Part i. 369.

[160] _Neal_, ii. 465.

[161] See _Journals_ for March 9th, 10th, 11th, and 22nd. _May_ says, "Doctors and parsons of parishes were made everywhere Justices of Peace, to the great grievance of the country, in civil affairs, and depriving them of their spiritual edification."--_Hist. of Long Parliament_, 24.

[162] _Rushworth_, iv. 206. This Bill was under discussion in the Lords, in October, 1641.--_Nalson_, ii. 496.

[163] _Journals._

[164] _Clarendon's Hist._, 94.

[165] July 1.--"The Lords, upon the reasons offered by the Commons, were satisfied to consent to pass the Bill to take away the High Commission Court both here and at York, but argued to have the Star Chamber Court not quite taken away, but bounded, limited, and reduced to what power it had in Henry VII's time."--_Rushworth_, iv. 304. Both Bills received the royal assent, July 5.

[166] The writers were: Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thos. Young, Matt. Newcomen, and Wm. Spurstow.

[167] _The Reduction of Episcopacy_, which bears Ussher's name, was not published till after his death, in 1656. Baxter says in reference to it, "I asked him (Dr. Ussher) whether the paper be his that is called, _A reduction of Episcopacy to the form of Synodical Government_; which he owned, and Dr. Bernard after witnessed to be his."--_Life and Times_, part ii. 206.

I may here observe that the Archbishop, according to his biographer, Elrington, appears always to have spelt his name with a double s.

[168] _Baillie_, i. 351.

[169] May 3, 1641. _Parl. Hist._, ii. 776.

I have here and elsewhere, in giving the substance of speeches, adhered to the quaint phraseology employed by the speakers.

[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.

[179] The bitter Presbyterian feeling against Strafford is plain enough in Baillie's letters.

It belongs not to the scope of this ecclesiastical History to enter on the details of the trial, but I cannot resist the temptation to insert in the Appendix two letters found in the State Paper Office, giving an account of the way in which the bill of attainder was introduced.

[180] See Speeches by Lane and St. John (_Rushworth's Trial of Strafford_, 671, _et seq._); then read what follows:

"It certainly does astonish us that men, however they may have condemned the conduct of Strafford, could bring themselves to believe that he was guilty of the crime of high treason; for they could hardly have been deceived by the wicked sophistry of St. John that an attempt to subvert the fundamental laws of the kingdom was high treason at common law, and still remains so, or by the base opinion delivered by the judges--that this amounts to high treason under the Statute of Edward III."--_Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors_, iv. 15.

[181] Ussher of Armagh, Juxon of London, Morton of Durham, Potter of Carlisle, and Williams of Lincoln.

[182] Slightly abridged from _Elrington's Life of Ussher_, 213.

[183] That such a distinction was suggested seems generally admitted. Clarendon attributes it to Williams, (_Rebellion_, 140.) This, considering the historian's prejudice respecting the Archbishop, is not perfectly conclusive against Williams, any more than the silence of Hacket (_Life of Williams_, pt. II., i. 161,)--who only speaks of the advice given in common, founded on the distinction between facts and law--is conclusively in his favour.

Clarendon is corroborated by the circumstance, that Ussher and Juxon were freed from the charge by the King himself (according to the report of Sir Edward Walker), and of the remaining prelates Williams was the most likely to give such advice as Clarendon mentions.

[184] _Fuller's Church History_, iii. 421.

The author says he copied what he gives of Hacket's speech out of his own papers. _Nalson's Report_ (ii. 240) seems to be an amplification of what is contained in _Rushworth_, iv. 269. Verney entirely agrees with Fuller (_Verney Papers--Camden Society_, 75), but only in a few particulars with Nalson. Nalson is also wrong in saying Hacket answered Burgess. Hacket spoke first. Burgess answered him.

[185] _Fuller_, iii. 422. According to _Verney's Notes_, Burgess speaks of "Choristers and officers as fellows that are condemned for felons, and keep ale-houses, and so they may still," 77.

[186] _Rushworth_, iv. 276.

[187] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 773.

[188] _Sanford's Illustrations_, 363.

[189] _Nalson_, ii. 248.

[190] _Parry's Parliaments and Councils of England_, 353.

[191] _Sanford's Studies and Illustrations_, 364.

[192] Dering published an apology in 1642.

[193] The following letter by Sydney Bere, secretary to Sir Balthazar Gerbier, afterwards to Sir H. Vane, is preserved in the State Paper Office.

"Whitehall, 17th June, 1641.

"You will surely have heard that the utter abolishing of the bishops and all titular ecclesiastics, with the dependents, hath been agreed upon in the House of Commons, and met with less noes in the debate than the business of the Earl of Strafford had. This day they voted it again, and now it is to be engrossed, a draft of the Act goes herewith.

"The business of the bishops will be of dangerous consequence, they being violent and passionate in their own defence, and having engaged, as it were, the Lords, by their late votes in their favour, to the maintenance of their cause; whereas the Commons seem as resolute to pass the Bill for their utter extirpation, and so transmitting it to the Lords, according to the custom; and then it may be justly inferred the city will prove as turbulent as they were on Strafford's cause."

Sidney Bere became under-secretary upon the appointment of Nicholas, in November, to the chief secretaryship of state.

[194] _Rushworth_, iv. 279.

[195] _Nalson_, ii. 529.

[196] _Journal_, June 7, 1641.

_Verney's Notes_ bear evidence that the same day the feeling of the House was unfavourable to Episcopacy. Monday, 7th June:--"Sir John Griffin, the elder, said, I see it is distasteful to this House to speak for the government of the Church."--_Verney Papers_, 83.

On the same day, in the course of a debate, the subject of ecclesiastical canons came again under consideration. Mr. Maynard "transmitted the votes about the canons." According to _Verney's Notes_, (84) in which this appears, the debate touched generally on the power of the clergy to make canons. No formal resolution or vote is recorded.

[197] _Sanford's Illustrations_, 365.

[198] _Clarendon's Hist._, 110.

[199] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 822-826.

Sir Ralph Verney notices the debate on the 12th, but his notes are unfortunately very brief, and run thus:--

"Actions constant at all times to men of one order, 'tis a great sign of their malignity.

Oil and water may be severed, but oil and wine never.

Pledwell's arguments might have been used for the pope as well as for other bishops.

Vaughan.--Three things considerable in bishops: election, confirmation, consecration.

_Os Episcopi_ is a chancellor.

_Oculus Episcopi_ is the commissary.

_Consilium Episcopi_ is the dean."--_Verney Papers_, 94.

Letters in the State Paper Office show the excitement produced by the Commons' proceedings. Slingsby says, 10th June, "The discourse of all men is they must now strike at root and branch, and not slip this occasion."

[200] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 828. _et seq._

[201] _Rushworth_, iv. 295.

[202] _Nalson_, ii. 245.

[203] White was grandfather of Susannah Annesly, the mother of the Wesleys.

[204] For cases which came before Dering, see "_Proceedings principally in the County of Kent, &c._" Edited by the Rev. L. B. Barking, with preface by John Bruce, Esq. _Camden Soc._

[205] _Rushworth_, iv. 113-123.

[206] _Rushworth_, 194, 195.

See _Laud's Journal_, March 1, p. 240.

March 1, Monday.--"I went in Mr. Maxwell's coach to the Tower. No noise till I came into Cheapside. But from thence to the Tower I was followed and railed at by the 'prentices and the rabble, in great numbers, to the very Tower gates, where I left them, and I thank God he made me patient!"--_Laud's Diary._

[207] _Rushworth_, iv. 122-351.

Widdrington's speech on presenting the impeachment is a curiosity in its way. Amongst other odd things he says of Wren: "Without doubt he would never have been so strait-laced and severe in this particular (_i. e._, his hatred of extempore prayer), if he had but dreamed of that strait which a minister, a friend of his, was put into by this means. The story is short. A butcher was gored in the belly by an ox; the wound was cured; the party desired public thanksgiving in the congregation; the minister, finding no form for that purpose, _read the collect for churching of women_."--_Parl. Hist._, ii. 888.

[208] _Fuller's Church History_, iii. 418. See also _Worthies_, ii. 359.

[209] _Hanbury's Historical Memorials_, ii. 97-100.

