YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY THE CHURCH UNDER THE COMMONWEALTH ABEEDEEN UNIVEBSITY PRESS. A HISTORY ENGLISH CHURCH DURING THE CIVIL WARS AND UNDER THE COMMONWEALTH 164O-1660 WILLIAM A. SHAW, Litt.D. editor of the " calendar of treasury papers," author of the "history of currency," etc. IN TWO VOLUMES VOL. I. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON NEW YORK AND BOMBAY 1900 All rights reserved To the Memory of my Father, James Sha'^a^, Died 20th June, 1899. PREFACE. The scope of this work is intentionally restricted. It is not a history of religion in England dur ing the years 1640-60. It is therefore not con cerned either with the history of Dogma or with that of the Sects or of the three Denominations. The history of the Congregationalists as such, or of the Baptists as such, or of the Presbyterians as such, or of the Quakers as such, or of any of the Sects as such, must be sought in the separate histories of those bodies. The bearing of the present work is quite different. The years 1,640-60 witnessed the most" complete and drastic revolution which the Church of England has ever undergone. Its whole struc ture was ruthlessly demolished — Episcopacy, the Spiritual Courts, Deans and Chapters, Convoca tion, the Book of Common Prayer, the Thirty- nine Articles, and the Psalter; the lands of the Bishops and of the Deans and Chapters were sold, and the Cathedrals were purified or defiled. On the clean-swept ground an entirely novel Church system was erected. In place of Epis copal Church Government a Presbyterian organisa- VIII PREFACE. tion was introduced, and a Presbyterian system of ordination. For the Spiritual Courts were substituted Presbyterian Assemblies (Parochial, Classical and Provincial), acting with a very real censorial jurisdiction, but in final subordination to a parliamentary committee sitting at Westminster. Instead of the Thirty-nine Articles the Confession of Faith was introduced, and the Directory in place of the Book of Common Prayer. New Catechisms and a new metrical version were prepared, a paror- chial survey of the whole country was carried out, and extensive reorganisations of parishes effected. Finally, the equivalent of a modern eccles iastical commission (or let us say of Queen Anne's Bounty Scheme) was invented, a body of trustees was endowed with considerable revenues for the purpose of augmenting poor livings, and for years the work of this ecclesiastical charity and reorgani sation scheme was earnestly pursued." There is hardly a parallel in history to such a constitutional revolution as this, and it is upon the constitutional revolution as such that I have kept my attention steadily fixed. So much for the scope of the work. As to its contents, a part (a little more than half) of the first chapter formed the introduction tothe "Minutes of the Manchester Classis," edited by me for the Chetham Society in 1890. The substance of a smaller part of the last chapter formed the introduction to the first volume of the proceedings of the "Plundered Ministers' PREFACE. IX Committee," similarly edited for the Lancashire and Cheshire Record Society in 1893. This latter, however, I have entirely recast and rewritten. Finally, portions of the whole book were read at Manchester College, Oxford, in February, 1899, in a series of lectures under the Hibbert Trust. With regard to the appendices, I have not made the slightest attempt at forming a corpus of docu ments or pieces justificatives. Such an attempt would be perfectly impossible except to the His torical Manuscripts' Commission, or to the Master of the Rolls. I have confined myself to publishing ¦definitely chosen parts of such materials as are never likely to be published in calendar form, or by ithe Historical Manuscripts' Commission. To be explicit. It is presumed that if ever there is a Calendar of the work of the various committees which dealt with Church affairs during the years 1645-60, the material of that calendar will be drawn only from the authentic records of those committees. Of these records I give a ¦detailed account in Appendix IV., vol. ii., pp. 457-76 infra. Now, outside this well-defined class ¦of material, there is much besides. In particular (firstly) there is all the wealth -of personal reference contained in the Commons Journals and Lords' Journals. For the period 1640-45, i.e., anterior to the commencement of the •definite records just referred to, there are pre- .served in the Lords' Journals (and nowhere else) hundreds of cases of clergymen tried, imprisoned, X PREFACE. sequestered or ejected ; or, on the other hand, pro moted or nominated to benefices by the Parliament. In an imperfect way Walker, with literally in credible toil, went through the journals whilst they were still unpublished with the object of taking out the first of these classes. Without distinction I have taken them all out ambulando. As I have read the journals systematically for the whole of the period, it was an easy part of my task tO' take out these cases. But it is safe to assert that no person (say, editing a Plundered Mini sters' Calendar) would ever draw up such a list. It could only be done by careful verbatim perusal of the Commons' and Lords' Journals, and to perform that perusal simply for the sake of recovering individual ministerial cases would be distracting. This class of material will be found in Appendix II. Many of the original papers (petitions, etc.) relating to the ministerial cases which are recorded in the Lords' Journals are still preserved amongst the MSS. of the House of Lords. See the Calen dars of them in the Historical Manuscripts Reports,, especially Report VI. If it is asked why I have abstracted the Journals and not included these papers, the answer is that the Calendars referred to are indexed, and therefore the material is. accessible ; whereas, in the case of the Journal.^-, the indices are so hopelessly inadequate under the head of personal- and place-names that the material is absolutely inaccessible. PREFACE. XI Secondly. All the evidence relating to the suc cess of the Presbyterian system during the years 1646-60 has become hopelessly scattered. The scribes of the various classical associations quietly walked off with the records when the Restoration came, and either destroyed them or handed them down to their descendants as private property. It is certain that such scattered material as this will never come within the purview of a Record Office Calendarer. All this material, so far as I have discovered it, is contained in Appendix III. Thirdly. It is extremely unlikely that any Calendar of (let us say) Plundered Ministers records would ever include the accounts of the sales of Deans and Chapters' lands, and of Bishops' lands, or, again, the accounts of First Fruits . and , Tenths which I have here printed. These accounts form a distinct class. They do not form part of the Records of any Common wealth Committee, and would be almost neces sarily neglected by a calendarer. These accounts will be found in Appendices VIL, VIII. and IX. The three classes of documents therefore which I have printed are such as the historical world cannot possibly ever hope to receive at the hands of an editor of the records of the Plundered Ministers' Committee. But if ever a Calendar of Plundered Ministers' Records should be given to the world, then the documents which I have selected for publication here would make, together xii PREFACE. with that calendar, a complete whole, or as com plete a whole as it is now possible to reconstruct. Besides this (to my mind important) point there is the further point ofthe interest of the documents themselves. In their entirety I believe they cover the whole country, and I hope it will be found that very few parishes indeed are unrepresented in one or the other of them. What this means only the local antiquarian can adequately understand. Parochial histories invari ably break down over the Commonwealth period. It is not, or not merely, prejudice. The period is not yet understood. The parish registers were neglected. The confused character, or legal status or position, and the conflicting numbers of the various parochial incumbents, the actual uncertainty as to who was the incumbent, the almost entire ceasing of the work of Episcopal ordination, and in con sequence of the registering of admissions and the neglect on the other hand of ever keeping a register of such ordinations as were performed by the Presbyteries — all these causes have combined to make it as yet impossible to piece together the history of any parish for the years 1640-60. I really cherish the hope that my book will inaugurate a new era in this matter, and that both in our county histories and in the increasing number of our parochial histories we shall see an end of that " 1640-60— />/ff»X- " system. The period was by no means blank. If any person is investigating the history of any PREFACE. XIII parish, and wishes to construct a list of the incum bents during the years 1640-60, let him proceed as follows: (1) Go to the Augmentation Books at Lambeth which are described in Appendix IV., pp. 467-76. There is at Lambeth a manuscript index of places, and he will have no difficulty in finding the particular parish in which he is interested. The material he will get from this source will cover mostly the years 1652-58. (2) For the earlier period 1645-52 he is reduced to a more scattered body of records, a difficult but still a workable body to handle. The three volumes at the British Museum, and the eight volumes at the Bodleian, have indices locorum. The material drawn from this source will cover the years 1645-50. (3) For the period 1640-45 he will be reduced, I fear, to — my book and to the appendices there contained; with the added advantage that those appendices contain incidental indications of value for practically the whole period. This must be my justification for the length to which I have drawn out the appendices. May I conclude this preface with a reference to a personal matter. Some nine or ten years since, when I was engaged in making collections for this work, I formed the purpose of visiting all the London parish churches with the object of examining (1) the vestry minute-book, (2) the registers, (3) if permitted, the parish chest itself in the hope of recovering any possible classis minute-book. The XIV PREFACE. result was disastrous. In some few cases I met with distinguished courtesy, mostly with cold indif ference, in more than one instance with most painful rudeness. The courtesy came from the incumbents, the rudeness from the parish clerks. I quickly found that my wish was hopeless of attainment, and I dropped it in despair. Now let there be no misapprehension as to the value of the materials which I was obliged to fore go the use of, and which is practically sealed to the historical student. Dr. Freshfield has worked at it in the cases of several parishes. In that of Bartholomew Exchange he has, regardless of ex pense, published the vestry minute-book verbatim up to 1676. The pages of my book will show what valuable material he has put at the disposal of the historical student, and how heavily I have drawn upon his work. But what is one parish to the whole, and why should the historical student be reduced to the accidental generosity of any individual, however enthusiastic? My thanks to Dr. Freshfield are incapable of expression, but it has made my heart ache to think that there exists a world of first hand historical material like that he has published and practically absolutely inaccessible. It is a gross scandal that historical documents at all, not privately owned, not pertaining to the private ownership of any one, not relating to the private afiairs of any one, should be locked up and rendered inaccessible as they practically are. PREFACE. XV Parish registers and vestry minute-books do not belong to the incumbent. He is a mere bird of passage, a person who has the minding of them for some brief period. That is all, and a most unfit person he is. No other country in the world would supinely witness as we do, and have done, the waste, decay, destruction and falsification of parish registers. I remember, some years since, being shown by a minister the registers of his parish. The first volume had decayed, and the remains were kept in a tin box, each tattered leaf being carefully rolled in tissue paper. That meant that every time the leaf should happen to be inspected the brittle membrane would have to be unrolled. What prospect was there of those fragments sur viving any handling at all ? I advised the parson to put the fragments into the hands of a skilled London binder. It is literally scandalising to think of parish registers being left in such keeping. All parish registers and all vestry minute-books earlier than the accession of Queen Victoria ought to be in stantly removed to public and safe keeping — to some specially organised side of the British Museum — where they would not only be accessible to the historical student, and not only be bound and safeguarded against further decay, but also subject to the proper provisions of scholarly handling. If he does his duty, an incumbent should actually sit with a person who is examining his registers, and very irksome it is both for the incumbent and the xvi PREFACE. searcher. Whereas, at the Manuscript Room at the British Museum there is every available precaution, there is every perfection of convenience, there is that ever present atmosphere or tradition of scholarly handling and keeping, not to mention the unspeakable convenience of having every register within call without having to write or to travel all over England for it. There is neither sense nor reason in delaying to do with the Church of England historical registers what has long since been done with the Dissenters' registers. In conclusion I have to acknowledge— as every student ofthe seventeenth century has — invaluable help at many points received from Mr. Firth ; and also assistance from Mr. Welch, librarian of the Guildhall. Above all am I indebted to my wife for help throughout, in the compilation of the book, in the correction of proofs, in the identi fication of place names and in the total construc tion of the index. CONTENTS. VOL. I. CHAPTBE I. The Ecclesiastical Debates and Legislation of the Long Parliament up to the Meeting op the Assembly of Divines, 1640-43 ^a^es 1-144 CHAPTEE II. The Consteuotive Woek op the Assembly of Divines, 1643-47. (§ I. The Thirty-nine Articles. § II. Church Government. § III. Presbyterian Jurisdiction or DiscipUne. § IV. Jus divinum of Presbytery. § V. Ordination. § VI. The Directory for Worship. § VII. The Confession of Faith. § VIII. The Catechisms. § IX. The Ne-w Metrical Version of the Psalms) pages 145-384 VOL. II. CHAPTEE III. The Peesbyteeian System, 1646-60. (Erection of the Pres byterian System, Extent of the Pure Cl-assical System, Toleration, Decay of Presbytery and of Presbyterian Discipline, Presbyterian versus Independent in the Parish, Catechising and Sacramental Eegulation, the Voluntary Associations, Final Attempts at Accommodation) foges 1-174 h xviii CONTENTS. CHAPTBE IV. Pateonage and Financial Administration. (Parliamentary Interference with the Clergy, Treatment of Scandalous Ministers, the Parliamentary Lecturers, the Eoyalist Clerical Sequestrations, the Plundered Ministers' Com mittee, Sale of Bishops' and Dean and Chapter Lands, the Trustees for Maintenance — their Income and Ex penditure, the Propagation Schemes, the Church Survey, Eepair of Churches, Eight of Tithe, First Fraits and Tenths, Legal Position of the Intruded Puritan Clergy, Patronage (Private, Episcopal, Eoyal and University), the Commissioners for Ejection ; Approbation and Certifi cation of Ministers) pages 175-286 APPENDICES. I.' Bishop Williams' Committee, 1641 pages 287-294 II. Cleegy Lists : — (a) " Malignant " Clergy, 1640-42 „ 295-300 (b) Puritan Lecturers, 1640-43 „ 300-306 (c) Eoyalist Clerical Sequestrations and Parliamentary Nominations, 1642-49 „ 306-364 III. The Presbyterian System : — (a) The County Certificates (1646-47) „ 365-373 (&) The Pure Classical Systems (1646-60) „ 373-440 (c) The Voluntary Associations (1653-60) „ 440-456 IV. The MS. Eecords op the Plundered Ministers' Committee, Etc 457-476 V. Account op Impropriations Purchased IN, to the Chuech, 1645-48 477-495 VI. Geneeal Eepoet on Cleeical Aug mentations, November, 1655 496-513 VII. Accounts op the Sale op Dean and Chapters' Lands c-. ^ cc,. CONTENTS. XIX VIII. Accounts op the Sale op Bishops' Lands pages 558-569 IX. Accounts op First Feuits, 1643-44, 1652, 1655-56, 1657-59, 1660; Ac counts OP Tenths, 1657-58 „ 570-600 X. Eepoet op the Plundeeed Ministees' Committee of 17th Maeoh, 1644-45, ON THE Applications op Dean and Chaptee Lands , 601-602 XI. The MS. Eecoeds op the Chuech SuEVEY, 1650-51 and 1655-59 „ 603-606 Index 607-707 ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. VOL I. CHAPTEE I. Ecclesiastical Debates and Legislation, 1640-43. Nov. Nf Underlying causes of the civil -wars ... V Accentuation of feeling, 1640-43, and its efiect on Puritanism -V Revolutionary adoption of Presbyterianism . English Puritanism never genuinely Presby1;erian Either under Elizabeth Or during the civil -wars \, General attitude in 1640 on the subject of religious grievances ; The petitions on grievances in 1640 V Compared -with those of 1642 Nov. 7-10 The debate on grievances, 7-lOth November, 1640 Grimston's speech ... ... Pym's speech ... ... The clerical petitions ... ... ... Condemnation of the canons of 1640 Deo. 19 Report on religion from the sub-committee for religion, 1640, 19th December ... ... Dec. 11 The London petition against Episcopacy, 1640, llth December Its reception ... ... ... ... Un-willingness of the House of Commons to approach the question of Episcopacy The county petitions against Episcopacy The " Ministers' Petition and Remonstrance " — a standard of moderate reform ... ... ... ... ... \ The Moderate versus the Root-and-Branch party Feb. 1 Debate of the Ministers' Petition and Remonstrance, 1st February Feb. 8 Debate of Sth February Rudyard's speech l)igby's speech... Falkland's speech Grimston's speech Piennes' speech Feb. 9 The debate continued, 9th February The reservation of the point of Episcopacy Bagsha-sv's speech D'Ewes' speech Deliberations of the committee for the ministers' petition and the London petition ... Mar. 9 The committee's report, 9th March Debate of the report of the committee, 10th March Mar. 11 Debate of llth March Mar. 22 Debate of 22nd March PAGE 1235,5678 9 101011131415 1617192123 26 2729 2930328435 3739404143 4749 5253 XXII ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. 1641 Mar. — May 1640-1 Mar. 1641 May — June — June — June — June — July — July 1641-3 1640 Nov. 1641 Aug. 26 Debate of 26th March on Deans and Chapters ••¦••- 12 12th May, the divines heard in defence of Deans and Chapters Hacket's arguments ¦¦• --• •-¦ Burgess's reply •¦• •-- --- The Bishops Bill, 1640-41, March The Bishops Bill in the Lords Reasons of the Commons forthe exclusion of Bishops from the Lords, Rejection of the Commons' Bishops Bill by the Lords The Lords' project of ecclesiastical reform, 1st March The Lords' Committee for Innovations \ B^SMTO^ of the committee's -work ... ... ... ... Platforms of reform of ecclesiastical government submitted to the Lords' Committee for Innovations ... ... ... Archbishop Usher's ... ... ... ... ... ••• Bishop Williams' ... ... The Lords' Bill for regulating Episcopal courts 27 Introduction of the Root-and-Branch Bill into the Commons, 27tli May Dering's speech on its introduction ... ... ... D'Ewes' speech ... ... ... ... ... ... Committment of the bill ... ... ... ... ... 11 Debate of the Root-and-Branch Bill in committee, llth June The preamble voted ... ... ... ... ... ... 12 The debate continued — on Episcopacy, 12th June ... D'Ewes' speech ... ... ... ... ... ... Vane's speech ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 15 The debate continued — on Deans and Chapters, 15th June D'Ewes' speech ... ... ... ... ... Perry's speech ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 21 The debate continued — on Ecclesiastical Courts and Regimen, 21st June ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Vane's scheme of organisation of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Dering's scheme of same ... ... ... ... ' 8 The Eoot-and-Branch Bill reported, Sth July 9-3,2 And adopted, 9-1 2th July \ Provisions for Ecclesiastical Discipline ... ... ... > Provisions for ordination ... ... ... ... V Critical estimation of the Boot-and-Branch proposals y A standard of Anglican Puritanism essentially non-Presbyterian ... 1 Legislative action of the Long Parliament against Innovations and Idolatry ... ... ... ... ,.. ... . . ) The position of the Communion Table 1 The rails before the Communion Table 1 The Commons' Bill against innovations, February-December, 1642 ... 1 The Legislation against Pluralities, 1641-43 1 The Legislation concerning the Sabbath, March, 1641, to April, 16441 The Legislation concerning the Liturgy, 1641-42 .. I The Legislation concerning the Bishops, etc., October, 1641, to February, 1642 _ ... ... ... ... ] The Legislation conceruing Episcopacy, September, 1642, January, 1643 ... ... ... ... ... ] The project of an Assembly of Divines ... ... "l The bill for calling the Assembly of Divines ... '.] The Solemn League and Covenant ... 1 Attitude of the Scotch towards the Eiiglish "religious dispute in November, 1640 = i- . The Treaty with the Scotch, November, I'eio-August, 1641 .'.'.' Z '- \ \ V ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. Xxiii > The demand for uniformity of Church government 129 July N The negotiations between the ParUament and the Scotch, July, 1642 132 Sept. The debate of 1st September, 1642 134 The Parliament declaration in reply to the Scotch, September, 1642 135 Its import ... ... ... 136 Course of Parliament's negotiations with the Scotch, 1642-August, 1643 137 The Parliament's indecision and surrender to the Scotch 139 Nature of the Parliament's capitulation to the Scotch 141 Aug.-Sept, The adoption of the Solemn League and Covenant, August-September, ^ 1643 142 CHAPTEE II. The Assembly's Consteuotive Woek, 1643-47. § I. The Thiety-kine Articles. ! ^ The Assembly's revision of the Thirty-nine Articles 145 The work interrupted and left incomplete ,. ... 147 § II. Chuech Government. \ The work of the Assembly on the subject of Presbytery or Church government ... ... ... 149 Aug. The Commissioners of the General Assembly of Scotland 150 Sept. The Parliamentary Reception Committee 150 Oct. The Parliamentary Treaty Committee 151 Influence exercised by the Treaty Committee upon the work of the Assembly ... ... ... 152 The question of Church government referred to the Assembly, 12th October, 1643 153 The Assembly's Committees at work on it 155 Nov. The office of pastor in the Church 156 The office of doctor and teacher in the Church 167 The Scotch Commissioners intervene ... 158 Ineffectual attempt at accommodation with the Independents on the question of the office of the doctor, November, 1643 160 The question of the office of Ruling Elders or Presbyters 161 Dec. The subject postponed ... ... ... 163 The office of deacon in the Church ... 163 The office of widows in the Church ... 163 IJan.-Feb. The Assembly digresses to the subject of ordination ... 165 The digression leads to an incidental and premature resumption of the debate of Presbytery 167 Feb.-Mar. Premature debate of Presbytery, February-March, 1643-44 168 \ Early attempt at accommodation with the Independents on the subject of Presbytery, February, 1643-44 170 \, The Assembly takes up the project of an accommodation with the Independents, March, 1643-44 I'^l April vV Resumption of the debate on Presbytery, April, 1644 172 ^ Postponement of the report to the Parliament on Presbytery ... 174 Aug. ^ Intervention of the Scotch l'^5 Sept. V Systematic debate of Presbytery begun, September, 1644 177 ^ Scotch influence quickens the debate 1'79 XXIV ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. 1644 Nov. '^ 8 First Report on Presbytery from the Assembly to the Parliament, Sth November, 1644 181 — • Dec. 11 Second and full Eeport on Church government from the Assembly to the Parliament, llth December, 1644 ... ... 1644-5 Jan. The question of Presbytery debated in Parliament, January, 1645 ... The completed votes of the Parliament on Presbytery prepared for the Treaty of Uxbridge ... ... 1645 May The work of the sub-oommittee of the House of Commons in prepar ing for the erection of Presbyteries ... — July y The complete draft of Presbyterian Church government presented from the Assembly to the Parliament, 7th July, 1645, under the title " the humble advice coiicerning Church government" ... ... 190 — July-Aug. The debates in the Commons on the erection of the Presbjrterian system — Aug. The first Parliamentary ordinance for the erection of the Presbyterian government : the directions for the election of elders, 19th August "1 1645 — Sept.-Oct. Measures proposed by Parliament for the execution of the ordinance, September-October, 1645 — Oct.-1646 The erection of the Presbyterian system delayed by the action of the July clergy I99 The dilatory action of the clergy supported by the city 200 — Nov.'Dec. Some defects in the ordinance of 19th August, 1645, remedied "! 201 The clergy still dissatisfied with the Parliament's ordinance 203 1645-6 Mar. The second Parhamentary ordinance for the erection of Presbyteriaii government, 14th March, 1646 204 1646 June The Loudon clergy yield to the ParUament's delimitation of the Pres byterian system, June, 1646 20s § IIL Pbesbytbrian Jurisdiction or Discipline. 1536-80 vj The origin of the idea of Consistorial discipline in the Reformed Churches ... . 2O6 Discipline in the Canon Law ... \\\ "206! Discipline in the Reformed Churches "' '" !!! 207 The juridical reorganisation of the Eeformed Church ... ... '" 208 In Saxony ... ... ... . . . . . " '" am In Switzerland " '" onQ Complete assumption of ecclesiastical powers by the Civil State 210 Particularly in Geneva '" 211 Calvin's part in the development of the" idea "of DiscipUne" in the Reformed Church 010 Literary anticipations of Calvin's " iksiitoVio " ... " 213 Explicable by Calvin's experienoe in Geneva, 1536-59 216 Nature of the Consistory established, 1541 216 The Consistory claims the function of excommunication 216 :sUWi:h:d,l555'^. '^' ^'^'^ ""' Consistorial DiscipUne thereby The Discipline adopted in France, 1559 010 Aud in the Netherlands, 1568 non And in Scotland, 1560 tZ The " First Book of Discipline" om The " Second Book of Discipline" 222 ^ ^^'ecH!si«ii?„f°™^'-°1-^''^ '*' j""'^*°^l reconstruction "of the T V The clergy revolt, March, 1646 29; — Mar. 20 The Assembly's petition against the ordinance, 20th March, 1646 ... 29! The Parliament's resentment of the petition ... ... 29i The city falters in its support of the clergy ... 29! 1646 May 18 The Commons nevertheless reopen the subject, May, 1646 29i — May 23 And return to their original project of a Standing Parliamentary Committee of Appeal ... ... ... ... ... 29( — June 9 The final ordinance for scandal, 9th June, 1646 29i § IV. Jus Divinum op Presbytery. 1643-6 V Origin of the claim of the Divine Right of Presbyter}' 29! \ Instinctive opposition of the Parliament to the claim from the very outset 3(1 1645 June v The Assembly commits itself to a claim of ./ms dM-i)U(Ht, June, 1645 ... 3(1 1645-6 Mar. Incidentally the Assembly debates the jii s divinum under the Con fession of Faith, March, 1646 30 The Assembly's petition of 19th March, 1646, lead to the Parliament's Queries concerning the ./ms (iTOMiMra ... ... ... 36 1646 April 22 The Queries conceruing the Jms dwinMHi, 22nd April, 1646 ... ...30 — April 30 The Commoner's speeches on the delivery of the Queries to the Assembly, 30th April, 1646 30 The Queries debated in the Assembly but never answered "' ... 31 — July The Queries laid aside, July, 1646 " 31 — Dec. The controversy taken up by the London ciergyi'becember, 1646 ...31 V Revolution m political theory implied in the attitude of the Presby terian clergy of 1646 on this subject of the jus divinum ... 31 ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. XXVII § Y. Ordination. PAGE N/ Pressing practical need for some system of ordination 319 148-4 Jan. The Assembly turns to the subject of ordination 319 \ Position of the Independents 321 The abstract question postponed before the need for some interim ordination machinery 321 — Mar. The debate resumed, March, 1644 323 144 April The Directory for Ordination and the twelve doctrinal propositions on ordination sent up to the Parliament, 20th April, 1644 ... 324 - June The Commons debate on ordination 325 s Erastian action of the Commons' sub-committee ' 326 — July-Aug. The Commons' Committee's report, July- August, 1644 327 — Aug. 14 The Commons' draft ordinance reported, 1644, 14th August 328 Attitude of the Assembly towards the Commons' draft ordinance . . . 329 — Aug.-Sept. The Commons ignore the material part of the Assembly's objections 330 — Oct. 2 The ordinance for ordination pro tempore passed 2nd October, 1644 ... 332 i45 Sept. The subject of ordination recurs, 1645, September 333 — Nov. 8 The second ordinance for ordination, 8th November, 1645 ... ... 334 146 Aug. 27 Final ordinance for ordination, 27th August, 1646 336 § VI. The Directory. (48 Deo. \ The Scotchmen make common cause with the Independents against » the Book of Common Prayer, December, 1643 338 >43-4 Jan.-April Proceedings of the sub-Committee for the Directory, January- April, 1644 339 — Feb.-Mar. The sub-committee's distribution of the work of preparing the Directory 341 )44 April The Assembly appoints its own Committee for the Directory, 3rd April 342 — May-Nov. The Directory for Worship in the Assembly, May-November, 1644 . . . 343 The Directory for Preaching ... ... ... 344 The Directory for Prayer 344 The Directory for the Sacrament ... ... ... ... 344 Directory for Baptism ... ... ... ... ... 346 Directory for Thanksgiving 347 N- The Preface 348 — Nov. 21 The Directory for Worship transmitted from the Assembly to the Parliament, 21st November, 1644 349 Supplementary portions of the Directory 350 - NOV.-1645 The Directory debated in the Parliament, November, 1644, to January, Jan. Y 1645 352 >44-5Jan. 5 The ordinance for the Directory passed, 1644-45, 5th January ... 353 \ The Directory accepted in Scotland 354 — Mar. '^g The first ordinance for the Directory, 5th March, 1645 354 145 June- Augi The enforcement of the Directory 355 - Aug. 25 The second ordinance for the Directory, 23rd August, 1645 356 § VII. The Confession op Faith. V, Need of a Confession of Faith for the purpose of a sacramental test 357 )45-6 The Assembly's work on the Confession, April, 1645, to June, 1646 ... 358 The Articles of the Confession in Committee, 1645-46 359 !46 June The report begun 17th June, 1646 360 - Sept. Part of the Confession sent up to the Parliament, 25th September, 1646 361 - Oct.-Nov. The Lords proceed upon it 362 Deo. The remainder of the Confession sent up to the Parliament, 4th December, 1646 363 xxviii ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. P4GS 1647 April Scriptural proofs added ... ... •¦• ¦•• -•¦ 364 — May \ The complete Confession in the Commons, May, 1647 .... 364 \ The Confession never received full Parliamentary authorisation ... 355 \ Subsequent attempts at the formulation of a Confession of Faith, 1652, 1654, 1657 and 1660 366 § VIII. The Catechisms. V Question as to the historical origin of the Catechism 369 1644-5 The Assembly's Committee for the Catechism, December, 1644- Februai-y, 1645 373 1646-7 Jan. The Assembly decides to prepare two Catechisms 374 1647 AprU-Oct. The Large Catechism, April-October, 1647 374 — Aug.-Nov. The Small Catechism, August-November, 1647 374 1648 June \ The Catechisms in Parliament, June, 1648 ... 375 § IX. The Metrical Version. 1643 Nov. Rouse's version commended to the Assembly ... ... 37j — Nov.-Deo. The Assembly at work on it, 1643, November-December 378 1645 Oct. Barton's version commended to the Assembly, 1645, October 379 — Nov. The Assembly's revision and allowance of Rouse's version, 1645, 14tli November... ... ... ... ... ... ... 380 The Commons order it to be printed, but do not enjoin its use pending the Scotch revision, 1645, 14th November ... 381 1646 April The Commons enjoin the Psalter, 1646, 15th April 382 1646-54 The House of Lords champions Barton's version, 1646-48 383 V Barton's version allowed, 1654 ... ... ... 384 VOL. II. CHAPTEE III. The Peesbyteeian System, 1646-60. 1646 June \ The ParUament orders the establishment of the Presbyterian svstem, June, 1646 •; .., 1 The city clergy yield to the Parliament, and consent to set up "ft limited Presbyterian system, June, 1642 ... 2 — June-Dec. The city parishes elect their elders, June-December, 1646 "." " 3 — Nov. First meeting of the classes, November, 1646 ... " .4 1647 May The first Provincial meeting iu London, May, 1647 '.' '. 5 "" The Presbyterian system iu the country at large 6 1645 Sept. The Speaker's letters to the County Committees, September, 1645 ... 6 — Dec. The county returns thereto, containing certificates of the classical divisions, December, 1645, to Mav. 1646 7 — Dec. 13 For Durham j — Dec. 13 For Northumberland For Westmorland Por Somerset ... 1646 April For Kent - June 9 T1^^^2"r^y .'^^^t"™^^ iii the House"of Commons"handed over'to the Oommittee for the Enumeration ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. Xxix Office of the Committee for the Enumeration 10 646 Aug. Case of Lancashire '] [" '" -^i Erection of the system in Lancashire ... ... ... ' 12 647 April ^ Obstructions to the Presbyterial Government; action "of the' House \ concerning, April, 1647 14 647-8 Jan. ''23 Ordinance for the Presbyterian Government, 23rd January, 1648 ... 16 Its provisions ' . '" i^ 648 Aug. V29 Final ordinance touching the Presbyterian Government^ 29th"August', ^, 16*?. 18 v Its provisions 19 \, Curious nature of the Presbyterian organisation as drafted in the ordinance of August, 1648 22 V Not a volunta,ry system : the classis in form is a nominated body ... 22 V Extent to which the country followed the Parliament's platform ... 23 Iu Lancashire ' 23 In London : the triers ... ... ... ... ... . . 25 The triers equivalent to the nominated classis 26 Question as to the adoption of the system in the remaining parts of the country ... ... ... ... ... ... . 27 Bodies found ordaining between 1647 and 1653 are pure Presbyterian classes 28 The classical system iu Derbyshire... ... 29 In Essex 29 In Hampshire ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 30 In Lancashire ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 30 In Lincolnshire ... ... ... ... ... 31 In London ... ... ... ... ... 31 In Northumberland ... ... ... ... ... ... 31 In Shropshire ... ... ... ... 31 In Somerset 31 In Suffolk ". 31 In Surrey ... ... ... ... ... 32 In Sussex 32 In Warwickshire ... ... ... 32 In Wiltshire 32 In Yorkshire 33 Toleration. S, An estimation of the services rendered to freedom of conscience by the Assembly and the Independents in the Army ... ... ... 34 1643-4 I The Westminster Assembly's attempts at accommodation essentially V rotten 35 1644 Sept. 13 Cromwell's intervention 36 The Committee for Accommodation, September-October, 1644 ... 37 Its proceedings ... ... 38 The proposed scheme of accommodation ... ... 40 — Oct. The Scotch success at Newcastle postpones the accommodation, October, 1644 43 1645 April The Assembly rids itself of the scheme of accommodation ... ... 44 — July Effects of the battle of Naseby on the movement for toleration, July, 1645 45 The Independents' dilemma ... ... ... ... 46 — Nov. The Commons revive the Committee for Accommodation, November, 1645 47 The question becomes henceforth not one of accommodation but of toleration ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 48 xxx ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. pagb 1645-6 The committee's proceedings, November, 1645, to March, 1646 ... 45 Reasons for the failure of the committee to achieve an aocommodationf 6(] The Independents' demands of a toleration 51 Manoeuvres of the Scotch and the Presbyterians 52 — Mar. 9 Close of the negotiation ... ... ••• ••• •¦• 53 The demand for toleration deserts the ground of mere clerical debate 54 And becomes political ... ... ••• ¦•¦ 55 1646-7 Alliance between the Army and the Independents 5j 1647 Aug. The Army demands a toleration, August, 1647 56 Sept. 7 The Treaty at Hampton Court between Charles and the Parliament, 7th September, 1647 57 Charles declares for a toleration, September, 1647 58 Oct. The Parliament deliberates on toleration, October-December, 1647 ... 58 The Commons' resolutions defining the proposed toleration 59 The Lords' proposed scheme of toleration, October, 1647 60 The Commons' final resolutions thereupon ... 61 — Dec. Objections of the Scotch Commissioners to the ParUament's proposed toleration, December, 1647 ... ... ... 63 Their abhorrence of an unlimited toleration ... 64 And insistanoe on the maintenance of the Solemn League and Covenant ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 65 The Scotch intrigue with Charles ... ... 66 Charles allies the Scotch, and declares against toleration, 26th December, 1647 67 — Dec. 24 The toleration clause in the Treaty between the Parliament aud Charles at Carisbrooke, 24th December, 1647 68 The second Civil War results in the triumph of the principle of toleration ... ... 70 1648 Sept.-Dec. The Treaty of Newport leaves the question of toleration untouched, September-December, 1648 ... ... ... ... 71 Both parties to the Treaty ignore the subject ... 72 1648-9 Jan. Declaration on the subject of toleration in the " Agreement of the people," January, 1649 ... ... ... ... ... 73 Its reception by the Rump ... ... ... ... ... 74 — Feb. Equivocation of the Rump on the subject, February, 1649 75 Due to political weakness ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 76 1649 Aug. First step towards a toleration, August, 1649 ... ... 77 1650 June Interrupted by legislation against the Ranters, June, 1650 78 1652-3Feb. The Rump returns to the subject ... ... ... ... 79' In connection with its scheme for the Propagation of the Gospel ... 80 Proposals of the Divines to the Committee for the Propagation of the Gospel 82 Reported to the Rump, but left practically undebated by it 83 1653 July The Nominated Parliament returns to the subiect of toleration, Julv, 1653 .•;. 84 — Dec. The pronouncement on the subject of toleration in the " Instrument of Government," 'December, \Q5S ... ... ... 85 1654 Nov. An Assembly of Divines to draft the fundamentals of beUef, November, 1654 ; 86 Owen's fundamentals in 1654 compared with those of 1652 87 Changed position of the merely clerical Independents 88 — Dec. The Commons practically neglect the work of the divines " ... 89 — Dec. 15 The Parliament's pronouncement on the subject of toleration in con nection with the debate of the " Jmsfo-raitemi " 90 Its resolutions mainly constitutional and finally abortive "' ,91 ^t^t ?«¦"*¦ Attitude of Cromwell's second Parliament to the question of toleration 92 1657 May In connection with the Bill for Catechising, May, 1657 . 93 And in connection with the debate on the Remonstrance 94 ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. XXXI Article XI. of the Humble Petition and Advice, May, 1657 May The revived Rump returns to the subject PAGE ,. 96 ,. 97 as witnessed in the Phbsbytbri.an vsbsus Independent in the Parish. \, Delay in the enactment of a settlement accountable for the subse^ quent ecclesiastical confusion ... \ Decay of the classes ... M Decay of the parochial elderships ... \ Largely due to the hostility of the laity . . . \ Parishes ignoring the classis State of the parish elderships in London, September, 1648 ^, Attempts to revive the parochial elderships in London, 1652 Instructions issued for the work by the London Provincial Synod ... An account of the execution of the regulations demanded by the Provincial Synod ... ... ... ... Returns from the London classes hereupon, March- April, 1652 From the 7th classis Prom the 1st classis Prom the 3rd classis ... Prom the 6th classis V Renewed attempt to revive the elderships, 1656 Proves equally futile ... Attempt to constitute the unconstituted classes and elderships in London, July, 1657 And also to re vi-vif y the existing classes . . . Practical failure of the attempt The attempt renewed in 1658 All these attempts unavailing Further illustrations of the decay of Presbytery fortunes of the parochial elderships ... In London And in the country at large ... And iu Lancashire ... ... ... Backwardness of the parishes in erecting the government Reasons of the powerlessness of the classis as against a recalcitrant parish ... ... ... ... ... ... Unavailing attempts of the Lancashire Provincial Synod to reanimate the elderships ... ... ... ^ Both lay elders and clergy recalcitrant ... N Diminished representation of the parochial elderships in the classes \ Causes of this invincible decay of the elderships \ Presbytery permanently undermined by the loss of civil support ,, Real immunity enjoyed by Independents' congregations ., Position of an Independent congregation as agaiust the classis ^, The struggle between Independent and Presbyterian becomes one for patrimony The classes ignore the existence of Separatist congregations, but resist any intrusions of Independents into the ordinary parish churches or chapels ... ... ... ... Instances in London ... ... -Oct. At St. Michael, Crooked Lane \^ Contest between Presbyterian and Independent over the possession of the parish church ... ... ... ... At St. Bartholomew, Exchange At St. Stephen's, Coleman Street . Terms of a parochial agreement between a gathered and a presbytrated Church \ 9898 99 100101 102 104 104 107 108108109109110110111112113 114 115 116 117117117120120121 122 123 124 125 125 126 127 128 129130130131 132 134 . 135 XXXII ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. PiCI 1649 seg \i Decay of the Consistorial discipline after 1649 ... _ I35 \, Question of the exercise of this discipline up to 1649 in London ... igj \ Severity of the discipline employed up to 1649 I35 \, Almost total disuse of penal disciplinary jurisdiction after 1649 ... 139 In the Manchester classis ... ... I39 And similarly in Bury classis ... ... ... 141 ¦xiThe classes devote themselves almost entirely to the work of ordaining candidates... ... ... ... ... ... ... 142 \i The parochial elderships devote themselves to the mere regulation of ' the administration of the Sacrament ... ... ... 142 \ General nature and method of this regulation ... I43 Insistence upon catechising as a text of personal fitness for admission ^ to the Sacrament ... ... ... ... I44 •v Mechanism for regulating admission to the Sacrament 145' ^ Question of the admission of non-parishioners 141 V Obstinate attitude of the Presbyterian clergy ... ... 14j ^ Attitude of the laity towards the enforcement of catechism and the regulation of the Sacrament ... ... ... ... I49 ^ The clergy sullenly cease to administer the Sacrament 161 The Voluntary Associations, 1653-60. 1653 seq. v The reaction against this attitude of the Presbyterian clergy leads to .^^ the formation of the Voluntary Associations from 1658 onwards 152 1653 The Worcestershire Association ... ... ... I53 Baxter's account of its formation ... ... ... ... I54 Its extent ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I55 — The Cumberland Association ... ... I55' V Extent of the movement for voluntary association 157 V Part played by the London clergy in the movement 158 1657 The Cambridge Association ... I50 1653 Sept. The Cheshire Association ... ... ... ... 159 1655 Sept. The Cornwall Association ... ... ... ... ... I59 1653 The Cumberland and Westmorland Association 160 1655 Oct. The Devonshire Association .. . ... ... ... ' 150 The Dorset Association ... ... ... ... I51 The Essex Association ... ... ... I! 161 The Hampshire Association .. . ... ... !." 161 The Norfolk Association ... ... ]" ]]| "' 161 1656 June The Nottingham Association "_[ ][[ ...WV The Somerset Association ... ... 162 1653 Oct. The Wiltshire Association .". '" \ 162 — The Worcestershire Association _,, "\ '] ]|| 162 ^Invariable spirit of compromise underlying the voluntary association movement from 1653 onwards 163 1 CKQ Q "^ ^^J movement non-sectarian and the parties to 'it homogeneous Z 16«j ib&H-9 ., DiHerence between this non-sectarian movement of 1653 and the attempts at accommodation between Presbyterian and Inde pendent in 1658 165 Baxter missed the import of the movement of 1658 166 The movement taken up after Cromwell's death 167 Effects of the movement of 1658 on CongregationaUsm' 'proper ' Z. 168 1 R^Q T„w 1 « m accommodation movement in Lancashire and Cheshire 169 ib5y July IS Terms of the agreement arrived at at Manchester 170 Dury's part in the movement ... I7I Historic significance of the movement ffl ^"^ Z1T^°^^^'°'^ between Presbyterian" and 'indepe"ndent"in 1658 ™ 1640 '° *^^ ^t^-^dard of EngUsh Puritanism Result of the failure of the movement .'.'. Ul ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. XXxiii CHAPTEE IV. Pateonage and Financial Administeation. V Limited nature of the action of the Parliament as regards the clerev up to 1642 ..175 ^( Arbitrary assumption by both Houses of jurisdiction over the clergy and their livings ... 176 Nov. The Commons' Grand Committee for Religion 176 Dec. The Committee for Scandalous Ministers 177 The bill against Scandalous Ministers 178 The Parliament slower to deal with presentation 180 The Bishops' rights of presentation interfered with 181 June The Parliament's nomination of parochial lectures 182 Extent of the Lecture system ... 183 Method of the Lecture system ... ... 184 Dec. From the outbreak of the war the Parliamentary sequestrations of Royalist livings commence 185 " Delinquent " RoyaUst clergy ... ... ... ... 185 The Houses seize and exercise the right of nomination 186 Various grounds for orders of sequestration 187 Charges of plurality 188 Of malignancy 189 Of scandal 189 t Early methods of dealing with scandalous clergymen 190 System of charitable relief ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 191 July The Parliamentary system of " fifths " ... 192 ! The Parliament's provision for Plundered Parliamentary ministers 193 Dec. The Committee for Plundered Ministers, 31st December, 1642 . . . 194 Its importance for the financial side of the period ... 195 Growth of the committee's powers ... ... ... 196 Its relations with the Westminster Assembly 197 Its dealings with scandalous ministers 197 Its other varied powers ... ... 198 Financial side of the work of the Plundered Ministers' Committee ... 199 Revenues of sequestrations ; settlements out of Royalist compositions ; purchases of Impropriations ... 199 Method of the committee's procedure ... ... 200 Purchases of Impropriations out of sequestrations ... ... ... 201 The Plundered Ministers' Committee not as yet possessed of any funds of its own... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 202 The Commons approach the question of providing maintenance for a preaching ministry ... 202 The first bill, October, 1641, April-1642 203 seq. Preliminary attacks on the properties of Bishops and Deans and Chapters 204 V At first of a personal and restricted nature ... ... ... ... 205 Mar. 31 The ordinance of 31st March, 1643 206 Individual instances of appropriation of revenues of the hierarchy towards the maintenance of ministers 207 Oct. First step towards devoting capitular revenues to the maintenance of the ministry 208 Partial and tentative proceedings of the Parliament up to 1646 ... 209 Oct. 9 The bills for the sale of Bishops' lands, 1646, ei postea 210 Nature of the trust created ... ... ... ... 212 April 30 The bills for the sale of Deans and Chapters' lands, 1649 213 Reservation out of such sales of a fund for the maintenance of the ministry ... ... ... 214 XXXIV ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. 1649 June 1650 April 1654 Sept. 1652-3 Feb. 1649-50 Mar. — Feb. 1653 Mar. 1654 Sept. 1653 seq — Dec. 1654 Aug. 1649-51 8 The first ordinance for the maintenance of ministers, Sth June, 1649 214 Nature of the trust created ••• ••• 215 First Fruits and Tenths 215 Nature of the grants to be made 216 The Trustees for Maintenance of Ministers 216 5 The second ordinance for maintenance of ministers, 1650, 5th April... 216 The Committee for the Reformation of the Universities 217 2 The third ordinance for maintenance of ministers, 1654, 2nd September 217 System of grants of augmentations and nature of the executive ... 21^ 4 Powers of the Committee for Reformation of the Universities trans ferred to the Plundered Ministers' Committee, February, 1653 ... 219 Reason alleged for the transfer 220 The Plundered Ministers' Committee : its history and functions during the years 1650-53 221 Extent of the Church revenue and patronage handled by the Plundered Ministers' Committee whilst separate from the Trustees for Main tenance ... ... ... 222 Account of the committee's income 223 Nature of the committee's powers up to February, 1653 224 Mechanism created by the Act of April, 1650, and nature of the com mittee's powers after February, 1653 ... ... 225 The separate trusts and executives created by the various Schemes for the Propagation ... ... ... ... 226 1 In the case of the four northern counties ... ... 227 22 And in that of Wales 228 Nature of the scheme ; of the trust and the executives created ... 228 The trust and the executive powers of these two "Propagations" transferred to the Trustees for Maintenance from March or April, 1653 229 Powers of the Plundered Ministers' Committee transferred to the Trustees for Maintenance, September, 1654 230 Nature of the powers of the Trustees for Maintenance from 1654, September ... ... ... ... 231 Their executive powers ... ... ... ... 232 Their judicial powers ... ... ... ... 232 Their financial function ... ... ... 232 Statements of the revenue administered by the Trustees for Main tenance ... ... ... ... 233 A rough hypothetical statement of the account 233 Authentic statements of account of the Trustees' revenue and ex penditure ... Account No. I ..: Account No. II. Account No. III. Account No. IV. Account No. V. Capital account of the sales of Deans and Chapters' lands 239 The capital value of the Bishops' lands sold 24^ Final attempts at legislation on clergy maintenance, 1656, 1659 ... 2431 V The treatment of scandalous ministers under the Commonwealth ... 244 ^ Separate proposals dealing with them 215 i The Scheme of Commissioners for Ejection ... ."' " ... 246 V The Little Parliament's scheme, 1653 ... ..". ...246 V Cromwell's ordinance, 22nd August, 1654 ..". .Z '.' ...n'i V The Commissioners for Ejection ... ... . ...247 V The Commonwealth Church survey, 1649-50 "... ..'. ..". ... 248 Early instances of re-arrangemeuts of parishes .!! !.. 24! The Ch'^'^'''* survey the result of the Scheme for Maintenance of the Ministry 248 ANALYSIS OF CONTENTS. XXXV PAGE A parochial survey pure and simple not a mere rental 249 Method and results of the survey 250 Later proceedings taken upon the survey of 1650 251 The later detached surveys of 1655-59 252 Question of the repair of churches and chapels 253 Churchwarden system practically undisturbed throughout the period 254 General attitude of the Long Parliament towards the right of tithe... 255 July The ordinance of 3rd July, 1644 256 seq. Later ordinances concerning payment of tithes, August, 1647, August, " 1654 257 , The poverty of the Commonwealth prevented any idea of the abolition of tithes 258 First Fruits and Tenths, futile proposals for their abolition 259 i The system fully maintained 260 . Treatment of the sequestered Royalists 260 Acts for assuring their livings to intruded Parliamentary clergymen, August, 1647, June, 1657 261 Uneasiness caused by the insecure legal position of intruded Puritan clergymen ... 262 General attitude of the period towards the rights of private patronage 263 Inefieotual attempts of both Houses to preserve these rights 264 Extent of interference with these rights 265 Different attitude iu oases of other than private patronage 266 Episcopal patronage ... 267 University patronage ... 267 Royal patronage partly usurped by the parishioners ! 268 Case of St. Bartholomew, Exchange 269 Nature and extent of the usurpation of the right of popular election 270 Royal patronage partly usurped by the Commissioners of the Great Seal: their powers 271 Question as to the rights of the Commissioners of the Great Seal ... 272 Extent of the usurpation of patronage by the Commissioners of the Great Seal 272 Extent of the patronage exercised by the Plundered Ministers' Com mittee and the Trustees for Maintenance 274 Interference by the parishioners in the patronage exercised by the Commissioners of the Great Seal ... 275 Cromwell's exercise of patronage 276 Nature and extent of Cromwell's usurpation of patronage 277 General r(!sMro^ of the exercise of patronage, 1646-60 277 seq. Method of certification and approbation of ministers 279 By the Assembly ... ... 279 seq. By the classes 280 1 Partial employment of Episcopal institution and induction 282 seq. , Attempts to provide a substitute for Episcopal institution 283 V By means of the classes 283 Feb.-April The Rump's Scheme for Approbation of Ministers, 1653 284 Mar. '- The Commissioners for Approbation of Public Preachers, 1654 ... 284 V Method of certifying ministers by the Commissioners for Approbation 286 V The Commissioners for Approbation had not the function of performing ordination ^^^ CHAPTEE I. THE ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES AND LEGISLATION OP THE LONG PARLIAMENT UP TO THE MEETING OP THE ASSEMBLY OF DIVINES. 1640-1643. Chap. I. The civil wars under Charles were the outcome of underlying ' causes that had been at work for more than two cmi wa°rs.*^^ generations. Since the consolidation of the nation under Elizabeth — since 1588 — a twofold growth had been silently going on — of Constitutionalism in the civil life, of Puritanism in the religious life of the nation ; and the wars became a necessity when this twofold progress could no longer be contained and controlled by the old forms, by the old civil and religious institutions. And yet an attentive consideration of these civil wars will reveal their phenomenal nature. The years 1640-45 were the most revolutionary that this country has ever passed through. In the domain of the civil as well as of the religious agitation there is noticeable an extra ordinary accentuation of feeling as the breach between King and Parliament widened, and it was this accentuation of feeling that led to the revolu tion itself. At the opening of the Long Parliament the expectation of change and the determination 4 VOL. I. 1 2 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. for it werc general, but a much milder reform would ^have satisfied in December, 1640, than a year or two later. This is true of both the phases of the agitation — of the religious as well as the consti tutional demands of the nation. As compared with this rise of principle, the mere accident of the usurpation of the army, and of Cromwell, is insignificant. It is not to be wondered at that the army mastered the Parlia ment, nor that the victory of the army resulted in the monarchy of Cromwell. It is of much more importance that, when the accident of this usurpa tion had been swept away, the return was made to the constitutional standard, not of 1639, but of 1641. So much of the work of the revolution, at least, was to endure and to become the basis of the constitutional progress of the succeeding century. Accentuation It is quitc as true that these first years of the i64oV3°^and Loug Parliament witnessed a similar accentuation Puritanism ^^ feeling and rise of demand in the second phase of the struggle — the religious agitation. The general idea of Church reform that obtained in November, 1640, had become insufficient and useless in June, 1641, and the scheme of June, 1641, was swept away by the events of 1642 and 1643. It is such a desertion of its original basis that makes one hesitate to speak of this as the Puritan Revolution, for the forms of Church discipline and government that were finally adopted were not contemplated by— did not grow out of— Puritanism proper. During the years 1640-48 English Puritanism itself underwent a revolution, and this fact must be recognised before the character of the period NATURE OF THE REVOLUTION. 3 can be rightly understood. The steps in that ^ chap. i. revolution are marked by the debates on the Root-and-Branch Bill in 1641, and by the calling of the Assembly, and the adoption of the Solemn League and Covenant in 1643. At the opening of the Long Parliament as much stress was laid upon religious as upon civil grievances, but the attitude of the Parliament was essentially lay — unclerical. In past years the clergy had largely intermeddled in secular affairs, and mostly in the interest of an unconstitutional exe cutive. It was necessary, therefore, to secure the national existence against any such danger for the future — to restrict bishops and clergymen to their spiritual function. Again, Episcopacy had shown itself intolerant of the Puritanism of the parochial clergy. The Commons were resolved to assert and. foster that Puritanism. These were the principles underlying the first legislation of the Long Parlia ment on matters of religion. But as the breach widened, so did the bounds of these principles. Episcopacy itself, the machinery of government of the State Church, was called into question, and it was resolved to replace it by some less centralised Revolution- system, that would give a share of the government of Pres'by-"'' to the parochial clergy and put an end to the *''"^"''™- dependence of the bishops upon the C*rown. It is probable that, without the necessity of calling in Scotch aid, and of adopting the Solemn League and Covenant, the Long Parliament would have re solved upon a system of Church government that might be called Presbyterian, though in a sense very different from that usually conveyed by the term 4 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. But cvcnts did not permit of such orderly evolution. ' The course of the war made it necessary to call in Scotch aid, and the condition of obtaining it was the adoption of the Covenant. The main facts of the result are well known. The Parliament was pledged to the adoption of Presbyterianism, and all through the years 1643-48 the work of its establish ment was in progress in various stages. In many parts of the country the Presbyterian system was not set up ; wherever established, there were re strictions on the power of the Presbyteries such as were unknown in Scotland ; but with these limita tions it still remains a fact that these years witnessed a, real attempt at the enforcement upon the English nation of a Presbyterian system. Abstractly con sidered, the phenomenon is the most remarkable in English history. The main feature of a rigid Presbyterian system is the censorial power exercised by the Presbytery. The Scottish Kirk Session and the English Congregational Presbytery of the year 1647 took cognisance of the morals of the con gregation, held investigations in regular form, and decreed punishment by suspension, being further empowered to call in the civil arm for the enforcement of this sentence. No system could be found more repugnant to the essence of English civil, constitutional, and national sentiment, and the attempt at the enforcement of such a system during the civil wars was nothing less than a blind conflict with that national sentiment. This, too, was at a time when there were in the minds of men vague and visionary notions of freedom nourished by the wars. Hence the phenomenal nature of this ENGLISH PRESBYTERIANISM. 5 English civil- war Presbyterianism, as judged from Chap. i. the point of view of the nation at large. ^ Nor is its strangeness less striking when viewed from the standpoint of clerical feeling merely. There have been only two occasions in the history of English dissent in which the Puritan clergy have English Puri- favoured a pure Presbyterian system. The one was genuSeiy^"^'' under Elizabeth, the other was the case in point P'^«^''y*«"^'^= during the civil wars. In both cases the movement stands apart from the general body of Puritan sentiment, from the general stream of Puritan protest. The broad principle underlying sixteenth and seventeenth century dissent was Puritanism merely, a spiritual perception expressing itself at different times in different forms — in the early days of the Reformation in scruples as to the vestments and the rubrics, that seemed to savour of Popery ; later, in the merely scholastic Sabbatarian contro versy ; later still, in a rigid Calvinism as opposed to an apparently laxer doctrine of grace ; and again later, in the inculcation of greater morality of life, and greater regard for the means of grace and the Lord's day, as opposed to the immorality and the Sunday sports of the England of Charles. And this continued to be the main basis and character and current of English Puritanism even under the explosions of Elizabethan and civil- war Presby- either under • n^-, T^ 1 • ¦ c 1 1 r Elizabeth terianism. [The Presbyterianism ot the days ot Elizabeth was an academic movement principally, never in a national sense a clerical movement. It was apparently confined to three counties and London, and to a small portion of the ministers even of these countiesn It never asserted itself in 6 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. 1. actual Organisation, and fell away before the close of Elizabeth's reign. There are no traces of any inheritance of the ideas or influence of this Eliza bethan Presbyterianism by the English Puritans of the days of James I. and Charles I. The Presby- or during the teriauism of the Civil War was a more vital and Civil Wars. , , , . i i •j_ concrete phenomenon, but none the less was it an abrupt and startling and illogical expansion from the basis of English Puritanism. And in sentiment the broad stream of Puritanism still flowed under neath. It is represented in the biography of the time in its entirety by one man — Richard Baxter. So vivid was his perception of the essential nature of Puritanism that he could not recognise the real existence of a Presbyterian system or party. Though Presbytery generally took in Scotland, yet it was but a stranger here, and it found some ministers that lived in conformity to the bishops' liturgies and ceremonies (ho-wever they might -wish for reformation), and the most that quickly after -were ordained -were but young students in the universities at the time of the change of Church govern ment, and had never -well studied the points on either side; and though most of the ministers then in England sa-w nothing in the Presbyterian -way of practice -which they could not cheerfully concur in, yet it was but fevy that had resolved on their principles ; and -when I came to try it, I found that most that ever I could meet with were against the jus divinum of lay elders, and for the moderate primitive Episcopacy, and for a narrow congregational or parochial extent of ordinary churches, and for an accommodation of all parties in order to concord {Autoh., i., 146). On the statement of fact Baxter's testimony will be found to break down in more than one instance. The significance of these words lies in their tone. They represent Baxter's attitude, and ATTITUDE OF tHE LAITY, 1640. 7 the attitude of many others ; they are the expres- ^ chap. i. sion of the constant element of Puritanism, as i64o. opposed to the mere accident of the Presby terianism of 1643-7. In November, 1640, the general frame of mind General atti- in the country, as in the Parliament, was negative, onthesubject not positive — destructive, not constructive. There g^evaS! were grievances existing in certain aspects of the Church system, inseparably linked with that system, and hateful by their offending. There were men, too, who had been instruments and promoters of those grievances. On these points there was no hesitancy. Men's minds were made up as to some things which should no longer continue — as to some high places of iniquity that should be cleansed. But the notions of a new state of things were vague. In the opening harangues the subject of religious grievances was only one with others — civil, judicial, parliamentary — and a large part of the consideration which the purely religious ques tion received in those harangues was devoted to the expression of fear as to a universally suspected Popish plot. With regard to the state of feeling in the country at large, it is not difficult to generalise. It is not to be denied that, as events proved later, there already existed in the country a Root-and- Branch party. It appears from Baillie's letters that the London petition had been started immediately after the meeting of the Parliament, and that at the same time, or very shortly after, petitions of a like nature were got up in Kent, Essex, and ten or eleven counties. But in November, 1640, the 8 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. ^ general feeling, as evinced in the petitions, was 1640. not such. For the clergy, the best statement of their position is given in the well-known Petition and Remonstrance. Two months before that peti tion was presented, there had been a very similar one preferred by two beneficed clergymen on behalf of many of the clergy of Lincoln. This petition complained of the increase of Popery, the renewing of idle and frivolous ceremonies, and the canons, and prayed that thereafter no canons should be made without consent in Parliament, that marriage might be lawful at all times, and that some severe law might be enacted against . . . the profanation of the Lord's day.^ Other petitions, as that from the churchwardens and sidesmen of London of the same date, com plained of the articles of visitation and the oath of presentment exacted from churchwardens. The petitions It is iu such petitions, rather than in those on grievances _ .,,,.. . in 1640. advocating the abolition ot Episcopacy, that can be discerned the true measure of reformation desired by the country at large ; and it is in this element, vaguely conservative and moderate, that we notice with the lapse of time and the progress of events, the change of attitude and accentuation of feeling which was so characteristic of the Parliament itself At the beginning of the session petitions poured in from the counties on the general subject of grievances. The names of fifteen counties which preferred petitions by the 9th November, are given in the journals and Rushworth. Some of them are preserved (those from Hertford, York, and 'D'Ewes' Diary, i., 8, I6th November; HarL MSS. 162, B. M. ATTITUDE OF THE LAITY, 1642. 9 Kent), and we may safely conjecture a similarity of chap. i. nature in all. The substance of the Dorset petition was given by word of mouth by Lord Digby, in one of those set speeches on grievances which will be noticed immediately. " There was given to us in the county court at the day of our election a short memorial of the heads, that we might rep resent them to the Parliament: (1) ship money; (2) pressing soldiers, and raising monies concerning the same ; (3) monopolies ; (4) the new canons, and the oath to be taken by lawyers and divines, etc. ; (5) the oath required to be taken by church officers to present according to articles new and unusual." The religious questions here raised are evidently subordinate in position, and of small intrinsic im portance as religious questions. Now, in this matter of county petitions alone, notice the rise of feeling. Sixteen months later the Lords, after Compared having previously refused to sanction a similar of i642. measure, passed the bill concerning ecclesiastical persons (taking away the bishops' votes in Parlia ment and disabling all persons in holy orders from exercising any temporal jurisdiction). On this occasion a petition went from Kent to the Lords, acknowledging with joy the good correspondence between Lords and Commons in passing the bill for the bishops' jurisdiction : "And we pray you will go on with them to a thorough reformation, especially of the Church according to the Word of God".^ During the agitation on this particular bill, no less than twenty counties presented peti- "L. J., iv., 571. 10 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES; 1640-3. Chap. L grievancesNovember7-10, 1640. , tions praying for thp passing of the measure, or 1640. ^ returning thanks for it, in almost identical words. The extent and the significance of such a rise in popular feeling can be traced and exemplified in the history of the struggle, and in the Parliamentary debates. The Parliament met on the 3rd of November, 1640. The first set debate was on the subject of The debate on grievances, and was opened on the 7th by Harbottle Grimston, the very embodiment of a constitutional Conservative. With him the question of Parlia mentary privilege preceded the question of religion, and, under the latter head, his attention was given almost entirely to the conduct of the late Synod, its canons, and the oath.^ Grimston's They would have us at the very first blush swear to speech. damnable heresy, that matters necessary to salvation are con tained in the discipline of our Church, . . . and they would anticipate and forestall our judgment by making us swear beforehand that we would never consent to an alteration. Nay, they go further, for they would have us swear that the govern ment of the Church by archbishops, bishops, etc., is jure divino. Their words are : " As by right it ought to stand," whereas we do not meet with the name of archbishop, bishop, dean, or archdeacon in all the New Testament. And whatsoever may be said of the function of bishop, it is one thing, but for their jurisdiction, it is merely humana institutione — they must thank the king for it. After referring to the boldness of the Synod in granting a benevolence, he thus concluded : — They which durst do this, will do more if the current of their raging tyranny be not stopped in time. Who are they 1 The speech is given to Rushworth, iv., 34, but wrongly assigned to the 9th. D'Ewes' Journal corrects it. DEBATE ON GRIEVANCES. 11 ¦that have countenanced and cherished Popery and Arminianism Chap. I. lio that height it hath grown to in this kingdom ? . . . Who are ' ^g^ ' they that of late years have been advanced to any preferment November. in the Church, but such as have been notoriously suspicious in their discipline, and for the most part vicious in their lives ? . . . Therefore, to put ourselves in a way for our redress and relief, I conceive it were fit that a committee might be named to take these petitions into their consideration . . . that the parties grieved may have just reparation, . . . and that out of them laws may be contrived and framed for the preventing of the like mischiefs for the future. Grimston was followed by Rudyard,^ who spoke of the Popish tendencies of the Court and prelates, and of the discountenance thrown upon the Puritan clergy; and by the fiery Sir Francis Seymour, who spoke little on the head of religion, and under that head only of the danger from Jesuits — the one aspect of the question which seems to us least real. As might be expected, Pym's speech was the Pym's speech. most representative. After speaking of the danger irom the Papists, he alludes to the corrupt part of the clergy : — Favourites such as for preferment prize not conscience, , . . and, worse than Papists, these are willing to run into Popery ; and these, though severed, aim at one end, and to its achievement walk on four feet — at first softly, now by strides — and are near their ends if they be not prevented. The first foot is ecclesiastical courts — their action in discountenancing of preachers and virtuous men whom they persecute under the law of purity — their countenancing of preachers of a contrary disposition . . . and their frequent preachings and instructions to preach up the absolute monarchy of kings. ^ Rudyard's speech in State Papers, Bomestic, cccclxxi. No. 38 is a single oration, and so printed in Cooke's Speeches in Parliament, 1641, pp. 103-9. In Rushworth it occurs as several speeches (iii., pp. J 349, 1355, 1350, 1368, I35I, IB4I, 1352). 12 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap, l It is nccdlcss to indicate further the nature of 1640, the debate. Pym had commenced his speech by November. ¦' . „ t. i i moving for a reformation, nnding out the authors of these grievances, and punishing them. Bagshaw concluded his similarly, thus : — In the interim, let them be made examples of punishment who have been the authors of aU these miseries. This merely general debate on grievances was continued on the 9th, on the occasion of the presentation of petitions from the counties. It was in this connection that Digby delivered to the House the message from Dorset already noticed. His condemnation of " such discontient divines," and of the conduct of the late Synod, was as vehe ment as any man's, and yet his subsequent change of attitude will be borne in mind. He was followed by Sir John Culpeper — destined likewise to a change of front. In the later debates of the fol lowing year. Episcopacy found no more vigorous defender than Culpeper ; but, in these early general debates, his condemnation of the canons and the ceremonies was clear and resolute. The outcome of the discussion was the appoint ment on the 10th November of the committee of twenty-four for a declaration on the state of the kingdom, and a motion to refer the book of new canons to the examination of the Grand Committee for Religion. These debates are very indicative of the attitude of the House. They show how small a place the questions which were later to agitate the Commons so violently— questions of Church government and CLERICAL GRIEVANCES. 13 organisation — had in the mind of the Long Parlia- Chap. i. ment at its commencement, and how vivid, on the i640, other hand, was its sense of the delinquency of ^°''^"'^^'- particular members of the existing ecclesiastical system, and of the impolicy of the recently enacted canons. It does not appear that the latter part of the motion was immediately acted upon. The debate on the canons did not commence until a fortnight after, and the vote on the subject was not taken until the middle of December ; but it was with this subject of the canons that the real ecclesiastical debates of the Long Parliament actually com menced. In the meantime the features of the situation were depicted in the petitions that poured in. The petition of the Lincoln clergy has already been The clerical noticed. The names of eight other petitions which ^^ ^ ^°^^' were delivered in on these days (9th and 10th November) alone are preserved in the Journals.^ They concern in their entirety the removing of the communion table, the railing of it in, the oath, and the articles put upon churchwardens and sidesmen, false doctrine, and irregularities of the clergy. Be sides these matters there were submitted to the investigation of the Grand Committee for Religion a,ll the cases of private injustice in the High Com mission, or from the bishops' ordinaries. The num- 1 Sir Edward Dering's speech on the presentation of the petition of Thos. Wilson, rector of Otham in Kent, contained a most bitter attack upon Laud as "the centre whence our miseries grow " (State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxi., No. 49, lOth November; Rushworth, iv., 39). George Walker's petition as pastor of St. John Evangelist is given in State Papers, Domestic, occclxxii., No. 37, 30th November. 14 ecclesiastical debates, 1640-3. Chap. I. ber of these (by 15th June, according to D'Ewes,^ 1640. they had reached the extraordinary figure of 900) led ultimately to the appointment of sub-com mittees, " The Committee for Deprived Clergymen," and " The Committee for Scandalous Clergymen," afterwards notorious under the latter name. On the occasion of the first report from the Grand Committee for Religion, bitter speeches were made by Sir Edward Dering and Sir John Wray. The former instituted an elaborate com parison between the High Commission and the Inquisition ; the latter called upon the House " to lay the axe to the root of the long and deep fangs of superstition and Popery " by moving " that the groves and high places of idolatry may be removed and pulled down ".'^ But as yet the interest of the Commons was confined to the action of the late Convocation. It Condemna- was determined first to pass a condemnation upon canons V that body. After three adjournments of the debate, 1640. which was entirely legal, the House passed resolu tions against the canons of 1640 in particular, and against the power of the clergy to make any canons without common consent in Parliament^ (15th and 16th December). 'D'E-wes' MS., vol. iii., p. 1021. ^25th November, Wednesday (Rushworth, iv., 55; Pari. Hist., ix., 147). In State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxii., Sir Edward Dering's speech is assigned to 2Ist November (Rushworth, iii., 1345 ; iv., 55). It concluded with a motion for a committee for discovery of the great numbers of oppressed ministers under the bishops' tyranny. = C. J., ii., 51-2.; L. J., iv., 273.; Rushworth, iii., 1365; State Papers, Domestic, ccoclxxxiii., Nos. 61, 67. The subsequent proceed ings against the bishops in 1640-1 were based upon these resolutions. In March, 164f , it was argued that the clergy had incurred a prffimunire„ THE GRAND COMMITTEE FOR RELIGION. 15 These debates were, however, as has been said, chap. i. purely legal. As yet the subject of religious refer- i64o, mation had not been broached in the full House, ^"^"^ ^'^' and the first notice of the question is significant from its timidity. In the course of the previous week, 12th December, 1640, the Grand Committee for Religion had named a sub-committee to inquire into the state of religion in general. This com mittee reported to the Grand Committee, and on Monday, the 19th December, the Grand Committee reported to the House. According to their report ^ the sub-committee had pitched upon three points -^^ ^^^ ^^ touching religion : (1) to inquire what is the cause "^''lig^oi^ ^'¦o™ " ^ ^ the sub-com- of the decay of preaching; (2) of the increase of mittee for Popery; (3) of scandalous ministers. The House igthD^e'cem- ' ordered that the sub-committee should be turned into a select committee — i.e., directly from the House itself — and meet forthwith. It is indi cative of the vague views and faltering attitude of the Parliament in its earliest months on the question of Church and religious reform, that on the llth of December, the very day before the appoint- and on 27th April an Aot was introduced for punishing and fining the members of the late Synod (see the list of fines in Rushworth). This was replaced on the 3rd June by a bill for making void certain canons, and for the punishment of such prelates as were the makers of them. It was adopted by the Lords on the 12th of June, 1641, and it was on this bill that the form of impeaobment was drawn up against fourteen bishops (C. J., ii., 165 ; Verney Notes, Camden Society, p. 83 ; D'Ewes' MS., ii., 657). Finally, the impeachment on such ground was not proceeded in, a fresh prosecution being instituted on the occasion of the withdrawal of the bishops from the Lords' House (30th December, 1641). The House returned to the subject of the canons and the punishment of convocation in 1642, but the outbreak of the ' war brought other issues to the front. ^ D'Ewes' i>mr2/, i., 87. 16 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. ment of the abovesaid sub-committee by the Grand The London Committee, the London petition^ against Episcopacy against^Epis- had been presented. In its own words, the latter mh Decern-' notorious petition prayed "that the government ^^^' of archbishops, lord bishops, deans, archdeacons, etc., and their courts and administrations in them, with all its dependencies, roots and branches may be abolished, as dangerous to the Church and Commonwealth, and the cause of many foul pres sures to the subject in liberties and estates, and the true government according to the Word of God established ". To the petition was appended a list of twenty-eight grievances in the existing government, which may be noticed later. The petition was signed by 15,000 hands, and not less than 1500 gentlemen of quality and worth attended in Westminster Hall on the day of its delivery. Only a slight debate greeted the appearance of this petition, though its existence had been known some time. Sir Miles Fleetwood and Strode spoke generally and vaguely for a careful consideration of religion as the chiefest pillar of happiness. The Puritan D'Ewes was much more explicit. He did not deny there was much chaff in the petition, but he found some wheat in it also. D'Ewes' views on the Church and religion were, like those of many of his contemporaries, critical and not constructive. On almost every occasion on which we find him speaking on religion, he takes pains to draw a distinction between ancient and godly bishops, whom he reverenced, and the bishops of his own 1 Rushworth, iv., 93-7. THE LONDON PETITION. 17 " degenerate " days, who had their minds and Chap. i. morals corrupted by the addition of their temporal le^o, , • ^ Dec. 11. baronies. Doubtless, said D'Ewes, the government of the Church Its reception. of God by godly, zealous, and preaching bishops hath been most ancient, and I should reverence such a bishop in the next degree to a king. But I protest in the presence of God that if matters in religion had gone on twenty years longer as they have done of late years, there would not in the issue so much as the face of religion have continued amongst us, but all should have been overwhelmed with idolatry, superstition, ignorance, prophaneness, and heresy. As I allowed ancient and godly bishops, so I disliked their baronies and temporal honours and employments. All the speakers who followed D'Ewes, with the exception of the Treasurer of the Household (the elder Vane), favoured the reception of the petition, and it was finally resolved that all the petitions"^ should be considered of on a certain day — the following Thursday. The roll of names attached to the petition was ordered to be sealed With the seal of the speaker and the two aldermen of London. There was hpwever a notable unwillingness on the part of the House in general to approach the consideration of this London petition, and of the general question of the government of the Church — of Episcopacy. The debate on it did not actually toommence until the 8th of February, and yet the existence of the petition had been known, as has lA counter petition in favour of the retention of Episcopal government had been presented on the same day, llth December. The text of it is preserved in State Papers, Domestic, ccoclxxxiii., No. 49. VOL. I. 2 18 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. been said, a month, and probably more, before it 1640. -was presented. Writing on the 18th of November, Baillie states ^ that \ The town of London, a world of men, mind to present a petition, which I have seen, for the abohtion of bishops and all their appurtenances. It is thought good to delay it till the Parliament have puUed down Canterbury and some prime bishops, which they mind to do as soon as the king has digested the bitterness of his lieutenants' censure. Huge things are here in working. The mighty hand of God be about this great work. We hope this shall be the joyful harvest of the tears which this many years have been sown in this kingdom.' All here are weary of bishops. ' In a later letter, on the 2nd of December, he informs the Presbytery of Irvine that The petition against Episcopacy, subscribed with some thousand hands, had been given in and pressed hard before now had not friends in both Houses, as more than two parts are, advised to spare the pressing of that conclusion till first they had put the whole bishops and their convocation in a praemunire for their last illegal canons, which now they are about, also till they have brought down some of the prime bishops for prime faults, which they have not will to essay tdl ^ they have closed the Lord Deputy's process. On the day after the presentation of the petition he writes as follows : — It was resolved that the petition against Episcopacy, root and branch, should be delayed tUl first we had gotten Canterbury down, and the Parliament had removed all the rest out of the House by a praemunire for their canons ; yet we are so delayed by Traquair's fencing for his own head ere we can come to the minor, where Canterbury stands to be concluded, as we hope, in a deep bocardo, that the people's patience could no longer keep in. So yesterday a world of honest citizens, in ^ Baillie, Letters, i., 273. FEELING IN THE COMMONS. 19 their best apparel, in a very modest way went to the House of ohap. I Commons, sent in two aldermen with their petition — subscribed, as we hear, by 15,000 hands— for removing Episcopacy, the January. service-book, and other such scandals out of their Church. It was well received. They were desired to go in peace and to send three or four of their number on Thursday next to attend some answer. Against that time, God willing, we will be in hand with his little Grace, and sundry petitions of several shires, to every one of which some thousand hands are set, will be given in against Episcopacy. As the petitions from the counties to which unwiiung- Baillie here refers, were not presented to the House House^o'f*^^ until the 13th of January, it seems certain that ^°°^™°"s '° , ., .,,. r. 1 T-r 11 approach the only the unwillingness ot the House delayed them question of so long; and even then the subject remained in p^^""^^"^' abeyance for a month further. Before the debates on these petitions in Feb ruary, there were several occasions on which the action of the Commons displays its disposition, and verifies the above statement. On Friday, the 8th of January, 164", the Subsidy Bill was under consideration. On that occasion certain doctors of divinity were found to have been hiserted in the list of commissioners for the town of Cambridge. A one-sided discussion arose as to the exclusion of their names from the list. As far as can be seen, all the speakers were in favour of the motion. D'Ewes impatiently declared that in his opinion the matter deserved no longer debate, for it had been the old grievance of England that clergymen intermeddled with secular affairs, "and it was a great grievance now to be remedied, and therefore we should much prejudice ourselves now to admit it. So after one or two more had 20 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. L^ spoken to it, all the clergymen were struck 1640-1, out." ' anuary. ^Qm- (Jays later the Commons were called upon to consider the report concerning the standing or otherwise of certain committees. The question was proposed that the Grand Committee for Religion should continue to exist, and should take into consideration the action of the ecclesi astical courts, "and the government of the Church as it now stands," and present it to the House. There was, to all appearance, no division of opinion as to the first of these agenda, but the second was demurred to. It was proposed to substitute the phrase " irregularities of the government " for the word "government". In the end neither phrase was adopted, but another circumlocution invented, "the government of the Church as it is now exercised " ,• and this was not until after some debate, and with the admission of such palliatives as that with which D'Ewes concluded his speech in favour of the word government.^ " Nor doubt I," said he, "however the question were put, whether of government or of the irregularities of the government, we should proceed with that discretion and moderation as to question nothing but what were fit to be questioned." I How long the Commons in their indecision would have postponed the consideration of the ' D'Ewes' Diary, i., 131 ; Harl. MSS., 162. 2 The resolution in D'Ewes, i., 138, says simply, "the proceedings of the ecclesiastical courts and the government of the Church ". Both the Commons Journals, ii., 66, and Nalson, i., 719, say, "the govern ment of the Church as it is now exercised ". THE KENT PETITION. 21 subject of Episcopacy cannot be conjectured, but Ohap. i. in this matter it was not entirely master of itself. i64o-i. On the 13th of January the resumption of the ^°"*'^- subject was moved by Sir Edward Dering, the occasion being the presentation of a petition with which he was entrusted from his county, Kent. The county The matter of it is identical, the wording almost agahist'^Bpis- {larallel, with that of the London petition. °°P^°y- By sad experience we do daily find the government in the Church of England by archbishops, bishops, deans, and arch deacons, with their courts, jurisdictions, and administrations by them and their inferior officers, to be very dangerous both to the Church and Commonwealth, and to be the occasion of manifold grievances to the subjects, their consciences, liberties, and estates. The dangerous effects of this lordly power hath appeared in their overruling with a hard hand all other ministers, the suspension of many godly preachers, and re straining the lawful preaching of others, both for lectures and for afternoon sermons on the Sabbath day ; their encourage ment of Papists' ceremonies and commendation of the Church of Eome ; their enforcing antiquated ceremonies and the oath ; their dispensation for plurality of benefice and abuse of the ordinance of excommunication ; their claim of Divine right for their office and jurisdiction, and assumption of temporal honours and offices in the Commonwealth; and the iniquitous and illegal proceedings of their courts. It is therefore prayed (the petition concludes), that this hierarchical power may be totally abrogated, if the wisdom of this honourable House shall find that it cannot be maintained by God's Word and to His glory.^ Among all our business (said Dering, in introducing the petition), I observe one, a very main one, to sleep sine die. It is a business of immense weight and worth, such as deserves our best care. I mean the grand petition long since given in by many thousand citizens against the domineering of the clergy ; wherein, for my part, although I cannot approve of all '¦ Nalson, i., 74; Rushworth, iv., p. 135 ; Dering's Speeches, p. 16; Proceedings in Kent, pp. 27-38. 22 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. that is presented to you, yet I clearly do profess that a great ~^iO^ — ' part thereof— nay, the greater part thereof —is so well grounded January, that my heart goes cheerfully along therewith. It seems that my county is of the same mind. Two thousand five hundred names were ap pended to this petition. Another to a like effect was presented on behalf of the county of Essex by Sir William Masham,^ and at the same time a petition of a slightly different nature was presented by Sir Philip Porter in the name of divers ministers of the county of Suffolk, desiring some relief from their burthens. On the presentation of these petitions there was some difference of opinion as to the appointing of a day for the reading of them. Some were for fixing the day shortly, others for postponing it for some time. D'Ewes, sanguine and Puritanical, was for a speedy consideration of the question. He saw only the practice of adorations and heretic preach ings, which still continued to deprave the Sabbath day. It would be the greatest glory of his majesty's reign if we could change the greater part of the clergy from brazen, leaden — yea, and blockish — persons, to a golden and a primitive condition, that their authority might be warranted by their godly example ... for it is evident that since the prelates have been debased and adulterated by the intermixture of their temporal baronies with their ecclesiastical function, all miseries and calamities at home and abroad have fundamentally risen from them. In the end, Monday, 25th January, was ap pointed for the reading of the petitions and the discussion of matters in them. ^ D'Ewes' Diary, i., 142. THE MINISTERS PETITION AND REMONSTRANCE. 23 Meanwhile the issues of the question were being Chap. i. decided outside the House. i64oIl Instigated by the rapid growth and activity of '^^°"'''^- the Root-and-Branch party, the moderate Puritan The ¦• Minis- clergy throughout the country determined to supply Ind Remon-° by one general petition a standard of the reform sunTardTf^ demanded by them in the name of the moderate f°'*^''«'*® "¦«- •' form. majority alike of clergy and laity. Various peti tions, signed in all by 700 to 800 clergymen, were drawn up and sent to London. There they were discussed at a meeting of representative clergy, and their substance drawn up into one general petition, the separate heads of grievance being appended in detail as a " remonstrance ". All the signatures to the separate petitions were then attached to this so- called " Ministers' Petition and Remonstrance," and it was determined forthwith to present it to the House.