Chapter XXX: Appendix: I.--Vol. I. 137 (3)

[11] _Scobell_, 40. One hundred pounds a year at that time was a large salary. It must have been as good as five hundred now, seeing that Sir Henry Slingsby kept an establishment of thirty servants on £500 per annum.--_Brodie's British Empire_, iv. 245.

[12] _Cromwell's Letters and Speeches_, i. 435. _Whitelocke_, 399.

[13] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1305.

[14] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1323, _et seq._

[15] _Scobell_, 104.

[16] _Ibid._, 111.

[17] April 5, 1650. _Scobell_, 111.

[18] _Ibid._, 119.

[19] _Scobell_, 123. In the Windsor churchwardens' accounts for 1652-3 there are several entries of persons fined for swearing.--_Annals of Windsor_, ii. 268.

[20] _Scobell_, 124. Milton praises this Act in his Treatise of Civil Power in Ecclesiastical Causes.--_Political Works_, i. 548.

[21] _Scobell_, 121. May 10, 1650. The _Parliamentary History_, vol. iii. 1347, states that on the 7th of June a bill was ordered to be read on the Friday evening ensuing against the vice of painting, the wearing of black patches, and the immodest dresses of women. But no mention is made of it in the Journal of that day nor in _Scobell's Acts_.

[22] _Scobell_, 131.

[23] From the same register may be added a few extracts illustrative of collections made at church in those times:--

"Divers ministers, and other distressed families, driven into the straitened garrison of Pembroke, and several imprisonments, most of them under the Earl of Carbery first, and now at last undergone the loss of all that they had by General Gerrard, only escaping with their lives, 1645. (Collected 8s. 10d.)

"Poor Protestants driven out of Ireland. 1647. (Collected on the thanksgiving-day for God's great blessing upon the Parliament's forces in Munster, under Lord Inchiquin, 5s.)

"John Cheynell, late minister of Beedon, Bucks, who had been continually plundered by both armies, 'and had lost two sons, gracious young men, cruelly murdered, himself having been sequestered by false information,' 1652. (Collected 15s. 8½d.)

"Mr. Philip Dandelo, a Turk by nation, by profession a Mahometan by God's gracious providence and mercy converted to the Christian faith, by the endeavours of Dr. Wild, Dr. Warmester, Mr. Christopher, and Dr. Gunning, 1661. (Collected 5s. 8d.)"--_Lyson's Environs_, iv. 285.

[24] _Letters and Journals_, iii. 66.

[25] _Baillie_, iii. 69, 74, 79.

[26] _Letters and Journals_, iii. 84-88.

"Dr. Bramble, of Derry, has printed the other day, at Delf, a wicked pamphlet against our Church. We have no time, nor do we think it fit to print an answer." The pamphlet was written by Bramhall, Bishop of Derry, entitled "A Fair Warning to take heed of the Scottish Discipline," and may be seen in his _Works_, iii. 237. Notwithstanding the remark just quoted, a reply appeared, entitled: "A Review of Doctor Bramble, late Bishop of Londonderry; his Fair Warning against the Scotch Discipline," by R. B. G., printed at Delf, 1649.

The following letter preserved amongst the _State Papers_ (Commonwealth, _Dom._) is worth introducing here:--

Most dear brother--We have not any news concerning Rupert the Devil, unless what comes out in print. No man receives any letter from you. My brother, the Prince Elector, is now here, and cares no more for those cursed people in England, for he hath done his duty to the King, which otherwise he might have avoided by reason of the affairs which required him at Cleare. Here, also, are the Scotch Commissioners, who every day bring some new proposal to the King, full of impertinency, for they would not that the King should keep about him any honest man, for which they are in great favour with the Princess of Orange, who declares herself much for the Presbyterians, and says that Percy is the honestest man the King has about him. But I believe you care not much to know the intricacies here, for which cause I shall not trouble you further, besides that you have other business to do than reading letters, only I entreat you to take notice.--I remain your affectionate sister and servant,

Sophia.

A Mons. le Prince Rupert, April 13th, 1649.

[27] _State Papers, Dom., Commonwealth._ 5th of March, 1649-50. Certain names are mentioned in the paper as desirable to be added to the King's Council.

[28] In the paper it is stated that arms and ammunition were already forwarded to the Scilly Isles for the purpose proposed.

There is a letter amongst the State Papers connected with this document and interlined with sympathetic ink, which interlining speaks of submitting to the engagement as necessary for his Majesty's service. It contains a request that his pleasure might be privately intimated with respect to religious parties generally.

[29] Erroneously placed under the month of May. The day is obliterated.

[30] _State Papers Dom. Interreg._ The last portion within brackets has been added by a later hand.

[31] To Sir E. Nicholas, from Mr. Nicholson, 1650, June 2, Jersey.--_State Papers Dom., Interreg._

[32] _State Papers_, under date, _Dom., Interreg._

[33] _Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, by Carlyle_, 20, 28.

[34] _Carlyle_, ii. 58, 64.

[35] _Letters and Journals_, iii. 112.

[36] An account of the coronation is given in _Baillie's Letters and Journals_, iii. 128.

[37] See _Cunningham's History of the Church of Scotland_, ii. 167, 168.

The following passages from Sir J. Turner's _Memoirs_ throw light on the hypocrisy of this period:--

"Glasgow, being a considerable town, was most refractory to this Parliament; for Mr. Dick, whom they looked upon as a patriarch, Mr. Baillie, Mr. Gillespie, and Mr. Durhame, all mighty members of the Kirk of Scotland, had preached them to a perfect disobedience of all civil power, except such as was authorized by the General Assembly and Commission of the Kirk: and so, indeed, was the whole west of Scotland, who cried up King Christ and the kingdom of Jesus Christ, thereby meaning the uncontrollable and unlimited dominion of the then Kirk of Scotland, to whom they thought our Saviour had delivered over His sceptre, to govern His militant Church as they thought fit." (Page 53.)