Thomas Wiseman, in a letter (July 1, 1641) _State Papers_, says of the Scotch, "God send us well rid of them, and then we may hope to enjoy our ancient peace both of Church and Commonwealth, for till they are gone, whatever they pretend, we find they are the only disturbers of both."

[210] _Rushworth_, iv. 368.

[211] _State Papers, Dom., 1641._ Letter of Sidney Bere, August 18.

[212] _Idem._ Letter of Sidney Bere, August 22.

[213] _Letter of Bere._ August 30th.

In a manuscript diurnal, also preserved among the _State Papers_, it is remarked: "Mr. Henderson is in great favour with the king, and stands next to his chair in sermon time. His Majesty daily hears two sermons every Sunday, besides week-day lectures."

[214] Baillie's notices are to the same effect as Bere's: "Mr. Alexander Henderson, in the morning and evening before supper, does daily say prayers, read a chapter, sing a psalm, and say prayer again. The King hears all duly, and we hear none of his complaints for want of a liturgy or any ceremonies." _Letters_, i. 385.

[215] _Nalson_, ii. 683.

[216] _Parry's Parliaments and Councils_, 365.

[217] On the 8th September, "upon Mr. Cromwell's motion, it was ordered, that sermons should be in the afternoon in all parishes of England, at the charge of the inhabitants of those parishes where there are no sermons in the afternoon."--_D'Ewes' Journals. Sanford's Illustrations_, 371.

[218] _Commons' Journals. Parl. Hist._, ii. 907.

[219] _Nalson_, ii. 483. _Parl. Hist._, ii. 910.

[220] An attempt was made in the Lower House to revise the Prayer Book, but it failed.--_Rushworth_, iv. 385.

[221] London was in a very troubled state that autumn, as appears from a letter by Thomas Wiseman, dated October 7th.--_State Papers Dom._

"The city is full of the disbanded soldiers, and such robbing in and about it that we are not safe in our own houses, yet this day there is an order come from the Committee of Parliament to send every soldier away upon pain of imprisonment, and leave granted to any of them that will to transport themselves for the low countries into the service of the States. On Tuesday last the post was robbed between this and Theobalds, and the letters to the King and other Lords in Scotland, from the Queen and the Lords of the Council, were taken away by fellows with vizors on their faces; such an insolence hath not been, however, before, and who they were, or who set them to work is suspected, but not yet discovered. We have the most pestilent libels spread abroad against the precise Lords and Commons of the Parliament, that they are fearful to be named. And the Brownists and other sectaries make such havoc in our churches by pulling down of ancient monuments, glass windows, and rails, that their madness is intolerable; and I think it will be thought blasphemy shortly to name Jesus Christ, for it is already forbidden to bow to his name, though Scripture and the practice of the Church of England doth both warrant and command it."

[222] _May's History of the Long Parliament_, 113-115.

[223] See his speeches in _Rushworth_, iv. 392-394.

[224] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 924.

[225] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 919, 920.

[226] _Rushworth_, iv. 438-451.

[227] Sidney Bere says in a letter dated 25th Nov., 1641 (_State Papers Dom._): "For the business of the Houses of Parliament, they have been in great debates about a Remonstrance, which the House of Commons frames, shewing the grievances and abuses of many years past. The contestation now is, how to publish it, whether in print to the public view, or by petition to his Majesty--it was so equally carried in a division of opinion, that there were but eleven voices different. This day is a great day about it, but what the event will be I shall not be able to write you by this ordinary. It seems there are great divisions between the two Houses, and even in the Commons House, which, if not suddenly reconciled, may cause very great distractions amongst us. It is the fear of many wise and well-meaning men, who apprehend great distempers, which I pray God to direct."

[228] _Memoirs by Sir Philip Warwick_, 201.

[229] _Forster's Grand Remonstrance_, 324. I refer the reader to this valuable work for minute particulars respecting this debate.

[230] _Clarendon. Hist._, 125. Compare _Carlyle's Cromwell_, i. 161.

[231] So Queen Henrietta Maria was then commonly called.

[232] _Nalson_, ii. 679-681.

[233] _Nicholas' Correspondence. Evelyn's Diary_, iv. 82.

[234] "I observe since my coming to town, a very great alteration of the affections of the City, to what they were when I went away. They say a great present is to be presented to the King after dinner, and a petition such as he will be glad to receive, the contents I hear not yet, only one clause for the maintenance of Episcopacy and the suppression of schism."--_Robert Slingsby, State Papers Dom., Nov. 25._

Respecting the King's reception, Wiseman says, "I confess it was a great one every way, and so acknowledged beyond the precedent of any made to former Kings, that history makes mention of, which well suits with the goodness, sweetness, and meritorious virtues of so gracious a King as ours is. The present mean estate of the Chamber denied the form of a gift, but this of the hearts of the citizens and those of the better sort, and at this tune so seasonably expressed, was of greater import to His Majesty than, for my part, I dare take upon me to value."--_2nd Dec., 1641. State Papers, Dom._

[235] _Nalson_, ii. 681. _Rushworth_, iv. 432.

[236] Letter of Thomas Wiseman, addressed to "Sir John Pennington, Admiral of his Majesty's fleet for the guard of the Narrow Seas."--_State Papers Dom._, 9th Dec., 1641.

[237] In the same letter to Sir John Pennington, Wiseman says, "His Majesty was pleased, with a return of many thanks for his entertainment, to set a mark of his favour by knighting the seven aldermen, whereof your cousin the alderman was none, whose ways, as you partly know, are rather to please himself than to strive to do any acceptable service for the king, if it stand not with the sense of the preciser sort of the House of Commons."

[238] Sir Ralph Hopton gave a report to the House of the interview.--_Parl. Hist._, ii. 942.

[239] _Rushworth_, iv. 452.

[240] _State Papers Dom._ Letters of Robert Slingsby, dated (by mistake) 6th Dec., 1641, and properly placed under Jan. 6th, 1641-2. Slingsby is not perfectly accurate in his account of what took place in the House.

[241] The High Church Lord Mayor Gourney would not accompany them.

[242] _Nalson_, ii. 764.

[243] There were other disturbances in London.

"For the proceedings of the Parliament, you have them here enclosed until Monday, which day there happened some disorder concerning the prisoners in Newgate, who being to suffer, and understanding the priests condemned with them were not, but in hope of reprieve, they found means to seize the jailor's keys, and so made themselves master of the prison, but the train bands coming up that same day forced them to surrender, and the next they were hanged, not without great murmuring of the common people. The saving of the priests is yet a point debated in Parliament, and, as I am told, will hardly be obtained. In the meantime, these intervenient things add much to the distractions and distempers of the time, which I pray God to give a better end unto than at present there is any great appearance for to hope it." * * *

"I am told the House did yesternight vote the printing of the Remonstrance."--_State Papers._ Letter of Sidney Bere, 16th Dec., 1641.

[244] _Bramston's Autobiography_, published by the Camden Society, 82.

[245] _Rushworth_, iv. 463.

Cutting the hair short was a Puritan reaction, occasioned by the opposite Cavalier fashion of wearing locks profusely long. It is worth notice, that the nickname given to Elisha by the boys at the town gate, as they watched the prophet passing by, was just the same as that given to the Parliamentarians. "Baldhead," is really "_roundhead_," in allusion to shortness of hair at the back of the head.--_Ewald_, iii. 512.--_Smith's Dict. of the Bible_, i. 537.

[246] The following letter by Captain Slingsby relates to this disturbance. It will be noticed that the writer says, "none were killed;" but Fuller states one man died of the injuries he received.