^ 1 There has been a question as to the authenticity of the remon strance attached to this petition from the ministers. The charge has been made by Royalist writers (first by Clarendon and after him by Echard) that a different paper was shown to the ministers subscribing, and that then their names were out off and appended to the remon strance. The truth of the affair oan be easily discerned from D'Ewes' MS. On the 1st February, Digby informed the House that some of the ministers who signed the petition disavowed the remonstrance. ^n reply, D'Ewes stated succinctly that the remonstrance had been framed out of several petitions or complaints sent out of several counties, " some being entrusted to draw the said remonstrance out of the said petitions ". When, on the foUowing day, these disavowing ministers appeared before the House, they were found to be no less personages than Dr. Burgess and Dr. Dovniing. It was then also found, as oan be clearly seen from D'Ewes' narrative, that Digby had, from motives known to himself, instigated or magnified the reluctance of these two doctors to avow the petition, for by their o-vvn explicit confession, twice re- 24 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. No copy of this Celebrated paper has survived, "leSIT'but its substance can be gathered from various January, ^^^^^^g^ ^^^ f^.^^ tj^Q debates upou it in the Commons. The petition contained at least two main heads : — 1. Touching matter of doctrine corrupted. 2. Touching " corruption of matter of govern ment in the Church ". It would appear from a tract of Dering that the first head of doctrine touched upon the liturgy and the prayer book.' " The ministers do complain that the creed is often rehearsed, but they blotted out what they had put in ; that in one place it is over- short, and in one place dangerously obscure." The Remonstrance consisted of " near fourscore heads," the following being hurried notes of some of them taken in committee : — 1. Church governors and officers are burdensome to all. 2. Bishops not of Divine institution, which they chaUenge. 3. Bishops assuming sole power of ordination and juris diction. 4. Largeness of bishops' diocese. The inconvenience of it. peated, they acknowledged that they avowed and allowed the petition and remonstrance, and only objected to the length of it, having been informed that the length of it would abate the edge of the House* On the other hand, it was shown by seven of the ministers in favour of the petition, who immediately previously had been called before the House (among them being Calamy and Marshall), that the names subscribed to the petition and remonstrance were taken out of the several petitions sent up. It further appears that the extracted petition and remonstrance had then been read, " in a large room, to upwards of fourscore ministers," Downing and Burgess themselves being of the number. On the whole, the procedure seems to me to be perfectly legitimate. ' Brit. Museum, E. 197, A Collection of Speeches. THE MINISTERS PETITION AND REMONSTRANCE. 25 5. Bishops delegating their powers to deputies, unmeet Chap. I. persons. — — -v- 6. Bishops encumbered with temporal power and estate. January. 7. Bishops pretend to be the only supporters of the pre rogatives of the king. 8. Bishops claim to be sole pastors in all parts of the diocese. 9. Confirmation by them only. 10. Sole probate of wills. 11. Bishops consecrate churches, etc., and make it neces sary. 12. Bishops inhibit marriages at divers times of the year. 13. Bishops compose forms of public prayer containing matter of state. 14. Bishops imposing oath, as of canonical obedience ex officio, etc. 15. Bishops enforce subscription. 16. Commendams in bishops' hands. 17. The bishops' charge at consecration, but they observe it not. 18. Scandalous bishops, drinking healths, etc. 19. The burdens of bishops' officers and dependents and servants, being above 10,000. Other points related to : — Irregular presentations to livings. Enforcing subscription to their opinions before granting institution. Exaction of exorbitant fees for institution. Induction often done " clancularlie and slightly". Notwithstanding institution and induction, ministers are forced to take Ucenses to preach from the bishops, their officials and commissaries. They give licences to physicians, midwives and meat- dressers in Lent, which they have no relation unto as ministers. They dispense with things unlawful, as pluralities and non-residence. Other points apparently urged by the Remon strance were the secular employment of bishops, 26 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. their judicial power in Parliament, in the Star 1640-1, Chamber, in Commissions of the Peace, and at the January. Council table, and also the greatness of revenues of deans and chapters. The remaining heads probably comprised the various grievances as to ceremonies and the Prayer Book.-' The moderate Sucli was the Statement of demand of the mode- Root-lnd- rates, and as it stood, this Petition and Remon- Branoh party, gtrancc was to foi'm duriug the ensuing February and March the basis of the first real action of the House on matters of Church reformation. But it was not to pass unchallenged. It was presented to the Commons on Saturday, 23rd January, and on the following Monday petitions similar to that from Kent, calling for the abolition of Episcopacy, were presented from eleven counties — Hereford, Bedford, Sussex, Surrey, Cheshire, Warwick, Suf folk, Cambridge, Gloucester, Buckingham, and Norfolk.^ Some of these were numerously signed — that from Suffolk with above 4400 nanies, that from Norfolk with 2000, etc. On the Saturday previous (23rd January) it had been determined, after some debate, to read the Ministers' Petition on the Monday. But on that day came pouring in these very different petitions from the counties. The question then was, which of the two classes of petitions should be read, and if both were retained, whether the Ministers' Petition should not be retained first. ' See D'Ewes' MS., i., 184 ; Commons Journals, ii., 100 ; 'Verney Notes, p. 4 (Camden Society). In the third volume of D'Ewes there are two sheets which have apparently been misplaced (fohos 117 and 129). They certainly refer to this matter. ^D'Ewes' Diary, i., 166. THE ministers' PETITION AND REMONSTRANCE. 27 In the end, it was decided to read the Ministers' chap. i. Petition on the 1st of February. On that day, after i640-i, wearying itself by an unsatisfactory discussion on ^ ^^''^' the exclusion from the debate of Dr. Eden and Dr. Debate of the Parry, who had taken the new oath, the House petit'ion^and passed to the discussion of the second head of the Sr^°J^/' Ministers' Remonstrance touching the corruption of -^^^ February. matter of government in the Church, " in which so many irregularities and wicked oppressions of the bishops and their ministers, which were numbered to be at least 10,000, were set forth, against godly ministers and godly men specially, as it moved all men's hearts that had any religion to a detestation of them ". The subject was not opened in debate, Pym moving the appointing of another day for it. It is significant of the later action of the House in adopting ^the scheme of the Assembly of Divines, that it should on this occasion postpone the con sideration of the first head, touching matter of doctrine, to that touching government, thereby seeming to recognise their own unfitness for that work. Clarendon's ^ most incorrect account of the event is as follows : — The first malignity which was apparent there was not only in their Committee for Eeligion, which had been assumed ever since the latter time of King James, but no such thing had been before heard of in Parliaments, where, under pretence of receiving petitions against clergymen, they often debated points beyond the verge of their understanding, but by their cheerful reception of a declaration of many sheets of paper against the whole government of the Church, presented by ten or a dozen ministers at the bar, and pretending to be signed by 700 ministers of London and the counties adjacent (and of.the II., 285. 28 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. London petition, but the House was then so far from being 16401 possessed with that spirit, that the utmost that could be ob- Pebruary. tained was that it should not be rejected, etc.), and for the ministers' declaration, one part of it only was insisted on by them and read to the House, which concerned the exercise of their jurisdiction and the excesses of the ecclesiastical courts ; the other parts are declined by many of them, and especially ordered "to be sealed up by the clerk, that it might be perused by no man" [these commas are Clarend9n's, and have no authority], so that all that envy and animosity against the Church seemed to be resolved into a desire " that a biU might be framed to remove the bishops from their votes in the Lords and from any office in secular affairs " .i The House did not on this occasion at all debate the question contained in the second head of the petition. The only discussion which arose, was as to whether the Remonstrance, or so much of it as had been read, should be committed or not, and, if referred, then to what committee. Some would have had it committed to a new one to be named, others to the Grand Committee for Re ligion, and Mr. St. John, newly created the King's Solicitor, moved, to refer it to the Committee of Twenty -four. " All agreed that whatsoever com mittee should take it into consideration, should only prepare heads for the House to debate, and that they should also prepare like heads out of the other petitions, touching the grievances of the ecclesiastical government."' Thus it was moved that similarly heads might be collected for con sideration out of the London petition, and presented along with the former. This motion was resisted, and 1 It was nearly two months before such a resolution was worded, vide infra, p. 60. '^ D'Ewes' Diary, i., 188. DEBATE ON THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 29 among others by the ever ready defender of Epis- ghap. i. copacy, Sir John Culpeper. He desired that the ^^^eioli"' London petition might not be referred at all, even ^^^''"^'y- if the others were, since Episcopacy itself was condemned therein, "and bishops," he declared in his warmth, " are the main columns of the nation ". The sentence excited indignation, and would have been followed by a hot discussion but for an interruption of the sitting.^ The subject was not resumed until the Sth, but Debate of on that and the following day a most memorable ^'^^'^™^'''- disciission took place. There was not intention ally a set debate on Episcopal government ; though, owing to a misconception on the part of some of the speakers, portions of the debate read as if there was. The question was simply that which had already engaged the attention of the House, viz., the referring or otherwise of the Londoners' petition to a committee, as well as the Ministers' Petition and Remonstrance.^ The debate was opened by Sir Benj. Rudyard. Rudyard's He inveighed against the want of simplicity in the ^^^^° ' clergy, against their Roman ambition of a sumptu ous religion with additionals of temporal greatness, and, repeating, perhaps, the very words of the Ministers' Petition, declared how it behoved to restrain them to the duties of their function, so as ' See in State Papers, Domestic, occclxxvii. No. 2., a curious paper of Grimston's argument in the House of Commons, 1st February, concerning the jus divinum of bishops and Selden's answer thereto. ' " The only question," says D'Ewes (Diary, i., 206), " was whether the London petition should be committed with the Petition and Re monstrance, but divers, mistaking the question, feU into a long and large disputation." 30 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. they might never more hanker after heterogeneous 1640-1, extravagant employment, nor to be so absolute, so single and arbitrary in actions of moment as ex- coinmunication, absolution, ordination and the like, but to join some of the ministry with them, . . . that they might not have power hereafter to corrupt the Church and undo the kingdom. But although Rudyard thus strayed from the point of the debate, and although he thus expressed all that the thinking element alike of country and Parliament had con ceived and determined on in the way of reform, he had no thoughts of the destruction of Episcopacy itself When they are thus circumscribed, and the public secured from their corruption, I shall not grudge them a liberal, plenti ful subsistence, else I am sure they can never be given to hospitality. Certainly, sir, this superintendency of eminent men, bishops over divers churches, is the most ancient, primi tive, spreading, lasting government of the Church ; wherefore, whilst we are earnest to take away innovations, let us beware we bring not in the greatest innovation ever was in England. I do very well know what very many do very fervently desire, but let us well bethink ourselves whether a popular democratic government of the Church, though fit for other places, will be either suitable or acceptable to a regal monarchical government of the State. Wherefore, Mr. Speaker, my humble motion is that we may punish the present offenders and reduce and pre serve the calUng for better men hereafter.^ Digby's Rudyard was followed by the briUiant Digby, speech. .^Yio at first kept more to the real point in debate. If I thought (said he) there were no further designs in the desires of some that the London petition should be com mitted than merely to make use of it as an index of grievances, then I should wink at the faults of it, and not much oppose it.^ ^Rushworth, iv., 183. ^Ibid., iv., 170-74. DEBATE ON THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 31 He allowed that when the petition was first chap. i. presented there would be more reason for the leio^ commitment of it=- ^'^^^'^y' As being then the most comprehensive catalogue we had of Church grievances, but now that the ministers by their remonstrance have given us so fair and full an index of them, without those mixtures of things contemptible, irrational and presumptuous wherewith this petition abounds, I do not know to what good end it can be committed. . . . What have we here ? A multitude of allegations, a multitude of instances of abuses and depravations of Church government — and ' what informed from thence? Let the use be abolished for the abuse's sake. Like every other speaker, Digby took occasion to record his indignation against the oppression that had marked the previously existing state of things. But in him it seems to be rhetorical. Methinks the vengeance of the prelates hath been so laid as 'twere meant that no generation, no complexion, no degree of men, should escape it. Was there a man of nice and tender conscience, him have they afflicted with scandal in adiaphoris, etc. But, rhetorical or not, he did not allow himself to be swayed by his own denunciation. He pro ceeded to expose, with most subtle ability, the difficulties of the situation. To strike at the root, to attempt a total alteration, before ever I can give my vote to that, three things must be made manifest to me : (1) That the mischiefs which are felt under Episcopacy flow from the nature of the function, and not from the abuse of it, i.e., that no rules, no boundaries, can be set to the bishops able to restrain them from such exorbitancieS ; (2) such a frame of government must be laid before us as no time, no corruption, oan make liable to proportionable grievances ; (3) it must be made appear that this Utopia is practicable. 32 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. In dwelling on the second of these demands, 1640-1, Disbv uses a phrase that is very significant, as Februarys. .?.•'. , , , ^ . i ¦ • <• indicative of the almost universal impression ot the time that the destruction of one system would be followed, as a matter of necessity and of course, by the erection of another. If we hearken to those who would quite extirpate Episco pacy, I am confident that instead of every bishop we should put- down in a diocese, we should erect a pope in each parish, and ... for my part I do not think that there is any such alliance as men talk of betwixt the mitre and the cro-wn but from this reason, that upon the pulling down of bishops the governments of assemblies is like to succeed it ; that to be effectual must draw to itself the supremacy of ecclesiastical jurisdiction." Digby was not the only one who turned with discomfort from such an alternative. What he was prepared for he stated succinctly enough. Let us not destroy bishops, but make them such as they were in primitive times. Do their large tei^ritories offend? Let them be restricted. Do their courts and subordinates ? Let them be brought to govern, as in the primitive times, by- assemblies of their clergy. Doth their intermeddling in secular affairs ? Exclude them from the capacity. He concluded by moving for a standing com mittee of certain members of both Houses, with such a number of learned ministers as the House should nominate for assistants, to take into con sideration all grievances and advise of the best way to settle peace and satisfaction of the government of the Church. Falkland's Hc was followcd in a similar strain by Falkland. Like the other speakers, Falkland admitted to the full all the charges brought against the bishops speech. DEBATE OF THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 33 as promoters and authors of grievances, civil as Chap. i. well as religious. ^^Tiii^iT February E I doubt not bishops may be good men, and let us give good men good rules, we shaU have good governors and good times. ... I am content to take away all those things from them, which to any considerable degree of probabUity may again beget the like mischiefs if they be not taken away. If their temporal titles, powers and employments appear likely to distract them from the care of, or make them look down upon, their spiritual duty, and that the too great distance between them and the men they govern will hinder the free and fit recourse of their inferiors to them, and occasion insolence from them to their inferiors, let that be considered and cared for. . . . I am sure neither their lordships, their judging of tithes, wills and marriages, no, nor their voices in Parliament, are jure divino, and I am sure that these titles and this power are not necessary to their authority. If their revenue shall appear Ukely to produce the same effects, let us only take care to leave them such proportions as may serve in some good degree to the dignity of learning. If it be feared that they will again employ some of our laws with a severity against the intention of those laws against some of their weaker brethren, that we may be sure to take away that power, let us take away those laws, and let no ceremonies which any member counts unlawful, and no man counts necessary, against the rules and policy of St. Paul be imposed upon them. With these things thus regulated, and their observation further guaranteed by triennial Parlia ments, Falkland was persuaded there would be no reason to fear any future innovation from their tyranny, or any defect in the discharge of their duty, and therefore there would be no need on a few days' debate to change an order which had lasted 1600 years, and with it to change the whole face of the Church. For his purpose, therefore,, the committing of so much of the Remonstrance as VOL. I. 3 February 8. Grimston's 34 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. had been read would be a sufficient basis on which 1640-L^ to proceed.^ Falkland was followed by a man of a quite different cast of mind, and yet one who in this matter entirely coincided with him and all the previous speakers. Harbottle Grimston had the speech. same terror of a hasty reformation, and his speech indicates clearly what he thought that reformation would be. I conceive it an easier matter for us addere inventis, to reform what is amiss in them and their government than creare novum, to set up a new form of government which we have had no experience of, nor do we know how it should suit either with the humours of the people or with the monarchical government ; and it may be the new government which is so much desired, if it be brought in upon the grounds and founda tions which some would have it, it wiU be out of our power ever to master it again, whereas the government already established, if the governors exceed their bounds, they may fall into a praemunire. His scheme of reform is identical with that sketched by Falkland. Every branch of the bishops' temporal power he would gladly see abolished — their seats on the bench, at the Star Chamber, and at the Council board, even in Parliament, with the reservation of some to be always present as assist ants to give their advice on spiritual matters when required; and the reformation of the High Com mission, and the Official and Commissary Courts. The debate had by this expanded from the somewhat narrow point really at issue to a general discussion of the question of Episcopacy, and it was 1 This speech, as given in Rushworth, agrees in substance with the extract of it in D'Ewes' Diary, but not in the internal order of it. DEBATE OF THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 35 on this wider ground that Nathaniel Fiennes rose Ohap. i. to meet the hitherto unanimous course of the dis- i64o-i, cussion. Fiennes was a Puritan, the second son p^e^^"^''^ * of Lord Saye, the most pronounced Puritan in the speech. Upper House. He answered perfunctorily Digby's somewhat frivolous objections to the petition itself, de clared he saw no reason why the London petition should not be committed, and then turned to the more general question of the government of the Church, as if to the more important and more immediate subject of debate. He touched first upon the general defence of Episcopacy which had been set up by Falkland and Digby. As might be expected, he easily met the claim of antiquity by a counter reference to the New Testament proofs of the parity of a bishop and preaching presbyter. It was a stock argument. But it is curious to notice how, when he answers the argument drawn from the probability of danger accruing to the State by the Church government of assemblies, he tacitly admits the justice of the inference that such and so narrow might the alter native come to be as a matter of history. At the same time he offers an alternative scheme of his own, a scheme which was subsequently adopted in the Root-and-Branch debates, and which indicates clearly how even the Puritan mind of England at this time turned from a Presbyterian scheme of ^government with dread and aversion. If it shaU be cleared, as it is affirmed, that anything herein doth strike at monarchy, I shall never give my assent thereto as long as I live. But, to clear that this is not so, I offer to 36 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3 Chap. I. your consideration that by the law of the land not only all ¦ — ^^^^ ' ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but also aU superiority and pre- February 8. eminence over the ecclesiastical state is annexed to the Imperial crown of this realm, and may be granted by commission under the Great Seal to such persons as his majesty shall think meet. How if the king should grant it to a certain number of com missioners equal in authority, as he may do ? This were an abolition of Episcopacy, and yet not diminution of monarchy. He then proceeds to lay down at great length the evils that have resulted from the government and ceremonies of the Church. All the points he particularises were urged as freely by Culpeper as by Fiennes himself, but they differed in their conclusions. To speak plain English, these bishops and deans and chapters do little good themselves, by preaching or otherwise, and if they were felled a great deal of good timber might be cut out of them for the use of the Church and of the kingdom at this time. He therefore moved to consider, not a part only,, but the whole matter, and to refer the London petition along with that part of the Petition and Remonstrance which had been read. Sir John Wray,i Holles, Pym, Bagshaw, Cage,. Robert and John Goodwyn, Strode, Hampden, Dering, Sir William Strickland, Cradock, Reynolds, Sir Jo. Clotworthy, Sir Ed. Hungerford, Sir Nevill Poole, Mr. Solicitor, Sir Walter Erie, Sir Hy. Mild- maye. Sir Jo. Evelyn, Mr. Peard, Sir Ed. Mumford 1 D'Ewes, iii., 916. There are two accounts in D'Ewes' MS. of these debates; the one is m the first volume, the other is buried in the midst of the third volume folio 113b. The second is evidently notes taken on the spot, and the foundation of the more expanded but unfinished first account. DEBATE OF THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 37 (Moundef ord),Maynard, Crewe, Chad well — all these, chap. i. by far the majority of the talent of the House, le^b-i, followed Fiennes in his motion to have the London ^ ^"^^^ ^' petition committed. In comparison with them, the opposing list is in matter of talentvery insignificant —Mr. Comptroller Hyde, WallerCSeldeii^jVane (the elder Vane), Capell, Griffin, HMborn^'-Bridgman, Kinge,Mr. Kyrton, Sir Henry Rainsford and Palmer. A different cast, however, was given to the debate when it was renewed on the following day (Tuesday, 9th February, 1640-41) by the proposi tion made on the 8th by Mr. Griffin that only some ^^^ Debate . . T continued, part ot the London petition should be referred. 9th February. This was the origin of the salvo which was made in the first resolution on the 9th, and it was sup ported by Mr. Treasurer of the Household (the elder Vane). We aU (said Vane) tend to one end — that was, reforma tion — only we differ in the way. I desire, therefore, that those words in the petition which strike at the root and branch ofit . . . Here the report ends, but it is plain that Vane desired the exclusion of the words referred to, a proposal which was in substance identical with the subsequent reservation of the point of Episcopacy. It was evident that the weight of numbers and of opinion lay with the party desiring the committal of the London petition, and accordingly such a conclusion seemed the only way of escape for the favourers of Episcopacy. On the Tuesday, there fore, the speeches turned on this point, as to whether there should be any reservation or excep tion of any point in the referring of these petitions. Palmer and Whitelock desired to reserve the ques- February 9. 38 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap, l tion of the total abolition. Holles contended "TeSi, against any such reservation. There are signs on this second day's debate of an increased violence and insolence on the part of the Root-and-Branch party. They called out to have the petitions of Gloucester and Hertford against Episcopacy read along with that from London, and, taking advantage of the disorder and misconceptions apparent in the debate, moved that the question to be put should be that of Episcopacy itself. Neither ruse suc ceeded, although the House was not thereby recalled to a more correct conception of the real matter in debate. It is evident that the turn which the discussion had taken was due to the precipitancy of the extreme members of both factions : the one through vindictive haste, the other through fear. Sir John Strangewayes declared that a parity in the Church would necessitate a parity in the Common wealth. The argument provoked Cromwell into such a warmth of expression or attitude that there were cries from several to have him to the bar. Pym, Holies and D'Ewes all supported Cromwell on the mere point of order, and protested against the call, but they said nothing as to his views. The expression of opinion, however, from the ac knowledged leaders of the constitutional party, whose views on Church matters were identical and went hand in hand with their views on the political exigencies, were not such. To all appearances, Hampden contented himself with announcing his wish to have the petition committed. The only ex pression of Pym's speech D'Ewes does not even notice. According to a tract written by Bagshaw DEBATE OF THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 39 at the Restoration, Pym expressed an opinion that Ghap. i. it was not the intention of the House to abohsh i640-i, either Episcopacy or the Book of Common Prayer, ^ ^^^^^ ^' but to reform both wherever offence was given to the people, and if that could be effected and con sented to with the concurrence of the people and Lords, they should do an acceptable work to the people — such an one, indeed, as hath not been since the Reformation.^ All these men voted for the committal of the The reserva- London petition, and, as will be seen, it was com- point of Epis- mitted, but with a reservation of the point Qf°°^^^- Episcopacy. That such was the just and general judgment of the House there can be no doubt ; but even if it had not passed in this particular form — even if the point of Episcopacy had not been reserved for the separate and serious consideration of the House itself — it is plain in what sense the moderates wished the committal to be understood. If it was to consider of Episcopacy at all, it was not to con sider of its abolition, but of its reformation, and, as a matter of fact, the committee did as much on this head when it did meet as it would have done if the resolution had passed without any salvo. The proposal of this salvo was immediately and eagerly accepted by Falkland and Culpeper ; the opposition from such speakers as D'Ewes and Bag shaw was more apparent than real. Bagshaw was for the retention of the petition and its committal. - But how ? ^Bagshaw, Just. Vindicat, Brit. Museum, E. I0I9. ^ Rushworth, iv., 186. 40 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. I do distinguish (said he) of a twofold Episcopacy. The " — i64o^x ' ^^®* *'^ statu puro, as it was in primitive times, the second February, 9. in statu corrupto, as it is at this day, and is so intended and Bagshaw's meant in the London petition. Now, I hold that Episcopacy speech. j^ ^j^j^ latter sense is to be taken into consideration as a thing whieh trencheth not only upon the rights and liberties of the subject, but, as it now is, it trencheth upon the Cro-wn of England in these four points, namely, (1) their claims of juris diction jure divino; (2) their maxim that Episcopacy is inseparable from the Crown of England ; (3) the iUegality of legislation without the bishops as a third estate ; (4) their holding ecclesiastical courts in their own names. Upon these reasons, so nearly touching the right of the Crown in point of Episcopacy, I am for the retaining the petition, and for a thorough reformation of all abuses and grievances of Epis copacy mentioned in the Ministers' Eemonstrance, which reformation may perhaps serve the turn without alteration of the government of England into a form of Presbytery, as it is in Scotland, France, Geneva and the Low Countries. In the tract above cited, Bagshaw recapitulates his speech at a distance of nearly twenty years. In spite of a few verbal incongruities, the sense of his reiteration, entirely confirms the view that Bagshaw, equally with the moderates — the bulk of the House — desired only a reformation of the " excresences " of Episcopacy, not of the function itself. I openly declared my opinion concerning bishops for establishing them in their function according to law, and I have just occasion to profess to all, as in truth I do, that I was so far from the very thoughts of destroying bishops that, observing at the time of my reading, and divers years before, the great invasions that were made by them upon the common law of England, I knew no other way how to hold them up in their functions and just jurisdiction and in esteem and honour among the people as by reading in that law which gave them their just bounds and limits, and my sticking close to this ppinion, and abhorrence of taking the Scotch Covenant, tending DEBATE ON THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 41 to the utter abolition of Episcopacy, was the alone ground of Chap. I. that load of affliction which lay long upon my body and ~ Trmi — estate. February 9. Identical was the position taken up by D'Ewes.^ I desired the question might be waived in respect of the D'Ewes' ambiguity of the matter, for if by Episcopacy is meant their speeoh. vain aerial titles of lordship, the spoils of the Crown with which they are loaden, and their vast tyrannical power which they exercise, so as the totum compositum of bishops as they now stand and tota sequela be meant, I said I just gave my "Aye" for the abolishing of them. But if by Episcopacy is meant only their spiritual function as it stood in the primitive and purest times, then I shall give my negative voice, for I should highly prize a godly preaching bishop, and heartily wish we might make ours such. I desired, therefore, we might first of aU, and unanimously, join to remove from Episcopacy those adulterations and admixtures which we disliked, and then I did not doubt that we should so far proceed with conjunction of hearts and minds as there should not need to be any division of opinion amongst us. I desired, therefore, we might for the present lay aside the disputes of Episcopacy, or referring it, but refer the London petition as it stood to a Select Committee. By this time the mind of the House was apparent, and its judgment a little clearer by the perception of the incongruity of any debate of the question of Episcopacy before the petitions them selves had been referred, much less debated. Several speakers followed D'Ewes in his desire to waive the question, and, seizing with unerring instinct the general sense of the House, Lenthall begged leave to read an order which he had drawn, and which, with only the alteration of one or two words, was the order subsequently adopted. The final order ran in these words : — ^ 1 D'Ewes, i., 210. ^ C. J., ii., 81. 42 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. Ordered that the Committee of Twenty-four, with the ~ 16401 ' addition of these six — Sir Thomas Eoe, Mr. HoUes, Mr. Palmer, February 9. Mr. Holborne, Mr. Eiennes, Sir H. Vane — do take into con sideration that part of the Ministers' Eemonstrance that has been read, and the petition of the inhabitants in and about the city of London, and other petitions of the like nature that have been read, to prepare heads out of them for the consideration of the House, the House reserving to itself the main point of Episcopacy for to take it into their consideration in due tinie. As against this supremacy of the moderate section of the House, however, in the constitution of the committee the extremists certainly scored a victory. The Root-and-Branch men pressed for an addition to the committee of the younger Vane, Holles and Fiennes. Three, others were named as a counterpoise — Roe, Holborne and Palmer — but the disparity of ability was so apparent that a division took place, when the nominations were confirmed by 180 to 145. That this latter small gain was a victory for the extremists is evident from Baillie's account. There was a great commotion in the Lower House when the petition of London came to be considered. My Lord Digby and Viscount Falkland, with a prepared company around them, laboured by formidable speeches and hot debates to have that petition cast out of the House without a hearing, as craving the rooting out of Episcopacy against so many estabUshed laws. The other party was not prepared, yet they contested on together from eight o'clock till six at night. AU that night our party solicited as hard as they could, and the morrow some thousands of citizens, but in a very peaceable way, came down to Westminster Hall to countenance their petition. It was voiced whether the petition should be committed or not. By 36 to 7 voices, our party carried it that it should be referred to the Committee for EeUgion, to which some four or six more THE COMMITTEE EOR THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 43 were added— young Sir Harry Vane, Mr. Eiennes, and some Chap. I. more of our firm friends. ^ ' — : — > ' 1640-1, The committee thus appointed lost no time in DeUbemtions meeting. In the Verney Notes, edited bv Mr. °^}t^ ?™- ° -^ mittee for the Bruce for the Camden Society, there is a valuable ministers' account of a portion of its deliberations. Its tirst the London meeting was on the 10th of February; the report ^^''''°''' from it was made on the 9th of March. Within these limits — The committee met thrice a week in the afternoon. Some sixteen of the remonstrant ministers attended them.^ They (the committee) required satisfaction practically on that head which concerned government. . . . The ministers, by their speaker, Xh:_JBui:ges§,_^ gave to the committee full contentment, and so much the greater by my Lord Digby and Mr. Selden's frequent opposition. The citizens also made good all the parts of their petition which the committee required to be proved. Before this committee every other day some eight or ten of the remonstrants appear. Dr. Burgess is their mouthpiece. We did suspect him of being too much Episcopal. Yet he has carried himself so bravely that we do repent of our suspicions. The passages of the Eemonstrance that yet has been called for, he has cleared to the fuU contentment of all the committee except Mr. Selden, the avowed proctor of the bishops. How the matter will go the Lord knows. All are for the erecting of -a kind of prBsbyteries, and for bringing down the bishops in aU things temporal and spiritual as low as may be. But their utter abolition, which is the only aim of the most godly, is the knot of the question.-'' ' On the 19th of February two other petitions against Episcopacy and the many abuses of their courts, from Cheshire and Devon, were presented to the House, and referred to the above committee, vidth the same restrictions as above. Similarly from Exon, 23rd February, Nottingham, Lancashire, Oxford, Buckingham. ^BaiUie, Letters,!., 306. '^ Ibid., i., 302. BaUlie's temperament influences all his state ments of opinion, which are therefore of small value as compared with his statements of fact. February. 44 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap, l | The first two meetings, ofthe 10th and 15th of ^leioli February, were taken up by a consideration of the sjecond and third heads of the Remonstrance. 2. The prelates' claim of Divine institution. 3. Their assuming sole power of jurisdiction a(nd ordination. It would seem as if, for the first three or four meetings, the committee was entirely in the hands of the ministers. Authorities were produced to prove that such a claim of Divine right had been made — Bishop Bilson, Andrewes, White, Davenant, Montagu, Dr. Pocklington, etc., and an equally long and significant list of references to Ignatius, Cyprian and the Councils, was brought forward to prove that in primitive times the bishops did not ordain or exercise jurisdiction alone, and to establish the identity of presbyters with bishops. On the former of these points some dispute took place between Selden and Burgess. Of the representa tions of the Episcopal party we have only one trace — their feeble objection that in " the work of ordination priests are taken in to ordain with bishops ". Such an objection was easily answered, and the proceedings ended in a vote — That the challenges of Episcopacy jv,re divino, as is com plained of in the second article, in the sole power assumed by bishops in ordination and jurisdiction, by virtue of a distinct order, superior to a presbyter, is a material head, and fit to be presented to the House. It is quite typical of the general situation that these points, especially the latter, should have been dwelt upon at such length. The point of the parity or disparity of bishops with presbyters was again - THE COMMITTEE FOR THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 45 debated before the committee on the 17th, when chap. i. the disputants were evidently, as before, Selden i64o^ and Burgess. " Wherein," Selden asked, " in per- ^'"'"^'^ ^'^• sons, places and causes, consists the difference between a bishop and a presbyter ? " Burgess's reply lays down for us the tenets of that party which was to acquire and retain through history the name of Presbyterians. 1. Constantine I. His time we count the primitive time. 2. Consecrations and interdictions of Church licences, sitting and ruling in civil assemblies and judicature, or acts concerning matrimony or testament, were not used by bishops or presbyters in ancient times. In general, all jurisdictions were exercised in common, and not by bishops alone. Eor Persons. — They were all them that were within the Church. Eor Causes. — Offences in matters of faith or manners, doctrine heretical or schismatical ; all offences against God's law so far as they were scandalous in any manner or degree, brotherly admonitions, binding of delinquents, loosing of the penitents. For Places. — Ordinary or extraordinary. The ordinary place was the Presbytery or Consistory. The ministers then proceeded in the explanation and defence of the remaining heads of their Remon strance, and Nos. 4 to 7 of these articles were voted by the committee to be material heads, and fit to be considered of by the House. It was plainly to be seen on which side the weight of argument and sympathy lay, and the exasperation of the prelatical party may easily be imagined. One Richard Flood, a clergyman, who had ^ been present at the above meeting of the committee on the 17th, came away in a rage, declaring he had 46 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. bccn amoug a company of rogues, who went about 1640-1, to pull down Episcopacy, and vowing to pistol Dr. Feb.-March. g^^^^gg ^-^.j^ j^-g ^^^ hsiud.^ Of the remaining heads of the Remonstrance, Nos. 9 to 19 were gone through in a similar manner on the 19th of February, from which date the Verney Notes cease on this point, the only other existing record of the debates of this committee being found in D'Ewes.^ It would seem that the subsequent debates in the committee up to the making of the report on the 9th of March abandoned the more general ground of the Ministers' Remonstrance, and in pro portion became more aggressive and secular. The matter for these debates, which were probably conducted by the committee without any further reference to the divines, was apparently furnished by the more extreme London and county petitions. For example, at the meeting on the 1st of March, the point in debate was the injustice and partiality displayed by the bishops in instituting to benefices.' 1 D'Ewes, i., 2,36. 2 It was probably in the Ught of this committee's debates that Nicholas (soon to be made Secretary) composed his remarkable paper. preserved in State Papers, Domestic, occclxxvii., No. 72. He proposed, on behalf of the Court party, that the House of Lords should interest themselves in the question of Church government before the Com mons had passed any resolution, it being doubtful how far they would go in their heat ; this to be done by way of conference between the two Houses, and supplemented by the caUing of a njAionaL-Sj^oi- .compflagd of a select_number of divines of aU the three nations, and, if possible, delegates from the Reformed Churches abroad, "in which may be resolved a uniform model of governraent to be presented to the Parhament of aU the kingdoms for approbation" It seems almost incredible that Nicholas could have put such propositions to paper, and I doubt exceedingly his authorsliip of the paper and the date of it. 'D'Ewes, ubi supra. THE COMMITTEE FOR THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 47 This will explain the apparent discrepancy chap. i. between the votes already recorded and the final Te^, votes which were reported to the House on the 9th. The latter evince a more extreme and secular character. They show that the committee had re ferred itself to the divines only on those matters of antiquities and theology, of which, in the unanimous opinion of the age, the determination properly belonged to the clergy. But, in its judgment of the whole question, from the point of view of State policy and general justice, the opinion of the com mittee was the average opinion of the secular mind of the day, and the votes indicate clearly on what heads and aspects of the Church system the attention of the secular public and the House of Commons was fixed, and which parts of that system were to be the first to meet a challenge. The re port was as follows : — Die Martis, 9 Martii, 164f . Mr. Crew reports from the committee for the Ministers' The commit- Eemonstrance three heads for the debate and consideration of gj^^Jaroh ' the House : — 1. Their secular employment, by which is intended their legislative and judicial power in ParUament, their judicial power in the Star Chamber and in commissions for the peace, and their employment as privy councillors and in temporal offices. 2, Sole power in ecclesiastical things, by which is intended ordination and censures. 3. The greatness of the revenues of deans and chapters, the little use of them, and the great inconveniences which come by them.i The paper of reasons with which Crew supported 1 G. J., ii., 100. 48 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. these motious is a strange document to be presented 1640-1, to a lay assembly : — March. •' '' The reasons to prove the first are : — 1. That their office is to preach and teach, and not to meddle with secular aifairs. 2. Because they are by this made judges of the property, etc., as judges in the Star Chamber, as justices of the peace, etc. 3. By this means they come wholly to neglect matters of the Church, contrary to Acts vi. 4. This is contrary to the command of the Apostle. 5. And of the Church of Chalcedon, and the constitutions of Ottobon.i The arguments on the second head were : — 1 Tim. iv. and 2 Tim. i. — Timothy was ordained by the laying on of hands of the elders. So they are not to have sole ordination. Matt. -viii. — Ordination belongs to the Church, and that cannot be one bishop alone. 1 Corinth, v. — The Corinth ians are commanded to gather together to excommunicate the incestuous person. There are several examples vouched of bishops who ordained with their Presbytery. ^ So, Ukewise, many examples were brought against sole jurisdiction, and there were two canons in Sir Henry Spelman's councUs that the bishop ought not to exercise sole jurisdiction. To prove the third point or head he brought no reason, because the matter was plain evident. Owing to other business brought down from the Lords, no set debate on the report took place on the 9th, but the temper of the House was seen significantly in an incident that occurred. Mr. 1 D'Ewes, i., 298. 2 See in State Papers, Domestic, cccclxx-viii.. No. 30, some pro positions touching the Divine right of bishops and the distinction- of his o£aoe from that of the presbyter. The main drift of this paper, which is dated 10th March, is that the King, Lords and Commons. are competent judges as to the fitness of bishops as lords of lands, and so as a political order of men setting themselves upon their punctOios before their betters. THE COMMITTEE FOR THE MINISTERS' PETITION. 49 Pleydall (the constant debater for Episcopacy, and Ohap. i. amongst the first to join the Parliament at Oxford) i64o-i, rose to declare that in his opinion the committee had exceeded their powers, and intermeddled too far with Episcopacy.^ Several answered him roundly in defence of the committee, and at a later stage Pleydall thought it discreet to explain him self, and made some slender satisfaction to the House by saying that he meant no hurt. There can be little doubt that at this time it ~ was in the mind of the generality of the House that the work of reformation could be accomplished by way of this committee. The House did not even ^ let it be supposed that it had ceased with the pre sentation of its report, for on the same day an order was made that the committee should have power to send for witnesses the better to prepare the heads for the House. The formal debate on this report was eagerly Debate of the taken up on the following day, 10th March, oommittel, ^ 1 OAO_ lOth March. On that day the discussion was opened by Bridgman, son of the Bishop of Chester, with a motion to admit a certain divine (whom, upon pressure, he allowed to be Dr. Brownrig) to argue the question of the secular employment of the clergy before the House. ^ He was answered by Selden and others that, as the matter concerned only secular employment, there was no need of it,, " for sole jurisdiction and ordination we might well have divines ". It is indicative of the waste of energy which ' D'Ewes, i., 299. ' Ibid., iii., 937. VOL. I. 4 50 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. characterises this Parliament, due to its want of an 1640-1, organised and recognised leadership, that the House debated at length the order of the discussion, finally determining to adopt the following order in debating of the first head of the report, viz.: (1) Legislative and judicial power [of the bishops] in Parliament ; (2) judicial power in Star Chamber and Commissions of Peace ; (3) their employment as privy councillors at the Council table and in temporal offices. Accordingly, the first day's debate was entirely taken up with the discussion of the first branch of the first head ; and here, again, it ran upon the very narrowest lines. The question became entirely one as to the right by which bishops, historically and constitutionally, sit in Parliament ; and this not only in the hands of antiquarians such as Selden and D'Ewes, and of lawyers such as Bagshaw, Whitelock and Glynn, but even of one purely and merely political, such as Pym himself. The only difference of opinion was as to whether bishops sit by tenure of barony or by right of diocese, having ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and as representing the clergy. The latter was the opinion of Selden and Bridgman, but with this exception there was neither opposition nor any deviation from the narrow argument. Even such a speaker as Culpeper, whom we should have expected to raise the debate into a higher plane of sentiment, contented himself with moving to have the question deferred. With equal docility, Pym followed ' Glynn and others in ^ With the single exception of a ludicrous comparison of the case of the bishops with that of Jonah : " Though Jonah came into the March 10. DEBATE ON THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. 51 their conclusion that the bishops could not be chap. i. representative, and that they sat by one right in ' i64b-i, the Convocation and by another in the Parliament. ^^" "^ '" What is stranger still is the contrast between the wording of the resolution as it finally passed and the course of the debate itself The final form of that resolution was as follows : — i;hat the legislative and judicial powers of the bishops in the House of Peers in Parliament is a hindrance to the dis charge of their spiritual function, prejudicial to the Common wealth, and fit to be taken away by a bUl, and that a biU be drawn for that purpose. With the exception of a discussion as to the retention or rejection of the word "inconsistent" (predicated of the spiritual functions) found in an earlier form of the motion, and which was finally omitted, no discussion took place on the motives as laid down in the explanatory part of this resolu tion. The case is identical with that of the votes on the canons. The secular mind was resolved on the absurdity and iniquity of leaving such power and influence in the hands of Churchmen ; and the Commons therein wisely and faithfully represented the secular mind. The sense of the more fervently spiritual and sternly moral part of the nation was impressed with the beauty of the simplicity of true religious life, with the necessity of such simplicity for the heads of the religious organisation as much as for the lowest unit in it, and with the incompati- ship by the Master's command, yet he, kno-wing he was not doing his Master's command, was to be thrown overboard, so these bishops, if they came in by Christ's commands, as I conceive they did not, and not performing their Lord's commands, are to be extinguished" (Moore's Diary, B.M. Harl. MS. 477, vol. ii., foUo 313). 52 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. bility with this of high temporal status and potency. 1640-1, Of such phase of opinion a faithful reflex was found March in the House of Commons, and stands expressed in their resolution of this day, notwithstanding that there is no apparent justification for it in the course of the debate. According to Baillie, the votes passed unani mously, " not ten contradicting ". The second head — the employment of the clergy in the Star Chamber and on Commissions of Peace — was reserved for debate on the following day, Debate of ThuTsdav, llth March, when it was disposed of on llth March. ,i , . , i i -ii ., ^ equally technical grounds, and still more summarily. The statutes generally reputed as establishing the court were read, 3 Hen. VIL, and 32 Hen. VIIL, and in the latter it was noticed that " the clergy are inhibited to intermeddle in secular affairs, and so the matter was soon drawn to a question".^ The resolution of the House was : — For bishops or any other clergyman whatsoever to be on the Commission of the Peace, or to have any judicial power in the Star Chamber or in any civil court, is a hindrance to their spiritual function, prejudicial to the Commonwealth, and fit to be taken away by a bill, and that a biU be drawn to that ' purpose.^ There is not even a trace that the point of the sitting of clergymen on Commissions of Peace, in cluded in this resolution, was at all touched upon in the debate. Owing to the preoccupation of the House with Strafford's trial, the third branch of the first head of the report was not deliberated upon until the ^D'Ewes, i., 307. = C. J., ii., 102. DEBATE ON THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. 53 22nd March (Monday), when the House resolved chap. l .that : — 1640-1. Eor bishops or any other clergyman whatsoever to have 22nd March. employment as privy councUlors at the CouncU table or in temporal offices is a hindrance to the discharge of their spiritual function, prejudicial to the Commonwealth, and fit to be taken away by a biU, and that a bill be drawn accordingly. On the occasion of this debate, D'Ewes has preserved a lengthy pedantic speech of his own, which images most forcibly the hatred in the secular mind of the interference of the clergy in any department of temporal affairs. At no period in the history of this country has the deserving part of the clergy met with greater reverence and obedience within their own sphere than in the civil war period, and at no other period has the revolt- partly popular, still more legal — against clerical in terference in matters outside the true domain of their activity, been more strongly and impatiently pro claimed. As might be expected, Hyde and the elder Vane contended that it was the inalienable right of the Crown to select its own advisers. As an antiquarian, D'Ewes could not but see the force and truth of the argument, but as a Puritan he had made up his mind against it, and D'Ewes was, on this matter, a Puritan first and an antiquarian after. He roundly asserted that the counsels of the clergy had always proved dangerous and fatal. But the weight of his argument lay in the iterated and reiterated necessity of their attending solely to their spiritual function. I deny not, as it hath been observed by Mr. Hyde, that they might be fit enough to advise at the CouncU table — yea, 54 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. more fit it is to be feared than to preach — but this drew on a 16400L ' neglect of their other charge, which was more weighty. March 22. o t • -i Some discussion then ensued upon the second head of the report, concerning sole jurisdiction and ordination. But, conscious of its own want of special fitness for the debate, the House re solved to lay it aside for the present, and in the meanwhile to hear divines on the subject, and accordingly empowered the Committee for the Remonstrance "to hear such ministers as have de sired to be heard on the sole power of bishops in ordination, and censure of such ministers, shall they desire it, and to hear such others as they shall think fit " . Immediately thereupon it was ordered, on Hampden's motion, to go on with the 2muaLh ^^^^^ head of Mr. Crewe's report — viz., deans and on deans and chapters — OU the foUowins dav. The debate, chapters. , i however, was not taken until Friday, 26th March, when it was opened by D'Ewes. D'Ewes was taking no mean part in the ecclesiastical debates of the Long Parliament, arid, his utterances, notwithstanding his pedantry, are typical of the two most important phases of thought in the Commons and in the nation at large ; its superstitious reverence for legality of form and its trenchant secularity ; in other words, the abrupt determination with which it resolved to assert for lay life— for national life — its proper independent sphere of action, and to banish clerical interference. Later in the year the Commons resolved to confiscate the revenues .of the Church, those of the bishops to the Crown, those of the deans and chapters to good uses; March 26. DEBATE ON THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. 55 and this after divines, both Episcopal and Chap. i. Puritan, had been heard before the Lower House, ^^^eST and after both parties (Dr. Burgess as well as Dr. Hacket) had pronounced it sacrilege to convert to secular purposes what had once been consecrated to God. The latter idea was common, and his attempt at overthrowing it is the merit of D'Ewes : "As the deans and chapters are now useless, we may well dispose of their revenues to better uses ". He was not certain whether the pfous ¦ donations of the eleventh century were sacrations to God or the devil, but he was quite certain that the patrimony of the Crown was as much sacration as the revenue of the Church. We are not now singly upon a consideration of the estates of the Church, but of the estate of the Crown also, for the main question is not between the deans and a common person, but between them and the king. Here is sacrum patrimonium against sacrum patrimonium.^ He was followed in a lower strain of vitupera tion by Reynolds, Wheeler and Sir Edward Mounde- ford, speakers to whom Falkland could only reply with his habitual argument that the abuse of the institution or the evil lives of certain deans were not reasons for taking away deaneries. In his argu ment he was followed by Culpeper, who desired to see deaneries made useful rather than abolished, which latter, to his mind, threatened a decay of learning ; and D'Ewes assures us " that of the many who spake after him, most spake to the effect that they might not be utterly abolished ".^ The debate was adjourned. On the following ^ D'Ewes, i., 359. ^Ibid., iii., 948. 56 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. Monday Culpeper presented to the House a peti- 1641, tion from divers deans who desired to be heard in '^^' defence of deans and chapters. There was a decided opposition to any reading of the petition at all, but on the following day it was read and the request granted. Owing to the pressing nature of Straf ford's business, the divines were not heard for some considerable time ; and when, on 30th April, it stood with the convenience of the House to hear them, they did not appear. Thereupon a very ill- tempered dispute arose, some proposing to go on with the matter without any further reference to them. These were, however, overruled, and Friday, 7th May, was appointed for the audience. As a 12th May, the fact, it was not Until the 12th of May that the inl.efencro^f hearing actually occurred. On that day there chapters.^ appeared on behalf of deans and chapters Dr. Bargrave, Dr. Hacket, Dr. Ward, Dr. Brownrig. On the part of the ministers who had signed the Remonstrance appeared Dr. Burgess, Mr. Marshall, Mr. White. .. The proceedings were opened by an extra ordinary request from Dr. Bargrave, Dean of Canterbury, who, after a few general observations in defence of the institution of deans and chapters, demanded that the consideration of the whole question should be postponed, and in the mean time counsel assigned to them. The House de clined to take any notice of the request, and then Hacket's the Weight of the defence fell upon Dr. Hacket, at arguments. ^^^^ ^.j^^ minister of St. Andrew, Holborn. He addressed himself to proving "the four points undertaken to be proven by Dr. Bargrave, viz., DEBATE ON THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. 57 that deans and chapters conduce (1) to the glory chap. i. of God ; (2) the propagation of the Gospel ; (3) the iiST" advancement of piety and learning; (4) the good ^^y^^' of the Commonwealth ". There is a remarkable timidity about this de fence on the part of the usually trenchant Hacket. In support of the first "point" he instanced the daily prayers in cathedrals, and yet he was aware that objections were taken as to the manner. The abuse he confessed, and declared that all humbly desired the House to reform the same. In defence of the second "point," he came from prayer to preaching, and felt bound to confess that this had been too much neglected. " They desired that in each cathedral two sermons [should be preached] each Sunday, and that some lectures [might be prescribed] for the week-day which they would perform." The rest of the defence consisted of protestations as to the sacred nature of their property, the glorious estate of the English Church, and the threatening flood of ignorance which would rise on the abolition of deans and chapters. Dr. Bargrave then delivered a Latin letter from Cambridge, and a petition from the officers of the Church at Canterbury, in favour of the continuance of deans and chapters, while Selden preferred a similar one from Oxford. In the afternoon, after a few more remarks from Hacket, Burgess was heard in reply. His task was easy. He agreed, as did the whole of his contem poraries, that the points laid down by Dr. Bargrave would, if fulfilled, be a sufficient justification of the 58 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. institution. The real question was whether such 1641, ends were met by it, and, if not, by what could they Burgess's ^® ™®^ ' ^"^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^°^' ^"^ SUppOrt of the reply. negative, to point to the [to the Puritan] objection able formality of the prayers and music of the cathedrals, to the paucity of the preaching, and to the ease with which provision could be made for the continuance of the grammar schools, etc. But he was entirely at one with his antagonists in claiming for the patrimony of the Church a sacred character. " For sacrilege, he acknowledged that it ought not to be perverted, as the Casuists and the Puritans hold, to civil uses " ; " and so," says D'Ewes, "the divines withdrew, and some spake to that which they had said on both sides, that they were to hold all the Church lands, and we were to have no more".^ Attitude of We cau f orm a tolerably good idea of the ParUament to . . • i • -i n i the question schcmc that was III the minds of the portion of tion^rf dean the clerical party represented by the remonstrant rev^enues^*'''' diviucs and Dr. Burgess from a tract extant among the king's pamphlets, "petition of divers of the clergy, . . . with five motions concerning deans and chapters". The five motions are as follow : — The deans and chapters may continue with these con ditions : — 1. That they may be annexed to the parish churches in the great towns where the cathedrals stand. ^ For the above account, see D'Ewes, ii., 556 ; Moore, iii., 518 ; Rushworth, iv., 269 ; Nalson, ii., 240. Bruce does not seem to have kuown of these jottings of Hacket's and Burgess's speeches in D'Ewes' and Moore's MSS. ; hence his introduction to the debates of this day in the Verney Notes (Camden Society), is vague and incorrect in detail. DEBATE ON THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. 59 2. That they may be elected in these places by the king. Chap. I. with the approbation and consent of the people. ' J^^^ 3. That they may be enjoined to preach ordinarily twic6 May. every Lord's day at their parish. 4. That they may preach every Sunday once or twice in their courses at the cathedrals. 5. That they may be a consilium to the bishop in all matters of ordination and jurisdiction, so that nothing shall be done without them.i On the other hand, there was a section of the Parliament which fearlessly advocated confiscation of the greater part of the property to purely secular uses. On the very day preceding the above audience of the divines, the House had been in debate as to the manner of raising £400,000, urgently needed to meet the expenses of the two armies and the Scottish indemnity. On that occasion Peard brought forward a decisive paper scheme. It is worthy of notice : — The deaneries do possess £28,400 {old rent). £8,400 to be aUowed out of this £28,400 to rectories and churches now Ul served. £20,000 is left of the old rent before named, worth £200,000 in true value. This, let to farm, will make £900,000 for twenty-one years and three lives, and this will be a superior way to raise money than any other, and will be a better security than any money granted can be.^ Characteristically enough the scheme received the support of Cromwell. The House, however, was not prepared to go to such lengths at once. The debate on the deans and chapters was adjourned till Wednesday, 19th May, and on that day it did not take place, though an ^ Brit. Museum, E. 170. ' D'Ewes, iii., 1007. 60 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. incident did which shows the apprehensions and 1641. distempers of the times. A fright was caused in the gallery by the fall of some plaster, and a rush ensued. Sir Thomas Mansell drew his sword "and came to the door of the House to inquire the cause, conceiving there had been some divisions in the House concerning deans and chapters, which mat ters had been ordered to have been debated this morning".^ In the end, as it proved, the conclusion on this head of Crewe's report from the Committee for the Ministers' Remonstrance was not arrived at in the above connection. The orderly debates on that report were interrupted by the Root-and-Branch Bill, and when later the confiscations of the re venues of deans and chapters was voted, it was as a part of the Root-and-Branch Bill itself The first really effective legislation of the Long Parliament was, however, the result of the work of the above Committee for the Ministers' Remon strance. In less than three weeks after the resolu- The Bishops' tion on the first head, a bill to take away the 1640-1, bishops' votes in the Lords passed its first reading 30th March. . ,_, ^ , , * in the Commons as "An Act to restrain bishops and others in holy orders to intermeddle with secular affairs". Some eagerly pressed for its reading a second time the same day.^ From the beginning of the Parliament the national mind at large, and the majority of the Commons, had determined at least on such an item of reform. The production of the bill, therefore, 1 D'Ewes. Ubid.,i.,STi. THE BISHOPS BILL. 61 was immediately, but not merely, the result of the Chap. i. resolution of the 10th of March. ^ In briefest ^~lm7~^ point, it was a bill to eject the bishops from the ^'¦'°^¦^''^¦ House of Lords and the Star Chamber. It was introduced and read a first time on the 30th March, 1640-41.^ This " Bishops Bill " was read a second time on the 1st of April, and reported on the 16th and 21st of April. On the following day a proviso was added by the House, though opposed by D'Ewes and others, exempting doctors of the two univer sities from the disability, and allowing them to act as justices of the peace.^ The bill was read a third time on the 1st of The Bishops' May, and immediately taken up to the Lords, and Lord™ there read primd vice. For almost a fortnight the Lords did nothing with it, until the 13th, when, on an impatient message from the Commons, they condescended to read it a second time, and fixed the debate on it for the 20th of May. The debate ' The concurrent legislation with regard to the status of the clergy and their exclusion from Commissions of Peace wUl be noticed in another connection, infra, p. 233. ^C.J.,ii., 114. ^According to D'Ewes' Diary, folio 984, e. 182, and foUo 477b, 85a, the debate on the proposition to exempt the two universities took place on the 22nd April. "A debate touching a proviso added to the biU for debarring bishops and other persons in holy orders from secular employments, by the Committee, for exempting the two universities. Mr. Whistler, Mr. Maynard, Mr. Selden and others spoke that it might stand. others spoke to the contrary ... I desired . . . that this pro-viso might be left out, and that the divines in the two universities might be left out vrith their brethren from being J. P." In the Commons Journals (ii. 127), the resolution as in the text was adopted on the 23rd. May. 62 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. continued for three days,' and on the 24th the 1641, House came to a composite resolution. It refused the bill as far as it related to the bishops' seats in Parliament, but adopted that portion of it which related to the Star Chamber : — Besolved, That the archbishops and bishops shaU have suffrage and voice in the House of Peers in ParUament.^ Besolved, That the archbishops and bishops shaU not have suffrage and voice in the Star Chamber when they are caUed. Three days later — on the 27th of May, the very day on which the Root-and-Branch Bill was first read in the Commons — the Lords, anxious to ex plain the nature of their act, appointed a committee to draw heads for a conference with the Commons. The paper of heads, as reported by the Earl of Bath, is exceedingly interesting : — Whereas the House of Commons have said in then- preamble of the bill that archbishops and bishops, and other persons in holy orders, ought not to intermeddle in secular affairs ; after long debate and consideration their lordships considered that by these words " ought not " they understood, not unlawfulness by any law, but conveniency or inconveniency; and among other reasons one principle did arise from the biU, for if this House conceived that if they thought it absolutely unlawful, they would not have put in these two provisos for the heads of colleges, and for such persons in holy orders to whom titles of nobUity shall descend. Por their right to vote in Parliament their lordships conceive that by the common and statute laws of this realm, and by ancient and continued practice, they have unquestionable right. Por inconveniency, their lordships yet understand not any sueh for certainty and weight that will induce them to ' Viscount Newark's speeches on the 21st and 24th of May are preserved in State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxx., No. 54, and in Cooke's Speeches in Parliament, 1641, pp. 305-13. "¦ L. J., iv., 256. THE BISHOPS BILL. 63 deprive them and their successors of that right ; but if there Chap. I. be any to be given by the House of Commons, this House ' J^J[ ' shall at a conference with them willingly hear and take them May-Ju'ne. into consideration. For the bishops having no votes and suffrages in the Star Chamber, for their not being of His Majesty's Privy Council, for their not being justices of the peace, commissioners in secular offices, otherwise than in performing their duty as they are directed by law in some special cases, as plenary of benefice, loyalty of marriage, and some others ; for their not having or enjoying any judicial place in any temporal court, this Hojise hath fuUy assented. Only it hath been offered to their lordships, on behalf of the bishops, that some consideration may be had of them in some particulars, as for the Dean of Westminster to have that corporation confirmed by Act of Parliament ; for the Bishops of Durham, Ely, and the Archbishop of York for Hexhamshire, and for aU in keeping court leet, and barons by their stewards, and all other courts that are executed by temporal officers, as formerly they have done, which their lordships conceive not contrary to the meaning of this bUl. The conference was held (27th May), and in answer the Commons determined to prepare reasons in defence of their vote. The reasons were re ported to the House a week later (4th June).' This paper is important as a statement of the Reasons of opinion of the House (and the Commons even for the exciu- ordered it to be printed), and also for another ^Siops from reason, viz..- As originally reported by Pierpont, ^^'^ ¦'^°'''^^'®*''- the paper contained eight heads or arguments, but, according to D'Ewes,' "The Lord Falkland, Mr. Nath. Fiennes, and one or two more gave some new reasons to be added to those former whilst we were voting the first six, and so it was ordered that they should retire into the committee chamber ' C. J., ii., 159, 167. ' D'Ewes, ii., 65L Chap. I, June 4. 64 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. and draw those reasons, which they did accordingly". liST It can easily be seen, from a comparison of the two forms of the paper, that Articles 7, 8, 9 of the final paper emanated from this strange combination, Falkland and Fiennes. The following is the final form of it (in the Commons Journals the final form of the paper is printed before the recommitment of it. 'The correction is due to D'Ewes, ii., 656) : — Eeasons of the House of Commons why bishops ought not to have votes in the House of Peers : — 1. Because it is a very great hindrance to the discharge of their ministerial function. 2. Because they do vow and undertake at their ordination, when they enter into holy orders, that they wiU give them selves wholly to that vocation. 3. Because councils and canons in several ages do forbid them to meddle with secular affairs. 4. Because the twenty-four bishops have a dependence on the two archbishops, and because of their canonical obedience to them. 5. Because they are but for lUe, and therefore are not fit to have legal power over the honours, inheritances, Uves and Uberties of others. 6. Because of bishops' dependency and expectancy of translation to places of greater profit. 7. That several bishops have of late much encroached upon the consciences and liberties of the subject, and they and their successors wiU be much encouraged still to encroach, and the subject will be much discouraged from complaining against such encroachment, if twenty-six of that order be to be judges upon those complaints. The same reason extends to their legislative power in any biU to pass for the regiilation of their power upon any emergent inconveniences by it. 8. Because the whole number of them is interested to maintain the jurisdiction of bishops, which hath been found so dangerous to the three kingdoms that Scotland hath utterly abolished it, and multitudes in England and Ireland have petitioned against it. 1641. BISHOPS BILL LOST IN THE LORDS. 65 9. Because the bishops, being Lords of ParUament, it Chap. I. setteth too great a distance between them and the rest of their brethren in the ministry, which occasioneth pride in them, discontent in others, and disquiet in the Church. To their having votes a long time. Ansiuer : If incon venient, time and usage are not to be considered law makers. Some abbots voted as anciently as bishops, yet they were taken away. That for the bishops' certificate for plenary of benefice and loyalty of marriage the bill extends not to them. For the secular jurisdictions of the Dean of Westminster, the Bishops of Durham and Bly, and the Archbishop of York, which they are to execute in their own persons, the former reasons show the inconveniences therein. For their temporal courts and jurisdiction, which are executed by their temporal officers, the biU doth not concern them. As it was still unconvinced by the arguments Rejection of n ,1 /-i ,1 TT i? T J n 11 theCommons' of the Commons, the House ot Lords finally, on Bishops' Bin the Sth of June, 1641, rejected the bill on the ^^ *^' ^°'^'- third hearing.' Accordingly, here for the nonce is an end to it, and here too — but not for a moment merely — was an end to all dreams of a moderate Church reform. That such a result, however, was not in- The Lords' tended by the Lords is plain. For some time ecoiSasticai they had been themselves intent on a scheme of ^^j^"/^™' ^'* Church reform, but from the more Umited stand point of objections to ceremonies and innovations. On the same day (1st March, 1640-41) on which they had issued their order ^ concerning the position of the Communion Table, the Lords appointed a The Lords most influential committee to consider of all inno- for™nnova- vations in the Church concerning religion. Five *'°°'- days later this committee was empowered to send 1 L. J„ iv., 269. ' See infra, p. 105. VOL. I. 5 66 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap, l for such learned men as they pleased to assist ~^L64o^i^ them.' The order was repeated on the lOth of March, and several names mentioned, "as the Lord Afchbishop of Armagh, Dr. Prideaux, Dr. Ward, Dr. Twiste (Twisse), Dr. Hacket," who were to have intimation given to them by the Lord Bishop of Lincoln.^ On the occasion of the appointment of this committee, Mr. Gardiner has extracted fronv, the Wodrow MSS. (Edinburgh) some slight account of the debate.^ The Lord Saye spoke very freely against Episcopacy and the liturgy, constantly averring that he would never hear it. Bristol answered that there were some things indifferent pressed on men's consciences which must be taken away, but what was established by law no man might separate from it. '.Saye replied that they were now in loco et tempore mutationis, and therefore desired that a committee might be appointed for that effect. Hacket has preserved some account of this committee.* Its constitution, apparently, subse quently changed ; a portion of the original number was joined with the divines to form a sub-com mittee. Over both forms of it Williams presided. The list of those divines who did constantly attend is thus given by Hacket : Bishop of Lincoln, Primate of Armagh, Bishop of Durham, Bishop of Norwich, Dr. Ward, Dr. Prideaux, Dr. Sander son, Dr. Featley, Dr. Brownrig, Dr. Holdsworth, Dr. Hacket, Dr. Twisse, Dr. Burgess, Mr. White, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Calamy, Mr. Hill. 1 L. J., iv., 177. 'Ibid., 180. ^ Gardiner, ix., 298. 'J Scrinia Pese-rata, part ii., p. 147. BISHOP WILLIAMS' COMMITTEE. 67 Williams summoned the divines to the assists chap. i. ance of the Lords' Committee in the following i64'o-i, important and ungrammatical letter : — I am commanded by the Lords of the Committee for Innovations in matters of Eeligion that you know that their said lordships have assigned and appointed you to attend them as assistant in that committee, and to let you know in general that the Lords do intend to examine all innovations in doctrine or discipline introduced into the Church without law since the Eeformation, and if their lordships shall find it behoveful for the good of the Church and State to examine after that the degrees and perfection of the Eeformation itself, which I am directed to intimate to you, that you may prepare your thoughts, studies, and meditations accordingly, expecting their lordship's pleasure for the particular points as they shall .arise, March 12, 164f . According to Hacket, " The theological junto had six meetings in Westminster 'CoUege, in all which time aU passages of discourse were very friendly between part and part. The complainants noted the passages of some books that suited not, in their judgment, with the doctrine of our Church. They were con demned. Somewhat in ceremony and in outward form, as beside [sic, for residentiary] canon and supernumerary, they had their asking to bid it be restrained. Their exceptions against our liturgy were petty and stale — older than the old ex- ¦change — yet for their contentment the vote of the meeting did tend one way, to castigate some phrases, to publish the next jprinted books in aU passages, from the beginning to the end, from the translation of King James's Bible, and to furnish the calendar altogether with passages of canonical scripture, ex- j)unging the apocryphal. The bishops had undertaken a draft for regulating the government ecclesiastical, but had not finished it. The sudden and quiet despatch of all that was done was attributed to the chairman's dexterity." On the 5th of April, the Lords ordered the committee to meet on the following Thursday, thus indicating an intermission of its sitting. Dr. 68 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap, l DcU in a letter' of the 10th of April, 1641, iin- TSii, directed, but possibly intended for Nicholas, gives ^"'' the following fragmentary account of its delibera tions at this time : — Our new committee for religion was appointed to have sate on Monday, in the afternoone last, but there being neither meeting nor adjournement it was left sine die : yet on Thursday in the afternoone, the Bishop of Lincolne, Durham, Winchester, BristoU mett, where the assistants attended by some three score other divines of inferior ranke were present, and many temporall lords ; and many points of doctrine and Church service being questioned among the rest one Lord sayd that it ought to be putt out of the creed that Christ descended into heU which he did not believe. Yesterday in the forenoone vrith out any intimation or notice given to the other committees [i.e., members of the committee] the same spirituaU Lords and divines mett at the Bishop of Lincolne's lodging, where in lesse then two houres they condemned (as I am informed by the Bishop of Bristol, present) about fifty points in doctrine which they had mett with in severall Treatises and sermons of late printed amongst us ; they had cuUed out a passage of my Lord of Cant [erbury] in his Starre Chamber speech, which they say is that Hoc est Corpus meum is more then Hoc est verbum meum, which the Bishop of Lincolne censured for that verbum meum did make Corpus, but would not further heere because his Grace was like to answer it shortly elsewhere. Resumioithe There can be little doubt that a resume of the committee's .• i 11 work. particular debate referred to above is contained in "a copy of the proceedings of some worthy and learned divines appointed hy the Lords to tneet at the Bishop of Lincolne's in Westminister," which will be found printed in the appendix (No. 1). The paper consists of eighteen questions as to the innovations in doctrine, appertaining to Popish opinions, or the gross substance of Arminianism. ^ State Papers, Domestic, cccolxxix., 24. BISHOP WILLIAMS' COMMITTEE. 69 These are followed by references to three books Chap. i. deserving reproof, and by twenty-one questions on ieST" innovations in " discipline," which include the ^^"'' turning of the table altarwise, bowing, candlesticks, canopies, the rails, the reading of the second ser vice, prohibiting ministers from expounding the catechism, suppressing lectures, and prohibiting conceived prayer before sermon. Then succeed three memoranda : — 1. That in aU cathedral and collegiate churches two sermons be preached every Sunday by the dean and pre bendaries . . and one lecture at the least to be preached on working days every week all the year round. 2. That the music used in God's holy service in cathedral and coUegiate churches be framed with less curiosity. 3. That the reading desk be placed in the church where divine service may best be heard of all the people. The paper closes with thirty-five exceptions to imperfections in the Prayer Book. The exceptions are advanced rather as propositions than as resolu tions. But it seems clear that they represent actual decisions of the Committee (Baxter, e.g., in his autobiography speaks of them as "conces sions'"), and that they were intended to be re commendations from the Committee to the Lords on the minor points of reform of doctrine and the Prayer Book. Much greater interest attaches to the work of the committee on the subject of the reconstitution of the Episcopal function itself. Various plans of reform were submitted, the chief one being Usher's "reduction of Episcopacy ^ Reliquix Baxterianx, part ii, p. 369. 70 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES. 1640-3. Chap. I. 1641. Platforms of reform of ecclesiasticalgovernment submitted to the Lords' Committeefor Innova tions. ArchbishopUsher's. unto the form of synodical government ".' This is the scheme that was oftenest quoted in connection with any idea of moderate reform or of comprehension, and was offered by the Puritan ministers at the Savoy Conference in 1661. It asserts that the preaching elders in common ruled the Church, that the pre sident obtained his honour by good report, and that betwixt the bishop and the presbytery there was a harmonious consent in the ordering of Church government (speaking of the Church of Ephesus). It, therefore, makes the following pro posals for the restoration of this ancient form of government by the united suffrages of the clergy, and for the accordance of the synodical conventions ^ First published surreptitiously on the 25th November, 1656 (B.M., E. -»|A) and authoritatively on the 17th December, 1656, by Nicholas Bernard (B.M., E. ^^). The imperfections which Bernard charges on the surreptitious edition are not formidable and leave the impression that the surreptitious edition was in accordance -with the original MS. form, and that Bernard's was in accordance with Usher's last wishes. The MS. copy in the Lauderdale paper (B.M., addit. MS. 23113, f. 18) is in accordance with the surreptitious edition. This latter was reprinted at London, 25th June, 1660 (B.M., E. ^^^). The authorised version is preserved in Baxter's Reliq. Bax., i., 238-40, and is reprmted in Ebington's Usher's IVorks, vol. xii. Usher acknow ledged the authorship of his tract in conversation to Baxter, Reliq. Ba,x., i., 206. This tract is quite distinct from the utterly apocryphal tract, " The Bishop of Armagh's direction concerning the Liturgy and Epis copal Government," London, 1642, B.M., 702, d. A- A MS. copy occurs in addit. MSS. 28273, fo. 31. This tract was reprinted in 1659 (E. 2^) and 1660 (E. iffa), and is identical with (almost but not quite word for word with) Ephraim UdaU's, " Directions propounded and humbly presented to the High Court of Parliament concermng the book of Common Prayer and Episcopal Government," Oxford, 1642, B.M., 702, d. -§^. It was this tract of which Usher complained as an injurious and false aspersion and which was condemned (C.J., ii., 81, 9th Feb., 1640-1). It wUl be noticed that this date would put it before the time of WiUiams' Committee. BISHOP WILLIAMS COMMITTEE. 71 of the pastors of every parish within the presidency chap. i. of the bishops of every diocese and province: (1)^ ieii^ rector, churchwardens, and sidesmen to be turned ^p"^"-^""^- into a parochial presbytery ; (2) rural deaneries to be the basis of a monthly synod ; (3) the diocese to be the basis of a half-yearly synod ; (4) the provinces to be the basis of a triennial national assembly. Williams himself also offered a scheme for re- Bishop conciliation on this head of Church government. ^ ^^^ ' The principal points of his scheme were heads three and four : — 3. That every bishop shaU have twelve assistants, besides the dean and chapter, four to be chosen by the King, four by the Lords, and four by the Commons, for assistance in the exercise of jurisdiction and ordination. i. That in aU vacancies those assistants, with the dean and chapter, shall present to the King three of the ablest divines in the diocese, who shall choose one to be bishop. These two items enable us to identify with almost absolute certainty the following paper " as either by Bishop Wilhams himself for an agenda paper for this Lords' Committee, or as representing the outcome of the deliberations of that committee. (1) AU the B^' under 70 yeares old in theyr owne Dioces being not sicke to preach every Lds day or pay 5 pound to the poore. (2) No Archb"-, B"'- or any other person being in orders & having care of soules to be Judge of the Star Chamber or Privy CounseUor or Justice of the Peace or a Commissioner from any ' State Papers, Domestic, Charles I., cocolxxxii., No. I, without heading or endorsement. ConjecturaUy, but incorrectly, assigned to Ist July, a date which the draft must have preceded by some time. See L. J. under Ist July, 1641, and infra 73-5. 72 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. temporall Court under severall [sic ? for severe] penaltye & 10^ disabilites excepting the 2 universities, honourable persons by April-June, descent & Deane of Westminster in Westminster & S' Martins le Grand onely. (3) 12 assistants to the B"- of every Dioces respectively to bee chosen out of every shire or county of England and Wales whereof 6 to assist the B""' & approve of every ordination of Ministers, one or two to assist in all ecclesiasticaU judgement or sentence & to allow of appeales, 6 to be present in the heare- ing of appeales made to the B''^ & the assistants to attend upon sumons under the penalty of 10'. (4) Election of Archbishops and B""- for the time to come to be performed by the Deane & the Chapter & aU assistants in that Dioces, who are to recommende 3 persons in holy orders out of that or any other Dioces to the Kings Ma"' who -wiU be pleased to name one of them, that shaU be consecrated and translated to the B'"'"'' within 20 days after the Congee desUer received, els the nomination is devolved to the King. (5) No Deanes, Chapters or Eesidensiaries in CathedraU or College Churches that have cure of soules to reside from theyr sayd cure above 60 dayes in the yeare : to preach 2 Sermons every Sunday & one Lecture in the weeke day in the place where theyr Cathedralls are situated upon a paine of a hundred pound to the King & losse of theyr profits for one yeare w* is to goe to raise a stocke for the poore of that towne & citty. (6) The fourth part of the fines of all cases made by the Archbishops, B"', Deanes, Deanes & Chapters, Dignitys, Pre- bendarys, as also of M"-, feUowes, and schollars of coUedges in both universities to be set aside to raise a stock to buy out aU the impropriations of this kingdome : this money to bee deUvered to coUectors named by the ParUament who are to present clerks the first time to the sayd impropriations & afterwards for every [avoidance] the Archbishops, B""- & other Corporations from whence the money was raised [to present] : & of the remainmg fine upon all impropriations the vicar or curate to be payd the tenth part. (7) AU Eesidentiarys that have a benefice with cure of soules to pay unto the Curate (who is to bee a preacher) for the time of his non-residence in proportion to the moity of the BISHOP WILLIAMS' COMMITTEE. 73 entire value of such a benefice. And all double beneficed men Chap. I. or pluraUsts to keepe a preacher that shall preach twice on the jTJT Lords day upon the benefice from w"" he shall be non-resident ; April-June. and to allow him an entire moity of the profits of the sayd benefice for his labour and paines. (8) The regulating of Courts EcclesiasticaU. No citation to be issued fotth before the Libell & the Articles be in. No proceeding hereafter ex officio mero but the Judge & Eegister shall pay the costs to the partie innocent. None to accuse themselves in Criminall causes upon oathes imposed on them. The defendant is to answer within 20 days after citation. Both parties to examine theyr proofes within 4 months after. No exception against the credit of witnesses but upon matter of Eecord in a Court Civill or EcclesiasticaU. All causes to be ended within the yeare. A competent number of Proctors & Appariteurs to be assigned to every Consistory by the B''- & 6 assistants. No suitor to goe to law upon trust in these Courts. No Proctors to take fees for desiring continuance of days. No more appeales but 2, one to the B""- in person & his assistants and the other to the Kings delegates the Arches & Audience in matter of appeall set aside as unnecessary vexatious. (9) The laws ecclesiasticaU in use in this Kingdome to be coUected & abridged in the EngUsh tongue & by 16 learned men to be named 6 by the King 5 by the House of Lords & 5 by the House of Commons ; that Archb"'-, B""-, Deanes, Arch deacons & Prebendarys may understand (w""" now they doe not) by w' lawes they judge & the Kings people may likewise know by w' lawes they are to be judged. ^ This committee proved entirely useless. Its meetings were interrupted or intermitted, not, as Hacket says, because its work was over in the first six meetings, but by the pressure of business and the course of events. For a time the House of ^ For a more apocryphal but possibly contemporary scheme see Sixteen propositions in Parliament touching the manner and form for church government by bishops and clergy of this kingdora. B.M. 702 d. I London [June 8], 1642. 