"About this time, the monstrous Remonstrance was hatched; and if Lambert had not, by good fortune to us all, beaten Colonel Ker at Hamilton, I believe the King had been just as safe at St. Johnston as his father was at Westminster. The desperate condition of affairs moved some of the best natured of the Presbyterian clergy to think of some means to bring as many hands to fight against the public enemy as was possible; and therefore, notwithstanding all their acts of Assemblies and Commissions of the Kirk to the contrary, they declared all capable of charge in state or militia who would satisfy the Church by a public acknowledgment of their repentance for their accession to that sinful and unlawful engagement. The King commanded all who had a mind to serve him to follow the Church's direction in this point. Hereupon, Duke Hamilton, the Earls of Crawford and Lauderdale, with many others, were admitted to Court, and numbers of officers re-assured and put in charge, and entrusted with new levies. My guilt in affronting the ministry (as they called it), in the person of Mr. Dick, at Glasgow, and my other command in the west, retarded my admission very long; but at length I am absolved, and made Adjutant-General of the Foot, and, after the unfortunate encounter at Inverkeithing, had once more Lieutenant-General Holburn's regiment given me by his Majesty's command. Behold a fearful sin! The ministers of the Gospel regard all our repentances as unfeigned, though they knew well enough they were but counterfeit; and we, on the other hand, made no scruple to declare that Engagement to be unlawful and sinful, deceitfully speaking against the dictates of our own consciences and judgments. If this was not to mock the all-knowing and all-seeing God to His face, then I declare myself not to know what a fearful sin hypocrisy is." (Page 94.)

[38] _Clarendon's History of the Rebellion_, 759.

[39] The loyal Lancashire Presbyterians refused to join the Earl of Derby, because he would not take the Covenant and dismiss all Papists.--_Hibbert's Manchester_, i. 400.

[40] _State Papers, Dom., Chas. II., Calendar by Mrs. Green_, 1660-1661, Preface, xiii. These are Annesley's own words. It is difficult, however, to reconcile all he says with his sermon before the House of Commons in 1648; but then it was very difficult to be consistent in those days.

[41] The following entries appear in the Council Book:--

"7th May.--That it be referred to the Committee appointed for the examining of the London ministers to send for Mr. Jenkins according as they shall have occasion, and to examine him upon such matter as they shall have before them; the Council being satisfied, upon a certificate of the physicians, that he may be brought without prejudice to his health; and they are likewise to send for such other persons as they shall find concerned in that business, and examine them concerning the same, and report the state of the whole matter to the Council.

"10th May.--That Mr. W. Jenkins be committed close prisoner to the Tower, for high treason, &c." (This was William Jenkyn, lecturer at Blackfriars, and author of _An Exposition on the Epistle of Jude_.) "That he may speak to Dr. Dwight, Dr. Guarden, or Dr. Pagett, all or any of them, concerning his health, if he shall think fit.

"That Mr. Massey be committed close prisoner to the Tower of London, for high treason, in keeping correspondence with the enemies of the Commonwealth, and endeavouring to subvert the Government thereof, and in order to his further examination and trial, according to law.

"That Mr. Christopher Love be also committed prisoner to the Tower, in like manner, for the like crime.

"That Mrs. Jenkins, Mrs. Case, Mrs. Love, and Mrs. Drake, be permitted to come and abide with their husbands, now prisoners in the Tower, notwithstanding their close imprisonment.

"12th May.--That they shall have liberty to visit their husbands, provided they speak not to them but only in the presence and within the hearing of the Lieutenant of the Tower, or such, by his appointment, as he will answer for.

"10th June, 1651.--That it be referred to the Committee for Examinations to send for, in safe custody, and at such time as they shall think fit, the persons hereafter named, viz.: Mr. Jackson, Mr. Nolton, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Cawton, Mr. Blackmore, Mr. Herrick, Mr. Haviland, Mr. Watson, Mr. Crauford, Col. Souton, Lieut.-Col. Jackson, Mr. Cawdry, and to examine them concerning their having had a hand in the London conspiracy, and to report to the Council their several examinations, when they shall be taken."

Baxter, at this time, refused to keep the humiliation and thanksgiving days appointed by Government, and preached so as plainly to shew he disapproved of their proceedings. This brought him into suspension. He says: "My own hearers were all satisfied with my doctrine, but the Committee-men look sour; but let me alone. And the soldiers said I was so like to Love that I would not be right till I was shorter by the head. Yet none of them ever meddled with me further than by the tongue." He adds that he was never forbidden to preach but once, and that was an assize sermon.--_Life and Times_, i. 67.

[42] The letter is dated "from the Tower of London, August 22nd, 1651, the day of my glorification," and is preserved, with others from which we have quoted, in _Love's Name lives_. London, 1651.

Eachard tells a story of Cromwell having written to the Parliament, recommending Love's reprieve on security for good behaviour, and of the letter being stolen by some cavaliers.--_Hist. of England_, ii. 706.

[43] After the dissolution of the Long Parliament, Cromwell was supreme.

The following extract is curious, as indicating that when he had all power in his own hands, he must have connived at the revival of old church customs: "Living here, in the churchyard of St. Margaret's, in Westminster, which was the church proper to the Parliament, for here they kept their thanksgivings, their humiliations, and all other their solemnities; whereas in their time the font was pulled down, and so continued demolished and in ruins, it is now set up again in a most decent and comely manner; and I hope it will be an example for other churches to follow; so likewise they had a very solemn perambulation in Rogation week, according to the old manner, which had been omitted during the sitting of Parliament; and holidays begin to be kept."--From the _Dedication to Goodman's Two Great Mysteries_. June 4th, 1653.

[44] Quoted in _Forster's English Statesmen_, v. 139.

Thurloe gives one of the replies, dated 13th May, 1653. The Dutch deputies say, in a letter of the 12th of August, 1653, that "the Independent party" are spread through all England under the name of gathered churches. The word "Independent" was often used in a very wide and general sense.--_Thurloe's State Papers_, i. 395.

[45] _The Broadmead Records_, 43. A strong feeling against Cromwell and his policy is manifest throughout. The writer was evidently a prejudiced sort of person.

[46] Whitelocke observes that "it was much wondered at by some that these gentlemen, many of them being persons of fortune and knowledge, would, at this summons, and from these hands, take upon them the supreme authority of the nation." _Memorials_, 559.