"I cannot say we have had a merry Christmas, but the maddest one that I ever saw. The prentices and baser sort of citizens, sailors, and watermen, in great numbers every day at Westminster, armed with swords, halberds, clubs, which hath made the King keep a strong guard about Whitehall of the trained-bands without, and of gentlemen and officers of the army within. The King had upon Christmas-eve put Colonel Lunsford in to be Lieutenant of the Tower, which was so much resented by the Commons and by the City, that the Sunday after he displaced him again and put in Sir John Biron, who is little better accepted than the other. Lunsford being on Monday last in the Hall with about a dozen other gentlemen, he was affronted by some of the citizens, whereof the Hall was full, and so they drew their swords, chasing the citizens about the Hall, and so made their way through them which were in the Palace Yard and in King's Street, till they came to Whitehall. The Archbishop of York was beaten by the prentices the same day, as he was going into the Parliament. The next day they assaulted the Abbey, to pull down the organs and altar; but it was defended by the Archbishop of York and his servants, with some other gentlemen that came to them; divers of the citizens hurt, but none killed. Amongst them that were hurt one knight, Sir Richard Wiseman, who is their chief leader. Yesterday, about fifteen or sixteen officers of the army, standing at the Court gate, took a slight occasion to fall upon them and hurt about forty or so of them. They, in all their skirmishes have avoided thrusting, because they would not kill them. I never saw the Court so full of gentlemen. Every one comes thither with their swords. This day 500 gentlemen of the Inns of Court came to offer their services to the King. The officers of the army, since these tumults, have watcht and kept a Court of guard in the presence chamber, and are entertained upon the King's charge. A company of soldiers put into the Abbey for defence of it."--_State Papers_, December 30th, 1641.

[247] "There has been great store of the scum of the people who have gone this holidays to Westminster, to have down Bishops, and against Lunsford, who is now dismissed from being Lieutenant of the Tower, the King having given him £500 pension per annum, and hath invested one Sir John Biron in that place. All things are in much distemper, and I fear that they yet will grow worse."--_State Papers._ Letter of Capt. Carterett to Sir J. Pennington, dated London, 29th Dec.

[248] I drew up this account from documents in the Record Office, dated the last few days of December, 1641, when I had no opportunity of consulting what Mr. Forster says of the disturbances, in his careful history of the _Arrest of the Five Members_.

[249] See _Rushworth_, iv. 695, for examples of exaggeration in the royalist statements. This disturbance became a subject of controversy between the King and Parliament.--_Rushworth_, iv. 710.

[250] "Here," says Mr. Forster, "and not in any dispute as to whom the powers of the militia should reside with, really began the Civil War." _Arrest of the Five Members_, 66.

[251] _Hall's Works for Hard Measure_, xiii.

[252] _Fuller's Church History_, iii. 431. He gives a copy of the protest.

[253] See his speech on the 4th of March--_Parl. Hist._, ii. 1111.

[254] _Bishop Hall's_ account in his _Hard Measure_ would seem to imply that the King had not seen the paper before it was brought under the notice of the Upper House by Lord-keeper Littleton, but it is clearly stated (_Parl. Hist._, ii. 993) that what Littleton did in this matter was by his Majesty's command. "The Jesuitical faction," says a letter of the day, "according to their wonted custom, fomenting still jealousies between the King and his people, and the bishops, continually concurring with the Popish lords against the passing any good Bills sent from the House of Commons thither; and their last plot hath been their endeavour to make this Parliament no Parliament, and so to overthrow all Acts past, and to cause a dissolution of it for the present, which hath been so strongly followed by the Popish party, that it was fain to be put to the vote, and the Protestant Lords carried it to be a free and perfect Parliament as ever any was before. This did so gall the bishops that they made their protestation against the freedom of the vote, and the Parliament; and in their protestation have inserted such speeches as have brought them within the compass of treason, and thus the Council of Achitophel is turned into foolishness. The Earl of Bristol and his son have been chief concurrents with them in this and other evil councils, for which they have been impeached and branded in the House of Commons."--_State Papers_, Letter of Thomas Smith to Sir J. Pennington, dated York House, 30th Dec., 1641.

There are allusions to these proceedings in other letters (_State Papers_) which all blame the bishops for want of wisdom.

[255] Hall says, "On January the 30th, in all the extremity of frost, at 8 o'clock in the dark evening, are we voted to the Tower. The news of this our crime and imprisonment flew over the city, and was entertained by our well-wishers with ringing of bells and bonfires." _Hard Measure._

[256] "This day the bishops have made a protestation against the proceedings of this Parliament, declaring it no free Parliament. This makes a great stir here. The favourers of them think it done too soon, the other side do seem now to rejoice that it is done, having thereby excluded themselves from it." _Slingsby to Pennington. State Papers_, 30th Dec., 1641.

[257] _Collier's Ecclesiastical History_, ii. 819.

[258] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 1206. The bishops were: Dr. John Williams, Archbishop of York; Dr. T. Moreton, Bishop of Durham; Dr. J. Hall, Bishop of Norwich; Dr. Robert Wright, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield; Dr. John Owen, Bishop of St. Asaph; Dr. William Piers, Bishop of Bath and Wells; Dr. John Coke, Bishop of Hereford; Dr. M. Wren, Bishop of Ely; Dr. Robert Skinner, Bishop of Oxon; Dr. G. Goodman, Bishop of Gloucester; Dr. J. Towers, Bishop of Peterborough; Dr. M. Owen, Bishop of Llandaff.

In _Parl. Hist._, ii. 998, Warner is mentioned as Bishop of Peterborough, but he was Bishop of Rochester. See list of the thirteen impeached in August.

[259] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 1080.

[260] _Lords' Journals_, Feb. 16th.

[261] It is related of this eccentric person that, as master of a household, he never allowed the presence of a female servant.--See _Worthies of Sussex, by Mark Antony Lower_.

[262] _Harl. MSS._ in _Lysons_, iii. 56.

[263] There is a curious letter from Towers, then Dean of Peterborough, dated December 30, 1633, in which he seeks to make interest with Sir John Lambe, Dean of the Arches, for the succession of the bishopric. He says he should be almost as glad to see his friend Dr. Sibthorpe in the deanery as himself in the palace. _State Papers Dom., Chas. I._

[264] _Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy_, part ii. 78. The few particulars we have given respecting the bishops rest chiefly on his authority.

[265] _Hacket's Memorial_, ii. 226.

[266] The following _State Papers Dom._, (_Chas. I._), was written at the same time:--

"Sir--What passeth in Scotland I presume you have already understood from Mr. Bere, so that I shall only say, that I believe the great plot there may prove much ado about nothing. Howsoever I am advertised that all the distractions thereupon have suddenly composed, which gives great hope of his Majesty's return ere it be long. Our Parliament, I mean the House of Commons, were very hot in getting the Lords to pass a bill which they had voted, and sent up against the bishops; but the news of a rebellion in Ireland made them cast that by, and ever since Saturday last both Houses have bestowed their time upon this business, and at length have concluded to send away the Lord Lieutenant speedily with 1,000 men and £50,000 in money, which is to be taken up of the city, if they can get it there, for the citizens of the best rank are at this time much discontented with the Parliament about protections, whereby they are stopped from getting in their debts to their great prejudice....

"H. COGAN.

"_Charing Cross, 4th Nov., 1641._"

[267] Letter of Thos. Wiseman, dated 4th Nov., 1641. (_State Papers Dom., Chas. I._)

This letter discloses to us facts which were the subject of many a letter, and many a conversation in the autumn of 1641. Public indignation was awakened by these atrocities in a way resembling that with which we were all sadly familiar at the period of the Indian massacre.

[268] _Mant's History of the Church of Ireland_, i. 467, 470.

[269] _Bramhall's Works_, i., _letters_, p. 79. The Lord Deputy's letter in 1634 also gives a lamentable description.--_Strafford's Letters_, i. 187. See also _Petition of Irish Convocation_.--_Collier_, ii. 763.

[270] _Mant's Church of Ireland_, i. 548.

[271] _Rushworth_, iv. 406.

[272] For the Roman Catholic view of the case, see _Lingard's History of England_, x. 41.

[273] _Lister's Autobiography_, 7. The places named are on the great highway from South Lancashire to Halifax.

[274] _Calamy's Ejected Ministers_, i. 45.

[275] _Nalson_, ii. 647-688. Cogan (servant to some one addressed by Nicholas as Rt. Honble.) in a letter dated Charing Cross, November 18, 1641, after relating the story told by the tailor of White Cross Street, continues--"he went with all speed to the House of Commons, unto whom being with great importunity admitted, he at large related all the aforesaid passages, and withal shewed in how many places of his cloak and clothes he was run through; and after long examination of him they sent him up unto the Lords, who in like manner questioned him a long time, and ever since there hath been a great coil about the finding out of this matter, by searching of Recusants' houses, as my Lord of Worcester's in the Strand, St. Basil Brooke's, and others. Now, whether this be a truth or an imposture, time will resolve."

