hist. of his Own Time, i. 590.

[719] This corresponds with the eulogium on his tombstone.

[720] Grainger's Biography, iii. 232.

[721] Le Neve's Bishops, pt. ii. 258.

[722] Hist. of his Own Time, i. 590. Dolben was Dean of Westminster at the time of Albemarle's funeral. Ward preached. "The Dean and prebendaries wore copes. Offerings were made at the altar."—Stanley's Westminster, 228.

The following notice occurs in Thoresby's Diary, i. 172:—"I rode with most of the gentry in the neighbourhood, to meet Archbishop Dolben, who was much honoured as a preaching bishop. May 1, 1684: he gave us an excellent sermon at the parish church; see his remarkable preliminary discourse concerning holydays, their institution, and abuse in the Romish Church, which makes many good people (his own expression) averse to them, even as celebrated in the Church of England, though without superstition. In the whole he showed great temper and moderation."

[723] In addition to the particular books which I have noticed, I may state that my chief authorities for these notices of the Bishops are Wood, Le Neve, and Salmon.

[724] I find amongst the State Papers the following, in a volume on Ecclesiastical affairs, containing Congé d'élires, &c.:—

"Dean and Chapter of Lichfield

"Whereas upon the vacancy of that see by the death of Dr. Hackett the late Bishop we did by our Congé d'élire and our Great Seal of England grant you our license to proceed to an election of a fit person to succeed in the same, and at the same time did by our letter written recommend to you our trusty &c. Dr. Wood Dean of that our cathedral church to be by you chosen Bishop of the said see according to the laws of this our realm. We have now thought fit hereby to signify our pleasure to you that we do hereby will and require you to forbear to proceed to the election of the said Dr. Wood until our pleasure shall be further signified unto you—whereof you may not fail.

"June 11, 1671."

[725] D'Oyley's Sancroft, i. 194.

[726] Yet it is said in his epitaph, in St. George's Chapel, Windsor,—"Exule Carolo II., bonis multatus, reverso, a sacris, hujus Capellæ Canonicus, Decanus Sarisburiensis, postea Cicestrensis Episcopus, φιλόξενος φιλάγαθος," &c., &c.

There is a curious account in Kennet's Hist. of Brideoake's visit to Lenthall, the Speaker, when on his death-bed. He owed much to Lenthall's influence during the Commonwealth. A letter in the State Paper Office, 1678, Oct. 7, conveys intelligence of his death, and asks, in consequence, for Church promotion.

[727] This Lloyd is to be distinguished from him of the same name who was one of the Seven Bishops.

[728] In Ichabod; or, Five Groans of the Church, mention is made of 1,342 factious clergymen.

[729] Dom. Chas. II., 1677, Sept. 12.

[730] Mystery and Iniquity of Nonconformity, 1664. A curious tract entitled The Ceremony-Monger, his Character, in Six Chapters, describes "bowing to the altar, implicit faith, reading dons of the pulpit, reading the Psalms, &c., alternately, bowing at the name of Jesus, unlighted candles on the altar, organs, church music, and other popishlike and foppish ceremonials," all of which are unmercifully ridiculed. The author is E. Hickeringhill, Rector of the Rectory of All Saints, in Colchester. There is no date to the publication, but from abundant internal evidence, it must have been written after the Act of Uniformity. Hickeringhill is justly described by Chalmers as "a half crazy kind of writer." He was a pensioner of St. John's, Camb., in 1650; junior Bachelor of Gonville and Caius; Lieut. in the English army in Scotland, and Captain in Fleetwood's Regiment. He took orders in 1661 or 1662, being ordained by Bishop Sanderson; became Vicar of Boxted, Essex, in October, 1662, and about the same time, Rector of All Saints, Colchester. In reference to the Act of Uniformity, he says it is an unnatural, impossible, irrational, wicked, and vain attempt. "Go teach God," he says, "to make a new heaven, with uniformity of stars and skies,—teach Him to make men uniform," &c. Hickeringhill wrote The Second Part of Naked Truth, and A Vindication of it. The copy of it which I have seen is in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. The Bishop of London brought an action against him, in March, 1682, for slander. A report of the trial may be found in the same Library, Political Tracts, Y 24. Hickeringhill held his Rectory until his death in 1708.

[731] Quotation in Vindication of the Clergy, 82.

[732] Chamberlayne, part 1. 205, 207. The following entries indicate the poverty of clergymen:—

"1669. Given to a poor minister who preached here, at the church, April 25, 3s. Bestowed on him in ale, 4d.

"Feb. 13, 1669. Collected then, by the churchwardens, in the church, upon a testimonial, and at the request of the Lord Bishop of York, for one Mr. Wilmot, a poor minister, 8s. 4d.

"1670, April 10. Given then by the neighbours, to a poor mendicant minister, one Mr. John Rhodes, who then preached here, and after the sermon stood in the middle aisle to receive the charity of the people, the sum 12s. 3d.

"1670, July 3. Given then by the neighbours to a poor lame itinerary, one Mr. Walker, who preached here, and after the sermon stood in the middle aisle to receive the people's charity, which was 9s. 3d."—See History of Morley Old Chapel, by the Rev. J. Wonnacott.

[733] Hunter's Life of Heywood, 336.

[734] Grounds and Occasions, 19. It is from this paragraph, and other similar authorities, that Macaulay draws materials for his humorous one-sided satire on the clergy—Hist. of Eng. i. 340.

[735] Grounds and Occasions, 107. North complains of his father's chaplain being very illiterate.—Lives, iii. 312.

[736] Evelyn's Diary, 1684, February 23.

[737] Vindication of the Clergy (1672), 122. The author of the Grounds and Occasions followed up his work by "Some observations upon the answer."

[738] Vindication, 100, et seq. See Answer to the Grounds and Occasions (1671), 14. Another book was published—Hieragonisticon, being an answer to the two books on the Grounds and Occasions (1672). Five additional letters were published by the author of the Grounds and Occasions, &c. Through the kindness of my friend, Mr. John Rotton, the whole of this curious collection has been placed at my service.

[739] Vindication, 108.

[740] Appendix to Second Report of Commission on Ritual, 628.

[741] "An account of the life and conversation of the reverend and worthy Mr. Isaac Milles," quoted in Ken's Life by a Layman, 48–50.

[742] Ichabod; or Five Groans of the Church (1663). Williams, Bishop of Lincoln, says he "met with three debauched clergymen in Hertfordshire, whom he shall deprive: the gentry are most kind wherever he goes. Thinks the principles he goes upon will be successful."—State Papers, July 18, 1668.

[743] Life of Philip Henry, 101. He made this remark at the close of the year 1662. In Hunter's Life of Oliver Heywood, p. 149, a wretched account is given of the six ministers who succeeded him.

[744] History of his Own Time, i. 186.

[745] Diary, 1668, February 16.

[746] Burnet, i. 258.

[747] Appendix to Second Report of Commission on Ritual, 628.

Transcriber's Note:
1. Printer's errors have been silently corrected.
2. Obvious spelling and punctuation errors have been silently corrected. Original spelling and hyphenated words have been retained where appropriate.
3. Superscripts shown as x.