[47] _Carlyle_, 187-217. _Foster_, v. 148-164.

[48] _Exact Relation. Somers' Tracts._

[49] Notices of these persons may be found in _Noble's Lives of the Regicides_--not, however, a trustworthy book. The account of Tomlinson is very meagre.

[50] The Act was passed August 24th, 1653.--_Scobell_, 236. Mr. Forster, in his _Statesmen_, v. 195, informs us on the authority of the compilers of the _Parliamentary History_, that in the debates on this marriage law, it was proposed but not passed, "That if any person then married or to be married according to this Act, should make proof by one or more credible witness upon oath, that either the husband or wife had committed the detestable sin of adultery during such marriage, then the said parties might be divorced by the sentence of three justices of the peace." In _Cobbett's Parliamentary History_, iii. 1413, however, no notice is taken of this circumstance.

[51] Baxter mentions that Mr. Tallents, of Shrewsbury, and other clergymen, married persons in the presence of a magistrate, the magistrate only declaring that it was a legal union.--_Calamy's Life of Baxter_, 67.

[52] See _Commons' Journals_, under dates.

There is, under date 26th of August, 1653, in the _Council Order Book_, the following entry:--"That the draft of the Act for the abolishing of all rural prebends, which was in the hands of F. Chas. Wolseley to be reported to the Parliament, be humbly reported to the Parliament by Mr. Laurence." No such Act appears in _Scobell_.

[53] See _Exact Relation_ and _New Narrative of the Dissolution_, and _Forster's Statesmen of the Commonwealth_, v. 218.

_Thurloe's State Papers_ furnish illustrations of the difference of opinion in the Short Parliament, i. 368, 386, 387, 393.

[54] _Commons' Journal_, December 2, 1653.

[55] _Exact Relation._

[56] We have endeavoured impartially to set down such facts as can be ascertained in reference to these important proceedings. What was done by the Little Parliament, or any other Parliament, in no wise affects the question as to the Scriptural mode of supporting religion. Many readers will have reached their own conclusions on that point. Some may believe the Bible favours the civil establishment of the Church; others that an establishment of this kind is inconsistent with the teaching and spirit of primitive Christianity. The author does not scruple to say that the latter is his opinion, though he has jealously watched lest the fact should prejudice any of his statements.

The above narrative points to the difficulties surrounding the controversy, when lifted out of the sphere of abstract truth, as studied by divines and philosophers in their closets, into the arena of political and financial debate; where practical men have to deal not only with first principles, or even with statute laws and long established usages; but also with a large amount of property which for generations the State has held in trust for religious uses.

[57] See Clarendon's statements in his _Hist. of Rebellion_, 795, and those of Baxter, in his _Life and Times_, i. 70. The question with regard to a Commission of Triers is thus unfairly represented by the latter: "It was put to the vote whether all the parish ministers of England should at once be put down or no. And it was but accidentally carried in the negative by two voices." Clarendon goes so far as to say: "They resolved the function itself to be antichristian, and the persons to be burdensome to the people."

[58] It was mooted at Norwich "whether it be fit to draw a petition to the Parliament that the cathedral may be given to the city for a stock for the poor."--_Corporation Records_, date 19th March, 1650.

From an extract of a petition in _Manship's History of Yarmouth_, p. 394, it appears that the townspeople "begged such a part of the lead and other useful material of that vast and altogether useless cathedral in Norwich, towards building a workhouse, to employ our starving poor, and repairing our piers."

[59] See _Thurloe_, i. 519, 523. We must leave the political historian to describe how far Cromwell influenced the resignation.

[60] Sterry was one of Cromwell's chaplains.

[61] _Thurloe_, i. 621.

[62] _Cunningham's Handbook of London._

[63] _State Papers, Dom., Interreg._, Dec., 1653.

[64] _Thurloe_, i. 641. It is added in a postscript: "I am just now assured, and from one that you may believe, that Harrison, Vavasour Powell, and Mr. Feake, have been all this day before his highness and council; and that Powell and Feake are this evening sent to prison, and Harrison hath his commission taken from him."

[65] _Thurloe_, i. 442.--Allowance must be made for the prejudices of the reporter, and consequently some abatement from the violent charge. From the _Council Order Books_, (State Paper Office) we extract the following minutes:--

"Dec. 21st. 1653.--That Mr. Feake and Mr. V. Powell be sent for, in custody, to appear before the Council, at four of the clock, in the afternoon of this day, to answer such matters as shall be objected against them, and that warrants be issued and signed by the Lord President, for authorising Sergeant Dendy to take them into custody accordingly.

"That it be referred to Mr. Scobell and Scoutmaster General Downing to peruse the paper now read, of words spoken by Mr. Feake and Mr. Powell, and to extract and divide into heads the material passages therein; as also to take in writing the examinations of such witnesses to the same purport as shall be produced before them.

"23rd.--That Mr. Feake and Mr. Powell be kept severally in custody by the Serjeant-at-arms, and brought to the Council to-morrow morning.

"22nd of December.--The Lord Protector present.--Mr. Vavasour Powell and Mr. Feake brought before Council.

"That Mr. Feake and Mr. Powell be continued in the custody of the Serjeant-at-arms apart, as formerly, until to-morrow morning; that the Council give further order, and that no person be permitted to come to them but for their necessary provisions."

We have not noticed any further entries on the subject.

[66] _Lingard's History of England_, xi. 14.

Hugh Peters was an earnest advocate for peace with the Dutch.

"Mr. Peters prays and preacheth for peace, and exhorteth them to peace. On the last thanksgiving-day he told them, that God Almighty had punished them long enough for their sins, and especially for their pride, covetousness, ambition, discord, ingratitude, and unmercifulness, and hardheartedness to the poor, which are sins that do reign to some purpose in this nation."--_From an intercepted letter in Dutch. Thurloe_, i. 330.

Peters had become an important political personage. One of the Dutch deputies in treaty with England, observes, in a letter, November, 1653: "Mr. Peters hath writ a letter to the Queen (of Sweden) by the Lord Whitelocke, wherein he relates the reasons why they put the King to death, and dissolved this last Parliament; and withal sends to her Majesty a great English dog and a cheese, for a present."--_Thurloe_, i. 583.