[276] _Nalson_, ii. 673. Dering's subsequent history does not belong to our pages. It is enough to say he was expelled the House, his published speeches were burnt by the hangman, he joined the King, and served in the army; and then, after all, made his peace with the Parliament.

[277] _Clarendon_, 433.

[278] _Macaulay's Essays_, i. 160.

[279] Quoted in _Forster's Grand Remonstrance_, 172.

[280] As to Royalists of the mean and selfish class, see _Brodie_, iii. 344-354.

[281] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 990.

[282] _Nalson_, ii. 673.

[283] _Letters_ of the 13th and 14th of January, in the State Paper Office, indicate the excitement of the period, and the uncertainty felt about the King's movements.

[284] _State Papers Dom._, under date January 13, 1642. Parts of this letter, of which I have not transcribed the whole, are inserted by Mr. Forster in his _Arrest of the Five Members_. I had intended to introduce other interesting letters of that date, but as they are already printed by him, I refer the reader to his pages.

[285] March 28, 1642.--A conference was held respecting a petition from Kent, which prayed for a restoration of the Bishops, and the Liturgy, &c., &c. Some parts of the petition were voted scandalous, dangerous, and tending to sedition.--_Lords' Journal._

April 21.--Both Houses made a curious order against counter-petitions--"As no man ought to petition for the Government established by law because he has already his wish; but they that desire an alteration cannot otherwise have their desires known, and therefore are to be countenanced."

April 28.--The Commons, by Mr. Oliver Cromwell, acquaint the Lords "that a great meeting is to be held next day on Blackheath, to back the rejected Kentish petition." 30--"The Men of Kent come to the House, and again present their petition formerly burnt. Several are committed to the Gate House and Fleet."--_Parry's Parliaments and Councils of England_, 385, 386.

[286] This appears from a letter by Slingsby.--_State Papers_, December 2, 1641.

[287] _Rushworth_, iv. 498.

[288] See also _Neal_, ii. chap. xii., and _May_, 247-265.

[289] July 28, 1642--The Lords give judgment against John Marston, Clerk, who had said--"The Parliament set forth flams to cozen and cheat the country and get their money, &c. He is deprived of all ecclesiastical preferments; made incapable hereafter to hold place or dignity in Church or Commonwealth; imprisoned in the Gatehouse; and ordered to give sureties."--_Parliaments and Councils of England_, 396.

[290] The Royalists sometimes appealed to Scripture.--There is amongst the _State Papers_, one containing texts of Scripture relating to royal authority:--1. Pray for the King; 2. Speak not evil of the King; 3. Exalt not thyself against the King; 4. The King's confidence in God; 5. The King loveth judgment; 6. The King ought to be feared; 7. God's care of his anointed; 8. Punishment of his adversaries; 9. Exhortation to obedience; 10. His triumph and thanksgiving.

There is also a paper of arguments in defence of taking up arms in maintenance of the true reformed religion:--From the law of nature. From Divine authority out of God's word. From human authority; Citations from fathers, &c. From reason. From practice of Reformed kirks, France, Holland, Germany, Bohemia, Switzerland, Hungary, and Sweden, which had all taken up arms for defence of religion against authority. From the custom of Kings in Reformed kirks--Elizabeth against Spain--James, in his _Basilicon_, approves reforming of Scotland--Charles sent a naval force to help French Protestants.

[291] I may add the following sentence from _Hook's Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury_, iii. 291:--"The first lawyer whose writings we possess, Bracton, asserts, '_Lex omnium Rex_.' A king not less than a subject may be a traitor."

[292] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 1168.

[293] These papers are given in full by _Rushworth_, iv. 624, 722. They are also to be found in _Neal_, ii. 553, 556, 563, as extracts from _Rushworth_, though much condensed.

[294] _Rushworth_, iv. 733.

[295] In the _Weekly Intelligencer_, October 18, 1642, mention is made of a woman called Moll Cutpurse, who wore both, saying she was for King and Parliament, too.

[296] "_Powers to be resisted_, or a dialogue arguing the Parliament's lawful resistance of the powers now in arms against them, and that archbishops, bishops, curates, neuters, all these are to be cut off by the law of God, therefore to be cast out by the law of the land, etc."--London, 1643. p. 13.

See also John Goodwin's _Anti-cavalierisme_.

That the people have a right to resist their rulers when they do wrong was a common opinion amongst Reformers in Mary's reign. See _Maitland's Essays on Reformation in England_, vi.

[297] All these particulars are mentioned in pamphlets of the King's collection.--British Museum, years 1642, 1643. Marvels and Monsters were rife at the time of the Reformation.--_Maitland's Essays_, 184.

[298] A list of contributors is printed in _Choice Notes, Historical_, p. 55.

[299] Such a contribution from William Bridge and his family is described in the _Yarmouth Corporation Records_.

[300] Baxter assigns a number of reasons which induced godly people to take side with the Parliament.--_Life and Times_, part i. 33. Mrs. Hutchinson, in the _Memoirs_ of her husband, gives amusing sketches of some who joined that party for sinister ends, pp. 105-116. _The Life of Adam Martindale_, p. 31, indicates how Royalists sought shelter amidst Parliamentarians.

[301] It is worthy of remark that Cromwell began his military course at about forty, the same age as that at which Cæsar commenced his victories. Cæsar, however, when a young man, had served in the army, which Cromwell had not. It is a curious parallel that both should have been such successful soldiers after so long an engagement in peaceful occupations. Both died at the age of about fifty-five.

[302] _Rushworth_, v. 39.

[303] A small volume was published containing portions of Scripture, and was entitled _The Souldier's Pocket Bible_.

[304] As to the presence of Roman Catholics in the two armies, the following passages from Baxter and Hallam should be considered:--

Baxter, whose prejudices against the army must be borne in mind when he refers to the subject, only expresses suspicion. "The most among Cromwell's soldiers that ever I could _suspect_ for Papists were but a few that began as strangers among the common soldiers, and by degrees rose up to some inferior offices, and were most conversant with the common soldiers; but none of the superior officers _seemed_ such, though seduced by them."--_Life and Times_, part i. 78.

Hallam leans to the idea that the common reports had some foundation. He remarks: "It is probable that some foreign Catholics were in the Parliament's service. But Dodds says, with great appearance of truth, that no one English gentleman of that persuasion was in arms on their side.--_Church History of England_, iii. 28. He reports, as a matter of hearsay, that out of about 500 gentlemen who lost their lives for Charles in the civil war, 194 were Catholics. They were, doubtless, a very powerful faction in the court and army."--_Hallam's Const. Hist._ i. 587.

[305] _Hibbert's History of Manchester_, i. 210.

[306] "_Some Special Passages from Warwickshire._" _King's Pamphlets, Brit. Mus. Acts and Orders_, i. 124.

[307] _King's Pamphlets, Brit. Mus. Acts and Orders_, ii. 124.

[308] _Rushworth_, iv. 783.

[309] These were commenced by Mr. Case, of St. Mary Magdalen, Milk Street, and afterwards circulated from church to church for the convenience of the citizens.--_Neal_, ii. 592.

[310] Letter of Nehemiah Wharton, dated Aylesbury, August the 16th, 1642. Addressed to his much honoured friend, Mr. George Willingham, Merchant, at the Golden Anchor, Swithin Lane.--_State Papers, Chas. I., Dom._

[311] In a letter, dated September 7, Wharton says of Northampton, for situation, circuit, stateliness of buildings, it exceeds Coventry, but the walls are miserably ruined though the country abounds in mines of stone. He also complains of certain soldiers of his regiment who discovered their base ends by declaring they would surrender their arms unless they received five shillings a man, which they said was promised them monthly by the committee. He alludes further to dissensions between foot and horse soldiers. In another letter he mentions a soldier's winter suit made for him, "edged with gold and silver lace," which he hoped he should never stain but in the blood of a cavalier.

[312] Letter of William Harrison, Berwick, dated 7th Sept., 1642, to his good friend Mr. Thomas Davison, at London.--_State Papers, Chas. I., Dom._

[313] _Whitelocke's Memorials_, 65.

[314] _Rushworth_, v. 35. _Baxter's Life and Times_, part i. 43.

[315] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 1495-1504.