74 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. Lords would appear to have been determined to 1641, wait for the results of its committee's proceedings ; " ^ ' and the bill " for the better regulating of arch- The Lords' ^ . ° . Bill for regu- bisliops, and for the better governing ot courts Bishfpsand ecclcsiastical," the presentation of which to the C(?urts.^^^ Upper House will be referred to immediately, is to be regarded as the final form of the independent resolution of the Lords on the matter of Church reform. But it cannot be gathered from the journals that this bill had been drawn up by Williams' committee, or that there had ever been a report made from that body. The text of the bill has been recently printed by Mr. Gardiner.' It is interesting as showing the full length to which the Lords were ready to go in matter of reform of Church and Church government. From another standpoint, however, the intro duction of this bill into the Lords is to be regarded also as their answer to the violent debates which were in progress, in June, in the Commons on the Eoot-and-Branch Bill. It was whilst the latter bill lay before the Commons' sub-committee that the Lords determined to take action. The Upper House was not deficient in its regard for the importance of the subject of religion, and already voices had been heard deploring the differences between the two bodies in the matter. Nalson has preserved a paper which he describes as presented to the House of Commons,- and which is strongly indicative of the situation at the moment. It is doubtless a paper intended to be presented to the Lords, or notes of a speech to ^ Const. Doc, pp., 94-106. 2 Nalson, ii., 301. THE LORDS BISHOPS' BILL. 75 be made by one of the Puritan Lords, Bedford or chap. i. Saye, or perhaps by Williams himself. iSTT" July 1. It is a doubtful case, in the heat of this dispute, how far the Commons may go in the declaration of their opinion, in which, if the Lords shall not concur, it may prove a great rock of offence between the two Houses. Therefore 'tis very re quisite that the Lords of the Upper House do timely interest themselves in the discussion. To this purpose the Lords may be pleased to make a committee in their House for the reforma tion of Church affairs and government, and thereupon demand a conference with the committee of the House of Commons that the business may be handled by a consultation on both sides. The fear expressed in such a paper must have been before the eyes of many in the Upper House, and it was doubtless partly the result of such a desire for compromise when the Lords took their last step in the matter of Church government. On Thursday, 1st July, therefore the bill was introduced into the Upper House — For the regulating of archbishops, bishops, deans and chapters, canons, prebends, and the better ordering of their revenues, and for the better governing of the courts ecclesiastical and the ministers thereof, and the proceedings therein. Evidently Nicholas looked to this bill of the Lords for the effecting of a working compromise. "We are still about the Church business," he writes on the 2nd of July, 1641, to Sir Thomas Roe, "which, if it were once accommodated, no doubt but all things else would be happily and quickly accommodated." ' ^ L. J., iv., 296, 298. State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxxii., No. 8. At one time the report was current in the country that the Lords had voted down the bishops in their House, and that the Church was to be governed by nine laymen in every diocese (ihid., ccoclxxxiii., No. 51). 76 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. The bill was read a second time on Saturday, ""iSi! ' 3rd July, 1641, and debated in a committee of the whole House on the 12th. On the 23rd of October the Lords ordered it to be again read,' but no further trace of it appears. The time for such a bill had, in fact, gone by. Had it been proposed in November, 1640, it would doubtless have been considered a complete satisfac tion on all points complained of, and the scheme of Church government there indicated is that to which the majority of opinions gravitated, and which might have become more than an opinion but for the outbreak of the war. But already by the middle of 1641 the growth of feeling had carried the question beyond the stage indicated by such a measure.^ The fate of the Commons' Bill against the ' L. J., iv., 308, 402. ^ It is possible that the anonymous tractate entitled '' Directions propounded and humbly presented to the High Court of Parhament concerning the Book of Common Prayer and Episcopal Government written by a reverend and learned divine now resident in this city,'' London, 1641 (a copy iu State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxxvii., No. 3), belongs to the occasion of Bishop WiUiams' committee. It argues m favour of both the Common Prayer Book and Episcopacy, but details certam emendations desirable in the first, and the foUowing qualifica tions and conditions as equally desirable in the second, in order to reduce it to the constitution and practice of the primitive church : — 1. Bishops to preach ordinarily ui their metropohtan church, or in parochial churches in their visitations. 2. To ordain only with the consent of three or four grave and learned presbyters. 3. To exercise suspension only with a necessary consent of some assistants, and that for such causes and crimes only as the ancient canons or the laws of the kingdom appointed. 4. Excommunication to be performed only by the bishop, with the consent of the pastor of the parish, and only for heinous and THE ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL. 77 bishops' votes in Parliament has already been noted, chap. i. On the 24th of May, 1641, the Lords rejected the' — Iiil~^ main head of it. Three days later, on Thursday, ofthf Eoor 27th May, the Root-and-Branch Bill was intro- B^i^P't^j'^^g duced into the Commons. The introduction of the Commons, measure is to be regarded as immediately due to ^ ^^^' the rejection of the main head of the Bishops' Bill, not as a threat or attempt at pressure on the Lords to pass the Bishops' Bill, as a little attention to dates will show. We are here in as great disorder as ever (writes Nicholas to Admiral Sir John Penington on the 10th of June). The biU which was passed by the Commons and sent up to the Lords to thrust bishops out of the Upper House, was last Monday cast out of their House, whereat the Commons are much troubled, and they have now a bill more sharp against bishops and the clergy, but it is conceived it will never pass to be made a law.i Such a view of the transaction is entirely con firmed by a letter of Captain Robert Slingsby to the same Admiral Penington and of the same date ^ : — I suppose you have heard of the biU that passed the Commons House against the bishops in temporal employment and votes in Parliament, which was transferred to the Lords. scandalous crimes ; for lesser offences lesser pimishments, and those according to law. 5. Bishops not to demand benevolence for the clergy, nor exact diet at their visitation, nor suffer their servants to exact undue fees at ordinations and institutions. 6. That bishops and chanceUors and officials may be subject to the censures of provincial synods and convocations. ^ State Papers, Domestic, cocclxxxi.. No. 21. 'Ibid., cocclxxxi., No. 22. 78 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. There their votes in ParUament only [were] voted to continue, ¦ J^^^ but their other temporal employments taken away: Where- May 27. upon a biU was twice read in the Commons' House for abroga tion of Episcopacy but not voted. In the meantime, at a conference betwixt the two Houses, the Commons propounded their reasons for passing the first biU entirely. Monday last Episcopacy was disputed on again in the Commons' House and hotly opposed and defended. The next day the Lords did throw the first bUl quite out, and so left the bishops in the state they were before. This bred much murmuring in the city. The discourse of aU men is they must now strike at Eoot-and-Branch, and not slip this occasion. Dering's The first reading of the Root-and-Branch Bill intro'duoSom was movcd by Sir Edward Dering, who, in a series of his own speeches, printed in the following year (1642), gives the following account of the trans action : — ' The bill for the abolition of our present Episcopacy was pressed into my hand by Sir A. H. [Haselrig] , being then brought unto him by Sir H. V. [the younger Vane] , and 0. C. [Cromwell] . He told me he was resolved that it should go in, but he was earnestly urgent that I should present it.^ The bill did hardly stay in my hands so long as to make a hasty perusal of it. Whilst I was over-reading it. Sir Edward Ainscough [Ayscough] delivered in a petition out of Lincoln, which was seconded by Mr. Strode, in' such a sort as that I had a fair invitement to issue forth the biU then in my hand, so I stood up. The bill as presented by Dering was very short and intituled : An Act for the utter abolishing and taking away of all archbishops, bishops, their chancellors, commissaries, deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, prebendaries, chanters, and canons, and all other their under officers, 1 Brit. Mus., E. 197. ""G.Z., iii., 57. THE ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL. 79 Dering's speech at the introduction of the chap. i. measure was hardly more than typical of the imZ~ general temper of the House : — '^^ Mr. Speaker, the gentleman who spoke last, taking notice of the multitude of complaints and complainants against the present government of the Church, doth somewhat seem to wonder that we have no more pursuit ready against the persons offending. Sir, the time is present and the work is ready. . . I am now the instrument to present to you a very sharp bi-l-l,-^ such as these times and their very sad necessities have brought forth. ... I give it you as I take physic, not for delight, but for a cure — a cure now the last and only cure, if, as I hope, aU other remedies have first been tried. . . I never was for ruin so long as I could hope any hope of reforming. . . . My hopes that way are now almost withered. Sir, you see their demerits have exposed them publici odii piaculares victimas. I am sorry they are so ill ; I am more sorry they wiU not be content to be bettered, which I did hope would have been effected by our last bill. When this bill is perfected I shall give a sad "aye" unto it, and at the delivery in thereof, I do now profess beforehand that if my former hopes of a full reformation may yet revive and prosper, I will again divide my sense upon this bill, and yield my shoulders to underprop the ancient, lawful, and just Episcopacy yet, so as that I wiU never be wanting with my utmost pains and prayers to root out all the undue adjuncts to it and superstructions ¦on it. The success which attended the measure must have surprised its most sanguine supporters. It seems plain, from some expressions in D'Ewes' speech, that the bill was not at first regarded very seriously, and it is also plain, from the numbers on the division, that its numbers included more than the mere Rooters ; that it included those Puritans who wished for a reformed primitive Episcopacy. " The utter abolishing of the bishops 80 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. and all titular ecclesiastics, with their dependants 1641, 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."' D'Ewes' I moved (said D'Ewes) ^ that I desired the biU might be speec 1. ^^^^ ^^^ second time, because I saw no inconveniency, for it might rest as well after the second reading as after the first. One thing was objected by the gentleman on the other side (Sir J. Culpeper), that he did not think the government of Episcopacy yet so past hope of reformation as we should yet need to enter upon this last and final remedy. I answer that the holding of their temporal employments be sueh as Diana to them as they will not part from, that there was little hope of other amendment, and for his desiring us to stay to see what the Lords would yet do with our bill lately sent up to them to debar bishops from all secular employments, and to take some time to debate the matter of Episcopacy and deans and chapters before we read the bill the second time, aU this might be as well done after the second reading thereof, for it might be referred to a committee of the whole House, and a fit time appointed when all these particulars might be fuUy debated. The bill was read a second time on the same day, the second reading being by 139-108. Commitment After the sccoud reading a debate arose on the question of commitment. Hyde stood up to defend his beloved Church, and that government " under. which it had continued many hundred years in great happiness". Pleydall asserted that the bill aimed at the subversion of truth and peace, and wished it committed to the fire. In answering an objection made on this occasion by one of their speakers (doubtless Pleydall), and which had cer- 1 Sidney Bere to Sir John Penington, 17th June, I64I ; State Papers, Domestic, cocclxxxi.. No. 42. ''D'Ewes, ii., 625. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 81 tainly been made on other occasions often enough, Chap. i. D'Ewes used words which show us what has been J^, already gathered from the debates in February, and is confirmed by the history of the Root-and-Branch Bill itself, that the House had not conceived any practicable scheme of Church government that might replace Episcopacy. The House shunned ;the question, and it was this disposition that led it to the adoption of the idea of a synod of divines. " Nor shall we need," said D'Ewes, "to study long for a new Church government, having so evident a platform in so many reformed churches." Holies, Pym and Cage spoke directly against the government of the Church by bishops, and it was not until after a long and frequently renewed debate that it was ordered to be referred to a com mittee of the whole House. Even then a fresh and hot dispute arose as to when the debate should take place — the defenders of Episcopacy desiring it to be postponed till after the disbanding of the two armies. The ruse was too apparent, and signally futile ; the debate was ordered for the following Thursday, 3rd June. It was not, how ever, held on the 3rd. It was moved for on the 7th, but did not actually commence till Friday, Debate oi the t-r . -E . . -1-^,-1-1 ) T-.- Root-and- 11th June, 1641. At this point D Ewes Diary Bra.neh Biw .,,.,,, , i. f in Committee gives US an insight into the secret management oi nth June. this memorable Parliament : — ' Sir Eobert Harley, as I gathered, Mr. Pym, Mr. Hampden, and others, with Stephen Marshall, parson of Finchingfield, in Essex, and some others had met yesternight and appointed that this bUl should he proceeded withal this morning, and the 'D'Ewes, ii., 692. VOL. I. 6 82 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. said Sir Eobert Stanley moved it first in this House. For Mr. j^'^^ Hampden, out of his serpentine subtlety, did still put others to 1641. move those business that he contrived. D'Ewes again refers to this in another, the most picturesque, passage of his whole Diary : — ' Conceiving that the great busiaess of the Bishops' Bill would not have been brought into the House tUl Monday next ensuing, 14th June, I went out of the House in the forenoon, after I had sitten there awhile, to walk in Westminster Hall behind the shops, near the Court of Common Pleas, when Mr. Steghen^aSshaJl, minister of Finchingfield, came to me and asked me how chance I was not in the House, and desired me to make haste thither, because they were in agitation about this great business for abolishing bishops. I told him I thought it was not possible, because I was but a little before come out of the House. He answered me that it was undoubtedly so, and that some of the House had determined to call for it to-day. I then asked him why I had no notice of this as weU as others. He told me they were sure of me. I said aye, if you expect only my aye or no ; but if you expect of me that I should speak in the cause, you should in civility have given me notice. As I hasted to my chamber near the haU to peruse anew those fragmentary notes which follow . . . but before I could peruse them half over, Mr. John Moore, a member of the House, came to my lodging to call me away, because the Bishops' [the Eoot-and-Branch] BiU was in agitation, which shows the hollow-heartedness of Mr. Pym, Mr. Hampden, and those other seeming wise men, who, though they reUed upon me to speak, yet they concealed their intendment from me, that I might do below myself in speaking. When D'Ewes entered the House, Pleydall was speaking against the bill and reading Latin quota tions from the fathers. In spite of his " unpre pared state," D'Ewes spoke in reply at great length. His speech consists of his usual long-winded account 'D'Ewes, iii., 1014. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 83 of the unpatriotic action of bishops in early English chap. i. history, and would not be worthy of remark were ^J^eUT" it not for the temper he displays towards the close. ^^*^' There was no flinching in D'Ewes' advocacy of a u4J, new order of things : — All grievances in inconveniences which may at first happen ^ in a new government wiU be remedied by frequent Parliaments, and for the distractions which may happen in the meantime, before a new Church discipline be settled, it may fully be pro vided for by a biU or act of twenty lines, in which I would have a clause inserted for the severe punishing of tradesmen and other ignorant persons who shall presume to preach.^ Fiennes and Clotworthy spoke generally to the bill ; then it was taken piecemeal, and the preamble was read and debated. The preamble was finally The preamble voted in the following form : — Whereas the government of the Church of England by archbishops, bishops, their chancellors and commissaries, deans, archdeacons and other ecclesiastical officers, hath been found by long experience to be a great impediment to the per fect reformation and growth of religion, and very prejudicial to the civil state and government of this kingdom.^ As was inevitable from the situation, such a preamble could not be rejected. It could not indeed be opposed. Even Culpeper confessed that of late years many calamities had happened by them in the Church, but he weakly desired tha,t the words " long experience " and " government " might be changed to " late experience " and "governors," as he was not aware that it had 'D'Ewes, iii, I0I5. In Nalson, ii., 298, there is a speech of Rudyard's whieh belongs to this date. Nalson wrongly assigns it to the 21st. nith June, 1641, G. J., ii., 174. 84 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. 1641. Chap. I. been characteristic of Episcopacy in former times. ~Juue, From the nature of the case, such was the only argument open to defenders of Episcopacy. Al though (Culpeper received a crushing reply at the hands of St. John, the argument was iterated and reiterated. John Crewe, of Northampton, a man of a very exact, strict life (and the fact moved D'Ewes to astonishment), desired rather a bill to restrain the bishops' power. Sir John Coke declared that by the same argument monarchy might be taken away. The debate was long and evidently fierce, for Hyde received, as chairman of the committee, a sharp rebuke from Fiennes for allowing Coke's words to pass ; but late at night (and the debate began at seven in the morning) the preamble was passed, reported to the House and adopted. On the following day, 12th June, 1641, the point for debate was the abolition of the offices of arch bishops, bishops, etc. It is indicative of the small difference in matter of political tenets, and of the huge difference in sentiment, that the debate pro ceeded as hotly as before, and yet revealed very little fresh matter. As on the previous day, Culpeper was driven by his own knowledge of matter-of-fact, by his own previous utterances, to acknowledge some measure of justice in the preamble. His only resource was to question the necessity of taking the most fatal and final course. " Agreeing first to the preamble, he said though they were in their persons an impediment, yet this should not make us to take them away ; and, secondly, that before we abolish The debate continued — on Episco pacy, 12th June. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 85 the government, we should offer a new."' Falk- Chap. l land's objection was, on a plane of sentiment, low JunSTi" and unworthy of him. Pleydall could only sigh ^^^^' for the condition of religion, and weakly declare that if religion would return to its primitive purity we should return to it. But circumstances gradually were making the maintenance of such an attitude impossible. Pari passu with the change that was taking place in the moderates, who were for reform, the course of events was adding to the acerbity and to the clearness of view and constructive ability of their opponents, and was simultaneously driving Falk land and the Episcopal party from a position in which their opinions clashed with their sentiment into one of mere antagonism to a party now at last bent on a specific reform. The rejection of the Bishops' Votes' Bill by the Lords had been a matter of satisfaction to the Root-and-Branch party. Sharper measures, they thought, were now at hand, and D'Ewes, though D'Ewes' far from a professed Rooter, did but reflect this feeling in his speech : — I acknowledge it a great providence that the Lords refused to pass our other biU. Truly, I think God gave no blessing to it, because we did our work by halves ; but now, when we shaU do our work thoroughly, we shall have no cause to despair of a good result. To Culpeper's demand for a platform, D'Ewes could give no reply : — , It hath been objected that before we alter the old govern ment of the Church we should establish a new one. For that ' D'Ewes, ii., 694. speech. 86 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. it may be answered that before a new house be builded where jmi^ 12 ^^^ old one stood, the old one must first be removed,^ Husband's Passages and Speeches of this Parlia ment contains a speech of Sir Henry Vane. As printed it is assigned to the llth, but doubtless it belongs to this debate of the 12th, and was uttered by the younger Vane.^ Vane's It is of interest as exhibiting the opinions of the man who was apparently the originator of the bill, and who certainly was the promoter of the scheme which was afterwards introduced into it : — For my part (said he) I am of the opinion of those who conceive that the strength of reason already set dovTn in the preamble to this bill by yesterday's vote is a necessary decision of this question. For one of the main ends for which Church government is set up is to advance and further the perfect reformation and growth of reUgion which we have already voted this government doth contradict. ... In the second place, we have voted it prejudicial to the civil state. . . . But to this it hath been said that the government now ia question may be so reformed and amended that it needs not be pulled down quite, because it is conceived it hath no original sin or evil in it, or, if it had, it is said regeneration wiU take it away ; unto which I answer, I do consent that we should do with this government as we are done by in regeneration, in which old things are to pass away and all things are to become new, and this we must do if we desu-e a perfect reformation, and growth of our reUgion, or good to our civU state, for the whole fabric of the building is so rotten and corrupt from the very foundation of it to the top, that if we puU it not down now it will fall about the ears of aU those that endeavour it within a very few years. He then passes in review the evils of the existing system, its affinity in character and deriva- ' D'Ewes, ii., 694. ¦^Dr. Nalson prints it, and ascribes it to the elder Vane. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 87 tion with popery, its pride, encouragement of chap. i. superstition and persecution of godly ministers, Jui>e, and its threatening attitude to the civil state, and concludes in a manner worthy of Cromwell himself : — Lastly, and that which I assure you goes nearest to my heart, is the check which we seem to give to Divine Providence if we do not at this time pull down this government. For hath not this Parliament been called, continued, preserved and secured by the immediate finger of God, as it were, for this work ? Had we not else been swaUowed up in many inevitable dangers by the practices and designs of these men and their party ? Hath not God left them to themselves as weU in these things [army plots, etc.] as in the evil administration of their government, that he might lay them open unto us, and lead us, as it were by the hand, from the finding them to be the causes of our evil, to discern that their rooting up must be our only cure? On Hyde's report from the committee, the House resolved that the taking away of the several offices of archbishops, bishops, chanceUors and commissaries out of the Church and kingdom should be one clause of the bill. Although the debate had lasted seven hours, and it was nearly four o'clock when Hyde made the report, some in their eagerness to go on with the work called out to proceed with the bill after the vote had passed.' The debate was, however, The debate l . ., 1 I-J.-1. T continued — adjourned until the following luesday, 15tn June, on deans and 1641, when the House took up the considera- igt'g'j^^e. ^ tion of deans and chapters, "and the rest of the rabble depending on them ". D'Ewes seemed to think the treatment of this ' D'Ewes, iii., 1025 ; C. J., ii., 174. 88 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. subject to be his peculiar and sole heritage. As June 15, on a former occasion, he was among the first to speak : and, however, the House disrelished his D'Ewes' r ' ' ' speech. long-wiiidcd discourses (though there is no inkling of such a fact in his egotistical Diary"), it was glad to listen to his fearless opposition to the clerical claim of inviolability for the revenues of deans and chapters. In his opinion these were but the revenues left formerly for superstitious purposes to abbeys, etc. " Both the doctors," said he, referring to the previous occasion on which Hacket and Burgess had been heard at the bar, " did agree in the end that neither king nor public should partake of the Church revenue, but that it was sacrilege to take it away. To this I hope to give a clear and full answer." The House had evidently made up its mind against deans and chapters ; it recorded its decision on this day. Yet it required some satisfaction on the point of legal right and justification, and there fore listened gratefully to such speakers as D'Ewes and Thomas, the latter of whom entered into a long disquisition on the nature of the functions of deans in the time of Augustine, and thence traced their history to his own time.' But it is evident that if no satisfaction of the kind had been given, the vote would have been the same. D'Ewes was followed by Glynn. Falkland, as might be expected, spoke in favour of the institution. Fiennes, Sir Thomas Widdrington and Peard as obstinately maintained the opposite. But ' Thomas's speech is given in Rushworth, iv., 285, and Nalson, ii., 283. The latter wrongly dates it llth June. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 89 the most surprising feature in the debate is Cui- chap peper's speech as recorded in D'Ewes. It plainly indicates how little heart the Episcopal party had in their cause, and how purely their position was a matter of sentiment : — For deans and chapters, he thought them so to depend on the bishops, as the bishops being taken away the others must necessarily be abolished ; . . . but he desired that provision might be made for the maintenance of those during their lives that we should put out, and for the disposition of those revenues for the time to come that learning and piety might be thereby advanced. In the afternoon the opposition to this head of the bill assumed a different aspect, though one equally futile, at the hands of Selden. In his opinion deans and chapters, not being a part of the government of the bishops, could not be included in the bill, therefore, their abolition was a non sequitur.^ The point was a puerile one for such a man to urge, and was easily answered by St. John and Pury. The speech of the latter is very noticeable. Pury's Pury was an alderman of Gloucester, and, to ^^^^'^ meet Culpeper's scruples on the score of the ejected members, he laid down a scheme for the employment of the revenues of the dean and chapter of Gloucester.^ It is noticeable as show ing that, though his vote on this occasion was evidently engaged for the bill, he is not to be reckoned among the veritable Rooters — after sketching a provision for the existing members of the system thus : — ' D'Ewes, U., 706. '' Ibid., ii., 707. 90 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. If the dean and those prebends, being but seven in aU j^^^ to be now taken away, will be preaching ministers, there is a 1641. suflicient maintenance for so many of them as have not too much besides, and yet to reserve as large a salary as now is allowed for so many singing men then in holy orders as cannot preach, etc., etc. . . . Out of the manors and lands, the said cathedral living to be made a parochial church, £200 or more may be allowed for a learned preaching minister there, and £100 per annum each for two such others to assist him ; and then the rest of the said manors and lands may be employed to other godly, pious and charitable uses as the wisdom of the King and Parliament shall think fit.i On Hyde's report the House resolved on the question : — That all deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, preben daries, chanters, canons and petty canons, and theu- officers, shall be utterly abolished and taken away out of the Church ; ahd, secondly, resolved that aU the lands taken by this bUl from deans and chapters shaU be employed to the advancement of learning and piety, provision being had and made that his Majesty be no loser in his rents, first-fruits and other duties, and a competent maintenance shall be made to the several persons concerned, if such persons appear not peccant and deUnquent to this House. ^ Owing to the pressure of business the bill was not proceeded with again till ]Monday, 21st June. The debate The clausc of the bill discussed on this latter on°Epritsi^- ^^7 was that which provided for the abolition of andifegimen, *'^® ecclesiastical courts, and the enacting of a 21st June, praemunire against such as should hereafter fall into error. The discussion was certainly the most momentous 1 For the speeches of Pury see Nalson, ii., 289, and Portland MSS. (Nalson, xiii., 45). ^C. J., ii., 176, 15th June, 1641. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 91 of all the ecclesiastical debates of the early years of Chap. i. the Long Parliament, and strikingly exhibits the JunriiT salient characteristics of the House. Even Hyde, the most blindly thorough-going of the Episcopal party, had a grudge against this element of the ecclesiastical system. " JMr. Hyde himself said that if they meddled with probate of wills or matrimony they should incur a praemunire." There cannot be detected in D'Ewes' account of this day's debate any trace of dissent or division of opinion as to the liability to a praemunire. Some members of the House supposed that this clause of the bill would affect the bishops' votes in Parliament, but, upon explanation given that the clause only concerned proceedings in ecclesiastical courts by and under the power of archbishops, bishops, deans, etc., exercised by their commissaries and officials, and did not at all touch upon any act performed by the bishops in their own persons, or to their votes in Parliament, no other dispute was made save as to the date from which the praemunire should be incurred.' The date fixed was the 1st of August. It is very evident, from the nature of a verbal addition made after the fixing of the date, that the course of the debate was being very carefully and skilfully managed. A qualifying clause was inserted in these words (whoso shall exercise jurisdiction) " otherwise or in any other manner than shall be provided and allowed in the present act". This clause, together with the last clause of the bill in its original form (viz., and be it further enacted by authority aforesaid that all ecclesiastical jurisdiction 1 D'Ewes, ii., 723. 92 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. June 21, 1641. Vane's scheme of organisationof Ecclesias tical Juris diction. Dering's scheme of same. fit to be exercised within this Church and kingdom of England shall be committed to such a number oj persons and in such a manner as by this present act [shall be) appointed), was meant to prepare the way for Vane's scheme, which was handed in almost immediately thereupon. For no sooner had Dering got up to urge the House, having regard to the chances of the bill in the Lords, to make some provision for the juridical government of the Church, and had offered to show the way by proposing certain provisions, than he was rudely and sharply interrupted, and before he could find opportunity to conclude his speech, the younger Vane had handed in a clause which in reality contained a new scheme for the Church jurisdictional government. The clause provided for the appointment of a body of commissioners, lay and clerical, to exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction in every shire for a time. As soon as Dering had recovered from his surprise, he hastened to conclude his speech and to offer his alternative scheme.' Dering's scheme is worthy of attention. It contains three points: (1) the circuit for future Church government, or the diocese should be the shire ; (2) in each of these, twelve or more chosen, able, grave divines to be appointed by Parliament to be of the nature of an old primitive constant presbytery ; (3) over each of these a president, "let him be a bishop, or an overseer, or a pre sident, or a moderator, or a superintendent, or a ruling elder, call him what you will ". ' Nalson, ii., 300. ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL IN COMMITTEE. 93 Here was the reduction and restoration of the chap. i. pure primitive Episcopal presidency. june-juiy, JSlany in the House seem to have adopted Dering's scheme, though there was a difference of opinion whether the president of the presbytery should be constant or only temporary and elective, and so at the will of the presbytery.' This is the first division of opinion discoverable in the action of the now triumphant majority of the Commons, and the day did not close with a final vote, as had* the debate on the 12th and 15th; instead thereof a sub-committee was named, and the three clauses of the bill already passed, with the addition brought in by Vane, were referred to its consideration. On Thursday, Sth July, Prideaux reported from The Eoot- the sub-committee to the Grand Committee certain bui re'^por'ted, amendments and considerations on the Root-and- ^'^ '^"^^' Branch Bill. The nature of the action of the sub-committee is apparent from the notes of the report (for such I take them to be) preserved in the Verney Notes (p. 104, Camden Society). They evidently are in the form of recommendations, thus : — [Bishops and Deans and Chapters' Lands\ — The dean and chapter's lands put to feoffees to satisfy the King's dues, and The feoffees to pay it to the persons now in possession. . . . Commissions to certify what lands the bishops, deans and chapters now have, and what is paid out of those lands, and also to certify what Church livings are under £100 per annum, and also about chapels of ease. Jurisdiction. — Two commissions for Canterbury and York for Archiepiscopal government, and nine or five commissioners in every county to exercise Episcopal government. AU writs 1 D'Ewes, ii., 723. 9-12th July. 94 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. to be directed to the commissioners ; aU ecclesiastical courts July, devolved to them, and to meet monthly. 1641. Ordination. — These commissioners give warrant to five commissioners to ordain any man into holy orders. (The) commissioners shall call three di-vdnes to punish heresy, schism, etc., according to ecclesiastical laws. For non-payment of fees he shall be as an excommunicate person, only he may come to church. Relatively to the importance of it, this report (if such it is) met with little discussion. And adopted ' On Friday, 9th July, it was adopted in toto, as to the matter of the first point, in the following resolutions, after a futile reiteration from Culpeper of the objections, on the ground of conscience, to the giving of the bishops' lands to the king ' : — 1. That all lands, possessions and rights of aU deans and deans and chapters shall by this biU be committed to the hands of feoffees to be nominated in this biU. 2. That all the lands and possessions of aU the arch bishoprics and bishoprics of England and Wales, except the impropriations and advowsons, shaU by this act be given to the King. 3. That all impropriations and advowsons belonging to the archbishoprics and bishoprics of England and Wales shaU be committed into the hands of feoffees in the same manner as the lands of deans and chapters are appointed to be.^ On the following day, 10th July (Saturday), the House supplemented these resolutions by another, making provision for the employment of the re venues : — A competent maintenance shall be aUowed out of the lands and possessions of the cathedral churches for the support of a fit number of preaching ministers for the service of every such church, and a proportionable allowance for the reparation of the said churches.^ ' D'Ewes, ii., 772. ^ q j^ y^ 204. '^ Ibid., ii., 205. ROOT-AND-BBANCH BILL REPORTED. 95 Passing next, on IMonday, 12th July,' to the chap.i. second head of the report — jurisdiction — jS^T 1641. The House resolved that such ecclesiastical power as shaU be exercised for the government of the Church shaU be trans ferred by this act into the hands of commissioners to be named in this act; secondly, that the commissioners, or the major part of them, named in this act shall have authority to appoint deputies and other officers to exercise the jurisdiction given to them by this act. It has been generally noticed that in the former provisions for of these two resolutions there was an alteration in DistrpUne!"^^ the pohcy of the House. In the proviso of Vane, which first moved this matter on the 20th of June, the scheme had proposed commissioners drawn equally from the clergy and the laity. By the vote of the 12th of July, all the commissioners were to be laymen. It is easy to understand how the general sense of the House went this way : — Divers (says D'Ewes) spake touching the committing of all ecclesiastical jurisdiction to lay commissioners. Mr. Selden spake exceeding well to it, and showed that the said jurisdiction might be exercised by laymen.^ The constitution of the proposed commission was further discussed on the 15th and subsequent days. It would seem, from D'Ewes,** that the House following out Prideaux's suggestions as reported ^I here follow D'Ewes, ii., 777, rather than the Commons Journal, ii., 205, the latter of which dates the first part of the resolution the 10th. 'D'Ewes, ii., 177. ' As the House was in committee, or through inadvertency, the resolutions of these days are not entered in the Commons Journal. They are preserved for us in D'Ewes, ii., 786. 96 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. from the sub-committee, determined on the estab- 1641. Jiiy. lishment of two committees — the one as succeeding to the Archiepiscopal jurisdiction, the other to the Episcopal. The whole scheme was, therefore, roughly as follows : The whole jurisdiction was to be in the hands of the chief commissioners (subsequently fixed at nine in number). These had power to delegate their functions, and by themselves and their delegates, ecclesiastical justice was to be administered in the several counties by county commissions (as inheriting Episcopal juris diction), and generally over the two provinces by two provincial commissions (as inheriting Archi episcopal jurisdiction). It was decided on the 17th that appeal should lie to the latter from the former.' Such I take to be the meaning of the resolutions passed on the 15th and subsequent days of July. Those of the 15th were in these words : — (1) The commissioners appointed by this act for the several provinces of Canterbury and York, shall respectively exercise archiepiscopal jurisdiction within the said several provinces; (2) All the ecclesiastical jurisdiction committed by this act to the commissioners, except the archiepiscopal, shaU be exercised by these commissioners in every county of England except York and Lincoln, where they are to be appointed in the parts and ridings thereof. A similar order was made for Wales. Provisions for Whcu the Housc Came next in order to consider of the constitution of a body for the purposes of ordination, much more division of opinion was displayed than on the matter of jurisdiction. A 1 D'Ewes, ii., 790. ordination . ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL REPORTED. 97 motion was made to constitute five ministers in chap. i. every county for the purposes of ordination, and j5^^ this was the form in which the final motion passed. ^^*^" But it was strongly objected to by some lovers of the primitive presbytery. To their minds the right of ordination was inherent in every presbyter, and it seemed as illogical to constitute five men for the purpose as to allow the bishops to do it alone. And it is probable that much division of opinion would have been displayed upon this head if it had not been pointed out, what was perhaps present as a menace to the minds of most, that a large body of the clergy at that moment was Episcopal in tendencies and scandalous in life, and therefore unfit for the work of ordination. As finally resolved, the nomination of these five commissioners in each county was vested in the body of nine chief commissioners. From the point of view of this narrative, these Critical 1 T ,...,.,. 1 Ti- i^ii estimation of heads of jurisdiction and ordination are by far the theRoot-and. most important elements in the Root-and-Branch ^^s^f^ '^^° scheme, showing as they do how the Parliament came to evolve a scheme of Church government, and what that scheme was, and how different from the Presbyterian system which was adopted four years later as a consequence of the alliance with Scotland. The idea that the body of clergymen and other ecclesiastical persons forming " the Church " needed a distinct organisation and government of their own, was to the English mind of the seventeenth century as commonplace and self-evident as that parliamentary and legal systems were needed for VOL. I. 7 98 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. the laity. Hitherto this ecclesiastical body had July, been governed in the diocese by the bishop and his court in all matters relating to ordination, institu tion, trial for offence and suspension. The Parlia ment had now declared against such Episcopal system, and it was necessary to replace it by some other. Apart from the abortive schemes for a " modified " Episcopacy, there were apparently only two plans feasible : (1) a system of government by clerical assemblies, a Presbyterian system more or less after the Scottish model — all matters of ordination, trial and censure being determined by vote in the local assembly or classis, and appeals lying to the higher ranges of the organisation, the provincial and national assemblies ; (2) the^ alter native would be some such scheme as is contained in the resolutions of the Commons just described, by which the jurisdiction of the bishops' court was vested in the hands of a body of lay commissioners, who were to go on circuit in the spiritual courts, while the matter of ordination was referred in a similar way to a lay commission, all in actual dependence upon Parliament. Had the course of events been different — had the English Parliament been left free to settle this question as its own instinct dictated— there can be no doubt that it is the latter scheme and not the former that would have been adopted. Such is the natural conclusion to be drawn from the above account of the ecclesiastical debates ofthe Long Par liament. It was only gradually that the House came to resolve on the abolition of Episcopacy, and that it faced the question of the discovery of a Church ROOT-AND-BRANCH BILL REPORTED. 99 system to replace it ; but throughout this course of chap. i. mental evolution the Parliament was thoroughly July, true to the national instinct, and would have re mained so had it not been that the course of the war made it necessary to accept Scotch aid at the price of the adoption of the Scottish Church system. To return to the Root-and-Branch debates. The remaining point for discussion was con cerning the disposition and use of the revenues of deans and chapters. This was agitated on the 27th of July, but for obvious reasons the matter had to be left in abeyance. In answer to Culpeper, D'Ewes urged that the House had, as a matter of fact, yet " first to know what are the revenues of the cathedrals, and what poor livings there are that ought to have a maintenance ". This would, in the ordinary course of things, be the work of a com mission during the recess, upon the result of whose investigations the House might, at the next meeting, make a full disposition of the revenues. Accord ingly the clause was left generally and vaguely worded, ordering merely the employment of the surplus for the advancement of the true religion, piety and learning.' Further than this the debates on the Root-and- Branch Bill did not go. The bill rested in com mittee. The fright occasioned by Charles's journey to Scotland drove the matter into the background. One solitary attempt was made to revive the bill. As late as the 13th of August, 1641, the Commons determined to proceed with the discussion on the following Mondaj. But the order was not 1 D'Ewes, ii, 798. I 100 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. followed out, and no other attempt was made.' July, After the parliamentary recess the Commons never went back to the project. Although, however, like many another of the early attempts at legislation on this subject, the bill was fruitless, it is not, therefore, to be disregarded. It stands as an illus tration of the advance of opinion that had been made since November, 1640, under the force of circum stances which compelled the House to examine its own mind to know what it desired. And, at the A standard of samc time, it supplies us with a complete programme PufitanTsm 0^ purely Anglican Puritanism — lay and clerical essentially alike. It shows what would probably have been Presbyterian, the actiou taken, the Church system and govern ment adopted, now that the House had been roused to settle the matter definitively if events had not necessitated the adoption of the Solemn League and Covenant. The noticeable feature in these debates, and in ' the scheme elaborated in them, is the absence of any Presbyterian element. It is at first sight, ' perhaps, hard to realise the meaning and the truth of this. Almost every speaker of importance had expressed a veneration for the character of a primitive bishop, had claimed for every minister his share in the work of Church government by the restoration of the ancient primitive presbytery 1 State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxxv., 26th October, 1641. Thomas Smith to Sir John Penington : " Our ParUament is once more met in fuU, and are very busy perfecting the businesses formerly begun, viz., the devoting of bishops iu the Upper House, and the pulling down of Episcopacy root and branch . . ." This, however, is only the assertion of a letter-writer and a pure misconception. The reference is only to the later Bishops BiU of October, I64I. ROOT-AND-BRANCH — CRITICISM. 101 But there is the greatest possible difference be- Chap. i. tween this and an advocacy of the Presbyterian ^ jS^ system, as it was understood in the seventeenth ^^"" century. Then, Presbyterianism was a clerical system, encroaching largely upon the civil and national life. It judged the actions and morals of individuals ; it haughtily arrogated to itself a share in the national government. There was nothing further from the mind of the English Parliament and nation than to favour such a scheme. What thej^ desired was some practicable plan for the ruling and ordering of an unwieldy institution in order to make it more patriotic and evangelical, and the scheme evolved during these debates on the Root-and-Branch Bill was peculiarly secular, indeed, astonishingly so when we bear in mind the respect the age had for the clerical function. But a Presbyterian system as such had not entered the mind of the Parliament. Later in the year (20th JSTovember, 1641), in the debates on the clauses of the Grand Remon strance which concerned religion, Dering had occasion to speak of Presbyterianism. His words are as follows : — Mr. Speaker, there is a certain newborn, unseen, ignorant, dangerous, desperate way of Independency. Are we for this independent way ? Nay, sir. Are we for the elder brother of it, the Presbyterial form? I have not yet heard any one gentleman within these walls stand up and assert his thoughts for either of those ways.^ BaiUie, in his remarkably interesting letters, 1 British Museum, E., 197, p. 100. 1641. 102 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. often exprcsscs his belief that the triumph of ^~^' ^ presbytery was at hand, etc. There is not the slightest doubt that in his ignorance of the English constitution and character, and in his own too sanguine eagerness, he made a great mistake. It must be borne in mind for the clearer com prehension of BaiUie's view, which was not his alone, that on this point clerical opinion would naturally proceed more quickly than lay or secular opinion. The very idea of presbytery was one that appealed strongly to the professional instinct of the clergy, and it is remarkable with^whaLswifb^ unanimity theTmikoFthe clergy embraced it within a period of hardly^ more- than two years from the date^of 4hese debates. Indeed for them— the clergy — the process of conversion began long be fore the Solemn League and Covenant. In October, 1641, for instance, one correspondent is found informing Viscount Conway, "our chiefest farmers have their loins girt with a divinity sur cingle and begin to bristle up for a lay eldership".' But between this advanced clerical standpoint and the general standpoint of the laity and the Parlia ment there was a great gulf — a gulf that was actually never crossed. Before passing to the train of events which led to the adoption of the Solemn League and Cove nant, it is necessary to complete in one view the remaining portions of such legislation on religious matters as the Long Parliament passed whilst still its judgment was untrammelled by that Solemn League and Covenant. ^ State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxxv., 22nd October, 1641. LEGISLATION AGAINST INNOVATIONS. 103 1. Innovations, Idolatry, Superstition. From the first moment of the meeting of the Parliament, it had its attention fixed on the inno- Legislative vations in Church service which had been intro- LU°gVariia! duced under the Laudian regime. On the 25th of S'novatfJns* November, 1640,' White reported from the Grand ^""^ ^^°'^^^^- Committee for Religion the case of Dr. Layfield : — He hath set the communion table altarwise, caused rails and ten several images upon those rails to be set at the altar. He bowed three times, (1) at his going to the rails ; (2) within the raUs ; (3) at the table, and so on the return. But since the images were taken down upon a complaint made by the parish he hath bowed but twice, and that is within the rails which is an argument he bowed before to the images. I.H.S. he hath caused to be set in gold letters upon the table and forty places besides : said to the people " Heretofore we see Christ by faith but now with our fleshly eyes we see him in the Sacrament ". When these images were taken down he charged them with sacrUege. He refused to give the Sacrament to his people unless they came to the altar, though [they] having offered reverently kneeling to receive the same in the body of the Church. He caused one Boulton to be excommunicated for not coming up to the rails to receive, and refused to read his absolution. He said he would not for a £100 come from the raUs to give the Sacrament, nay he would rather lose his living. . . . He teUs them they must confess their sins, and he hath power to absolve them. . . . The Committee was of opinion that even though he was a member of Convocation he should be sent for as a delinquent, and so the House ordered. Similar charges of setting up idolatry and exer cising acts of it in his own person Avere brought against Matthew Wren, Bishop of Ely.^ In this case of Wren a special committee was appointed, ' C. J., ii, 36. 2 Md., ii., 54, I9th December, 1640. of the Com munion Table. 104 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. which rcportcd on the Sth of July, 1641,' but the 1640-1. ordinary course taken with regard to the almost innumerable charges of a similar nature seems to have been to refer the petitions or cases to the Committee for Scandalous Ministers. The sense of the House, like that of the nation itself, was very precise and strong on this head of grievance of Popish innovations. When some few days after the opening of the Parliament the Com mons decided to take the Sacrament, they deputed The position two members to request Bishop Williams, Dean of Westminster, to consecrate the elements on a com munion table standing in the middle of the church, according to the rubric, and to have the table removed from the altar. ^ The House decided to proceed summarily in the matter by way of sending commissions into all the counties for the defacing, demolishing, and quite taking away of all images, altars or tables turned altarwise, crucifixes, superstitious pictures, ornaments and relics of idolatry out of all churches and chapels.^ Accordingly, on Sth February, 1640-41, a bill was introduced for abolishing superstition and idolatry, and for the better advancing of the true worship and service of God.* 1 C. J., ii., 199, I9th December, 1640. '' Ibid., ii, 32, 20th November, 1640. Ubid., ii., 72, 28rd January, 1640-41. « Ibid., ii., 79. Read a second time and committed 13th February, 1640-41 {ibid., ii., 84). On the 1st of June, 1641, the committee for this biU was ordered to stand and be continued as to the biU only (ibid., ii., 162, 183, 199). On the 15th of July, 1641, the conmiittee was again ordered to stand (ibid., 212). Bill ordered to be reported Sth August, 1641 (ibid., 246). After this nothing further is heard of it. LEGISLATION AGAINST INNOVATIONS. 105 Independently of the Commons, the House of Chap. i. Lords took similar action in the matter. On the ^leioT" 16th of January, 1640-41,' they ordered that divine service should be performed as appointed by the Acts of Pariiament of the Realm, and all disturbers of the same severely punished, "and that the parsons, vicars and curates in the several parishes shall forbear to introduce any rites or ceremonies that may give offence otherwise than those which are established by the laws of the land ". On the occasion of their trial of Dr. Pocklington, they ordered all the images and superstitions set up by him as incumbent to be demolished, and strictly commanded the bishop of the diocese to see this done. Some few .weeks later, on the 1st of March, 1640-41, the Peers similarly ordered that every bishop in his diocese should see that the com munion table in every church " should stand in the ancient place where it ought to do by the law, and as it hath done for the greater part of these three score years last past". At the same time the Upper House appointed a committee of its own to consider all innovations in the Church concerning religion.^ As in the case of all the other ecclesiastical legislation of the Long Parliament, the Commons Bill for the abolition of superstition had a very inter rupted career. On the 8th of August, six months ' L. J., iv., 134. This order was repeated almost verbaUy on the 22nd of AprU, 1641 (ibid., iv., 215). 'Ibid., iv., 174, 1st March, 1640-41. For the history of the committee see supra, pp. 65-74. Table. 106 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. after it had been committed, it was ordered to be 1641. reported.' On the occasion of this order the House further made a declaration to the effect that the churchwardens of every parish should have power and liberty within their own parish The rails be- churchcs to take do WU the rails from about the Communion commuuion tablcs, and to set up the said tables " in the same order as by the laws and rubric they be set. The House doth likewise declare that they hold it fit that no man shall presume to oppose the Discipline or Government of the Church established by law." The concluding terms of this order were occa sioned by the frequent anti-ceremonial disturbances and riots in churches which had occurred during the early months of the Parliament's existence.^ That the order was momentarily ineffectual is proved by the recurrence of the subject two months later. On the 30th of August the Commons re solved that the — Churchwardens of every parish church or chapel do forth with remove the communion table to the east end of the chm'ch, chapel or chantry, where they stand altarwise, and place them in some convenient place of the church or chancel, and take away the rails and level the chancel, as heretofore they were before the late innovations.^ ' C. J., ii, 246. TJt supra, p. 104 note. ' See L. J., iv., 100, 113, 30th November, 1640 ; L. J., iv., 215,, 22nd April, 1641. In June, 1641, a mob of persons, during the time of the administration of the communion in St. Saviour's and St. Olave's,. Southwark, rushed upon the communion rails and broke them down (L. J., iv., 270-71, 277, 318). Similar outbreaks of mob violence against the communion rails occurred at St. Thomas Apostle, London (C. J.,. ii., 194 ; L. J., iv., 295, 30th June, 1641), and in numerous other places 'C. J., ii,278. LEGISLATION AGAINST INNOVATIONS. 107 A committee was specially appointed to see the chap. i. order carried out as far as related to the Univer- i64i~ sities and the Inns of Court, and to draw up the terms of a formal order. This order was reported on the following day, 1st September.' After reiterating the regulation concerning the position of the communion table, it prescribed the abolition of scandalous pictures of the Trinity, etc., and of images from the Church, of tapers, candlesticks and basins from the com munion table, and of bowing at the name of Jesus or towards the East. The order concluded with provisions for a return as to its due execution throughout the country. After some debate, which was renewed on the 6th of September, an addition was proposed to it for preventing all contempt and abuse of the Book of Common Prayer. This addition was, however, shelved, and on the 9th of September the Commons finally adopted the order with the object of presenting it to the Lords at a conference.^ The Lords debated this order on the 8th of Sep tember,^ and agreed to the abolition of communion rails and images, but not to the enforced abolition of bowing at the name of Jesus. Without going further with the debate, on the following day they revived their own order of 16th January, 1640-41, for the performance of divine service as appointed by law, and invited the Commons to assent thereto. The latter hot-temperedly declined, and drew up a declaration of the point at issue between the two 1 0. J., ii., 279. 2 Ibid., ii., 280, 287, S.P.D., cocclxxxiv., No. 16. -"L. J., iv., 391-92. 108 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. chap^l^ Houses,' stigmatising the order of the House 1641-2. of Lords as ill-timed and lacking in due authority. During the recess which ensued immediately (10th September to 20th October, 1641), the care of this matter was left to a standing committee of the Commons, which took care for the dispersal of the {Commons') declaration through the counties.^ No effect followed from such a step, however, and the matter of innovations generally rested in this undetermined state until the following February, when the Commons resolved that a bill should be brought in based in substance upon its orders already passed for taking away innovations.^ The Com- Accordingly, on the 16th of that month, there mons' Bill ° •" ' . against inno- -Rras read foT the first time * an act for suppressing vations Feb.-Dec,1642. iL. J., iv., 395 ; C. J., ii., 286, 9th September, 1641. ^0. J., ii, 289, Pym's Report, 20th October, 1641. -> Ibi.d., ii., 427, 12th February, 1641-42. y ¦* Ibid., ii., 436, I6th February, 1641-42. Read a second time and committed 17th February, 1641-42 (C. J., ii., 437, 465). Reported 12th March aud re-committed (ibid., 476). Again reported 21st March and ordered to be engrossed with the amendment " that the time expressed in the bill for the levelling of the chancels shaU extend to twenty years last past" (ibid., 489). Read a third time, and passed in the Commons, 23rd March, 1641-42 (C. J., ii., 493). Read a first time in the Lords, 25th March, 1642 (L. J., iv., 669) ; a second time, and com mitted 29th March (ibid., 679). It was named in the " nineteen pro positions" in June, 1642 (C. J., ii., 598, 639 ; L. J., iv., 96, 160). It was again debated in the Lords on the 14th of July, 1642 (L. J., iv., 210, 212), and referred to a committee to consider of a proviso for the appoint ment by both Houses of commissioners in each county for the taking down the glass windows in the churches. On the I6th of July, with this amendment, it was read a third time and passed by the Lords, and sent down to the Commons (ibid., v., 214 ; C. J., ii., 675, 677, cp. C. J., ii., 691, L. J., v., 248). Finally, on the 1st of November, 1642, the Lords accepted the Commons' amendments (L. J., v., 425), and the bill was ordered to pass, but as the time limited in the bUl had lapsed, a short bill had to be prepared to prevent any iaconveniences thereby LEGISLATION AGAINST INNOVATIONS. 109 divers innovations in the churches and chapels of Chap. i. England and Wales. ' Tm~~^ The subsequent history of this ordinance is given in the preceding footnote. After its elabora tion the Commons, without expecting the king's assent to it, proceeded to act upon it. On the 24th of April, 1643, they appointed a small committee of nine to receive information from time to time of any monuments of superstition and idolatry in the Abbey Church at Westminster, or in the windows thereof, or in any other church or chapel in or about London, with power to demolish the same.' A few days later the powers of this committee were extended so as to include all superstitious monuments in any public or open place, or in or about any church or chapel.^ Late in the following month the committee was ordered to take into its possession the copes in the " cathedrals of West minster, St. Paul's, and Lambeth," and to see them burned or converted to the relief of the poor in Ireland.'* With the object of replacing the defunct " bill The ordi- p . T .J. . . „ nance against for the suppression ot . . . innovations, a new superstitious ordinance for pulling down superstitious pictures, s^triugust, 1643. (0. J., ii, 831, 2nd November, 1642). Seven days later order was taken for the removal of the crucifix, etc., and the proper placing of the communion table in Lambeth Chapel and Denmark House (ibid., ii., 843). In December the bUl for taking away superstitious innova tions was included for royal assent in tbe propositions for accom modation -with the king then framing, (20th December, 1642 L. J., v., 504, 581-83 ; 0. J., ii., 903). With a view to this the time limited in the biU was extended by amendments (C. J., ii., 904, 27th December, 1642). 1 0. J., iii., 57, 60. ' Ibid., in., 63, 28tb AprO, 1643. 8 C. J., iii., 110, 31st May, 1643, ep ibid., 347, 368, 422, 503, for Uke special orders. 110 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. ^ crucifixes and altars, etc., was introduced into the 1643-4. Commons on the 19th of June, 1643.' It passed the Lower House on the Sth of July,^ was agreed to by the Lords on the 26th of August, and finally passed on the 28th August, 1643.^ All altars and tables of stone were ordered to be de molished before the 1st of November, 1643, the com munion tables removed from the east end to the body of the church, the rails round it taken away and the chancels levelled, tapers and candle sticks removed from the communion tables, and crucifixes, crosses, images and pictures from the churches. The ordinance concluded with directions for the conduct of churchwardens, etc., in the carrying out thereof and for the preservation of monuments of kings or nobles, etc. In substance this ordinance was further repeated by an additional ordinance of 9th May, 1644, which also added that no copes, surplices, superstitious vestments, roods and roodlofts or holy water fonts, should be any more used in any church or chapel.* 2. Pluralities. Theiegisia- A Icss Striking evil than that of superstitious tion against ° ^ Pluralities, and Popish ceremonies was that of Pluralities, with its necessary attendant non-residence. With the object of regulating this abuse a bill "con- 1 c. J., iU., 134. ^Ibid., iii, 155; L. J., vi, 133. s L. J., vi., 198, 200 ; C. J., iii., 220 ; Rushworth, v., 358-9 ; Husband's (Foho), 307 ; ScobeU, i., 53. ¦•Rushworth, ^•., 761; Husband's, Fo., 487; ScobeU, i, 69. For the legislati-^e history of this additional ordinance see G. J., ui., 470, 486 ; L. J., vi., 545-6 ; cp. also C. J., iii, 485, iv., 246. Tbe subsequent attempts at legislation on the subject in 1645 and 1647 were under taken with a view to the treaties with the king and were abortive. See L. J., vii, 54 ; C. J., iv., 349, 412, v., 351 ; L. J., ix., 513. 1641-3. LEGISLATION AGAINST PLURALITIES. Ill cerning pluralities " was introduced into the Com- chap. i. mons on the 25th of February, 1640-41.' i64b-i. 1 C. J., ii., 92. Read agam for the second time, and committed as " an Act against pluralities of spiritual promotions," on the 10th of March, 1640-41 (C. J., ii., 100). On the same day another Act was mtroduced "for reformation of pluraUties and non-residence," and read the first time (ibid.). This latter biU was read a second time on the 16th of March, and committed to the same committee as the first bUl (ibid., u., 105, 129). From this point the two bUls were apparently combined. The bUl ' against the enjoying of pluralities of benefice and non-residency ' was read a third time, and passed on the 19th of June, 1641. On the same date it was read a first time in the Lords (C. J., u., 181 ; L. J., iv., 280). It was again read and debated in the Lords on the 19th of July (L. J., iv., 321, 332, 400) and on the 25th of October, 1641, and referred to a committee to consider of the king's chaplains the pri-vUege of noblemen, and of heads of coUeges, and also of a proviso for a pluralist to supply his extra livings with a curate on a moiety aUowance (L. J., iv., 404). The Lords would appear to have contemplated reserving some of these extra livings for the supply of clergymen who had been persecuted under the Laudian regime (ibid., iv., 410, 457). On the llth of February, 1641-42, the Upper House agreed to its amendments on the bUl, and requested a conference with the Commons upon it (ibid., iv., 577). On the foUowing 17th the Commons agreed to some of these amendments (C. J., ii., 438, 476). A confer ence between the two Houses was held on these amendments on the 23rd of March, 1641-42 (L. J., iv., 661, 664 ; C. J., n., 493). On the 3rd of May, 1642, the Lords consented to waive the amendments which the Commons could not accept, with the exception of a proviso concern ing the two Universities (L. J., v., 40). After a conference the Commons accepted this proviso, the date by which pluralists were to resign extra hvings being amended from 1st June to 1st August, 1642 ¦(C. J., ii, 555). Like aU its feUows this bUl was included in the " nineteen propositions " for the king's assent in June, 1642 (0. J., ii., 598; L. J., v., 151, 160, 211), and agaui m the propositions for accommodation with the king framed in December, 1642 (L. J., v., 504; C. J., ii., 903-4), for which purpose the date limited in the bUl was again altered to 1st AprU, 1643. For this purpose the bill was ¦again passed through the Commons, being read a third time on the 7th of January, 1642-43, as " an Act against the enjoying of pluralities of benefices by spiritual persons and non-residence," with the addition of a proviso concerning parishes where divers presentations or coUa tions or portions of tithes have been used (C. J., u., 917). In this form it was read a first time in the Lords on the llth of January (L. J.. 112 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap- I- The legislative history and fate of this bill was parallel with that of its fellows in all points — in its frequent interruptions and in its final rejection by the king, after a period of nearly two years. 3. Scandalous Ministers. The almost identical history of the legislation on the subject of the treatment of Scandalous Ministers will be detailed in another connection (see vol. ii., chapter iv.). The legisia- 4. The Sabbath. ing^thT*^^™ Besides these three main heads of superstitious MMch^i64i innovations in the churches, of pluralities, and of to April, 1644. gcan(Jals in the lives of the clergy, the reforming zeal of the Long Parliament attempted futilely to embrace the lay evils of drunkenness, swearing and usury.' » v., 545), and a second time and committed on the Mth of January (ibid., v., 553), and finally passed on the I6th of January (ibid., v., 558). It was accordingly included in the fourth proposition presented to the King at Oxford (L. J., v., 581-83, 28th January, 1642-43). y 1 On the 1st of March, 1640-41, a bill was read for the first time for the suppressing of alehouses and tippling houses, and for the avoiding of drunkenness. References to the subject of this biU are not infre quent in the journals of the Commons. On the 17th of December, 1641, a small committee was appointed to prepare a declaration for quicken ing the justices of peace throughout the kingdom to put the laws in execution against swearers, drunkards and Sabbath breakers (C. J., ii., 348). This declaration was reported in the form of an ordinance seven days later, 24th December, 1641 (C. J., ii., 356). The House, however, preferred to proceed by way of bUl, and ordered one to be brought in against Sabbath breakers, common swearers and drunkards, and to prevent the increase and suppress the great number of ale houses and tippUng houses. The measure, however, went no further. The bill against usury was read a first time on the 2nd of March, 1640-41 (C. J., ii., 95), and again on the I5th of March (ibid., ii., 104), and a second time on the 19th of March (ibid., ii., 108). The measure almost immediately dropped out of sight, and no further reference to it can be traced, as was also the case with the bUl against the importation Chap. I. SABBATARIAN LEGISLATION. 113 With regard to the observation of the Sabbath, however, its Puritan spirit was more resolute.' i64i On the 10th of April the Commons ordered the Lord Mayor in London, and the justices of peace throughout the counties, to see to the execution of the statutes for the due observing of the Sabbath.' This step was followed by the introduction of a bill to restrain bargemen, lightermen and others from labouring on the Lord's Day.^ As usual this latter measure was lost in the mass of undi gested, multifarious, and in great part unfinished legislation which strewed and marked the Parlia ment's path. In the following December it harked back to its original idea of enforcing the existing statutes against Sabbath breakers, swearers, etc., and the form of an ordinance for that purpose was presented to the House. ^ Again changing their mind the Commons determined to proceed by way of a bill, and ordered the introduction of one " against Sabbath breakers, common swearers and drunkards, and to prevent the increase and suppress the great number of alehouses and tip pling houses ". In its turn this proposition was lost sight of, . and more than a year later the Commons decided of foreign cards, read for the first time on the 4th of January, 1640-41 (ibid., ii., 96). Ubid., ii., 118. " 0. J., u., 155, 24th May, 1641. Read a second time on the 3rd of June, 1641 (C. J., ii, 165). Reported from committee on the Mth of July, 1641 (C. J., ii., 211). Read for the first time in the Lords on the 24th of December, 1641 (L. J., iv., 488), and again on the 12th of January, 1641-42 (ibid., iv., 508). A second time on the 15th of January (ibid., iv., 514). ' C. J., ii., 356, 24th December, 1641. VOL. I. 8 114 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. to renew and revive its former order for the better observation of the Lord's Day, entrusting the execution of it to the Deputy Lieutenants of the Counties.' It was not until the 6th of April, 1644, and after repeated appeals from the clergy, that the ordinance for the better observation of the Lord's Day finally issued.^ Closely related to this Sabbatarian legislation were the more abortive measures for the free pas sage of the Gospel, the bill for which was intro duced into the Commons ^ on the 30th of March, 1641. Reserving for future treatment such of the measures of the Long Parliament as touched upon the question of Church patronage and finance (see chapter iv.), and upon ecclesiastical jurisdiction see chapter ii.), two important series of measures or proposals complete this summary review of the religious legislation of the Long Parliament prior to the calling of the Westminster Assembly, viz. : (1) as to the Liturgy, the conduct and administra tion of the Sacrament and Divine service ; (2) as to the Episcopal system. The legisia- 5. The Liturgy. ing'thT"^™' As to the former of those two both Houses 1641-1^' ^^^ "^^^^ clearly indicated their intention with regard to the restoration of the pre-Laudian manner of attending the administration of the 1 C. J., ui, 80, llth May, 1643. ^ See it in Rushworth, v., 749. ^C. J., il., 114. Read a second time on the 12th of April, 1641, and committed (ibid., ii., 119, 130, 186, 209). LEGISLATION CONCERNING THE LITURGY. 115 Sacrament, and the performance of Divine service Chap. i. in strict accordance with the law (see supra, p. 105). leST" It was quite in keeping with this conservative attitude that it prohibited the Bishop of Lincoln from publishing a prayer to be read at the time of pubhc thanksgiving.' In the debates on the Grand Remonstrance the House on the whole preserved the same attitude though evidently with greater division and heat. During the progress of those^"^ debates, the proposal had been made to insert in the Remonstrance a clause concerning the Book of Common Prayer. This clause was offered on the 15th of November, 1641, and referred back to the committee. On the following day it was again '- read and gave rise to a fierce dispute. D'Ewes' account of the occurrence is as follows : — ¦' We then proceeded with the discussion of that clause again which concerned the Common Prayer Book, and the errors and superstitions of it, and at last it was resolved upon the question that the clause and all that which is therein contained concern ing the Common Prayer Book should be laid out. But it was severaUy moved that a clause of addition might be drawn whereby we might justify the use of the Common Prayer Book till the law had otherwise provided. Mr. Pym moved that we might read the examinations which should have been read in the morning. I stood up next and moved in effect foUowing, that two things had been now proposed-;— the one that a new clause should be drawn by which we might show our intentions to maintain the use of the Common Prayer Book tiU some alteration were made by law, the other that we might proceed to read those examinations which should have been read in the morning. For the first I oan no way assent to it, for though 1 C. J., u., 280, 6th September, 1641. ^D'Ewes' Diary, Harl. MS., 163, Fol. 154a, Tuesday, I6th November, 1641. For petitions in favour of the Liturgy, September- November, 1641, see Proceedings in Kent, pp. 60 seq. 1641. 116 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. ^ j gave my aye to the laying aside of that clause, but now in November, debate among us, which concerned the Common Prayer Book, yet it was not of any dislike I had of the clause itself for my heart went with it, but only because I thought it fit to be waived at this time that so we might discontent nobody, and for that which was said by the gentleman on the other side {viz., Mr. Hyde), that many sober good men were afraid the Common Prayer Book should be taken away, I did believe some sober men might be of that opinion yet I durst boldly say that there were divers of the looser part of the clergy who were the defiers of that book, that if they were sober to read it on the Sunday they were scarce so all the six days before, and therefore at this time to add any other clause touching this particular were most unreasonable. I shall therefore second the motion of the gentleman at the bar which was in my thoughts before he made it [viz., Mr. Pym), that seeing we have so much spare time to dispute the addition of unnecessary clauses we may proceed with the reading of those examinations which require haste. But the House generaUy inclining to finish the said Eemonstrance or declaration at this time, the clerk's assistant read the next clause concerning our intentions to dispose of the lands of the bishops and deans whereon divers spake, myself also briefly, and in conclusion the Episcopal party were so strong in the House as we were fain to lay aside this clause also. In this passage D'Ewes enables us at once to understand the resolution which appears in the Journals of the Commons,' and the strength of the Conservative and. Episcopal party in the House. 1 0. J., ii, 317, 16th November, 1641. Moved, that the clause that has been now read concerniag the Liturgy shaU be recommitted to the same committee that a clause may be brought in that may not cast any aspersions or scandal upon the Book of Common Prayer estabUshed by law, and to bring m a clause that may declare that this House does approve of a set form of prayer. Resolved, upon the question that the clause or anything therein oontamed that concerns the Common Prayer Book shaU be totally left out of this declaration. LEGISLATION CONCERNING THE LITURGY. 117 In the course of the succeeding months, how- Chap. i. ever, the drift of events carried the Parliament far leS from such a standpoint, and it made no concealment of its intention to attempt a reform of the Liturgy after advice had with the intended assembly of divines. In this form it was stated in the " nineteen propositions " in June, 1642.' Pending such action, however, the situation, as regarded the Prayer- Book and the performance of Divine service, was decidedly uncertain, and great laxity and difference of practice prevailed. The disorder was further increased when the Parliament found itself driven to utilise the cathedrals as magazines for ammuni tion, to melt down the bells for cannon, and to do away with, or if possible to sell, the organs for cash. In accordance with these new conditions a joint order ^ of the two Houses prescribed as follows — In these times of public danger and calamity . . . such part of the Common Prayer and service as is performed by singing men, choristers and organs in the cathedral church be wholly forborne and omitted, and the same to be done in a reverent, humble and decent manner without singing or using. the organs. /' 6. Episcopacy. That the Root-and-Branch Bill should have been rhe legisia- , , tion concern- dropped altogether after the recess is explicable ing Bishops, only on the ground that the Parliament perceived igli, to Feb., the necessity of the advice of an assembly of^^*^- divines for so momentous a measure, and possibly also that it anticipated, however conjecturally, the 1 C. J., U., 598. 'L. J., v., 487, 12th December, 1642; C. J., ii, 88L 118 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. comiug cvcuts which were to make even a modified 1641. t; Episcopacy an impossible alternative. But on one point the Commons were insistent. They were determined to get rid of the bishops from the Upper House. On the 21st of October, 1641— the second day of the reassembling after the recess — a bill was introduced for disenabling all persons in holy orders to exercise any regal jurisdiction or authority. The bill passed the Commons in two days,' but rested practically unnoticed in the Lords iRead a first and second time, 21st October, 1641, and com mitted to a committee of the whole House (C. J., ii., 291). Reported and engrossed on the 22nd, and read a third time and passed on the 23rd (ibid., 292-93), with the excision of the foUowing clause : " Or any other temporal court whatsoever by virtue or colour of auy law, statute, commission, charter, or otherways " Read a first time in the Lords, 23rd October (L. J., iv., 402. See in the State Papers, Domestic, cccclxxxv., No. 29, 26th October, 1641, an account of a conference between the two Houses hereupon). Read a second time on the 4th of February, 1641-42 (ibid., 562), and committed to a committee of the whole House. Reported with slight amendments 5th February, and read a third time and passed, under the protest of the Bishops of Winchester, Rochester and Worcester (ibid., 564). The Commons accepted the amendments the same day (C. J., ii, 414), and sent back the bUl to the Lords to be sent on to the king for his royal assent. On the 14th of February, 1641-42, the king passed the bUl by a commis sion (L. J., iv., 580). He accompanied this favour with the foUowing message : " His majesty observes great and different troubles to arise in the hearts of his people concerning the government and Liturgy of the Church. His majesty is willing to declare that he will refer the whole consideration to the wisdom of ParUament — which he desires them to enter into speedily that the present distraction about the same may be composed — but desires not to be pressed to any single act on his part tUl the whole be so digested and settled by both Houses that his majesty may clearly see what is fit to be left, as weU as what is fit to be taken away " — words which it is absolutely impos sible to reconcile with the non-possumus attitude assumed by Charles in the later treaties of Uxbridge, Newcastle and Newport. The Aot, therefore, appears quite properly among the statutes of the Beahu (v., 138), as 16 Car. i, c. 27 : "An Aot for disenabling all persons in LEGISLATION CONCERNING EPISCOPACY. 119 until the egregious folly of the petition of the twelve chap. i. bishops on the 30th of December, 1641, alienated i64i-2. the sympathies of the Lords from them. The high indignation of the Lords was the Commons' oppor tunity, most men expressing a great deal of alacrity of spirit for this indiscreet and unadvised action of the bishops.' On the following day, therefore, the Lower House sent a message to remind the Peers of the bill against bishops' votes, and after some weeks' delay the bill passed the Upper House and received the royal assent by commission. Further than this the Parliament did not go in The legisia- ' the direction of either destructive or constructive ing^Eprsco™" independent legislation in Church matters. When P^^y-J^P'-' next it took up the question of either bishops or ^643. Episcopacy, the war had broken out, and the Parliament had courted the aid of the Scotch. On the 26th of August, 1642, the Lords communi cated to the Commons the declaration of the General Assembly of the Churcli of Scotland of the 3rd of August, 1642.^ What -hope (said this declaration) can the kingdom and kirke of Scotland have of a firm and durable peace till prelacy, which hath been the main cause of their miseries and trouble, first and last be plucked up root and branch as a plant which God hath not planted. This declaration was debated in the Commons on the 1st of September, 1642. Without contradic- holy orders to exercise any temporal jurisdiction or authority". From the 15th of February, 1641-42, no person in holy orders could sit in Parliament, or in the Privy CouncU, or could be on any commission of peace, or exercise any temporal authority. ' D'Ewes' Diary, ui, 295a. 'C. J., ii., 738; L. J., v., 321. 120 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. tion it was resolved upon the question, that " the 1642. government of the Church of England by arch bishops, bishops, their chancellors and commis saries, deans, deans and chajiters, archdeacons and other ecclesiastical officers hath been found by long experience to be a great impediment to the perfect reformation and growth of religion, and very pre judicial to the state and government of this kingdoin, and this House doth resolve that the same shall be taken away ". As the main article of the intended reply to the General Assembly's declaration, this resolution was sent up to the Lords for their assent, and by them amended on the 9th of September.' It was not, however, until the 22nd of November that the Commons nominated a committee to prepare a bill for the abolition of bishops, etc., out of the Church of England in accordance with its resolution.^ Pending the completion of the bill, the Pariiament determined at first to demand of the king, as one of the propositions for accommo dating differences, that he should confirm the de claration passed in both Houses for taking away bishops, etc.'* Almost immediately, however, the decision was taken to hurry through the bill with the object of printing it in regular form for royal assent. On the 30th of December, therefore, the bill " for the utter taking away of all archbishops, bishops, their chancellors and commissaries, deans, sub-deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, canons and pre bendaries, and all chaunters, chancellors, treasurers, ^L. J., v., 345. ^ C. J., ii., 858. = L. J., v., 504, 20th December, 1642. LEGISLATION CONCERNING EPISCOPACY. 121 sub-treasurers, succentors and sacrists, and all chap. i. vicars choral and choristers, old vicars and new ' 1642-3. vicars of any cathedral or collegiate church, and of all other their under- officers out of the Church of England," was introduced into the Commons, read a first and second time and committed.' As re ported from committee, the bill contained a provi sion of feoffees for the lands of the bishops, etc., and the House thereupon proceeded to limit the number of them to seven, and to nominate them. In this form the bill finally passed Parliament on the 26th of January, 1642-43, and was included in the fourth proposition sent to the king at Oxford (L. J, v., 581-83). It did not, of course, receive Charles's sanction. The Act represents the last effort on the part of the Parliament at either destructive or constructive legislation on the question of Episcopacy, prior to the calling of the Assembly.^ ^ ^C. J., u., 906. Debated in committee, 14th January (ibid., 914), 17th January (ibid., 931), 19th January (ibid., 935). Reported from committee on the 21st of January, 1642-43, adopted, read a third time and ordered to be sent up (ibid., 937-38). Read a first time in the Lords, 23rd January (L. J., v., 569), and a second time and committed on the foUowing day (ibid., 570). It was reported on the 26th of January without amendment, read a third time, passed and ordered to be sent in title to the king as a proposition (ibid., 572). ' The subsequent proceedings with regard to the bUl for the aboli tion of Episcopacy are of interest only from the point of view of the negotiations with the king. With a view to the Treaty of Uxbridge, the Act was altered so as to include a destruction of the hierarchy in Ireland along with that in England and Wales, an amendment which was occasioned by the Treaty of Edinburgh, 29th November, 1643, with the Scotch, and by the terms of the Solemn League and Cove nant. For the process of the alteration of the biU in the Houses, see C. J., iv., 43-4, 6th and 10th February, 1644-45. For the progress of the treaty itself, see the papers entered sporadicaUy in the Lords Journals 122 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. The Assembly of Divines. 1641. rpj^g j^g^ ^j appealing to an Assembly of Divines an Assembly^ for cxpcrt assistaucc in Church affairs had in one ofDivmes. forru or other been present to the mind of the Long Parliament for some time before the out break of the war. In the debates on the Ministers' Remonstrance, in the early part of 1641, the House had heard divines before its committee. The Lords had proceeded similarly in the case of their own projected reform of innovations in the Church (see supra, pp. 65-74). These were, however, merely occasional references to individual divines. But the idea of a systematic reference, on matters concern ing the settlement of religion, to an assembly called ad hoc had been broached by more than one speaker in the debates on the Root-and-Branch Bill, and was explicitly avowed in the Grand Remonstrance in November, 1641.' It was not until the following February, how ever, that the House proceeded to put its avowed determination into force. On the 12th of that month it ordered the knights and burgesses to bring in the names of such ministers as they severally and respectively thought fit to be em ployed for the setthng of the affairs of the Church.' (vii, 167 seq.), and Dugdale's Treaty of Uxbridge. For the propositions as presented at Oxford in November, 1644, see L. J., vi, 531; vii., 54 ; and for those at Uxbridge in January, 1645, and at Newcastle in July, 1646, see as above and Rushworth, vi, 309. For the subsequent treaty of December, 1647, in the Isle of Wight, in which the above proposition occurs as propositions 9 and 10 appended to the four bUls, see L. J., ix., 408, 483, 499 ; C. J., v., 351 ; Parliamentary History, xvi., 405, 483. 1 Rushworth, iv., 438, section 185 of the Remonstrance. ''C. J.,ii., 427. DESIGN OF AN ASSEMBLY OF DIVINES. 123 For a few more weeks the design slept. But on the 26th of March the Commons urgently appointed the Grand Committee to consider " what is fit to be done for the present in the matter of religion, and what will be further necessary to be done for the future." ' At the same time they despatched an importunate message to the Lords to expedite the " declaration of the causes and remedies of our evils, especially because there is something con tained in it that concerns the matter of religion which this House desires should be settled and established ".^ On this matter the Grand Committee did not sit until 4th April, when a committee was appointed to frame a declaration expressing the intention of the House to vindicate the doctrine of the Church from aspersions and concerning government, dis- ciphne and liturgy in the Church, and consultation to be had with divines thereupon. D'Ewes' account of the debate preceding this resolution is as follows : — Mr. Eous moved that some divines might be appointed to prepare the way to settle the Church in doctrine and discipline. On this it was generally moved that we should have a com mittee to prepare such a declaration as might include this. Sir Hugh Cholmley moved that we might first vote for it here, and only leave it to the committee to put it into words, which made me move in effect following. . . ,^ 1 C. J., u., 498, 26th March, 1642. ' " I came in between nine and ten. Sir Benj. Rudyard was then ordering to appoint a day to consider of the matter of religion, to settle the distraction of the Church for the present and to provide for the future. Divers spake to it, and at last it was settled for Thursday next" (D'Ewes' Diary, iu., 443, 26th March, 1642). ^ D'Ewes' Diary, in., 455. 124 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. Thrcc days later this declaration was reported 1642^ and accepted by the House : — ' The Lords and Commons do declare that they do intend a due and necessary reformation of the government and Uturgy of the Church and to take away nothing in the one or the other but what shaU be evU and justly offensive, or at least unnecessary and burdensome, and for the better effecting there of speedily to have consultation with godly and learned divines. To this declaration the Lords assented on the 9th of April, ordering it to be published by the sheriffs in the counties and market towns.' Consistently with this measure the Commons three days later reiterated its order for the nomina tion of divines by the knights and burgesses, two divines for each English county, one for each Welsh county, two for each university, and four for London.