[67] They are printed in the _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1417. They bear this simple title: "The GOVERNMENT of the COMMONWEALTH of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging."

[68] _Carlyle_, ii. 227.

[69] _Whitelocke_, 571.

[70] The Acts and Resolves of Parliament for taking the Engagement were repealed the 19th of January, 1653-4, and the repeal was confirmed in 1656.--_Scobell_, 277.

The following letter is an example of the way in which Presbyterian ministers availed themselves of this change to recover benefices forfeited by refusing the Engagement:--

"Mr. Sympson,

"If the order (by colour of which you invaded my church) did give you (which I confess I could never understand) any power to do so, the late revolution hath made it void and null; and the Lord Protector having taken to his sword a sceptre, and consented and sworn to govern according to law, and not otherwise, I conceive it to be my duty to ... let you hereby know that ... I am legal incumbent of the place; in pursuance whereof, I am resolved to return on lord's Day afternoon, at the usual hour of public worship, to my own church, and therefore desire you to cease your future pains in that place, and signify so much to your friends, that we may have no disturbance: and if you conceive you have any right in the place, commence your action; you shall receive in any court of judicature a plea from him who is resolved to defend his own just privilege, and give an account of his reasons to the world.

"Zach. Crofton.

"The next lord's Day, being the 2nd of August, I intend to preach at my own church between one and two of the clock, afternoon."--_State Papers._

Amongst petitions and other papers in the Record Office, _Dom. Interreg._, vol. 677, 371, is the following from the Earl of Worcester, shewing the style in which the Protector was addressed:--

"May it please your Excellency,

"The obstacle which hindered many your Excellency's just and laudable intentions for the common welfare being now by God's providence and your Excellency's unparalleled endeavours removed, I make these my most humble addresses to your Excellency (to whose ears were my condition rightly made known), not doubting of redress, and in deed and effectually to receive what the late Council of State put me in daily hopes [of], which my humble petition will in part declare. For I can aver that no subject in England hath been so hardly dealt with; but having recourse to the fountain head of mercy and nobleness, whose crystalline waters may now run without interruption, my heart is elevated with hopes, not only to receive obligations thereunto, but also an opportunity to make evident how much I am ambitious to appear your Excellency's most humble and obliged servant,

"Worcester."

There are several other petitions from this Earl and his Countess.

[71] I have honestly endeavoured to understand and describe this crisis in the Commonwealth affairs, uninfluenced by any ecclesiastical opinions of my own. But I must add that nothing said in these pages is to be taken as inconsistent with a firm belief that the voluntary support of religion is the Divine law of Christianity.

[72] Article xxxv., _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1425.

[73] "The clergy in Scotland refused to observe the fast day ordered by the Protector, it being their principle, not to receive any directions for the keeping fasts from the civil magistrates."--_Whitelocke_, 607.

[74] Harris, in his _Life of Cromwell_, 432, on Clarendon's authority, says that Cromwell, by a declaration, rendered all Cavaliers incapable of being elected, or of giving a vote.

[75] _Scobell_, 232, 288; _Cromwellian Diary_, i. cxviii., 17; ii. 253.

Respecting the administration of wills during the Commonwealth, we subjoin the following illustrations:--

In relation to a chasm in the Registry of Norwich between 1652 and 1660, the following passage is found in one of the indexes:--"Cætera ab hoc anno desiderantur testamenta. Cæpit jam Cromwelli usurpatoris istius ambitio rabide sævire; cujus sub vexillo grassabantur undique seditio, violentia, rebellio, sacrilegium, et quod (horrendum dictu est) regicidium. Huic sequuta sunt, confusio in ecclesia, in republica militum insolentia, in parochiis factio, in familiis atheismus. Et plebs miserrima cum maximo suo damno et detrimento (apud nescio quæ tribunalia Londinensia) ad Cromwelli libitum, coacta est se sistere ad testamenta proband."--_Nicolas's Notitia Hist._, 181.

Extract from Council Books, 14th July, 1653:--

"That it be referred to the Judges for Probate of Wills to appoint such persons as they shall think fit to be keeper of the records belonging to that court.

"That all those rooms formerly used for, or called the Star Chamber rooms, be appointed for the keeping of records belonging to the late Prerogative Court; and also for the records of the New Court for Probate of Wills; and for the erecting and establishing of an office there, and fitting places for the officers and clerks belonging thereunto, in such manner as the said judges, or any of them, shall direct."

"_Patent Roll_, 1655, p. 3, No. 46.--Mainby. Salary as a Commissioner for Probate of Wills."

"_Patent Roll_, 1654, p. 4, No. 46.--Lucy." Similar entry.

Amongst _Petitions and Reports Intereg._, W.Z. No. 246, there is a paper respecting probates, dated 9th of January, 1655.

[76] _Scobell_, 279.

[77] Yet they were constantly subject to the control of the Protector and Council of State; these without being formally constituted a court of appeal, were so in fact. Take the following instance from the council books:--

"October 5th, 1654.--Whereas, by a late ordinance of his Highness the Lord Protector and the Council, passed the 2nd of December last, it is ordained that the Commissioners for Approbation of Public Preachers shall not give admission to any person formerly sequestered from any ecclesiastical benefice, or promotion for delinquency, until, by experience of conformity and submission to the present government, his Highness and the Council shall receive satisfaction of his fitness to be admitted to ecclesiastical promotion within the Commonwealth, and the same shall be signified to the said Commissioners. Now, upon reading and consideration of a report from Mr. Sterry and Mr. Nicholas Lockier, made in pursuance of a reference to them from the Council concerning Mr. Bridge, of Petworth, it is ordered and declared by his Highness the Lord Protector and the Council, that they are so far satisfied thereby concerning the said Mr. Bridge, his submission and obedience to the said authority, that they do hereby refer it to the said Commissioners, to proceed to the trial of his fitness for preaching of the Gospel; and upon their satisfaction in that behalf, to give him their approbation and admittance, the said bar or restraint contained in the said ordinance notwithstanding."