[316] _Whitelocke_, 65. _Sanford's Illustrations_, 535.

[317] _Rushworth_, v. 81.

[318] November 26th.--_Rushworth_, v. 69-71.

[319] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 59.

[320] The speech is printed in the _Harleian Miscellany_, v. 224.

[321] _Calamy's Continuation_, ii. 737.

[322] Edmund Calamy, the popular clergyman of the Commonwealth, was grandfather to the historian of that name.

[323] _The Loyal Satirist.--Somers' Tracts_, vii. 68.

[324] August 3, 1642.--_Rushworth_, v. 388.

[325] _Parl. Hist._, ii. 1465.

[326] On the 20th of January Maynard "spoke very earnestly that we should not abolish the jurisdiction of bishops until we had replaced another government in the Church: which he thought would not be very soon agreed upon, some being for a presbytery, some for an independent government, and others for he knew not what."--_Harl. MSS._, clxiv. p. 1078, A. B. _Sanford's Illustrations_, 550.

[327] See _Commons' Journal_ and _Lords' Journal_.

[328] _Baillie's Letters and Journals_, ii. 58.

[329] _Rushworth_, v. 399-406. The papers were presented in February, 1642-3. The petition bears date 4th of January.

[330] _Memorials_, 67. The safe conduct bears date 28th of January, 1642-3.

[331] _Rushworth_, v. 166-169.

[332] _Hist._, 962.

[333] _Rushworth_, v. 459.

[334] _Baillie's Letters_, ii. 66, 67.

[335] _Letters and Journals_, i. 287.

[336] _Nalson_, ii. 766. Thomas Fuller advocated the calling of a synod.--_Life, by Russell_, 124.

[337] _Rushworth_, v. 337. _Husband_, 208.

"There must be some laymen in the synod, to overlook the clergy, lest they spoil the civil work; just as when the good woman puts a cat into the milk house to kill a mouse, she sends her maid to look after the cat, lest the cat should eat up the cream."--_Selden's Table Talk_, 169.

[338] Hacket, Bishop of Lichfield; Morley, Bishop of Winchester; Nicholson, Bishop of Gloucester; Prideaux, Bishop of Worcester; Reynolds, Bishop of Norwich.

[339] _Calamy's Continuation_, i. 28.--Bancroft, on the authority of Winthrop, says that the colonial Churches of America were invited to send deputies to the Westminster Assembly. But Hooker, of Hartford, "'liked not the business,' and deemed it his duty rather to stay in quiet and obscurity with his people in Connecticut, than to turn propagandist and plead for Independency in England."--_United States_, i. 417. Did Philip Nye seek to strengthen the Independents in the Assembly by inviting brethren from America?

[340] "It was almost implied in the meaning of the word. An 'Œcumenical Synod,' that is an 'Imperial gathering,' from the whole οἰκουμένη, or empire (for this was the technical meaning of the word, even in the Greek of the New Testament) could be convened only by the emperor."--_Stanley's Lectures on the Eastern Church_, 80. The first council of Arles, inferior only to a General Council, was called by the Emperor Constantine.--_Euseb. Hist._, _lib._ x. _c._ v.

[341] The Divines were allowed by the Parliamentary ordinance four shillings a day.

[342] Perhaps some one better versed in the controversy touching powers of Convocation than I am might shew that, after all, the power of decision, and the liberty of discussion in the two Houses, do not far exceed what was allowed to the Westminster Assembly. It is admitted on all hands that Convocation cannot meet without a royal writ, nor make canons without licence, nor publish them without confirmation by the Great Seal, and some contend that Convocation may not even discuss any matters _without royal licence_.--See _Lathbury's History of Convocation_, 112.

While I am revising this book for the press, I find the following in to-day's _Times_, January 11th, 1866: "Convocation is nothing more whatever than a general commission of enquiry into the affairs of the Church empowered to report its opinions to the Crown." Change "Crown" into "Parliament," and this passage describes the Westminster Assembly, so far as its power was concerned.

[343] _Rushworth_, v. 339. It does not appear clearly whether the sermon was delivered in the abbey or the chapel. Rushworth, after mentioning the sermon and the presence of the two Houses, says of the Divines, "After which they assembled in the said chapel:" as if the "Houses" had heard the sermon in some other part of the abbey.

I do not find any notice of Twiss's sermon in the list of his works.

[344] The Upper House of Convocation met in Henry the Seventh's Chapel both in 1572 and in 1640.--_Gibson's Synodus Anglicanus._

[345] Washington Irving.

[346] _Fuller's Church History_, iii. 448.

[347] _Neal_, iii. 60.

[348] _Journal of the Assembly. Lightfoot's Works_, xiii. 3.

[349] This was Mr. John White, of Dorchester, great grandfather of John and Charles Wesley.--See _Kirk's Mother of the Wesleys_, 18.

[350] _Lightfoot_, xiii. 7-9. _Hetherington's History of the Westminster Assembly_, p. 114.

[351] This will be inserted in the Appendix.

[352] _True and faithful Narrative of the Death of Master Hampden_, quoted in _Nugent's Life of Hampden_, 363.

[353] Scarborough church was stormed in 1644 by the Parliament soldiers, and afterwards fortified by them. It is remarkable to find church towers so constructed, as to shew they were intended for warlike purposes. Melsonby and Middleham, in Yorkshire, and Harlestone, in Northamptonshire, are examples.--_Poole's Ecclesiastical Architecture_, 358.

[354] _Joseph Lister's Narrative_, 23. Bradford was taken on the 2nd of July.

[355] _Hist._, 416.

[356] _Rushworth_, v. 287.

[357] _Rushworth_, v. 290. _Calamy's Account_, ii. 675. _Palmer's Non. Con. Mem._ ii. 467.

[358] _Rushworth_, v. 344.

[359] _Sanford's Illustrations_, 575.

[360] _David's Annals of Nonconformity in Essex_, 535.

[361] _Vol._ ii. 103, &c.

[362] Instructions given are inserted in _Parl. Hist._, iii. 151.

[363] _Baillie_, ii. 88, 97.

[364] _Baxter's Life and Times_, p. i. 48.--He adds that this public explication was given by Mr. Coleman, when preaching on the Covenant to the House of Lords: "That by prelacy we mean not all Episcopacy, but only the form which is here described."

On the 12th of September, the Solemn League and Covenant was proposed to the Parliament, who, on the 21st, ordered it to be printed.

On the 20th, the Lords declared that none shall have command till they have taken the Covenant.

[365] _II. Chron._ xv. 12, 14, 15.--The 15th verse is printed with two other texts on the title page of the Solemn League and Covenant, published Sept. 22nd, 1643.

[366] _Cunninghame's History of the Church of Scotland_, i. 315, ii. 81.

[367] The Solemn League and Covenant will be inserted in the Appendix.

[368] _Nye's Exhortation_ was published, and a portion of it, extolling the Covenant, may be seen in _Hanbury's Memorials_, ii. 215.

[369] Gouge was a Puritan divine who died in 1653, after being minister of Blackfriars nearly forty-six years.

[370] In the State Paper Office is the following letter written by Falkland in the spring of the year.

"Sir,--If my health were not so ill as yours, with all my business to boot, I should not hope to be excused for being so slow in giving you thanks for two so great favours. I heartily wish we were in a condition of being able to make use of any good inclinations to us beyond sea, and perhaps they are the kinder, because they find it safe to be so, whilst we are as we are, that is, unable to take them at their words, and make use of their kindness. Of Mr. Wightman's commitment I never heard before I read your letter: the petition for him is in Mr. Secretary's hands, but I will assist it to my power; though I conceive it indiscreetly done of the Company to send so obnoxious a person, and yet more indiscreetly done of him to be sent, who could not but know that he was such. My desire of peace, and my opinion of the way to it, agree wholly with yours, for which I congratulate with myself, and wish the second followed (but both sides must then contribute) that the first might be obtained, and I might then have occasion to congratulate with the kingdom too. His Majesty hath commanded me to let you know that he is very sensible of your present condition, and that he is sorry for nothing more than that his friends (especially so honest and deserving a man) should be in danger for being so, and be not able to protect them, but that if retiring of yourself hither out of their power would stand with your occasions, he assures you, you shall be very welcome, but what to advise you, if you stay, I find he knows not, and I am sure I know as little. I wish, whether you stay or come, it might be in my power to serve you. I assure you, Sir, if there were any occasion of doing it by my readiness to catch at, and my diligence in pursuing it, you should find what I must now desire you to believe, that I am, Sir, your very really humble Servant,

FALKLAND.

