[298] Lathbury (Hist. of Nonjurors, 178), on the authority of the State Tracts, ii. 561, states that Fenwick was permitted to seek the aid of any of the Clergy who had taken the oaths, or any of the Bishops who had opposed the attainder; that on his refusal of the offer, the names of three or four Nonjurors were mentioned, but they declined to attend him, fearing the oaths might be tendered. Macaulay (vii. 404), however, says White was with him at the last.
[299] Impartial Hist. of Plots, 176.
[300] Evelyn notices, “16 Nov., the King’s entry very pompous, but is nothing approaching that of King Charles II.”
[301] Evelyn’s Diary, Dec. 2nd.
[302] Milman’s Annals of St. Paul’s, 427. Evelyn says, “5th December was the first Sunday that St. Paul’s had had service performed in it since it was burnt in 1666.”
[303] Kennet’s Hist. of England, iii. 777.
[304] Tallard, the French Ambassador, writing home, says the Catholic religion “is here tolerated more openly than it was even in the time of King Charles II., and it seems evident that the King of England has determined to leave it in peace, in order to secure his own.”
“I hear from Calais of priests coming over every day, and here they get into the herd, so that it is hard to distinguish them.”—Vernon Cor., ii. 193.
[305] Burnet, ii. 229; Statutes 11 and 12 Will. III. c. 4.
“The judges put such constructions upon the clause of forfeiture as eluded its efficacy; and I believe there were scarce any instances of a loss of property under this law.” (Hallam’s Const. Hist., ii. 333.) The Act was repealed in 1779.