[78] By the ordinance of January the 19th, 1653-4, (see _Scobell_), the Act for taking the Engagement was repealed. Some of the sequestered ecclesiastical clergy took advantage of this, appeared before the tribunal, secured their approval, and returned to their livings. But by another ordinance of the 2nd of September, 1654, the Commissioners were forbidden to admit any delinquents until they submitted to the existing government, so as to satisfy his Highness and the Council. The enforcement of subscription to the doctrines of Presbyterianism by ministers of the Establishment was contemplated by some members of Parliament in December, 1654. _Cromwellian Diary_, i. cxvii.

[79] August the 28th--_Scobell_, 335-347.

[80] _Scobell_, 347, 353.

Besides support from tithes there were proposals that ministers should be exempted from paying tenths and first-fruits, and one debate went so far as to suggest the exemption of ministers from all taxation whatever.--_Cromwellian Diary_, i. ciii.-cxxi.

[81] _Scobell_, 139. This Act has been referred to, vol. i., p. 487.

[82] _Ibid._, 353.

[83] Articles xxxvi., xxxvii.--_Parl. Hist._, iii. 1425.

[84] "Provided this liberty be not extended to Popery nor Prelacy, nor to such as under the profession of Christ hold forth and practice licentiousness."--_Art._ xxx. 61.

Short observes in his _Sketch of the Church of England_, ii. 189: "There was at one time a project for extending liberty of conscience to the Roman Catholics, and consultations were held among the members of the Government for the purpose of granting them security of person, and of the remainder of their property after composition, as well as for providing a safe living for a prelate who might execute his functions. But the loyalty of the Roman Catholics was alarmed at the idea of compounding with the usurper, and they communicated the circumstances to the exiled court, where a stop was put to the whole." He refers to _Butler's Roman Catholics_, 418, and _Thurloe's State Papers_, i. 740.

[85] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. cxiv. Dec. 12th, 1654.

[86] At an earlier period, it is remarked in a letter in the State Paper Office, dated 10th of May, 1650: "I received notice of a meeting of my Lord Beauchamp and Sir Arundell, and many others, at Salisbury, upon pretence of being at a race, but purposely to treat of the King's business."

[87] The dates of these ordinances are March 31st, July 4th, June 29th, 1654.--See _Scobell_.

[88] In these books there occurs an order for the enforcement of arrears of rent due to Dr. Wyniffe, Bishop of Lincoln, before the 9th of November, 1646;--and a reference of the petition of Mrs. Cosin, wife of the Dean of Peterborough, respecting her claims upon the fifths of the income of the rectory of Brancepeth, Durham, held by her husband, to Sir George Vane and others, who, if possible, were to adjust this dispute with the incumbent, Mr. Leaver. If not, they were to report to the Council accordingly.

There is an order on the 3rd of July, 1654 for exempting from excise duty so much paper used in printing the Bible, in the original and other learned languages, as "shall make up 7,000 pounds."

It is remarkable what an unusual number of orders belong to the 2nd of September, 1654, the day before Cromwell met his first Protectorate Parliament.

[89] _Newspaper_ (1654); _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. xvii.; _Carlyle_, ii. 254; _Whitelocke_, 599.

On this second day of meeting the following resolutions were passed:--

"September 4th, 1654.--Resolved, that the governors of the school and almshouse of Westminster do take care that such of the morning lecturers as preacheth on the respective days, do attend, each morning that they preach, to pray in this House.

"Monday, 11th.--The House being met, and opportunity taken about something that fell from the parson that prayed this morning, it was moved that something should be done as to matter of religion. And in order thereunto, it was resolved that the several members of each county should present the name of one godly and able minister of the Gospel for each county, to be approved of by the House, who should meet together, and present their advice to the Parliament, in such points only as the Parliament should propose to them; the names to be presented upon Friday next."--_Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. xxvii.

[90] _Godwin's Commonwealth_, iv. 129.

[91] Article xvii.

[92] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. xcviii. The drinking of healths, however, it should be remembered, "seems now to have been chiefly, if not entirely, confined to the convivial meetings of the Cavaliers, and employed to express their disaffection" to the Commonwealth government.

[93] November 27th, 1654, _Journals_. This resolution deprived Owen of his seat.

[94] November 17th, 1654. _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. lxxix.

[95] Baxter's account of this committee betrays his dislike to the "over-orthodox Doctors Owen and Cheynell." He introduces a rather triumphant description of his own hair-splitting as "one merry passage which occasioned laughter."

Some were, he says, for making it "a fundamental that he who alloweth himself or others in a known sin cannot be saved." Baxter wagered he would make them strike that out. "I told them that the Parliament took the Independent way of separation to be a sin; and when this article came before them, they would say, 'By our brethren's own judgment we are all damned men, if we allow the Independents or any other sectaries in their sin.' They gave me no answer, but left out the fundamental."--_Life and Times_, ii. 197-9.

[96] _Calamy's Abridgment_, 121.

[97] _Neal_, iv. 98. Baxter says twenty propositions were printed, but in Neal's copy, taken from Scobell, there are but sixteen.

[98] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. p. cxix.

After a careful consideration of what Baxter says, compared with Goddard's Journal in _Cromwellian Diary_, vol. i. (Introduction), I am brought to the conclusion above expressed, notwithstanding the attempt of Mr. Orme in his _Life of Owen_, p. 115, to give a different version of the affair. John Goodwin attacked the principle involved in the measure in his _Thirty Queries modestly propounded in Order to the Discovery of the Truth and Mind of God in that Question or Case of Conscience, whether the Civil Magistrate stands bound by Way of Duty to interpose his Power or Authority in Matters of Religion and Worship of God_. 1653.

[99] Soon after the rising of the first Protectorate Parliament, Biddle was released, but getting again into trouble, after much suffering and imprisonment in Newgate, the poor man became an exile for life. The Protector allowed him a hundred crowns per annum for his subsistence, and in 1658 permitted a writ of _habeas corpus_ in his favour. Notwithstanding his errors, Biddle seems to have been an honest and devout man, and certainly the treatment which he received was most unrighteous.