"18th April."

(Addressed) "For the Right Honourable Sir Thomas Rowe, Knight, one of His Majesty's most honourable Privy Council."--_Dom. Car._ i., April 18, 1643.

[371] _Rushworth_, v. 486.

[372] _Perfect Diurnal_, 2nd of Sept., 1643.

[373] _Baillie's Letters_, ii. 99, 113-115.

[374] _Rushworth_, v. 358.

[375] "Horses have stood ready in several stables, and almost eaten out their heads, for those that were to go with the news to Oxford."--_Parliament Scout._

[376] The Diurnals which supply these statements are not trustworthy.

[377] Amongst the _State Papers_ is the following programme, or, as it is entituled, "The proceeding" of Mr. Pym's funeral:--

Two Conductors. Servants in Cloaks. Friends in Cloaks. Esquires. Knights. Baronets. Divines. The Preacher. _The Pennon borne by_ Mr. Faulconer. Rouge Dragon _Helm and crest_. Lancaster _Coat of arms_. +---------+ | | | The | Supporters | | to the Pal | Body. | | | Mr. Anth. Rous, _supporter_. | | Mr. Chas. Pym, _supporter_. +---------+ Mr. Alex. Pym, _chief mourner_. Mr. Simons and Mr. Nicholls. Mr. Askew. Mrs. Symons and Mrs. Katherine Pym, and other Ladies and Gentlemen. Then the Lords. Then the Speaker of the House of Commons.

An endorsement shews that the three officers of arms allowed by the committee for this funeral were appointed £20 apiece, making a sum of £60. The following names also appear on the back of the document: Mr. Solicitor, Sir Arthur Haslerigge, Sir John Clotworthy, Mr. Knightley, Sir Gilbert Gerard, Sir Harry Vane, Mr. Stroud. Probably all these were present.

[378] Pym defended himself against imputations on his religious character, by saying that he had ever been a faithful son to the Protestant religion, without the least relation in his belief to the gross errors of Anabaptism or Brownism. He had sought a reformation of the Church of England--but not its overthrow. Neither envy nor private grudge against the bishops, who were personally inimical to him, made him averse to their functions, but only his zeal for religion, which he saw injured by the too extended authority of the prelates, who should have been upright and humble, "shearing their flocks and not flaying them."--_Rushworth_, v. 378.

Marshall in his _Sermon_ and Baxter in his _Saint's Rest_ would not have spoken of Pym as they did, had they not been satisfied that charges against his moral character were utterly untrue. Marshall includes chastity in the catalogue of his virtues. I can find no proof of anything improper in his intimacy with the Countess of Carlisle. For extracts from _Marshall's Sermons_, and the _Diurnals_, see _Forster's British Statesmen_, vol. ii. 294-302.

[379] Baillie says: "The plottings are incessant."--_Letters and Journals_, ii. 132.

[380] This is stated in a curious book, called _Magnalia Dei Anglicana; or, England's Parliamentary Chronicle_, by John Vicars, part iii., entitled _God's Ark Overtopping the World's Waves_, 135. A full account of these plots is given from the writer's own point of view. Vicars was a violent Presbyterian, and his book is full of party prejudice and curious information. Baillie notices these plots pretty fully, ii. 137.

[381] Mr. Nye and Mr. Goodwin entered into conference with Ogle only that they might entrap him. In the Journal of the House of Commons, January 26th, 1643-4, it is recorded "that Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Nye, with the privity of my Lord General and some members of the House, had conference with Ogle--Resolved, 'that it doth appear upon the whole matter, that the King and his council at Oxford do endeavour and embrace all ways to raise and ferment divisions betwixt us and our brethren of Scotland, and amongst ourselves under the fair pretences of easing tender consciences; that during these fair pretences their immediate design was the ruin of the kingdom by the destroying and burning the magazines thereof; that thanks be returned to Mr. Nye and Mr. Goodwin from both Houses.'" We learn from Baillie, ii. 137, that _John_ Goodwin is the person here intended.

[382] _State Papers_, April 13, 1651. Bundle 646. Ogle is here styled "Colonel."

[383] _Vicars' Chronicle_, iii.

[384] _Vicars' Chronicle_, iii. 128, _Baillie_, ii. 134, and _Perfect Diurnal_. In the _Perfect Diurnal_ of Thursday, June 19th, 1645, there is an account of another City feast. After dinner, and grace said by Mr. Marshall, both Houses of Parliament, the Assembly of Divines, the Aldermen of the City, and all the rest being assembled in the hall, they sung the 46th Psalm, and after that they departed.

[385] Mr. Bruen, of Tarvin, in the Deanery of Chester, an eminent Puritan (born 1560, died 1625) "the phœnix of his age," distinguished himself as an iconoclast. Finding in his own chapel superstitious images, and idolatrous pictures in the painted windows, and they so thick and dark that there was, as he himself says, "scarce the breadth of a groat of white glass amongst them," took orders to pull them down, indeed by the Queen's injunctions utterly to extinguish and destroy all pictures, paintings, and other monuments of idolatry and superstition, so that there might remain no memory of the same in the walls, glass windows, or elsewhere within their churches and houses. The Bible and ecclesiastical history are appealed to as further authorities. _Theodosius abscondit simulacra gentium, omnes enim cultus idolorum cultus ejus abscondit; omnes eorum ceremonias obliteravit. Ambrosii Orat. in Mort. Theo._--See _Hinde's Life of Bruen_.

[386] _Rushworth_, v. 358.

[387] _Oct 3. P. Diurnal._ "The Commons, for the better taking away of superstitious ceremonies in churches, as in wearing the surplice and the like; which they had noticed (notwithstanding all former orders) was still used in sundry places--especially at the Abbey of Westminster--agreed in a further order, for the taking away of all copes and surplices, belonging to the said Abbey of Westminster, and to forbid the wearing of them in that or any other church or cathedral in England."

[388] Laud was at work upon the restoration of St. Paul's in 1640, "the whole body was finished with Portland stone excellent against all smoke and weather, and the tower scaffolded up to the top with purpose to take it all down and to rebuild it more fair." After his apprehension "the scaffolds were taken away and sold, with some of the lead which covered this famous structure."--_Chamberlayne's Anglica Notitia_, part ii. 155.

In the State Paper Office there is a document by Montague, Bishop of Chichester, containing an exhortation to the clergy of his diocese, giving thirteen reasons for their contributing to the fund for repairing the Cathedral of St. Paul. He dwells upon the dignity of St. Paul's as, in a sort, the mother church of the kingdom, and stimulates the persons addressed to liberality by a consideration of what was done by their predecessors.--_Calendar_, 1633-4, 384.

[389] _1643, May 27._--Resolved, an ordinance for borrowing the plate in all cathedrals superstitiously used upon their altars.

_1644, April 24._--Ordered, the mitre and crosier staff found in St. Paul's Church to be forthwith sold, and the brass and iron in Henry the Seventh's Chapel.--_Parry's Councils and Parliaments._

Whatever was now done in St. Paul's, worse things had been done there and elsewhere at the time of the Reformation.--See _Strype's Cranmer_, i. 251. Besides spoiling, embezzling, and taking away ornaments, he says, "they used also commonly to bring horses and mules into and through churches, and shooting off hand guns." It should be recollected, that the Puritans of the seventeenth century were familiar with such memories, and that reverence for sacred places had long been on the decline.

[390] Corporation Records in the Guildhall.

[391] _Hard Measure_, prefixed to _Hall's Works_, p. xviii. The proceedings at Norwich were of an infamous description, yet more shameful acts had been perpetrated by the Roman Catholic fathers of these very citizens. In 1272, we are told "_Quam plures de familia, aliquos subdiacanos, aliquos clericos, aliquos laicos in claustro et infra septa monasterii interfecerunt; aliquos extraxerunt et in civitate morti tradiderunt, aliquos incarceraverunt. Post quæ ingressi, omnia sacra vasa, libros, aurum, et argentum, vestes et omnia alia quæ non fuerunt igne consumpta depradati fuerunt: monachos omnes, præter duos vel tres, a monasterio fugantes._"--_Anglia Sacra_, i. 399.