^ From the 20th of April, 1642, onwards the Lower House was intermittently engaged in considering and voting the names of these divines.'' The bill for The list of nominations being finished, a bill Ass^biy^of was at once introduced for the calling of the Divines. Asscuibly.'' The extraordinarily chequered-legis lative career of this measure is given below. 1 C. J., il, 515, 7th April, 1642. 2L. J.,iv., 707. 3 0. J., ii., 524. ^ " We went to the order of the day to name the several ministers that should be elected to be at the Synod, and so the names of the divines of Bedford, Buckingham aud Berkshire were delivered in by the knights and burgesses of the said counties. When we came to the divines to be named for Cornwall, the several members, burgesses , of that county, brought in several names, whieh after a long debate ' were at last agreed upon'' (D'Ewes' Diary, ui, 475, 20th AprU, 1642). The entries of the separate votes run through pages of the Commons Journals from ii., 535-564. ° 9th May, 1642, read a first and second time, and committed to the whole House (C. J., ii., 564). Reported on the 13th of May and THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 125 The Solemn League and Covenant. ohap. i. The Solemn League and Covenant was theThlTol^ determining factor in the final revolution of opinion covlnant!"^ which was ultimately forced upon the Long Parlia- recommitted (ibid., 571). Reported again on the I7th of May and ordered to be engrossed (ibid., 575). Read a third time, 19th May, and passed with the proviso [the divines to debate, etc.] " as in their judgments and consciences they shaU be persuaded to be most agree able to the Word of God " (ibid., 579). Read a first time in the Lords, 20th May (L. J., v., 76) ; a second time, 21st May, and committed to the whole House (ibid., 78). On the 26th the Lords added sundry names of divines, and fixed the date of meeting for the 1st of July, 1642 (ibid., 84 ; C. J., ii., 287), and hereupon a conference was moved between the two Houses. The Commons considered the Lords' amendments on the 31st May (C. J., ii., 595). The differences between the two Houses were considered at a conference, which was reported on the 1st of June (C. J., ii., 598), and on the 3rd of June the bUl passed its third reading in the Lords (L. J., v., 101). In reply to the request of the Commons, the Lords sent away the bill for the king's assent (C. J., ii, 605, 4th June). Three weeks later they urged the Secretary to urge the king for his assent (ibid., v., 154, 21st June). The royal assent not being obtained, the bill lapsed by the expiry of the time limited in it for the meeting of the Assembly. Accordingly a com mittee was appointed by the Commons to prepare a new bUl (C. J., ii., 672, 14th July, 1642). This bUl for giving further time for the meeting of the Assembly was read a first time and second time, and committed on the foUowing day (C. J., ii, 673). The date of the meeting was hereby extended to 10th August, 1642. The bUl was reported and engrossed on 16th July (ibid., ii, 675). It, however, prooeeded no further. On the 15th of September, 1642, a third bUl was ordered to be prepared (0. J., ii., 767, 781). This bill was read a first time on the 6th of October, 1642, as " an Act for giving further time for the Assembly of Divines" (C. J., u., 796). Bead a second time, and committed on the same day. On the foUowing day the committee reported its advice for the preparation of a new biU altogether. This was accordingly ordered (C. J., ii, 798, 7th October, 1642). Three days later the fourth bUl was read a first time as " an Act for the calling and assembUng together of an assembly of godly and learned divines to be consulted with by the Parliament for the settUng the Church government and vindicating the doctrine of the Church of England from all calumnies and aspersions, etc." (C. J., ii, 802). It was read a second time the same day, and committed to the whole 126 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. ment. From the first the influence of Scotland ^ had tended in this direction. At the opening of Parliament, England and Scotland were nominally at war. Negotiations for peace had been begun at Ripon, which were shifted to York, and finally, in House. From the llth of October, the House sat in committee on the biU, and on the 13th it was reported with some alterations of names of divines (C. J., ii., 806). On the 15th of October it was read a third time and passed. On the same day it was read a first tune in the Lords (C. J., ii., 809; L. J., v., 400). A second time, 18th October (L. J., v., 405). Considered in committee, 19th October, when altera tions of ministers were proposed (ibid., 407), reported, read a third time and passed. The same day the Commons agreed with the Lords' amendments (C. J., ii., 814), and the Lords thereupon ordered the Clerk of the Crown to prepare a commission for the passing of the bUl, "and that it be speedily sent away to the king to be signed" (L. J., v., 407). The bUl was accordingly named for the king's assent in the " propositions for accommodation " (L. J., v., 504 ; C. J., ii, 903, 20th December, 1642). With the object of bringing this bUl, which was now lapsed, within a new time Umit for the purpose of this negotiation with the king, a fifth bill was introduced into the Com mons on the 27th of December, 1642 (C. J., ii., 904). Read a second time, and ordered to be engrossed on the same day. Read a third time on the 6th of January, 1642-43, and passed -svith certain alterations of names (ibid., 916). Read a first time iu the Lords on the 10th of January (L. J., v., 542), and a second time and committed on the 14th of January (ibid., 554). Reported, read a third time, and passed on the 19th of January (ibid., 564), with amendments, to which tbe Commons agreed on the 28th of January (C. J., ii., 947). The bill was immediately sent off to Oxford (ibid., 948 ; L. J., v., 581-83). Of course the biU did not receive the king's assent. On the 3rd of May, 1643, therefore, a [sixth] measure was ordered to be prepared (C. J., iii., 68). This was read as an ordinance on the 13th of May (ibid., 83) and committed. Reported with amendments and engrossed on the 20th of May (ibid., 93). Carried up to the Lords on the 24th of May (ibid., 99 ; L. J., vi, 60). Referred to a committee of the Lords on the 5th of June, 1643 (L. J., vi., 81). Reported on the 6th of June with amendments, among them the very material one of the addition of ten Peers and a proportionable number [i.e., twenty] of the Conunons to be made to the Assembly (ibid., 84), and with the express exception of any right of jurisdiction to the Assembly (ibid., 84). To these amendments the Commons substantially agreed on the 7th of June (C. J., in., 119). A conference THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 127 November, 1640, to London. Whilst in London the chap. i. Scotch Commissioners did not confine themselves^ iSo to the mere work of negotiation. They intrigued actively to fan the feeling against Episcopacy. The Scotch Commissioners were accompanied by four Attitude of ministers— Alexander Henderson, Robert Blair, wrTs the "to satisfy the minds of many in England who ^^f^^f J^^; love the way of New England better than that of p"*^ *" n°^- -r-» 1 • " 1 • 1640. Presbyteries used in our Church [of Scotland] " ; Robert BaiUie, " for the convincing of that prevalent faction against which I have written [Canter- burians] " ; and Gillespie, " for the crying down of the English ceremonies for which he has written ; and all four to preach by turns to our commissioners in their houses ".' They arrived in London on the ISth of November, 1640, and if Baillie's words are an index of the thoughts of the commissioners generally, they must was held hereupon on the 10th of June, the Commons having insisted on the retention of tbe reference to the Church of Scotland as intending an uniformity -with it. On this point the Lords gave way in the con ference, and on tbe 12th of June, 1643, it finally passed the Lords (C. J., iii., 126 ; L. J., vi., 89, 90). This form of the ordinance is printed in the Lords Journals, -vi., 92. But on the 16th of June an order was issued for the caUing of it in (C. J., iu., 131). The clerical omission of " together with some members of both Houses " was corrected on the 17th of June (C. J., in., 132), and so this extraordinary piece of legislation was finished. The rules for the guidance of the Assembly were pre pared by the Lords on the 29th of June, 1643, adopted by them, and sent down to the Commons (L. J., vi., 114 ; C. J., iu., 149). After consul tation in committee -with some of the divines thereupon these rules were accepted by the Commons on the 6th July (see the two forms of the rules in L. J., -vi., 114; 0. J., iii., 156) with the exception of clause 5, to which omission the Lords assented (L. J., vi, 123). The form of oath to be taken by the members of the Assembly was voted by the Commons on the same day (G. J., iu., 157). ^ BaUUe, Letters, i., 269. 128 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. have imagined that there was a Presbyterian faction 1640-1. ready to welcome them. The erroneousness of such an assumption has been already pointed out, but it would seem that the commissioners for some time proceeded with the negotiations under that impression. Think not (says Baillie) we live any of us here to be idle. Mr. Henderson has ready now a short treatise, much called for, of our Church discipline. Mr. Gillespie has the grounds of Presbyterial government well asserted. Mr. Blair a pertinent answer of Hall's Eemonstrance. On the occasion of Charles's declaration at Whitehall of the 23rd of January, 1640-1, that he would consent to no change in the estate of bishops, the Scots put into print " Mr. Alexander Hender son's very good reasons for their removall out of the Church ". „,, „ ^ The method of the treaty was to take one The Treaty •' with the demand at a time, the Scots refusing to reveal the Nov., 1640,- whole of their demands beforehand. In conse- "^"^ ' ¦ quence, the eighth demand, which contained as its third head the demand of the Scots on the point of Church government, was not reached till the middle of February, 1640-1. In the uncertainty of the times preceding the condemnation of Stra fford, both parties were reluctant to approach the question of uniformity of Church government, and it was only on the 10th March that the Scotch decrees concerning unity of religion were pre sented. But the unwelcome point was suddenly brought to the front by an act of imprudence — the publication by Henderson of That Uttle quick paper proclaiming the constancy of our zeal against Episcopacy. . . . Divers of our true friends did think THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 129 us too rash, and though they loved not the bishops, yet for the honour of their nation they would keep them up rather than "that we strangers should pull them down. The result is told by Baillie thus : — We give in a moUifying explanation of our meaning. Here we were put in a new pickle : the English peers were minded to have cause printed our explanation. This, doubtless, this rash and ignorant people would have taken for a recanta tion of what we had printed before. But, in the end of that explanation, we had professed that we had yet more to say to the Parliament according to our instructions against Episco pacy, so before we had said all out, the king thought meet neither to pubUsh his proclamation nor our explanation. EvU wiU had we to say out aU our mind about Episcopacy till the EngUsh were ready to join with us in that greatest of questions, but there was no remedy.' On the ISth March the English Commissioners replied by desiring the Scots not to move the Parliament in that matter, and, after many passionate words from the Earl of Bristol, the Scots consented to lay it aside till after the con clusion of Strafford's trial. The complete demands under this head, therefore, were formally received by the Lords Commissioners on the 10th of April, and on the 14th were discussed by the Upper House. The first demand concerned uniformity of The demand religion and conformity of Church government as a oTchur?™ ^ special means of preserving peace between the two government. kingdoms. But it was accompanied by an assur ance from the Earl of Bristol that the same morning 'BaUlie's Letters, i, 306-7. For this transaction see S. P. D., oocclxxviu., No. 70; L. J., iv., 159, 216, Hist. MSS. Rep., x., vi., 139; Portland MSS., i, 8-9 ; Tomasson tracts, E., 157. VOL. I. 9 130 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Some of the principal lords of the Scots Commissioners told the Lords Commissioners that they could do no less but deliver in those papers, as they were commanded to do by those that employed them in this service, but yet told the Lords Commissioners that what answer it shaU please both Houses of Parliament to return in their own time, they wiU abide and acquiesce with that.i The various papers which had passed between the Commissioners were read at the same time. These data were communicated to the Commons at a conference on the following day, and were debated in the Lords on the 20 th of April, ^ but the subject was not noticed in the Commons till the 15th and 17th of May. On that occasion Hyde moved simply to adhere to the answers of the commissioners, but D'Ewes, afraid of offending "so friendly and so potent a nation," moved " rather the question of the affection of the Scots, yea though we never intended to pursue any part of what they desire".^ The resolution finally adopted was as follows : — This House doth approve of the affection of their brethren of Scotland in their desire of a conformity of Church govern ment between the two nations, and doth give them thanks for it. And, as they have ah-eady taken into consideration the reformation of Church government, so they wUl proceed therein in due time as shall best conduce to the glory of God and peace of the Church. From this answer both Houses refused to swerve, and with a verbal alteration it stood in that form in the final words of the treaty, as ratified by bill in August, 1641. >L. J.,iv., 216. ^ JWd, v., 224. ' D'Ewes' Diary, ii., 191. THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 131 Two points appear plain from the account of ohap. i. this debate of the 15th of May, as preserved in D'Ewes' MS : (1) That the answer of the Commons was framed on a previously prepared, though more curt and ungracious answer of the Commissioners ; (2) that the House did not at all touch upon the substance of the Scots' request. The only division of opinion was upon the question of the use of the words, " and do give them thanks ''. The question of the uniformity of Church government — the substantive proposition of the Scotch paper — was not alluded to apparently by a single speaker.' Such was the fate of the first negotiation between Scotland and England on this subject of the intro duction of a Presbyterian system into England. When the subject was again taken up, it was on the initiative not of the Scots but of the English. That initiative was taken, however, only under the- pressure of^ sheer necessity, and the course of the negotiations shows with what reluctance the final step of calling in Scotch aid was adopted. From the moment the outbreak of war became a certainty, it became an object of great consideration for either side to secure the neutrality or the goodwill of the Scotch nation. A diplomatic rivalry ensued on this merely negative policy, and it is plain that until the return of their commissioners from the ' Cf. Clarendon, iii., 294. There had been a general inclination to return a rough answer and reproof for their intermeddling in anything that related to the laws of England. But by the extra ordinary industry and subtlety of those who saw that business was not yet ripe, and who alleged that it was only wished not proposed, and, therefore, that a sharp reply was not merited, the above gentle answer was returned. 132 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. futile negotiations at Oxford, in the spring of 1642. 1643, a party among the Scots themselves thought neutrality the only likely attitude. They stood, and it pleased them to think that they should so stand, as mediator between two belligerent powers, with a truly national loyalty to the person of their prince, but with a full knowledge that their interests lay with the English Parliament, and it required the actual teaching of events to convince them of the impracticableness of such a policy. During this interim period of diplomacy, the subject of Church government was at first avoided by the English Parliament, and then handled with The negotia- almost all their accustomed caution. On the occa- thTpari^''' sion of the meeting of the General Assembly of ment and the ^j^ Scottish Church, which had been called for Scotch, July, ' 1642. 26th July, 1642, the Commons drew up a declara tion " how affairs stand here," wherein they assured the Assembly that if war could be avoided We do not doubt that we shaU settle matters ... in Church and State to the . . . glory of God by the advancement of the true religion, and such a reformation of the Church as shall be agreeable to God's word.^ A previous declaration, in April, sent to the Great Council, had been still more unsatisfactory and vague. The reply of the General Assembly to the former of these was of a nature to convince the Parliament that Scotch aid, if ever required, would only be obtained on one condition — an uniformity of Church government. They complained of the slowness of the reformation of religion in England, ' L. J., v., 228. THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 133 surmising that God had some quarrel with England chap. i. for this, and with a reference to the demand of leS" their Commissioners in the treaty of London, 1641, proceeded to lay down their main require ment : — (4) The Assembly doth renew the proposition made by the aforesaid commissioners for beginning the work of reformation at the uniformity of kirk government. For what hope can there be of unity in reUgion, of one confession of faith, one form of worship, and one catechism, till there be one form of ecclesiastical government. Yea, what hope can the kingdom and kirk of Scotland have of a firm and durable peace till prelacy ... be plucked up root and branch. (5) The prelatical hierarchy being put out of the way, the work win be easy without forcing any conscience to settle in England the government of the reformed kirks by assemblies ; for although the reformed kirks do hold their kirk officers and kirk government by assemblies higher and lower in their strong and beautiful subordination to be jure divino and perpetual, yet prelacy ... is almost universally acknowledged to be an human ordinance. This declaration of the General Assembly was unanimously approved by the Secret Council on the 18th of August, 1642, and forwarded to the Enghsh Parliament. It was communicated to the Commons on the 26th, but not debated there till the 1st of September. It will be seen from D'Ewes' notes of this debate, and from the reply subsequently drawn up, that the effect of the Scotch declaration was instantaneous, but only in one direction. There no longer remained any idea of a preservation of Episcopacy in any form — modified, purified or otherwise; but none the less the Parliament avoided the giving of any pledge on the subject of a Presbyterian system of government, referring 134 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. itsclf rather to the deliberations of an Assembly of 1642. Divines. On both points there seems to have been , .practical unanimity in these debates. The debate of After the reading of the declaration of the Itit^'- Assembly, There followed (says D'Ewes) many speeches there upon, I cannot say any debate, for aU men argued for the abolishing of bishops after Mr. Eous had first made the motion, and scarce a man spake for them. About two of the clock Mr. Solicitor and others desired that we might put off the debate till Saturday morning next ensuing, because, it being a matter of great weight, we might argue it upon the greater premedita tion. And I thought the House so strongly inclined this way as I went out of the House about the time, but, after my departure, the House sat till about three of the clock, and then voted the abolishing of them.i The resolution, as it appears in the Journals of the House, ran as follows : — The declaration from the General Assembly of Scotland was, according to the order of this House, now again read. And the House fell into the debate thereof. Besolved upon the question nemine contradicente that the government of the Church of England by archbishops, bishops, their chancellors and commissaries, deans, deans and chapters, archdeacons, and other ecclesiastical officers, hath been found by long experience to be a great impediment to the perfect reformation and growth of religion, and very prejudicial to the State and Government of this kingdom, and this House doth resolve that the same shall be taken away. Besolved upon the question that this vote shall be one head of the Declaration to be prepared for answer to the Declaration from the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. Further, a committee was appointed to prepare this declaration: " They are likewise to declare the 1 D'Ewes' MSS., B 312, 1st September. THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 135 mischiefs that have come to their Church and State Chap. i. by Episcopacy ".' iSi! ^ Five days later (6th September) the reply of the Commons to the Scotch declaration was presented from committee and forwarded to the Lords, who consented to it with a few verbal alterations. This reply -deserves attention^: — We acknowledge it an act of love that our brethren in The Parlia- Scotland have bestowed their serious thoughts for unity of ™aratio'^^i" religion, that in aU His Majesty's dominions there might be reply to the one confession of faith, one directory of worship, one publick 1542° ^P*" catechism, and one form of Church government. And although it will hardly be punctuaUy obtained and exactly,, unless some way might be founds or^ mutual communication and conjunction of counsel and debate in framing that one form, yet both intending the same end, proceeding by the same rule of God's word, and guided by the same spirit, we hope, by God's assist ance, to be directed so, that we may cast out whatsoever is offensive to God or justly displeasing to any neighbour church, and so far agree with our brethren of Scotland, and other re formed churches in all substantial parts of doctrine, worship and discipUne, that both we and they may enjoy those advan tages and conveniences which are mentioned by them in this their answer, to the more strict union of both kingdoms, more safe and easy government of His Majesty, and both to himself and people more free communion in all holy exercises and duties of worship, more constant security of religion against . . . the Papists, and deceitful errors of other sectaries, and more profitable use of the ministry, for the compassing and attaining whereof we intend to use the labour and advice of an assembly of godly, learned divines, for the convening of whom a bUl hath already passed both Houses. The main cause which hitherto hath deprived us of these and other great advantages, which we might have by a more close union with the Church of Scotland and other reformed churches, is the government by bishops . . . and ... we do iC. J., u., 748, 1st September, 1642. 'lUd., ii, 754. 136 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. declare that the government by archbishops, bishops, their chancellors and commissaries, deans and chapters, etc., is evil and justly offensive and burdensome to the kingdom, a great impediment to reformation and growth of religion, very pre judicial to the state and government of the kingdom, and that we are resolved that the same shall be taken away. And, according to our former declaration of the 7th of February, our purpose is to consult with godly and learned divines that we may not only remove tliisy but settle such a government as may be most agreeable to God's holy word, most apt to procm-e and preserve the peace of the Church at home, and happy union with the Church of Scotland and other reformed churches abroad, and to establish the same by a law which we intend to frame for that purpose, to be presented to His Majesty for his royal assent. Its import. Such a declaration is indicative at once of the past and of the impending action of the English Parliament on the subject of Church reform. The General Assembly of 1641 had appointed Henderson to draw up a confession of faith, a catechism, a directory for all parts of the public worship, and a platform of Church government, " wherein possibly England and we might agree".' The succeeding Assembly of 1642 had been greeted by a letter from a number of English ministers at London showing their desire of a Presbyterian government. But such was not the attitude of the House of Commons. A few months later the Parliament was driven to throw itself unconditionally into the arms of the Scotch, but its whole precedent and subsequent action shows its determination to con trol the reconstruction of the national Church in its own sense-— in a lay sense, in an English sense- by the help of an Assembly of Divines, and with ^ BaUlie, i, 364. THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 137 a desire of approximation to the best reformed Chap. i. churches, but none the less with a repugnance to 1642. the pure Scotch Presbyterian system.' At the conclusion of the General Assembly (13th August, 1642), a standing commission had been named to watch over the negotiations with England. It was to this body that the Parliament's declarations of September were sent. In theu- joy at the nature of those declarations, they at once proceeded to nominate a body of commissioners to be in readiness to carry out actual negotiations ; but for this final step there was wanting the same alacrity on the part of the Parliament. At that time the king, being desperate of our assistance, and the ParUament apprehending no need of it, we were no more soUcited by either, so for a long time lay very calm and secure. But after Kentown and Brainford, or thereabouts, when Newcastle had gathered his northern army, the Parlia ment thought meet to crave help from us, there was great word of commissioners coming from them to our council, and it was a wonder, if they desired any help, that they denied to use better means for its obtaining. But sueh was their (as I take it) oversight, that they used no other means but a declaration of their desires to have our help according to the late treaty.^ The hesitation which Baillie notices in these Course of the "pQ T 1 1 fl Tn pn Tj ^ words was not due to oversight, but to indecision negotiations on the part of the Parliament. On the 2nd of gcotoh, Nov., November, 1642, the Commons passed a declara- J^^g;'^"^'''*' tion inviting Scotch aid. This declaration the Lords put on one side, and although on the falling 1 Clarendon (iii, 298) maintains that the Scotch imagined that England would never accept their ultimatum of "uniformity ". The statement deserves no credit, but it is indicative of the impression of one party. ^BaUlie, Letters, u., 58. 138 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. ^AP. I. through of the negotiations between the king and 1642-3. the Parliament the Lords adopted it, a month passed before the messengers to carry the invitation were named. As it was, the expectation of an agree ment with the king was strong enough to defer the adoption of this final step. The negotiations with Charles, which had been broken off in November, were renewed at Oxford in February, 1642-43. The " Treaty of Oxford " lasted from the 4th of March to the 15th of April. It was for the purpose of these negotiations that the Houses hurried through their bills for the Assembly and for the abolition of Episcopacy. Clarendon represents the adoption of the latter measure as a mere ruse, the House not intending to insist on it, " very probably their departing from their proposition of the Church might be the most powerful argument to the king to gratify them with the militia" (iii., 378). Such a view is a mere perversion of fact. The deter mination to abolish Episcopacy, and to reconstruct the national Church by the help of an Assembly of Divines, had come to the Parliament through the debates of 1641 and 1642, through the intensifica tion of its own feeling and the rise of popular opinion. From that position it was impossible for the Parliament to recede, even if it had wished, and even though it knew that to insist on it would be fatal to the success of the negotiations. The Scottish Commissioners who had been destined for London had been detained in Oxford by Charles, and to the Parliament's request to allow them to proceed to London, according to their instructions, Charles replied on the 18th of April, 1643 by a THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 139 practical refusal.' On the 1st of May, the Commons Chap. l a,ccordingly took the final step, and requested the 1643. Lords to join with them in sending members from both Houses as commissioners into Scotland. It was not until the 27th, and upon reiterated messages from the Commons, that the Lords acceded to the proposition, and named as their commissioner Lord Gray of Warke. The Commons at once nominated on their behalf Sir William Armyn and Henry Darby. Three weeks later, the Commons added to their number Sir Henry Yane (the younger) and Hatcher ; but it was not until the 1 1th of July that the Lords took the corresponding step of nominating the Earl of Rutland. Meanwhile the Scottish Estates had met on the 22nd of June, 1643, and were waiting in great perplexity the arrival of the promised commissioners. Yet there was no word of them. All did much admire that not so much as one excuse was made of this so great neglect. Some did conjecture one cause, some another. Some did think them so overwhelmed with plots and dangers- that they were amazed. . . . Yet the most thought the greatest ¦cause of their irresolution to flow from their division. The House of Lords was said to be opposite to the Commons' conclusion of craving our help.^ There is much truth in the latter surmise, but The Pariia- it was not as a mere faction or party that the Lords ™si^n\™d^ hesitated to invite into England a Scottish army ^°^^i ^^"j^^^^^"- and a Scottish Covenant. But, whatever lingering scotch. hope either House may have had that the final step might yet be avoided, was swept away by the events of June and July, 1643 ; and the reffexion proves il. J., vi, 10. ^BaUlie, ii, 79. 140 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Chap. I. how purely a thing of necessity the Solemn League 1643. and Covenant was. Those two months mark the lowest point in the ebb of the Parliament's fortune. During the preceding three months Waller's plot, the treachery of the Hothams, the successive defeats of the Fairfaxes in Yorkshire and Waller in Devon shire, and the surrender of Bristol, had constituted an almost unbroken series of royalist successes. And there is a remarkable parallelism between these events and the action of the two Houses in the matter of the Scotch negotiations. For instance. Pym made his report concerning Waller's plot on the 6th of June. On the same day the Lords agreed to the ordinance empowering the Assembly of Divines to meet. Three days later the Commons ordered instructions to be brought in for their commissioners intended for Scotland. On the 27th of June was received Charles's proclamation declaring the Parliament no longer a free Parlia ment. On the same day the Lords agreed to the despatch of Corbett as a preliminary commissioner to Scotland. On the 30th of June, the Fairfaxes were beaten by Newcastle at Adwalton ; the news of this was followed by the renewed treachery of Hotham at Lincoln (2nd July). Three days later the Commons resolved that the Scotch nation should be forthwith desired to send in aid and assistance. On the same day the Lords resolved That this House will send two lords as commissioners into Scotland by this day sevennight, or sooner if they can be ready, and do concur with the Commons that one of their instructions. shaU be to desire the aid and assistance of the Scotch nation. THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 141 This parallelism could be further illustrated, Ohap. i. but it is needless. The facts which prove it are liks. well known. And, intrinsically, the interest of the Nature of the question lies not in these minor fluctuations of ^^^"'j^^^^^'j!^^ resolution on the eve of other great negotiations, to the scotch. The way for the Covenant had been paved, not in 1642, but in 1641, when the only chance for a compromise on the Church question had been lost, and when the Commons determined on a more radical scheme, and with the aid of its own Assembly. Such was the attitude of Parliament at the opening of the war. Had the success of the Parliament been immediate and decisive, as was at one time expected, the Church question would have been treated in a purely national sense, probably on the lines sketched out in the debates on the Root-and-Branch Bill. There may have been — there doubtless would have been — some concession to clerical feeling, but there would not have been, as there subsequently was, a formation of presby teries, parochial and classical, possessing censorial powers, and proceeding by legal methods. There would have been none of the Scotch element of jurisdiction in the English Church of the years 1643-51. As it was, no sooner had it become apparent that the war could not be finished at a stroke, than the necessity of securing Scotland for the Parliamentary cause was at once seen. The only possible condition was the adoption of the Covenant — of a uniformity of Church government — so much was known from the first ; the question then became one of time, or of the immediate fortune of the war. Fortune declared against the 142 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. Parliament, and the Covenant was accepted. It may be that a slight portion of the Commons had no dislike for a pure Presbyterian system — it is certain that a Presbyterian party had sprung up amongst the clergy — it may also be that the course of the ecclesiastical debates of the year 1641 had educated the majority of the Commons, or had habituated them to the conceptions and terminology of a primi tive Presbyterian system in the abstract, but none the less the final adoption of the Covenant was, under the circumstances, of the nature of a capitulation. The adoption The instructions to the commissioners were of the Solemn itt-.!- League and reported by Pym from committee on the 12th of AuguX^ep- July, 1643, and agreed to and sent up to the Lords tember, 1643. ^^ ^^^ following day. The Lords agreed to them on the 15th. To these was subsequently added the declaration to the Assembly of Divines in Scot land, which was accepted by the Upper House on the 19th, under which date all the papers are entered in the Journals. There is no further trace in the negotiations of the hesitancy which had marked the proceedings of the last three months. The commissioners landed at Leith on the 4th of August; by the 18th the draft of the Covenant had been completed and despatched to the Enghsh Parliament. It reached London on the 26th, was at once referred to the Assembly, and adopted in principle in the Commons on the Sth of September. The arrival of commissioners from Scotland facili tated the speedy settlement of disputed points, and on the 18th the Lords adopted the Covenant. It was then solemnly sworn to by both Houses at St. Margaret's on the 22nd. THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 143 The conclusion was foregone, but there are chap. i. two points that should, perhaps, be taken into ""leS"" consideration in the final estimation of the tran saction. The first has been explained with great succinctness by Mr. Gardiner.' In the first draft of the Covenant, as agreed upon at Edinburgh, Yane had proposed an amendment by adding after the words, "the Church of Scotland in doctrine, worship, discipline and government," the words "according to the word of God". When the Covenant was referred to the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, this amendment was re tained, along with another of the Assembly's own, defining the prelacy, which it was desired to abolish, as that which consisted in archbishops, bishops, etc. The scope of both amendments is plain. The former would pledge the Covenanted Parliament to the Scottish system only in so far as it was found agreeable to the word of God ; the latter gave it freedom in the construction it put upon the word prelacy — in the view it took of the then existing Church system. Practically both amendments were retained in the final form of the Covenant. Secondly, before its final adoption both Houses insisted on being satisfied by the Assembly at Westminster that the Covenant could be taken in point of conscience, and they joined in requiring the Assembly to set forth a declaration stating the reasons and grounds of the opinion which they had thereupon expressed of that lawfulness in point of conscience. The latter exception is, however, under the 1 CivU War, ii, 268. 144 ECCLESIASTICAL DEBATES, 1640-3. circumstances comparatively meaningless. It did not detract from the simple fact that the English Parliament, under the pressure of necessity, had forfeited its future freedom of action in the matter of Church reform — that it had pledged .itself to a particular policy. 145 CHAPTEE II. THE CONSTRUCTIVE WOEK OP THE WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 1643-1647. § I. — The Thirty-nine Articles. § II. — Church Government. § III. — Presbyterian Jurisdiction or Discipline. § IV. — Jus Divinum of Presbytery. § V. — Ordination. § VI. — The Directory for 'Wwship. § VIL— The Confession of Faith. % VIII.— The Oreater and the Lesser Catechism. § IX. — The New Metrical Version of tlie Psalms. § I. — The Thirty -nine Articles. The Westminster Assembly met on the 1st of July, '^^^\ ^g_ 1643. After hearing: a sermon from its appointed vision of the , '¦ . Thirty-nine Prolocutor, Dr. Twiss, in the Abbey Church, it Articles. adjourned to Henry YII.'s chapel ' to call the roll of its members. According to the ordinance of 12th June, 1643, the Assembly consisted of 10 English lords and 20 English commoners, sitting as lay assessors ; 121 English divines ; 3 scribes or clerks; and 8 Scottish commissioners, 5 of them clerical and 3 lay. The personale of the list, and the subsequent alterations in it owing to death, etc., can be seen in Hetherington, 103-6. On the first day the roll call revealed an attendance of sixty- nine, and Baillie says that the ordinary attendance of the English divines was about three score.' On the same day, 1st July, the House of Commons read over the draft rules to be observed 1 On 23rd September, 1643, an ordiuanoe was passed to enable the Assembly to meet in the Jerusalem Chamber in the abbey, because of the cold of Henry Vll.'s chapel (L. J., vi., 230). 2 Letters, ii., 108-9. VOL. I. 10 i 146 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. by the Assembly in its debates,' and recommitted 1643. them to its own committee for conference there upon with some of the divines. Four days later, ; Wednesday, Sth July, these rules were passed by the Commons along with two other resolutions. The first of these latter called upon the Scotch to send in aid for the preservation of the religion and liberties of the English kingdom. The second ran as\)llows : — Resolved upon the question that it shaU be propounded to the Assembly of Divines to-morrow at their meeting to take into consideration the 10 first Articles of the 9 and 30 Articles of the Church of England to free and vindicate the doctrine of them from all aspersion and false interpretations. The vote was carried up to the Lords the same day by Mr. Rouse, and agreed to by them.^ The rules for the debates and the above resolu tion were brought into the Assembly on Thursday, 6th July, and on the following Saturday it pro ceeded to resolve itself into three separate com mittees to corrsider respectively of Articles 1-4, 5-7, and 8-10. From Monday, 10th July, these com mittees accordingly sat in their several places. After two days' work in them the Assembly met on Wednesday, 12th July, and decided upon debate that in proceeding upon the Articles places of Scripture should be alleged for the clearing of ,,.4hem. Thereafter the Assembly, with the not infrequent interruption of other more secular work, settled down to its committee work on the Articles, passing the 4th Article on the 1st of 1 Q. J., iii., 150. 1 ' Ibid., 155-56 ; L. J., vi, 121. THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. 147 August, and debating the three creeds on the 18th chap. ii. of August.' ^"16437" On the 22nd of August, 1643, the two Houses ordered " that it be propounded to the Assembly of Divines to consider of the doctrine of the 9 next Articles of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church to clear and vindicate the same from all aspersions and false interpretations ".^ This work was interrupted during the whole of September by the consideration of the Solemn League and Covenant, and when the form of that agreement had been settled and sworn, both in England and Scotland, it was found that it necessitated a more immediate consideration of the question of Church government, with a view to the assimilation of the English Church system to the Presbyterianism of Scotland. " On Thurs day, the 12th of October, 1643," says I^ightfoot in his Journal, " we being at that instant very busy upon the 16th Article of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England, and upon that clause of it which mentioneth departing from grace, there came The work an order to us from both Houses of Parliament andMUn- enjoining our speedy taking in hand the Discipline complete. and Liturgy of the Church.'" This effectually interrupted the work of the Assembly on the Thirty-nine Articles. In the course of its subsequent labours of „ 1643-46, on the various parts of the Presbyterian system which it developed, the Assembly %orked whatever of the Thirty-nine Articles of the-Church of foot, xiu., 8, 10. 2C. J., in., 214; L. J., vi, 194. ^ Lightfoot, xiii., 17. 148 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. ii. England it thought worthy of preservation into the n Confession of Faith, and in view of that disposal and arrangement of t^e matter proposed tacitly to drop the Articles altogether. But on the 7th of December, 1646, the Commons sent to require of it all that had been accomplished on the Thirty-nine Articles, with the text of Scripture attached as proofs.' Accordingly, on the Sth and 6th of January following, the Assembly re-read its former proceedings on the Articles, and ordered them to be transcribed and sent up.^ It was not, however, until the 13th of April that Gower reported the Assembly's preface to the Articles.* The Scriptural proofs were ordered to be in serted two days later, and on the 29th of April, after an energetic demand from the House for the forwarding of these Articles, they were presented to the Commons by Dr. Smyth.* There is nothing discoverable in the Journals of either House with regard to any proceedings of the Parliament upon them.^ The Articles revised and passed by the Assembly include 1-15, and are so printed in The Proceedings of the Assembly of Divines upon the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England.'^ This tract contains the .' 1 C. J., v., 2 ; MitcheU, ilfinirfes of the Westminster Assembly, 309. 2|MitcheU, 318. =J6id, 348-49, 352-53. * C. J., v., 151, 156, ''The numerous references to the " articles of Christian reUgion " relate, of course, to the Assembly's Confession of Faith (see infra, 361, 365). The twenty articles of religion elaborated by the later Assembly of Divines of 1654 were a draft Confession of Faith or definition of fundamentals not an attempted revision of the Articles of the Church of England (see infra, 366, ii., 82-4). « B. M., E. ijii- without title page or date. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 149 whole of the Articles 1-15 inclusive, together with Chap. ii. the Assembly's preface. In thex^orm in which they " were inserted by the Parliament in the 14th proposi tion sent to the king in the Isle of Wight, to Caris ¬brooke Castle, December, 1647 (see infra, ii., pp. 59- 69), the 8th Article and the preface were omitted. In this form they were reprinted in 1654,' and in Neal, Puritans, vol. v., appendix liii., and elsewhere. § II. — Presbytery oi^ Church Government. The draft form of the Solemn League and The work of y , , • 1 • T -1 p . -1 the Assembly Covenant was received in London from the com- onthesubject missioners of the English Parliament in Edinburgh, „ churah^''''' on the 26th of August, 1643. It was immediately s°^'^™"'""*- referred by the Parliament to the Assembly, and from that date onwards to the solemn taking of it by the two Houses on Monday, 25th September, it was the constant subject of debate between Assembly, Parliament and the Scottish Estates and the General Assembly of the Scottish Church.. Regarding its adoption in England as a certainty, the General Assembly followed up the adoption of the draft of the Covenant by the appointment of commissioners to treat in England at first hand with the Parliament and the Westminster Divines, on all matters concerned with the evolution of that uniformity of Church system which was the mam item in the Covenant. The "Commissioners of the General Assembly of 1 B. M., -«-^. Articles of religion, or the 14 PiUars of the Church of England, presented to our late King Charles at the Isle of Wight, and now humbly tendered to the mature consideration of the supreme authority of this nation. 4to, London [Sth October], 1654. The iWually missing 8th Article and the Assembly's preface are reprinted ty Dr. MitcheU (Minutes of the 'Westminster Assembly, p. 541). 150 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. the ChuTch of Scotland appointed tb treat with the 1643. English Parliament or Assembly for the union of The oommis- England and Scotland in one form of kirk govern- sioners of the ment, oue coufessiou of faith, one catechism and General Assembly of ouc directory for worship," was a body composed of five ministers ' and three elders.^ They were elected at a session of the General Assembly at Edinburgh, 19th August, 1643. On the following 9th September, tlie two Houses in London appointed a joint committee ^ to receive the propositions brought by the said commissioners from Scotland. The latter presented their cre dentials and papers to the Parliament's committee, and by them they were laid before the House of Lords on Monday, llth September, 1643. As the commissioners had brought also a declaration to the Westminster Assembly, the latter body was empowered by a joint vote of the two Houses to The Parlia- appoint a committce of its own members to receive ception Com- propositious from the Scotch Commissioners.* The ™' ®^' Assembly therefore elected its committee (of twelve members) on the salne day, llth September.* ; This double committee of Lords and Commons, and the separate concurrent committee of the West minster Assembly, are to be regarded as things of the moment, an organisation solely intended for the ^Alexander Henderson, Eobert Douglas, Samuel Rutherford, Eobert BaiUie, George GUlespie. ^John, Earl of Cassilis, John, Lord Maitland, Sir Archibald, , Johnston of Warriston. ..e^ 'The Commons' members, Mr. Solicitor, Mr. Pym, Sir Gil. '-Gerard, Sir J. Clotworthy (C. J., iii, 235). The Lords' members, Lord Viscount Saye and Sele, Lord Howard of Echt (L. J., vi., 211). " 0. J., iii, 237 ; L. J., vi, 211-12. « Lightfoot, xiii, 13. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. ' 151 consideration of the Covenant, and for the formality Ohap. ii. of the reception of the Scotch Commissioners' ieii"^ and their papers. According to Baillie, the com missioners when they came up to London were desired to sit as members of the Assembly. This, however, they declined to do, " since they cam^. up as commissioners for our National Church, they required to be dealt with in that capacity ".' Whilst - willing as private men to sit in the Assembly, and upon occasion to give their advice in points debated, they insisted on being dealt with formally on the matter of the treaty for church uniformity, and demanded that a committee should be appointed from the Parliament and the Assembly of Divines to treat with them thereupon. "All these," says BaiUie, "after some harsh enough debates, was granted to once a week, and whyles after there is a committee of some Lords and Commons and divines which meets with us anent our commission." This latter standing committee to which Baillie The Pariia- refers was appointed by order of the Parliament of Treaty'^com- 17th October, 1643, as follows :— ™^**''- Ordered that the committee ^ formerly appointed to treat with the Scots Commissioners shall be the committee appointed to join with a committee of the Assembly to meet and treat with the divines from Scotland concerning a form of Church government, directory of worship, confession of faith and form pf oatechism.^ To this order the Lords assented three days rlater.* On Monday, 23rd October, the Assembly ^ Letters, u., 110. 2 Ut supra, p. 150, under date 9th September, 1643. ' C. J., iu., 278. ^ 20th October, 1643, L. J., vi., 265. 152 THE ASSEMBLYS CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. 1643~ Influenceexercised by the Treaty Committeeupon the work of the Assembly. received this order from the Parliament, and after ¦ some agitation " partly about the work to be done and what is like to be," the divines re-appointed as their committee the twelve divines who had been previously appointed to receive the papers from the Scots and to treat upon the Covenant.' The Treaty Committee, therefore, was the same in personale as its predecessor; but, instead of being appointed for the treaty as to the Covenant, it was now constituted a standing committee for the treaty as to church uniformity. Baillie distinctly claims that this standing treaty committee of Lords, Commons, divines and Scotch men stood behind the Assembly and prompted it for the time being in its debates on the important subject of Church government and officers. "To this committee," he says, " a paper was given in by our brethren [some of the Scotch divines] before we [Baillie and Rutherford] came, as ane intro duction to further treatie. . . . According to it the Assemblie did debaite and agree anent the deutie of pastors."^ It is, of course, natural that few direct traces of such predominant influence, as Baillie here ascribes to this treaty committee, should be dis coverable in the Journals of Parliament or in the Records of the Assembly. It would not be likely to be confessed. But the course of the narrative of the Westminster Assembly's work prove that Baillie has hardly overstated the case. At the time of the definite establishment of this treaty committee, 17th to 20th October, the Assembly ' Lightfoot, xiii., 27 IBaiUie, ii, 110 CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 153 had been already for some days engaged on the chap. ii. debate of the crucial matters of Church government i643. and discipline. The sudden interruption of the academic discussion of the Thirty-nine Articles on which the Assembly had been engaged^ and the in troduction of the more highly controversial topic of Church government and discipline, was doubtless due to the arrival of the Scotch Commissioners from the General Assembly. It was the immediate and logical consequence of the adoption of the Covenant. So much instantly must be ascribed to Scottish influence. How much more will remain to be traced. From the 28th of August, 1643, onwards to ISth September, the Assembly had been almost entirely engaged upon the consideration of the Covenant on reference from the House of Commons. On the latter date, ISth September, 1643, the very day on which the first members of the Scotch Commis sioners were received in the Assembly of Divines, the House of Commons ordered " that Mr. White do bring in an order for the Assembly to consider of matters of the discipline of the Church govern ment ". ' On the following Monday (1 8th September) this order was rendered more express and drawn up as an ordinance, as follows : — Upon serious consideration of the present state and con- The question juncture of the affairs of this kingdom, the Lords and Commons g^^g^^e^j assembled in this present Parliament do order that the Assembly ref erred to the ¦of Divines and others do forthwith confer and treat among them- ^gTh'octr' selves of such a discipline and government as may be most i648. agreeable to God's holy word, and most apt to procure and 1 C. J., ui., 242. 154 THE assembly's constructive work. preserve the peace of the Church at home, and nearer agreement with the Church of Scotland and other reformed churches abroad ; to be settled in this Church in stead and place of the present Church government by archbishops, bishops, their chancellors, commissaries, deans, deans and chapters, arch deacons, and other ecclesiastical officers depending upon the hierarchy which is resolved to be taken away ; and touching and concerning the directory of worship or liturgy hereafter to- be in the Church ; and to deliver their opinions and advices of and touching the same to both or either House of Parliament with all the convenient speed they can.i On Wednesday, 20th September, Sir Robert Pye was ordered to carry up this ordinance to the Lords for their concurrence therein. The Lords respited it " for a while ".^ On the following Saturday the Assembly, by the mouth of Dr. Temple, acknowledged the receipt of these instructions, "which we find to be a busi ness of a large nature and will require time to give present satisfaction ; yet, as time will give leave,. they will fall on that work also ".^ On the 17th November, 1643, Baillie writes [from London] : — At last the Assemblie of Divines have permission to fall on the question of Church government. "What here they wUI do we cannot say. Mr. Hendersone's hopes are not great of their conformitie to us before our armie be in England.*^ Acting upon this ordinance of 12th October, the Assembly began the consideration of the great ' C. J., iii, 246. Uhid., 249 ; L. J., vi., 223. ^ Ibid., 252, 23rd September, 1643. It is to be noted, however, that it was not untU the foUowing 12th October that the Lords formally agreed to this ordinance for the Assembly to treat of a discipUne and Church government (L. J., vi., 254). -* BaiUie, Letters, ii, 104. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 155 question of Church government. On Monday, 16th Ohap. ii. October, it held a solemn fast as a preparative, i643. and on the following day proceeded to debate upon The as- the order of reference.' The divines voted to deal Committees first with the question of government. Thereupon ^ debate arose as to whether to proceed instantly with the discussion of church officers or to settle the precedent question, viz., " whether there were la rule for government to be had in the Scripture ". |The Independents put forth their strength in de fence of the latter, but were outvoted — a foretaste if the differences of opinion that were soon to eveal themselves. The Assembly was then divided into three committees as before, each having the same question referred to them. Speaking appar ently of no particular committee, but of all three, Lightfoot says: "After dinner we met in the committee, and the business we did was to collect all the texts where mention of any church officers is, and we set down very many upon which to consider at our next meeting, and appointed then to treat upon apostles, prophets, evangelists, and the seventy disciples ".^ On Thursday, 19th October, the second and third committees reported hereupon. The latter committee found out of Scripture the following officers : apostles, evangelists, prophets, pastors, teachers, bishops or overseers, presbyters or elders, deacons, widows. On this particular report the Assembly debated in full session on Monday, 23rd October, the disputed point being whether the Hst of officers quoted was complete or not. The matter ' Lightfoot, xiu., 20. ^ Ibid., p. 21. 156 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. was concludcd in the morning debate, and in the 1643. afternoon the Assembly resolved itself into its usual committees to agitate the question whether a pastor and teacher were the same officer in substance, "and after very long we concluded affirmatively".' It was not until the 27th of October that the first committee reported on the question of officers in the Church. It found the following church officers in Scripture, viz., apostles, 25rophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, bishops, elders, deacons, widows. The office of The diviucs debated in full session on this report Church. on Thursday the 2nd of November, and following days. The debate commenced with the office of pastor. It is at this point that Baillie's evidence ut supra, p. 152, concerning the course of the debates becomes pertinent. The Assembly first voted the continuity and necessity of the office of pastor,^ and then proceeding to define his office, stuck upon the question of the public reading of the Word. Such public reading of the Word in the public congregations was voted an ordinance of God, but on the subsequent question whether this public reading was the pastor's office, the Assembly suddenly faltered. "When the thing was coming to the very question, it was much desired to delay the vote for fear of some inconvenience that might follow. And hereupon it was put to the question whether this should be put to the question, and it was voted negatively, and so we laid it by for the present and adjourned till Monday."^ 1 Lightfoot, xiii., 27. 2 75,;^^^ 3g_ ^Ibid., 39-40, Friday, 3rd November. church government. 157 It is of course permissible to see in these words some confirmation of Baillie's testimony. But it is to be noted (1) that the first recorded interference of the Scotch Commissioners in the debate did not take place until nearly a fortnight later, see infra, and (2) that there appears in effect to have been no break in the material continuity of the debate, for on the following Monday, 6th November, the Assembly voted the public reading of the Scripture to belong to the pastor's office,' subsequently adding thereto the further duties of catechising, sacra mental administration, blessing, prayer,^ rule of the flock, and care of the poor. The inconvenience of the method adopted by the Assembly in its committee arrangements is curiously illustrated by the fact that after having thus traversed part of the ground it was drawn back again over it by the belated report of the second committee. On Wednesday, 8th November, that committee reported as follows : — The Church officers under the New Testament before the ascension of Christ were John Baptist, the twelve Apostles and seventy Disciples. After his ascension, apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers, elders, deacons, widows.^ On this report the Assembly proceeded to resolve that pastors and teachers were one and the same for the substance of the office. Almost immediately thereupon the chairman of The office of ¦' -^ . . , doctor and the first committee reported five propositions ad- teacher in the vanced concerning the office of doctors and teachers, and the difference between it and that of the pastor.* ' Lightfoot, xiu., 40. ^Ibid., 40, 44-47. ^26?d, 43. -"Ibid^U. 158 THE assembly's constructive work. The Scotch Commissioners intervene. The report was laid by to be debated another day, but before the committee could set specifically upon it the Scotch Commissioners intervened with an ex parte declaration. They imparted their desires to the triple committee of Lords, Commons and Divines with whom they were in treaty, and from that body they were reported to the Assembly of Divines by Mr. Marshall on Tuesday, 14th November. In effect the Scotch Commissioners wished to lay down four permanent officers in the Church-pastors, teachers, ruling elders and deacons, the former three having the government in the Church. To this expression of opinion they added an enumeration of the four sorts of assemblies in their own Church, viz., Church sessions or par ticular elderships, classes of presbyters, provincial synods, national assemblies. The report being read, which was very long. Dr. Burgess moved that Mr. Marshall would relate whether the committee had examined by Scripture that part of it which concerns Church officers. To which Mr. Marshall answered that the committee had not debated them all but referred it to the Assembly. ^ In the light of this communication the Assembly proceeded to the aforementioned report of the preceding 8th November, from the committee on the office of doctor and teacher — their identity or difference. The debate on this point endured for a week, from the 14th to the 21st November, and was carried on with extraordinary pertinacity and warmth. Baillie's account of the dispute is as follows : — The Independent men, whereof there are some ten or 'Lightfoot, xiu., 51. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 159 eleven in the Synod, manie of them very able men, as Thomas Chap. II. Goodwin, Nye, Burroughs, Bridge, Carter, Caryll, Philips, ' iiSl"' Sterry, were for the divine institution of a Doctor in every congregation as well as a Pastor. To these the others were extreamlie opposite and somewhat bitterlie, pressing much the simple identitie of Pastors and Doctors. Mr. Hendersone traveUed betwixt them, and drew on a committee for accom odation in the whilk we agreed unanimouslie upon some six pro positions wherein the absolute necessitie of a Doctor in everie congregation, and his divine institution in formall termes was eschewed. Yet where two ministers can be had in one con gregation, the one is allowed according to his gift to applie himself most to teaching and the other to exhortation according to Scripture. '^ According to Lightfoot's Journal, the first inter ference of the Scotch in the debate occurred on the second day (Wednesday, ISth November) : — Then returned we to the business again [viz., of the identity of Doctor and Pastor] , and treating very largely of this business, Dr. Burgess desired that one of the Scots divines would speak on this business, which Mr. Henderson did, advising that as the churches reformed have their eyes upon us so should we have our eyes upon them and on this point particularly. It was after this urged that this [should be framed as the] proposition. " The pastor and the doctor are equally ministers of the Gospel," which when it was urged Mr. Henderson again desired that we would be wary lest we give offence and prejudice to other churches. He also after some further debates about this spoke again, that we would not in metaphysical and abstract notions consider of these things, but go to work to determine what offices we think fit to be in the Church, with out more ado.^ Notwithstanding this plain and coercive advice the debate continued with undiminished tenacity 1 Letters, ii, 110. ^ Lightfoot, xiu., 53. 160 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. and length until the following Friday, 17th Nov- 1643. ember, when upon the motion of Mr. Henderson Ineffectual the busiucss was referred to a committee of six. attempt at -pj^jg committee reported on the following Monday accommoda- ¦¦¦ ^-^ ./ tion with the a scrics of fivc propositious of the nature summar- on the ques- iscd by Baillie as above, but without apparently office°ofthe conducing to any accommodation. "Mr. Hender- November, SOU and Mr. Palmer offered several tempers for ^^^^' accommodation, and so did others, and so we spent the session without conclusion of anything, but only determined this by vote, 'that we should to-morrow first consider wherein we agree in this question about pastors and teachers,' and for that purpose was a committee chosen, and so we adjourned." ' The following day, Tuesday, 21st November, was spent in the consideration of six colourless propositions from this latter accommodation com mittee, the use of a teacher or doctor for exposition and doctrine being admitted, but practically nothing more.' It is quite clear from the words in which Lightfoot refers to the proceedings of the next day that this conclusion was not an accommodation, but an interim statement of a few commonplaces of agreement, the main contention of the Independent, viz., the necessity and divine "institution of the doctor being postponed until the Directory of Wor ship should come on for consideration.^ Much more crucial was the immediately suc ceeding subject concerning ruling elders, and the 1 Lightfoot, xiii., 58. 2 ji,i^_^ 58_ ^ Ibid., 60. This point, a not unimportant one, could not be gathered from Baillie's testimony at all. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 161 division of opinion upon it was as clear and, if chap. ii. anything, sharper. 1643. The question was raised, on Wednesday, the The question 22nd of November, 1643, on the basis of a pro- °j '^^i°^°^ position reported by the second committee on the Sj'^^';^ °^ . Presbyters. preceding Sth November, in the following terms : — Besides those Presbyters which rule well and labour in the word and doctrine, there be other Presbyters who especially apply themselves to ruUng, though they labour not in the word and doctrine.! Quite early in the debate Henderson, as repre senting the Scotch members of the Treaty Com mittee, spake concerning this thorny business of ruling elders, " that however it be somewhat strange in England, yet that it hath been in the reformed churches even before Geneva, and that it hath been very prosperous to the Church of Scotland".^ At a later point in the debate Henderson again inter vened, taking the prudential ground and proving the necessity of ruling elders to see to the manners of the people. The debate ran, however, mainly upon the lines of Scripture authority and inter pretation. The Independents, supported by Snaith, Gataker, Temple, Vines and others, argued strongly against the divine institution of the ruling elder. The main body of the Synod reasoned for it, and with this latter Bailhe joyfully identifies himself and his brethren of the Scotch Commission. " When aU were tired it came to the question. There was no doubt but we would have carried it by far most voices ; yet because the opposite were men verie considerable, above all gracious and learned little Palmer, we agreed upon a com- iLightfoot, xui., 43, 60. ^ Ibid., 60. VOL. I. 11 162 THE assembly's constructive work. mittee to satisfie if it were possible the dissenters. For this end we meet to-day, and I hope ere all be done we shaU agree. All of them were ever willing to admitt elders in a prudentiaU way ; but this to us seemed a most dangerous and unhappie way, and therefore was peremptorily rejected. We trust to carry at last, with the contentment of sundry once opposite, and silence of all, their divine and Scriptural institution. This is a point of high consequence, and upon no other we expect so great difficultie, except alone on Independencie ; wherewith we purpose not to medle in hstste tiU it please God to advance our armie, which we expect will much assist our arguments. "^ One accommodation committee, but not that to which Baillie refers in these words of hardly concealed cynicism, was appointed on Friday, 1st December, after five days' debate. A week later, after days of equally futile dispute, on the 7th of December, a second committee for accommodation (the one mentioned by Baillie as above) was ap pointed to draw up heads of agreement, and then to draw up the ruling elder's office.^ The three propositions reported from this com mittee were adopted on the following day, Friday, Sth December. Of these propositions the last asserted that some others beside the ministers of the Word, or Church governors, should join with the ministers in the government of the Church.'* Following this inconclusive beginning, the Assembly proceeded to debate the antiquities of the Jewish civil and ecclesiastical courts, and the position of the civil elder in respect to them. Day after day the discussion held, notwithstanding Sir Benj. Rudyard's plainspoken advice "to lay this 1 Letters, u., 111. « Lightfoot, xiu., 75. " Ibid., 76. CHURCH government. 163 subject by, for that it would prove but a weak chap. ii. ground to build our eldership upon the Jewish ".' i643. On the following day Lord Saye, reiterating The subject Rudyard's opinion, moved to waive the scrutiny as ^°^ ^°^^ ' to the Jewish elders, and on an exhortation from Lightfoot to hasten the material things tending to settlement, leaving these speculations alone till leisure, the Assembly agreed to lay by the present subject for the present, and to proceed to the con sideration of the oflfice of the deacon.^ Baillie in his Letters ^ asserts that in addition to voting the existence of Church governors, as joining with the ministers in the government, the Assembly actu ally came to a vote "that in the Jewish Church the elders of the people did join in ecclesiastick government with the Priests and Levites". This assertion is, however, not borne out by Lightfoot's Journal {ubi supra). The oflfice of deacon presented no points of The office of controversy like that of the doctor or the ruling thrchurch. elders, and the committee report " that it was the office of a deacon to take special care to distribute to the necessaries of the poor," was quickly adopted, Friday, ISth December,* though the discussion as to the exact nature and limitation of his office held till past Christmas.* After two days further debate on the oflfice of The office of widows,^ the Assembly had brought to a close what cwh." was practically the first portion or earliest stage of ^Lightfoot, xiu., 81. ^Ibid., 83, Thursday, 14th December. 3 Letters, ii., 117. " Lightfoot, xui., 84. 5 Ibid., 93, 28th December. " Ibid., 94-98, 29th Dec.-lst Jan. 164 THE assembly's constructive work. its constructive work. Baillie asserts in efifect that the Assembly hereupon was for a moment at a stand, "because the Committee [the Treaty Com mittee of Scots, Lords, Commoners and Divmes] had prepared no other matter to compt of for the Assemblie to treat on. Sundrie things were in hand, but nothing in readyness to come in publick ".' Speaking later in the same letter,^ and referring apparently to the debate of Friday, 29th December,^ Baillie throws further light on this outside manage ment of the Assembly's debates : — We were caUed out before twelve to dine with old Sir Henry Vane. Doctor Twisse was absent that day. Dr. Burgesse fell to be in the chaire. The question came : What should follow the Widows? There were left some branches of the Apostles' and Evangelists' duties yet undiscussed. We thought these questions needless, and wished they had been passed ; but sundrie by all means would have them in, of designe to have the dependence of particular congregations from the apostles in matters of ordination and jurisdiction deter mined. 'The Independents foreseeing the prejudice such a determination might bring to their cause by all means strove to decline that dispute ; as indeed it's marked by all that to the uttermost of their power hitherto they have studied procrastina tion of aU things, finding that by tyme they gained. We indeed did not much care for [i.e., object to] delayes till the breath of our armie might blow upon us some more favour and strength. 1 Letters, ii., 120. ¦" Ibid., 122. ^ Lightfoot, xiii., 96. The debate on the Anabaptist letter from Amsterdam took place on Thursday, 28th December, and the debate to which Baillie refers on the day following, Friday, 29th December — a day also on which Burgess occupied the ohair in place of Dr. Tvsdsse (Lightfoot, xiii, 93, 96; BaiUie, 121-22). The resolution as to the office of widows was voted on the 29th (the subsequent debate on Ist January being devoted to the Scripture proofs). Lightfoot was called to the city before this vote was taken, hence his Journal contains no reference to this iinportant passage of arms which Baillie recounts. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 165 However, that day, we being gone, the one partie pressing the Chap. II. debaite of the Apostles' power over congregations, the other ""ibJs^ — ' sharpUe decUning, there feU in betwixt Goodwin and Burgess hotter words than were expected from Goodwin. Mr. Marshall composed all so weU as he could. Men's humores, opinions, ingagements are so farr different that I am afraid for the issue. We doubt not to carrie aU in the AssembUe and Parliament clearUe according to our mind ; but if we carie not the Inde pendents with us, there wUl be ground laid for a verie trouble some schisme. Always it's our care to use our utmost endeavour to prevent that dangerous evil.^ Baillie's hopes and plannings were destined to speedy disappointment. The split with the Inde pendents came swiftly enough. With such material of difference and strife it could not be averted though it actually declared itself in an unforeseen connection. After its work on Church oflficers was concluded The Assembly as above related, the Assembly turned for a moment the'^subject of aimlessly back to add some particulars to its °'^'^'°**'°°- previous determinations as to the character and power of Apostles and Evangelists. And then, in spite of the wish of the Scotch to have on the question of the Presbyterian Church organisation, threw itself upon the consideration of ordination. The ensuing debate, which will be referred to more fully below,^ held from the 2nd of January to the 2nd of February, 1643-44, and it was out of this question of ordination that grew the undesigned but inevitable split with the Independents concerning presbytery. During the course of this debate on ordination, on the 19th of January, a formal report had been 1 BaUlie, u., 122. ^ ggg infra., pp. 318-20. 166 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. made in the usual purposeless manner from the 1644. first committee concerning presbytery. The report was tentative merely and confined to proposing (1) that the Scripture holdeth out a presbytery in the Church ; (2) that a presbytery consists of ministers of the Word and such other public oflficers as the Assembly had already voted to have a share in the government of the Church.' What notice was taken of such report does not appear, but at the following meeting '^ the chairman of what seems to have been the same committee ^ tendered a further report, the tenor of which was that there may be many congregations under one presbytery as in the Church at Jerusalem. The Independents were exceedingly opposed to the presentation of this proposition, and it cost an hour's sharp debate or more before the report was on the question admitted.* Equally with its predecessor, however, this proposition lay for the time being unheeded, as did also the elaborate paper presented on 25th January by the Scotch Commissioners to the Treaty Com mittee, and from the latter to the Assembly con cerning the Presbyterian Church system in Scotland ^ Lightfoot, xiii, 115. ^Monday, 22nd January, 1643-44, ibid., 116. ^ The chairman of the committee that was chosen to consider of the presbytery (ibid.). This appears to have been simply the first of the three committees of the Assembly, the other two committees having simUarly the work of jurisdiction and ordination respectively referred to them. ^ On the 24th of January, the Commons ordered Mr. Rouse to hasten their resolutions concerning their settlement of the govern ment of the Church (0. J., iu., 376). On the 16th of February foUowing, an even more urgent vote was taken bythe Lords (L. J., vi, 429-33). CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 167 and the fourfold system of assemblies— parochial, classical, provincial and national.' The proposal to refer this paper to the committee to which the question of presbytery had been referred, was for the moment lost on the opposition of the Inde pendents. The origin of these latter proceedings is thus explained by Baillie : — - Being wearied with the length of their proceedings and foreseeing ane appearance of a breach with the Independents we used all the means we could while the weather was faire to put them to the spurrs. After privie conference with the special men [the leading Presbyterians of the Assembly] , we moved in publick to have ane answer to our paper anent the officers of the Church and Assemblies thereof that we might give an account to our Church of our diligence. We were referred as we had contrived it to the Grand Committee to give in to it what further papers we thought meet which the Assemblie should take to their consideration. They [the Assemblie] were very earnest to have us present at their [three] committees, where aU their propositions which the Assemblie debaited were framed. This we shifted as too burden some and unfittkig our place, but we thought it better to give in our papers to the Great Committee appointed to treat with us. So we are preparing for them the grounds of our Assemblies and Presbyteries. Also we wrote a common letter [dated 2nd January, 1643-44,] to the Commission of our Church desiring a letter from them to us for putting us to more speed in such termes as we might show it to the Assemblie. When, however, towards the end of January The digres- the Assembly found itself face to face with a dead- an^incidentai rpck, and that it could not decide the question of ^^^fe!""^' qrdination by the London ministers until it tad sumption^of ^ decided the precedent question of presbytery itself. Presbytery. ^ Lightfoot, xiu., pp. 1 19-20. ^ Letters, u., 131. 168 THE assembly's constructive work. that question forced itself to the front, and had inevitably to be taken in hand once for all. As a result a mere side-issue had the effect of precipitat ing that collision between Presbyterian and Inde pendent which the Scotch Commissioners had spent all their force in trying to avert. On the 2nd of February the Assembly, by the urgency of Lord Saye, laid aside for the moment the question of the London ministers ordaining, and, in face of the opposition of the Independents, fell upon the above reported proposition that divers or many churches may be under one presbytery.' The scriptural examples in support of the proposi tion were brought in by the same committee on the 14th of February.^ The regular debate hereupon, which developed into the first great trial of strength between Inde pendent and Presbyterian, began on Monday, Sth February, 1643-4, and for more than a month, until 14th March, the Assembly devoted itself to this theoretical, premature, merely declai-atory debate Premature j of prcsbytcry. The dispute ranged, not only over Presb^tfr ' ^^^ qucstiou of representation of the separate Peb.-March,j churches in one presbytery, and the position of I each of these in relation to that presbytery, but also j as to the seat of jurisdictional power — the power of I censure and excommunication, viz., whether it lay with the particular congregation or the presbytery. After a fortnight's debate the negative opinions of the Independents were voted out, and the affir mative proposition ordered to be considered.^ 1 Lightfoot, 131 ; GiUespie, 9. ^Ibid., 150. Ubid., 170; GUlespie, 10-27. CHURCH government. 169 On the 22nd Feb. it was voted that the number chap. ii. of believers mentioned in Acts i. 15 and other places i644. belonged to the Church in Jerusalem as members of that Church,' and on the following day that the numberof those believers in the Churcli in Jerusalem was more than could ordinarily meet in one place in one time in the exercise of worship and govern ment.^ To these votes were similarly added, on the 26th of February, that the many apostles and other preachers in the Church in Jerusalem import that there were many congregations : " on the Sth of March, that the elders of that Church are men tioned :* on the 7th, that the apostles did the ordinary acts of presbyters as presbyters in the Church of Jerusalem, and that this shall be brought to prove the Presbyterial government at Jerusalem :° on Wednesday, 13th March, that the instance of the Church of Jerusalem shall be brought to prove that many several congregations may be under one Presbyterial government. "^ This point in the long drawn argument, how ever, was not reached without a certain amount of engineering. In his letter of 18th February, 1643-44, Baillie had asserted the wish of the Scotch Commissioners " againe to assay the Independents in a privie conference, if we can draw them to a reasonable accomodation, for that toleration they aim at we cannot consent ".' In a subsequent letter of 2nd April, 1644, and speaking of the debates prior to 22nd February, while still the Indepen- 1 Lightfoot, 174. = Ibid., 181, 23rd February ; GiUespie, 29. "Ibid., 182; Ibid., 30-3L * Ibid., 195; Ibid., 33-4. ^ Ibid., 203 ; Ibid., 34-6. " Ibid., 214 ; Ibid., 39-42. ' Letters, ii, 140. 170 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. dents held the field with their negative arguments 1644. against presbytery, Baillie gives some curious details of this attempt of the Scotchmen. He Early assigus UO date to the meetings which he describes, accommoda- but they must havc taken place before the 22nd iXIX^s of February. on the Sresbytery ^^^ ^° remeid these eviUs and satisfie the minds of aU we Feb., 1643-4. thought meet to assay how far we could draw them in a private friendlie way of accomodation, but Satan, the father of dis cord, had well near crushed that motion in the very beginning. After our [the Scotch Commissioners] first meeting with some three [Presbyterians] of the Assemblie, MarshaU, Palmer, Vines, and three of them [the Independents], Goodwin, Bur roughs, Bridge, with my Lord Wharton, Sir Harie Vane, and the Solicitor in our house and very fair appearances of pretie agreement, Mr. Nye was like to spoil aU our play. When it came to his turne in the Assemblie, he had from the 18th of Matthew drawn in a crooked informall way which he could never gett in a sillogesme the inconsistence of a Presbyterie with a civil state. In this he was cried down as impertinent. The day following when he saw the AssembUe full of the prime nobles and chief members of both Houses he did fall on that argument againe [then foUows Baillie's description of Nye's discomfiture, of which Lightfoot gives an account under date 21st February, 1643-44, xiu., 169]. We had many consultations what to doe ; at last we resolved to piursue it no further, onlie we would not meet with him except he acknowledged his fault. The Independents were resolved not to meet without him, and he resolute to recaU nothing of the substance of that he had said. At last we were entreated by our friends to shuffle it over the best way might be and to goe on in our husinesse. God that brings good out of evill made that miscarriage of Nye a means to doe him some good, for ever since we find him in all things the most accomodating man in the company.^ ^ Letters, ii., 145-46. On the 17th of February the Scotch Com missioners had dra-wn up a paper in which inter al referring to the order of the Commons to the Assembly to quicken their proceedings CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 171 Whether or not this incident interrupted the chap. ii. underhand workings of the Scotch Commissioners i644. is not clear, but the subsequent attempts at accom- TheAssembiy modation between the Presbyterians and Indepen- proj^ect of'an dents appear to have been pursued if not to have tfon'^^^^he originated in the Assembly itself. On the after- independ- r-n-i ^i'T.,ri . ents, March, noon of Iriday, Sth March, a committee was 1643-4. appointed for the purpose of accommodation, con sisting of four Presbyterians ' and four Inde pendents.^ Baillie adds to Lightfoot's account the assertion that this committee was to meet with a, committee of four of the Scotch Commissioners " to see how far we could agree ". He adds a pious ejaculation that his brother Scotch Com missioners were glad that what they were doing [contriving] in private should be thus authorised." The committee met several times, and agreed upon several propositions in which a presbytery was in substance granted by the Independents on prudential grounds of Church polity.* The further (supra, p. 166, note 4), they desired the adoption of means thereto. The Lords and Commons made a merely conciliatory reply (L. J., vi., 460-61). 1 Seaman, Vines, Palmer, Marshall. ^ Goodvidn, Bridge, Burroughs, Nye (Lightfoot, xui., 206-7). ' Letters, u., 147. " Lightfoot, xiii, 214-15, 229 ; BaUUe, ii., 147. The draft of the terms of an accommodation on the moot point of the relations between a classical presbytery, a congregational presbytery and a congregation was produced by MarshaU at the first meeting of the new accommoda tion coimnittee " as the results of our and their conference about accomodation before," Sth March, 1644. This interesting draft is preserved in GiUespie, 37. For alternative propositions offered to the committee on the foUowing day by Mr. Vines, see ibid., 38-9. Vines' propositions represented the miaimum of Presbyterian concessions. The Independents' propositions which were handed hi on the 13th, are preserved, ibid., 40-1. Out of the three competing series five pro- 172 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. proceedings under this head were then again tem- 1644. porarily interrupted by the resumption of the question of ordination (see infra, p. 323). Resumption By the 3rd of April, however, the Assembly had onPr^ef-^^'^*^ Completed the doctrinal part of ordination, and had 164^'^' '*^^"^' drawn its conclusions into the form of twelve propositions.' On numbers five and ten of these propositions there arose a fresh debate as to the word presbytery, and the nature of congrega tion, whether fixed or not. This led to a review of the votes already taken concerning presbytery,. and on the afternoon of the 10th of April they were accordingly presented by the committee which had been appointed for the methodising of them,. as follows : — 1. The Scripture doth hold out a Presbytery in a church (1 Tim. iv. 4 ; Acts xv. 2, 4, 6). 2. A Presbytery consisteth of ministers of the Word and such other public officers as are agreeable to and warranted by the Word of God to be church governors to join with the ministers in the government of the Church (Eom. xii. 7, 8 ; 1 Cor. xii. 26). 3. The Scripture holds forth that many congregations may be under one Presbyterial government. Proved by instance of the Church of Jerusalem [by arguments detaUed].^ Upon the question, however, that those votes should then be transmitted to the Parliament a long agitation ensued, the Independents strongly opposing it. With a view to accommodation, therefore, the committee for methodising the above votes reported on the following day, positions were agreed upon between the 13th and 19th of March, and provisionally reported to the Assembly on the latter day (ibid). 1 Lightfoot, 237-38. 2 Ibid., 243. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 173 Thursday, llth April, proposing in a singularly inconclusive manner to insert the first two votes concerning presbytery into some proper place among the twelve propositions concerning ordi nation, and for the present to omit the third proposition concerning a presbytery over many congregations.' The report was disliked, and practically fell to the ground, and for two more days the Assembly discussed the fixity of con gregations, resolving at last, on Monday, ISth April, " that fixedness or not fixedness of the con gregations is indifferent as in point of government".^ Well might Baillie write : " I cannot tell you what to say of the Assemblie. We are almost desperate to see anything concluded for a long time ; their way is woefully tedious. Nothing in any Assemblie that ever was in the world, except Trent, like to them in prolixities." ^ On the following Wednesday, 17th April, Dr. Burgess reported a draft of the Assembly's votes concerning ordination and presbytery, drawn as ready to be presented to the two Houses.* After a hot debate they were ordered to be drawn up ready till the Parliament should call for them or the Assembly think fit to send them. When, however, on the 19th April, the Directory of Ordi nation was finally adopted by the Assembly it was decided to send up to the Parliament that Directory, together with the twelve propositions concerning the doctrinal part of ordination, and to ' Lightfoot, 244. ^ jfeic^.^ 247 ; GUlespie, 49-51. ''' Letters, u., 165, 12th April, 1644. ^ Lightfoot, 249 ; GUlespie, 51-2. 174 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. lay aside for the present the draft votes concerning presbytery "as not yet to be sent into the two .,^ , Houses". Postpone- report°to the ^® have given in to the ParUament our conclusions about Parliament ordination, whereupon we have spent, I think, about fortie long tery '^^^ ^' sessions. To prevent a present rupture with the Independents we were content not to give in our propositions of Presbyteries and congregations that we might not necessitate them to give in their remonstrance against our conclusions, which they are peremptor to doe when we come on that matter. We judged it also convenient to delay till we had gone through the whole matters of the Presbyteries and Synods to send them up rather in their full strength than by pieces ; also [in this way] we suffered ourselves to be persuaded to eschew that rupture at this tyme when it were so dangerous for their bruckle state. ^ The resolution, however, with regard to the non- forwarding of the votes to the parliament did not hinder the prosecution of the abstract debate of Presbytery which recommenced on 2Sth April, and from that date to the 10th of May, ranged over the vital questions of the power of congregations, the number of ruling elders in a congregation, and of the seat of the power of ordination whether in the congregation or in the Preaching Presbyter. - The decisive vote taken on the latter date, 10th May, that " no single congregation which may conveniently join together in an association may assume unto itself all and sole power of ordination," was carried by 27 to 19, and is to be regarded as one of the severest blows the Independents had yet received. Lightfoot notes in his diary that the business "had been managed with the most heat ' BsUhe, Letters, ii., 169-70. ^ GiUespie, 55-64 ; Lightfoot, 261-2. of the Scotch. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 175 and confusion of any thing that had happened among us ". Four days later the Committee for the Summary of Church Government made a report which di verted the Assembly to the question of Discipline or Jurisdiction,' a question which will be treated separately below. This diversion and the sub sequent intrusion of the Directory for Worship had the effect of postponing for some months the consideration of the question of Presbytery. In the middle of August, 1644, however, intervention Warriston came up to London from Scotland bearing letters from the General Assembly there to the Assembly of Divines, designed to quicken the latter body. The letters were read in the Assembly on the 14th of that month^ when Warriston particularly declared the passionate desires of the Scotch Parlia ment and Assembly and nation for the completion of the Church uniformity in accordance with the Solemn League and Covenant.^ Immediately there upon, 15th August, the Scotch Commissioners called a meeting of the Treaty Committee, and delivered into it a paper penned by Henderson concerning the evil of tlie delay in settling religion, and the earnest desire of the Scotchmen that some ways might be found out for expedition. Copies of the paper were taken to be presented to the Lords, Commons and Assembly respectively.* This paper was read to the Lords on the 16th August, and is entered in extenso in the Journals.^ In the Commons more note was taken of it. It 1 Lightfoot, 262 ; GiUespie, 64. ^ Lightfoot., 303. 3 BaiUie, ii, 220. " Ibid. ''L.J., vi., 674. 