[100] _Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy_, part i. 176.

In vol. xvii. of _Petitions and Reports_ (_State Papers_) are the following memoranda:--

"Case tried at Worcester Assizes, 1656. Charge of defamation of character by ejected clergyman, against the person who prosecuted him before the Commissioners. Sued the person for damages. Judge Windham, in charging the jury, did urge very much the increase of damages as aforesaid, declaring that by such conduct as the defendant's honest men came to be sequestered, to the discouragement of many then present who had stated this to be the fact. The jury gave a verdict for the plaintiff--£80 damages."

[101] Some instances will occur in our account of the Episcopalians under the Commonwealth. Others beside Episcopalians were objected to before the Commissioners. In illustration of this, I subjoin the following document amongst the State Papers:--

"To the most reverend the Commissioners for approbation of public preachers.

"Articles that will be proved and deposed to upon oath against James Cockaine, of Tredsham, in the county of Chester.

"That Mr. James Cockaine denies the ministry as an office.

"That no Christian in these ages hath the Spirit of God in any measure.

"That the image of God in us doth not consist in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness.

"That Mr. Cockaine affirms in public, upon occasion, that the sacraments were Popery.

"That he disallows of catechising.

"That syllogisms are of the devil. Denies the Sabbath; saith all days are alike, and that it ought not to be called the lord's Day.

"That several parishioners, eminent for religion and piety, have withdrawn themselves from his ministry in the said parish. He humbly prayed that as the witnesses are many who will ascertain these articles upon oath, there may issue a commission to justices of the peace for the said county, and ministers to examine the truth of the premises, and to certify thereon."

[102] So far as the law of the Triers were concerned, this is true; but it is right to add that the complaints of non-payment in many cases had a sufficient foundation.

[103] Compare _Twell's Life of Pocock_, 151, 175, with _Thurloe_, iii. 281. Owen says in the letter there printed--"There are in Barkshire some few men of mean quality and condition, rash, heady, enemies of tithes, who are the Commissioners for ejecting of ministers." He then refers to Pocock as a man of great learning and high character, as liable to be cast out "on slight and trivial pretences."

[104] These Royalists were religious men. Upon receiving sentence, they exclaimed: "Now, farewell world! welcome heaven! Oh! what a happy change shall we make from night to day! Oh! blessed Jesus and Saviour of the world, how wonderful are Thy mercies! Thy love is unspeakable!" This is reported in one of the newspapers of the day, dated April the 19th, 1655.

In the _Perfect Proceedings_ of the 12th to the 19th of April, it is reported from Hereford that the governor had secured Colonel Birch, who affirmed that the plotters were not Cavaliers, but Ranters, Quakers, and Anabaptists.

[105] Letters from Secretary Thurloe and Mr. Pell in _Vaughan's Protectorate of Cromwell_, i. 145 and 165.

[106] _Harris's Cromwell_, 429. Cromwell attempted to vindicate himself on the ground that the Episcopal clergy "meant to entail their quarrel, and prevent the means to reconcile posterity" (435).

Amongst the State Papers is a petition to the Protector from Dr. Woolley, a schoolmaster, to be allowed to continue "his painful employment." There is also a certificate by his friends to the following effect:--"We, whose names are underwritten, do most humbly certify that, upon our knowledge, Edward Woolley, of Hammersmith, in the county of Middlesex, Doctor of Divinity, is a religious, learned, and sober person, and hath most quietly submitted to this present authority under his Highness's government, of whom he never speaks but with great honour and reverence, and so inclineth his scholars under his tuition. He hath a very excellent faculty in the education of youth in the Latin, Greek, and French tongues, with many other commendable exercises, beyond any whom we have seen besides in this nation.--Signed by Thomas Coxe, Doctor of Physic; John Hexing, Minister at Bride's, Fleet Street; and other persons."

[107] Derby, November 17th, 1655.--_Thurloe_, iv. 211.

[108] November 10th, 1655.--_Ibid._, 184.

[109] December 1st.--_Thurloe_, iv. 274.

[110] _Ibid._, 216.

[111] _Thurloe_, iv. 228.

[112] _Ibid._, 151.

[113] _Thurloe_, iv. 273.

[114] _Ibid._, 37. There is a curious letter from the same writer (p. 49) from which it appears that the policy of Cromwell's government in Scotland was not to interfere with religious peculiarities if they did not threaten any political disturbance.

[115] _Thurloe_, iv. 56.

[116] _Ibid._, 127, 128, 223, 250.

[117] _Ibid._, 700. The following is worth notice:--

"The other day a minister in a country church prayed for all the exiles and prisoners high, and low; and I being informed of it, caused the man to be brought before the council here, who not denying the words, we committed him, and afterwards he acknowledging his fault and promising never to be guilty of the like again, or using any indirect terms, which might keep up Charles Stuart in the memory of the people, we dismissed him from his imprisonment and from ever preaching again in that church."--Ibid. 558.

[118] _History of Nonconformity in Wales, by T. Rees._ Appendix, 501. This act is not given in _Scobell_.

[119] _Thurloe_, iv. 334.

[120] _Thurloe_, iv. 565.

[121] _Ibid._, 380, 505.

[122] _Thurloe_, iv. 314, 348.

[123] _Ibid._, 450.

[124] _Ibid._, 447.

[125] _Forster's Statesmen of the Commonwealth_, iii. 365.

[126] _State Papers, Dom. Interregnum_, August the 26th, 1656.

We find the author of the _Christian Armour_ giving advice before the election.

_The Magistrates' Portraiture_: a Sermon at Stowmarket, in Suffolk, upon August the 20th, 1656, before the election of Parliament-men for the same county, on Is. i. 26: "And I will restore thy judges as at first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning;" by William Gurnall, of Lavenham. 1656.

The preacher expresses a fear of the letting in of Popery through the sects, Anabaptists, Seekers, Quakers, &c., and recommends his hearers to seek out men faithful to the ministers of the Gospel.