[392] The following appears in the records of the Norwich Corporation: "Ordered that the churchwardens shall demolish the stump cross at St. Saviour's, and take the stones thereof for the use of the city."

[393] _Calamy's Abridgment of Baxter_, 24.

[394] _Memoirs of Colonel Hutchinson_, p. 80.

[395] This was in spite of orders "to do no injury to the church." Before these wars the cathedral suffered through neglect, as appears from a draft letter written by Archbishop Laud to the dean and chapter, in the name of the King, complaining that the dotations and allowances were very mean, and that there was "little left to keep so goodly a fabric in sufficient reparation."--_State Papers, Domestic_. (undated) vol. cclxxxi. 57.

[396] Mr. Britton asserts that numbers were removed when the cathedral underwent repairs in 1786. Two tons of brass were taken to the brazier's shop.--_Winkle's Cathedrals_, iii. 43.

[397] _Poole's History of Ecclesiastical Architecture_, p. 260.

All the mutilation of statues must not be put down to the Puritan account, nor the destruction of the mosaic pavement in the choir. "One half of its eastern border was entirely destroyed when the altar-piece was put up at the commencement of the last century." The rest but narrowly escaped.--_Neale's History and Antiquities of Westminster Abbey_, p. 20.

Oliver Cromwell has been charged with despoiling the tomb of Henry V., but we read in _Stowe's Annals_: "A royal image of silver and gilt was laid upon his tomb, which Queen Catherine his wife caused to be made for him; but about the latter end of King Henry VIII., the head of the king's image being of massy silver, was broken off and conveyed clean away, with the plates of silver and gilt that covered his body." p. 363.

It is a common story amongst cathedral vergers, that Cromwell turned churches into stables. Like stories are told in the East, with judgments superadded. "It was related to us by our Tartar, that about fifty years ago, Tamr Pasha turned the church into a stable, _and next morning all his horses were found dead_."--_Badger's Nestorians_, i. 68.

[398] It appears from the following entry that when the wars were over, the cathedral was desecrated by being made a prison. "That a letter be written to the Mayor of Salisbury, to let him know that the Council are informed that the Dutch prisoners who were lately sent to the town, to be kept there, have done much spoil upon the pillars of the cloisters, and to the windows of the library there, being committed to custody in that place, and also that by reason that due care hath not been had over them, some of them have escaped, &c." _October 10, 1653._--_State Papers, Order Book of Council._

[399] Again we may remark that like excesses had been committed in Roman Catholic times. In the annals of Rochester, 1264, we find: "_Portæ, siquidem, ejus circumquque exustæ sunt, chorus ejus in luctum, et organa ejus in vocem flentium sunt concitata. Quid pluras, loca sacra, utpote oratoria, claustra, capitulum infirmaria, et oracula quæque divina, stabula equorum sunt effecta; et animalium immunditiis spurcitiisque cadaverum ubique sunt repleta._"--_Anglia Sacra_, i. 351.

After the Reformation Ridley was prevented from giving Grindal a prebend in St. Paul's by the King's Council, who had bestowed it on the King, for the furniture of his stable.--_Blunt's History of the Reformation_, 244.

In 1561, according to Strype, the south aisle of the cathedral was used for a horse fair.

[400] _Rushworth_, v. 476.

Instructions were given for the taking of the Covenant throughout the kingdom, "the manner of the taking it to be thus:--The minister to read the whole Covenant distinctly and audibly in the pulpit, and during the time of the reading thereof the whole congregation to be uncovered; and at the end of his reading thereof, all to take it standing, lifting up their right hands bare, and then afterwards to subscribe it severally by writing their names (or their marks, to which their names are to be added) in a parchment roll or a book, whereinto the Covenant is to be inserted, purposely provided for that end, and kept as a record in the parish."--_Husband's Collection_, 421.

[401] _Husband's Coll._, 416.

[402] _Neal_, iii. 81.

[403] _Husband's Coll._, 404.

[404] In the State Paper Office are additional instructions, (dated March 6th, 1643-4,) to the Earl of Rutland, Sir W. Armyn, Bart., Sir H. Vane, and others, to declare to our brethren of Scotland that the Parliament have settled a course for taking the late Solemn League and Covenant throughout this kingdom and dominion of Wales, "we do hereby give you full power and authority by yourselves, or such as you shall appoint, to cause the said League and Covenant to be taken throughout the several places and counties where you shall come."

Vane, on the scaffold, said, respecting the Covenant: "The holy ends therein contained I fully assent to, and have been as desirous to observe; but the rigid way of prosecuting it and the oppressing uniformity that hath been endeavoured by it, I never approved."

Wood states, (_Ath. Ox._, ii. 84), that Strode made a motion to the effect, "that all those that refused the Covenant, (being certain ill-wishers to the laws and liberties of this kingdom,) might, therefore, have no benefit of those laws and liberties." He adds, "that motion being somewhat too desperate, was waived for the present, and took no effect."

[405] See _Sermon on Solemn League and Covenant, by Saltmarsh_.--_Tracts in Brit. Mus._, vol. 253.

[406] These also are in the British Museum; I think in the same volume as the former.

[407] Bishop Hall went on ordaining Episcopal clergymen in spite of the Covenant. He says: "The synodals both in Norfolk and Suffolk, and all the spiritual profits of the diocese were also kept back, only ordinations and institutions continued awhile. But after the Covenant was appointed to be taken, and was generally swallowed of both clergy and laity, my power of ordination was with some strange violence restrained; for when I was going on in my wonted course, which no law or ordinance had inhibited, certain forward volunteers in the city, banding together, stir up the mayor, and aldermen, and sheriffs, to call me to an account for an open violation of their Covenant."--_Hard Measure, Hall's Works_, p. xvii.

[408] _Memoirs of the Life of Col. Hutchinson_, 143-191.

[409] _Mant's History of the Church of Ireland_, i. 580.

[410] Eusebius observes, in his Epistle respecting the Nicene Creed, that he and his friends did not refuse to adopt the word ὁμοούσιος, "_peace being the end in view_, as well as the not falling away from sound doctrine." He excused the damnatory clause, simply on the ground that it aggrieved none by prohibiting the use of unscriptural phraseology.--_Socrates' Ecc. Hist._, b. i. c. 8.

[411] "Epistle" by John Canne, quoted in _Hanbury's Memorials_, iii. 380-386.

The following passage occurs in a paper by the Dissenting Brethren in 1646, also quoted in _Hanbury_, iii. 62:--"This Covenant was professedly so attempered in the first framing of it, as that we of different judgments might take it, both parties being present at the framing of it in Scotland." "It is as free for us to give our interpretation of the latitude or nearness of uniformity intended, as for our brethren."

[412] The following passages illustrate the state of public feeling in reference to the Covenant:--

"Men cry shame on the Covenant. Those that took it down cast it up again, and those that refuse it have given a world of arguments that it is unreasonable, which arguments our Assembly, like dull, ignorant rascals, never answered. I know, my Lords, many of our friends never took this oath, but they refused it out of mere conscience." ... "I hold the Covenanters extremely reasonable. Though some malignants take it, yet many refuse it; and, as some who love us do hate the Covenant, so some who hate us do take it. Yet our friends who hate it do love to force others to it, for their hatred to malignants is more than to the Covenant; and, as the one takes it to save his estate, so do others give it to make him lose his estate. They both love the estate, and both hate the Covenant."--_A learned Speech spoken in the House of Peers by the Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery upon the 28th July last, taken out of Michael Ouldsworth's own Copy. State Papers, 1647._

"All this while I did not take the National Covenant, not because I refused to do, for I would have made no bones to take, swear, and sign it, and observe it too, for I had then a principle, having not yet studied a better one, that I wronged not my conscience in doing any thing I was commanded to do by those whom I served. But the truth is, it was never offered to me, every one thinking it was impossible I could get any charge, unless I had taken the Covenant either in Scotland or England."--_Sir James Turner's Memoirs of his own Life and Times, published by the Bannatyne Club_, 16.

Turner was a Royalist.