176 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. -^yas resolvcd that the Treaty Committee should 1644. inform the Scotch Commissioners of the progress made by the House in the matter of the ordinance for ordination, and further, that the said Committee should consider with the Scotch Commissioners how the whole Directory might be expedited.' The reference here is probably to the Directory for Worship, and the compliance of the House was doubtless due to the timely need of propitiating the Scotch. " Also," says BaiUie,^ " we have the Grand Committee to meet on Monday [19th August], to find out ways of expeditione : and we have gotten it to be the work of the Assemblie itselfe to doe no other thing till they have found out wayes of accelerating ; so by God's help we expect a farr quicker progress than hitherto ". The recommendations on this head from the Grand or Treaty Committee were reported to the Assembly by Mr. Palmer on the following day, Tues day, 20th August. = The report was as follows :— 1. That the Assembly appoint a committee to draw up the Directory : which is already done. 2. A committee to join with the Commissioners of Scotland to draw up a Confession of Faith. 3. The Committee for the summary [of Presbytery or Church government] , hasten their report about Church government. 4. The Assembly to return to the government. 5. Then to handle excommunication. On items 3 and 4 no resolution was taken on the day of the presentation of this report, but some time before the 28th of August, the Assembly had ^ C. J., iii., 593-94, 17th August. •^ Bailhe, ii., 221. 'Lightfoot, 305. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 177 appointed to return to the question of government, chap. ii. and to hold to it till the conclusion of the erection i644. of sessions, presbyteries and synods.' / Accordingly, on the 4th of September, thfe systematic Assembly approached the debate on governmeni, Pre3b^°ely and after some dispute, and acting apparently i|i lefr' ^^^*' compliance with the wishes of the Scotchmen and against the recommendation of the Treaty Com mittee drew up the preparatory question for dis cussion in the following form : — " It is lawful and agreeable to the word of God that the Church be governed by several sorts of Assemblies." ^ This proposition was under debate on 6th September, and agreed to.^ As the Assembly had already discussed congregational and classical Assemblies, it was thereupon agreed to debate first of Synods.* This was accordingly done on the 13th of September, on the proposition that " Synods are one of these sorts of Assemblies whereby the Church may be governed," but on the 16th of September, the question was restated in the following form : " The Scripture holds forth another sort of Assemblies for the government of the kirk beside classical and congregational, which we call Synodical ".* The debate on this held through the 16th and 17th and was voted on the latter day,^ when the succeeding proposition also relating to the constitution of Synods, was pro pounded thus : " Synodical Assemblies are made ^BaUlie, u., 224. ^ GiUespie, Notes of the Debates and Proceedings of the Assembly of Divines, p. 65 ; Lightfoot, 308. 'Ibid., 66-67; Ibid., 309. ^Ibid., ibid. ' GUlespie, 71-72. Ubid., 73 ; Lightfoot, 311-12. VOL. I. 12 178 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. ^ up of pastors and teachers and other Church 1644. governors". This last item of the enumeration represented the wishes of the Independents as against the Scotch and English Presbyterians. It was hotly debated during the 19th and 20th of September, and was only adopted on the latter day when qualified by the words, "when it shall be deemed expedient ".' On the 23rd, therefore, the proposition was adopted in the following form : " Pastors and teachers and other Church governors as also other idoneous persons, where it shall be deemed convenient, are members of those Assemblies which we call Synodical, where they have a lawful call thereto ".^ The succeeding proposition was thereupon also ordered, " Synodical Assemblies may be of several sorts, as provincial, national and oecumenical".^ This was voted without much debate, but on the consequent question of the subordination of these Assemblies, of appeal, and of the seat of govern ment in the Church, whether in the congregation or in the superior Assemblies, the old division of opinion again emerged. The debate on it raged hotly through four sessions, from 26th September to 1st October.* On the latter day the proposition was voted in these words : " It is lawful and agreeable to the word of God that there be a subordination of congregational, classical, pro vincial and national Assemblies for the government of the Church ".' 1 GUlespie, 75-77 ; Lightfoot, 312-13. 2 GiUespie, 78. = Ibid. " Ibid., 78-84. ^ The Scriptural proofs of the proposition were adopted on the foUowing day (ibid., 85-86; Lightfoot, 313-14). CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 179 The smooth and compaiatively rapid progress Chap. ii. made on these debatable topics can only be attri- i644. buted to the drooping spirits of the Parliament in consequence of Essex's disaster in the West, though Baillie hints in one of his letters at something more.' Two days before the vote of 25th October con- scotch in- cerning suspension^ was taken, the Lords, acting q^f^^'g^us ti^e with a view to the propositions for peace which debate. were then preparing, had deputed the Lord Admiral and the Earl of Pembroke to acquaint the Assembly that " in regard of the many divisions and distrac tions abroad, this House desires they would hasten the settling of the government of the Church".' The Lord Admiral reported on the following day, 24th October, that he had acquainted the Assembly of Divines with their Lordships' desires, " and they received the message with much joy, and will speedily set upon it".* On the same day the Commons sent to the Assembly, by Mr. Tate and Mr. Salway, for a report and despatch of the Directory and of anything else ready concerning Church affairs.* In consequence of this latter message,* which arrived on the 2Sth of October, the Assembly appointed a committee to methodise the votes already taken on the matter of Church government, ordering it to report on Thursday, 7th November.^ 1 16th September, 1644. " We begin with Synods, and hope to make quicker despatch than before by God's help. We have sundry means of haste in agitation with our private friends " (Letters, 228). ^ See infra, p. 249, under Discipline. ^ L. J., -vi., 31. " Ibid., 32. 5 0. J., iii., 675 ; Whittaker's Diary, 327. ^ The message of the Lords is strangely enough not mentioned in either GUlespie or Lightfoot's Journals. ' Lightfoot, 321 ; GUlespie, 96. 180 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap, n. _ In the interim, the two Houses acting jointly, 1614. and under the excitation of a letter sent from Newcastle from the committee of the Estates of Scotland, which was forwarded to them on the 1st of November from the Committee for both King doms, again sent on the 4th of November to the Assembly to request a return of how far they had proceeded concerning the government of the Church, " and speedily to send in what they have already prepared touching that matter, and to acquaint them that the Houses have received desires in letters from the committee of the Estates of Scotland to press an expedition in settling the affairs of the Church ".' The repeated behests and appeals produced their effect in quickening the divines. On the Sth of November Dr. Burgess read to the Assembly a draft of what they had finished in the preceding April concerning presbytery, with a view to its being sent to the Houses. The scribes compared the transcript with the original records, and the title "concerning some part of Church government " was adopted after some controversy. - The part reported by Burgess pertained only to the presbytery, and was composed of such pro positions as the Assembly had finished and had left lying by for report from the 10th to 18th of April, 1644.^ After much tugging with the Inde- 1 C. J., iii., 684-85 ; L. J., vu., 43, 45, 4th November, 1644. BaiUie's exultation at the change of tone in the ParUament is discernible between the Unes of his letter of Ist November to Spang (u., 240). 2 Lightfoot, 324. ' Ibid., 243, 250 ; see supra, p. 172, and compare with the text of the humble advice itself (L. J., vii, 61). CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 181 pendents, who entered their dissent to the third Chap.ii. proposition,' The humble advice of the Assembly iSI of Divines . . . concerning some part of Church .r.- -r, -^ "^ First Report government was presented to the Commons on the o^ Presbytery same day by Dr. Burgess.^ It was ordered to be Ass'Lbiy to taken into consideration on the following Tuesday, mrnt^sth" On the llth of November it was read in the Lords,"' ^°^-'^^^^- and on the following day the House of Commons took the propositions into consideration. At the commencement of the debate Mr. Holland pre sented to the House the petition of the Dissenting Brethren against the propositions concerning pres bytery, desiring liberty to bring in their reasons of dissent.* As the outcome of their debate, the House requested the Assembly to state " what those officers are that are intended in the second proposition of their advice," and to present the remainder of its votes concerning presbytery. In reply to the latter request the Assembly appointed a committee to draw up its votes on presbytery, and two days later presented to the Houses, on the ISth of November, its " humble declaration" concerning those officers as above.* On the 17th and 18th of November the House proceeded in the consideration of one of the propositions from the Assembly, viz., that the Scriptures hold forth a presbytery in the Church.' ^ Lightfoot, 324. 2 Friday, 8th November, 1644, C. J., ui., 691 ; L. J., vu., 51 Whittaker's Diary, 343. ' L. J., vu., 61. 4 C. J., ui., 693 ; Lightfoot, 327. ^ Lightfoot, 330 ; C. J., ui., 697 ; L. J., vii., 64, where the humble declaration is entered in fuU. « Whittaker's Diary, 348. 182 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Second and full Eeport on Church governmentfrom the Assemblyto the Parliament, llth Dec, 1644. The debate was deferred, and until January the House was unable to return to the subject owing to the intrusion of the work of completing the Directory for Worship. {See infra, pp. 349-52). On the 2nd of December the Lord Chancellor of Scotland made a speech in the Assembly touching the approaching meeting of the General Assembly of Scotland in the coming January, desiring with a view to it that the English Assembly would complete its work on Church government. The Assembly thereupon ordered the draft of its votes on Church government to be brought in on the following Thursday.' On the day prescribed the report of this draft of Church government was made,^ and after being debated on Sth and 6th December, was voted on the 9th to be sent into the two Houses, some slight discussion being added on the following day on one of the sub-titles of the draft. ^ Accordingly, on the llth December, the Assembly presented their draft to both the Houses as The humble advice of the Assembly of Divines now sitting at Westminster concerning Church government. In delivering it Dr. Burgess explained to the House of Lords that the Assembly having formerly brought up some papers [the first humble advice of Sth November], being three pro positions concerning Church government, "they have now brought it up again in the same place [in the completed draft], where it is to be to co-here with other particulars ".* 1 Lightfoot, 338 ; MitcheU, 12-13. " Thursday, 5th December, Lightfoot, 339 ; MitcheU, 15. ' MitcheU, 17 ; Lightfoot, 339-41 ; GUlespie, 97. * L. J., vn., 94 ; C. J., iu., 721. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 183 The House of Commons ordered this second chap. ii. "advice" to be taken into consideration peremp-^ liiT" torily on the succeeding Thursday, 19th December. Meanwhile, with a view to a full and deliberate debate, it requested the divines to send up all the remaining points of Church government. In reply to the request, Marshall informed the House,' on the 23rd of December, that all the material parts of Church government had been already reported to Parliament, and that there remained only the point of excommunication. In BaiUie's sanguine expectation the end of this troublesome question was at last in sight. We have (he says, writing on the 26th December), putt together aU our votes of government, and sends them up to-morrow. The Independents have entered their dissents only to three propositions. " That in Ephesus was a classical Pres byterie ; that there is a subordination of Assemblies ; that a single congregation has not aU and sole power of ordination." Their reasons against these three propositions we expect to morrow. Against the end of next week we hope our com mittees will have answers ready to aU thiey wiU say ; and after aU is sent up to the House by God's help we expect shortlie ane erection of Presbyteries and Synods here, for there appears a good forwardness to expede all things of that kind in both Houses since the taking of Newcastle. Later, in the same letter, speaking of the literary labours of his fellow Scotch Commissioners, he again expresses this hopeful view ; — We have transmitted our answers to the Independents' reasons against our Presbyterie. They are well taken and now upon the press. We hope in the beginning of the next week to send up also our answer to their reasons against our Synods. 1 C. J., il, 730, 733, 20th and 23rd December, 1644. 184 THE assembly's constructive work. We make no question but shortUe thereafter the Houses wUl ' pass an ordinance for the Government ; what is behind, a good part wiU be ended and foUow us to our General AssembUe ; and aU the rest, by aU appearance, wiU be closed a month or two thereafter, for all men now inclines to a conclusion. God in his good Providence has made many things, especiaUie the counsels of our enemies and retarders, to co-operate for His ends.i The question In vicw of this meeting of the General Assembly dlb^tedYn^"^^ and Parliament, the Scotch Commissioners had, on Fa'nuar"!'''' the Ist of January, 1644-45, dehvered in a paper ^^*^- to the Treaty Committee concerning giving an account to the Scottish Parliament and General Assembly of the proceedings of the English Parlia ment in the matter of Church government.^ And with the fear of such an ordeal before their eyes, the Commons decided to take in hand immediately the question of Church government. On the 6th the House resolved that a presbytery consisting of ministers of the word and other public officers may be in a church. On the question being put whether the word congregational should be added to that resolution, it was resolved in the negative.^ 1 Letters, u., 247-49. = MitcheU, 24 ; C. J., iv., 7 ; L. J., vu., 122. 3 C. J., iv., 11, 6th January, 1644-45. " It was resolved that of the three propositions concerning Church government sent from the Assembly we should join the first two together and make one of them, which was that a presbytery consisting of preaching ministers and other officers might be in a church ; and that the two Scotch Com missioners who were this day to go to Scotland should inform the General Assembly there that we had passed that vote in the House ; and for the third, that it was now in agitation " (Whittaker's Diary, 368). The entry in the Journals of the House of Commons is as foUows : " The House of Commons, having received from the Hon. and Rev. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 185 Still animated by this interested deference to Chap.ii. the Scotch, the House resolved on the 14th of 1644-5. January, " that many particular congregations may be under one Presbyterial government," ' and that this vote should be part of the ordinance [for Church government].' On the following day a series of votes was adopted declaring pastors, -doctors and teachers, elders and deacons to be officers of the Church,^ and similarly eight days Ifiter (23rd January, 1644-45), to the following effect : — That there shall be fixed congregations. That the ordinary way of dividing Christians into congrega tions is by the respective bounds of their dwellings. That the minister and other Church officers in each th^ Commissioners of the Church of Scotland a paper dated 1st Jai^uary, 1644-45, wherein they desire to know what is done and what is ^ doing concerning uniformity of reUgion, returneth this answer : — 1 " That Episcopacy and the jurisdiction of it is by biU (which hath pas\ed both Houses, and been presented to the king for his royal asseit) taken away and abolished. The Book of Common Prayer and festl-al days, commonly caUed Holydays are by ordinance of Parlia- meni taken away, and a Directory for Public Worship established by the 4me ordinance. \Some propositions concerning Church government being pre- .sente( to the House of Commons from the Assembly of Divines this one ol great concernment that the Scripture doth hold forth ' that many Particular congregations may be under one Presbyterial govern- ment,'is appointed to be debated in the said House upon the 6th day -of thistnstant, January 1644-45 ". "ind the House of Commons hath by order sent to the Assembly •of Di-vies recommending to their oare the fitting of psalms to be sung inthe congregations." ^"We passed proposition 3, about which there had been some dipute among the divines, -with this alteration, leaving out the words 'hat the Scripture doth hold forth,' and resolving it thus ^that m|ny several congregations may be under one Presbyterial •Govermint ' " (Whittaker's Diary, 371). ^C. Liv., 20. Ubid.,n. 186 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. particular congregation shall join in the government of the lQii.5, Church in such manner as shall be established by Parliament. That these officers shall meet together at convenient and set times for the weU ordering of the affairs of that congregation. That many particular congregations shaU be under one Presbyterial government. That the Church shall be governed by congregational, classical and synodical Assemblies in such manner as shaU ba established by Parliament. That synodical Assemblies shaU consist both of provincial and national Assembhes. i The com- On Mouday, the 27th of January, 1644-45, Mr. of^the Parha- B-ousc Carried up to the Lords the four substantial Pr^bytery portious of thesc votcs OU ChuTch government, viz., prepared for concerning the Treaty of o 1. The officers in each particular congregation. 2. The government by particular congregations under ene presbytery. 3. By congregational, classical and synodical Assembhes. 4. Synodical Assemblies to be provincial and national. The Lords agreed to the votes on the same day,^ and they were completed on the foUoTring day by the adoption by the Lords of the proposition concerning the geographical delimitation of con gregations.^ The speed with which such progress had been accomplished can only be explained by the necessity of presenting the votes concerning Church government to the king as a whole tefore the expiry of the twenty days limited for the 7reaty of Uxbridge. It was with a view to the same object that the House desired the Assembly to hasten the finishing of Church government, and to 'C. J., iv., 28. 2L. J., vu., 158. '' C. J., iv., 33 ; L. J., vii, 159. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 187 send in to the Parliament the remaining portions,' chap. ii. the commissioners at Uxbridge having written ieSX" urgently for them. Under the influence of the same stimulus too the Assembly passed and presented, on the 4th of February, its advice concerning excommunication and its advice for a directory concerning admonition, excommunication, and absolution (see infra, p. 257).^ It is not part of our purpose to tell the tale of the abortive negotiations at Uxbridge on the sub ject of religion. The alterations which, in view of these negotiations, the Parliament made in its bill for the abolition of Episcopacy, and in these propositions concerning Church government,^ were merely such as were necessitated by the Treaty of Edinburgh, 19th November, 1643, between the Parliament and the Scotch for uniformity of Church government, a treaty which rendered the inclusion of Ireland in the new Church system a aecessity. The Treaty of Uxbridge fell to the ground, and svith it the bill which the Parliament had prepared for the abolition of Episcopacy and the establish- ot^ent of presbytery and the Directory. Thence forth the Parliament were left to establish its CJhurch system by its own act and authority. From the middle of May, 1645, through most of June, and into July, the Commons debated in committee the business of the Church, i.e., as to the Directory and the putting into effect the votes on government already agreed to by the erection 1 3rd February, 0. J., iv., 40; L. J., vii., 169. 2 C. J., iv., 41. ^ Ibid., 43, 44 ; L. J., vu., 179. 188 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. of Prcsby tcries. ' For this purpose the committee 1645. of the House had appointed a sub-committee of The work of its OWU member s to draft proposals in conjunction committee ^ith the diviues and the Scotch. The sub- of cJ)mm°on^s^ committcc appealed to the city ministers for their in preparing advicc OU the proposcd Prcsbyterial organisation for the ereo- ¦'¦¦'¦ •' ° . tion of of London, and to the Assembly of Divines for res y eries. ^^^^^ schcme applicable to the rest of the country. The city divines appear to have their draft of the classes of the London Province ready cut and dried. But the problem of arranging such classes for the rest of the country was more difficult. On the 26th of May a message was sent from the sub-committee to the Assembly requesting its advice concerning the constituting of congregational, classical, provincial and national elderships, with the object of drafting a scheme for dividing up the country into these various systems.^ An influential committee of the divines of the Assembly was appointed to prepare this matter with the assis tance of the Scotch Commissioners. It reported on the 29th of May,'' proposing to establish pro vincial Synods coterminous with the various counties, together with sundry rules concerning the nomination of officers. On the following day, 30th May, the first portion of this advice was taken up to the sub-committee of the House.* After perusal of the paper the sub-committee desired some addition concerning possible differ ences between the minister and people in the elections.'* The Assembly accordingly reconsi- 1 C. J., iv., 180. 2 MitcheU, 97. = Ibid., 98. " Ibid., 99. = Ibid., 2nd June. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 189 dered their advice, and again presented it to the Chap. ii. sub-committee of the House on the 4th of June, i645. whereupon that body requested the Assembly to draw a catalogue of sins which should justify exclusion from the Sacrament. After being de bated through four sessions, the requested cata logue was, on the 13th of June, ordered to be carried up to the sub-committee.' It is internally evident that BaiUie's letter (ii., 271-72) relates to this particular period, and that it should be dated 3rd June, not 4th May. The letter as usual throws much light on the interior workings of the sub-committee of the Commons. We have this fourteen dayes been upon our advyce to a sub committee of the House of Commons anent the execution of our votes of government : for it is the work of that sub-com mittee to draw two ordinances, the one for the practice of the directorie. . . . The other ordinance is for the erection of Ecclesiastick Courts over the whole kingdom. Por their help herein they caUed the ministers of London to advyse them for their city, and they sent to the Assemblie for their advyce anent the rest of the kingdome. The city ministers have sent them their unanimous advyce (for of 121 city ministers there are not three Independents) for planting just after our Scotch fashion an eldership in every congregation, of fourteen Presby teries within the laws of communication, every one consisting of ministers betwixt twelve and sixteen and as many ruling elders ; and of a provinciali synod for London and ten miles round about. The Assemblie have presented their advyce this day. We went throw this forenoon session ^ unanimouslie what concerns Provinciali and Natlonall Assemblies, as yester day what concerned Presbyteries and the days before Congrega- 1 MitcheU, 103. 24th May was Sunday. There was no session of the Assembly as usual from Friday, 2nd, tUl Monday, 5th May. The date of this letter ought without question to be corrected as above. 1645. 190 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. tionaU Elderships. They have concluded ProvinciaU Synods twice a year. Presbyteries once a moneth and NationaU Assemblies once a year, and after, every one of these as it shaU be needfull. Herein the [geographical] greatness of this nation forces them to differ from us with our good lyking. Their Pro-yinciall Assemblies cannot consist of all the ministers, but of so many delegat from every Presbyterie ; for in sundrie of their provinces wiU be above 600 Churches which would make at least 1200 members in a ProvinciaU Synod: also their NationaU Assemblie is constitute of three ministers and two ruleing elders deputed not from every Presbyterie, but as it is in France and Holland from every ProvinciaU Synod, whereof there will be at least sixty. We shortlie expect an ordinance according to our advice and the execution presentUe upon the back of it.i In another undated letter (which must be at least after 2nd June),^ Baillie ^ again refers to the proceedings of the Assembly in reference to the Parliamentary sub-committee. The condition of our Church affaires here is good. We are at a point with the government; and beginning to take the Confession of Paith and Catechise to our consideration. These eight dayes we have been on our advyce for the manner of choysing of elders in every congregation and di-vision of the country into Presbyteries and ProvinciaU Synods. We hope now shortUe by God's help to see a Synod and fourteen The com- Presbyteries in London and a session in every Church, just of Presby- after the [Scotch] fashion. terian Church PIseZr On the 7th of July the debates of the sub-com- Ass'^r^w mittee of the Commons were interrupted by the to the Parlia- presentation of the completed draft of Church July, 1645, government from the Assembly. It is necessary title TU for a moment to explain the genesis of this draft, humble ad/vice c"f '^ ' BaUUe, u., 271-72, 4th May, 1645. government. ^ See MitcheU, 99. ^ BaiUie, u., 275. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 191 which was something more than a duplication of chap.ii. the Assembly's advice to the sub-committee of the 1645. House of Commons. On the 1st of April, 1645,' propositions for the supplement or completion of the votes concerning Church government were reported to the Assembly from two sources : (1) the committee for the sup plement of government; (2) the Assembly's com mittee. The Assembly proceeded to the debate of the four propositions emanating from the former, and by resolution passed the first of these, viz., that the congregation should be heard on its ex ceptions to a minister ordained to them. From the 10th to the 17th of April propositions two and three were debated.^ It was out of the latter proposition concerning a member'§ renouncing his membership that the debate upon the gathering of churches arose, 18th April.'* For a time this put on one side the consideration of the perfection or completion of the Assembly's work on Church government, on which Dr. Staunton had made a further report on the same day, 18th April.* From the 23rd of April the Assembly, however, returned to the consideration of Dr. Staunton's propositions for the completion of the government. The fourth proposition, concerning the power of the civil magistrates in the suppressing of heresies, was debated from the 1st to the 6th of May,^ and on the latter day was altered to the following form : " The civil magistrate hath authority, and it is his duty to provide that the Word of God be 1 MitcheU, 75. ^ Ibid., 79. ' Ibid., 82. ^ Ibid., 83. ' Ibid., 87. 192 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap, n. truly and duly preached, the sacraments rightly 1645. administered, Church government and discipline established and duly executed according to the Word ofGod".' On the same day the Assembly appointed a committee to methodise all its votes concerning Church government which had not yet been sent up to Parliament, and to consider what was wanting to the said votes,^ thus anticipating by only a day an order of the Commons requesting them to hasten the despatch of the matters which concern the government of the Church.^ On the 7th of May this committee reported various items con cerning moderators of the assemblies, the election, etc., of ruling elders, and the summons issuing from these latter.* The discussions of these items occupied the Assembly through four sessions to the 15th of May. On the latter day^ it was pro posed to send up all the votes now drawn into the form of a "Draft of Government". Before this could be agreed to, however, differences arose as to the classical presbytery, which prolonged the debate to the 26th of May, when a message from the sub-committee of the Commons then sitting upon the question of the practical erection of Church government intervened (see supra, p. 188), and kept the Assembly, as already described, engaged till the second week in June. Writing on the 17th of June, Baillie refers to this delay a little petulently. ^MitcheU, 89. ^Ibid.,m. s C. J., iv., 133, 7th May, 1645. •• MitcheU, 89. " ^ Ibid., 95. 1645. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 193 Since my last, 3rd June, there is by God's mercy a great Chap. II. change of affaires here. Our progress in the Assemblie is but ^ small. We feU in a labyrinth of a catalogue of sins for which people must be keept from the Sacrament and ministers be deposed. When we had spent many dayes upon this we found it was necessare to have ane [preface] and a general cause [? clause], whereby the Presbyteries and Synods behooved to be intrusted with many more cases than possibly could be enumerat, that yet it wiU be some dayes before the body of our Government goe up to the Houses. ^ On the 16th of June, however, the draft of government was at last complete, with the ex ception of the preface, and was read and adopted by the Assembly,^ and ordered to be sent up. Certain changes in the draft were reported and considered on the 20th of June,^ and ordered to- be carried up on a paper by themselves. Still later, on the 26th of June, the Assembly proceeded! in the debate of the report of the committee for methodising of Church government.* Little more progresse is made (writes Baillie, on the 1st of July), in Church affaires. The Assemblie has been forced to adjourne on fyve diverse occasions of fastings and thanks giving lately every one whereof took from us almost two dayes. When we did sitt we had no reaU controversie ; only petty debates for alteration of words and transposition of propositions in the whole Body of Government took up our time. Our luck will be very eviU if once this week by God's help we doe not at last put out of our hands to the Houses all that we have to say of Government, the whole platforme there[of] really according to the practice of our Church. ^ On the 30th of June the Assembly was engaged 1 Letters, n., 286. ^ MitcheU, 104. 3J6iU, 106. * Ibid., 101. 5 Letters, u., 291, 1st July, 1645. VOL. I. 13 194 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. in the consideration of the names of the ministers 1645. to be elected for the proposed classical system in London.' On the 3rd of July the draft was at length completed, and at last, after a further alteration on the following day, Friday, 4th July, was again voted to be sent up to the House on the following day.^ On Monday, 7th July, accordingly Mr. Marshall presented to the two Houses as The humble advice of the Assembly of Divines concerning Church government, together with the [Scriptural] proofs of several additional votes concerning Church government.^ This paper is to be looked upon as incorporating the previous humble advice of De cember, 1644. The debates Being UOW iu possessiou both of the completed mo*Mon°Sie draft of government from the Assembly, and of thTpr^shy- ^^® proceedings of its own sub-committee, the teriansystem. Commous at last, OU the llth July in Grand Com mittee, " proceeded in the debate of the directions of the congregational, classical, provincial and national Assemblies, according to a report made to us from a sub-committee ; London, Westminster, and the parishes adjacent being divided into twelve classes, which are to form one province ".* Twelve days later Whittaker reported from the Grand Committee of the House the matter of Church government, and upon his report three resolutions were passed touching the manner of and qualification for election of elders for a ^Letters, ii., 108". ^ Ibid., 109. 'C. J., iv., 199; L. J., vii, 483. ¦* Whittaker's Diary, 439. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 195 parochial and congregational eldership.' On the chap. n. same day the Lords sat down to the consideration i645. of the Assembly's completed draft [' the humble advice'^ concerning Church government, read it a second time, and referred it to a committee.^ Proceeding with Whittaker's report, the Com mons, on the 2Sth of July, 1645, completed their votes concerning the election of elders, and sent them up as an ordinance for the election of elders for the concurrence of the Lords.^ They then appointed a committee to consider of persons fit to be a committee " to give directions for the choice of elders of congregational and classical presbyteries in the province of London, and to present the names to the House ". The said Commons Committee was further to prepare a letter to be sent from the Speaker to the respective Parliamentary Committees of the counties, request ing them to consider of and nominate certain persons, ministers and others, to be appointed by authority of Pariiament, " who shall consider how the several counties respectively may be most con veniently divided into distinct classical presbyteries, and what ministers and others {i.e., lay elders] are fit to be of each classis, and that they accordingly make such division and nomination of persons for each classical presbytery, which divisions and per sons so named for every division shall be certified to the Parliament ".* 1 C. J., iv., 215, 23rd July, 1645 ; Whittaker's Diary, 443. For Whittaker's position on this committee and for a characterisation of his MS. 6ia,Ty see infra, pp. 257-8. 2 L. J. , vu. ,504. 3 C. J., iv. , 218. ' Ibid. 196 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. IL The Housc further empowered its committee 1645. to call in the assistance of divines of the Assembly or others for their assistance in the matter. The ordinance concerning the electing of elders was read in the Lords on the 26th of July, 1645, and committed to a committee of the whole House.' On the 29th they made certain amendments. Six of the seven amendments the Commons promptly accepted, but the seventh, which exempted from the ordinance chapels belonging to Peers of the realm, they as promptly rejected.^ Eventually, on the 19th of August, 1645, a compromise was agreed to on the point, and the ordinance accord ingly passed both Houses on that day as Dii-ections for the Election of Elders.^ The first After prescribing four rules concerning the ta^ryoSi-"^ manner of the election and the qualification of ™tion of*^^ elders, the ordinance provides for the hearing and terian^govern- ^^^^^ '"'^ ^^^ cxceptions brought agaiust any elder ment: the from the cougregatious by a body to be nominated directions for . -i ¦ the election by Parliament, with power to approve or remove of elders, 19th , . ,. , -,, , .11 August, 1645. him accordingly. It then provides that all parishes and places whatsoever, except Peers' chapels, shall be brought under the government of congregational, classical, provincial and national assemblies, and proceeds to depict the limits of the various classes which together should form the province of London. The Chapel of the Rolls, the two Serjeants' Inns, and the four Inns of Court, were constituted each a con gregational presbytery and united into one classical presbytery. The parish churches of London, 137 ' L. J., vu., 510. 2 JJ^^ g]^g . Q j^ j^^ 224. 'L. J., vu., 543-44; 0. J., iv., 242. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 197 in number, were arranged in twelve other classes, Chap. il and the whole thirteen classes constituted the i645. province of London. For the country at large the instructions already quoted for the choice of county committees to con sider of the mapping out of the classical districts were repeated verbatim. For the universities the chancellors, vice-chancellors and heads were to consider and certify to Parliament concerning their arranging under classical presbyteries, " and the said several classes respectively being approved by Parliament, within their several precincts shall have power to constitute congregationall elderships where a competent number of persons so qualified for elders as aforesaid shall be found ; and where no persons shall be found fit to be elders as afore said, then that congregation shall be immediately under the classical presbytery until the congrega tion shall be enabled with members fit to be elders". The congregational eldership was to meet once a week, the classis once a month, the provincial assembly twice a year (the first meeting to be determined by the aforesaid persons or committees appointed for the settling the various classical, etc., bounds). The national assembly to meet and sit as summoned by Parliament, and not otherwise, being constituted of two ministers and four elders from each provincial assembly (the provincial assemblies being similarly constituted of at least two ministers and four elders from each classis). On the 17th of September, Mr. Whittaker reported from the Grand Committee on Religion, which had that day been engaged in the consider- 198 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. IL atiou of the uamcs of the tryers of elders ' a letter 1645. to be sent to the standing Parliamentary Com- Measures mittces iu the respective counties concerning the PariiWnt' establishment of presbyteries in the counties. It t^n^f th^°" ^^^ adopted, and ordered to be signed by the ordinance. Speaker, and sent into the counties, together with Sept.-Oct., . ' . „ , 1. 1 1645. printed copies ot the ordinance and votes concern ing the election of ruling elders.^ Six days later the Commons, vigorously following up their own ordinance, resolved on report from the Grand Committee for Religion, that a choice of elders within the province of London should be forthwith made.'' In order to do this the Grand Committee proceeded energetically to consider the names of the tryers or judges of the elders to be elected in the province of London. The names were reported on the 26th of September, were approved by the Commons on the same day, and by the Lords on the 29th.* Finally on the 8th of October, 1645, the Commons likewise adopted from the Grand Com mittee for Religion the names of the tryers of elders for the two classes of the two Serjeants' Inns.'* In these' ordinances the Parliament had at last outlined the new Church system for the nation. But the essence of Presbyterianism is discipline, the exercise of Church censure, and until the breath of that spirit had been breathed into the structure of the material fabric thus erected by the Long 1 Whittaker's Diary, 464. 2 C. J., iv., 276. ' Ibid., 282, 23rd September, 1645. *Ibid., 288, L. J., vU., 607. ^C. J., iv., 300 ; L. J., vii., 637. church government. 199 Parliament, it was impossible to put the scheme Chap. ii. into execution. The professional clerical spirit, 1645-6. now thoroughly roused and self-conscious, would The erection not contemplate the execution of the scheme until Z^ t^^- ^^^^' the point of jurisdiction had been assured to them, fy^*«,°? ^^- " layed by the and although in the end that clerical spirit was action of the doomed to a bitter disappointment, the play of such motive was strong enough to postpone the actual erection of the congregational and classical elderships from this date, October 1645, until July, 1646. The question of jurisdiction will be treated in the succeeding paragraph. Here it is only necessary to summarise the events of the intervening months up to the latter date, in so far as they bore upon the question of the erection of the Presbyterian system. When the Scotch Com missioners perceived what a difficulty would be made over the question of jurisdiction, they advised the divines to set up their presbyteries and synods for the present, with as much jurisdictional power as they could get, and after the system had been got to work, then to strive to obtain from the Parliament their full due power.' The Assembly, however, was of another mind, and in the end framed its peremptory petition, 7th August, 1645.'^ It is strange that even in the midst of this crucial contest with the House, the Scotch Com missioners should have been expecting a speedy issue and an immediate erection of the presbyteries. We expect this week (writes Bailhe in August, 1645), that aU over London elders and deacons shall be chosen for every congregation, and then in a week or two that the thirteen 1 BaUUe's Letters, u., 307. ^ See infra, p. 268. 200 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. Presbyteries and the Provinscall Synod within the lynes [of ^ I645! communication] shall be sett up, and so without delay in the other shyres, for orders are drawne aUready for this effect. ^ Two months later he is still, though less, hopeful : — Great wrestling have we for the erecting of our Presbyterie. It must be a Divine thing to which so much resistance is made by men of all sorts, ^ yet by God's help we will very speedelie see it sett up in spight of the de-yill. . . . Our greatest trouble for the time is from the Erastians in the House of Commons. They are at last content to erect Presbyteries and Synods ixx all the land and have given out their orders for that end ; yet they give to the ecclesiastick courts so little power that the Assemblie finding their petitions not granted are in great doubt whether to sett up anything till by some powerfull petition of many thousand hands they obtaine some more of their just desyres. In a similar deluded spirit the House, on the 27th of October, 1645, ordered the Lord Mayor to inform the House what he had done on the order formerly sent to him from the Parliament concerning the election of elders.^ The dilatory As it provcd, the Tcfusal by the Parliament of dergy sup- "^ ^n Unlimited jurisdiction to the eldership w^as for ported by the ^lonths an effectual and the only impediment in the way of the erection of presbyteries and synods. The ministers refused to accept of presbyteries with such limited jurisdiction,* and the lay spirit in London supported them. The action of the city, on the 20th of November, 1645, in supporting the petition of the London ministers complaining of 1 Letters, u., 307-8. ^ BaUUe, u., 317-18, 14th October, 1645. =¦ C. J., iv., 324. "BaUUe, ii, 326, 25th November, 1645. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 201 defects in the directions of the Parliament of 19th chap. ii. August, and in the ordinance of 20th October, will iiS^ be detailed in its own connection {infra, under Juris diction). Certain portions of this petition, how ever, concerned the mere machinery or framework of presbytery. The powers given to the tryers of the elections of elders were not explicit. The Chapel of the Rolls, the two Serjeants' Inns, and the four Inns of Court, although made a classis, were not included in the London province. There was as yet no ordinance plainly authorising and commanding the election of elders.' From 28th November the Grand Committee of Some defects T -r-r ¦ • -1 • r 1 . . in the ordi- tne House sat in consideration ot the petition, nance of i9th turning its attention firstly to the powers of the remedied. ' tryers.- On the Sth of December it resolved that the Chapel of the Rolls, the Serjeants' Inns, and Inns of Court should be divided into two classes and form a province of themselves.^ The Grand Committee was still engaged in the consideration -of the remaining portions of this petition concern ing scandal when, on the 16th of January, 1645-46, the Common Council of London presented its second petition to Parliament,* pressing for the settling of Church government and decrying a toleration. In this petition the Common Council inform the Houses that in the city elections of the preceding December, 1645, most of the city wards had petitioned their respective aldermen to move the Council for an address to Parliament for the 1 L. J., vu., 714, 20th November, 1645. 'Whittaker, 490. Ubid., 492 ; C. J., iv., 365. " 0. J., iv., 408. 202 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. IL speedy settling of Church government within the 1645-6. city. In proof of this the Council appended to their petition the representation of the ward of Farringdon Within at their wardmote. To his account of this petition Baillie adds some significant words : — ' There are but few of the city ministers about the first and secret wheeles of the husinesse. I make it a part of my task to give them [the city ministers] weekly my best advyce and incouragement, and, blessed be God, with such successe hitherto that it is worth my stay here. The usual intermediary between Baillie and the city ministers seems to have been Francis Roberts, minister of St. Augustine's, and Baillie's Letters con tain frequent indications of his direct intervention and instigation.^ On the 12th of February, 1645-46, the Assembly adopted from its own committee a petition to the House pressing for the establishment of the classical presbyteries, with a view to carrying out the ordi nance for ordination, " and that where there cannot at present be any presbyteries settled, the next presbytery adjoining may have power to ordain for those that want ".^ The petition was presented to the Lords on the following day, and to the Commons on the 16th of February.* It was as a result of this representation that the Commons, on the 18th of February, passed its three resolutions authorising and commanding a choice of elders to ''Letters, ii, 336-37. '^ See a particular instance in Letters, u., 333, and infra, p. 292, under Presbyterian Discipline. ^ MitcheU, 186. ¦¦ L. J., viu., 166 ; C. J., iv., 443. CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 203 be made forthwith through England and Wales,' Chap. n. votes which were agreed to punctually by the 1645-6. Lords three days later. ^ It is evident from Whit- The clergy taker's report of this transaction that these three g^^it^^^'^; resolutions were not at first intended to stand ^^j:^'^'^™''^ ordinance. alone. ^ They formed part of the draft ordinance which was reported on the 18th of February from the sub-committee to the Grand Committee for Religion, the remainder of the ordinance dealing with the provision for the election of Commissioners of Appeals {q.v., infra, pp. 285-288). The deter mination to separate the resolutions from the remainder of the ordinance, and to issue them separately, can only be explained by a supposition that the House believed that the clergy waited only for a direct and categorical ordinance, enabling and commanding them to set up the Presbyterian system, and that immediately on its passing they would proceed to act upon it. The clerical spirit, however, was as yet not sufficiently broken to accept such a conclusion without a struggle. Nothing was done upon the resolutions pending the passing of the ordinance for scandal, and when that ordinance, with its scheme of clerical com missioners, finally passed, on the 14th March, the ministers folded their arms. It mars us to set up anything (says BaiUie).'* Oft we have been on the brink to sett up our Government, but Sattan to this day has hindered us. The ministers and elders are not 'C. J.,iv.,446. 2 20th February, 1645-46, L. J., viii. 178. Husband's Ordinances, (foUo) p. 809. ^ Whittaker, 510. ^ Letters, ii., 357, 6th March, 1645-46 ; u., 360, 17th March. Chap. II. 1645-6. The second Parliamentary ordi nance for the erection of the Presby terian government, 14th March, 1646. 204 THE assembly's constructive work. willing to sett up and begin any action till they may have a law for some power to purpose ; aU former ordinances have been so intolerablie defective that they could not be accepted. The ordinance of 14th March, 1645-46 (the ordinance for Scandal, see infra, p. 288), repro duces textually in its first three clauses the above- quoted three resolutions of 20th February. 1. Be it ordained that there be forthwith a choice made of elders throughout the kingdom of England and dominion of Wales in their respective parish churches and chapels. 2. Notice of the election to be given by the ministers in the public assembly the next Lord's day but one before. 3. Electors to be members of the congregation who have taken the National Covenant, being over age, and not servants. It then proceeds to provide for the trial by the Tryers of exceptions against the elders nominated, for the exemption of the Houses of the King or of Peers of the Realm from the ordinance, for the inclusion of the Savoy in the eleventh classis of London, and for the establishment of the Inns of Courts, Serjeants' Inns, and Chapel of the Rolls as two classes separate from the London province. It finally provides that the meetings of the classes should be held monthly or oftener if need be, the classes being constituted of two elders or more, not exceeding four, and one minister from each congregational eldership. The remainder of the ordinance was concerned with the question of jurisdiction over scandals (see infra, pp. 288 seq.y For nearly three months the ordinance remained unacted upon, until the House had made some ^C. J., iv., 463. CHURCH government. 205 slight concession on the question of jurisdiction, chap.il and had consented, by way of accommodation, to i646. replace the courts of Commissioners of Appeals in The London each county by a single Parliamentary Committee ll^'l^^ ^^Jfj^^. of Appeal. The final ordinance for this accommo- ?^?*'?, ,. ^ ^ delimitation dation passed the Upper House on the Sth of of tbe Pres- Tl- • 1 i-i.-iT byterian sys- June. With this concession the clerical spirit had tem, June, perforce to rest content : and grudgingly and with an ill-grace it at last gave way and consented to co-operate in setting up the Presbyterian system thus elaborated and delimited by the Parliament. Four days later the Commons issued an order requiring the ministers in the parishes of the Province of London, and the Classes of the Inns of Court, forthwith to put in execution the ordinance concerning Church government. The members of the House for London and Westminster were hke wise thereby ordered to send copies of the ordinance to the several parishes, " and to take care that the government may be speedily settled and put in execution ".' Eor the matter of our Church (writes BaiUie), with much adoe we gott the ProvinciaU Commissioners laid aside and soe resolve to act. The ministers of the Assemblie did meet with those of London and agreed upon a declaration for acting ; so the next week they purpose to set up. I pray God be with them.2 At last the Presbyterian machinery, which had been so long in forging, was to be set in work. 1 C. J., iv., 569, 9th June, 1646. 2 Letters, ix., 377, 26th June, 1646. 206 THE assembly's constructive work. - ^"^r"' ' § IIL — Presbyterian Discipline or the Spiritual Jurisdiction of the Eldership. The origin of In the Reformed Churches, those, i.e. , of Switzer- consistor°iai land, Fraucc, the Netherlands and Scotland, the fSeformed codified systcm of internal spiritual government Churches, came to be known by the name Discipline. At first glance it niight seem that this discipline occupied for those churches the place which the Canon Law occupied for the Church of Rome, and the inference might be drawn therefrom that the one institution derived from the other. Neither opinion is more than half true, if so much. The word itself does indeed occur in the Decretum of Gratian, and the phrase " ecclesiastical discipline " was evidently in use among the Canon jurists,' but only as applied to the actual administrative rule of the bishop over his diocese. He is to rule his clergy by love rather than by blows. But of the specialised consistorial discipline of the Reformed Church the Canon Law of the Church of Rome knew nothing. In the first place the Canon Law was a more or less complete body of jurisdiction, dealing with persons and things, grandly organised, standing side by side with and in a sense competing with the Civil Law of the various European nationalities. In the second place, of any special regulation for the safeguard ing of the Sacrament the Roman Church was careless. They who partook of the Sacrament Discipline in the RomanCanon Law 'Decretum, part i, Distinctio xiv., chap. 9. For the phrase ecclesiastica disciplina, see Lyndwood, p. 352, referring to the Sext. 1, tit. vi., and Clementines I, tit. iii, cap. iv. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 207 unworthily, partook of it to their own damnation. Ghap. il No grace came to them thereby. Such unworthy partaking did not defile the Sacrament, it only increased the perdition of the partaker. And there the Roman Church left the matter.' Theor etically, communion was as much the duty of all in the Christian Commonwealth, good and bad alike, as the partaking of the Passover had been the duty of the whole Jewish community, good and bad alike. The sentence of excommunication in the Canon Law stood simply for any equivalent form of out lawry in the Common Law, and its application was as wide and as diverse. Whoever broke the peace of the king or kingdom, or delayed justice, who ever as an advocate offered malicious exceptions in matrimonial causes, was to be excommunicated, and so on ad infinitum. On the other hand, the consistorial discipline of the Reformed Churches had none of this civil and multifarious character. It was special, purely spiritual in its import, and restricted as to its intention to the safeguarding of the Sacrament and to a censorship of morals. How did these Churches come by this idea of Discipline . . Tl J. il in the Ee- disciplme? The answer springs readily to tfie formed lips — from the genius of Calvin. But there is both truth and untruth in such an answer. The question requires much more painstaking investi gation than it has yet received. Very briefly the course of the development of this institution may be summed up thus : (1) Everywhere the Reforma- '' Decretum, ui., Dist., u., chaps. 24, 25, 65-68. 208 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. The juridical reorganisa tion of the Eeformed Church. Chap.ii. tiou had a moral purpose, and all the reformed states with varying degrees of certainty and clear ness seized upon the idea of excommunication as an engine against immorality. (2) This engine was appropriated to itself by the state or civil power, which everywhere unhesitatingly assumed the undivided heritage of the Papal power and of the Canon Law. (3) It was Calvin who vindi cated or usurped this machine of excommunication as the possession of the Church. He led the revolt of the Reformation Church against the Reforma tion State. The sweeping away of the ecclesiastical and juridical organisation of the Catholic Church left a gap. Everywhere the temporal power stepped into the gap, and the old structure was replaced by an ecclesiastical and juridical organisation at the bidding, and under the auspices of, that temporal or civil power. It was so, for instance, in the In Saxony, hoiiie of the Reformation. In Saxony the old ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Catholic bishops was transferred to the Consistories which became patterns for the rest of Protestant Germany. These consistories or courts owed their origin entirely to the civil power, and throughout the sixteenth century they were completely dependent upon it. In 1537 the Standing Committee of the Estates at Torgau proposed to the elector the erection of four Consistories. The proposition was submitted by the elector to a committee of four theologians, Justus Jonas, Cruciger, Bugenhagen and Melancthon, and two jurists. In their report thereupon this committee sanctioned the idea of PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 209 the erection of four Consistories for the electoral ghap. ii. dominions, with competence over all cases which had previously appertained to the ecclesiastical jurisdiction under the Catholic regime, and with , power to inflict excommunication, corporal punish ment or monetary fines. The jurisdiction of the courts was to be directed especially to : (1) false doctrine (with appeal to the Elector and the Elector's court) ; (2) immorality and usury ; (3) violence to parents and to spiritual persons ; (4) blasphemy ; (5) neglect or disturbance of divine service ; (6) witchcraft.' The mere history of the erection of these Con sistories in accordance with this report lies outside our subject. It may be noted, however, that the committee of divines and jurists had proposed a single judge for the consistories, but that the form actually adopted was that of a college or commission — in close imitation of the temporal or political administration. The first Consistory, which was erected at Wittenberg, comprised four assessors, two jurists and two theologians. The others were erected at different later times, and with occasionally slightly varying constitutions. In the Saxony churches, therefore, the Con sistories, together with the Superintendent who exercised the function of visitation, represented the juridical and administrative reorganisation of the Church. In the case of the Swiss churches there was in Switzer land. 1 Dr. George MiiUer, " Verfassung und Verwaltungsgeschichte der Sachsiohen Landeskirohe," vol. ix. of the Beitrdge zur Suchsichen Kirchengeschichte, Leipzig, 1894. VOL. I. 14 210 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. Complete assumptionof ecclesias tical powers by the Civil State. ^ every reason why that reorganisation should take a different form. The Swiss Republics were small — simply towns or unions of towns — so small that a large and elaborate territorial organisation was not necessary, and so small again that the town Council, in each case having to deal with a small area and with citizens directly and daily under its own eye, felt no difficulty in the assumption of a mixed authority — spiritual as well as temporal. At Zurich in 1S21 the council published an edict enjoining preachers to preach only according to the Word of God. The town council of Berne and Bale did the same two and three years later (1523, 1524), as did also the Council of 300 at Geneva in June, 1532, i.e., before the arrival of Farel in the town, before the adoption of the Reformation, and before the rejection of the authority of the Bishop of Geneva — showing the universal assumption by these states of authority over the organisation of the Church. But more than this, in Switzerland as else where, the Reformation was intimately connected with a determined censorship of morals. One of the first results of the adoption of the new faith or law was the appointment of a Consistory, or some form of consistorial authority, to watch over the public morals. It was so at Berne in 1528, i.e., thirteen years before a Consistory was adopted at Geneva. Bale declared for the Reformation in 1529, and in the following year the council declared that those should be excluded from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper who were designated by the councils of the parishes as impenitent sinners. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 211 The exercise of this power, directly over the chap. ii. organisation and doctrine of the Church, and indirectly (through the appointment of the Con sistory and the supervision of its proceedings) over the moral life of the people, was purely and solely an attribute of the civil state. Not only was it assumed as such by the town council without any trace of hesitation, it was not even disputed by the theologians. (Ecolampadius was alone among them — i.e., in the days before the advent of Calvin — in desiring to initiate the exercise of excom munication as a theological function. Zwingli did not wish to hear speak of it, opining that faithful magistrates constituted a sufficient protection for the Church. More explicitly still BuUinger de clared ' " excommunication does not enter into the- attributes of the Church. It is a function of the Christian state " — meaning the civil state. In a more detailed and interesting way still the Particularly same is demonstrable of Geneva. For 400 or 500 ™ years before the Reformation, Geneva had been an estate of Holy Church ; its prince was the Bishop of Geneva, formerly as unchecked in his authority in the town as any German Prince bishop. One of the bishops created a precedent ; he granted the little town a charter of liberties, and henceforth Geneva was a little Republic, with its tiny town council [of 50 (subsequently the council of 60)] supplemented by a larger council [of 300], and a popular assembly occasionally summoned — all working under the shadow, the ' Letter to Leo Juda in 1532. Roget, L'Etat et I'Eglise a Geneve, p. 19. Hottinger, Geschichte Zurich, I, 3. 212 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. temporal as well as the ecclesiastical rule, of a bishop imposed on them by the Pope. So long as the bishops were patriotic there was harmony, but from the time when they lent themselves to the designs of the neighbouring house of Savoy against the town, the hour of revolution and therein also of Reformation had sounded for Geneva. From the moment of the declaration of the Reformation in Geneva — and in a less degree for the few years antecedent, during which the autho rity of the bishop had been gradually set aside — the magistracy of Geneva (the syndics and the councils) had put itself purely and simply into the bishop's vacant place. The civil power of the State was substituted for that of the ecclesiastical overlord. The Council organised the great re ligious dispute in June, 1535, and constituted itself the sole judge thereof. It interdicted the Mass and disposed of the goods of the Church. It imposed penalties on libertinage and made the attendance on Divine service obligatory under a penalty. In January, 1537, it approved the Con fession of Faith drawn up by Farel and Calvin ; it decided upon the method of the celebration of the Lord's Supper and baptism ; it assumed to itself the right of pronouncing in matrimonial causes after having consulted the divines ; it prohibited the celebration of feasts or holy days. Practically, one may say, that before the arrival of Calvin in Geneva the main outlines of the ecclesiastical reorganisation had been laid down, and that by the civil power — the Petit Conseil had stepped into PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 213 the place of the bishop and had assumed his Chap.ii. jurisdiction. ' ' From the point of view, therefore, of the Caivin-s part historical progress of the Swiss Reformation, veiopmtnt of Calvin is not the inventor of the idea of discipline. DisJf ^nne^in His law-giving and formulating influence belong S^^ ^^fo'^™^'^ " o Church. to a second and later phase of that history — the phase and period in which the right to and exer cise of that discipline was in dispute between the civil and the religious power. In another direction also, viz., literary, the credit of origination and formulation is still less his. Fifteen years before the publication of the first edition of Calvin's Christiance religionis Lnstitutio, Melancthon had attempted in his Loci Literary j-~, J.1 1 • 7 , anticipations Communes rerum theologicarum seu hypotyposes of caivin's theologicce a formulation of the theological position -^"'*^*"''*''- of the Protestant movement. Melancthon's work had grown out of his lectures on the Epistle to the Romans' in the summer and winter of 1520. In its first tiny form the work is more philosophical than either theological or juridical, but it distinctly anticipated some of the features of Calvin's later work. In the twenty-second paragraph, de parti cipatione menscB Domini, he stumbled upon that very verse in the eighteenth chapter of Matthew which was to become the grand basis of the Pres byterian system. " The keys," he says, " belong to all, not to one. But expediency demanded some ^ For the history of this work see the introduction to Plitt and Kolde's edition of it ; Krafft's Briefe und Dokumente aus der Zeit der Reformation; Melancthon's letter to Hess (Corp. Reformat., I, 158; xi, 49); and Sohwarz, Melancthon's Entwurf zu den Hypotyposen, in " Theolog. Studien und KritUsen," p. 75, 1855. 214 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. form of deputation or procuration which should " ¦ place the ecclesiastical administration in the hands of skilled persons." Four years after the appearance of Melancthon's Loci, Zwingli pubhshed at Zurich his Commen tarius de Vera et Falsa Religione, 1525, and some years later, but still before the date of the first edition of Calvin's Lnstitutes, William Farel had issued his short and summary declaration.^ In method and matter both these works resemble Melancthon's and anticipate Calvin's. In a pre liminary way, and with much of disorder and illogicality of arrangement, they are attempts at an lnstitutio — a book of principles of the reformed religion, partly theological, partly philosophical, partly juridical. That Calvin knew of these works can hardly be doubted. How far he was influenced by them is a question. Advance in The first cditiou of Calvin's Lnstitutio was [heocratic pubhshcd at Bale in 1536. Three editions fol- betwien 1536 lowcd at StrassbuTg, 1539, 1543, 1545, and three and 1559. others at Geneva, 1550, 1553 and 1554. The last Latin edition which was not subject to further alteration was that of 1559 at Geneva, which formed the basis of the French translation of 1560, Geneva. Now, the noticeable feature of this work is that in its earliest seven editions it contains neither ' Summaire brief ve declaration daucuns lieux fort necessaires a ung chascun Chrestien pour mettre sa confiance en Dieu et ayder son prochain. Item ung traicte de Purgatoire nouvellement adjouste sur la fin. Printed at Serri6res, near Neufchatel, some time before 1535. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 215 draft of Church discipline, after the consistorial Chap.ii. pattern, nor draft of Church organisation, after the ' pattern of primitive times. It is only in the 1559 edition that Calvin expounds both, and thereby became the law-giver of presbytery. What is it that bridges over the gulf between those editions — between the literary standpoint of Calvin in 1536 and in 1559 ? Simply the events of his life in Geneva — his continual struggle with the civil power of the little State. When Calvin first arrived in Geneva, in the latter half of 1S36, he was preoccupied with only one thing — the excesses of the Church of Rome and her repre sentatives. Accordingly in that part of the sixth or last chapter of the 1536 lnstitutio, in which he treats de Potestate ecclesiastica, he hardly raises the fringe of the question of the internal organisa tion of the Church. It does not enter his thoughts. He is concerned only with a precise vindication of the rights of the civil magistrate. Exactly similar was the attitude of Melancthon in his Ljoci fifteen years before. " Concerning ecclesiastical rulers," says Melancthon in the twenty-fourth locus de magistratibus, " thus we think — firstly, bishops are ministers or servants. They are not a power {potestas) or a magistracy, therefore they have not the right of making laws." The steps by which Calvin passed from such a position to that of the law-giver of a theocracy in conflict with the civil power could only be ade quately explained at great length. The ordinarily accepted account of the struggle between him and the civil power in Geneva is very wide of the truth. 216 THE assembly's constructive work. 0hap.il From 1538 to 1541 Calvin was in exile from the town. He returned on the 10th of September Explicable of the latter year, and three days later presented ^L»fwl%n himself before the Council with a demand for cJA.UoimilL'C 1X1 Geneva, 1536- jjjgasures to be taken for the ordering of the Church. The Council appointed a commission, and the propositions of this body were definitely accepted in November by the Council of 300 and the General Assembly. Thereupon the Consistory was immediately installed, and from December, 1541, proceeded to act. Nature of the The ouly purpose of the Consistory was the Consistory i .• i- Ti. i estabUshed regulation of manners. Its only weapon was m^^eneva, admouition. It had no jurisdiction over doctrine — that was not so much reserved to the council as considered to be inherent in it of simple right and course. The majority of the members ofthe Con sistory were laymen. Calvin was only a member, he never presided. The Consistory had neither right nor power to exclude from the Sacrament. Its only function was to admonish, and thereupon re port to the Council, and the magistracy would thereupon proceed to judge and punish. This the Council of Geneva laid down in most categorical terms in March, 1543. A month before, the magistracy of Berne had, with equal decisiveness, refused the right of excommunication to the ministers of Lausanne. TheCousis- It was upou this ground that the contest de- tory claims , , . if, ^ the function vcloped itsclf between Calvin and the Genevan municXon. State. The reformer was determined to vindicate for the Church the complete right of administra tion of the sacraments. The Contest lasted twelve PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 217 years, and was in the end decided in Calvin's ghap. ii. favour only by a, for him, fortunate accident. In the first place, the ministers demanded, in March, 1547, that the delinquents who had been tried by the Council on the presentation of the Consistory should be sent back to the Consistory. The Council compromised by allowing it in the case of the impenitent, "but as for the repentant, they shall be let depart in peace ".' In September of the following year, 1548, the Council laid down emphatically that the Consistory had only the power of admonition and not of excommunication, and thereupon ordered that a certain Guichard Roux should be admitted to the Sacrament. It made a similar order as late as January, 1552. It was not until September of the following year, 1553, that the ministers at last openly revolted, and the struggle came to a head. They refused the Sacrament to Berthelier, although he had the regular authorisation of the Council for his admission. Berthelier appealed to the Council. That body, after hearing Calvin, declared again that Berthelier should be admitted to communi cate. Calvin declared that he would rather die than submit. On its side the Council was as definite and obstinate. It expressly reiterated its right to order the administration of the Sacrament to whomever it pleased. It added a further re solution, some days later, to the effect that persons punished or reprimanded by itself were dispensed with from being again brought before the Con sistory, and that when a resolution had been taken 1 Roget, L'Eglise et VEtat a Geneve, p. 41. 218 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. The claim conceded by the State, and Consis torial Discip line thereby established,1555. in the Council for the admission of anybody to the Lord's Supper, it ought to be put in force instanter without any further resort to the Consistory. As one man the Consistory and the ministers revolted against the Council. The larger Council of 300 were assembled. It ranged itself on the side of the smaller Council. To avoid an open rupture the latter body thereupon consented to submit the question to the Swiss Churches. That opinion was obtained, but naturally threw no light on the question, and the quarrel dragged its length through 1554. It was only decided in the following year, 15S5, in Calvin's favour by the influence of the new burgesses — the French re fugees who were thronging in crowds to Geneva, and whose admission to the rights of burgesses was only settled in May of that year, after an almost revolutionary strife. From 1555 the Consistory remained in uncon tested possession of the right of administering or I'efusing the Sacrament. It had carried the mere point of excommunication. There remained the further question of the penal sanction for this new jurisdiction. A year later, in June, 1556, the Consistory proposed that such members as wilfully separated from the (.'hurch should be chased from the city. The Council again resisted, and it was only in June, 1557, that it consented to a more mitigated penalty — persons debarred from the Sacrament and re maining impenitent for a year were to be exiled from the city for a twelvemonth. Practically further than this Calvin did not in his lifetime go. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 219 We are thus carried to within little more than Chap. ii. a year of the date of the final Latin edition of the lnstitutio, in the fourth book of which Calvin laid down the bases at once of Presbytery (see chapter iii.. Of the Ministers of the Church) and of Discipline {chapter xi.. Of the Jurisdiction of the Church, and chapter xii., Ofthe Discipline ofthe Church). The mantle of Calvin's Presbytery and Discipline The Discip- fell first upon the Reformed Churches of France. i^Pran^e,^ In May, 1559 — the very year of the last Latin ^^^^• edition of the Lnstitutio — the first national Synod of the Reformed Churches of France met at Paris. Three ministers went from Geneva to it, and Calvin's correspondence at the time shows the painful interest he took in it.' The Synod adopted a Confession of Faith and a form or scheme of Discipline, which has been preserved. This Discipline provided for the repre sentation of the separate churches in the " colloques or synodes by a delegated minister or elder for each, and for a consistory or senate in each church, composed of ministers, elders and deacons, for the judgment of scandals and other like things ".^ All the subsequent national Synods concerned themselves with the redaction of this Discipline, but practically the principles of a Presbyterian system and of a disciplinary code were outhned so clearly in this first Synod that very little or no 1 Histoire Ecclesiastique des eglises reformees au royaume de France, Baum and Cunitz's edition, i, 201, 215; Aymon, Actes ecclesiastiques, etc., i. 98 ; Quick, Synodicon, I, pp. xvi., and 3. ^ See Ch. L. Frossard, Etude sur la discipline ecclesiastique des eglises reformees de France, in " Bulletin de la Society de I'histoire du Protestantisms Fran9ais," 1886. 220 THE assembly's constructive WORK. 0hap.il development of principle is needed to carry us to the standpoint of the French Churches in the middle of the seventeenth century, when the ques tion of presbytery came to agitate the English State. And in the In the Low Countries the French refugees NeWieriands, ^.^^^.^^^^ ^^^^1 them this twofold inheritance of presbytery and discipline. As early as 1560 the Walloon Churches met in synod at Tournay. In 1563 their first regular synod was held at Oudenarde. The first convention or synod of which record has survived, was held at Wezel in Nov ember, 1568.' It treated of Church organisation, presbyters, and discipline. The succeeding synod at Emden, October, 1571, subscribed the con fession of faith of the French Churches, elected representatives to attend the next French synod, and sketched a distribution of the Netherland and Rhine Churches into eight classical organisa tions. Besides the republication of their Discipline,^ in the most heated times of the Church disputes of the Civil War period, these Netherland Churches were constantly in touch during the years 1643-47 with the Presbyterian party in the Assembly of Divines, as appears both from the Assembly's "minutes" and, more explicitly, from BaiUie's Letters. And in Scot- To tum to Scotland. Knox returned to Scot land in June, 1559, after having been for some ' p. L. Rutgers, Acta van de Nederlandsche Synoden der Zestiende eeuw., Utrecht, 1889. B. van Meer, De Synode te Emden- See also Reglemens du Synode des eglises Wallonnes des provinces unies des Pays-Bas, 1705. Reglemens generaux et particuliers a Vusage des eglises wallonnes du royaume des Pays-Bas, 1847. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 221 time at Geneva Calvin's intimate friend. He Chap. ii. resided in St. Andrews from November, 1559, to ^ ' April, 1560. It was doubtless due to his influence that the canons of the church of St. Andrews declared for the Reformation, and established the Consistory or Kirk Session there as early as July, 1559 — one month after his return. From the 25th of July, 1559, the Kirk Session of this particular church was formally constituted of ministers and elders. Its records are preserved.' Knox's in dividual influence, therefore, had effected an entry for the Discipline before it had even been brought before the reforming parliament. It was not until 1560 that the Convention adopted the Confession of Faith, and not until January, 1561, that the First Book of Discipline, which had been composed The First by Knox and five other reformers, was ratified by msci^une. the Secret Council.^ The seventh head of this first Discipline treats of ecclesiastical discipline, which consists in the reproving of faults which the civil sword neglects or is unable to punish. "Blasphemy, adultery, murder, perjury, pertain to the civil sword, being worthy of death. But drunkenness, excess, forni cation, oppression of the poor, deceit, wantonness, pertain to the Church of God, to punish in accord ance to the Word." The Discipline then proceeds to lay down the manner, firstly of admonition, and then of excommunication, for private and public offenders. ' Scottish History Society, vols, iv., vu. 2 It is priuted in its draft form and vrith the marginal notes of the Lords of Secret Session upon it ia Knox's Works, ii, 185. 222 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. ii. As to prcsbytcry, the essentials of it are con tained in the eighth head of the Discipline, " of the election of elders and deacons," in the provision for the yearly election of elders in each church, and for the exercise of their jurisdiction as a Consistory. Further than this the first Discipline did not go in the matter of the organisation of pure presbytery. What it did for the higher ranges of the organisa tion was to propose the appointment of ten or twelve superintendents, successors in some sort to the bishops, with power to plant churches and visit them, and to set order and to appoint minis ters. The Consistory of the superintendents' church niight have developed into a classical presbytery, but in reality such a development was never in question. Only five superintendents were ever actually nominated, and the institution served merely as a lever for the designs of King James against unalloyed presbytery. The first step towards the organisation of classical presbyteries and provincial synods — the higher ranges of the Presbyterian system — wa.s taken by the Assembly of 1576, which ordered the restoration of the Exercises formerly appointed by the first Discipline to meet at particular centres or towns. Five years later the General Assembly at Glasgow, April, 1581, ordered the erection of presbyteries at Edinburgh and twelve other places to serve as examples for the rest. The Second Concurrently with this development — or slightly Discipline, bcfore, viz., in July, 1580— the Second Book of Discipline received the sanction of the Church. In PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 223 the seventh chapter this Discipline treats of elder- ghap. ii. ships, assemblies and discipline, specifying four kinds of assemblies, particular, provincial, national, and oecumenical, i.e., the classical presbytery is not yet either expressed or existent. Apart from this change, however, the difference between the First and Second Book of Discipline is rather one of spirit — of Melville's spirit as con trasted with Knox's, of the hierarchical as opposed to the democratic ; the rights of the eldership were strengthened as against those of the congregation, and the assertion was explicitly made that it was the duty of the magistrate to enforce the decisions of the ecclesiastical courts by civil penalties. For the discipline itself, it was claimed to be enjoined by Scripture, and to be in accordance with the Primitive Church and of perpetual authority — implying a claim of jus divinum for the discipline itself, if not for the presbytery. I am here concerned only with the origin and nature, or ground plan, of the Scottish Presbytery. With its chequered history up to the National Covenant of 1637 I have nothing to do. The Reformation in England had not so im- The English ,1 • "J. 1 Eeforma- mediate and drastic an effect on tne spiritual tion and its courts as it had in Upper and Lower Germany. ieeonsTruc- The renunciation of the Papal supremacy led to ^'.^^.^^^ttLi the ascription of juridical authority to the king, organisation. For appeals to the Pope were substituted appeals to the King in Chancery, i.e., to the Court of Delegates, constituted the supreme tribunal of appeal in ecclesiastical causes by 25 Henry VIIL, c. 19. 1588-1640. 224 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.ii. As for the Canon Law itself, the provision for the revision of it was not acted upon in the reign of Henry VIII. Under Edward VI. three several commissions were issued for it, under the Act 3 & 4 Edward VL, c. 11, and the work was actually accomplished, mainly by Cranmer and Peter Martyr. The Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, in which their labours were embodied, was not confirmed by either Edward VI. or Elizabeth, and therefore never became law. As, therefore, by the last section of the Act of 25 Henry VIIL, c. 19, the provision was made that until the revision of The Canon the Cauou Law was complete all the existing canons England, and coustitutions, not repugnant to the law or the royal prerogative, should still stand and be exe cuted, the only inference can be that on the failure of the project of revision the old Canon Law remained in force. In actual practice, however, the Canon Law was discredited in three wavs : — .J 1. By direct inroads made upon it by Statute Law. 2. By the cessation of the study of the Canon Law. 3. By the wholesale opprobrium cast upon it under the new order of things — alike by legislator and by civil and common lawyer. Henceforth the knowledge and practice of the Canon Law tended to become a mere appendage to that of the Civil Law. The Canon Law, therefore, applicable in the English ecclesiastical courts from the Reformation to the Revolution of 1640, must be regarded as diminished in its authority and changed in its content. The annulling of the Papal authority must have greatly restricted the matter of the PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 225 Canon Law which was applicable to the Church of Ghap. ii. England ; and, on the other hand, there was now to be added to the body of this law {a) the king's ecclesiastical laws ; {b) such canons or bodies of canons as might be passed in Convocation and receive the royal authorisation. Up to the period of the Civil War this latter source had added to ecclesiastical law the canons of 1597, 1604 and 1640. The two former received the royal assent and were regarded as binding on the clergy, but not on the laity, as not having been sanctioned by Parliament. The latter, the canons of 1640, were regarded as binding neither on clergy nor laity. Equally with the Canon Law itself the ecclesi- The spiritual ¦astical courts remained after the Reformation, and England, with far less of change either in structure or ^538-1640. procedure. In the manner of citations certain ¦alterations were made by 23 Henry VIIL, c. 9, whilst by the later Act of 37 Henry VIIL, c. 17, laymen were made eligible for the office of judges in the ecclesiastical courts. Whilst, however, the actual constitution of the ancient courts were not materially changed, their working must be regarded as in great measure paralysed by — 1. The uncertainty as to the Canon Law itself whUst under revision. 2. Such Acts as gave to the ci-sdl courts concurrent action in ecclesiastical matter, e.g., the Act of 1 Edward VI., c. 1, against irreverent speaking of the Sacrament, and the two Acts of Uniformity, 2 & 3 Edward VI. , c. 1, and 5 & 6 Edward VI., c. 1. 3. By the interference of the supreme judicial power of VOL. I. 15 226 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. the king through commissions of visitation and jurisdiction, ' ' ' which must be regarded as for the time being superseding the jurisdiction of the Ordinaries. 4. By the obligation under which some of the bishops placed themselves of taking out commissions for the exercise of their ordinary jurisdiction. The High -p^ ^j^jg structurc of ecclcsiastical courts the Commission Court, reign of Elizabeth made one very material addition. 1559-1640. The Court of High Commission was created in 1559, under the power of the statute 1 Ehzabeth, c. 1, with authority to inquire into offences against the Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity, and into cases of heresy, seditious books, offences in church or offences against Divine service or ministers, abstention from church, or any other offences which could be dealt with by any spiritual or ecclesiastical power. With many and important changes in the terms of the written commission, the court lasted up to the outbreak of the Revolution. This double organisation of High Commission and Episcopal or Archideaconal Courts sufficed the English Church from the Reformation to 1641 for purposes at once of discipline and of judgment of doctrine. For instance, Bartholomew Legatt and Edward Wightman, who were burned in 1612 for heresy, were tried, the one by the Consistory Court of the Bishop of London, the other by the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield.' Again, in 1622, the Chancellor of Norwich excommunicated a female for refusing to wear a veil when she was churched.^ For the action and jurisdiction of the High ' HoweU, State Trials, ii, 727. ^ pabner's Reports, 297. presbyterian discipline. 227 Commission itself during this period there is much chap. ii. fuller illustration available. The extent of its activity, however, being concurrent with that of the Consistory Courts, can only be regarded as having superseded, so far, that of the latter, so that according to Hacket ' the Consistory Courts of the suffragans in tbe Province of Canterbury, became in a manner despicable in the reign of Charles I. Upon this structure the Long Parliament threw The Long itself with a fury bred at once of the professional atteckrth'e hatred of the common lawyer for the Civil and courts and Canon Law, and of the national revolt against the exSt^^g "^^" Laudian Church system. juridical •' organisation- The Act of 16 Charles I., c. 11 abolished the of the church. High Commission Court and (by section 4) de prived the ordinary ecclesiastical courts of all penal jurisdiction from and after 1st August, 1641. It was followed in the same year by the Act 16 Charies I., c. 27, which disenabled all persons in holy orders to exercise any temporal jurisdiction or authority. Finally the abolition of Episcopacy itself swept away the courts themselves at a blow. Together the three Acts abolished all ecclesiastical jurisdiction in England, and all the then existing mechanism for the regulation of the clergy and ecclesiastical causes. There was, indeed, probably no other depart ment of the legislative and executive action of the Long Parliament which was so instantaneously revolutionary in character as this in dealing with the ecclesiastical courts and judicature. On this 1 Scrinia reserata, p. 97. 228 the assembly's constructive work. Ghap. II. head the lay and the Common Law element were at one, and the combination was irresistible. From the first moment of its assembly the Parliament commenced to interfere with the Consistory Courts, the High Commission and Convocation, reviewing ecclesiastical sentences, and inquiring into the abuses of the spiritual courts. Individual The cascs of rcvicw of ecclesiastical sentence ieview^by" iucluded ministers persecuted for not reading the men^of^'* book of sports,' prosccutious in the Consistory sentences^"^' Courts for tythcs,^ wrougful suspensions from divinity lectures in Oxford by the vice-chancellor of the university,^ imprisonment of laymen for thirteen years in the Bishops' Prison for refusing the oath ex officio, wrongful deprivation or institu tion to vicarages,* sentences on laymen for hearing sermons out of their parish churches,^ excommuni cation and arrests of churchwardens for refusing to rail in the communion table," illegal proceedings in the obtaining of injunctions to stop trials of right at Common Law," wrongful suspensions and sequestrations of clergymen by ordinaries^ or bishops, etc. It would be almost impossible to enumerate the individual cases of injustice and illegality committed by the inferior ecclesiastical courts, which throng the pages of the Journals of both Houses, in the years 1640-43, irrespective altogether of the more notorious cases of injustice bythe High Commission, e.g., Bastwick, Dr. Smart of Durham, and so on. 1 C. J., ii., 39. 2 Ibid., u., 56. 3 Ibid., u., 57. iL. J., iv., 152, 155, 181, 273, 410. ^ Ibid., 156. " Ibid. ' Ibid., 183. s q j^ ^^ ^92, 227. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 229 In these individual cases the method of either ghap. ii. House (for the petitions were promoted indiffer ently in the Lords or the Commons) was summary and severe. By the mere order of the House pending proceedings were instantly stopped, judg ments were reversed, and wrongfully deprived clergymen were restored,' and reparation ordered by money fine or restoration to benefice — a pro cedure which, from a legal point of view, can only be styled revolutionary. Against the ecclesiastical courts themselves. The proceed- however, the Parliament determined to proceed afeocfeTia*- constitutionally. On the 1st of December, 1640, *^to-4°'''*'' long before it had made up its mind as to any reform of Church polity, a bill was introduced into the Commons for the reformation of divers abuses in ecclesiastical courts.'^ The measure, however, did not get beyond its second reading. A few weeks later a special committee was empowered to examine into all matters concerning the ecclesi astical courts and officers in the diocese of Lincoln, where abuses had been particularly rife." To prevent this subject of the ecclesiastical courts being dropped out of sight in the onrush of multifarious legislation, the Commons, on the llth of January, 1640-41, again ordered the Grand Committee to be empowered to consider "the ecclesiastical courts and the government of the Church as it is now exercised".* There is no iL. J., iv., 181; ibid., vi, 16. 2C. J., u., 40. Read a first time, 1st December, 1640. Read a second time, 27th AprU, 1641, and committed (C. J., u., 128). The committee ordered to sit 5th May, 1641 (ibid,., u., 134). 3 Ibid., ii, 56, 22nd December, 1640. " Ibid., ii., 66. 230 THE assembly's constructive work. Ghap. ii. trace, however, of any further direct or special legislation on the subject. The fate of the ecclesi astical courts was necessarily involved in that of the Episcopal system itself, so that the discussion of the juridical system became virtually an appen dage to the debates on Episcopacy which have been already detailed. One special feature of the question, viz., the infliction of fines and corporal punishments by spiritual courts, was particularly and especially condemned in the Act {infra) for the abolition of the High Commission, but otherwise the fate of the courts was left to depend and did depend upon that of the various Bishops' Bills already detailed. Until the prescription of the Episcopal system, therefore, the spiritual courts nominally remained at work. As late as October, 1642, the Commons sanctioned this by contemplating a declaration for these courts to " proceed upon those statutes that are in force concerning tythes".' The abolition of Episcopacy, however, (see supra, p. 121) swept the whole system away as will be seen. Proceedings Two days aftcT the first introduction of the Bill Hi^h com^ for the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Courts, the Courta64o-i. Commons appointed a committee to consider of the jurisdiction of the High Commission Courts of Canterbury and York, and the abuses com mitted in those courts or by any judges or officers of them.