[127] _Carlyle's Cromwell_, ii. 416, _et seq._

The following document is in the State Paper Office, 17th of September, 1656:--"We whose names are subscribed, with others, being chosen and accordingly returned to serve with you in this Parliament, and in discharge of our trust offering to go into the House, were at the lobby-door kept back by soldiers, which, lest we should be wanting in our duty to you and to our country, we have thought expedient to represent unto you to be communicated to the House, that we may be admitted therein."--Subscribed by Sir Ralph Hare and 160 others.

September 22.--Resolved, that the persons which have been returned from the several counties to serve the Parliament, and have not been approved, be referred to their application to the Council for their approbation, and that the House do proceed with the great affairs of the nation.

The Committee's answer is, that they have refused none that to them have appeared to be men of integrity, and according to the qualification of the Instrument. And therefore his Highness and the Council have given orders to the soldiers to keep those persons out.--_State Papers Dom._

[128] This was Henry Laurence, Lord President of the Council, member for Westmoreland in the Long Parliament, and for Colchester in the Parliament of 1656.

[129] Member for Bedfordshire in the Parliaments of 1654 and 1656.

[130] This was Major-General Lambert, called _Lord_ Lambert, from his being the first president of the Protector's Privy Council. He was member for Yorkshire in 1654 and again in 1656.

[131] Member for Somersetshire in 1654 and in 1656.

For all these speeches see _Cromwellian Diary_, i. 62, 28, 33, 55.

[132] _Ibid._, 158.

[133] _Carlyle_, ii. 470.

[134] _Carlyle_, ii. 473.

[135] _Cromwellian Diary_, i. 359.

Mr. Gillespie is no doubt intended. The editor says:--"Notes were expressly prohibited by a direction in the Covenant." I do not find this to have been the case. Nothing is said upon the subject in the Directory.

[136] The petition and advice was first presented to Cromwell, March the 31st, 1657. It was accepted by him May the 25th.

[137] It is related by Henry Neville, member for Reading, in Richard's Parliament, and the author of _Plato Redivivus_--That "Cromwell, upon this great occasion, sent for some of the chief city Divines, as if he made it a matter of conscience to be determined by their advice. Among these was the leading Mr. Calamy, who very boldly opposed the project of Cromwell's single government, and offered to prove it both unlawful and impracticable. Cromwell answered readily upon the first head of unlawful, and appealed to the safety of the nation being the supreme law. 'But,' says he, 'pray, Mr. Calamy, why impracticable?' Calamy replied, 'Oh, 'tis against the voice of the nation; there will be nine in ten against you.' 'Very well,' says Cromwell, 'but what if I should disarm the nine, and put the sword in the tenth man's hand; would not that do the business?'"--See _Critical Review of the Life of Oliver Cromwell_, p. 149, note. _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 321.

[138] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1508 and 1425.

[139] _Carlyle_, ii. 567.

[140] _Carlyle_, ii. 579-581.

[141] _Ibid._, 497.

[142] In 1651 "their High Mightinesses decreed that the sects should be restrained, and not suffered to spread. _Sectas cohibendas et in ordinem redigendas, neque permittendum ut in plura loca quam hodie sunt diffundantur._"--_Bayle's Dict., Art. Anabaptists._

[143] Whitelocke, when Ambassador to the Court of Sweden, had the following conversation with the Archbishop of Upsala. _Archbishop_: "No one must vent his private fancies or new opinions contrary to the doctrine of the Church. If he does, we severely punish it." _Whitelocke_: "That is somewhat strict, and may be construed to a kind of assumption of infallibility." _Archbishop_: "We take no such thing upon us, but desire to preserve peace and unity in the Church and its members." _Whitelocke_: "Those are good things, but I doubt hardly to be settled in this world, where offences must come." _Archbishop_: "But woe to those by whom they come." _Whitelocke_: "They may possibly come by imposing too much on men's consciences as well as by new opinions."--_Memoirs of Whitelocke_, 375.

[144] April 28th. _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 55, 58, 60., and _Journals of the House of Commons_.

[145] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 149-152.

[146] _Faulkner's History of Brentford and Chiswick_.--The minutes of the Commissioners are cited as authorities.

[147] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 165, 166.

[148] _Neal_, iv. 135.

[149] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 202-206.

[150] _Journals_, 11th of June, 1657.--In the report of the Committee, it is stated, that in the said Bibles there are already discovered these omissions and misprintings, _i.e._, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God," for "shall _not_ inherit."--John ix. 21; these words wholly left out: "Or who hath opened his eyes we know not."--Rom. vi. 13; "Neither yield ye your members as instruments of righteousness unto sin," for "unrighteousness."

On the 16th of January this year, 1657, the Grand Committee for Religion had ordered a sub-committee to advise with Drs. Walton, Cudworth, and others, respecting translations and impressions of the Bible. In consequence, there was a meeting at Whitelocke's house, at Chelsea, upon the 6th of February following. The Committee often met, "and had the most learned men in the Oriental tongues to consult with in this great business, and divers excellent and learned observations of some mistakes in the translations of the Bible in English, which yet was agreed to be the best of any translation in the world." Great pains were taken in it, "but it became fruitless by the Parliament's dissolution."--_Whitelocke's Memorials_, 654.

[151] _Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 261-269.--The following instance of Parliamentary interference with the ministers of St. Margaret's church occurs in the _Journals_ just after the debate on the Sabbath:--

"Tuesday, June 23rd, 1657.--Ordered, that the Lord Strickland and Major-General Whalley do represent it unto his Highness the Lord Protector, as the desire of the Parliament, that his Highness will be pleased to remove from Margaret's, Westminster, the present preacher, being a prisoner to the Upper Bench; and also one Warmstree, who is employed as a lecturer there, being a notorious delinquent; and to appoint some person of eminent godliness and abilities to be public preacher there; which the Parliament doth apprehend to be a matter of very great concernment to the good of this place."

This probably was Thomas Warmestry, who, though a Puritan, retired to Oxford during the Royal residence there. After the Restoration he was made Dean of Worcester.

[152] _Scobell_, 438. He places it under 1656.

[153] "It was moved that the sword to be delivered by way of investiture might not be left out.

"Mr. Lister: His Highness has a sword already. I would have him presented with a robe.

"Some understood it a rope, and it caused _altum risum_. He said he spoke as plain as he could--a robe.