[413] _Journals._, Sept. 21st.--It was resolved by the Commons: That the Assembly of godly Divines, who, by Ordinance, July 1st, 1643, met in King Henry the Seventh's Chapel, shall, in respect of the coldness of the said chapel, have power to adjourn themselves to the Jerusalem Chamber, in the College of Westminster.

[414] For some of this information I am indebted to the kindness of the Dean of Westminster.

[415] _Baillie's Letters_, ii. 108, 109.

[416] This is stated on the authority of _Brook's Lives_, iii. 15. His account of Twiss's illness is confused, so is _Clark's_ (_Lives_, p. 17,) to which Brook refers.

[417] As Erastianism is a word vaguely used, I subjoin the principal theses in the _Book on Excommunication_, by Erastus, and his own account of the occasion of his writing it.

"Excommunication is nothing else but a public and solemn exclusion from the sacraments, especially the Lord's Supper, after an investigation by the elders."--Thesis viii.

"In the Old Testament none were debarred from the sacraments on account of immorality of conduct."--Thesis xxiii.

"Christ did not hinder Judas, who betrayed Him, from eating the paschal lamb."--Thesis xxviii.

"It is not the will of Christ that His kingdom in these lands should be circumscribed within narrower limits than He appointed for it anciently amongst the Jews."--Thesis xxxi.

"As in the account given of the celebration of the sacraments we see no mention is made of excommunication, so neither in the history of their institution can anything warranting that practice be discovered."--Thesis xxxvii.

"'Tell it to the church' means nothing else than tell it to the magistrate of thy own people."--Thesis lii.

"I see no reason why the Christian magistrate at the present day should not possess the same power which God commanded the magistrate to exercise in the Jewish commonwealth."--Thesis lxxii.

"If then the Christian magistrate possesses not only authority to settle religion according to the directions given in the Holy Scriptures, and to arrange the ministries thereof, but also, in like manner, to punish crimes, in vain do some among us now meditate the setting up of a new kind of tribunal, which would bring down the magistrate himself to the rank of a subject of other men."--Thesis lxxiv.

According to Erastus, an ignorant man, a heretic, or an apostate should be excluded from the sacraments. But sins were to be punished by the civil magistrate.

The theses were handed about in MS., and not published till 1589--six years after the death of the author--with only the fictitious name "Pesclavii," 1589. The work was reprinted at Amsterdam, in 1649. Two old English translations exist, published in 1659 and 1682. There is a modern one by Rev. R. Lee, D.D., Edinburgh, 1844.

The occasion of writing the theses, Erastus says, was a proposition that a select number of elders should sit in the name of the whole church, and judge who were fit to be admitted to the Lord's Supper, which he thought would introduce dangerous divisions.

Theodore Beza wrote a reply, published at Geneva, 1590. Selden's views of excommunication in his _Table Talk_ (p. 56) are similar to those of Erastus, though not so full.

Hobbes wrote his _Leviathan_ in 1651, in which he says (pt. iii., ch. 42, p. 287, London edition), "The books of the New Testament, though most perfect _rules_ of Christian doctrine, could not be made _laws_ by any other authority than that of kings or sovereign assemblies." His doctrine with regard to Christianity is, that socially considered it is "good and safe advice," but not obligatory law till the government of a country shall make it so. This part of the philosopher's theory runs on the same line with Erastianism, only it is pushed further.

[418] Altogether there were ten or eleven Independents in the Assembly. Baillie mentions Goodwin, Nye, Burroughs, Bridge, Carter, Caryl, Philips, and Sterry.--_Letters, &c._, ii. 110.

[419] His works have been recently republished. His _Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians_ illustrates what is said here.

[420] See _The Wounded Conscience Cured, &c.,_ by William Bridge, 1642.

[421] Baillie remarks: "Liberty of conscience, and toleration of all or any religion, is so prodigious an impiety, that this religious Parliament cannot but abhor the very naming of it. Whatever may be the opinions of John Goodwin, Mr. Williams, and some of that stamp, yet Mr. Burroughs, in his late _Irenicum_, upon many unanswerable arguments, explodes that abomination."--See _Tracts on Liberty of Conscience_, 270.

[422] Neal says he died of consumption (_Hist._, iii. 377), but the following appears in the _Perfect Occurrences_, 13th November, 1646:--"This day Mr. Burrows, the minister, a godly, reverend man, died. It seems he had a bruise by a fall from a horse some fortnight since; he fell into a fever, and of that fever died, and is by many godly people much lamented."

[423] P. 190.

[423] I do not attempt to vindicate this great man against the charge of inconsistency. One side of a subject was everything to him while he gazed at it. He had no faculty for harmonizing apparently opposite truths, and was apt, as ardent men are, to fall into errors, from which his clearly expressed opinion on certain points ought to have saved him. Mr. Hallam (_Literature of Europe_, iii. 112), in whose severe judgment of Taylor's inconsistency I cannot coincide, thinks that one inconsistent chapter, (the seventeenth) was interpolated after the rest of the treatise was complete. This is possible, but it is also possible that Taylor when first writing his book might suddenly swing from one side to the other, and then come round again. It has been said that Taylor forgot his liberality when he became a bishop. His biographer, Bishop Heber, attempts to meet this charge.--_Works_, i. 30. It may be added, that the _Dissuasive from Popery_, published in 1664, proceeds on the same principles as the _Liberty of Prophesying_. See _Dissuasive_, part ii. book i.--_Works_, x. 383.

How Taylor's work was regarded by a Royalist and an Episcopalian may be seen in _Mrs. Sadleir's Letter to Roger Williams_. "I have also read Taylor's book of the _Liberty of Prophesying_, though it please not me, yet I am sure it does you, or else I know you would not have wrote to me to have read it. I say, it and you would make a good fire. But have you seen his 'Divine Institution of the Office Ministerial?'" _Life of Roger Williams_, 99. Mrs. Sadleir was daughter of Sir Edward Coke. A writer in the _Ecclesiastic_, April, 1853, p. 179, remarks: "Whatever Taylor may have been thought of since, certainly his contemporaries amongst the Church party had no very high opinion of him."

[425] Sermon preached before the House of Commons, March 31st, 1647.

[426] _Ward's Life of Henry More_, 171. I have here confined myself to those in the Church of England who advocated toleration, pointing out the grounds which they adopted as distinguished from those occupied by the Independents. Others, who proceeded in the same advocacy on the broadest principles of justice, will be hereafter noticed, _i.e._, John Goodwin, Leonard Busher, and Sir Henry Vane. Of the last of these it may be remarked that so early as 1637 he used this memorable language, in New England: "Scribes and Pharisees, and such as are confirmed in any way of error, all such are not to be denied cohabitation, but are to be pitied and reformed; Ishmael shall dwell in the presence of his brethren." (_Bancroft's United States_, i. 390.) The most thorough advocate of intellectual liberty in the New World was Roger Williams, who, though in many respects an impracticable man, and wanting in catholicity of spirit, appears to have been an original and intrepid champion for the political independence of theological opinions, as well as a noble minded and disinterested leader in colonial enterprise. Milton advocates toleration in his _Areopagitica_, a speech to the Parliament of England for the liberty of unlicensed printing, 1644. Harrington's _Political Aphorisms_, in which liberty of conscience is justly placed on a political basis, was not published until 1659. Episcopius and Crellius were early advocates for toleration. See Hallam's Introduction to _Literature of Europe_, iii. 103, 104.

[427] _Const. Hist._, i. 612.

[428] The petition is largely quoted by Waddington in his _Surrey Congregational History_, p. 32, and the pamphlet, entitled _Queries of Highest Consideration_, is quoted in _Hanbury_, ii. 246.

[429] For proofs and illustrations of this we refer to our second volume. In the meanwhile we may observe that in _An Attestation_, published by the Cheshire ministers in 1648, allusion is made to some of the Independents as "averse in a great measure to such a toleration as might truly be termed intolerable and abominable"--meaning by that universal toleration.--_Nonconformity in Cheshire._ Introduction, xxvi.

[430] _Life of Goodwin, by Jackson_, 93.

[431] _A Reply of Two of the Brethren to A. S._, 1644. Quoted by Jackson, p. 116. Goodwin states "that the part which treats of religious liberty was the production of his own pen."--_Jackson_, 57.

[432] Baillie, writing to Mr. Spang, May 17th, 1644, (_Letters_,