^ It would appear from an order of three months later, however, requesting the committee to resume, that its sittings had been interrupted.' 1 C. J., ii, 811, 17th October, 1642. 2 Ibid., 44, 3rd December, 1640. ' Ibid., 95, 2nd March, 1640-41. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 231 The result of this order was seen in the intro- chap. ii. duction, on the 25th of March, 1641, of a Bill " for the repeal of a branch of a statute made, 1 Elizabeth, concerning commissioners for causes ecclesiastical ".' This Act, which received the royal assent in the following July, not only abolished the High Commission Court, but prohibited any archbishop, bishop or ecclesiastical court what ever from inflicting any fine, penalty or corporal punishment, or to administer an oath ex ofiicio. Higher than the Ecclesiastical Commission stood Attitude of Convocation itself. Without the slightest hesi- parliament tation the Parliament assumed the same attitude oonvo'^ltion. and authority over it that it did towards every other item of the Church system. No direct attack upon Convocation as such was ever made, and when it fell, it fell only as an adjunct or part of the Episcopal system generally. But both Lords and Commons were at one in scrutinising and attempting to define for the future the exercise 1 Read a first time 25th March, 1641 (C. J., ii., 112) ; a second time, and committed (ibid., u., 115, 3rd AprU, 1641). Reported with amendments, and ordered to be engrossed, 29th May (ibid., u., 161). Itead a third time and passed on the 8th of June, and carried up to the Lords on the foUowing day (ibid., u., 171). Bead a first time in the Lords llth June (L. J., iv., 272), a second time on the 17th of June, and committed to the whole House (ibid., 278). Before reading it a third time the Lords moved for a conference with the Commons on amendments suggested by the judges (ibid., 289 ; C. J., ii, 191, 25th June). The Commons considered these amendments on the 29th or 30th of June (C. J., U., 192, 194). On the 1st of July the Lords recon sidered these amendments and read the bill the third time, and sent it down (L. J., iv., 196). The Commons accepted the amendments on the 3rd of July, and the royal assent was given to it on the 5th of July (ibid., 299 ; C. J., ii, 197). The statute is printed among the " Statutes of the Realm,'' v., as 16 Charles I., o. 11. 232 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. ii. of its fuuctiou. The condemnation of the canons of 1640 has been already referred to as one of the earliest acts of the Parliaments. The mere judg ment of the canons themselves implied a judgment of Convocation. But the Commons were not satisfied to leave it to mere imphcation. The resolutions of the ISth of December, 1640, laid down a ruling — it can hardly be styled more for it was merely declaratory — which, from the point of view of ecclesiastical law, was at the time open to grave question. But it laid it down emphatically for all that. Eesolved upon the question nullo contradicente that the clergy of England convented in any Convocation or Synod or otherwise have no power to make any constitution, canons or acts whatsoever in matter of doctrine, discipline or otherwise to bind the clergy or the laity of this land -without common consent of Parliament.^ The accompanying resolution condemned the particular canons of 1640 as a corollary. This claim of the Commons to a legislative consent to canons was reiterated in another resolution a few months later. Eesolved upon the question that this House doth declare that such persons as shall be admitted into holy orders or hereafter instituted or inducted into any living ought to be so admitted, instituted and inducted without any other oath or subscription to be required of them but such as are enjoined by the statutes of the realm, and being instituted or inducted, ought not to execute any power by virtue of any canon not warranted by Act of Parliam ent.^ Behind the ecclesiastical organisation stood the ' C. J., ii., 5L 2 j[j^i^^ ]^g2_ PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 233 body of the clergy themselves. In every way in chap. ii. which the clergy were liable to jurisdiction the' ' Parliament instantly assumed such jurisdiction to attitude of itself with revolutionary violence. In individual "^^ ^""^s. cases, without waiting for legislation on the point, towards the clergymen were put out of Commissions of Peace ' ind^poiiticai by the Lords, whilst the Commons went the length boly of the' of requesting the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal "^^''^y- and the Chancellor of the Duchy to leave out all clergymen from the Commissions of Peace on the renewal of the commissions at the assizes.^ Concurrently with this highly characteristic proceeding the Commons were legislating by bill against the secular employments of the clergy, and also discussing them in the abstract in a third connection, viz., in the debates on the Ministers' Remonstrance {vide supra, pp. 29, 47-53). The interference with the political status of ' L. J., iv., 136. ^C. J., U., 79, 5th February, 1640-41. This matter was subse quently the subject of a conference between the two Houses (C. J., ii, 94, 1st March, 1640-41). This conference resulted in tbe intro duction of a bUl " disabling any clergyman to exercise any temporal or lay employment or commission as justices of the peace in England and Wales ". Read a first time 2nd March, 1640-41 (C. J., u., 95), and a second time on the Sth of March. On the occasion of the second reading HolUs moved to add to the biU the taking away of bishop's votes in the Lords. The Commons' committee, however, which was then sitting on the Ministers' Petition, bad made up its mind to effect this latter object by a separate biU. D'Ewes, speaking with a know ledge of what had taken place at the Ministers' committee, opposed HolUs' motion : " It would be weU if we could have it granted after long debate in this House, and it would deserve a bill alone " (D'Ewes, i, 294). Owing to the progress of this later bill, the first Bishops BiU, the clergy DisabUities Bill was considered to be super seded, and was dropped 21st April, 1641 (C. J., ii, 125). The legislative history of the first and second Bishops BUl wiU be found supra, pp. 60-5 and 118. 234 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.il clergymen, which the Commons thus deliberately made even without awaiting the outcome of its own legislation, by no means sums up the total of its revolutionary seizure of power and jurisdic- Revolution- . . i .1 r aryseizureby tion. On the slightest provocatiou, whether of Pariiamfnt of petition from parishioners or of rumour of dis- JurisTiotior^ affected words spoken, either House ordered toa^Jch^ clergymen to be sent for as delinquents by its own serjeant-at-arms. Without hesitation they were committed to prison, questioned for their life, morals, or title, their livings were sequestered, and other men presented by mere command of Parlia ment, and the institution of the new nominees forcibly insisted upon. When Laud or his officials proved recalcitrant to such orders their jurisdiction was sequestered. The whole of this phase of the action of the Long Parliament will be detailed later in connection with the general question of patronage (see infra, ii., 218). It is here noticed only in reference to the wider subject of clerical jurisdiction generally, and of its abrupt revolu tionary assumiDtion by the Long Parliament. Not content, indeed, with dealing with the general body of the clergy, hitherto amenable in such matters only to their own spiritual courts, the two Houses went behind them, and assumed to itself such jurisdiction over the body of the laity generally as had hitherto pertained confessedly to the spiritual courts. Either House called to its bar laymen for disturbances in churches (see supra, p. 106), for holding conventicles, or for absenting themselves from their parish churches,' ' L. J., iv., 133. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 235 or for preaching when not ordained.' Further, ghap. ii. Parliament interfered in the Universities, ordering the subscription demanded of the scholars in accordance with the Thirty-sixth Article of the canons of 1603 not to be pressed on any, as being against the law and liberty of the subject.^ On the same ground the enforcement of academical garments was prohibited." To complete the circle of the assumption by The Pariia- .-iT T-«T i-1!- • T J-- • 1-J.-1 ment assumes the Long Parliament ot jurisdiction in ecclesiastical authority matters there remained only the point of doctrine. °^®'" ^°<=''^™®- The course of its dealings with the Assembly throughout the years 1644-46 will show with what peremptory decision the Parliament assumed to itself this right also as a matter of course. Whilst paying every respect to the expert opinion of divines, its attitude was the same from the first. In May, 1641, the Commons ordered the Stationers' Company to suppress a book called The Saints' Belief, and directed the author, John Turner, to be sent for as a delinquent " for his boldness in ¦causing a new belief to be printed without authority, sitting the Parliament ".¦* Similarly, a few months later, complaint was made to the Lords of the preaching of dangerous and seditious doctrine in St. Margaret's Church, Westminster, by the oversight or neglect of Williams, who, as Dean of Westminster, was ordinary of the parish. The House thereupon ordered him to take more care thereof, and that all preachers there should be allowed by him 1 G. J., u., 168. ^ Ibid, 70, 117, 922 ; L. J., v., 559. ' Ibid., 969. - Ibid., 148, 18th May, 1641. 236 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.il before they preached.' More distinctive reference will be made to this in another connection. It is indicated here simply as an exemplification of the unscrupulous and revolutionary seizure by the Parliament of every part of the domain of ecclesiastical jurisdiction which had hitherto in whole or part belonged peculiarly to the spiritual courts. Gap left in But iu ti'uth the violencc of this action overshot system'by'' the mark. The abolition of all distinctly ecclesi- thi^Long" °^ astical jurisdiction in the country left a gap. The Parliament. Housc of Commous could uot stcp iuto that gap without demeaning itself to the level of a (factious) court of law, and bewildered though it was with its multiplicity of affairs, it had no intention of turning so astray. There can be little doubt that even if the Long Pariiament had reformed the Church on the basis of a Primitive Episcopacy, it would have been driven sooner or later to face the question of evolving some method form or structure of ecclesiastical regime or discipline, which would have raised the old point of ecclesi astical courts and ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Presbyterian As it was, the coursc of the Rcvolution ended Discipline •¦in.. r t-> i ¦ -i adopted to IU tuc acloption ot a Presbyterian system, and to IS gap. the ordinary non-legal mind the inevitable accom paniment of presbytery, i.e., Presbyterian discipline, may have seemed at first sight as elegible a system as any other to fill the gap. It is only by such a consideration that we can at all account for the amount of support which the proposal of the Presbyterian form of discipline did actually come ' L. J., iv., 299, 5th July, 1641. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 237 to receive within the bosom of the Long Parlia- Ohap. ii. ment itself. On the other hand, the opposition of ' the common lawyer to any such proposal was a foregone certainty from the first. The Erastianism But essen- of the Long Parliament sprang from the common ^g"^ ™^g'' lawyers, nurtured on the traditional enmity of the Erastianism Common to the Civil and Canon Law, before it Parhament^ became a lay or national movement in any sense. The whole history of the transactions of the years 1645-46, between the Parliament and the Assembly on the matter of discipline, turns on the deep-seated antagonism thus revealed. On the 12th of October, 1643, the Pariiament ordered the Assembly to confer upon such a Discipline and Government of the Church as might be most agreeable to the Word of God, and most apt to preserve the peace of the Church at home and nearer agreement to the Church of Scotland and other Reformed Churches abroad ; to be settled in place of the present Church government by archbishops, etc., etc' The large question of the jurisdiction of Church TheAssembiy officers — of the internal government of the Church commences —had been referred to the second of the three '^^^i^^^^^*f<,°{ Assembly committees. On the 8th of January, Ji^j^fi=*i°° •' •' and disci- 1643-44, a report from this committee was pre- pfiue, Janu- ' K . , r 11 ary, 1644. sented concerning the work of pastors and teachers. " Pastors and teachers have power to inquire and judge who are fit to be admitted to the sacraments or kept from them ; as also who are to be excom municated or absolved from that censure." ^ The 1 Husband's Ordinances (folio), p. 362, and supra, pp. 153-4. 2 Lightfoot, 105-6. 238 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. I?44. proposition met with the decided opposition, not only of Independents, but also of the Erastians under Selden, and in the end it was recommitted to the second committee to take the whole business of excommunication and censures into consideration. On the 19th of the same month this committee reported that " there is a power of censuring and absolving from censures in the Church," ' and pro posed as the plan of its deliberations to inquire (1) what the Church is that is to exercise censures ; (2) what kind of censures these are ; (3) by whom and in what manner they are to be exercised. Incidentally the Assembly touched on a portion of these questions in the heated debate on presbytery during the following February.^ But this portion of the Assembly's debate is to be held strictly to belong to the theoretical debate of presbytery." From the second committee Dr. Staunton re ported six propositions on the Sth of February, 1643-44,* and a further series of eight propositions on the Sth of March.^ In their entirety these propositions are as follow : — Doctrinal propositions ooucerniugGovernmentaud Discip line, Feb.- March, 1644. 1. There is one general visible Church in the New Testament. 2. The ministry and ordinances are given for the perfect ing of the Church. 3. Particular visible churches and members of the general Church are by the institution of Christ. 4. Particular churches in the primitive times were made up of visible saints and believers. 1 Lightfoot, 115. 2 jj^^^ 138-60. = See supra, p. " GiUespie's Notes, p. 10. ' Lightfoot, 192-94. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 239 5. In great cities there either were or might be more such Chap. II. saints and beUevers than could meet together in one place to ' T^JT — partake of all the ordinances. 6. So many of these saints as dwelt together in one city were but one Church as touching Church censures, whether they were one congregation or not. 7. When believers multiply, so that they cannot meet in one place, it is lawful and expedient that they divide into distinct and fixed congregations. 8. We find no other way of dividing than by the bounds of their dweUings. 9. Single congregations ought to have such officers, ordinances, and administrations as God had instituted for edification. 10. There is a measure of liberty and privilege belonging to single congregations, as of exception against their oflicers. 11. When congregations are divided and fixed they need all mutual helps one from another. 12. No single congregation may ordinarily take to itself aU and sole power in elections, ordinations and censures, or in forensical determining controversies of faith, cases of conscience, and things indifferent. 13. AU the elders of a city in the apostles' time did join in one to order and govern the congregations thereof, as in other things so for censures. 14. The elders of several congregations in our times have Uke power and authority as they — as much need of association among smaller congregations in villages as amongst them in cities, and they may reap as much profit by it, and ergo ought they to be joined also to make up ample presbyteries upon the same ground and to the same end that city congregations are united. No systematic debate appears to have taken place on these doctrinal propositions. The second proposition was discussed and voted on Thursday, 28th March ; the third on 2nd April ; ' the fourth on Friday, 26th April ; the sixth was debated on > Lightfoot, 235-37. 240 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.ii. 29th April and two following days, and for the moment waived.' The seventh and eighth pro positions were voted on the 1st of May, the ninth on Monday, 3rd May, with some alteration.^ The Division of twelfth proposition held in debate from Tuesday cerS the" to Friday, 7th to 10th May, and was finally voted iuhe'coug" e- ^''^ t^rminis by 27 to 19, having been "managed ffdersM ^^^^ ^^^^ ^°^^ ^^^^ ^'^^ confusion of anything that May, 1644. had happened among us ".^ On the 15th May, Dr. Staunton reported from the second committee a series of reasons in proof of this twelfth proposition, and hereupon the hot debate again waged for two days.* The points scrupled by the Independents are succinctly and repeatedly stated by Baillie in his Letters. But on this head the division of opinion was not merely between Independent and Presbyterian. For our Assemblie matters we are daylie perplexed ; not only we make no progresse, and are farr from the sight of any appearance of ane end, but also matters oft are in hazard of miscarriage. The Independents so farr as we can yet see are peremptor to make a schisme, and their partie is very strong and growing, especiallie in the armies. The leading men in the Assemblie are much at this time divided about the questions in hand of the power of congregations and synods. Some of them would give nothing to congregations denying peremptorilie aU examples, precept, or reason for a congregational eldership. Others and many more are wilfull to give to congregationaU eldership all and intire power of ordination and excommuni- 1 Lightfoot, 256. 2 "In every congregation there ought to be one at the least to labour in the word and doctrine and to rule. It is also requisite that there be others to assist him in ruling, aud some to take care for the poor, the number of each of which is to be proportioned according to the condition of the congregation " (Lightfoot, 262). - Ibid. 0 15th and 16th May, ibid., 266-67. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 241 cation and aU. Had not God sent Mr. Henderson, Mr. Chap. II. Eutherfoord, and Mr. GiUespie among them, I see not that ever ' TgT ' they could have agreed to any settled government.^ Besides the above propositions there were at The com- 1 . 1 . . mittee for the same time two other competing series before Accommoda- the Assembly. The Committee for Accommodation, ApS'i, i644. which had been appointed on 8th March, 1643-44, at the close of the fierce debates of the preceding February on presbytery,^ reported on the 14th of March the following propositions, accepted by the Independents as the basis of agreement : — " 1. That there be a presbytery or meeting of many neigh bouring congregations' elders to consult upon sueh things as concern these congregations in matters ecclesiastical : and such presbyteries are the ordinance of Christ, having His power and authority. 2. Such presbyteries have power in cases that are to come^ before them to declare and determine doctrinally what is; agreeable to God's Word ; and this judgment of theirs is to be received with reverence and obligation as Christ's ordinance. 3. They have power to require the elders of those con gregations to give an account of anything scandalous in doctrine or practice. On the conclusion of this report there was some debate as to the policy of continuing this Committee for Accommodation, as it was feared by some from the tone of its report that it would anticipate the work of the Assembly by taking into consideration the matter of Churcli censures. It was, however, finally voted that the committee should stand, and should have power to deliberate upon and bring 1 BaUUe, ii., 177, 9th May, 1644. 2 See supra, p. 171. ' Lightfoot, 214. VOL. I. 16 242 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. in anything that might tend to accommodation between the Independents and Presbyterians. Accordingly, on the 21st of March,' Marshall reported from it an addition to proposition one above and two additional propositions, numbers four and five, as follow : — 1. ... At these meetings let them pray and preach, handle practical cases, or resolve hard questions. 4. The churches and elderships being offended, let them examine, admonish, and in case of obstinacy declare them either disturbers of the peace or subverters of the faith or otherwise, as the nature and degree of the offence shaU require. 5. In case that the particular church or eldership shaU refuse to reform that scandalous doctrine or practice, then that meeting of elders which is assembled from several churches and congregations shall acquaint their several congregations respectively, and withdraw from them and deny Church communion and fellowship with them. Hereupon there arose, as on the occasion of the previous report, a debate as to the desirability of continuing the Committee for Accommodation. And, as before, in the end it was again decided to let the committee stand. The only account of the meetings of this committee are contained in Bailhe's letter of 2nd April, 1644.- We have mett some three or four times alreadie, and have agreed on five or six propositions, hoping by God's Grace to agree in more. They [the Independents] yield that a pres- bytrie, even as we take it, is ane ordinance of God which hath power and authoritie from Christ to caU the ministers and elders or any in their bounds before them to account for any offence in life or doctrine, to try and examine the cause, to 1 Lightfoot, 229. - Letters, U., 147. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 243 admonish and rebuke, and if they be obstinate to declare them Chap. II. as ethnicks and publicans, and give them over to the punishment ' J^g — of the magistrates ; also doctrinaUy to declare the mind of God in all questions of reUgion with such authoritie as obliedges to receave their just sentences ; that they wiU be members of such fixed presbytres, keep the meetkig, preach as it comes to their turne, joyne in the discipUne after doctrine. Thus far we have gone on without prejudice to the proceedings of the AssembUe. When the committee was in the act of going on to the rest of the propositions concerning this matter of jurisdiction, the Assembly was suddenly turned aside to the more pressing question of ordination,' and as far as these propositions con cerning Church Discipline are concerned, this is the last that was heard of them, though the Committee for Accommodation itself will be found emerging later. It is very indicative of the want of order in the Assembly's proceedings that, on the same day, 21st March, 1644, on which the above report was made from the Committee for Accommodation, a parallel report on the same subject of Church government was made from another quarter. Mr. Coleman reported from the first committee con cerning presbytery the acts of presbytery, viz. : — 1. Ordination. 2. Censures and release. 3. Eesolving of doubtfuU and difficult cases. 4. Ordering things concerning the worship of God.- On the report no proceedings or debates were taken in consequence of the obtrusion of the question of ordination,' which held far into April, 1 See infra, pp. 323-4. ^ lightfoot, 229-30. ' See imder Ordination, infra, pp. 323 seq. 244 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. 1644, and Subsequently of that of prcsby tery.' But when, in the third week of April, the Assembly had finished the consideration of ordination and shelved for a moment its resolutions concerning presbytery, the larger question of jurisdiction as a part of Church government again came to the front. The work Qu the 2Sth of April a committee was, upon of the , r., , . , 1 1 , Assembly's Mr. Scamau s motion, chosen to hasten and draw Committee „ ^^i i i /^i i j. 9 for the Sum- up a Summary of the whole Church government.^ Government, Fivc days later the House of Commons resolved April-, 1644.' ^.j^^^ u|^^._ g^lway should from this House desire the Assembly of Divines to proceed to the ex pediting and settling this question of the govern ment of the Church." ^ Under the influence of this demand for speed, the Assembly's committee for the summary of Church government reported, on the 14th of May, the following draft propositions for debate : — The jurisdic- («) Concerning the officers of particular conereeations tion of the ^, \ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ congrega- ^^ley have power— tional elder- (1) Authoritatively to caU before them scandalous or suspected persons. (2) To admonish or rebuke authoritatively. (3) To keep from the Sacrament authoritatively. (4) To excommunicate.* ' As preparatory to these propositions the com mittee had debated and concluded that "the government of the Church belongs either to con gregations or presbyteries or synods," and had ' See under Presbytery, supra, pp. 172 seq., from 10th AprU. 2 Lightfoot, 254. « C. J., iu., 473, 30th AprU, 1644. " Lightfoot, 262-63. ship. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 245 thereupon drawn up the above propositions as Chap. ii. concerning the first item in this system of Church government. Writing on the day preceding this debate, Baillie again throws much side -hght on the engineering of the Assembly's proceedings : — On Friday [12th May],i after a week's debaite, we carried albeit hardlie that no single congregation had the power of ordination. To-morrow we begin td debaite if they have any right of excommunication. We gave in long agoe a paper to the Great [the Treaty] Committee wherein we asserted a congregationaU eldership for governing the private .affaires of the congregation, from the 18th of Matthew. Mr. D. Calder wood, in his letter to us, has censured us grievouslie for so doing ; shewing us that our books of Discipline admitts of no Presby trie or Eldership but one ; that we put ourself e in hazard to be forced to give excommunication and so entire government to congregations, which is a great stepp to Inde pendencie. Mr. Henderson acknowledges this, and we are in a pecke of troubles with it.^ After some debate the committee's reported preamble and first proposition were in substance passed on the same day,^ and as far as related to the third proposition, the following general pro position was voted on the 21st of May, after two Power of days' debate :* " Authoritative suspension from the camedt^May, Lord's table of a person not yet cast out of the ^^**- Church is agreeable to the Scripture ". The Scrip tural proofs of this proposition held the Assembly for two more days.* The debates on the Directory interrupted any The subject further immediate pursuit of the subject of excom- °ic^ation post poned. 1 Lightfoot, 262. ^ BaUlie, ii, 182. ' Lightfoot, 264-65. *Ibid., 268-73. ^ 22nd to 23rd May, ibid., 273-77. 246 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. muuication, and when incidentally the Committee 1644. for the Directory found itself obliged to touch upon the question of the celebration of the communion and the exclusion of the scandalous and ignorant, it simply submitted a report of two clauses for that purpose, drawn in an alternative and non- controversial form.' The report was read in the Assembly without debate.^ The actual debate of the two propositions four days later was itself perfunctory.^ The question of excommunication and suspension was too burning a one to be decided on such a side-issue as the wording of an order in the Directory. Since our Friday fast (writes BaiUie on the 31st of May) we have made good speed in the Assemblie. Our Church Sessions, to which Independents gave aU and their op posite nothing at all, we have gotten settled -with unanimity in the Scots fashion. Our great debate of the power of excommunication we have laid aside {and taken in the directory}.* For the whole of June, July, and till the middle of August, the Assembly was engaged almost ex clusively on the Directory. On the 20th of August Mr. Palmer reported from the Grand Committee ' (1) The communion or supper to be celebrated frequently, etc. (2) None to be admitted but suoh as being baptised are found, upon careful examination by the ministers before the officers, to have a competent measure of knowledge of the grounds of rehgion and abUity to examine themselves, aud who profess their wUlingness and promise to submit themselves to aU the ordinances of Christ. Or thus, wbo give just grounds in the judgment of charity to conceive that there is faith and regeneration wrought in them. The ignorant, scandalous, etc., not to be admitted, nor strangers unless they be weU known. 2 6th June, Lightfoot, 279-80. s 10th June, ibid., 282. " Letters, ii, 186-87. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 247 [the Treaty Committee] certain suggestions for the Chap. ii. conduct of the further debates of the Assembly. liS Items three to five of this agenda paper, already noticed,' ran as follows : — 3. The committee for the summary [of Church govern ment]^ [to] hasten their report about Church government. 4. The Assembly to return to the government. 5. Then to handle excommunication. As usual, Baillie here again throws light on the workings behind the scenes : — So soon as my Lord Warriston came up we resolved on the occasion of his instructings and the letters of our General Assemblie both to ourselves [the Scotch Commissioners] and this Assemblie [at Westminster], which he brought to quicken them a Uttle who had great need of spurs. My Lord Warriston very particularlie declared in the AssembUe the passionate desires both of our parliament, assemblie, armies, and whole people of the performance of the covenanted uniformity ; and withall we caUed for a meeting of the Grand Committee of Lords, Commons, Assemblie, and us, to whom we gave a paper penned notablie weU by Mr. Henderson, bearing the great eviUs of so long a delay of settling religion, and our earnest desyres that some wayes might be found out for expedition. This paper my Lord Say took to deliver to the House of Lords, Mr. Solicitor also for the House of Commons, and a third copy was given to Mr. Marshall to be presented to the Assemblie . . . also we have the Grand Committee to meet on Monday to find out wayes of expedition ; and we have gotten it to be the work of the AssembUe itselfe to doe no other thing till they have found out wayes of accelerating; so by God's help we expect a farr quicker progress than hitherto.^ It was, however, not until the 4th of September eociesLsUcai that -the Assembly found itself at liberty to s^ct i^j^fi°^^_ upon the suggestions of the Grand Committee, munication -¦- oo resumed, ' Supra, p. 176. ^ Lightfoot, 305. ^'^^" "^^*^" * BaiUie, Letters, u., 220-21, 18th August, 1644. 248 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. Qn that day, having finished the Directory and 1644. ordination, it took up the question of government. After much preliminary debate as to the order of discussion, whether to treat first of government or excommunication, it was decided to fall first on government, the question being finally proposed in the form already particularised.' The account of the debate of this proposition has been already given." Having at last voted the existence of the several Church Assemblies, outlined in the plan of government, the divines, on the 4th of October, approached the question of the jurisdiction to be assigned to them. The debate was grounded upon a report that day made by Dr. Temple from the third committee ^ to the following effect :— 1. The Assemblies mentioned have power to convent and call before them any person within their bounds. 2. To hear and determine such causes and differences as come orderly before them. 3. They have also some power of or to dispense censure.^ The first clause was voted the same day, after being narrowed down by the addition of words restricting the reference to ecclesiastical business. The second clause was voted on the 7tli, and the third on the following day.'* Having settled the question of the seat of jurisdiction, the Assembly next approached that of the nature of the jurisdiction itself, and on the 14th of October sat down to debate of excom munication an sit et quid sit,^ on the proposition ' Supra, p. 177, Lightfoot, 308, 4th September. ^ Supra, ibid. 3 Lightfoot incorrectly says the first committee, 314. * Lightfoot, 314 ; GUlespie, 86-87. ^ GUlespie, 88. « Ibid., 91. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 249 "'there is such a Church censure as excommuni- Chap.ii. cation ; to wit, the shutting out of a person from iSI the communion or fellowship ofthe faithful".' The an sit was voted affirmatively, after three The question days' debate, 16th to 18th October.^ On therfcU^;,''''' question of the ubi sit (in whom the power of ^'''^'^y p"™^''- cxcommunication resided — the second committee having voted it to be in the presbytery) the Assembly, again a prey to itself, turned aside from excommunication to suspension, and voted this latter to be the prerogative of the officers of a particular congregation . ^ From this latter date until late in December the Assembly was occupied with its two " humble advices " containing its draft of Church government [organisation], and with the dispute over the "Reasons" of the Dissenting Brethren.* On the 23rd of December, 1644, in reply to the demand of the House of Commons for the despatch of the re maining parts of Churcli government, the Assembly explained to the House, through the mouth of Dr. ' On the following day, 15th October, an unusual incident occurred in the Assembly and took up the whole of its session. The Grand ¦or Treaty Committee sent to desire an account of what the Assembly had done in the item of excommunication in the programme pro posed from them on the 20th of August pre-vious. In reply, the scribe ¦of the Assembly drew up a report from his books, showing that the Scotch Commissioners had pressed that the Assembly might first fall upon the several sorts of Assemblies and their subordination, and that the Assembly had now entered upon the report of the second [? third] committee [concerning excommunication]. Hereupon a dispute arose as to the authority of the Assembly to make any report at aU to other than the two Houses (Gillespie, 92). 2 GUlespie, 93-95 ; Lightfoot, 317-21. = GiUespie, 96 ; Lightfoot, 320-21, 24th to 25th October. * See supra, pp. 181, 183. 250 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. I64I The Scotch men draft a directory for exoom- muuication. Burgess, that all the material parts of Church government [so far, i.e., as related to the form or organisation of it] had been already sent into the Parliament.' There remains only the point of Excommunication. They have found that there is that point of Excommunication, but the ubi is a theological dispute which they have not yet agreed upon, but have thought upon some general rules in the mean time, the which they doubt not will be generaUy agreed unto.- This hopeful view was shared by the Scotch Commissioners. If the Directorie were once out of our hands (-writes BaUUe, on the 26th of December), as a few days wiU put them, then we will faU on our great question of Excommunication, the Catechise, and Confession. There is here matter to hold us long enough, if the wrangling humour which long predomined in many here did continue ; but thanks to God that is much abated and all inclines towards a conclusion.^ On the 20th of December, 1644, the Assembly, having at last practically finished the Directory and the draft of Church Government, and completed its answer to the Dissenting Brethren, passed a re solution for the drafting of a directory for the practical part of discipline and government.* With a view to the impending discussion of what Baillie calls this great question of excommunication, Henderson, on behalf of the Scotch Commis sioners, had drawn up a draft directory for Church censures and excommunication in which, whilst eschewing speculative questions, he had kept to the practice of the Scotch Church. The Scotch- 1 See supra, p. 182. ^ C. J., iu., 733, Monday, 23rd December, 1644. = Letters, ii., 248. -i MitcheU, p. 22. presbyterian discipline. 251 men were in hopes ' that it would please all parties, Chap. ii. even the Independents. The leading Presbyterians i644. of the Assembly to whom the draft had been submitted had expressed satisfaction with it,^ and if the Independents still proved unaccommodating, the Scotchmen yet hoped that at least the debates of such speculative questions might be either eschewed or shortened.^ There can be no doubt that this directory emanating from the Scotch Commissioners had been compiled before the 26th of December, 1644. It may possibly have been drawn up in consequence of the Assembly's vote of 20th December. But the alternative probability is much greater than it had been drafted prior to that vote, and had been kept in readiness to be offered to the Assembly when the right moment and occasion had been engineered.* On the 27th of December, a week after the order for the draft of a directory of excommuni cation, the Assembly appointed a committee of five Presbyterians to take into consideration the report concerning excommunication.^ As we are here reduced to the single and meagre testimony of the Assembly's " minutes," it is not clear what report is intended, but it is most likely that the reference was to Dr. Temple's belated report of 4th October, 1644, on excommunication.'' If so, ^BailUe, ii, 248, 250. ''^ BaUUe, ibid. ; GiUespie, 97. 3 BaiUie, ii., 248. ¦¦ In January BaUUe and GiUespie left London to be present at the meeting of the General Assembly at Edinburgh, and tiU his return on 9th AprU we miss the invaluable assistance of his letters. " MitcheU, 23-24. ^ See supra, p. 248. 252 THE ASSEMBLYS CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. 1644. Their draft introduced into the Asaembly,Dec, 1644. it would indicate that the Assembly was intending to proceed on its own initiative. It could there fore hardly have been pleased when three days later the Scotchmen, through Mr. Marshall, offered to it their ready drafted directory of excommuni cation.' That the Assembly consented to consider it at all from such a source is proof at once of its own abjectness and of the powerful influence of the Scotchmen at the moment. As it was, the Independents, through Nye, opposed the bringing of it in, but the Assembly called to have it read. " It was drawn up by Mr. Henderson," says Gil lespie ^ with ludicrous candour, " and given to Mr. Marshall, who, first by himself then with divers others, thought upon it and made some altera tion." In order to save appearances, Dr. Temple moved that it might be referred to a committee, so that it could be brought into the Assembly under the formality of a report. But even this was waived, and the Assembly voted to consider of the directory as presented.'* Accordingly from the foUowing day the Assembly sat down to the systematic debate of this Scotch directory for excommunication.* The discussion raised by the Independents turned upon the nature of the sins which should be taken cognisance of by the eldership for the purpose of Church censures, and on the 1st of January the Assembly made a memorandum that something should be considered of to set out such 1 30th December, MitcheU, 24 ; GUlespie, 97. ^ GiUespie, 97. ^ Ibid., MitcheU, 24. ¦' Lightfoot, 344 ; GiUespie, 97-98 ; MitcheU, 24-25, 8Ist December. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 253 sins.' But when, on the 7th of January, the Chap. ii. divines reached the crucial question of the ubi, 1644Z the repository of the power of excommunication „ , , . " . Breach with whether in the congregation, the congregational tbe indepen- eldership or the classical eldership, the Indepen- question of ^ dents objected against the method of adopting a j'urisdirtion. directory drafted by the Scotch Commissioners, and to which the Assembly had been originally no party at all.- The Scotchmen had naturally placed the power of excommunication in the classis, and the Independents as determinedly maintained it as pertaining to the congregation. After a heated debate, in which Marshall felt himself obliged to explain his own proceedings in his transac- a Committee tion with the Scotchmen, the paragraph was modaMo^ referred to a Committee for Accommodation." its work. On the 14th of January the remainder of the directory was committed to the same committee.* It was reported on the 16th by Mr. Marshall, and again on the 21st after a recommitment. On the following day, 22nd January, Mr. Marshall further reported the sins worthy of excommunication.'* This first draft of a catalogue of excommunicable The first sins came from the above-named Committee f or sfns. °^"^ ° Accommodation, but in the following session the Scotch Commissioners offered a paper of their own on the subject,'^ as representing the ultimate con cessions they were able to make by way of accommo dation on the point of doctrinal error of opinion as an excommunicable sin. " If you give way to that paper, " said Henderson, referring evidently to the 1 MitcheU, 27. ¦^ Ibid.,2,(i. Ubid., 'S'l-SS, *Ibid., 37. Ubid., 41. ''23rd January, 1644-45, ibid., 41-42. 254 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. first draft of sins from the Accommodation Com- 1644-5. ' mittee, "I see not how any error can be sup pressed." ' Form after form was proposed of a clause to conciliate the Independents on this their idol of a permissible ' liberty of opinion in things not sub versive of Church order, until on the 30th of January, a fresh committee was appointed for the consideration of the point. ^ Pending its report, the Assembly on the following day continued its con sideration of the catalogue of sins as in the paper from its own Committee of Accommodation, when after a heated debate in which the Independents renounced t]je whole accommodation to which in the said committee they had been a party, the entire directory for excommunication was ordered to be drawn up by the committee formerly ap pointed for the wording of the votes of the Assembly.^ The directory It was accordingly in the following session * mun^o^tkin reported, read, adopted and ordered to be sent up passed'^and indcr the incentive of a message from both the sent up, Lords and Commons for the hastening of the re- Peb., 1645. » mainder of Church government in view of the Treaty of Uxbridge.^ The five Independents as before formally entered their dissent, handing in a paper of their reasons. For four sessions "^ the Assembly was engaged hotly upon these " Dissenters' reasons " and its own answer thereto. 1 Mitchell, 42. ^Ibid.,U. = J6id, 45. •'3rd February, ibid., 46. ^^L. J., vu., 169 ; C. J., iv., 40. Hth to 7th February, ibid., 46-48. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 255 On the latter day a committee was appointed to draft clauses relating to appeals and the remainder of the directory. These clauses were brought in on the 10th of February,' and instantly considered. Through seven sessions, 10th to 18th February, The question the Assembly hotly debated this moot point of temporarily appeals, the Independents striving with all their p°^*p°°®^- force of argument against the admission of regular appeal from the congregation or the congregational eldership.^ The conclusion of the debate does not appear in the Assembly's " minutes," but it would seem that on the 18th of February the question was diverted from appeals as such to the preced ent question of the jurisdiction and subordination of synods. The Assembly apparently appointed a com mittee to report on this latter subject, and from the following day, 19th February, when that com mittee reported, the debate ran upon the article of synods and their powers, especially of their ex communicating.^ The proposition affirming the power of synods to excommunicate would appear to have been passed on the l7th of March.* Thereupon the divines descending the scale of the Church Assemblies fell upon the jurisdiction of the classis. On the 18th of March, Dr. Temple reported from the sub-committee propositions concerning the powers of classes. Part of the report was accepted and part recommitted,' and then the Assembly at 1 C. J. , iv. , 48. ^ Mitchell, 49-62. ^ Ibid., 62-70. * Ibid., 69. 5 ISth and Wth March, ibid., 70. 256 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. last reached the consideration of the right, power 1644-5. and practice of particular congregations.' The Inde- With a vicw to meeting, or at any rate focussing' pendents _ o' ./ o propositions in ouc cxprcssion, the views of the Independents, concerning , iiia it i-. the power of they wcTc requested bythe Assembly to bring in tiSfs^^March, their opinions on this subject.^ Accordingly six ^^^^' days later Mr. Nye presented the Independents' propositions concerning particular congregations.' For a moment the Assembly appears to have been staggered by the breadth of these propositions which strayed back over ground that had been already made the subject of accommodation. Eventually the Dissenting Brethren were desired rather to bring in a platform of Government con cerning particular congregations.* That such a proposal was merely a ruse to get rid of the Independents for a while, or to catch them on the horns of a dilemma, is frankly avowed by BaiUie,' and was doubtless perfectly well known to the Independents themselves.'' Without waiting a moment for this " platform " from the Dissenting Brethren, the Assembly pro ceeded in its debate, and from the following session (28th March), discussed the matter of the power of congregational churches on a report by Mr. Reynolds.^ The conclusion of the debate does not appear in the Assembly's very imperfect record. But that 1 19th March, MitcheU. 2 gigt March, ibid. '27thMai-ch, i6?d, 72. ¦'I6«U, 73, 27th March. ^Letters, ii, 266, 271. "See a copy of a Remonstrance lately delivered in to the Assembly, 1645. Hanbury Historical Memorials, ui, pp. 1-6. ' MitcheU, 74. presbyterian discipline. 257 the question was carried, in a sense, adverse to the Ohapjii. Independents is evident from Baillie's words : " The 1644.5. Assemblie hath now, I may say, ended the whole body of the Church government, and that according to the doctrine and practice of the Church of Scot land in everything materiall ".' In the meantime, so much of its conclusions. The question and of the directory of excommunication, as the of the co^^^ Assembly had passed by the 3rd of February f[dOTship^^ preceding, had now reached the Parliament. On the com™ the 4th of February, 1644-45, the Assembly ^°°s, Feb., through Dr. Burgess presented them to both Houses in the shape of two papers : — 1. The Humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines now by ordinance of ParUament sitting at Westminster concerning ex communication . 2. The Humble Advice of the said Assembly concerning a directory for admonition, excommunication and absolution.^ On Monday, the 10th of February, the Commons, taking up these two papers, referred it to a com mittee of the whole House to consider " what power the officers of a particular congregation shall have over the members of the said congregation concerning their knowledge and spiritual estate, and likewise to consider of the propositions in the paper presented from the Assembly of Divines touching this matter, and further to consider what other power is fit to be given to the officers of a par ticular congregation ".' 'Letters, n., 266, 25th AprU, 1645. 2C. J., iv., 41; L. j., vu., 176. ' C. J., iv., 45 ; Whittaker's Diary. Brit. Mus. addit. MSS. 31 1 16, p. 382. Whittaker was throughout chairman of this Grand Committee, and his Diary enables one to fiU in gaps in the Commons VOL. I. 17 258 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. ch^p-ii- The failure of the Treaty of Uxbridge, for which 1644-5. this draft of a directory for suspension had been pressed forcibly through the Assembly, deprived them of their momentary relevancy. In addition, the individual consideration of these papers of advice was further for the time being interrupted by the presentation of the more im mediately practical question of the erection of the Church system which had at last been accepted in its main outline by both Assembly and Parliament. Consequently the first form in which the Parlia ment at last definitely approached the question of excommunication was in connection with, or as a logical appendix, to the " ordinance for the election of elders." The ordi- On the 6th of March, 1644-45, the divines pre- eieotion°of*^^ scuted to both Houses a paper touching the settling delfatVTn the °^ ^ preaching ministry, and touching the keeping Parliament, of iguoraut aud scaudalous persons from the Sacra- August, 1645. ment.' Both Houses sat down instantly to the consideration of it, the Lords appointing a com mittee to draw it up in the form of an ordinance. This latter was reported on the 10th of March, and the Lords instantly adopted and ordered it to be sent down to the Commons. In the Lower House it was read on the same day as " an ordinance "^ for Journals, as the latter only note the committee's work when reports were made and do not note the sub-oommittee at aU. But it is a disappointingly meagre Diary, e.g., his entry for the day, 10th February, is simply as foUows : " Proceeded in the proposi tions concerning Church government, and in the afternoon the House was resolved into Grand Committee, myseU in the chair. We pro ceeded touching the power of suspension from the Lord's Supper by the congregational! elderships ". ' C. J., iv., 70 ; L. J., vu., 265. =L. J., vu., 267 ; C. J., iv., 74. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 259 the election and establishing of elders in every con- Chap. ii. gregation ". It was read a first and second time on 1644-5. the same day, 10th March, and committed to a committee of the whole House with a special re commendation to take into consideration in the first place the clause contained in it concerning the keeping from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ignorant and scandalous persons.' Not content with having originated the ordinance, the Lords sent down a somewhat impatient message three days later putting the Commons in mind of it, and desiring its speedy expediting.^ On the 21st, the Commons sat upon it in full Particulars committee ; and, after debate, resolved to refer it to and^rfsoan- the Assembly to express the particulars of that commuS- ignorance and scandal for which they considered ^emaXd by persons ought to be suspended from the Sacra- ^gj^^^"^^'^" ment.^ The message was taken to the Assembly the same day by Sir Robert Harley,* and a Com mittee of Divines was immediately appointed to draw up a report. On the 24th of March the com mittee brought in the required particulars to the Assembly, and on the following day they were forwarded to the House. '^ The House thereupon went into committee. But, before the committee would begin to debate upon the Assembly's answer, it passed two votes 1 C. J. , iv., 74. On the same day the ministers of London, assembled at Zion CoUege, presented to the Lords a petition for the adoption of ¦some course by ParUament for keeping back ignorant and scandalous persons from the Sacrament (L. J., -vu., 268). ^C. J., iv., 77, 13th March, 1644-45. "Ibid., 85, 21st March ; Whittaker's Diary, 399. -i MitcheU, 71. '^Ibid. ; C. J., iv., 89, 25th March, 1645. 260 THE assembly's constructive WORK. Chap. IL 1645^ The subject matter of disciplineadopted by the Com mons, April 17, 1645. That there be some persons so grossly ignorant and so ' notoriously scandalous that they shall not be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. i Two days later the Commons resolved, after a whole sitting's debate in the Grand Committee " That a person not ha-ving a competent measure of understanding concerning God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost shaU not be admitted to the Sacrament." Concurrently, however, with this, it ag&.in re ferred itself to the Assembly for a statement of the particulars of such competent measure of under standing concerning God the Father, etc.^ The divines debated this message the next day, 28th March, and on the 29th their reply was pre sented to the House.^ Some of these particulars the Commons proceeded to adopt on the 1st of April, but it again referred itself to the Assembly to set down in particular what they conceive to be such a " competent measure of understanding con cerning the state of man by the creation, and by his fall, the redemption," etc., etc.* As before, the Assembly instantly took the message into con sideration (2nd April), but it was not until 4th April that its committee reported, and not until 10th April that the report was forwarded to the Commons.'' Hereupon, on the 17th of April, Whittaker re ported from the Grand Committee of the House its votes concerning the point of the ignorant and ' C. J., iv., 89, 25th March, 1645. Whittaker's Diary, 401. ''C. J., iv., 90, 2eth-27th March, 1645 ; Whittaker's Diary, 401-2. ' C. J., iv., 92 ; MitcheU, 74. 4 c. J., iv., 95. ^ MitcheU, 75-76 ; C. J., iv., 105. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 261 scandalous, and they were immediately adopted by Chap. ii. formal resolution of the House. In brief, this 1645. series of votes excluded from the Sacrament (1) adulterers, etc., drunkards, swearers, blasphemers ; (2) such as have not a competent measure of un derstanding concerning the state of man by crea tion, etc., the redemption of Jesus Christ, etc., the way and means to apply Christ, etc., the nature and necessity of faith, etc., repentance, etc., the nature and use of the Sacraments, etc., the condi tion of man after this life, etc. In each case the particulars of the "competent knowledge" were set out in explicit words in the resolution. In conclusion, the House adopted a resolution that the examination and judgment of such persons as should not be admitted for the above-specified scandals or ignorances was to be in the power of the eldership of every congregation. A committee was then appointed to draft an ordinance in accord ance with the terms of these resolutions. The com position of this committee is significant.' Having settled the matter of the jurisdiction of Debate as to the eldership, the Commons turned to the manner of^tMs^'^"^'^ of it. On the 17th of April it had resolved that f^^^Z this jurisdiction rested in the hands of the con gregational eldership. This was, however, by no means intended as a final pronouncement on the point. The question was debated again in full committee of the House on the 21st and 24th of iC. J., iv., 114, 17th AprU. Rouse, Sir John Cooke, Sir Wm. Masham, Selden, Sa Browne, Serj. WUde, SaUoway, Tate, Bigby, Nicholas, Sir Benj. Rudyard, Mr. HoUand, Mr. Lisle, Su: Ro. Harley, Sir Henry Mildmaye, Mr. Younge. 262 THE assembly's constructive WORK. Chap.ii. April, and 1st and 3rd May. On the latter day 1645. the House adopted the following composite resolu tions on report from Committee : — 1. Power shall be given to the eldership of every congrega tion to examine any person complained of for such matter of scandal as is passed by vote of this House, and upon confession of the party before the eldership to suspend him from the Sacrament, pro tempore. 2. The eldership of every congregation to suspend from the Sacrament any person lawfully convicted of any matter of scandal passed by vote of this House. 3. The cognisance of capital offences shaU rest with the civil magistrate, who upon committal shall certify the elder ship of the congregation who shall thereupon have power to suspend the accused.^ In the succeeding session (Monday, 5th May), the Commons added to the above resolutions a fourth : — 4. Matters of scandal, not capital, voted by this House, shall be examined by the eldership of every congregation, who upon just proof made thereof shaU have power to suspend the accused.^ 3 On the following day, 6th May, these votes were sent up to the Lords for their concurrence Without waiting for the expression of their con currence, however (which was given by the Lords on the 9th of May), * the House continued its consideration of the method of the exercise for jurisdiction by the eldership. It adopted* two resolutions from its committee empowering con gregational elderships to judge upon the testimony 'C J., iv., 131 ; Whittaker's Diary, 411-12, 414-15. "C. J.,iv., 132. '/ftid., 133, 6thMay. *L. J., vu., 360. 5 Sth May, C. J., iv., 134; Whittaker's Diary, 416. presbyterian DISCIPLINE. 263 of two witnesses, and to administer an oath, but Chap. ii. upon a division the motion to send these resolu- i645. tions also to the Lords was lost by 49-39. The meaning of this division was made more clear five days later, when upon report from the Grand Committee, the Commons adopted the following additional resolutions : — 1. Satisfaction shall be given to the eldership of every congregation by sufficient manifestation of the offender's repen tance or the party's innocency appearing, before the suspended, as above, shaU be readmitted to the Sacrament. 2. If any person suspended from the Sacrament of the The Com- Lord's Supper shaU find himself grieved with the proceeding mons' plan of before the eldership of any congregation, he shaU have liberty the elder- to appeal to the Classical Assembly, from thence to the Pro- ^^'f^' J"™" . , , I diction. May, ¦ymcial, from thence to the National, and from thence to the i645. ParUament.i Writing on the 25th of April, 1645, BaiUie throws light on what had been going on in the Commons' • Committee. The Parliament have passed many of our votes of Govern ment purposing quickly to erect the ecclesiastick courts of [kirk] Sessions, Presbyteries and Synods and thereafter to pass so much of our government as they think necessare. We wUl have much to doe with them to make sundrie of our votes pass, for most of their lawyers are strong Erastians, and would have aU the Church government depend absolutelie on the Parliament : For this end they have past a vote in the House of Commons for appeals from [kirk] Sessions to Presbyteries, from these to Synods, from these to National! Assemblies, and from these to the Parliament. We mind to be sUent in this least we marr the erection of the ecclesiastick courts, but when we find it seasonable we mind to make much adoe before it goe so. We are hopefull to make them declare they meane no ' 13th May, C. J., iv., 140; Whittaker's Diary, 418. 264 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. other thing by their appeaUs from the NationaU AssembUe to ' 1647 ' a Parliament than a complaint of an injurious proceeding which we did never deny.i In his despondency at the triumph of this Erastianism in the Parliament, Baillie attributed it to the weakness of the Scotch army and to its delay in marching South. These things have made us [the Scotch in London] look almost contemptible, and this contempt hath occasioned jealousie and provocations which may (if not provided for) prove dangerous. 2 That Baillie's advice to show no immediate resentment at the blow to a pure presbytery, which the last vote of the Commons implied, was followed is evidenced by the fact that until the following month the Assembly made no reference whatever to the question of scandal and excommunication. Its time during these weeks was to all appearance given wholly to the preparation of its various advices for, and negotiations with, the sub- committee of the Commons then actively engaged in the settlement of the classical and provincial system.^ On the TheAssembiy 4th of Juue, howcvcr, the Presbyterian spirit of returns to the . . • i i t i • i t ' subject of the Assembly again broke loose, and yielding to oatk>n,'june, temptation the divines adopted an addition con- 1645. cerning scandals to the particular paper of advice to the sub-committee, which it was at the moment considering.* The sub-committee apparently re ceived the paper the same day, and immediately thereupon requested the Assembly to consider of a catalogue of sins, with the intention of having 1 Letters, ii., 267. " Ibid. ^ See supra, pp. 188 seq. ¦" MitcheU, 100. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 265 them added as particulars to the former vote of chap. ii. the House. That a fierce faction fight was pro- 1645. ceeding in the sub-committee is quite apparent, although all details are hidden from us. But it is further plain, as will be seen, that the sub-com mittee, which included the indefatigable Presby terian member. Rouse, was strongly inclined to propitiate the clerical spirit. Immediately on receiving the sub -committee's a second request for this fresh or additional enumeration of of scandals™ sins, the Assembly set to work to draft it,' Sth to 13th June. Not content, however, with preparing TheAssembiy the catalogue, it proceeded to appoint a committee unlisted ^' to draw something to be added by way of desire j,"er th°e^°° that there may be some general proposition to eldership, leave it to presbytery to proceed in other cases or rariiy shelves scandals [not enumerated] of the like nature as in those [enumerated], and some reasons for such a clause,"^ adding a request to the Scotch Com missioners to assist in the preparation. This addition was completed on the 13th of June, and at once taken to the sub-committee of the Com mons.' The latter body, however, would appear to have demurred to the responsibility of receiving such a paper as out of its power (being not strictly relevant to the only matter which it had in hand on reference from the House, viz.. Church govern ment and its erection). The Assembly was there fore confronted with the necessity of leaving out the catalogue or of presenting it direct to Parlia ment itself, as advice concerning the Sacrament. The latter course was adopted, 16th June. A ' MitcheU, 100-104. ^ Ibid., 108. " Ibid., 104. 266 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.il committee was appointed to draft it, and on the 1645. following day it was presented to the House by Mr. Marshall.' It would appear, however, that at the last moment, for prudential reasons, the im portant additional clause in which the Assembly desired a practically unlimited jurisdiction was withdrawn and only the simple request for a fresh catalogue of sins was given in. No immediate notice of this paper was, however, possible. Through the remainder of this month, and the most of July, both House and Assembly were busily occupied with the discussion of the com pleted draft of Church government and the pro posals for the instant erection of presbytery. Accordingly, it was not until late in July that the Commons could return to the consideration of the Assembly's desires concerning excommunication. On the 25th of that month, the day on which the Commons practically agreed to the directions for the elections of elderships, it ordered "the last paper from the Assembly of Divines concerning scandal " to be referred to the consideration of the Grand Committee for Religion.^ On the same day the Assembly appointed a committee to draw up a petition and a narrative to be presented to both Houses for the hasting of the business of the sacraments.' This paper was reported, debated and adopted at the following session on Monday, 28th July, and on the 31st ordered to be sent up to both Houses in the name of the Assembly.* On the 1st of August it was 1 MitcheU, 104 ; C. J., iv., 176, 17th June, 1645. ^ C. J., iv., 218. 3 MitcheU, 116. - Ibid., 117. The Com mons con sider the Assembly'sdemands.July, 1645. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 267 accordingly presented as the Assembly's "humble Chap. ii. petition in pursuance of their humble advice formerly iSi! delivered into the House concerning persons not to be ^-^^ ^^ admitted to the Sacrament ". semWy's At the time of the presentation of this ive^h. petition," paper from the Assembly, the Commons was ^'^^"^*' ^^^' actually engaged on the consideration of the pre- ^.^^ ^^^ ^^ ceding paper of 17th June. Several votes had aleady f?r an un- passed in Grand Committee adopting other notori- diction for- ous and scandalous sins, as requested by the ™^ ^ ^^ ^' divines in that paper. Accordingly, when the deputation from the Assembly came with their new request for additions to be made to the cata logue of scandals, the House, possibly with some surprise, informed them that the matter had been in consideration all day, and that many of their desires were already granted.' This new petition of the Assembly, however, desired something more than an addition to the catalogue of sins. It contained that clause con cerning a general remainder jurisdiction which had formerly been proposed for insertion in the paper of 17th June, 1645, but which may very possibly have been prudentially kept out of that earlier petition.^ The present "humble petition" de sired in brief that all [not a selected and strictly defined list] of scandalous persons sho.uld be kept from the sacraments, " for if any scandalous sins deserve abstention, then hkewise all other scan dalous sins do lie under the same demerit, and by parity of reason should undergo the like censure ". ' Whittaker's Diary, 446, 1st August ; 0. J., iv., 226 ; L. J., vii., 522 ; MitcheU, 118. ' See supra, p. 266. 268 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. 1645^ The As sembly's petition in support of the demand, Sth August, 1645. Five days later Mr. Vines made a motion in the Assembly "to move the Houses for the pre serving of the sacraments pure, because the ordi nance is drawing [in either the Grand Committee or the sub-committee of the Commons] up only for seven sins ". The Assembly thereupon appointed a committee to consider what was fit further to be done by them to discharge their duties and consciences in this important matter.' It may be significant that Calamy and Dr. Temple moved for leave to be absent for some days from the Assembly, and that Dr. Lightfoot entered his dissent. But the Assembly was resolute, and, after nominating the committee, desired the Scotch Commissioners to assist at it. On the following day, 7th August, the committee reported a petition which was instantly read, debated and voted to be sent up.- Accord ingly, on the 8th of August, this third petition was presented to both Houses. In presenting it. White, the Assessor of the Assembly, informed the Commons "that there is not a matter of higher concernment for the glory of God and peace of this Church than the matter of this petition, nor was anything ever presented to the House with more zeal and tenderness of conscience ".' Anticipating the conclusions of the Parlia mentary Committee — of whose debates it could not be supposed cognisant — the divines appealed to the Solemn League and Covenant, pleaded that the power of excluding from the Sacrament could 1 MitcheU, p. 118-19, 6th August. ^Ibid., 119. 'C. J., iv., 234 ; L. J., vii., 532; MitcheU, 120. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 269 not be arbitrary seeing it was Hmited by the Chap.ii. exactest law, the word of God, nor could be styled leS! inconsistent with the liberties of the subject, seeing the Sacrament was not a matter of civil liberty or right, and pointed to the example of other Christian states which had given to the eldership full exercise of the power of censures. They even concluded with a threat : " Should things be so ordered (which God forbid) that any wicked and scandalous person might without control thrust himself upon this Sacrament, we do evidently foresee that not only we but many of our godly brethren must be put upon this hard choice, either to forsake our stations in the ministry, which would be to us one of the greatest afflictions, or else to partake in other men's sins". For the moment both Houses returned a civil answer. The Commons promised to take it into further consideration.' It is to this period that belongs Baillie's undated letter, ii., 306, in which he gives so vivid an account of the agitation which the question produced. The most part of the House of Commons, especiallie the Agitation lawyers, whereof there are many and divers of them very able J^"^^° ''y . , , . the question. men are either half or wholfe Erastians, believing no Church government to be of divine right but all to be a humane institution depending on the will of the magistrates. About this matter Whittaker's Diary, 448, Sth August. The House in Grand Committee, myself in the ohair. Proceeded to consider how the ministers of the Assembly might be satisfied in their desire of having some other scandalous sins expressed. A sub-committee was appointed to consider thereof to oaU unto them some of the divines to advise and debate with them concerning it. Speaker in the chair. Divers ministers of the Assembly came concerning suspension, aUeging divine right vidth a threat of resignation. 270 THE assembly's constructive WORK. Chap. II. we have had at diverse tymes much bickering with them : now 1045^ ' it is come to a shock. Ever since the directorie came out we have been pressing for a power to hold aU ignorant and scandal ous persons from the table : with much adoe this was granted ; but soe as we behooved to sett down the poynts of knowledge the want whereof should make one ignorant, upon this we agreed. But for the scandalous, where we had long essayed, we could not make such ane enumeration, but alwayse we found more of the lyke nature which could not be expressed ; therefore we required to have power to exclude aU scandalous as weU as some. The generali they would not grant as including ane arbitrarie and ilUmited power. Our advyce was that they would goe on to sett up their Presbyteries and Synods with so much power as they could gett, and after they were once settled then they might strive to obtain their full due power. But the synod [the Assembly of Divines] was in ane other mind ; and after diverse fair papers at last they framed a most zealous, clear and peremptor one wherein they held out plainUe the Church's divine right to keep off from the Sacrament aU who were scandalous, and if they cannot obtaine the free exercise of that power which Christ hath given them, they will lay downe their charges and rather choyse aU afflictions than to sinne by prophaning the Holy table. The House is highly inflamed with this petition, and seems resolute to refuse it. The Assemblie is also peremptor to have it granted. For upon this point they say depends their standing, aU the godly being resolved to separate from them if there be not a power and care to keep the prophane from the Sacraments. If the Lord assist us not in this difficultie it may be the cause of great confusion among us. The House has appointed a conference with us to-morrow afternoon, and we purpose to require a Grand Com mittee thereafter that we may press our interest of uniformity : we are hopefuU by God's help to obtaine our poynt if this jarr delay it not.i On the return of the divines to the Assembly, Mr. Rouse informed them that a sub-committee of the House had been appointed, and that it desired ' Letters, u., 307. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 271 the advice of such members of the Assembly as it chap. ii. might appoint.' i645. On the following Monday, llth August, accord ingly the Assembly proceeded to nominate a com mittee of twenty-four, to whom they desired the Scotch Commissioners might be added, " to advise and debate with the sub-committee of the House of Commons concerning a course to be settled touching suspension from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper".^ Having elected the committee the divines pro ceeded to pass resolutions strictly limiting the sphere of its action. Ordered. — This committee is not to present any list of Instructions scandalous sins tiU they have further order from the Assembly, l"^"™ ^^f ,. •' ¦' Assembly to nor in the debate and advice to recede from the sense of the its ovm sub- Assembly declared in their votes and petitions till the Assembly committee. is acquainted therewith. Ordered. — Not to conclude anything de novo till the Assembly be acquainted with it. Ordered. — The committee are to apply themselves especiaUy to these two particulars in their advice and debate : (1) the jus divinum of a power in church officers to keep scandalous persons from the Sacrament ; (2) the impossibiUty by any enumeration of sins to make a catalogue so sufficient as to preserve the Sacraments pure. Ordered. — This committee is to prepare a character of scandalous sins, and to report it to the Assembly with all convenient speed. ^ On the following day a request was communi- its trans- cated to the Assembly from the sub-committee of theTom- the Commons "that the divines be desired to™^it"ee. advise what notorious and scandalous sins, besides 1 Mitchell, 120. ' Ibid., 121. ' Ibid., 121, llth August, 1645. 272 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. thosc that are already voted by the Houses, and 1645. how such persons as are guilty of them shall be suspended from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and touching a course to be settled for suspension from the said Sacrament".' Upon debate of this message the Assembly resolved tO' A third draw up an enumeration of some particular sins to enumeration , iiii r-i th j.- e- of scandals 06 added by way ot instance. Ihe preparation of prepared. ^.j^j^ reply agitated the divines through their two succeeding sessions, 13th and 14th August.^ On the 18th of August Palmer reported to the Assembly rules about suspension from the Sacra ment, which were thereupon debated and ordered to be presented to the sub-committee, together with clauses relating to the examples and instances of the discipline of other [foreign] churches, re ported on the same day by Dr. Burgess. From the Parliamentary sub-committee these papers were passed on to the House. On the 20th of August, when the House was in Grand Committee, Mr. Tate reported from the sub-committee "a list of notorious sins which had been presented to them [the sub-committee] to be added to the other sins formerly voted in the House, and also a relation of the form used in many Protestant churches beyond sea in suspen sion, and of the form used in primitive times, and of the opinion of the Greek fathers and other divines, but the resolving of other notorious and scandalous sins to be added as aforesaid was deferred till another sitting".^ ' Mitchell, 121-22. ^ jj^-^^ ^22-23 ; BaUUe, u., 309. ^ Whittaker's Diary, 453. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 273 Meanwhile the city clergy — Presbyterian by Chap. ii. this time almost to a man — had taken up the 1645. cause of the Assembly. The cit On the 25th of August the divines of London ''i^i^gy J°™ 'n presented a petition to the Commons' on this subject of the safeguarding of the Sacrament, and praying for fulness of power without unnecessary restraint to be left in the hands of the presbyteries. Under the combined influence of Scotch Com missioners and city divines, the Grand Com mittee temporarily gave way on this momentous issue, and on the 26th of August voted that the words and other notorious scandalous sins should be added to the offences formerly voted. Which vote I reported to the House, but the House had a long debate about it and could not that day resolve it but deferred it tiU next sitting.^ Again, on the 29th, the House debated this The Com- report of Whittaker's from the Grand Committee, ^^'11^" but could come to no resolution.'' falter in their opposition to the In the Assemblie (writes BaiUie *) we are goeing on demand. languidlie with the Confession of Faith and Catechisme. The mindes of the Divines are much enfeebled by the House, their delay to grant the petition, a power to seclude from the table all scandalous persons as well as some. Again, on the 3rd of September, the House 1 C. J., iv., 253 ; L. J., vu., 558. ^ Whittaker, 455. This is, as far as I know, the single but quite sufficient authority for the statement in the text, and the entry constitutes Whittaker's one great contribution to the history of the subject. The Journals of the House of Commons and all the ordinary authorities are absolutely silent about this unexpected (but happily averted) surrender of its position by the Parliament. ' Ibid., 455-56. * Letters, u., 315. VOL. I. 18 274 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.ii. proceeded to take into consideration the report. 1645. The recommendations consisted of two : — 1. The addition of the words " and other notorious scandal ous sins " to be added to the offences justifying exclusion from the Sacrament. 2. A new proposition empowering elderships when first constituted to admit persons to the Sacrament only after trial and examination. But Whittaker in his Diary only refers to the former of these as presenting the great difliculty. " After the long debate, the variety of opinion was such that they thought fit to recommit it to the consideration of the Grand Committee." ' Three days later, 7th and Sth September, the Grand Committee proceeded in the renewed discus sion of the above clause, " and after long debate, But com- resolved that some cautions should be considered the™doptk.n of to limit the cognisacion of the presbytery, that of cautions. Jt should uot extend to causes of such and such nature ".^ In addition to taking this action, which was undoubtedly meant by way of compromise, the Grand Committee further discussed, through its sessions of the 10th, 12th and 19th, other scandal ous oflences, presented from the sub-committee, to be added to the list.^ But, returning on the 23rd September to the more vital question of the safe guards to be erected against the presbytery itself, it resolved that a " Standing Committee of Lords and Commons should be nominated to consider of such other causes of suspension as should be pre- ' Whittaker's Diary, 458. ¦^Ibid., 459. -¦> Ibid., 461, 462, 464. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 275 sented to them from the eldership, and by that, committee to be presented to Parliament, and Par liament not sitting, that committee to be judges „ ° Jo Propose a of it .' Three days before this, on the 20th of standing Parlia- September, the House of Commons had been made mentary acquainted with a paper which was being busily of°A^earfor canvassed in the city for subscriptions touching enumerated,' this matter of Church government, then under ^^p*' ^^*^- debate in the House. They promptly voted it scandalous to their proceedings, and appointed a committee to prepare a declaration concerning the matter of the paper, and to find out the authors of it.^ Without suffering itself, however, to be turned aside by such an incident, on the 26th of September the Grand Committee reported several votes con cerning such other particular sins for which persons guilty should be suspended from the Sacrament. In brief these votes were as follows : — ' The Presbytery may exclude from the Sacrament wor shippers and makers of images, etc., persons confessing them selves not to be in charity, senders or carriers of chaUenges, any using dancing, gaming, masking, etc., etc., on the Lord's Day, or resorting to plays, or selling or travelUng on that day, any repairing to witches, wizards or fortune-teUers, any who assaults his parents, magistrates or elders, any person legaUy attainted of barratry, forgery, extortion, perjury or bribery. Two cautions the committee had itself recom mended : — 1. That the presbytery should not have cognisance of any matter concerning payments, contract, demand, conveyance er title. 2. No use should be made at a trial of any confession or proof made before the eldership. ^VThittaker's Diary, 465-66. 2 76id, iv., 282. ' 3C. J., iv., 288-90. 276 THE assembly's constructive WORK. Chap.ii. To thcsc the Commons proceeded to add a ~^645! more drastic safeguarding clause, adopting the suggestion bodily from the Grand Committee, "that there be a Standing Committee of both Houses of Parliament to consider of causes of suspension from the Sacrament not contained in the ordinance which is to be framed for that pur pose, unto which committee any eldership shall present such causes to the end that the Parliament if need require may hear and determine the same ". The Commons concluded by ordering the sub committee of the Grand Committee for Religion to prepare an ordinance to be brought in to compre hend all the votes passed in the House concerning Church government. These votes of the 26th of September were sent up to the Lords and agreed to by them on the 29th.' Two days later the Scotch Commissioners presented to the Lords a paper pressing this matter for the safeguarding of the Sacrament.^ But, without re garding the Scotchmen, the Commons proceeded with their ordinance.^ iL. J., vii., 609, 620. ^Ibid., 620 (paper dated 30th September, presented Ist October). ^ The discussion on the Scotch paper took place in the Commons on the 6th October. See Sir Robert Honeywood's letter to Sir H. Vane, senior (S.P.D., Car. L, DXL, no. 9, Oct. 7, 1645). "The chief thing of the moment which has lately been agitated was the debate yesterday in the House of Commons upon a paper some days since deUvered in by the Scots containing a reproach to the parhament for the payment of their army, their not settling the Presbyterian Govern- ment, in which business they used some sharp language and the very words of a petition projected to have been delivered from the city to the House for settlmg of said Government, which petition the House upou preoognizance had voted to be false and scandalous ... to all vphich there was an inchnation in the House to answer with neglect PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 277 On the 3rd of October the Grand Committee chap. ii. with Whittaker in the chair " all forenoon and after- 1645. noon debated concerning the power to be given to the presbytery for suspension, and an ordinance was brought in from the sub-committee containing the votes formerly passed in the House concerning the subject [of suspension] ".' Drawn up as it was, the whole ordinance was Disappoiut- a heavy blow to the Presbyterian clergy. " The l^gyti'th" Assembly is much discouraged," writes Baillie. m^n^'T^'r ' " They find their advyce altogether slighted ; a vos!>-^s. kind of [nominall] Presbyterie sett up ; sects daily spreading over all the land." ^ In their extremity the Assembly resolved upon a fast for the further carrying on of their advice to the Parliament that God might guide the House in a due way.^ On the 8th of October, on a report from the Grand Committee for Religion, which had at last, Whittaker thought, made a vote tending to the con clusion of the business, the House proceeded to adopt an additional series of votes. Persons keeping stews, etc., or marrying Papists, or consenting to their children marrying Papists, were made liable to suspension from the Sacrament, and with regard to the further extension of the catalogue of excommunicable sins an additional enough, but 1 am told that my brother [in law] Vane Jun'' showed great judgment in turning all into a fair way by proposing . . . and for the Presbyterian government it was ordered to be set up, but not with that latitude of power which the Assembly of Divines desired, which the sense of the House could not admit " The resolutions in the Commons Journals, iv., 298, do not notice the Church question at aU. 1 Whittaker's Diary, 470. ^Letters, U., 320. ' MitcheU, 134-47, 6th October. 278 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. regulation was made that such sins not enumerated 1645. in the above votes might be certified from the con gregational eldership to the classis, and from the classis to the above-specified committee of the House of Commons, " to the end that Parliament, if need require, may hear and determine the same ".' On the same day the draft of an ordinance for putting in execution these several votes concerning the keeping of scandalous and ignorant persons from the Sacrament was reported, read a first and second time and committed.^ On the 10th of October, the amendments to the ordinance were reported and debated, and upon a division it was resolved by 43-40 to add the decisive words "and not otherwise until it be otherwise declared by both Houses of Parliament " [voted to be added to the clauses concerning the eldership's jurisdiction].^ Whittaker * puts the matter more plainly, " The ordinance was brought into the House from the committee to which it was committed, and with a negative clause that there should be no other causes of suspension but those, except such as should be allowed by both Houses of Parliament," 10th October. On the 15th of October, 1645, the ordinance was read a third time in the Commons,* a proviso 1 0. J., iv., 300 ; Whittaker's Diary, 471. ^ C. J., ibid. ^C. J.,iv., 303. * Diary, ill. ^C. J., iv., 308. Cp. S.P.D., Car. L, DXL, no. 14. Sir H. Vane, junior, to Sir H. Vane, senior, Oct. 14, 1645. " For church govern ment the ordinance is to be read the third time to-morrow when the great dispute wiU be whether the clause of restraining the Presbytery from suspending from the sacrament [for unenumerated scandals] wUI PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 279 added, and the whole adopted and ordered to be chap. il sent up to the Lords. 1645. The proviso is not specified, but it appears to be contained in the following resolution of the same day:— Eesolved that it be referred to the members of this House that are of the committee on the ordinance for establishing rules and directions for suspending ignorant and scandalous persons from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, to consider how it may be held forth to all the world, how other notorious and scandalous sinners not named in the said ordinance may be kept from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper.^ The ordinance was read in the Lords for the first time on the 16th of October, and a second time on the 18th. On the 20th it was read a third time, after some delay over the question of hearing the Divines of the Assembly before passing the ordinance. This proposal was negatived, and the ordinance was adopted and ordered to be forth with printed and published.^ The ordinance of the Lords and Commons as- The first sembled in Parliament together with rules and direc- ta^ radi-'^ tions concerning suspension from the Sacrament of^^°^^"^ the Lord's Supper in cases of ignorance and scandal ^°^^ October, is accordingly dated 20th October, 1645.^ On the 22nd, finding that the ordinance had been incorrectly printed. Parliament called it in, and ordered it to be suppressed, and referred it to the care of the Committee for Plundered Ministers to see to the proper printing thereof.* be agitated, though the House upon the second reading and engross ing resolved it in the affirmative." ' C. J., iv., 309. 2 L. j., vii, 649, 652. Ubid., 649. * The two texts can be compared in L. J., vn., 649, and C. J., iv., 309- 280 THE assembly's constructive work. The Parlia ment re opens the matter and asks for an additionalcatalogue of scandals. 27th Oct., 1645. As a matter of course, the divines, and the clerical spirit generally, were not contented with the ordinance, and did not for a moment intend to accept it as a final form or as satisfactory. "There can be no doubt that the Parliament consented to recur to the subject primarily under the impulse of the poignantly expressed discontent of the clerical mind at the insufficiency of the ordinance which had just passed. Only three days after its first and incorrect printing, Marshall moved in the Assembly for some consideration of the ordinance. " It is so short in some things that according to my present light we shall not be able to proceed in our ministry with a good conscience." ' He moved for a petition, and a committee was in the end appointed to draw some such petition for further relief or help from Parliament in the matter of the Sacrament. The form of it was reported the same day and agreed to, with the dis sent of Goodwin and others.- As the Assembly's Committee could not find an opportunity on the following day, the 24th of October, for the pre sentation of their paper to the Commons, it was kept in hand till the succeeding Monday, the 27th, when some addition was presented to it. On the following Thursday, 30th October, this latter was still in debate. It is therefore clear that this paper being unpresented could not be the ostensible cause of the order which the Commons made on the 27th of October,'' when it resolved to send a message to the Assembly to desire the divines to present to the House "such other notorious and ' MitcheU, 157. ^ Ibid., 158. ' C. J., iv., 324. presbyterian discipline. 281 scandalous sins in particular for which they desired Chap. ii. that persons guilty thereof may be suspended from i645. the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper ". This mes sage was brought into the Assembly on the 30th ¦of October, at the very moment that the divines were debating concerning their petition to the House on that identical subject.' The Assembly at once named a committee to consider the mes sage, desiring the Scotch Commissioners to be present.^ It was not until the 7th of November that the additional enumeration of scandals was reported from this committee of the Assembly, and it was only delivered to the House on the 12th.' Meanwhile the Commons had been proceeding as before on their own initiative. On the 31st it sat in Grand Committee with Whittaker in the chair, and " proceeded in consideration of a directory for a,dmonition and suspension and excommunication, which was heretofore * sent into us by the Assem bly : and only entered [began] it".^ At the same time the House, with a view to vindicating itself from the reflections which the attitude of the clerical mind towards its ordinance implied, had prepared a declaration touching its proceedings in the matter of Church government." At last, on the 12th of November, 1645, the Assembly presented to the House its humble advice ' MitcheU, 160. ^ Ihid. ^ Ibid., 161-62. *4th February, 1644-45, see supra, p. 257. From February to November the directory had lain practically unconsidered and neg lected by the Commons. 5 Whittaker's Diary, 479 ; C. J., iv., 327. ^ 28th October, C. J., iv., 326. For the time being, however, this was laid aside on the Sth of November (ibid., 336). 282 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. 1645! The addi tional cata logue presented 12th Novem ber, 1645. Impoliticand uncon stitutionalinterferenceof the Lon don clergy, 19th Novem ber, 1645. and request touching some more particulars to be added to the catalogue of scandalous offenders, according to the order of this House of 27th October, 1645. As usual the paper was read and referred to the Grand Committee for Religion.' Two days later, 14th November, this committee met with Whittaker in the chair, " and having voted two of the additional sins, and finding a difliculty in the third concerning the having of images of any person of the Trinity in a man's house, the com mittee referred it to be further considered of by the sub-committee, calling to them some of the Assembly of Divines to advise with them there upon ".^ The succeeding meeting of the Grand Com mittee, on the 19th of November, was interrupted by the presentation, through the aldermen of the city, of the petition of the ministers of London complaining of divers passages in the recent ordi nance, instancing defects in the enumeration of scandals and elsewhere, and desiring the establish ment of presbytery forthwith and greater power to be put in the hands of the tryers in regard to the election of elders. The House was highly incensed,. both at the implied censure of its own proceedings and at the method of the presentation of the peti tion, and after a long debate it returned a very sharp answer.'* ' C. J., iv., 339. Whittaker's Diary, 484-85. 