"You are making his Highness a great prince--a king indeed--so far as he is Protector.

"Ceremonies signify much of the substance in such cases, as a shell preserves the kernel, or a casket a jewel. I would have him endowed with a robe of honour."--_Cromwellian Diary_, ii. 303.

At length it was "Resolved that there be a purple robe lined with ermine, a Bible, a sceptre, and a sword, provided for the investiture of the Lord Protector." Thursday, 25th June, 1657.--_Post-meridian Journals._

[154] Mr. Lockyer, chaplain to his Highness, made an exhortation at the Banqueting House, Whitehall, after the Westminster Hall solemnity.

[155] _Parl. Hist._, iii. 1514-1518.

The following story is told:--"When Cromwell took on him the Protectorship, in the year 1653, the very morning the ceremony was to be performed, a messenger came to Dr. Manton to acquaint him that he must immediately come to Whitehall. The doctor asked him the occasion. He told him he should know that when he came there. The Protector himself, without any previous notice, told him what he was to do, _i.e._, to pray upon that occasion. The doctor laboured all he could to be excused, and told him it was a work of that nature which required some time to consider and prepare for it. The Protector replied that he knew he was not at a loss to perform the service he expected from him, and opening his study-door, he put him in with his hand, and bid him consider there--which was not above half an hour. The doctor employed that time in looking over his books, which he said was a noble collection."--_Harris's Life of Cromwell_, p. 4.

If the story be true, the date is incorrect; and the ceremonial of 1653, when Lockyer gave an exhortation at Whitehall Banqueting House, is confounded with the ceremony of 1657, when Manton prayed in Westminster Hall. It would look as if the devotional part of the service had not been contemplated in the original arrangement, but was afterwards introduced by the express desire of Cromwell.

[156] A report of this speech is given in the _Journals of the Commons_, under date January the 25th, 1657-8.

[157] In connection with this notice of a godly ministry at the re-opening of Parliament, it may not be irrelevant to mention that the daily meetings of Cromwell's Parliament commenced with prayer; and that whereas in the Little Parliament the members turned the legislative assembly into a prayer-meeting--and "engaged" one after another in devotional exercises--in the Parliaments which followed, no such custom obtained; but some regular minister officiated each morning. So scrupulous did the Commons become in confining the performance of Divine worship to the Clergy, that in the last of Oliver's Parliaments, the House on one occasion waited half an hour for the minister, and because he did not make his appearance proceeded without prayer.--_Cromwellian Diary_, i. xxvii., and _Parry_, 522.

[158] The Republicans at first rejected had been now admitted.

[159] "Il Signor Protettore col consenso del suo consilio di stato ha questa settima banito per una sua proclamatione di Londra tutte Cattollici e Roalisi alle lor proprie stanze di campagna, o al luogo della lor nascita, prohibendo li sotto pena di incarceramento di allontanarsi di detti luoghi più de cinque miglia, e questa proclamatione commencia a essere in vigore li venti-dui di Marzo, e dura fin alli otto di Maggio." Di Londra, 14mo. Marzo, 1658.--_Thurloe_, vi. 841.

[160] _Carlyle's Cromwell_, ii. 634.

[161] Carlyle, ii. 651.

[162] The question of augmentations of livings had been brought before the Council in the month of October, 1656: it was referred to the Lord Deputy and others to speak with Dr. Owen and Mr. Nye upon the subject, and to report their opinions to the Council.

Some points respecting ministers in later entries were referred to Nye, Caryl, and Peters.

[163] The last three minutes belong respectively to May, 1658, June, 1658, and March, 1656.

[164] The authorities for this sketch of Presbyterianism are the Westminster form of Presbyterian government, Parliamentary ordinances, and the account of the particular form under which Presbyterianism appeared in Lancashire, as given by Hibbert, in his _History of the Foundations of Manchester_.

It should be borne in mind that, while the law, as it regarded the civil enforcement of Presbyterian discipline, remained a dead letter, there was nothing to prevent the carrying out of its purely ecclesiastical arrangements.

[165] In the eighth chapter of the _Second Book of Discipline_, it is said of Deacons: "To them belongs the collection and distribution of the ecclesiastical property; and in this they must be subject to the presbytery, though they are not members of it."

[166] Members liable to be brought before their several Presbyteries adopted measures of retaliation. Accusations were preferred against church officers. They were accused, for instance, of being present at horse-races, or at ale-feasts, where there was fiddling, bowling, or tippling going on; of neglecting to sing psalms in the family; of entertaining Cavaliers; of affirming that the Parliament was a body without a head; of appealing to the authority of Scripture in support of the royal cause; and of never having publicly manifested any sorrow for malignancy. These accusations were followed by recriminations on the opposite side.--_Hist. of the Foundations of Manchester_, i. 276.

[167] The following passage with respect to him occurs in the _Life of Adam Martindale_, p. 61:--

"Mr. Heyrick was then up at London, and after his coming down, I heard him, on a fast day, in a great congregation at Manchester, declare himself (before the ministers of the classis then just setting up) so perfect a latitudinarian as to affirm that the Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Independents, might all practice according to their own judgments, yet each by Divine right. How his brethren liked this I know not; but I am sure so he said, his text being: 'The government shall be upon his shoulder' (Isaiah ix. 6). And Mr. Harrison did little less than contradict him, following him upon that text (Zechariah iv. 9), making it his great business to reprove the Independents for not laying a good foundation."

[168] _Hist. of Manchester_, i. 238.

[169] The _Diary_ and _the Autobiography of Newcome_, and the _Life of Adam Martindale_, have been published by the Cheetham Society.

[170] It may be seen in Sion College Library. I feel much pleasure in here expressing my thanks to the librarian for the courteous aid he has afforded me in my researches.

[171] "In regard there was no more ministers present by reason of the Act at Oxford, the further consideration was deferred."

[172] _16th February, 1656._--"The question of the Fifth Monarchy being propounded, it was debated whether there shall be a more glorious time for the Church of Christ before the end of the world. Ordered that this branch of the question be further debated the next meeting."

[173] The title of Saint is carefully dropped.