[170] For the protestation, see Parl. Hist., ii. 777. Alterations were made which throw light on the fears of returning popery.—Verney's Notes, published by the Camden Society, 67-70.
[171] Instances of the taking of it are numerous. In the Register Book of Wansted it is found with the names of the principal inhabitants.—Lyson's Environs of London, iv. 243.
Whitaker, in his History of Richmondshire, mentions an endorsement on the Return Roll for the parishes and townships of Bentham, Ingleton, Thornton, Sedberg, Dent, and Garsdale:—"The names of those persons who refused to make protestation within Garsdale parcell of the township of Dent, viz: George Heber Gent, Abraham Nelson, chapman, who publiquely refused before the whole Dale in the Church."—vol. ii. 363.
[172] See Journals of the Commons, May 12th.
[173] August 2nd. Parl. Hist. ii, 895. Compare Nalson, ii. 414-417.
[174] Baillie, i. 351. He refers here to the Commons.
[175] Hallam's Const. Hist., i. 524. The sagacious author justly remarks—"And thus we trace again the calamities of Charles to their two great sources; his want of judgment in affairs, and of good faith towards his people." The Lords passed the Bill on the 8th; the royal assent was given on the 10th.
[176] Parl. Hist., ii. 778.
[177] Parl. Hist., ii. 783. May 5. D'Ewes gives another amusing version of the story, (under date May 19).—Sanford's Illustrations, 373. Baillie's account is somewhat different.
[178] Maitland's London, i. 338.