'Whittaker's Diary, 486; C. J., iv., 348 ; L. J., vii., 346. After the House had voted to return this ansv^er requesting the divines to forbear in future to misrepresent and forejudge the proceedings of the House, the ministers themselves came and presented the same peti tion to the House (Whittaker, 486). It was presented to the Lords on PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 283 Leaving for future censure the offence thus chap. ii. given by the ministers, the Grand Committee con- iST" tinned, on the 21st of November, its consideration of the Assembly's paper concerning suspension, " and after long debate a sub-committee was appointed to consider of some questions to be moved to the Assembly concerning that matter, and to present them to the Grand Committee".' A week later the Grand Committee sat in con sideration of certain questions brought in by the sub-committee to be offered to the Assembly con cerning Church government, with the object of removing the obstructions that hindered the putting in execution the directions concerning the electing of elders, and the ordinance concerning scandal. It resolved to refer it to the same sub-committee to consider what power is fit to be granted to tryers of elders, and to present a draft of an Act for the purpose.^ On the 2nd of January, 1645-46, the Grand Committee again sat on these matters, and con sidered of both the above points complained of by the divines, " and of some good way to settle the foUowing day, and met with a simUar reception (L. J., vii., 714). The Commons referred it to the Committee for Examinations to inquire concerning the origin of the petition, and the method of its presentation to the Common CouncU (G. J., iv., 348, 19th November, 1645). On the Mth of March, 1645-46, a report was made concerning the breach of privUege by tbe Common CouncU of London in tbeir petition concerning Church government (Whittaker, 518). Five days later the Common CouncU presented their excuses, desiring that the petition might be obliterated from the Journals (ibid., 520 ; C. J., iv., 479). 1 Whittaker's Diary, 487. ^Ibid., 490; C. J., iv., 357, 28th November. 284 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. I645! The city championsthe cause of the clergy, January, 1646. them". Both questions were referred to a sub committee, "and Wednesday, seven night, was fixed for a fast to prepare us for settling of this great work of Church government".' Notwithstanding the severe rebuke which the London ministers had received at the hands of the Parliament, they did not rest till they had in veigled the city into an outspoken championship of their cause. On the ISth of January, 1645-46, the aldermen and common council presented a petition to the Parliament for the settling of Church government.^ We have gotten it (says Baillie ^) thanks to God, to this point that the mayor, aldermen and common councill and most of the considerable men are grieved for the increase of sects and heresies and want of Government. They have yesterday had a publick fast for it, and renewed solemnly their Covenant by oath and subscription ; and this day have given in a strong petition for settling of Church government and suppressing of all sects without any toleration. No doubt if they be constant they will obtain all their desires, for all know the ParUament here cannot subsist without London : so whatsomever they desyre in earnest and constantlie it must be granted. Where fore albeit they gave them a bafHing answer to their former petition a moneth agoe, yet considering the addresse of this in all its progresse, they have thanked them for it and promised a good answer speedilie. The Independents and all sects are wakened much upon it, and all will sturre, which way we doe not know yet. Acting under the incentive of this petition, the Grand Committee on the following day, 16th January, at the order of the House, returned to ' Whittaker's Diary, 502. " C. J., iv., 407 ; L. J., viu., 104. ' BaUUe, Letters, u., 337. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 285 the question of the suspension of the scandalous Chap.ii. "and in whom that power should be placed, 1645-6. and how other scandalous offences, besides those rru n 1 ^^ ipjjg Com- already enumerated should be judged".' On the ™°"s adopt 21st, on Whittaker's report from this committee, scheme for the House passed a series of resolutions extending unenu^ ° the list of excommunicable offences, and making ™antafs, provision for the trial, by the tryers, of exceptions 2is^ January, against elders elected. For the vexed question of the trial of unenumerated offences, the resolutions were as follows : — 7. There shaU be Commissioners appointed in every pro- Provincial or vince who shall have power to judge of any scandalous un- Ciounty Com- ^ JO J missioners of enumerated offence presented unto them for which the guilty Appeal pro- may be suspended. posed. 8. Upon the certificate of the judgment of said Commis sioners to the eldership that sueh an offence presented to them is scandalous, the said eldership may proceed to suspend. 12. Upon certificate made of such a scandalous offence not enumerated, the above Commissioners shall make certificate of the case, with their opinions thereof, to both Houses of Parlia ment with aU speed. 13. Upon such a certificate the House shall proceed to a final determination of the case.^ Part of these votes were considered of and passed in the Lords on the 16th of February.^ The part concerning the commissioners was in debate on the 16th, when on a division the votes were equal.* It was speedily apparent, however, that such an arrangement as the proposed commissioners ' Whittaker's Diary, 608 ; C. J., iv., 408. «C. J., iv., 412-13 ; 2Ist January, 1645-46. ^L. J., viu., 168, 174. * Ibid., 18T. 286 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.il gave the intensest dissatisfaction to the clergy. 1645-6. That presbytery should be under the control of a , committee of Parliament was bad enough, but it The proposal ^ proves even was quitc intolerable that for a central, and there- tionabie to f orc manageable Parliamentary Committee, should t eoergy. ^^ substituted a series of decentralised local lay bodies, wholly unmanageable by the clergy, and very probably at heart antagonistic to them. It concerns you (says BailUe,i writing to Eoberts, the minister of St. Augustine's, London), to be advysed without delay what is needful to be done. I think the Lords wiU make some alterations if they were dealt with. I wish by aU means that unhappie Court of Commissioners in every shyre may be ex ploded. If it must be so, let the new cases of scandals come to the Parliament by the letters of the eldership, or any other way, but not by a standing Court of Comnnssioners. You had need to be at your witts' end quicklie. . . . The Parliament wiU have a Court of CivU Commissioners erected in every shyre on pretence to make report to the Houses in every new case of scandaU, but realUe to keep down the power of the Presbyteries for ever, and hold up the head of sectaries. It's our present work to gett that crushed, and I hope we have done some good in this.^ It may be a mere coincidence that on the 29th of January, in the Assembly, Mr. Dury made report from the second committee, concerning Church officers and censures.^ But it is certainly The Com- significant of the agitation, as well as uncertainty for a moment, of the mind of the House of Commons, that a few days later, in response to a communication made from the Committee for Accommodation,* a pro- ' BaUlie, u., 346. ^ Ibid., BAB. Baillie to Dickson. = MitcheU, 183. ¦> Infra, U., 48-50. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 287 posal was made to give the Grand Committee Chap. ii. power to find out some expedient for settling the 1645-6. business concerning keeping the scandalous from the Sacrament, " notwithstanding any former order or resolution passed in this House ".' The motion to put this proposal was negatived. Instead of it the House ordered the Grand Committee to re ceive Mr. Bacon's report concerning the digesting into an ordinance the votes passed in both Houses concerning the matter of Church government.^ Accordingly, on the 18th February, the sub committee reported to the Grand Committee the draft ordinance for the election of elders throughout the kingdom, and of commissioners in every pro vince to receive complaint concerning such persons as should be suspended from the Sacrament." On Whittaker's report to the House, however, that body only voted the portions relating to the elec tion of elders.* These portions were passed by the Lords two days later, '^ and on the 26th ordered to be printed and published.® The Commons, meanwhile, were proceeding steadily with their ordinance for Church govern ment, of which the above votes were a part only. The whole ordinance was reported from the Grand Committee on the 27th of February. The last article concerning provision for appeals by elders was referred back to the sub-committee. The ^C. J., iv., 428, 4th February. 2 10th and llth February; C. J., iv., 436. 3 Whittaker's Diary, 510. ^C. J., iv., 446, 18th February, 1645-46. = L. J., viu., 177. ^Ibid., 187. See supra, pp. 202-3. 288 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.il remainder of the ordinance was voted, read a first 1645-6. and second time, and recommitted to the Grand Committee.' The recommitted portions of the ordinance were reported on the 3rd of March, and on the Sth of March the whole ordinance was read a third time, and after the offering and debate of several provisos, was passed and ordered to be sent up to the Lords. ^ On the following day the title of the ordinance was presented and voted, and on the 7th Holles, accompanied by the whole House, carried it up. " The soul of all laws," said Holles, in his speech at the bar of the Lords, " is execution, which this ordinance doth to those votes and ordinances formerly passed the Houses. This is the dawning of a glorious day which our an cestors hoped to have seen but could not." On the 13th of March the Lords voted the crucial item No. 14, which provided for commissioners of appeals, ten Lords entering their protest against it.* On the following day the ordinance passed the Upper House, with some slight amendments, promptly accepted by the Commons, and was forth- The second with Ordered to be printed ^ as an ordinance for ta^ryoSS- keeping of scandalous persons from the Sacrament of l^lllli, 14th ^^^ Lord's Supper, the enabling of congregations for March, 1646. the choicc of eMers, and supplying of defects in former ordinances, and directions of Parliament con cerning Church government.'' Such portions of this ordinance as related to 1 Whittaker's Diary, 512; C. J., iv., 455. '^Ibid., 513-16; Ibid., 460, 463. ^L. J., viii, 202. "Jfeid, 208. ^C. J., iv., 475; L. J., viii, 209; Whittaker's Diary, 518. " 14th March, 1645-46. presbyterian discipline. 289 the large and vital question of jurisdiction were as chap. ii. follow : 1646, March. iv., v., vi. The tryers of elders shall have power to try j^g provisions exceptions concerning the elections of said elders, to examine concerning the qualifications of elders, to remove the disqualified. ^^"^ '" ^°^' xiii. All renouncers of the true Protestant religion pro fessed in the Church of England, aU who maintain such errors as are subversive of the Articles of that religion, all makers of images or pictures of the Trinity, all in whom malice appears and they refuse to be reconciled, may be upon just proof sus pended from the Sacrament. xiv. In every Province persons shall be chosen by the Houses of Parliament that shall be Commissioners to judge of scandalous offences, not enumerated in any ordinance of Par Uament, to them presented : and the eldership of that con gregation, where the said offence was committed, shall upon examination and proof of such scandalous offence (in like manner as is done in the [case of] offences enumerated) shall certify the same to the said Commissioners, together with the proofs. And before the said certificate the party accused shall have liberty to make such defence as he shaU think fit before the said eldership, and also before the Commissioners, before any certificate shall be made to the Parliament. And if the said Commissioners, after examination of all parties, shaU de termine the offence so presented and proved to be scandalous, and the same shaU certify to the congregation, the eldership thereof may suspend such person from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in like manner as in cases enumerated in any ordinance of Parliament. XV. (Quahfications of such Commissioners). xvi. In ease of offences committed on the day of the Sacra ment the minister may temporarily suspend the accused, certifying the offence to the Commissioners within eight days, who shall proceed thereupon and certify the Parliament with all speed, and thereupon the Parliament shall proceed to a final determination. xvii. Said Commissioners shall assemble in a convenient place in each Province. VOL. I. 19 Chap. II. 1646, March. Disappoint ment of the clergy and Scotch 290 the assembly's constructive work. xviii. The Congregational Eldership, the Classis and the ' Province, shall have power by warrant under their hands, in aU cases whereof they have cognisance by any ordinance of Parliament to convent before them aU persons against whom complaints shaU be made, and the witnesses in the case. Upon complaint to the next Justice of Peace, the party refusing obedience to such warrant shall be brought before him, and in case of obstinate persisting shall be committed by the said Justice of Peace till he submit to the order. xix. Persons suspended in one congregation not to be received to Communion in another without a certificate from said congregation. XX. Ministers and elders may be suspended simUarly as above. xxi. In all cases of appeal the Classical, Provincial or National Assembly shall have power to proceed thereupon by examination of witnesses in like manner as the Congregational Eldership is enabled. xxii. On manifestation of repentance the suspended person may be readmitted. Baillie was well-nigh in despair over the Or dinance — as well he might be.' The Sectarian party is very malicious and powerfuU. They have carried the House of Commons and are lyke also to carry the House of Lords to spoile much our Church government. They have past an ordinance, not only for appeale from the GeneraU Assemblie to the Parliament, for two ruleing elders, for one minister in every church meeting, for no censure except in such particular offences as they have enumerat ; but also, which vexes us most, and against which we have been labour ing this moneth bygone, a Court of Civill Commissioners in every county, to whom the congregationall elderships must bring all cases not enumerat, to be reported by them, with their judgment, to the Parliament or their committee. This is a trick of the Independents invention of purpose to enervat and disgrace all our [Church] government, in which they have ' Letters, ii., 357, 6th March, 1646. presbyterian discipline. 291 been assisted by the lawyers and the Erastian partie. This Chap. II. troubles us aU exceedingly, the whole Assemblie and ministrie ' J^ over the kingdom. The body of the citie is much grieved with March. it, but how to help it we cannot weU tell. In a letter of approximately the same date, Baillie reveals to us the state of mind in the city {as seen through the Scotch spectacles) on the point of these County Commissioners of Appeal. The order of the House of Commons for Commissioners in and of the every shyre, though it be not as yet reported to the House of "i*?- Lords, is far advanced. The burgesses of Southwarke and some others of the nearest have named their Commissioners. The burgesses of London before they would name theirs were pleased to signify to my Lord Mayor their purpose ; whereupon yesternight a Common CounceU was caUed, which appointed a committee, the same that drew the petition [ut supra, pp. 282-3] to consider of that business, and if they found it convenient,, without more adoe to advyse with their burgesses upon the persons to be nominate. This day they mett : they were like, unanimousUe, to finde that Court of Commissioners contrarie to the Covenant and to be disavowed, but Alder man Foulkes did change them, and did perswade that what Uad passed the vote of the House should not be called by them contrare to the Covenant : yet the business is put off till Monday. If your burgesses [of London] have allowance, yea, were it but a connivance from the citie to name these •commissioners, they will be received in the whole kingdome. It were needful to take this business to serious consideraeion.i BaiUie's state of mind, as representing that of the Presbyterians generally, is indicated by the feverish frequency of his letters at this moment. Writing on what must have been the same or following day he assures his correspondent, Francis Hoberts, minister of St. Augustine's, that the com- ' Letters, u., 358. 292 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. March. Scotch Intrigues. mittee of the Common Council dishked the idea of these Commissioners the more they thought upon them, "and so doe other Common Councell men. I have good ground to conceave that it will be quite disclaimed". In a third letter, following im mediately after, he even proposed a scheme to the same Roberts for attempting to obstruct the passing of the ordinance in the Lords. Yesterday Mr. Eouse and Mr. Tate came to confer with us.i From them we learned that the new Ordinance whereby the most of your [the London minister's] grievances are remeeded is sent up to the Lords, that it is in [the Earl of] Manchester's hand to be reported speediUe ; that if he wUl carry it soe as the Lords scrape out all that concerns the Commissioners for shyres and put in their rowme the Classical Presbyteries to be reporters to the Parliament of all the not enumerat cases of scandalis, they are confident to carry in their House [i.e., the Commons] according to the Lords' amendment. Consider therefore if it were not expedient for you to speak with Mr. Ashe, that with all possible speed he might go to [the Earl of] Manchester and obtaine of him leave to peruse with you and Mr. Clerk that Ordinance. I am very hopeful that his Lordship will doe his uttermost endeavour to make the House of Lords assent not only to the mentioned amendment bot to others which you may find necessar to move on the sight of the Ordinance. If Mr. Ashe find it more expedient for you to go with him lest my Lord scruple to give the writings out of his House, you will doe well in my mind to goe. Allen's business and the citie 's zeale has much altered in a few dayes the temper of the House [of Commons] . Our friends there lift up their head, the sectaries are lower ; strick the iron while it is hott.2 ' Eouse, as a Parhamentary member of the Assembly of Divines, acted consistently as the go-between between the House and the Presbyterians of the Assembly. Tate had been chairman of the sub committee of the Commons for the drafting of the ordinance in ques tion, and was a perfervid Presbyterian (Whittaker's Diary, passim). 2 Baillie, Letters, u., 358-9 BaiUie to Mr. Ramsay. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 293 When, however, in spite of the protest in the Ohap^il Lords, the measure passed in the form in which it had left the Commons, the blow to the Presbyterian ^e^if ^Mch party was too heavy to be borne in patience. 1^46. ' Baillie openly indicates the intended resistance to it. The Erastian and Independent party joyning together in the Houses to keep off the [Presbyterian] Government so long as they were able, and when it was extorted to make it as lame and corrupt as they were able : yet at last, yesterday an ordinance came forth to supply the defects of all the former that soe without further delay we might goe to worke. We laboured so much as we were able before it came out to have it so free of exceptions as might be : but notwithstanding of all we could doe it is by the malignity of the fore- mentioned brethren in evill so filled with grievances that yet it cannot be put in practice. We for our part mind to give in a remon strance against it, the Assemblie will doe the like ; the city ministers will give the third ; but that which by God's help may prove most effectual is the zeale of the city itselfe. Before the ordinance came out they petitioned against some materialis of it. This both the Houses voted to be a breach of their privilege to offer a petition against anything that is in debate before them tiU once it be concluded and come abroad. This vote the city takes very well : its likelie to go high betwixt them.i On the 20th of March the Assembly, acting under the instigation of MarshaU, on whose con- '^^^^p^ science some things in the ordinance lay verypetitiou ^ . . agamst the heavy, appointed a committee to prepare a petition ordinance, 1 -rT T , -r 1 .Ll 20th March, to the Parliament.^ It was drawn up the same i646. day and presented to both Houses on the 23rd of March. ^ ' Letters, u., 360-1, 17th March, 1645-6. " MitcheU, 208. = 0. J., iv., 485 ; L. J., vui., 227, 232 ; Whittaker's Diary, 521. 294 THE assembly's constructive work. Ohap. II. ^ The petition complained of defects in the 1646, enumeration of scandalous sins, very many such ordinarily committed in all places and formerly presented by the Assembly being stiU omitted, and it characterised the Courts of Commissioners as so contrary to that way of government which Christ hath appointed in the Church that they dared not practice according to that provision. They there fore prayed to be enabled to keep back all scandal ous from the Sacrament, a power belonging to them by Divine right. The petition was practically a threat of open disobedience on the part of the The Parlia- Presbyterian clergy, and the House was naturally "ntoentof highly inccused and determined to express its dis- the petition, pleasure, finding it no less a breach of privilege than the previous petition from the Common Council of the city.' ' On the 27th of March, the House appointed the Grand Com mittee to consider of the petition and the manner of its presentation, with power to hear the divines, put questions to them, and receive their answers in writing (Whittaker, 523 ; C. J., iv., 4921 The Grand Committee debated this question of the breach of privUege on the 1st of AprU (Whittaker, 524), and again on the Sth, " a debate that took up the whole day from morning tiU night without any intermission, and divers questions were propounded but no vote passed " (ibid., 527). On the llth of AprU, it was voted a breach of privilege (ibid., 528 ; C. J., iv., 506), and on the I6tb the House appointed a committee to state the particulars of the breach of privUege, and to present to the divines certain questions reported from the sub-committee of the Grand Committee concerning the power of ruling elders aud divine right (Whittaker, 529; C. J., iv., 511). On the following day the House adopted, and ordered to be printed, a declaration for taking off the misrepresentations put upon the Parliament, especially with regard to this article of religion (C. J., iv„ 513). On the 18th of AprU, the Committee of the House reported the narrative of fact concerning the breach of privUege and the questions to be proposed to the divines (Whittaker, 529 ; C. J., iv., 514). On the PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 295 Furthermore, as it proved, the hopes of the chap.il Presbyterians that the city clergy and the city i646, itself would support the Assembly in their ^^^' temerous action was doomed to disappointment. The city shamefully succumbed, and by a few The city words were made as dumb as fish, whUst the suppo^rtof\he remonstrance put in by the Scotch Commissioners °^^'^^- against the ordinance received no answer, and though the ministers of London subscribed a peti tion a good deal higher than either the Assembly's or the Scotchmen's remonstrance, there is no record of its presentation.' The city ministers (writes BaUlie) are to give in one [petition] much higher, not so much upon hope of success as resolution to deUver their conscience. The citizens say they wiU give in ane other for the same end, but we doe not believe them ; their fainting has given our cause one of the greatest wounds yet it has gotten. - What, therefore, finally induced the House to reconsider the whole question of the Commissioners of Appeal does not appear on the surface. Possibly it was the presence of the king as a prisoner in the Scottish camp, and the sense of growing danger The Com- from the Independents. Whatever the cause, on the ^^^essTe^^' 18th of May, 1646, the Commons had a long de- "^bfecf May, bate concerning a further enumeration of scandals.^ i646, 21st the narrative was adopted in the House and eight of the ques tions (ibid., 517). The remainder was adopted on the following day, and are entered in the Journals (C. J., iv., 519, 22nd AprU, 1646). The vote and questions were communicated to the divines on the 30th of AprU (MitcheU, 225). For the continuation of this subject, see under Jus Divinum, infra, pp. 305 seq. 1 Letters, U., 366-7. 2 Ibid., 356, 23rd AprU, 1647. "" C. J., iv., 549. 296 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. 1646, May. and return to their original pro ject of a Standing Parliamentary Com mittee of Appeal. The Journals only record the appointment of a committee ad hoc with power to advise with the Assembly therein, but Whittaker adds in his Diary the words : " And that there should be also some consideration had of the lay Commissioners es tablished in the last ordinance".' On receipt of the order the Assembly promptly appointed a committee to attend on the Committee of the House of Commons for the purpose of advice.^ Three days later, 21st May, the House resolved after a long debate by 110-99, "that leave be given at this time to take into consideration that part of Church government which concerns the Commis sioners ".' The substance of the adjourned debate on the following day is not stated in the Journals. But in Whittaker's Diary it is stated very succinctly, " very long debate whether they should consider of laying aside the lay Commissioners and find out some expedient to supply that which was to be performed by them, whether by prohibitions or some other way ; but resolved upon nothing but that to-morrow they would hear what could be said for or against them ".* On the foUowing day a member, Sam Browne, offered an expedient for taking away lay Commis sioners in every Province, and putting in their place a Standing Committee of Parliament to sit at West minster — a proposal which practically carried the House back t&- the first position which it had ' Whittaker's Diary, 538. 2 MitcheU, 233. ' C. J., iv., 552 ; Whittaker's Diary, 539. * Whittaker's Diary, 540, 22nd May, 1646. PRESBYTERIAN DISCIPLINE. 297 a,ssumed on this important question.' The sub- chap. ii. stance of the proposal was adopted and ordered to i646, be drawn up into an ordinance, after a long debate which lasted till 4 p.m., the committee being in structed to alter it on certain points which were controverted. Under the stimulus of a strong Presbyterian petition ^ from the city, the House, on the 2nd of June, read the ordinance a first and second time and committed it with the proviso that it was to be in force for only three years. ^ On the following day it was reported, adopted and ordered to be sent up to the Lords.* On the Sth the Upper House agreed to the The final -,. ¦ T ¦; 1 r 1 1 i j_i ordinance for ordinance unanimously,^ and four days later the scandal, 9th ministers of the Province of London were ordered ''^^^' '^^^' to put the Church government into execution. "^ In this final form the ordinance contained no further enumeration of scandalous offences, although the Committee of the Assembly had distinctly offered an addition.' It merely appointed a Com mittee of Lords and Commons as judges of unenu merated offences in place of the previous bodies of Commissioners in the respective Provinces and Counties, and prescribed the method of its pro- 123rd May, C. J., iv., 553; Whittaker's Diary, 540. 2 26th May, 1646, C. J., iv., 555 ; L. J., viii., 334. ^VThittaker's Diary, 543 ; C. J., iv., 561. *3rd May, Wliittaker's Diary, 543-44 ; C. J., iv., 562. ^L. J., vui., 358. " C. J., iv., 569, 9th June. ' On the 20th of May the Assembly resolved that tbe drinking of healths be added to the enumeration as a scandalous offence (MitcheU, 233-35). On the foUowing day they added also " neglect of famUy prayer" and refusal to instruct families in religion. 298 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. ccdure, viz., elderships to certify offences and leie! proofs direct to said committee, complaints of irregular procedure in the eldership to lie before the next three Justices of Peace who are likewise to certify said committee.' With this ordinance the Presbyterian clergy had, perforce, to be content. Although with qualifications and safeguards the wooden sword of excommunication had been at last in reality put into their hands. It only remained for them to get their system erected and to wield the weapon. § IV. — The Jus Divinum of Presbytery. Almost from the opening days of the West minster Assembly the question of the Divine right of Church institutions and government had been in agitation. It was not so much that the conceit of Divine right had laid hold on the clerical mind from the outset of the struggle. It was simply Origin of the that iu the Orderly course of its constructive de- DiJiSeVght bates the Assembly was thrown back at every of Presbytery. pQJj^^ q^ ^q ^|jg precedent question — what was the corresponding or original form or office in the Primitive Church, — what had Christ himself insti tuted ? Was, for example, the doctor or teacher an ordinary and perpetual officer in the Church e.v instituto Christi, and therefore of perpetual endur ance, or was he merely temporary without any institution of full office for the time to come? SimUarly for the question of the office of the ruling lay elder. In the debates of December, 1643, the 'C. J., iv., 562. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 299 laymen of the Assembly wished the matter to be Chap. ii. argued from the point of view of expediency. The iST" divines persisted in arguing it only from analogy with the institutions of the Jewish and early Christian Church.' There needed only such an environment as that of the events of the years 1643-46 to produce from such a root a full-grown doctrine of Presbyterian jus divinum. At the very outset of the debates on Church government, the Scotch Commissioners and the Independents (at one for once) had desired that the debate should be so ordered as to treat, firstly, the question whether a platform of Church government at all is laid down in the Scriptures, before proceeding to the logically subsequent ques tion, viz., what, if so, that platform was. In the end, however, the Assembly, overruling for once both its friends the Scotch Commissioners and its enemies the Independents, proceeded in the reverse order. It concluded a sovereign power of govern ment in Christ, the Head and King of the Church, and that the Apostles had received the keys from His hands immediately, and did exercise them in all Churches of the world and upon all occasions. Only after establishing so much did the Assembly proceed to inquire whether there was any such government now in the Church, unanimously re solving it in the affirmative. The result was equiva lent to a declaration that the government of the Church which Christ had instituted was in the Church to-day, i.e., that it was of Christ's institu tion for all time, and therefore of Divine origin and 1 Lightfoot, xiu., 54, 74, 77, 82-83. 300 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. right. The subsequent course of the Assembly's debates on this head has been already described.' The point to notice is not the minor one of the difference between Presbyterian and Independent as to the proper order of the debate, but the greater one of the agreement between them on the abstract question of the jus divinum. They were at one in the conviction that the form of Church govern ment had been instituted by Christ, that it was of Divine origin and right. They differed only in their opinion as to what that form actually was which Christ had instituted. Of course such a result was not achieved merely in the Westminster Assembly, and in the year 1644. It had been the heritage of presbytery from the days of Calvin ; it was implied in the very begin nings of Independency, and had been proclaimed in explicit terms by Henry Jacob. But it was only by and through its formulation in the West minster Assembly that the doctrine of a jus dirinum of Church government appears as an official phenomenon in Commonwealth Church History, and as such came into conflict with the lay sense of the nation as concentrated and repre sented in the Parliament. Instinctive From the first the Commons were quick-sight- the Pariia-° ©dly jcalous OU the point. D'Ewes has preserved ™arm*fro'm ^^ ^"^^"^J ^"- ^^^ ^^- Diary pointedly demonstrating '^^^s very out- this for a period as early as March, 1643-44. The Assembly had sent a letter to the Churches in Zealand, and received a reply. On the 13th of March both letters were read in the Commons, and ' See supra, pp. 155 seq. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 301 the Assembly's letter was ordered to be printed. Ohap. ii. So much alone the Commons Journals^ record. But D'Ewes continues : — It was moved also to the House by the Speaker to know if they would have the other letter [the reply of the Zealand Churches] printed, but Mr. Selden spake earnestUe against it, shewing that in that letter they challenged an ecclesiastical or Church government to be jure divino, with which the civil magistrate had nothing to do, and this he saied was contrarie to the ancient law of England and the use heere received, and therefore advised that we should forbeare to print that letter, which after some debate was thought to be the best way.^ In the matter of ordination, too, as will be seen, the Erastian action of the Houses, both Lords and Commons,^ had been equally decisive. This decided attitude of the Parliament at such an early date is all the more remarkable as indicative of its permanent disposition ; for explicitly, and in so many words, the Assembly had not yet formulated a claim to the jus divinum — not from any want of desire, but from what can only be described as policy. So much appears conclusively from Marshall's speech on the 27th of March, 1645, on the occasion of the intro duction by Nye of the Independents' propositions concerning the power of congregations. Some of these propositions (he said) concern Church government general and some particular congregations. . . . The first run upon this, a jus divinum of the platform and of the particular officers. . . . Concerning this by a vote in the Assembly you did lay aside the disputing of that point whether ' C. J., in., 426. 2 D'Ewes' Diary, Harl. MS. 166, fo. 40. 3 See infra, pp. 325-32. 302 THE assembly's constructive work. Ghap. II. a perfect platform of government [is prescribed in the Scrip- ' tures] . . . and for the jus divinum you have been careful to go this way not to seek for a Divine institution. It's contrary to the whole way you have gone, and to the intent and purpose of the Parliament. 1 TheAssembiy ^^ was uot uutU the qucstion of jurisdiction ?°™™*^^ came to be disputed between the Assembly and claim of jus the Parliament that the divines committed them- aivmum, Juue, 1645. selves purposcly and definitely to a claim of jus divinum. In response to the desire of the sub committee of the House of Commons, which had requested the divines to prepare an additional catalogue of scandalous excommunicable sins, the Assembly had, in June, 1645, appointed a com mittee to draw the addition. Not content with the mere specifying of certain further scandals, they also drafted, as has been seen, a general clause to include all "like" sins unenumerated,^ and as a corollary to this they debated "about adding another reason to show and hold out the jv^ divinum. We claim our poiver of Je.ms Christ." ^ Accordingly, the Assembly's petition of 1st August, 1645, contains both the claim and the assertion thus meditated. Albeit there may be amongst learned and pious men dif ference of judgment touching the particular kind and form of ecclesiastical poUty, and some particular points and of&cers there unto belonging : yet in this one point there is a general consent that as Christ hath ordained a government and governors in His Church and according to His wiU to order the same, so one special and principal branch of that government is to exclude ' MitcheU, 72. 2 Ibid., 101, 103, 5th and 12th June, 1645. ' Ibid., 103, 13th June. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 303 from ecclesiastical communion such as shall publicly scandalise Chap. II. and offend the Church . . . nor do we find that there hath ' J^ ' been any great doubt or question made thereof in the Church, August. until Erastus, a physician, who by his profession may be sup posed to have had better skiU in curing of the diseases of the natural than the scandals of the ecclesiastical body, did move the controversy. Eleven days later, as the controversy between the Assembly and the sub-committee of the House of Commons developed, the divines appointed their own committee to negotiate, ordering it not to recede from the already declared sense of the Assembly's votes, but in their negotiations to apply themselves to two particulars, of which the first was " the jus divinum of a power in Church officers to keep scandalous persons from the Sacra ment ".' The course of the succeeding strife or dispute, incidentally as has been already seen, held through the sue- debateft^e ^ ceeding ten months. But before that strife had {'^*^*''^g™ reached the point of the jus divinum, the Assembly S,°?ff ^^"^ ?f had been drawn a second time, and in another i646. ' connection, into a formulation of its views and claim in regard to it. The debate of the 2Sth Article of the Confession of Faith (" of the Church ") had involved the question of the institution by Christ of Church government in the hands of Church officers as distinct from the government of the civil magistrate. The debate hereupon held the Assembly from the 6th to the 17th of March, 1645-46,^ and the defence, which would seem to have fallen entirely on Coleman, took the purely 1 MitcheU, 121, llth August, 1645. 2 Ibid., 193-206. March. 304 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. Erastiau line of argument that the Church of the 1645-6, New Testament held out no such distinction be tween civil and ecclesiastic government. Selden's name is not mentioned in the debate, and Lightfoot spoke little and only eclectically. The discussion, synchronising as it did with the publication of the Ordinance for Church government of March, 1645- 46, had the effect of compeUing the Assembly, on the 19th of that month, to appoint a fresh com mittee " to prepare something for the Assembly to assert the jus divinum of Church censures, and in whose hands jure divino they are ".' And in the petition which was drawn up on the following day against the Parliament's ordinance the divines re iterated their claim "as an attribute of that way of government which Christ hath appointed in His Church to keep back from the Sacrament ... of which we must, as formerly in our petition we have done, say it expressly belongeth to them by Divine right and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ " •' Beyond the wording of this petition it is not certain whether the last named Committee of the Assembly for the jus divinum ever made a report on its reference or not. On the 26th of March it was ordered to make a report on the following Tuesday, but the parallel matter which occupied the Assembly from that latter date through several sessions seems to have originated in a report of two articles of the Confession of Faith {ciz.. Articles 26 and 30 "of the Church" and "of Church censurers"''). It is 1 MitcheU, 207. ''Ibid., 209-10; L. J., viu., 232. ^Ibid., 212-15. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 305 therefore probable that the action of the House of Ohap. ii. Commons anticipated the work of the Assembly's 1645-6, r^ . "^ March. Committee. The Assembly's petition of the 19th of March The As- had been presented on the 23rd.' On the 27th the pt™tion\f Commons appointed a committee to consider of iele, kital'^to the manner of presenting it, and on llth April 1^^^^,^''''^" voted it a breach of privilege. They further drew Queries oon- '. '-I •' cerning the up a declaration for taking off the misrepresenta- jus divinum. tion put upon the Parliament, in which they de clared their inability to consent to the " granting of an arbitrary and unlimited power and jurisdiction to near 10,000 judicatories to be erected within this kingdom, and this demanded in such a way as is not consistent with the fundamental laws and government of the kingdom, and whereof we have received no satisfaction in point of conscience or prudence ".- At the time of the appointment of the committee of 27th March, the Commons had further em powered it to propound to the divines what ques tions they should think fit, and to receive their answers thereunto in writing. This committee, which is subsequently described as the sub-committee of the Grand Cdmmittee for Eeligion (doubtless the sub-committee which had throughout been in close touch and negotiation with the Assembly on this matter of discipline), had prepared at some time previous to the 16th of April, 1646, a series of questions to be propounded to the divines. On the latter date these questions were iC. J., iv., 485 ; L. J., vui., 232. ^ C. J., iv., 513, I7th AprU, 1646. VOL. I. 20 306 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.ii. read in the House, and were practically handed 1646. over to the discretion of a new Committee for the Breach of Privilege to revise as they saw fit' Two days later Sir Arthur Haselrig reported the narrative of the matter of fact concerning the breach of privilege together with the draft questions.^ The narrative was adopted by the House on the 21st April and the questions on the 22nd.^ The latter were as follows : — The Queries Whereas it is resolved by the House of Commons that aU the'j'M™™^ persons guilty of notorious and scandalous offences shaU be divinum,22aA suspended from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, the said pn , 1646. House desires to be satisfied by the Assembly of Divines in these questions following : — 1. Whether the parochial and congregational elderships appointed by ordinance of Parliament or any other congrega- liional or presbyterial eldership are jure divino and by the wiU and appointment of Jesus Christ, and whether any par ticular Church government be jure divino and what that government is ? 2. Whether all the members of the said elderships as members thereof, or which of them, are jure divino and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ ? 3. Whether the superior assemblies or elderships, viz., the classical, provincial and national, whether all or any of them 'C. J., iv., 511, 16th April, 1646. Resolved — That the questions to be propounded to the diviues, oon_ sidered by a sub-oommittee of the Grand Committee for Religion, and read in the Grand Committee, shaU be now read in the House. Resolved — That further power shaU be given to the committee (for the breach of privUege) to prepare questions to be propounded to the divines upon the matter of Divine right for them to return theu- answer in writiug. They are likewise to consider of the former questions considered of by the Grand Committee, aild what altera tions and additions are fit to be made to those questions, and what other things are fit to be propounded. 'Ibid., 514, 18th AprU. '^Ibid., 517-18. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 307 and which of them are jure divino and by the will and appoint- Chap. II. ment of Jesus Christ ? " ^^r 4. Whether appeals from congregational elderships to the April 22. classical, provincial and national assemblies or to any of them, and to which of them, are jure divino and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ, and are their powers upon such appeals jure divino, and by the will and appointment of Jesus Christ ? 5. Whether ceoumenical assemblies are jure divino and whether there be appeals from any of the former assemblies to the said oecumenical jure divino and by the will and appoint ment of Jesus Christ ? 6. Whether by the Word of God the power of judging and declaring what are such notorious and scandalous offences for which persons guilty thereof are to be kept from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and of conventing before them, trying and actual suspending from the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper such offenders accordingly, is either in the congregational eldership or presbytery or in any other eldership, congregation or persons, and whether such powers are in them only or in any of them and in which of them jure divino and by the will and appoint ment of Jesus Christ ? 7. Whether there be any certain and particular rules ex pressed in the word of God to direct the elderships or presby teries, congregations or persons or any of them in the exercise and execution of the powers aforesaid, and what are those rules ? 8. Is there anything contained in the word of God that the supreme magistracy in a Christian State may not judge and determine what are the aforesaid notorious and scandalous offences and the manner of suspension for the same and in what particulars concerning the premises is the said supreme magis tracy by the word of God excluded ? 9. Whether the provision of Commissioners to judge of scandals not enumerated (as they are authorised by the ordi nance of Parliament) be contrary to that way of government which Christ hath appointed in the Church and wherein are they so contrary ? In answer to those particulars the House of Commons desire of the Assembly of Divines their proofs from Scripture 308 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. 11. to be set down, the several texts of Scripture in the express —'^ ' words of the same, and it is ordered that every particular April. minister of the Assembly of Divines that is or shaU be present at the debate of any of these questions do upon every resolu tion which shaU be presented to this House concerning the same subscribe his respective name either with the affirmative or negative as he gives his vote ; and that those that do dissent from the major part shall set down their positive opinions with the express text of Scripture upon which their opinions are grounded. 1 The questions, together with the narrative of the breach of privilege, were delivered to the Assembly on the 30th of April, 1646, by a committee of the The Com- Commous, several of whom made most notable beeches on spcechcs of which WO cau still discern the main out of the'^QuerL line from the Assembly's disjointed minutes : — to the As sembly, 30th We trust (said Sir Jo. Evelyn) that no division is now to ^^^ ' ¦ arise between us. If there shall, you will give occasion to all the world to say that as you were willing to serve the ParUa ment a while, so you were wilUng to have them serve you for ever after. . . . Do not think that the Parliament is unwiUing to submit their yoke to Jesus Christ ; His yoke is easy. If it be a gaUing, vexing yoke it is not His and we [wUl not bear it]. Fiennes continued in the same strain : — The Parliament doth not pretend to an infallibilty of judg ment, and the Parliament suppose this Assembly wiU not do so neither. If, therefore, the question be but of a human judgment subject to error, preserved only by means common, they must and do claim privilege that they have the supreme judgment in making laws. . . . Something in the matter . . . that aU power in all causes should be derived from them [the Parliament]. You derive it in part from Jesus Christ to the presbyteries. For that concerning the Divine right though the Houses have not been so positive yet till that be made clear unto them. . . . 1 C. J., iv., 519, 22nd AprU, 1646. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 309 Fiennes was followed by Browne, a member who, chap. il as has been seen, was subsequently responsible for leie. the expedient which was accepted by the Presby terians as a compromise on the point of the lay Commissioners : — The Commons (he said) have declared that by the funda mental laws the Parliament is the supreme judicature . . . spiritual and ecclesiastical . . . there was never any writ but [the king's] for matters concerning the Church ... in the first of EUzabeth ... if the Parliament of England had not settled it then good, . . . this power of judicature they may delegate to what person they please. . . . But the great ques tion is whether of Divine right it's fit that those that are to declare it so should find it to be so. Nothing come to them yet hath satisfied them [on this]. . . . Heretofore both Lords and Commons have been very serious in considering of any thing offered to be jure divino. . . . Many thing offered to the ParUament jure divino that the Parliament hath been very careful to weigh and consider . . . and is it not cause they should ? . . . If it be of God it must not alter. ... It is much pressed for the point of the Covenant. We all agree that the word of God is the rule and must be the rule, but say there be no positive rule in the word are we by the Covenant bound to foUow the practice of Eeformed Churches in case it be against the fundamental law of the kingdom ? You must interpret the Covenant so as that all parts may stand. We are bound to raaintain the liberties of Parliament and kingdom. If I do any act against this I am a breaker of the Covenant. If I should encourage any by petition. . . . For this of Commissioners, this unheard of word, it hath been in the English Church ever since the Conquest to judge of ecclesiastical things. Thirty- seven of Henry VIII. the judges did resolve that the king might grant a commission in ecclesiastical causes to determine spiritual causes. ... It is the doctrine of the Pope to take from princes the power that God committed to them, to judge of the maladministration. . . . For this exorbitant power we have smarted for it and you have smarted with it. 310 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. Morc iucisivc still, and even minatory, was Sir 1646, Benjamin Kudyard : — April 30. '' •' The matter you are now about, the jus divinum, is of a formidable and tremendous nature. It will be expected you should answer by clear, practical and express Scriptures, not by far-fetched arguments which are commonly told before you come to the matter. ... I have heard much spoken of "the pattern in the Mount," so express. ... I could never find in the New Testament [suoh a pattern]. The first rule is " Let all things be done decently and in order" to edification. Decency and order are variable, and therefore cannot be jure divino. Discipline is but the hedge. I desire you would make your answer in plain terms. I have heard it often very well said the present Assembly are learned and pious men, but a Parliament is to make laws for all sorts of men. . . . We are pressed as to our Covenant. I believe we have done nothing against the word of God. Neither do all the Churches agree throughout. . . . The civil magistrate is a Church officer in every Christian Commonwealth. . . .^ The Queries AftcT the spccches and the reading of the the Assembly Querfes, the Staggered Assembly adjourned. It answere'd. appointed a day of humiliation' in reference to "this great business," and sent letters to all the member divines to attend on the debate, which opened on the following Monday, 4th May. After a preliminary discussion, the Queries were referred to the usual three committees, viz., the nature of jus divinum in reference to Church government in general to the first committee; the nature of Church government, and wherein it doth consist, to the second; and to the third, whether the Church government be in the hands of Church officers only.'^ Ten days later the Dissenting & 1 MitcheU, 225, 448-60. Ubid., 227, 229, 460, 236, 469. ¦TUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 311 Brethren, at their own request, were made a chap. ii. separate committee for the questions.' leie. Once for all it may be premised that the Assembly never reached the conclusion of its agitation of the Queries, and that they remained unanswered by it to the day of its dwindled and discredited close. How far such a result was due to accident or to design can hardly be decided. Intermittently for more than two months, 15th May to 6th July, they were busily and determinedly debated.^ On the 1st of July a " most comprehensive " answer to the first query was reported from the first com mittee, although it was admitted in the I'eport that some of the members of the committee had strongly opposed it. In the consideration of this report the Assembly resolved on the 6th of July, nemine contradicente, " that Jesus Christ, as Head and King of the Church, hath Himself appointed a Church government distinct from the civil ". Following this on the next day, elaborate regulations were made concerning the method of attesting the answers by the subscriptions of the divines.^ Even so little progress would indicate a determination on the part of the Assembly to pro ceed with the work, but that there were cross currents is evident. The work of the Assemblie these bygone weeks (says BaUlie* on the 14th July), has been to answer some very captious questions of the Parliament about the clear Scriptural warrant for all the punctilios of the government. It was thought 1 MitcheU, 231, 468, I4th May, 1646. 2 Ibid., 231-50, 469. ^ /jj£^_^ 250-51. "Letters, U., 378; I4th July, 1646. 312 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. it would be impossible for us to answer, and that in our answers 1646. there should be no unanimitie ; yet by God's grace we shaU deceave them who were waiting for our halting. The com mittee has prepared very solide and satisfactory answers already almost to aU the questions, wherein there is Uke to be ane unanimitie absolute even with the Independents. But because of the AssembUe's way and the Independents' miserable un- amendable designe to keep all things from any conclusion, its like we shaU not be able to perfyte our answers for some tyme ; therefore I have put some of my good friends, leading men in the House of Commons, to move the Assemblie to lay aside our questions for a time, and labour . . . the perfecting of the Confession of Faith and the Catechism. Before Baillie's motion took effect, the Assembly had resolved ' several clauses of its answer to the first query, and the divines were stiU engaged upon it when the message was brought from the House requesting them to hasten the perfecting of the Confession and Catechism. - In his letter BaiUie takes aU the credit of this diversion to himself. . Ill tiie AssembUe we were like to have stucken many laidasWe!^^ moneths on the " questions," and the Independents were in a July, 1646. way to gett all their differences debated over againe. I dealt so with Mr. Eouse and Mr. Tate that they brought in an order from the House to lay aside the "questions" tUl the Confession and Catechise were ended. Many took it for a trick of the Independents and Erastians for our hurt, but I knew it was nothing less.^ Although Baillie's assertion is to be taken with a certain amount of reserve (as is evident from the fact that on the 7th of December in the same year, 1646, the House sent to desire of the Assembly to ' MitcheU, 251-53, 255-57. ^ Ibid., 258, 22nd July. s Letters, u., 388. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 313 speedily send in their answer to the queries),' yet chap. ii. the result achieved was practically that which he i648. asserts. For nearly two years, from July, 1646, to May, 1648,^ the further consideration of the Queries was interrupted in the Assembly by the debates on the Confession and the Catechism. When, on the 9th of May of the latter year, the divines resumed the discussion of their answer to the Queries, they commenced with the still unanswered first Query. The work proceeded dilatorily, and apparently with out reference to the progress previously made, although Baillie distinctly asserts that the committee of 1646 had prepared for report full answers to all the Queries. In June, 1648, e.g., it was resolved to divide the Assembly into several committees to draw up their several answers to the Queries.^ Five days later the divines returned to the subject in a lackadaisical way,* but from this date onwards to its close, no further reference occurs in their debates to the Queries. The Assembly melted away into oblivion, with its claim of the jus divinum still upon its head dishonoured and unsubstantiated. With the outside and merely literary phase of the contest which waged between these clerics and the lay Erastians I am not so much concerned, save to indicate the general tenour of the argument. The work which the Assembly as a body never The contro- accomplished was undertaken by the London up'^by the™ clergy with a greater sense of freedom and irre- '^i^gy^^ea., sponsibility towards the Parliament. i^*^- The jus divinum regiminis ecclesiastici, or the 1 G. J., v., 2. 2 MitcheU, 516-19. Ubid., 523. " J&id, 525, 21st June, 1648. 314 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. Diviue right of Church government asserted and ~^^S! evidenced by the Holy Scriptures . . ¦ by sundry ministers of Christ within the city of London, was published on the 2nd of December, 1646. It is entirely on the hues laid down through three years of bitter and wearisome warfare in the Assembly. It asserts that there is a Church govern ment jure divino now under the New Testament declared in the Scriptures, shows what that govern ment is, and concludes that neither the supreme civil magistrate as such, nor consequently any commissioners or committees nominated under, or by them, are or can be, the proper subject or wielder of the formal power of Church government. In Baillie's opinion the answer was complete. We have no more adoe in the Assemblie, neither know we any more work the Assemblie has in hand, but ane answer to the nine queries of the House of Commons about the jus divinum of diverse parts of the government. The ministers of London's late jus divinum of Presbytery does this abundantly, also a committee of the Assemblie has a full answer to all those queries ready. The authors repents much of that motion. Their aime was to have confounded and divided the AssembUe by their insnaring questions, but finding the AssembUe's unanimitie in them, the Independents' principles forceing them to join with the rest in asserting the Divine right of these points of government, whereupon the Parliament does most sticke, the movers of these questions wishes they had been silent. It is possible that the answer which Baillie here asserts to have been fully drawn by the Assembly's Committee is represented in a controversial way by an anonymous ansiver, which was published late in 1646, as an answer to those questions propounded JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 315 by the Parliament to the Assembly of Divines touch- Chap. ii. ing the jus divinum in matter of Church government. leie. Wherein is clearly proved from- Scripture that the Presbyterial government is jure divino of Divine in stitution and according to the will and appointment of Jesus Christ.^ The answer is comprehensive. All the nine Revolution Queries are gone through, though the bulk of the '^'!°^^^. reply is naturaUy devoted to the first. In discuss- ^Jtit^u'^"^ ^^^ ing the crucial point, " whether any Church govern- *^^ Presby- ment be jure dimno, the anonymous author raises of i646 on the large question of constitutional theory, and it of 'theVr is for his explicit pronouncement upon it, and fQj.""™"™- the method of his argument, that he is to be taken as a complete representative of the revolution in matter of political theory which had overtaken the members of the English Church. As a separate national Church it had been borne under the shadow of the royal supremacy, and had been subject at every point to the interference of the civil or regal power. Even when it had been most Calvinistic in doctrine, it had still been most terri torial in constitution. But when, from being merely Calvinistic in doctrine, it came to adopt a Calvinistic Presbyterianism in matter of Church government, it was obliged to fling away the politi cal traditions of a century, and to reconstruct its constitutional theory anew. Of such reconstruc tion of political theory this particular tract is most aptly illustrative. I shall answer this [first question] (he says) by dividing the of&cers in the Church and bounding them in their place 1 Bodlem Library (B., 20, 16, Line). 316 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. and station where Christ hath set them, and to prove that the 1646. °iis hath a Divine right of government from Christ in the State and not in the Church ; and the other hath a Divine right of government in the Church but not in the State. I prove it thus : Christ hath two kingdoms, the one temporal the other spiritual (p. 10). ... If kings and magistrates should rule in the Church as emperors rule the State, this were to dethrone Christ ... to confound the spiritual kingdom of Christ with the kingdoms of men (p. 12). . . . The supreme magistracy is to judge and determine of sins by the positive laws of the land, and punish the offenders according to those laws in the temporal kingdom of Christ, but he may not judge and deter mine of them in the Church (p. 20). . . . Christ alone is to give both of&ces and officers and also their names, but Christ never gave any such for His Church as commissioners, neither must Parliaments create any names, or offices, or officers, as their creatures to be set up and appointed their work in the Church ; it is a great affront to Christ, the Head of the Church, to do it . . . the authority of the Parliament will not bear them out when Christ will disclaim them as usurpers whom He never placed in the Church. i Nothing could be more precise than such state ments, and at the same time nothing could be more antagonistic at once to the whole traditions of English constitutional and ecclesiastical history, to the earliest principles of the Reformation, and to the prevailing trend of political thought and theory in the middle of the seventeenth century. The earliest Reformation had never proclaimed such a separation of the civU from the ecclesiastical government. It was the fatal and malignant heri tage of the genius and life of Calvin, and how adversely it has affected the later history of Euro pean progress can hardly yet be estimated. It matters little, from the point of view of this ' MitcheU, 525, 2lst June, 1648. JUS DIVINUM OF PRESBYTERY. 317 narrative, that such a claim or theory was wrecked ghap. ii. by the success of the army ; the important point is ' that it should ever have been advanced, and that the Enghsh clergy even in part should ever have given themselves over to it. The answer which it received was as complete as it was representative.' From the point of view of political theory, how ever, the most significant and complete reply is contained in the Leviathan. Hobbes deduced the Hobbes- rights of sovereign power and the duty of subjects '"''^^^' thereto from the principles of nature only. Mon archical, aristocratical or democratical, all these sorts of power are sovereign and coercive. Christ left no coercive power, but only a power to pro claim the kingdom of Christ, and to persuade men thereunto (chap. xliL). If a man, therefore, should ask a pastor his authority for the execution of his office, he can make no .other just answer but that he doth it by the authority of the Commonwealth, given him by the king or Assembly that repre- senteth it. All pastors, except the supreme, exe cute their charges in the right ; that is, by the authority of the civil sovereign that is jure civili. But the king and every other sovereign executeth his office of supreme pastor by immediate authority from God ; that is to say, in God's right or jure divino. In intention Hobbes' lance, so far as it was poised in controversy at all, was poised against 1 See The difference about Church government elided by taking away the distinction of government into ecclesiastical and civil, and proving the government of the civil magistrate only [alone'] sufficient in a Christian kingdom, J. M., London, 30th May, 1646. See also Saltmarsh's Divine Right of Presbyterie, 7th April, 1646, 318 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. ii. BcUarmino and the temporal power of the Papacy, ~l643-4. but the same shaft that slew the Pope slew Presbytery. § V. — Ordination. Logically, the Assembly, after having concluded on the 1st of January, 1643-44, the constructive portions of its debates on Church officers should have followed this work up by the consideration of the jurisdiction of those officers as exercised in the Church Assemblies, parochial sessions, clas sical presbyteries and provincial synods. That this course was not punctually pursued is to be attributed partly to the want of system in the Assembly's debates and partly also to the intrigue which Baillie details in his account of the debate of 29th December, 1643.' If, as may be gathered from Baillie's narrative, this intrigue was checked on the 29th of December, the check was not for long, for on Tuesday the 2nd of January, 1643-44, the Assembly deliberately resumed the considera tion of the report made, the .3th of December preceding, by the second committee on the char acter of Apostles, their power to ordain in all Churches, to order all the service and worship, and to determine controversies of faith. ^ BaUlie, glossing over what must have been a severe tactical defeat of the Scotch Commissioners, merely says that the Assembly having reached certain conclusions concerning Church officers, before going on, " thought meet to consider some things further in the officers both extraordinar and 1 Supra, pp. 164-5. = Lightfoot, xiii., 98-99. ordination. 319 ordinar, some mor characters of the apostles, their chap. ii. power to ordain "... etc. misA, Putting aside, however, the want of system in ''°' '^' the Assembly's debates, and the further question of the war of parties, Presbyterian versus Independ- ant among the divines themselves, there was a pressing practical reason for the instant considera- Pressing tion of this question of ordination, viz., the actual S'fof some need of the kingdom for some supply of new o^^in^ti°n ministers and some mechanism for presentation and ordination. " There were divers motions and reasons made and given to hasten that business [of ordination] because of the great necessity of it in the kingdom." ' The proposition as to the apostles' power to ordain was passed on the first day's debate.^ Their power to appoint evangelists to ordain was voted on the 4th." Unlike the above two propositions, which were hotly contested, their power to order all the service and worship, and to determine controversies of faith, passed on the Sth without debate or difference, a fact whicli Lightfoot notes as hitherto unexampled in the Assembly's history.* After this preliminary or postliminary survey which, according to Baillie, had ended in agree ment after commencing in hot dispute from the jealousy that the point had been raised " for pre- The as- judice and far ends," ^ the Assembly settled down to'the'^subj-rct to the more orderly discussion of the work of °* °''^™^*'°°- ^Lightfoot, xui., 102. '^Ibid., 100, 2nd January, 1643-44. Ubid., 103. "Ibid., 105. ^Letters, ii., 128-29. 320 THE ASSEMBLYS CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap. II. 1643-4, January. Who are to ordain ? Preaching presbyters. ordination on a report thereon made by Dr. Temple from the third committee.' The first contest on this report arose out of the third clause in it — who are to ordain? In the New Testament Apostles, Evangelists and preaching presbyters did ordain. " Because Apostles and Evangelists are officers extraordinary and not to continue in the Church, and since in Scripture we find ordination in no other hands, we humbly con ceive that the preaching presbyters are only to ordain." ^ The preamble or declaratory portions of this proposition were passed by the 16th of January,'* and on the following day, Wednesday, 17th January, 1643-44, the Assembly approached the substantive part of it — "preaching presbyters are only to ordain," an alternative statement being offered in the following words : " Ordination is only in the hands of those who by office are to attend the preaching of the word and administra tion of the Sacrament ".* "When it was ready to go to the question whether this should be debated, there was a motion made by Mr. Calamy, and backed by Mr. GiUespie, that we might not fall as yet upon it. And so it was moved also by others. And this held us in debate whether we should fall upon this or no till twelve o'clock ; and then upon a motion of Mr. Seaman's, there was a committee of Inde pendents chosen that should state the question concerning ordination, and so we adjourned."'* 'Lightfoot, xiii., 107, Tuesday, 9th January, 1643-44. "Ibid., 107-9. 'Ibid., US. 'Ibid.,lU. ^lUd. ORDINATION. 321 Through the mouth of Mr. Nye this Inde- chap. ii. pendents' Committee reported two days later' in two 1643-4, propositions (1) that as far as the participation of ™"^'^5'- the elders in that work is concerned, ordination Position of is simply the solemnisation of the officers' outward dents. call ; (2) there is no proof that in the act of ordi nation there is a derivation from the elders as such of such power as gives formal being to an officer. - On this report the Assembly spent very little debate. The paper was laid aside, and the divines almost instantly fell back upon the statement of the question as drawn up on the preceding Wednesday, viz., that ordination is only in the hands of preaching elders.^ Hardly had they reached this determination, and commenced the debate, when they received an order from the House of Lords requiring them to dispatch the matter of ordination, A committee was accordingly chosen to that end. With commendable despatch the committee re ported at the following meeting,^ and in view of the pressing need of the moment, and of the The abstract practical nature of the report, the Assembly for ponedTeforV the moment laid aside its wrangle as to the seat of somelnteriL the power of ordination.^ ordination J- machinery. 1 Friday, 19th January, 1643-44 ; Lightfoot, 115. ^The proceedings of the Independents' Committee, and of the Assembly, thereupon were the subject of bitter controversy iu print in 1645. See the Independents' "copy of a remonstrance," B.M., E. ij^, and the Assembly's "answer" thereto. The latter details the pro ceedings had on the matter of ordination at this particular juncture by both Independents and the Assembly, see Hanbury, ui., pp. 1-31. 3 Lightfoot, xui., p. 116. * Monday, 22nd January, ibid., 116-17. ^ In their " copy of a remonstrance " the Independents charge the Assembly with having adopted the course it did at the above juncture VOL. I. 21 322 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.il The report was as follows : — Jan.-Maroh. 1- In extraordinary cases, and until a settled order can be had, extraordinary means may be employed. 2. It is lawful, and according to the word, that certain ministers of the city be desired to ordain ministers in the vicinity jure fraternitatis. The first of these propositions was passed on the foUowing day,' 23rd January, after a hot pro tracted debate. The second was discussed on the 25th,^ and later days. The reason of the bitter opposition of the Independents to this proposition lay in their fear that the operation of selecting some of the London ministers to carry on the work of ordination would " come too near a presbytery," that such ordination being a matter of jurisdiction those that performed it might also excommunicate, and that to settle so much at such a stage would be to prejudge the whole larger question of presbytery itself* After holding through six days' obstinate debate (26th January to 2nd February), this ques tion of the London ministers performing ordina tion was temporarily laid aside on the urgent motion of Lord Saye, and, spite the bitter opposi tion of the Independents, the precedent question of presbytery itself — the union of many churches under one presbytery — was ordered to be discussed in a proposition from a committee thereto ap pointed." From this date until the 18th of March, merely as a ruse to snatch a decisive vote for presbytery on a side issue. 1 Lightfoot, 117-18. 'Ibid., 120-21. 'Ibid., 126, 129-30. ^Thursday, 1st February, ibid., 131. ORDINATION. 323 the large abstract question of presbytery was hotly Ohap. ii. contested in the Assembly,' and it was only on its 1643-4, conclusion, and on the decisive routing of the Inde- ^^''°^' pendents, that the Assembly could resume the subject of ordination, to which it was, in addition, importuned by both the Earl of Warwick and the Earl of Manchester, from the need of a supply of divines for the navy and the Eastern Association.^ In consequence of the urgent request of the latter, The debate the Assembly at last, on Friday 15th March,-'' voted MarSi!'i644. to fall upon ordination, and the work was begun on the following Monday, on a report from the third committee. After two days' debate the Assembly resolved, as preparatory to the whole subject, that such as were to be ordained ministers should be designed to some particular church or other ministerial charge.* On the following day it voted that no man should be ordained minister to a particular congregation if that congregation could show any just cause of exception against him.^ The formalities of ordination by the hands of preaching presbyters were then successively agreed upon by votes of 22iid and 25th March." The whole scattered series of votes thus passed con cerning the doctrinal part of ordination were then referred to a committee to be drawn up in proper form. From this committee Dr. Burgess reported on the 3rd April a series of twelve' propositions ^ See supra, pp. 165-8. ^Lightfoot, xui., 207, 217. 'Ibid., 218. r- lished for the benefit of the kingdom, as the parts ^^^^'"°^- concerning discipline, which were still under con sideration, might require time.^ Early in May the Lords agreed to the corrections made by the Commons,* except inthe article concerning marriage. The last alterations by the Lords were accepted by the Commons on the 20th of June, 1648, and the "Articles" ordered to be printed. '^ Further than this the Long Parliament never got in its review of the celebrated Confession." It is not part of our purpose to tell the story i Debated 4tb February, 1647-8, C. J., v., 455-6 ; llth February, ibid., 461-2 ; 3rd March, ibid., 478 ; and 10th March, ibid., 489-92. 2 Ibid., v., 602, 17th March, 1647-48. ^L. J., ix., 167, 3rd AprU, 1648 ; Rushworth, vii, p. 1035. ^L. J., X., 239, 2nd May, 1648; 301, 3rd June, 1648. ^ 0. J., v., 608. 8 See Ibid., vi, 270, for the appointment of a committee to take into consideration the articles of Christian Religion, and to consider what is further fit to be done with them. See note infra, p. 376. The mere detaUs of the genesis of the Confession in the Assembly and of its partial passage through the Commons are given in the note infra, pp. 367-372. 366 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. II. of the rcccption of the Confession in Scotland.' 1652-60. Its practical lack of authorisation at the hands of the English Parliament renders it of little further interest to our national history. Subsequent In the subscqucnt years of the Commonwealth the^Srmuia- thrcc half-hcartcd attempts were made to revive fession of°°°" such a Confession, without counting the abortive f6tri657^fAd ^^^^y °^ ^^® Independent divines in 1652 at a 1660.' definition of fundamentals of behef, see infra, ii., pp. 81-4. On the llth of September, 1654, CromweU's first Parliament resolved upon the calling of a fresh Assembly of Divines to be consulted with concerning matters of religion.^ For the purposes of consulting with this body, a committee of the House was nominated, and by this committee twenty " Articles of Faith" with their scriptural proofs, were reported to the House on the 12th of December, 1654. The House received them with thankfulness, and requested the divines to perfect what they had further prepared.''' The first instalment thus offered was ordered to be printed. Nothing further however was heard of the articles.* But in the debates on the " Address and Remon strance" in February, 1656-57, CromweU's second Parliament returned to the project of establishing some Confession ^ by its resolution that " a Confes sion of Faith, to be agreed by His Highness and the Parliament, according to the rule and warrant of the Scripture, be held forth and recommended to the people of these nations ". ' See Mitchell, Minutes of the Westminster Assembly, 418. 2 C. J., vu., 367. ' Ibid., 399, 12th December, 1654. " See infra, u., pp. 86-90. = C. J., vu., .506-7. the confession of faith. 367 In February, 1659-60, the reassembled Rump Chap.ii. returned to the old, and as yet, unauthorised Con- 1660. fession of the Westminster Assembly. A com mittee was appointed to consider of it,' and two days later the Confession was agreed to by the House, except chapters 30 and 31, concerning Church censures '^ and synods. The ordinance for the Confession in accordance passed on the 5th of March.'' Needless to say that the enactment was perfectly futile and unregarded.* 1 29th February, 1659-60, C. J., vu., 855. 2 "Whitelock, iv., 401, 2nd March. ' C. J., vu., 862. " The genesis of the Confession of Faith in the Assembly, and its treatment in the House of Commons. In order to avoid a duU repeti tion of dates and references, the detaUed account of the progress of the Confession of Faith in the Assembly and Parliament is here given in a note : — Title referred to the committee for perfecting, 3rd September, 1646 (MitcheU, 273). Scriptural proofs concluded, 5th April, 1646-47 (ibid., 345). Title altered by resolution of the House of Commons, 17th March, 1647-48 (C. J., v., 502). Article 1. Scripture (subsequently of the Holy Scriptures). — De bated in the Assembly, 7th, llth, 14th, 16th, 17th and 18th, July, 1645 (MitcheU, 110, 111, 113, 114, 115). Passed and ordered, 18th June, 1646 (ibid., 245). Scriptural proofs debated, 7th to 15th January, 1646-47 (ibid., 319-22). Debated in the Commons on the 19th aud 28th May, 1647 (C. J., v., 177, 189). The respited eighth clause again debated and accepted, I7th March, 1647-48 (ibid., v., 502). Article 11. Of God and the Holy Trinity (at first proposed separately of God, 23rd July, 1645, Mitchell, 115, and of Trinity, ibid., same date). The two titles combined, 18th June, 1646 (ibid., 245). Scriptural proofs debated, Sth and 18th January, 1646-47 (ibid. 319, 322). Debated in the Commons, 28th May, 1647 (C. J., v., 189). Article III. Of God's Eternal Decree (proposed as God's Decrees, 29th August, 1645, MitcheU, 126. Altered to God's Eternal Decree, 18th to 19th June, 1646, ibid., 245-46).— Debated, 29th August ; 2nd, 3rd, 9th and llth September (ibid., 127, 129, 130). Scriptural proofs added, 13th, 19th, 20th and 21st January, 1646-47 (ibid., 321-23). Debated m the Commons, 28th May, 1647 (C. J., vi, 189). 368 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chap.ii. § YIll.— The Larger and Smaller Catechisms. The first reference in the records of the West minster Assembly to the preparation of a Catechism Subsidiary to this Article were tbe foUowing, at first proposed in the Assembly as separate heads : — Reproba-tion.—'Deha.teA, 3rd, 6th, 7th and llth November, 1645 (MitcheU, 160-62). Redemption of the Elect only by Christ— Deha-ted, 22nd to 24th October (ibid., 152-60). Predestination.— Debated, 3rd, 17th, 20th and 21st October (ibid., 134, 150-52).Article IV. Of Creation.— Deha,ted, 17th to 20th November, 1645 (ibid., 164-65), ordered, 19th June, 1646 (ibid., 246). Scriptural proofs added, 15th, 21st and 28th January, 1646-47 (ibid., 322-24). Debated in the Commons, 2nd October, 1647 (C. J., v., 323). Article V. Of Providence. — Debated, 27th and 28th November ; 2nd aud 4tb December, 1645 (MitcheU, 166-67), ordered, 19th June, 1646 (ibid., 246). Scriptural proofs debated, 28th and 29th January, 1646-47 (ibid., 324). Debated in the Commons, 2nd October, 1 047 (C. J., v., 323). Article VL Ofthe FaU of Man, of Sin, and the Punishment thereof. —Debated, 17th and 21st November, 1645 ; 22nd and 25th June, 1646 (MitcheU, 164-65, 246). Scriptural proofs debated, 2nd February, 1646-47 (ibid., 325); not accepted by the Commons. Article VIL Of God's Covenant with Man (title proposed as of Covenants, 9th October, 1645 (ibid., 147) ; altered as above, 25th June, 1646, ibid., 246). Debated in the Asseinbly, 9th, 10th and 17th October ; 6th, 14th and I7th November ; 23rd December, 1645 ; 25th June, 1646 (ibid., 147-48, 150, 161, 163-64, 172, 246). Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd and 5th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 325-26). Article VIIL Of Christ the Mediator. — Debated in the Assembly, 29th August; 2nd to 4th, Sth, 9th, llth, 12th and 15th September; 14th November, 1645 ; 25th June, 1646 (ibid., 126-31, 163). Scriptural proofs debated, Sth February, 7th AprU, 1647 {ibid., 326, 346-47). Article IX. Of Free-will. — Debated in the Assembly, 15th andl7th December, 1645; 29th to 30th June, 1646 (ibid., 170, 247-48). Scrip tural proofs debated, 2ud and 9th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 325, 327). Article X. Of Effectual Calling. — Debated in the Assembly, 9th, I7th, 25th and 29th September ; 6th November, 1645 ; 30th June, 1646 (ibid., 129, 132-33, 161, 248). Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd and 9th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 325, 327). Article XI. Of Justi-fication.—Deh&ted ixx the Assembly, 2nd, 3rd, THE CATECHISMS. 369 occurs on the 2nd of December, 1644, when a ghap. ii. committee was appointed for summing one up.' iSil, December. 8th to llth, 16th December, 1645 ; 23rd July, 1646 (ibid., 166-70, 259). Scriptural proofs debated, 4th, 10th, llth February, 1646-47 (ibid., Question as 326, 328). to the his- Article XII. Of Adoption.— T)eha,ted m the Assembly, 20th Nov- oflhe'cate '^ ember, 1645 ; 23rd July, 1646 (ibid., 165, 259). Scriptural proofs de- chism. bated, 5th and llth February, 1646-47 (ibid., 326, 328). Article Xlll. Of Sanctification. — Debated in the Assembly, 20th and 24th November, 1645 ; 16th and 23rd September, 1646 (ibid., 165-66, 284, 288-89). Scriptural proofs debated, 5tb and 12th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 326, 329). Article XIV. Of Saving Faith. — Debated in the Assembly, 20th August to 1st September ; 9th September, 1646 (ibid., 271, 276-77). Scriptural proofs debated, 5th and 12th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 326-29). Article XV. Of Repentance unto Life (proposed as Of Repentance and Good Works, 19tb August, 1646, ibid., 270; title altered as. above, 10th September, 1646, ibid., 278). — Debated in Assembly, I9th August ; 10th, 17th, 18th and 2Ist September, 1646 (ibid., 270, 278,. 284, 286). Scriptural proofs debated, 12th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 329). Article XVI. Of Good Works (see under title of Article XV.). — Debated in the Assembly, 19th August and 9th September, 1646 (ibid., 270, 277-78). Scriptural proofs debated, 15th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 329). Article XVII. Of the Perseverance of the Saints (title proposed as Of Perseverance, 19th December, 1646, ibid., 171). — Debated in the Assembly, 16th, 26th December, 1645; 14th September, 1646 (ibid., 171, 173, 281). Scriptural proofs debated, 17th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 330). Article XVIIL Of Assurance of Grace and Salvation (title pro posed as Of Certainty of Grace and Salvation, 24th July, 1646, ibid., 259 ; altered to Of Certainty of Salvation, 1 4th September, 1646, ibid., 281-82).— Debated in the Assembly, 24th and 30th July ; 14th Sep tember, 1646 (ibid., 259-60, 281-82). Scriptural proofs debated, 17th and 18th February, 1646-47 ; 7th AprU, 1647 (ibid., 330-31, 347). Article XIX. Of the Law of God (title proposed as The Law, Ceremonial and Judicial, 29th January, ibid., 182). — Debated in 1 Lightfoot, 327, 338. Dr. MitcheU in his Catechism of the Second Reformation refers to the Committee for the Directory (December, 1643, BaUUe, u., 118, 140) as if engaged in the preparation of a cate chism. It was only engaged on the Directory for Worship (including a directory of catechising), not on a catechism. VOL. I. 24 370 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. Accordiug to Lightfoot, this committee was a 1644, new creation. According to the minutes of the Assembly, it was formed by adding Marshall, the Assembly, 1st, 7th, 9th, 12th, 13th and 29th January ; 2nd and 9th February, 1645-46 ; 20th August, 1646, to 3rd September ; 15th and 17th September, (ibid., 173, 177-78, 182-83, 185, 271-74, 282, 284. Scriptural proofs debated, 19th and 22nd February, 1646-47 (ibid., 331-32). Article XX. Of Christian Liberty and Liberty of Conscience (title proposed as of Christian Liberty, 29th January, 1645-46, and Of Liberty of Conscience, proposed as a separate Article at first, 10th March, 1645, ibid., 182, 205. The two heads or titles united, 26th March, 1646). —Debated, 29th January, 1645-46 ; 9th to 12th and 16th February ; 10th, 26th, 27th, and 30th to 31st March, 1646 ; 23rd to 25th Sep tember ; 1st, 7th to 9th, 13th to 14th, 16th, 21st and 30th October (ibid., 182, 185-87, 196, 205, 211, 213-15, 289-90, 292-98. Scriptural proofs debated in Assembly, 25th to 26th February, 1646-47 ; 4th, llth and 12th AprU (ibid., 332-35, 337). Debated in the Commons on tbe 4th February, 1647-48, when paragraph 4 was respited till the consideration of Article XXX. (C. J., v., 455). Article XXI. Of Religious Worship and the Sabbath Day (title originaUy proposed as Religionand Worship, and altered to Of Religious Worship, 5th March, 1645-46. The Sabbath proposed as a separate head, 9th March, ibid., 192, 195. The two heads united as above, 12th October, 1646, ibid., 295.) Debated in the Assembly, 1645-46; 5th, fith, 10th and 20th March; 26th March, 1646; 6th AprU; 12th October ; 30th October ; 20th and 23rd November, 1646 (ibid., 192, 195, 205, 209-10, 215-16, 295, 298, 302, 303). Scriptural proofs debated, 2nd February, 1646-47 (ibid., 331). Debated in the Commons, 4th February, 1647-48 (C. J., v., 455). Article XXIL Of Lawful Oaths and Vows (title proposed as Of Lawful Oath, Sth January, 1645-46. Altered as above, 12th October.) —Debated in the Assembly, Sth, 13th, 15th, 16th, 19th, 20th and 21st January, 1645-46 ; 12th October, 1646 ; 3rd, 6th and 23rd Novem ber, 1646 (MitcheU, .177-81, 295, 298-99, 303). Scriptural proofs de bated, 18th February, 1646-47 (ibid., 331). Debated in the Commons as above (Article XXL). Article XXIII. Of the Civil Magistrate (title proposed as Of the Magistrate, 26th March, 1646, ibid., 210).— Debated in the Assembly, 26th March ; 24th and 27th AprU ; 12th to 15th October ; 9th Nov ember ; 4th December, 1646 (ibid., 210, 223-24, 295-96, 299, 308). Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd March, 1646-47 (ibid., 335). Debated in the Commons, ut supra, under Article XXL, significant alterations THE CATECHISMS. 371 Tuckney and Newcomen to Mr. Palmer for the chap. ii. purpose of hastening the Catechism.' The fact i644, December. made in paragraph 4, and the remainder respited tUl the consideration of Article XXX. Article XXIV. Of Marriage and Divorce (presented as separate heads of marriage, 17th June, 1646, ibid., 244 ; Of Divorce, 10th August, 1646, ibid., 266; the two heads united, 12th October, 1646, ibid., 295). — Debated in the Assembly, 17th June ; 23rd July ; 3rd, 4th and 10th August ; 10th and llth September ; 12th October ; 9th, 10th and llth November, 1646 (ibid., 244, 259, 262-64, 266, 279-80, 295, 299-300). Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd March, 1646-47. Debated in the Com mons, 4th and llth February, and 3rd March, 1647-48 (C. J., v., 455, 461, 478, and alterations made). Article XXV. Of the Church. — Debated in the Assembly, 16th, 23rd, 26th and 27th February, 1645-46 ; 2nd, 5th, 6th and 18th March, 1646 ; 3rd, 7th to 10th, 13th to I7th, 20th to 22nd AprU, 1646 ; 13th and 17th November (ibid., 188, 190-203, 206-207, 215-221, 301-302). Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd March, 1646-47 (ibid., 335). Debated in the Commons, 10th March, 1647-48 (C. J., v., 489). Article XXVL Of the Communion of Saints. — Debated in the Assembly, 17th February ; 3rd to 5th March, 1645-46 ; 13th, 17th, 19th and 20th November, 1646 (ibid., 188, 192, 301-2). Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd March, 1646-47 (ibid., 335). Debated in the Commons, lOth March, 1647-48 (C. J., v., 489). Article XXVII. Of the Sacraments (title proposed as Of the Sacraments in general, 2nd December 1645, ibid., 167). — Debated in the Assembly, 2nd, 5th, llth, 12th, 16th, 16th and 24th December, 1645 ; lOth November, 1646 (ibid., 169-70, 172, 299). Debated in the ¦Commons, ut supra, under Article XXVI. Article XXVIII. Of Baptism.— Debated in the Assembly, 29th December, 1645 ; 1st, 2nd, Sth, 6th, Sth, 9th, 16th, 21st and 26th January, 1645-46 ; llth September, 1646 ; and 10th November (ibid., 173, 175-79, 181-82, 280, 299). Debated in the Commons, ut supra, under Article XXVI. Article XXIX. Of the Lord's Supper.— Debated in the Assembly, 1st and 26th December, 1645 ; llth to 13th, and 16th November, 1646 (ibid., 166, 173, 300-302). Scriptural proofs debated, 5th March, 1646-47 (ibid., 336). Debated in the Commons, ut supra, under Article XXVI. Article XXX. Of Church Censures (title proposed as Of Church Officers and Censures), 29th January, 1645-46 (ibid., 182).— Debated in the Assembly, 29th January, 1645-46 ; 23rd April ; 13th, 23rd aud 1 Mitchell, 13. April-Dec. 372 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap. IL would Seem to be that the joint committee for the ^^644^ Directory ' had assigned the drafting of a directory for catechising (not the preparation of a catechism) to Palmer. That divine's draft of it, however, did not please the Scotch, and his papers were handed over to them to frame according to their mind.^ When BaUlie later refers to the " catechise " as al most ready in April, 1644,'' and as drawn up in November, it is uncertain whether he is referring to the " directory for catechising " or to a catechism of their own which the Scotch Commissioners had drawn, as they had previously drawn a directory of worship — on chance, i.e., without authority from 26th November, 1646 (ibid., 182, 222, 301, 303). Scriptural proofs debated, 5tb March, 1646-47 ; 2nd AprU, 1647 (ibid., 336, 345). Article XXXI. Of Synods and Councils. — Debated in the As sembly, 4th to 7th, 10th to llth, 13th to 14th, 19th to 20th August ; 13th and 26th November, 1646 (ibid., 264-71, 301, 303). Scriptural proofs debated, 5th March, 1646 47 ; 2nd AprU, 1647 {ibid., 336, 345). Article XXXII. Of the State of Men after Death and of the Resur rection of the Dead. Debated in the Assembly under two separate heads. (1) Of the State of the Soul after Death, 24th and 3Ist July, 1646 ; altered to Of the State of Man after Death, 26th November, 1646 (ibid., 259, 261-62, 303). (2) Of Resurrection.— Debated, 4th August and 4th September, 1646 (ibid., 264, 275). Scriptural proofs of the united heads debated, 5th March, 1646-47 ; 2nd AprU, 1647 (ibid., 336, 345). Debated in the Commons, ut supra, under Article XXVL Article XXXIII. Of the Last Judgment (title proposed as Of the Last Judgment and Life Eternal, 4th September, 1646, MitcheU, 275). — Debated in the Assembly, 20th August to 1st and 4th September ; 26th November, 1646. Scriptural proofs debated, 3rd March, 1646-47 ; 2nd April, 1647 (ibid., 336, 345). Debated in the Commons, ut supra, under Article XXVI. Besides the above Thirty-three Articles, the Assembly, on the 2nd of January, 1645-46, debated of Dedication to God (MitcheU, 175). If uot represented by Article XII. it must have been omitted in the final draft of the confession. ' See supra, p. 341. ^ BaiUie, u., 118, 140, 148. ' Ibid., 172, 242. THE catechisms. 373 either Assembly or Parliament, and simply to be chap. ii. held in readiness to be produced in the Assembly i644, Dec, to whenever the project of a catechism should come to be broached there. BaiUie says as much as this in his public letter of 26th December, 1644. We [the Scot Comm'* (?) or the Grand Treaty Committee] have near also agreed in private on a draft of catechise, where upon when it comes in publick we expect little debate. ^ On the 7th of February, 1644-45, Reynolds and The As- Delm^ were added to the Assembly's Committee for committee the Catechism.^ From this committee a report was ohismtDect made on the 13th of May, 1645,« concerning the ^'=^' ^6**-^- method or principles of catechising. On the 1st of August following, Palmer made report of the Catechism, and a spasmodic debate of it com menced.* Although, however, on the 20th of that month, the Assembly appointed Palmer, Staunton and Young to draw up the whole draft of the cate chism with all convenient speed, nothing further was heard of it for nearly a year, in consequence of the interposition of the debates on the Con fession of Faith. In July, 1646, the House sent impatiently for the Confession and Catechism, and on the 14th of September the Assembly resumed the systematic debate of it.^ From that date to January, 1646-47; with a considerable break de voted to the Confession, the Assembly considered the Catechism.* On the 14th of that month, how- 1 Letters, u., 248. ^ MitcheU, 48. For other additions, see ibid., 268-59, 400, 477. 'Ibid., 91-94; C. J., iv., 133. " MitcheU, 118 ; BaiUie, ii., 306. " C. J., iv., 622. « MitcheU, 281-321. 374 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. ever, a resolution was taken that the Committee 1647^ ^for the Catechism should prepare a draft of two Aprii-Nov. (3a^|.gpjjjgjj^g^ a larger and a smaller, the smaller one biy^deoM^to having special bearing on the Confession of Faith.' ScMsmT Without discarding all their previous work, both committee and Assembly from this point prac tically recommenced their labours on this subject. The Larger The Tcport of the Larger Catechism began on the Aprfi-Oc™,' 14th of AprU, 1647,^ and with certain slight breaks ^^*^' the debate of it continued in the Assembly up to October, 1647.' On the 22nd of the latter month, it was delivered to both Houses, and graciously The Shorter reccived.* The Shorter Catechism had, meanwhile Aug^ust™'v., (5th August, 1647), been committed to the Pro- ^^*^' locutor of the Assembly, with Palmer, Temple, Lightfoot, Gunn and Delm6 as assistants.^ At a later date, 19th October, 1647, a different committee is referred to as ordered to prepare it, but probably only in the sense of reviewing the preparation of the previous committee, for the purpose of report ing in the Assembly." From the 21st of October the Lesser Catechism was in debate until the 22nd of November,^ when it was finished. Three days later it was presented to both Houses.^ On the occasion of its delivery the Commons requested the divines to affix scriptural proofs to both the Larger and Lesser Catechism, and on this work the Assem bly was engaged, as its last task, tUl near the time of its dwindled and discredited close. The discussion of these scriptural proofs occupied the divines from ' MitcheU, 321, 474. 2 ihid., 349. ' Ibid., 349-485. " L. J., Ik., 488 ; C. J., v., 340. ^ MitcheU, 408. « Ibid., 485. ' Ibid , 485-92. «C. J., v., 368; L. J., ix., .543, 25th November, 1647. THE CATECHISMS. 375 30th November, 1647, to the 12th of April, 1648.' Chap. n. Two days later they were delivered to both Houses.^ i647, nov.- It was not tUl the 12th of June, 1648, that the ^^*^' ^'^*' Commons condescended to review the Larger Cate- The cate chism.^ With two slight corrections, the House Parliament, finished the consideration of it on the 24th of July, ''^"°^' ^^*^' when it was passed and sent to the Lords with a desire for its publication.* On the same day the Shorter Catechism was proceeded with, passed and ordered to be sent up. On the 18th and 25th of August the Lords com mitted the Larger Catechism for reconsideration^ but passed the Shorter Catechism, and sent it down to the Commons,^ with the title (reported from the divines) " The grounds and principles of religion contained in a Shorter Catechism according to the advice of the Assembly of Divines sitting at West minster to he used throughout the kingdom of England and dominion of Wales". The Commons agreed to the Lords' order for the Shorter Catechism on the 22nd of September, 1648." The Larger Catechism was never passed by the Lords. Later in the Commonwealth period Crom weU's second Parliament returned to the subject of catechising, and drafted a bill enjoining that duty on ministers and others. In connection with this biU which passed the House; but was refused by the Protector,^ the Shorter Catechism of the 1 MitcheU, 493-611. ^C. J., v., 630 ; L. J., x., 204. 'C. J., v. 633. "Ibid., v., 645. ^^L. J., x., 443, 452, 455. "C. J., vi, 27. The order for the printing of the Shorter Cate chism in L. J., X., 611. 'Burton's Diary, u., 203-5. 376 THE assembly's CONSTRUCTIVE WORK. Chapel Assembly was revised and presented to the 1657^ Commons to be made part of the biU and to be publicly taught.' This is practically the last reference in English constitutional history to the work of the West minster Assembly. It is not a little curious that those portions of its accomplished work which have remained through later times the most distinct and memorable accomplishment of the Assembly — i.e., the Confession of Faith and the Larger Catechism — should have never received the assent of the Par liament which had called the Assembly into being, and at whose behest it had prepared those works. ^ iC. J., vu., 482, 13th February, 1656-57. ^ The account of the reception of the Confession and Catechism by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland is detaUed in a note to MitcheU's edition of The Minutes of the Westminster Assembly, pp. 418-24, 514-16. In the Narrative of the Proceedings of tlie Parlia ment of England in the Work of Reformation, which was printed on the sth of August, 1648, and wbich is reprinted in Parliamentary History, xvu., 373-81, the Long ParUament claimed as foUows in its list of accomphshed works : — " They have approved and passed The Confession of Faith or Articles of Christian Religion as it came from the Assembly of Divines with some smaU alterations, only some small part is yet under consideration, the rest being printed and pubUshed by authority of Parliament. " They have passed a Greater and Lesser Catechism that came from the Assembly of Divines." It must be clearly understood, however, that this declaration emanated from the Commons alone and speaks, in these items cer tainly, only of the legislative work of the Lower House which, when alone, did not of course give constitutional enactment. The very preamble of this " narrative " commences with the words " we the Commons assembled in the Parliament of England". In the final negotiation with Charles, the Commons sent up a message on the 1st of November, 1648 (L. J., x., 572), requesting the Lords' concurrence in an order instructing the Commissioners then treat ing with Charles iu the Isle of Wight, to desire his consent concerning THE PSALTER. 377 § IX. — The Metrical Version ofthe Psalms. chap.ii. The last and least important of the constructive ^^^' works undertaken by the Assembly concerned the Psalter. In this matter, however, it pursued no independent plan of its own, but had to remain — a,nd was apparently well pleased to remain — con tent with perusing, revising and sanctioning an existing version. The fact may of course be partly due to the terms of the reference from the Parlia ment — behind which the Assembly dared not ordinarily go. On Monday, 20th November, 1643, the Com- Rouse's mons made an order desiring the advice of the mended to Assembly ."whether it may not be useful and* ^^^^®™ y- profitable to the Church that the Psalms set forth by Mr. Rouse be permitted to be pubhcly sung, the same being read before singing, until the books be more generally dispersed ".' the Catechism. The Lords agreed to it on the same day. It is not ¦clear what reference is meant in this entry, but presumably it related to the Shorter Catechism. The corresponding order in the Commons on the same day (C. J., vi, 67) mentions " the catechisms," doubtless implying both. The difference is probably intentional — the Commons having passed both, and the Lords not. iC. J., iu., 315. For an account of Rouse's version, see the appendix to Laing's edition of BaUUe's Letters, ui, 532. It was flrst pubhshed in AprU, 1643, the imprimatur of the Committee of the Commons for printing being dated on the 17tb of tbat month. The revised version of it was published in 1646 with an imprimatur of the Commons' Committee of date 4th November, 1645. The compet ing contemporary versions of Sir WiUiam Mure of Rowallane and of i5achary Boyd do not appear to have been ever brought officiaUy before the notice of our Westminster Assembly, although BaiUie repeatedly referred to BowaUen's, as he called it (Letters, U., 101, 121, 332). 378 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. Writing apparently before the receipt of this leS order from the Commons, BaUlie refers to Rouse's version in somewhat disparaging terms.' Ane old most honest member of the House of Commons, Mr. Eous, hes helped the old Psalter, in the most places faultie. His friends are verie pressing in the AssembUe that the book may be examined and helped by the author in what places it shall be found meet, and then be commended to the Parliament, that they may injoin the publick use of it. One of their considerations is the great private advantage which would by this book come to their friend. But manie do oppose the motion, the most because the work is not so weU done as they think it might. Mr. Nye did speak much against a tie to any Psalter, and something against the singing of paraphrases as of preaching of homilies. We, underhand, wiU mightly oppose it [i.e., this anti-Psalter attitude of the Independents] for the Psalter is a great part of our uniformitie, which we cannot let pass till our Church be weU advised with [regarding] it. I wish I had Eowallen's Psalter here. Por I Uke it much better than anie yet I have seen. TheAssembiy The Very limited and precise order of the Com- i64Tnov°-^ ' mons was communicated to the Assembly on the December. 22nd of November, 1643, by Sir Benjamin Rudyard,^ and was immediately referred to the usual three committees, each committee being assigned fifty Psalms. To judge by the example of the particular committee of which Lightfoot was a member, these committees further delegated the work, for on the llth of December, 1643, that body distributed the part of Rouse's Psalms which had been assigned to it, to six of its members, Walker, Burroughs, Caryl, Hall, Whittaker and Lightfoot. =* On the 22nd of the same month it was pro ^ Letters, ii., 121. 2 Lightfoot, 60. 3 Ibid., 79. THE PSALTER. 379 posed in the Assembly that a select committee of chap. ii. Hebrew scholars should be chosen to confer with i645. Rouse on his work.' The proposal, however, does not appear to have been acted upon, and in the subsequent onrush of hotly debated business the whole subject of the metrical version sank out of the Assembly's sight for almost two years.^ The first trace of a return to the subject in the Assembly occm's on the 12th of September, 1645, when Mr. Wilson reported as follows : — This Assembly doth humbly advise and desire that those Psalms set forth by Mr. Eouse, with such alterations as are made by the Committee of the Assembly appointed to review it, may be publicly sung in Churches as being useful and profit able to the Church.^ Upon this report the Assembly voted to read over the said Psalms in its own Grand Committee without the allowance of any debate. " Those that desired to be satisfied in anything, they are to consider of it together with the committee that have already examined." At this point the orderly evolution of the work was interrupted by a merely personal incident. One William Barton, M.A., Barton's T . .... ,, „ version oom- having composed m Lnglish metre two books ot mended to the David's Psalms, first pubhshed in 1644, presented leiroct.' his book to the House of Lords with a petition. The Lords thereupon referred it to the Assembly to be read over, judged and reported upon by 1 Lightfoot, 90. ' The reference in BaUUe's Letters, u., 140, 259, to the subject of the reading of the Scriptures and singing of Psalms relates entirely to the Directory for Psalms and of the several portions of the Di rectory for Worship, for which see supra, pp. 341, 351. ^ MitcheU, 131. 380 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. them, "that such further direction may be given 1645. touching the same as shall be meet".' In response to this message, the Assembly re ferred the fresh partial version to its Committee for the Psalms, that body being strengthened by the addition of six members ^ in the succeeding month. On the 14th of November, 1645, the Assembly came to the following conclusion : — Ordered that whereas the Hon"' House of Commons hath by an order bearing date the 20th of November, 1643, recom- The mended the Psalms set out by Mr. Eous to the consideration re^vSou and °^ ^^^ Assembly of Divines ; the Assembly hath caused them allowance of to be carefully perused and as they are now altered and sion 1645 ' amended do approve of them and humbly conceive that it 14th Nov. may be useful and profitable to the Church that they be per mitted to be publicly sung.^ The vote was at once forwarded to the Com mons. At the same time a more comprehensive answer was despatched to the Lords, in which, after detailing that the Assembly had with much care perused Rouse's version and concurred [sic for conferred] with him thereupon to amend and per fect his copy, they expressed a preference for his said version over that of Mr. Barton.* Immediately on the receipt of the Assembly's report, the House of Commons resolved " that the Book of Psalms set forth by Mr. Rouse and perused by the Assembly of Divines be forthwith printed, and that it be referred to Mr. Rouse to take care iL. J., vii, 627, 7th October, 1645. For another competing contemporary version of the Psalms by Mr. Roberts see Lightfoot, 266. 2 Mitchell, 147, 9th October, 1645. 'Ibid., 163. " L. J., vii., 703, 705, I4th November, 1645. THE PSALTER. 381 for the printing thereof, and that none do presume Ghap. ii. to print it but such as shall be authorised by him ".' i64Ji~ This order of the Commons is not to be re- The com- garded as more than a formal allowance of the f"?^ °^.'^!^ 1* " _ to be printed, Psalter. It did not as yet enjoin its pubhc use. ^"t ^° "°* r\ £ ii-ii 1. enjoin its use One reason tor delaying the latter decisive step —pending doubtless lay in the fact that the Scotch Commis- revision," sioners in the Assembly had throughout insisted that Novemb^. the Psalter should first be submitted to the judg ment of the Scotch Church. Periodically, as the work progressed in the Assembly, it had been des patched to Scotland by the said Commissioners — the last batch of fifty psalms of Rouse's version being sent off about the middle of June, 1645.^ As late as the 25th of November of the same year {i.e., after the Assembly had practically adopted the version by resolution), Baillie informed his countrymen that it was " not to be perused [presumably in the House of Commons] till they be sent to you and your animadversions returned hither, which we wish were so soon as might be ".^ It is not, however, quite clear when the correc tions and suggestions of the Scotch Church were actually received in London. On the 14th of July, 1646, BaiUie states " that the corrections of the Scotch had been friendlUy received and almost aU of them followed [i.e., adopted]. Its hke the Assembly and Parliament here wiU ere long authorise the use of that oft corrected Psalter."* ^C. J., iv., 342, 14th November, 1645. ^Bailhe, Letters, ix., 279, 293. ' Ibid., U., 326. For other references to the first Scotch revision of the Psalter see ibid, 280, 286, 293, 321, 326, 329-31, 379, 401. " Ibid., h., 379. 382 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.ii. The difficulty with regard to this letter (pre- 1646^ suming the date of it correct) is that the House of Commons had already two months before returned to the subject and definitely authorised the version. The Com- Ou the 1 5th of AprU, 1 646, the Commons ordered thrpslue™ that Rouse's Psalms, as perused by the Assembly, iprii.^^*^ should be forthwith printed, " and that the said Psalms and none other shall after the first day of January next be sung in all Churches and Chapels within the Kingdom of England, Dominion of Wales and town of Berwick-upon-Tweed ".' This order and the Psalter were then sent up to the Lords, who three days later read the book twice and committed it to a committee of their own.^ It was not until the 23rd September, 1646, that the Lords' amendments to the Commons' order were passed and voted to be sent down, and it does not appear that these amendments were -accepted by the Commons.^ The delay in the formal concurrence by the Lords in the Commons' order would appear to be attributable to the opposition of the Inde pendents, who disliked the injunction of any uni formity in the matter of singing. In October, 1646, BaiUie distinctly attributes the delay to this faction as he styles it : — Our long labours on the Psalmes when readie to be put in practice are like by a faction to be altogether stifled ; they will have a liberty to take what Psalter they will.* There was, however, in the case of the Lords an additional and more personal motive. They do not appear to have been satisfied with the As sembly's answer on the 14th of November, 1645, 1 C. J., v., 509, 511. 2 L J., viii._ 277, leth AprU, 1646. ' L. J., vui, 500, " Letters, 504 U., 401. THE PSALTER. 383 with regard to Barton's version.. Upon that answer ghap. ii. Barton had promoted a second petition to the i646-8. Lords, who thereupon requested the Assembly to state why his Psalms might not be sung in churches as well as other translations by such as were wiUing to use them.' The Assembly ap pointed a committee to satisfy the Lords,^ and this committee's reply was reported and voted on on the 22nd of April, and forwarded to the Lords on the 25th.^ The reply steadily deprecated the employment The House of more than one version. A further play of champions motive too is revealed in Baillie's letter of 26th ion*°r646T' January, 1647 : — The Commons past their order long agoe ; but the Lords joyned not, being solicited by divers of the Assemblie, and of the ministers of London, who loves better the more poetical paraphrase of their colleague Mr. Barton. The too great accuracie of some in the Assemblie, sticking too hard to the originall text, made the last edition more concise and obscure than the former. With this the Commission of our Church wes not so weell pleased ; but we have gotten all these obscurities helped ; so I think it shaU pass. Our good friend Mr. Zacharie Boyd hes putt himself to a great deale of paines and charges to make a Psalter, but I ever warned him his hopes were ground less to get it receaved in our Churches ; yet the flatteries of his unadvysed neighbours makes him insist in his fruitless designe.* The result was that the House of Lords was swept away before it had agreed with the Com mons on the subject of the latter's order of injunction.^ On the 4th of April, 1648, on Barton's petition, the Lords gave leave for the publication of "an exact emendation of the whole ^ L. J., viu., 236, 26th March, 1646. 2 MitcheU, 216, 9th AprU, 1646. ' Ibid., 221 ; L. J., viu., 283-84. ^ BaUUe, Letters, in., 3. = See L. J., ix., 280. 384 THE assembly's constructive work. Chap.il _ book of Psalms begun by Francis Rouse, Esq., and 1648-54. perfected with sundry hymnes thereunto annexed by WiUiam Barton, M.A"' Barton's ver- Three years later, on the 27th of September, sion allowed, -J ' ^ 1654. 1650, Barton petitioned the Commons with regard to this his version. In reply the Commons appointed six divines "to peruse and consider of the. transla tion of the Psalms set out by Mr. Rouse, and since reviewed by the said William Barton, and if they shall approve of the same then to license the printing thereof".^ Ultimately Barton's version re ceived the imprimatur of the Protector and his Council, January, 1653-54, and it is noticeable th^t the 1654 edition differs materially from those of 1644, 1645 and 1646. The mere licensing his version for the press was, however, and of course, quite a different matter from the public enjoining of it for purposes of worship. The final result, therefore (speaking ofthe period 1640-60), was (1) that Rouse's version, though revised by the Westminster Assembly and by the Scotch Church, and accepted by the Commons, was never accepted by the Lords, and therefore never legally enjoined. (2) That no other version either was enjoined. Very strangely the fate of the English (un accepted) version was more kindly in Scotland. As adopted by the Assembly it was subject to much critical handhng by the Scottish Kirk during the years 1647-49, but was finally adopted by the General Assembly in November, 1649, and ratified by the Committee of Estates in January, 1654.' 1 L. J., X., 178. "- C. J., vi, 474. ' See BaiUie, Letters, iu., 60, 97, 640-52. END OF VOL. I. H Classifieb CatalOGue OF WORKS IN GENERAL LITERATURE PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO. 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON, E.C. 91 and 93 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK, and 32 HORNBY ROAD, BOMBAY CONTENTS. BADMINTON LIBRARY (THE). BIOGRAPHY, PERSONAL ME MOIRS, &c. CHILDREN'S BOOKS CLASSICAL LITERATURE, TRANS LATIONS, ETC. COOKERY, DOMESTIC MANAGE MENT, &c. EVOLUTION, ANTHROPOLOGY, &c. FICTION, HUMOUR, &c. - FINE ARTS (THE) AND MUSIC FUR, FEATHER AND FIN SERIES HISTORY, POLITICS, POLITY, POLITICAL MEMOIRS, &c. LANGUAGE, HISTORY AND SCIENCE OF - LOGIC, RHETORIC, PSYCHOLOGY, &c. PAGE 12 9 32 36 25 36 15 17 MENTAL, MORAL, AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 17 MISCELLANEOUS AND CRITICAL WORKS 38- POETRY AND THE DRAMA 23, POLITICAL ECONOMY AND ECO NOMICS - zo POPULAR SCIENCE - 30 RELIGION, THE SCIENCE OF 21 SILVER LIBRARY (THE) - 33 SPORT AND PASTIME - - 12 STONYHURST PHILOSOPHICAL SERIES ¦ ¦ 19 TRAVEL AND ADVENTURE, THE COLONIES, &c. - II WORKS OF REFERENCE- - 31 INDEX Page Abbott (Evelyn) 3 (J. H. M.) (T. K.) - (E. A.) - Acland (A. H. D.) Acton (Eliza) - Adelborg (0.) ^schylus Albemarle (Earl of) Alcock (C. W.) Allen (Grant) - Allgood (G.) Alverstone (Lord) Angwin (M. C.) Anstey (F.) AristophanesAristotle - Arnold (Sir Edwin) (Dr.T.) - Ashbourne (Lord) Ashby (H.) Ashley (W. J.) - Atkinson (J.J.) Avebury (Lord) Ayre (Rev. J.) - BaconBagehot (W.) - Bagwell (R.) Bailey (H. C.) - Baillie (A. F.) Bain (Alexander) Baker (J. H.) - (Sir S. W.) Baldwin fr.. R.l 19, 22 3 17,18 17 3 363222 1313 30 3 15 3625 22 17 ¦ 11,23 33 36 3. 20 31 9,17 9, 20, 38 3 25 3 1738 - II, 12 OF AUTHO Page Balfour (A. J.) - 13, 21 Ball (John) 11 Banks (M. M.) - - 24 Baring-Gould(Rev.S.)2i,38Barnett (S. A. and H.) 20 Haynes (T. S.) - - 38 Beaconsfield (Earl of) 25 Beaufort (Duke of)i2, 13, 14 Becker (W. A.) - 22 Beesly (A. H.) - 9 Bell (Mrs. Hugh) 23 Bent (J. Theodore) - ir Besant (Sir Walter)- 3 Bickerdyke (J.) - 14, 15 Bird (G.) - 23 Blackburne (J. H.) 15 Bland (Mrs. Hubert) 24 Blount (Sir E.) 9 Boase (Rev. C. W.) - Boedder (Rev. B.) Bonnell (H. H.) Booth (A. J.) - Bottome (P.) - Bowen (W. E.) Brassey (Lady) Bright (Rev.J. F.) - Broadfoot (Major W.) Brooks (H. J.) - Brough (J.) Brown (A. F.) - Bruce (R. L) - Buckland (Jas.) Buckle (H. T.) - Bull (T.) RS AND EDITORS. Page 3 Burke (U. R.) - Burne-Jones (Sir E.) Burns (C. L.) - Burrows (Montagu) Butler (E. A.) Campbell (Rev. Lewis) Casserly (G.) - Chesney (Sir G.) - Childe-Pemberton(W.S.) 9 Chisholm (G. C ) - 31 Cholmondeley-Pennell (H.) - - 13 Christie (R. C.) - 38 Churchill (Winston S.) 4, 25 Cicero - - 22 Clarke (Rev. R. F.) - 19 Climenson (E. J.) Clodd (Edward) Clutterbuck(W. J.)- Cochrane (A.) - Cockerel) (C. R.) Colenso(R. J.) Conington (John) - Conybeare(Rev.W.J.) & Howson (Dean) Coolidge (W. A. B.) Corbett (Julian S.) Coutts (W.) Cox (Harding) Crake (Rev. A. D.) Crawford 0- H.) Creed (S.) Creighton (Bishop) -4. Cross (A. L.) 21,30 12 23 Crozier (J. B.) - Cutts (Rev. E. L.) Dabney (J. P.) - Dale (L.) - Dallinger (F. W.) Dauglish (M. G.) Davenport (A.) Davidson (A. M. C.) (W. L.) - 17, Davies (J. F.) Dent (C. T.) - De Salis (Mrs.) De Tocqueville (A.) - Devas (C. S.) - Dewey (D. R.) - Dickinson (W. H.) - Dougall (L.) - Dowden (E.) Doyle (Sir A. Conan) Du Bois (W. E. B.)- Dunbar (Mary F.) Dyson (E.) Ellis (J. H.) (R. L.) Erasmus - Evans (Sir John) Falkiner (C. L.) Farrar (Dean) - Fitzmaurice (Lord E Folkard (H. C.) Ford (H.) - Fountain (P Fowler (Edith H.) Francis (Francis) Page 9. 17 6 23 4 5 9 25 22 20,21 22 14 36 4 19, 20 20 3825 40 25 5 25 26 1517 9 38 4 20, 26 .) 4 1516 II 26 16 INDEX OF AUTHORS AND KUlTORS—eontinued. Page Francis (M. E.) - 26 Freeman (Edward A.) 6 Fremantle (T. F.) - 16 Frost (G.)- - ¦ 38 Froude (James A.) 4,9,11,26 Fuller (F. W.) - - 5 Furneaux (W.) - 30 Gardiner (Samuel R.) 5 Gathorne-Hardy (Hon. A. E.) - - 15, 16 Geikie (Rev. Cunning ham) - - - 38 Gibson (C. H.)- 17 Gilkes (A. H.) - 38 Gleig (Rev. G. R.) 10 Graham (A.) 5 (P. A.) - 15, 16 (G. F.) - 20 Granby (Marquess of) 15 Grant (Sir A.) 17 Graves (R. P.) - 9 (A. F.) - 23 Green (T. Hill) - 17, 18 Greene (E. B.)- 5 Greville (C. C. F.) 5 Grose (T. H.) - 18 Gross (C.) 5 Grove (Lady) - II (Mrs. Lilly) 13 Gurnhill (J.) - 18 Gwilt (J.) - - 31 Haggard (H. Rider) II, 26, 27, 38 Halliwell-Phillipps (j .) 10 Hamilton (Col. H. B.) 5 Hamlin (A. D. F.) 36 Harding (S. B.) 5 Hardwick (A. A.) - 11 Harmsworth (A. C.) 13, 14 Harte (Bret) - 27 Harting (J. E.)- 15 Hartwig (G.) 30 Hassall (A.) 8 Haweis (H. R.) 9, 36 Head (Mrs.) - ..37 Heath (D. D.) - 17 Heathcote (J. M.) 14 (C. G.) - 14 (N.) II Helmholtz (Hermann von) - - - 30 Henderson (Lieut- Col. G. F. R.) - 9 Henry (W.) 14 Henty (G. A.) - 32 , Higgins (Mrs. N.) 9 ; Hill (Mabel) - 5 (S. C.) 5 Hillier (G. Lacy) 13 Hime (H. W. L.) - 22 Hodgson (Shadworth) 18 Hoenig (F.) 38 Hogan (J. F.) g Holmes (R. R.) 10 Homer - - 22 Hope (Anthony) 27 Horace - - 22 h.ju^ion(D. F.) - 5 Howard (Lady Mabel) 27 Howitt (W.) - II Hudson (W. H.) 30 Huish (M. B.) - 37 HuUah (J.) 37 Hume (David) - 18 (M. A. S.) 3 Hunt (Rev. W.) 6 Hunter (Sir W.) - 6 Hutchinson (Horace G.) 13, 16, 27, 38 Ingelow (Jean) - 23 Ingram (T. D.) 6 James (W.) - - 18, 21 Jameson (Mrs. Anna) 37 Jefferies (Richard) - 38 Jekyll (Gertrude) 38 Page Jerome (Jerome K.) - 27 Johnson (J. & J. H.) 39 31 6, 27, 39 18 23 ones (H. Bence) Joyce (P. W.) Justinian - Kant (I.) - Kaye (Sir J. W.) Keary (C. F.) - Kelly (E.)- Kielmansegge (F.) Killick (Rev. A. H.) - Kitchin (Dr. G. W.) Knight (E. F.) - Kbstlin (J.) Kristeller (P.) Ladd (G. T.) - 18 Lang (Andrew) 6 ,13, 14, 16, 21, 22, 23, 27, 32, 39 6 II, 14 10 37 Lapsley (G. T.) Laurie (S. S.) - Lawrence (F. W.) Lear (H. L. Sidney) - Lecky (W. E. H.) 6, Lees (J. A.) Leighton (J. A.) Leslie (T. E. Cliffe) - 5 6 2036 18,23 12 2120 Lieven (Princess) 6 Lillie (A.)- 16 Lindley (J.) 31 Locock (C. D.) 16 Lodge (H. C.) - 6 Loftis (Rev. W. J.) - 6 Longman (C. J.) - 12, 16 (F. W.) - 16 (G. H.) - - 13, 15 (Mrs. C. J.) 37 Lowell (A. L.) - 6 Lucian - - 22 Lutoslawski (W.) 18 Lyall (Edna) - 27, 32 Lynch (G.) 6 (H. F. B.)- 12 Lytton (Earl of) - 24 Macaulay (Lord) 6, 7, 10, 24 Macdonald (Dr. G.) - 24 Macfarren (Sir G. A.) 37 Mackail (J. W.) -10,23 Mackenzie (C. G.) - 16 Mackinnon (J.) 7 Macleod (H. D.) - 20 Macpherson (Rev.H. A.) 15 Madden (D. H.) 16 Magniisson (E.) 28 Maher (Rev. M.) 19 Mallet (B.) - - 7 Malleson (Col. G. B.) 6 Marbot (Baron de) - 10 Marchment (A. W.) 27 Marshraan (J. C.) 9 Maryon (M.) - 39 Mason (A. E. W.) 27 Maskelyne (J. N.) 16 Matthews (B.) 39 Maunder (S.) - 31 Max MiiUer (F.) 10, 18, 20, 21, 22, 27, 39 May (Sir T. Erskine) Meade (L. T.) - Melville(G.J.Whyte) Merivale (Dean) Merriman ;H. S.) Mill (John Stuart) - Millais (j. G.) - Milner (G.) Monck (W. H. S.) Montague (F. C.) Moore (T.) (Rev. Edward) - Moran (T. F.) - Morgan (C. Lloyd) - Morris (W.) - 22, 23, 24, 27. 28, 37, 40 Mulhall (M. G.) - 20 Murray (Hilda) - aa Myers (F. W. H.) 19 7 32 27 7 27 18. 20 16, 30 40 19 7 31 17 7 Page Nansen (F.) 12 Nash (V.) - 7 Nesbit (E.) - 24 Nettleship (R. L.) 17 Newman (Cardinal) - 28 Nichols (F. M.) 9 Oakesmith (J.) - 22 Ogilvie (R.) - - 22 Oldfield (Hon. Mrs.) 9 Osbourne (L.) - - 28 Packard (A. 8.) 21 Paget (Sir J.) 10 Park (W.) 16 Parker (B.) - - 40 Payne-Gallwey(SirR.)i4,i6Pears (E.) - - 7 Pearse (H. H. S.) 6 Peek (Hedley) - - 14 Pemberton (W. S. Childe-) - - 9 Penrose (H. H.) - 33 Phillipps-Wolley(C.) 12, z8 Pierce (A. H.) - - 19 Pole (W.) - - 17 Pollock (W. H.) - 13, 40 Poole (W.H. and Mrs.) 36 Poore (G. V.) 40 Portman (L.) 28 Powell (E.) 7 Powys (Mrs. P. L.) - 10 Praeger (S. Rosamond) 33 Pritchett (R. T.) - 14 Proctor (R. A.) 16, 30, 35 Raine (Rev. James) - 6 Ramal (W.) - 24 Randolph (C. F.) 7 Rankin (R.) - 8, 25 Ransome (Cyril) 3, 8 Reid (S. J.) - 9 Rhoades (J.) 23 Rice (S. P.) 12 Rich (A.) - 23 Richmond (Ennis) - 19 Rickaby (Rev. John) 19 (Rev. Joseph) - 19 Riley (J. W.) - 24 Roberts (E. P.) 33 Robertson (W. G.) - 37 Roget (Peter M.) - 20, 31 Romanes (G.J.) 10, 19,21,24 (Mrs. G. J.) - 10 Ronalds (A.) - 17 Roosevelt (T.) - 6 Ross (Martin) - - 28 Rossetti (Maria Fran- cesca) - - 40 Rotheram (M. A.) 36 Rowe (R. P. P.) 14 Russell (Lady) - 10 Sandars (T. C.) 18 Sanders (E. K.) - 9 Savage- Armstrong(G.F.)25 Seebohm (F.) - 8, 10 Selous (F. C.) - 12, 17 Senior (W.) - 13, 15 Seton-Karr (Sir H.)- 8 Sewell (Elizabeth M.) 28 Shadwell (A.) - - 40 Shakespeare as Shaw (W. A.) - 8 Shearman (M.) - 12, 13 Sheehan (P. A.) 28 Sheppard (E.) - 8 Sinclair (A.) 14 Skrine (F. H.) - q Smith (C. Fell) 10 (R. Bosworth) - 8 (T. C.) - . 5 (W. P. Haskett) la Somerville (E.) - 28 Sophocles - 23 j Soulsby (Lucy H.) 40 I Southey (R.) 40 Spedding (J.) - g, ly \ Spender (A. E.) 12 Page Stanley (Bishop) 31 Stebbing (W.) - 28 Steel (A. G.) 13 Stephen (Leslie) - 12 Stephens (H. Morse) 8 Sternbierg (Count Adalbert) - - 8 Stevens (R. W.) - 40 Stevenson (R. L.) 25,28,33 Storr (F.) - - - 17 Stuart-Wortley (A.J.) 14, 15 Stubbs (I. W.) - - 8 (W.)- - - 8 Suffolk & Berkshire (Earlol) - 14 Sullivan (Sir E.) 14 Sully (James) - - ig Sutherland (A. and G.) 8 (Alex.) - - ig, 40 Suttner (B. von) 29 Swinburne (A. J.) 19 Symes (J. E.) - 20 Tait a.) - 7 Tallentyre (S. G.) 10 Tappan (E. M.) - 33 Taylor (Col. Meadows) 8 Theopjirastus - 23 Thomas (J. W.) 19 Thomson (H. C.) 8 Thornhill (W.J.) 23 Thornton (T. H.) 10 Thuillier (H. F.) 40 Todd (A.) - 8 Tout (T. F.) Toynbee (A.) - - 2 Trevelyan(SirG.O.) 6. 7. 8, 9, 10 (G. M.) - - 7, 8 (R. C.) - - 25 Trollope (Anthony)- 29 Turner (ri. G.) 40 Tyndall (J.) 9, 12 Tyrrell (R. Y.) - -22,23 Uhwin (R.) - - 40 Upton(F.K.and Bertha) 33 Van Dyke (J. C.) 37 Vanderpoel (E. N.) - 37 Virgil - - 23 Wagner (R.) - 25 Wakeman (H. O.) 8 Walford (L. B.) 29 Wallas (Graham) 10 (Mrs. Graham) - 32 Walpole (Sir Spencer) 8, 10 (Horace) - - 10 Walrond (Col. H.) - 12 Walsingham (Lord)- 14 Ward (Mrs. W.) - 29 Warner (P. F.) - 17 Warwick (Countess of) 40 Watson (A. E. T.) 12, 13, 14 Weathers (J.) - - 40 Webb (Mr. and Mrs. Sidney) (Judge T.) (T. E.) Weber (A.) Weir (Capt. R.) - 14 Wellington (Duchess of) 37 Wemyss (M. C. E.)- 33 Weyman (Stanley) - 29 Whately(Archbishop) 17,19 Whitelaw (R.) - - 23 Whittall(SirJ. W.)- 40 Wilkins (G.) - 23 (W. H.) 10 Willard (A. R.) 37 Willich (C. M.) 31 Wood (Rev. J. G.) - 31 Wood-Martin (W. G.) 22 Wyatt (A. J.) - - 24 Wylie (J. H.) - 8 Yeats (S. Levett) 29 YoxaU g. H.) - - 29 Zeller (E.) . 19 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History, Polities, Polity, Political Memoirs, &e. Abbott. — A History of Greece. By Evelyn Abbott, M.A., LL.D. Part I. — From the Earliest Times to the Ionian Revolt. Crown 8vo., los. 6d. Part II. — 500-445 B.C. Crown 8vo., lOi. 6d. Part III. — From the Peace of 445 B.C. to the Fall of the Thirty at Athens in 403 B.C. Crown 8vo., los. 6d. Abbott. — Tommy Cornstalk : being Some Account of the Less Notable Features of the South African War from the Point of View of the Australian Ranks. By J. H. M. Abbott. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Acland and Ransome. — A Hand book IN Outline of the Political His tory of England to 1896. Chronologically Arranged. By the Right Hon. A. H. Dyke Acland, and Cyril Ransome, M.A. Crown 8vo., 6s. '•- Allgood. — China War, i860 : Letters and Journals. By Major- General G. Allgood, C.B., formerly Lieut. G. Allgood, ist Division China Field Force. With Maps, Plans, and Illustra tions. Demy 4to. 12s. bd. net. Annual Register (The). A Review of Public Events at Home and Abroad, for the year 1902. 8vo., i8s. Volumes of the Annual Register for the years 1863-igoi can still be had. i8i. each. hvtioXA..— Introductory Lectures ON Modern History. By Thomas Ar nold, D.D., formerly Head Master of Rugby School. 8vo., "JS. 6d. Ashbourne. — Pitt : Some Chapters ON His Life and Times. By the Right Hon. Edward Gibson, Lord Ashbourne, Lord Chancellor of Ireland. With 11 Por traits. 8vo., gilt top, 215. Ashley (W. J.). English Economic History and Theory. Crown 8vo., Part I., 5s. Part II., los. 6i. Surveys, Historic and Economic. Crown 8vo., gs. net. Bagwell. — Ireland under the Tudors. By Richard Bagwell, LL.D. (3 vols.) Vols. I. and II. From the first invasion ofthe Northmen to the year 1578. 8vo., 32s. Vol. III. 1578-1603. 8vo., i8s. Baillie. — The Oriental Club, and Hanover Square. By Alexander F. Baillie. With 6 Photogravure Portraits and 8 Full-page Illustrations. Crown 4to., 25s. net. Besant. — The History of London. By Sir Walter Besant. With 74 Illus trations. Crown 8vo., is. gd. Or bound as a School Prize Book, gilt edges, 2s. 6d. Bright. — A History of England. By the Rev. J. Franck Bright, D.D. Period I. Mediaeval Monarchy: a.d. 449-1485. Crown 8vo., 4s. 6d. Period II. Personal Monarchy. 1485- 1688. Crown 8vo., 5s. Period III. Constitutional Monarchy. 1689-1837. Crown 8vo., 75. dd. Period IV. The Growth op Democracy. 1837-1880. Crown 8vo., 6s. Bruce. — The Forivard Policy and its Results; or. Thirty-five Years' Work amongst the 'Tribes on our North- Western Frontier of India. By Richard Isaac Bruce, CLE. With 28 Illustrations and a Map. 8vo., 15s. net. Buckle. — History of Civilisation IN England. By Henry Thomas Buckle. Cabinet Edition. 3 vols. Crown 8vo., 24s. ' Silver Library ' Edition. 3 vols. Crown 8vo., los. 6d. Burke. — A History of Spain, From the Earliest Times to the Death of Ferdinand the Catholic. By Ulick Ralph Burke, M.A. Edited by Martin A. S. Hume. With 6 Maps. 2 vols. Crown 8vo., i6s. net. Caroline, (^&t.n.— Caroline the III us trio us, Q ueen- C onsor t of George II. and sometime Queen Regent: a Study of Her Life and Time. By W. H. Wilkins, M.A., F.S.A., Author of ' The Love of an Uncrowned Queen '. 2 vols., 8vo., 36s. Casserly. — The Land of the Boxers; or, China under the Allies. By Captain Gordon Casserly. With 15 Illustrations and a Plan. 8vo., los. 6d. net. Chesney. — Indian Polity: a View of the System of Administration in India. By General Sir George Chesney, K.C.B. With Map showing all the Administrative Divisions of British India. 8vo., 21s. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History, Polities, Polity, Political Memoirs, ka.— continued. Churchill (Winston Spencer, M.P.). The River War : an Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan. Edited by Colonel F. Rhodes, D.S.O. With Photogravure Portrait of Viscount Kitchener of Khartoum, and 22 Maps and Plans. 8vo., los. 6d. net. The Story of the Malakand Field Force, 1897. With 6 Maps and Plans. Crown 8vo., 3s. 6d. London toLadysmith viAPretoria . Crown Svo., 6s. Jan Hamilton's March. With Portrait of Major-General Sir Ian Hamilton, and 10 Maps and Plans. Crown 8vo., 5s. Corbett (Julian S.). Drake and the Tudor Navy, with a History of the Rise of England as a Maritime Power. With Portraits, Illustrations and Maps. 2 vols. Crown 8vo., i6s. The Successors of Drake. With 4 Portraits (2 Photogravures) and 12 Maps and Plans. 8vo., 21s. I Creighton (M., D.D., Late Lord Bishop of London). A History of the Papacy from ; THE Great Schism to the Sack op . Rome, 1378-1527. 6 vols. Cr. 8vo., [ 5s. net each. Queen Elizabeth. With Portrait. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. Historical Essays and Reviews. Edited by Louise Creighton. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. Dale. — The Principles of English Constitutional History. By Lucy Dale, late Scholar of SomerVille College, Oxford. Crown Svo. , 6s. De Tocqueville. — Democracy in America. By Alexis de Tocqueville. Translated by Henry Reeve, C.B., D.C.L. 2 vols. Crown Svo., i6s. Falkiner. — Studies in Irish His tory AND Biography, Mainly of the Eighteenth Century. By C. Litton Falkiner. 8vo., 12s. 6rf. net. I Fitzmaurice. — Charles William Ferdinand, Duke op Brunswick: an Historical Study. By Lord Edmund Fitzmaurice. With Map and 2 Portraits. Svo., 6s. net. Froude (James A.). The History of England, from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat of the Spanish Armada. 12 vols. Crown 8vo., 3J. 6d. each. The Divorce of Catherine of Aragon. Crown Svo., 3s. 6d. The Spanish Story of the Ar mada, and other Essays. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. The English in Ireland in the Eighteenth Century. 3 vols. Cr. Svo., los. 6d. English Seamen IN the Sixteenth Century. Cabinet Edition. Crown Svo., 6s. Illustrated Edition. With 5 Photo gravure Plates and 16 other Illustra tions. Large Cr. Svo., gilt top, 6s. net. ' Silver Library ' Edition. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. The Council of Trent. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Shoe t Studies on Gre a t Subjects. Cabinet Edition. 4 vols. 24s. ' Silver Library ' Edition. 4 vols. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. each. CyESAR : a Sketch. Cr. -Svo, 3s. 6d. Selections from the Writings of James Anthony Froude. Edited by P. S. Allen, M.A. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Fuller. — Egypt and the Hinter land. By Frederic W. Fuller. With Frontispiece and Map of Egypt and the Sudan. Crown Svo., 6s. net. Gardiner (Samuel Rawson, D.C.L., LL.D.). History of England, from the Ac cession of James L to the Outbreak ofthe Civil War, 1603-1642. With 7 Maps. 10 vols. Crown Svo., 5s. net each. A History of the Great Civil "War, 1642-1649. With 54 Maps and Plans. 4 vols. Cr. 8vo., 5s. net each. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History, Polities, Polity, Political Memoirs, &e, — continued. Gardiner (Samuel Rawson, D.C.L., LL.D.) — continued. A History OF THE Commonwealth and the Protectorate. 1649-1656. 4 vols. Crown Svo., 5s. net each. The Student's History of Eng land. With 378 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., gilt top, I2S. Also in Three 'Volumes, price 4s. each. What Gunpowder Plot Was. With S Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 5s. Cromwell's Place in History. Founded on Six Lectures delivered in the University of Oxford. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. Oliver Cromwell. With Frontis piece. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. German Empire (The) of To-day : Outlines of its Formation and Development. By 'Veritas'. Crown 8vo., 6s. net. Graham. — Roman Africa : an Out line of the History of the Roman Occupa tion of North Africa, based chiefly upon Inscriptions and Monumental Remains in that Country. By Alexander Graham, F.S.A., F.R.I. B.A. With 30 reproductions of Original Drawings by the Author, and 2 Maps. Svo., i6s. net. Greville. — A Journal of the Reigns OP King George IV., King William IV., and Queen Victoria. By Charles C. F. Greville, formerly Clerk of the Council. 8 vols. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. each. Gross. — The Sources and Litera ture of English History, from the Earliest Times to about 14S5. By Charles Gross, Ph.D. 8vo., iSs. net. Hamilton. — Historical Record of the 14TH {King's) Hussars, from a.d. 1715 to a.d. igoo. By Colonel Henry Black burne Hamilton, M.A., Christ Church, Oxford ; late Commanding the Regiraent. With 15 Coloured Plates, 35 Portraits, etc., in Photogravure, and 10 Maps and Plans. Crown 4to., gilt edges, 42s. net. Hill. — Liberty Documents. With Contemporary Exposition and Critical Com ments drawn from various Writers. Selected and Prepared by Mabel Hill. Edited with an Introduction byALBERT Bushnell Hart, Ph.D. Large Crown Svo., 7s. bd. net. HARVARD HISTORICAL STUDIES. The Suppression of the African Slave T^ade to the United States of America, 1638-1870. By W. E. B. Du Bois, Ph.D. Svo., 7s. bd. The Contest over the Ratificaton op the Federal Constitution in Massa chusetts. By S. B. HardinGjA.M. 8vo.,6s. A Critical Study of Nullification IN South Carolina. By D. F. Houston, A.M. Svo., 6s. Nominations for Elective Office IN THE United States. By Frederick W. Dallinger, A.M. 8vo., 7s. bd. A Bibliography of British Muni cipal History, including Gilds and Parliamentary Representation. By Charles Gross, Ph.D. Svo., 12s. The Liberty and Free Soil Parties in the North West. By Theodore C, Smith, Ph.D. Svo, 7s. bd. The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies of North America. By EvARTS Boutell Greene. Svo., 7s. bd. The County Palatine of Durham: a Study in Constitutional History. By Gail- lard Thomas Lapsley, Ph.D. 8vo., los. bd. The Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonies. By Arthur Lyon Cross, Ph.D., Instructor in History in the University of Michigan. Svo., los. bd. fjill, — Three Frenchmen in Ben gal; or, The Loss of the French Settle ments. By S. C. Hill, B.A., B.Sc, Officer in charge of the Records of the Government of India. With 4 Maps. Svo. Historic Towns.— Edited by E. A. Freeman, D.C.L., and Rev. William Hunt, M.A. With Maps and Plans. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. each. Bristol. By Rev. W.Hunt. Carlisle. By Mandell Creighton, D.D. Cinque Ports. By Mon tagu Burrows. Colchester. ByRev.E.L. Cutts. Exeter. By E. A. Freeman. London. By Rev. W. J. Loftie. Oxford. By Rev. C. W. Boase. W. Winchester. By G, Kitchin, D.D. York. By Rev. James Raine. New York. By Theodore Roosevelt. Boston (U.S.) By Henry Cabot Lodge. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History, Polities, Polity, Political Memoirs, ho,.— continued. Lecky (The Rt. Hon. William E. H.) — continued. Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland: Flood— Grattan—O'Con- nell. 2 vols. 8vo., 25s. net. Hunter (Sir William Wilson). A History of British India. Vol. I. — Introductory to the Overthrow ofthe English in the Spice Archipelago, 1623. With 4 Maps. 8vo., i8s. Vol. II. — To the Union of the Old and New Companies under the Earl of Godolphin's Award, 170S. 8vo., i6s. The India of the Queen, and other Essays. Edited by Lady Hunter. With an Introduction by Francis Henry Skrine, Indian Civil Service (Retired). Svo., 9s. net. Ingram. — A Critical Examina tion op Irish History. From the Eliza bethan Conquest to the Legislative Union of iSoo. By T. Dunbar Ingram, LL.D. 2 vols. Svo., 24s. Joyce. — -4 Short History of Ire land, from the Earliest Times to 1603. By P. W. Joyce, LL.D. Crown 8vo., los. bd. Kaye and MaXl&son.—HisTORv of THE Indian Mutiny, iS57-rS58. By Sir John W. Kaye and Colonel G. B. Malle son. With Analytical Index and Maps and Plans. 6 vols. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. each. Lang (Andrew). The Mystery op Mary Stuart. With 6 Photogravure Plates (4 Portraits) and 15 other Illustrations. Svo., iSs. net. James the Sixth and the Gowrie Mystery. With Gowrie's Coat of Arms in colour, 2 Photogravure Portraits and other Illustrations. Svo., 12s. bd. net. Prince Charles Edward Stuart, THE Young Chevalier. With Photo gravure Frontispiece. Cr. 8vo., 7s. bd. net. Laurie. — Historical Survey of Pre-Christian Education. By S. S. Laurie, A.M., LL.D. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. Lecky (The Rt. Hon. William E. H.) History of England in the Eigh teenth Cektury. Library Edition. S vols. Svo. Vols. I. and II., 1700-1760, 36s. ; Vols. III. and IV., 1760-17S4, 36s. ; Vols. V. and VI., 1784-1793, 36s. ; Vols. VII. and VIII., 1793-1S00, 36s. Cabinet Edition. England. 7 vols. Crown Svo., 5s. net each. Ireland. 5 vols. Crown 8vo., 5s. net each. History of European Morals from Augustus to Charlemagne. 2 vols. Crown Svo., los. net. A Survey of English Ethics: Being the First Chapter of the ' History of European Morals'. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by W. A. Hirst. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. History of the Rise and Influ ence op the Spirit of Rationalism in Europe. 2 vols. Crown Svo., los. net. Democracy and Liberty. Library Edition. 2 vols. Svo., 36s. Cabinet Edition. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., ios.net. Lieven. — Letters of Dorothea, Princess Lieven, during her Residence IN London, 1812-1S34. Edited by Lionel G. Robinson. With 2 Photogravure Por traits. Svo., 14s. net. Lowell. — Governments and Par ties IN Continental Europe. By A. Lawrence Lowell. 2 vols. 8vo., 21s. Lumsden's Horse, Records of.— Edited by H. H. S. Pearse. With a Map, and numerous Portraits and Illustrations in the Text. 4to., 21s. net. Lynch. — The War of the Civili sations : BEING A Record op ' A Foreign Devil's' Experiences with the Allies IN China. By George Lynch, Special Correspondent of the ' Sphere,' etc. With Portrait and 21 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 6s. net. Macaulay (Lord). The Life and M'orks of Lord Macaulay. 'Edinburgh' Ediiion. 10 vols. 8vo.,6s.each. Vols. I. -IV. History op England'. Vols. V.-VII. Essays, Biographies, Indian Penal Code, Contributions TO Knight's 'Quarterly Magazine'. Vol. VIII. Speeches, Lavs of Ancient Rome, Miscellaneous Poems. Vols. IX. and X. The Life and Letters op Lord Macaulay. By Sir G. O. Trevelyan, Bart, MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History, Polities, Polity, Political Memoirs, &e. — continued. Macaulay (Lord) — continued. The Works. • Albany ' Edition. With 12 Portraits. 12 vols. Large Crown Svo., 3s. bd. each. Vols. I. -VI. History op England, FROM THE Accession OP James the Second. Vols. VII.-X. Essays and Biographies. Vols. XI. -XII. Speeches, Lays op Ancient Rome, etc., and Index. Cabinet Edition. 16 vols. Post Svo., £i i6s. Library Edition. 5 vols. Svo., £4. History of England from the Accession op Jambs the Second. Popular Edition. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., 5s. Student's Edition. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., 12s. People's Edition. 4 vols. Cr. Svo., i6s. 'Albany' Edition. With 6 Portraits. 6 vols. Large Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. each. Cabinet Edition. 8 vols. Post 8vo., 48s. ' Edinburgh' Edition. 4 vols. Svo., 6s. each. Critical and Historical Essays, with Lays op Ancient Rome, etc., in i volume. Popular Edition. Crown 8vo., 2s. bd. ' Silver Library ' Edition. With Portrait and 4 Illustrations to the ' Lays '. Cr. 8vo., 3s. bd. Critical and Historical Essays. Student's Edition, i vol. Cr. Svo., 6s. 'Trevelyan' Edition. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., gs. Cabinet Edition. 4 vols. Post Svo., 24s. 'Edinburgh' Edition. 3 vols. Svo., 6s. each. Library Edition. 3 vols. 8vo., 36s. EssA YS, which may be had separately, sewed, bd. each ; cloth, is. each. Addison and Walpole. Crolter's Boswell's Johnson. Hallam's Constitutional History. Warren Hastings. The Earl of Chatham (Two Essays). Frederick the Great. Ranke and Gladstone. Lord Bacon. Lord Clive. Lord Byron, and The Comic Dramatists of tbe Restoration. Miscellaneous Writings, Speeches and Poems. Popular Edition. Crown Svo., 2S. bd. Cabinet Edition. 4 vols. Post Svo., 24s. Selections from the Writings of Lord Macaulay. Edited, with Occa sional Notes, by the Right Hon. Sir G. O. Trevelyan, Bart. Crown 8vo., 6s. Mackinnon (James, Ph.D.). The History of Edward the Third. Svo., 18s. The Growth and Decline of the French Monarchy. Svo., 21s. net. Mallet. — Mallet du Pan and the French Revolution. By Bernard Mallet. With Photogravure Portrait. Svo., I2S. bd. net. May. — The Constitutional His tory op England since the Accession of George III. 1760-1870. By Sir Thomas Erskine May, K.C.B. (Lord Farnborough). 3 vols. Cr. Svo., i8s. Merivale (Charles, D.D.). History OF the Romans under the Empire. 8 vols. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. each. The Fall of the Roman Republic: a Short History ofthe Last Century ofthe Commonwealth. i2mo., 7s. bd. General History of Rome, from the Foundation of the City to the Fall of Augustulus, B.C. 753-A.D. 476. With 5 Maps. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. Montague. — The Elements of English Constitutional History. By F. C. Montague, M.A. Crown Svo;, 3s. bd. Moran.— The Theory and Prac tice of the English Government. By Thomas Francis Moran, Ph.D., Professor of History and Economics in Purdue Uni versity, U.S. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Na.sh.— The Great Famine and its Causes. By Vaughan Nash. With S Illustrations from Photographs by the Author, and a Map of India showing the Famine Area. Crown Svo., 6s. Owens College Essays.— Edited by T F. Tout, M.A., Professor of History in the Owens College, Victoria University, and James Tait, M.A., Assistant Lecturer in History. With 4 Maps. Svo., 12s. 6d.net. Pears. — The Destruction of the Greek Empire and the Story op the Capture of Constantinople by the Turks. By Edwin Pears, LL.B. With 3 Maps and 4 Illustrations. Svo., iSs. net. 8 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History, Polities, Polity, Political Memoirs, ^q.— continued. Powell and Trevelyan. — The Peasants' Rising and the Lollards : a Collection of Unpublished Documents. Edited by Edgar Powell and G. M. Trevelyan. Svo., 6s. net. Randolph. — The Law and Policy op Annexation, with Special Reference to the Philippines ; together with Observations on the Status of Cuba. By Carman F. Randolph. Svo., gs. net. Rankin (Reginald). The Marquis d' Argenson ; and Richard the Second. Svo., ios. bd. net. A Subaltern's Letters to His Wife. (The Boer War.) Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Ransome. — The Rise of Consti tutional Government in England. By Cyril Ransome, M.A. Crown Svo., 6s. Seebohm (Frederic, LL.D., F.S.A.). The English Village Community. With 13 Maps and Plates. 8vo., i6s. Tribal Custom in Anglo-Saxon Law: being an Essay supplemental to (r) ' The English Village Community,' (2) 'The Tribal System in Wales'. 8vo., i6s. Seton-Karr. — The Call to Arms, 1900-igoi ; or a Review of the Imperial Yeomanry Movement, and some subjects connected therewith. By Sir Henry Seton- Karr, M.P. With a Frontispiece by R. Caton-Woodville. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Shaw. — A History ob the English Church during the Civil Wars and under the Commonwealth, 1640-1660. By William A. Shaw, Litt.D. 2 vols. Svo., 36s. Sheppard. — The Old Royal Palace of Whitehall. By Edgar Sheppard, D.D., Sub-Dean of H.M. Chapels Royal, Sub-Almoner to the King. With 6 Photogravure Plates and 33 other Illustrations. Medium 8vo., 2rs. net. Smith. — Carthage AND the Carth aginians. By R. Bosworth Smith, M.A. With Maps, Plans, etc. Cr. 8vo., 3s. bd. Stephens. — A History of the French Revolution. By H. Morse Stephens. Svo. Vols. 1. and II. iSs. each. Sternberg. — My Experiences of THE Boer War. By Adalbert Count Sternberg. With Preface by Lieut.-Col. G. F. R. Henderson. Crown Svo., 5s. net. StuhhS.—HlSTORY OF THE UNIVER SITY OP Dublin. By J. W. Stubbs. Svo., I2S. bd. Stubbs. — Historical Introduc tions to the ' R oils Series '. By William Stubbs, D.D., formerly Bishop of Oxford, Regius Professor of Modern History in the University. Collected and Edited by Arthur Hassall, M.A. Svo., r2S. bd. net. Sutherland. — ^'^.E History of Aus tralia AND New Zealand, from 1606- igoo. By Alexander Sutherland, M.A., and George Sutherland, M.A. Crown Svo., 2s. bd. Taylor. — A Student's Manual of THE History op India. By Colonel Mea dows Taylor, C.S.I. Cr. 8vo., 7s. bd. Thomson. — China and the Powers : a Narrative of the Outbreak of 1900. By H. C. Thomson. With 2 Maps and 29 Illustrations. Svo., los. bd. net. Todd. — Parliamentary Govern ment IN the British Colonies. By Alpheus Todd, LL.D. Svo., 30s. net. Trevelyan. — The American Revo lution. Part I. 1766-1776. By Sir G. O. Trevelyan, Bart. Svo., i6s. Trevelyan. — England in the Age OF Wycliffb; By George Macaulay Trevelyan. Svo., 15s. Wakeman and Hassall. — Essays Introductory to the Study op English Constitutional History. Edited by Henry Offley Wakeman, M.A., and Arthur Hassall, M.A. Crown Svo., 6s. Walpole. — History of England prom the Conclusion of the Great IVar in 1815 to 1858. By Sir Spencer Walpole, K.C.B. 6 vols. Cr. 8vo., 6s. each. Wylie (James Hamilton, M.A.). History of England under Henry IV. 4 vols. Crown Svo. Vol. I., 1399-1404, IOS. bd. Vol. II. , 1405- 1406, 15s. (out of print). Vol. III., 1407- 1411, 15s. Vol. IV., 1411-1413, 21S. The Council of Constance to the Dea th of John Hus. Cr. Svo., 6s. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Biography, Personal Memoirs, &e. Bacon. — The Letters and Life of Francis Bacon, including all his Oc casional Works. Edited by James Sped ding. 7 vols. Svo., £4 4s. Bagehot. — Biographical Studies. By Walter Bagehot. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Blount. — The Memoirs of Sir Edward Blount, K.C.B., etc. Edited by Stuart J. Reid, Author of ' The Life and Times of Sydney Smith,' etc. With 3 Photogravure Plates. Svo., los. bd. net. Bowen. — Edward Bowen: a Me moir. By the Rev. the Hon. W. E. Bowen. With Appendices, 3 Photogravure Portraits and 2 other Illustrations. 8vo., 12s. bd. net. Carlyle. — Thomas Carlyle: A His tory of his Life. By James Anthony Froude. 1795-1835. 2 vols. Crown Svo., 7s. 1834-1881. 2 vols. Crown Svo., 7s. Crozier. — My Inner Life : being a Chapter in Personal Evolution and Auto biography. By John Beattie Crozier, LL.D. Svo., 14s. Dante. — The Life and Works of Dante Allighieri : being an Introduction to the Study of the ' Divina Commedia '. By the Rev. J. F. Hogan, D.D. With Portrait. 8vo., 12s. bd. Danton. — Life of Danton. By A. H. Beesly. With Portraits. Cr. Svo., 6s. De Bode. — The Baroness de Bode, 1775-1803. By William S. Childe-Pem- BERTON. With 4 Photogravure Portraits and other Illustrations. Svo., gilt top, I2S. bd. net. Erasmus. Life and Letters of Erasmus. By James Anthony Froude. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. The Epistles of Erasmus, from his Earliest Letters to his Fifty-first Year, arranged in Order of Time. English Translations, with a Commentary. By Francis Morgan Nichols. 8vo., i8s. net. Faraday. — Faraday as a Dis coverer. By John Tyndall. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Fenelon : his Friends and his Enemies, 1651-1715. By E. K. Sanders. With Portrait. 8vo., los. bd. Fox. — The Early History of Charles Jambs Fox. By the Right Hon. Sir G. 0. Trevelyan, Bart. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Granville. — Some Records of the Later Life of Harriet, Countess Granville. By her Granddaughter, the Hon. Mrs. Oldfield. With 17 Portraits. Svo., gilt top, i6s. net. Grey. — Memoir of Sir George Grey, Bart, G.C.B., i7gg-i8S2. By Mandell Creighton, D. D., late Lord Bishop of London. With 3 Portraits. Crown Svo., 6s. net. Hamilton. — Life of Sir William Hamilton. By R. P. Graves. Svo. 3 vols. 15s. each. Addendum. Svo., bd. sewed. Harrow School Register (The), 1801-igoo. Second Edition, 1901. Edited by M. G. Dauglish, Barrister-at-Law. Svo. IOS. net. Havelock. — Memoirs of Sir Henry Havblock, K.C.B. By John Clark Marshman. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Haweis. — My Musical Life. Bythe Rev.H.R.HAWEis. With Portrait of Richard Wagner and 3 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 6s. net. Higgins. — The Bernards ofAbing- TON and Nether W inchendon : A Family History. By Mrs. Napier Higgins. 2 Vols. Svo., 21S. net. Hunter. — The Life of Sir William Wilson Hunter, K.C.S.I., M.A., LL.D. Author of ' A History of British India,' etc. By Francis Henry Skrine, F.S.S. With 6 Portraits (2 Photogravures) and 4 other Illustrations. Svo., i6s. net. Jackson. — Stonewall Jackson and THE A merican Civil War. By Lieut.-Col. G. F. R. Henderson. With 2 Portraits and 33 Maps and Plans. 2 vols. Cr.Svo., i6s. net. Kielmansegge.— ^/^^i' of a Jour ney to England in the Years 1761- 1762. By Count Frederick Kielman- segge. With 4 Illustrations. Crown Svo. 5s. net. L.\xther.—LiFE of Luther. By Julius Kostlin. With 62 Illustrations and 4 Facsimilies of MSS. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Biography, Personal Memoirs, ko..— continued. Macaulay. — The Life and Letters OP Lord Macaulay. By the Right Hon. Sir G. O. Trevelyan, Bart. Popular Edition, t vol. Cr. Svo., 2S. bd. Student's Edition i vol. Cr. Svo., 6s. Cabinet Edition. 2 vols. Post 8vo., 12s. ' Edinburgh' Edition. 2vols. Svo. ,6s. each. Library Edition. 2 vols. Svo., 36s. Marbot. — The Memoirs of the Baron DE Marbot. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., 7s. Max Miiller(F.) The Life and Letters of the Right Hon. Friedrich Max MVller. Edited by his Wife. With Photogravure Portraits and other Illustrations. 2 vols., Svo., 32s. net. My Autobiography : a Fragment. With 6 Portraits. Svo., 12s. bd. Auld Lang Syne.. Second Series. Svo., IOS. bd. Chips from a German Workshop. Vol.ii. Biographical Essays. Cr.Svo., 5s. Meade. — General Sir Richard Meade and the Feudatory States of Central and Southern India. By Thomas Henry Thornton. With Portrait, Map and Illustrations. Svo., los. bd. net. Morris. — The Life of William Morris. By J. W. Mackail. With 2 Por traits and 8 other Illustrations by E. H. New, etc. 2 vols. Large Crown Svo., los. net. On the Banks of the Seine. By A. M. F., Author of ' Foreign Courts and Foreign Homes' Crown Svo., 6s. Paget. — Memoirs and Letters of Sir James Paget. Edited by Stephen Paget, one of his sons. With Portrait. Svo., 6s. net. Place. — The Life of Francis Place, 1771-1854. By Graham Wallas, M.A. With 2 Portraits. Svo., 12s. Powys. — Passages FROM theDiaries op Mrs. Philip Lybbe Powys, op Hard wick House, Oxon. 1756-1S0S. Edited by Emily J. Climenson. Svo., gilt top, i6s. RamakWsh/ia : His Life and Sayings. By the Right Hon. F. Max MiJLLER. Crown Svo., 5s. Rich. — Mary Rich, Countess of Warwick (1625-167S) : Her Family and Friends. By C. Fell Smith. With 7 Photogravure Portraits and 9 other Illustra tions. Svo., gilt top, i8s. net. Rochester, and other Literary Rakes of the Court of Charles II., with some Account of their Surroundings. By the Author of ' The Life of Sir Kenelm Digby,' The Life of a Prig,' etc. With 15 Portraits. Svo., i6s. Romanes. — The Life and Letters OP George John Romanes, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S. Written and Edited by his Wife. With Portrait and 2 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo., 5s. net. Russell. — Swallowfield and its Owners. By Constance Lady Russell, of Swallowfield Park. With 15 Photogravure Portraits and 36 other Illustrations. 4to., gilt edges, 42s. net. Seebohm. — TheOxford Reformers — John Colet, Erasmus, and Thomas More : a History of their Fellow- Work. By Frederic Seebohm. Svo., 14s. Shakespeare. — Outlines of the Life OP Shakespeare. By J. O. Halli well-Phillipps. With Illustrations and Facsimiles. 2 vols. Royal 8vo., 21s. Tales of my Father.— By A. M. F. Crown Svo., 6s. Tallentyre. — The Women of the Salons, and other French Portraits. By S. G. Tallentyre. With 11 Photogravure Portraits. 8vo., los. bd. net. Victoria, Queen, 1819-1901. By Richard R. Holmes, M.V.O., F.S.A. With Photogravure Portrait. Crown Svo., gilt top, 5s. net. Walpole. — Some Unpublished Letters of Horace Walpole. Edited by Sir Spencer Walpole, K.C.B. With 2 Portraits. Crown 8vo., 4s. bd. net. Wellington. — Life of the Duke op Wellington. By the Rev. G. R. Gleig, M.A. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Wilkins (W. H.). Caroline the Illustrious, Queen- Consort OF George II. and sometime Queen-Regent: a Study of Her Life and Time. 2 vols. Svo., 36s. ^ BBu The Love of an Uncrowned Queen: Sophie Dorothea, Consort of George I., and her Correspondence with Philip Christopher, Count Konigsmarck. With Portraits and Illustrations. 8vo., I2S. bd. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Travel and Adventure, the Colonies, &c. Arnold. — Seas and Lands. By Sir Edwin Arnold. With 71 Illustrations. Crown Svo. , 3s. bd. Baker (Sir S. W.). Eight Years in Ceylon. With 6 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Rifle and the Hound in Ceylon. With 6 lUusts. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. Ball (John). The Alpine Guide. Reconstructed and Revised on behalf of the Alpine Club, by W. A. B. Coolidge. Vol. I., The Western Alps : the Alpine Region, South of the Rhone Valley, from the Col de Tenda to the Simplon Pass. With 9 New and Revised Maps. Crown Svo., 12s. net. Hints and Notes, Practical and Scientific, for Travellers in the Alps: being a Revision of the General Introduction to the ' Alpine Guide '. Crovra 8vo., 3s. net. Bent. — The Ruined Cities of Ma- shonaland : being a Record of Excavation and Exploration in 1891. By J. Theodore Bent. With 117 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Brassey (The Late Lady). A Voyage in THE ' Sunbeam' ; Our Home on the Ocean for Eleven Months. Cabinet Edition. With Map and 66 Illus trations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 7s. bd. ' Silver Library ' Edition. With 66 Illus trations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Popular Edition. With 60 Illustrations. 4to., bd. sewed, is. cloth. . School Edition. With 37 Illustrations. Fcp., 2S. cloth, or 3s. white parchment. Sunshine and Storm in the East. Popular Edition. With 103 Illustrations. 4to., bd. sewed, is. cloth. In the Trades, the Tropics, and the ' Roaring Forties '. Cabinet Edition. With Map and 220 Illus trations. Cr. 8vo., gilt edges, 7s. bd. Gockerell. — Travels in Southern Europe and the Levant, 1810-1817. By C. R. Gockerell, Architect, R.A. Edited by his Son, Samuel Pepys Gockerell. With Portrait. Svo. Fountain (Paul). The Great Deserts and Forests of North America. With a Preface by W. H. Hudson, Author of The Naturahst in La Plata,' etc. Svo., gs. bd. net. The Great Mountains and Forests of South America. With Portrait and 7 Illustrations. 8vo., los. bd. net. Froude (James A.). Oceana : or England and her Col onies. With g Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. The English in the West Indies : or, the Bow of Ulysses. With 9 Illustra tions. Crown Svo., 2s. boards, 2s. bd. cloth. Grove. — Seventy-one Days' Camp ing IN Morocco. By Lady Grove. With Photogravure Portrait and 32 Illustrations from Photographs. 8vo., 7s. bd. net. Haggard. — A Winter Pilgrimage : Being an Account of Travels through Palestine, Italy and the Island of Cyprus, undertaken in the year igoo. By H. Rider Haggard. With 31 Illustrations from Photo graphs. Cr. Svo., gilt top, I2S. bd. net. Hardwick. — An Ivory Trader in North Kenia : the Record of an Expedi tion to the Country North of Mount Kenia in East Equatorial Africa, with an account of the Nomads of Galla-Land. By A. Arkell-Hardwick, F.R.G.S. With 23 Illustrations from Photographs, and a Map. Svo., I2S. bd. net. Heathcote.— 57-. Xilda. By Nor man Heathcote. With 80 Illustrations from Sketches and Photographs of the People, Scenery and Birds by the Author. Svo., IOS. bd. net. Howitt.— Visits to Remarkable Places. Old Halls, Battle-Fields, Scenes, illustrative of Striking Passages in Enghsh History and Poetry. By William Howitt. With 80 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Knight (E. F.). With the Royal Tour : a Narra tive of the Recent Tour of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York through Greater Britain. With 16 Illustrations and a Map. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. The Cruise of the - Alerte ' : the Narrative of a Search for Treasure on the Desert Island of Trinidad. With 2 Maps and 23 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Travel and Adventure, the Colonies, &e. — continued. Knight (E. F.) — continued. Where Three Empires Meet: a Narrative of Recent Travel in Kashmir, Western Tibet, Bahistan, Ladak, Gilgit, and the adjoining Countries. With a Map and 54 Illustrations. Cr. 8vo., 3s. bd. The '¦Falcon' on the Baltic: a Voyage from London to Copenhagen in a Three-Tonner. With 10 Full-page Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Lees. — Peaks and Pines : another Norway Book. By J. A. Lees. With 63 Illustrations and Photographs. Cr. Svo., 6s. Lees and Clutterbuck.— B.C. 1887 : A Ramble IN British Columbia. By J. A. Lees and W. J. Clutterbuck. With Map and 75 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Lynch. — Armenia : Travels and Studies. By H. F. B. Lynch. With ig7 Illustrations (some in tints) reproduced from Photographs and Sketches by the Author, 16 Maps and Plans, a. Bibliography, and a Map of Armenia and adjacent countries. 2 vols. Medium Svo., gilt top, 42s. net. Nansen. — The First Crossing of Greenland. By Fridtjof Nansen. With 143 Illustrations and a Map. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Rice. — Occasional Essays on Na tive South Indian Life. By Stanley P. Rice, Indian Civil Service. Svo., los. bd. Smith. — Climbing in the British Isles. By W. P. Haskett Smith. With Illustrations and Numerous Plans. Part I. England. i6mo., 3s. net. Part II. Wales and Ireland. i6mo., 3s. net. Spender. — Two Winters in Nor- WA Y : being an Account of Two Holidays spent on Snow-shoes and in Sleigh Driving, and including an Expedition to the Lapps. By A. Edmund Spender. With 40 Illustra tions from Photographs. Svo., los. bd. net. Stephen. — The ^Play-Ground of Europe (The Alps). By Sir Leslie Stephen, K.C.B. With 4 Illustrations, Crovm Svo., 3s. bd. Three in Norway. By Two of Them. With a Map and sg Illustrations. Crown Svo., 2S. boards, 2S. bd. cloth. Tyndall. — (John). The Glaciers of the Alps. With 61 Illustrations. Crovim Svo., 6$. bd. net. Hours of Exercise in the Alps. With 7 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 6s. bd. net. Sport and Pastime. THE BADMINTON LIBRARY. Edited by HIS GRACE THE (EIGHTH) DUKE OF BEAUFORT, K.G., and A. E. T. WATSON. ARCHER Y. By C. J. Longman and Col. H. Walrond. With Contributions by Miss Legh, Viscount Dillon, etc. With 2 Maps, 23 Plates and 172 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net; half- bound, with gilt top, gs. net. ATHLETICS. By Montague Shearman. With Chapters on Athletics at School by W. Beacher Thomas ; Ath letic Sports in America by C. H. Sherrill ; a Contribution on Paper-chasing by W. Rye, and an Introduction by Sir Richard Web ster (Lord Alverstone). With 12 Plates and 37 Illustrations in the Text. Cr. Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound,with gilt top.gs.net. BIG GAME SHOOTING. Clive Phillipps-Wolley. H Vol. I. AFRICA AND AMERICA. With Contributions by Sir Samuel W. Baker, W. C. Oswell, F. C. Selous, etc. With 20 Plates and 57 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. Vol. IL EUROPE, ASIA, AND THE ARCTIC REGIONS. With Contribu tions by Lieut.-Colonel R. Heber Percy, Major Algernon C. Heber Percy, etc. With 17 Plates and 56 Illus trations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 13 Sport and Pastime — continued. THE BADMINTON lAB'RKYCI—continu.ed. Edited by HIS GRACE THE (EIGHTH) DUKE OF BEAUFORT, K.G., and A. E. T. WATSON. BILLIARDS. By Major W. Broad- foot, R.E. With Contributions by A. H. Boyd, Sydenham Dixon, W. J. Ford, etc. With II Plates, 19 Illustrations in the Text, and numerous Diagrams. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. COURSING AND FALCONRY. By Harding Cox, Charles Richardson, and the Hon. Gerald Lascelles. With 20 Plates and 55 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. CRICKET. By A. G. Steel and the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton. With Con tributions by Andrew Lang, W. G. Grace, F. Gale, etc. With 13 Plates and 52 Illus trations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half bound, with gilt top, gs. net. CYCLING. By the Earl of Albe marle and G. Lacy Hillier. With 19 Plates and 44 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. DANCING. By Mrs. Lilly Grove. With Contributions by Miss Middleton, The Hon. Mrs. Armytage, etc. With Musical Examples, and 38 Full-page Plates and g3 Illustrations in the Text. Crovvn 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. DRIVING. By His Gracethe (Eighth) Duke of Beaufort, K.G. With Contribu tions by A. E. T. Watson the Earl of Onslow, etc. With 12 Plates and 54 Illus trations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. FENCING, BOXING, AND WRESTLING. By Walter H. Pollock, F. C. Grove, C. Prevost, E. B. Mitchell, and Walter Armstrong. With 18 Plates and 24 Illustrations in the Text. Grown Svo., cloth, 6s. net; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. FISHING. Pennell. By H. Cholmondeley- Vol. I. SALMON AND TROUT. With Contributions by H. R. Francis, Major John P. Traherne, etc. With g Plates and numerous Illustrations of Tackle, etc. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. Vol. II. PIKE AND OTHER COARSE FISH. With Contributions by the Marquis of Exeter, William Senior, G. Christopher Davis, etc. With 7 Plates and numerous Illustrations 01 Tackle, etc. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. FOOTBALL. History, by Mon tague Shearman ; The Association Game, by W. J. Oakley and G. O. Smith ; The Rugby Union Game, by Frank Mitchell. With other Contributions by R. E. Macnaghten, M. C. Kemp, J. E. Vincent, Walter Camp and A. Suther land. With 19 Plates and 35 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. GOLF. By Horace G. Hutchinson. With Contributions by the Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour, M.P., Sir Walter SiMPSOfJ, Bart., Andrew Lang, etc. With 34 Plates and 56 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. HUNTLNG. By His Grace the (Eighth) Duke of Beaufort, K.G., and Mowbray Morris. With Contributions by the Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire, Rev. E. W. L. Davies, G. H. Longman, etc. With 5 Plates and 54 Illustrations in the' Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half- bound, with gilt top, gs. net. MOTORS AND MOTOR-DRIV ING. By Alfred C. Harmsworth, the Marquis de Chasseloup-Laubat, the Hon. John Scott-Montagu, R. J. Me- CREDY, the Hon. C. S. Rolls, Sir David Salomons, Bart., etc. With 13 Plates and 136 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, gs. net ; half-bound, 12s. net. A Cloth Box for use when Motoring, 2S. net. H MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Sport and Pastime — continued. THE BADMINTON lABRhRY— continued. Edited by HIS GRACE THE (EIGHTH) DUKE OF BEAUFORT, K.G.. and A. E. T. WATSON. MOUNTAINEERING. By C. T. Dent. With Contributions by the Right Hon. J. Bryce, M.P., Sir Martin Conway, D. W. Freshfield, C. E. Matthews, etc. With 13 Plates and 91 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half- bound, with gilt top, gs. net. POETRY OF SPORT [THE).— Selected by Hedley Peek. With a Chapter on Classical Allusions to Sport by Andrew Lang, and a Special Preface to the BADMINTON LIBRARY by A. E. T. Watson. With 32 Plates and 74 Illustra tions in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. RACING AND STEEPLE-CHAS ING. By the Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire, W. G. Craven, the Hon. F. Lawley, Arthur Coventry, and A. E. T. Watson. With Frontispiece and 56 Illus trations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. RIDING AND POLO. By Captain Robert Weir, J. Moray Brown, T. F. Dale, The Late Duke of Beaufort, The Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire, etc. With 18 Plates and 41 lUusts. in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. ROWING. By R. P. P Rowe and C. M. Pitman. With Chapters on Steering by C. P. Serocold and F. C. Begg ; Met ropolitan Rowing by S. Le Blanc Smith ; and on PUNTING by P. W. Squire. With 75 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; ¦ half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. SHOOTING. Vol. I. FIELD AND COVERT. By Lord Walsingham and Sir Ralph Payne- Gallwey, Bart. With Contributions by the Hon. Gerald Lascelles and A. J. Stuart-Wortley. With 11 Plates and 95 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. Vol. II. MOOR AND MARSH. By Lord Walsingham and Sir Ralph Payne- Gallwey, Bart. With Contributions by Lord Lovat and Lord Charles Lennox Kerr. With S Plates and 57 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. SEA FISHING. By John Bicker- dyke, Sir H. W. Gore-Booth, Alfred C. Harmsworth, and W. Senior. With 22 Full-page Plates and 175 lUusts. in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. SKATING, CURLING, TOBOG GANING. By J. M. Heathcote, C. G. Tebbutt, T. Maxwell Witham, Rev. John Kerr, Ormond Hake, Henry A. Buck, etc. With 12 Plates and 272 Illus trations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. SWIMMING. By Archibald Sin clair and William Henry, Hon. Sees, ofthe Life-Saving Society. With 13 Plates and 112 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. TENNIS, LA WN TENNIS, RACKETS AND FIVES. By J. M. and C. G. Heathcote, E. O. Pleydell-Bou- VERiE, and A. C. Ainger. With Contributions by the Hon. A. Lyttelton, W. C. Mar shall, Miss L. DoD, etc. With 14 Plates and 65 Illustrations in the Text. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. net ; half-bound, with gilt top, gs. net. YACHTING. Vol. I. CRUISING, CONSTRUCTION OF YACHTS, YACHT RACING RULES, FITTING-OUT, etc. By Sit Edward Sullivan, Bart., The Earl of Pembroke, Lord Brassey, K.C.B., C. E. Seth-Smith, C.B., G. L. Watson, R. T. Pritchett, E. F. Knight, etc. With 21 Plates and 93 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, 6s. net ; half- bound, with gilt top, gs. net. Vol. II. YACHT CLUBS, YACHT ING IN AMERICA AND THE COLONIES, YACHT RACING, etc. By R. T. Pritchett, The Marquis of DUFFERIN and Ava, K.P., The Earl of Onslow, James McFerran, etc. With 35 Plates and 160 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., cloth, gs. net; half- bound, with gilt top, gs. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. IS Sport and Pastime — continued. FUR, FEATHER, AND FIN SERIES. Edited by A. E. T. Watson. Crown Svo., price 5s. each Volume, cloth. * The Volumes are also issued half-bound in Leather, with gilt top. Price js. bd. net each THE PARTRIDGE. Natural His tory, by the Rev. H. A. Macpherson; Shooting, by A. J. Stuart-Wortley ; Cookery, by George Saintsbury. With II Illustrations and various Diagrams. Crown Svo., 5s. THE GROUSE. Natural History, by the Rev. H. A. Macpherson ; Shooting, by A. J. Stuart-Wortley; Cookery, by George Saintsbury. With 13 Illustrations and various Diagrams. Crown Svo., 5s. THEPHEASANT. Natural History, bythe Rev. H. A. Macpherson ; Shooting, by A. J. Stuart-Wortley ; Cookery, by Alexander Innes Shand. With 10 Illus trations and various Diagrams. Crown 8vo., 5s. THE HARE. Natural History, by the Rev. H. A. Macpherson ; Shooting, by the Hon. Gerald Lascelles ; Coursing, by Charles Richardson ; Hunting, by J. S. Gibbons and G. H. Longman ; Cookery, by Col. Kenney Herbert. With 9 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 5s. RED DEER.— ^atmsil History, by the Rev. H. A. Macpherson ; Deer Stalk ing, by Cameron of Lochiel ; Stag Hunting, by Viscount Ebrington ; Cookery, by Alexander Innes Shand. With 10 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 5s. THE SALMON. By the Hon. A. E. Gathorne-Hardy. With Chapters on the Law of Salmon Fishing by Claud Douglas Pennant; Cookery, by Alexander Innes Shand. With 8 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 5s. THE TROUT. By the Marquess OF Granby. With Chapters on the Breed ing of Trout by Col. H. Custance ; and Cookery, by Alexander Innes Shand. With 12 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 5s. THE RABBIT. By James Edmund Harting. Cookery, by Alexander Innes Shand. With 10 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 5s. PIKE AND PERCH. By William Senior (' Redspinner,' Editor of the ' Field'). With Chapters by John Bicker- dyke and W. H. Pope; Cookery, by Alexander Innes Shand. With 12 Il lustrations. Grown Svo., 5s. Alverstone arid Mzocfs..— Surrey Cricket: its History and Associations. Edited by the Right Hon. Lord Alver stone, L.C.J. , President, and C.W. Alcock, Secretary, of the Surrey County Cricket Club. With 48 Illustrations. Svo., i6s. net. Bickerdyke. — Days of My Life on Water, Fresh and Salt; and other Papers. By John Bickerdyke. With Photo-etching Frontispiece and S Full-page Illustrations. Grown 8vo., 3s. bd. Blackburne. — Mr. Blackburne' s Games at Chess. Selected, Annotated and Arranged by Himself. Edited, with a Biographical Sketch and a brief History of Blindfold Chess, by P. Anderson Graham. With Portrait of Mr. Blackburne. Svo., 7s. Bd. net. Dead Shot (The) : or, Sportsman's Complete Guide. Being a Treatise on the Use ofthe Gun, with Rudimentary and Finishing Lessons in the Art of Shooting Game of all kinds. Also Game-driving, Wildfowl and Pigeon-shooting, Dog-breaking, etc. By Marksman. With numerous Illustrations. Crown Svo., los. bd. "EWis.— Chess Sparks ; or. Short and Bright Games of Chess. Collected and Arranged by J. H. Ellis, M.A. Svo., 4s. bd. Folkard.— y.^'E Wild-Fowler : A Treatise on Fowling, Ancient and Modern, descriptive also of Decoys and Flight-ponds, Wild-fowl Shooting, Gunning-punts, Shoot ing-yachts, etc. Also Fowling in the Fens and in Foreign Countries, Rock-fowhng, etc etc., by H. C. Folkard. With 13 En gravings on Steel, and several Woodcuts. ivo., I2S. bd. Ford —The Theory and Practice OP Archery. By Horace Ford. New Edition, thoroughly Revised and Re-wntten by W. Butt, M.A. With a Preface by C. J. Longman, M.A. 8vo., 14s. Francis —A Book on Angling : or, Treatise on the Art of Fishing m every Branch ; including full Illustrated List of Sal mon Flies. By Francis Francis. With Por trait and Coloured Plates. Crown Svo., 15s. Fremantle. — ^A^^ ^ook of the Rifle. By the Hon. T. F. Fremantle, V D.7Major, ist Bucks V.R.C. With 54 Plates and 107 Diagrams in the Text. 8vo., I2S. bd. net. 16 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Sport and Pastime — continued. Gathorne - Hardy. — Autumns in Argyleshire with Rod and Gun. By the Hon. A. E. Gathorne-Hardy. With 8 Illustrations by Archibald Thorburn. 8vo., 6s. net. . Graham. — Counti^y Pastimes for Boys. By P. Anderson Graham. With 252 Illustrations from Drawings and Photographs. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. Hutchinson. — The Book of Golf and Golfers. By Horace G. Hutchin son. With Contributions by Miss Amy Pascoe, H. H. Hilton, J. H. Taylor, H. J. Whigham, and Messrs. Sutton & Sons. With 71 Portraits from Photographs. Large crown Svo., gilt top, 7s. bd. net. Lang'. — Angling Sketches. By Andrew Lang. With 20 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Lillie. — Croquet up to Da te. Con- . taining the Ideas and Teachings of the Leading Players and Champions. By Ar thur Lillie. With Contributions by Lieut.-Col. the Hon. H. Needham, C. D. Locock, etc. With ig Illustrations (15 Portraits), and numerous Diagrams. Svo., los. bd. net. Locock. — Side and Screw: being Notes on the Theory and Practice of the Game of Billiards. By C. D. Locock. With Diagrams. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Longman. — Chess Openings. By Frederick W. Longman. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. Mackenzie. — Notes for Hunting Men. By Captain Cortlandt Gordon Mackenzie. Crown Svo., 2s. bd. net. Madden. — The Diary of Master William Silence : a Study of Shakespeare and of Elizabethan Sport. By the Right Hon. D. H. Madden, Vice-Chancellor ofthe University of Dublin. Svo., gilt top, i6s. Maskelyne. — Sharps and Flats : a Complete Revelation of the Secrets of Cheating at Games of Chance and SkiU. By John Nevil Maskelyne, of the Egyptian Hall. With 62 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 6s. Millais (John Guille). The Wild-Fowler in Scotland. With a Frontispiece in Photogravure by Sir J. E. Millais, Bart., P.R.A., S Photo gravure Plates, 2 Coloured Plates and 50 Illustrations from the Author's Drawings and from Photographs. Royal 4to., gilt top, 30s. net. I Millais (John Guille) — continued. The Natural History of the British Surface -Feeding Ducks. With 6 Photogravures and 66 Plates (41 in Colours) from Drawings by the Author, Archibald Thorburn, and firom Photo graphs. Royal4to.,cloth,gilttop,;f66s.neL Modern Bridge.— By ' Slam '. With a Reprint of the Laws of Bridge, as adopted by the Portland and Turf Clubs. iSmo., gilt edges, 3s. bd, net. Park. — The Game of Golf. By William Park, Jun., Champion Golfer, 1S87-S9. With 17 Plates and 26 Illustra tions in the Text. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. Payne-Gallwey (Sir Ralph, Bart.). The Cross-Bow : Mediaeval and Modern ; Military and Sporting ; its Construction, History and Management, with a Treatise on the Balista and Cata pult of the Ancients. With 220 Illustra tions. Royal 4to., ;^3 3s. net. Letters to Young Shooters (First Series). On the Choice and use of a Gun. With 41 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. Letters to Young SH0OTERs(Secoi\d Series). On the Production, Preservation, and Killing of Game. With Directions in Shooting Wood- Pigeons and Breaking- in Retrievers. With Portrait and 103 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 12s. bd. Letters to Young Shooters. (Third Series.) Comprising a Short Natural History of the Wildfowl that are Rare or Common to the British Islands, with complete directions in Shooting Wildfowl on the Coast and Inland. With 200 Illustrations. Crown Svo., iSs. Pole. — The Theory of the Modern Scientific Game op Whist. By William Pole, F.R.S. Fcp. Svo., gilt edges, 2s. net. Proctor. — How to Play Whist: with the Laws and Etiquette of Whist. By Richard A. Proctor. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. Ronalds. — The Fly-Fisher's Ento mology. By Alfred Ronalds. With 20 coloured Plates. Svo., 14s. Selous. — Sport and Travel, East AND West. By Frederick Courteney Selous. With 18 Plates and 35 Illustra tions in the Text. Medium Svo., 12s. bd. net. Warner. — Cricket in Australasia: being Record of the Tour of the English Team, igo2-3. By Pelham F. Warner. With numerous Illustrations from Photo graphs. Grown Svo. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S ST^ANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 17 Mental, Moral, and Politieal Philosophy. LOGIC, RHETORIC, PSYCHOLOGY, &-C. Abbott. — The Elements of Logic. By T. K. Abbott, B.D. i2mo., 3s. Aristotle. The Ethics: Greek Text, Illustrated with Essay and Notes. By Sir Alexan der Grant, Bart. 2 vols. Svo., 32s. An Introduction to Aristotle's Ethics. Books I. -IV. (Book X. cvi. -ix. in an Appendix). With a continuous Analysis and Notes. By the Rev. E. MoORE, D.D. Grown Svo., los. bd. Bacon (Francis). Complete Works. Edited by R. L. Ellis, James Spedding and D. D. Heath. 7 vols. Svo., £i 13s. bd. Letters and Life, including all his occasional Works. Edited by James Spedding. 7 vols. 8vo.,;^4 4S. The Essays : With Anno^Atior^B. By Richard Whately, D.D. 8vo., los. bd. The Essays: with Notes. By F. Storr and C. H. Gibson. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. The Essays: with Introduction, Notes, and Index. By E.A.Abbott, D.D. 2 Vols. Fcp. Svo. ,6s. The Text and Index only, without Introduction and Notes, in One Volume. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. Bain (Alexander). Mental and Moral Science : a Compendium of Psychology and Ethics. Crown Svo., los. bd. Or separately. Part I. Psychology and History op Philosophy. Crown Svo., 6s. bd. Part II. TheoryofEthics andEthical Systems. Crown 8vo., 4s. bd. Logic. Part I. Deduction. Cr. 8vo., 4s. Part II. Induction. Cr. Svo., 6s. bd. The Senses and the Intellect. Svo., 15s, The Emotions and the Will. 8vo., 15s. Practical Ess a ys. Cr. Svo. , 7,s. Dissertations on Leading Philo sophical Topics. Svo. Baldwin. — A College Manual of Rhetoric. .By Charles Sears Baldwin. A.M., Ph.D. Grown Svo., 4s. bd. Brooks. — The Elements of Mind : being an Examination into the Nature of the First Division of the Elementary Sub stances of Life. By H. Jamyn Brooks. Svo., IOS. bd. net. Brough. — -The Study of Mental Science: Five Lectures on the Uses and Characteristics of Logic and Psychology. By J. Brough, LL.D. Crown Svo, 2S. net. Crozier (John Beattie), Civilisation AND Progress : being the Outlines of a New System of Political, Religious and Social Philosophy. Svo., 14s. History of Intellectual Devel opment :ontheL,ineso{M.odein'Evolution. Vol. I. Svo., 14s. Vol. II. (In preparation.) Vol. HI. Svo., IOS. bd. Davidson. — The Logic of Defini tion, Explained and Applied. By William L. Davidson, M.A. Crown Svo., 6s. Green (Thomas Hill).— The Works OF. Edited by R. L. Nettleship. Vols. I. and II. Philosophical Works. Svo. i6s. each. Vol. III. Miscellanies. With Index to the three Volumes, and Memoir. Svo., 21s. Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation. With Preface by Bernard Bosanquet. Svo., 5s. Gurnhill.— r/y^ Morals of Suicide. By the Rev. J. Gurnhill. B.A. Vol. I., Crown Svo., 5s. net. Vol. II., Crown Svo., 5s. net. t8 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Mental, Moral and Politieal Philosophy- PSYCHOLOGY, &-C. -continued. LOGIC, RHETORIC, Hodgson (Shadworth H.), Time and Space: A Metaphysical Essay. Svo., i6s. The Theory of Practice: an Ethical Inquiry. 2 vols. Svo., 24s. The Philosophy of Reflection. 2 vols. Svo., 21S. The Metaphysic of Experience. Book I. General Analysis of Experience ; Book II. Positive Science; Book III. Analysis of Conscious Action ; Book IV. The Real Universe. 4 vols. Svo., 36s. net. Hume.— The Philosophical Works of David Hume. Edited by T. H. Green and T. H. Grose. 4 vols. 8vo., 2Ss. Or separately, Essays. 2 vols. 14s. Treatise OF Human Nature. 2 vols. 14s. James (William, M.D., LL.D.). The Will to Believe, and Other • Essays in Popular Philosophy. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. The Varieties of Religious Ex perience : a Study in Human Nature. Being the Gifford Lectures on Natural Religion delivered at Edinburgh in igoi- igo2. Svo., I2S. net. Talks to Teachers ox Psycho logy, and to S'iudexts o.y so.me of Life's Ideals. Crown Svo. , 4s. bd. Justinian. — The Institutes of Justinian : Latin Text, cliiefly that ol Huschke, with English Introduction, Trans lation, Notes, and Summary. By Thomas C. Sandars, M.A. Svo., i8s. Kant (Immanuel). Critique of Practical Reason, and Other IVorks on the Theory op Ethics. Translated by T. K. Abbott, B.D. With Memoir. Svo., 12s. bd. Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysic of E thics. Translated b> T. K. Abbott, B.D. Crown isvo, 3s. Introduction to Logic, and his Essay on the Mistaken Subtilty oi the Four Figures. Translated by T. K. Abbott. Svo., 6s Kelly. — Government or Human Evolution. By Edmond Kelly, M.A., F.G.S. Vol. I. Justice. Crown Svo., 7s. 6rf. net. Vol. II. ColleStivism and Individualism. Crown Svo., los. bd. net. Killick. — Handbook to Mill's System of Logic. By Rev. A. H Killick, M.A. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Ladd (George Trumbull). Philosophy of Conduct: a Treatise of the Facts, Principles and Ideals of Ethics. Svo., 21S. Elements of Physiological Psy chology. Svo., 21S. Outlines of Descriptive Psycho logy: a Text-Book of Mental Science for CoUeges and Normal Schools. Svo., 12s. Outlines of Physiological Psy chology. Svo., I2S. Primer of Psychology. Cr. 8vo., 5s. bd. Lecky(WiLLiAM Edward Hartpole). The Map of Life : Conduct and Character. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. History of European Morals from Augustus to Charlemao.ye. 2 vols. Crown Svo. , los. net. A Survey of English Ethics : being the First Chapter of W. E. H. Lecky's ' History of European Morals '. Edited, with Introduction and Notes, by W. ,\. Hirst. Cfrown Svo., 3s. bd. ] - History of the Rise and Influ ence of the Spirit of Rationalism i.v Europe. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., los. net. De.vocracy axd Liberty. Library Edition. 2 vols. Svo., 36s. Cabinet Edition. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., los. neL Lutoslawski. — The Origin and Growth op Plato's Logic. With an Account of Plato's Style and of the Chrono logy of his Writings. By Wincenty Lutoslawski. Svo., 21s. Max Miiller (F.). The Science OF Thought. 8vo.,2is. The Six Syste.us of Indian Phil osophy. Svo., iSs. Three Lectures on the Vedanta Philosophy. Crown 8vo., 5s. Mill (John Stuart). A System of Logic. Cr. 8vo., 3s. M. On Liberty. Crown Svo., is. \d. Considerations on Representa tive Governmeat. Crown Svo., 2s. Utilitarianism. Svo., as. 6rf. Examination of - Sir William Hamilton's Philosophy. Svo., i6s. Nature, the Utility of Religion, Three Essays. Svo., 5s. AND Theism. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 19 Mental, Moral, and Politieal Vhi\osop}\j—conti7i7ied. LOGIC, RHETORIC, PSYCHOLOGY, ^-C. Monck. — An Introduction to Logic. By William Henry S. Monck, M.A. Crown Svo., 5s. layers. — Human Personality and ITS Survival of Bodily Dejith. By Frederic W. H. Myers. 2 vols. 8vo., 42s. net. pjgj-ce. — Studies in Auditory and Visual Space Perception : Essays on Experimental Psychology. By A. H. Pierce. Crown Svo., 6s. bd. net. Richmond. — The Mind of a Child. By Ennis Richmond. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. net. Romanes. — Mind and Motion and Monism. By George John Romanes, Cr. Svo., 4s. bd. Sully (James). An Essay on Laughter: its Forms, its Cause, its Development and its Value. Svo., 12s. bd. net. Jhe Human Mind : a Text-book of Psychology. 2 vols. Svo., 21s. Outlines of Psychology. Crown 8vo., 9s. The Teacher's Handbook 6f Psy chology. Crown Svo., 6s. bd. Stujhes OF Childhood. S\'0.,xos.6d. Children's Ways: being Selections from the Author's ' Studies of Childhood '. With 25 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 4s. bd. Sutherland. — The Origin and Growth op ihe Moral Instinct. By Alexander Sutherland, M.A. 2 vols. 8vo., 2Ss. Swinburne. — /'/cTf/jf.ff Logic: an Attempt to Popularise the Science of Reasoning. By Alfred James Swinburne. M.A. With 23 Woodcuts. Cr. Svo., 2s. bd. Thomas. — Intuitive Suggestion. By J. W. Thomas, Author of Spiritual Law in the Natural World,' etc. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. net. Webb. — The Veil of Isis : a Series of Essays on Idealism. By Thomas E. Webb, LL.D., Q.C. 8vo., los. 6(f. Weber. — History of Philosophy By Alfred Weber, Professor in the Uni versity of Strasburg. Translated by Frank Thilly, Ph.D. Svo., i6s. Whately (Archbishop). Bacon's Essays. With Annotations. Svo., IOS. bd. Elements of Logic. Cr. Svo., 4s. 6d. Elements of Rhetoric. Cr. Svo., 4s. bd. Zeller (Dr. Edward). The Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics. Translated by the Rev. 0. J. Reichel, M.A. Crown Svo., 15s. Outlines of the Histokv oi Greek Philosophy. Translated by Sarah F. Alleyne and Evelyn Aruott, M.A., LL.D. Crown Svo., los. bd. Plato and the Older Acade.vv. Translated by Sarah F. Alleyne and Alfked Goodwin, B.A. Crown 8vo., iSs. Socrates and the Socra'tic Schools. Translated by the Rev. 0. J. Reichel, M.A. Crown Svo., los. bd. Aristotle AND the Earlier Peri patetics. Translated by B. F. C. Cos- telloe, M.A., and J. H. Muikhead, M.A. 2 vols. Crown 8vo., 24s. STONYHURST PHILOSOPHICAL SERIES A Manual of Political Economy. By C. S. Devas, M.A. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. First Principles of Knowledge. By John Rickaby, S.J. Grown Svo., 5s. General Metaphysics. By John Rickaby, S.J. Crown 8vo., 5s. T. ^ c T P.:vrunrorY By Michael Maher, Logic. By Richard F. Clarke, S.J. | P." ^^^^^jul.M.A. (Lond.). Cr. 8vo., 6s. erf, Crown Svo., 5s. '1' ' Moral Philosophy {Ethics and Natural Law). By Joseph Rickaby, S.J. Crown 8vo., 5s. Natural TiiEOLOoy. By Bernard BoEDDER, S.J. Crown Svo., 6s. bd. 20 M&SSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. History and Seienee of Language, &e. Davidson. — Leading and Import ant English Words : Explained and Ex emplified. By William L. Davidson, M.A. Fcp. Svo., 3s. 6rf. Farrar. — Language and Languages. By F. W. Farrar, D.D., late Dean of Canterbury. Crown Svo., 6s. Graham. — English Synonyms, Classified and Explained: with Practical Exercises. By G. F. Graham. Fcp. Svo., 6s. Max Miiller (F.). The Science OF Language. 2 vols. Crown Svo., los. Max Miiller {F .)— continued. Biographies of Words, and the Home op the Aryas. Crown Svo., 5s. Chips from a German Workshop. Vol. III. Essays on Language and Literature. Crown Svo., 5s. Last Essays. First Series. Essays on Language, Folk-lore and other Sub jects. Crown Svo., 5s. Roget. — Thes A urus'of English Words and Phrases. Classified and Arranged so as to Facilitate the Expression of Ideas and assist in Literary Composition. By Peter Mark Roget, M.D., F.R.S. With full Index. Crovra Svo., gs. net. Political Economy and Economies. Macleod (Henry Dunning) — contd. The Theory and Practice of Banking. Vol. I. Svo., 12s. Vol. II. 14s. The Theory of Credit. Svo. In I Vol., 30s. net; or separately. Vol. AND Part Ashley (W. J.). English Economic History Theory. Crown 8vo., Part I., 5s. II., IOS. bd. Surveys, Historic and Economic. Crown 8vo., gs. net. The Adjustment of Wages : a Study on the Coal and Iron Industries of Great Britain and the United States. With 4 Maps. Svo. Bagehot. — Economic Studies. By Walter Bagehot. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Barnett. — Practicable Socialism : Essays on Social. Reform. By Samuel A. and Henrietta Barnett. Crown 8vo., 6s. Devas. — A Manual of Political Economy. By C. S. Devas, M.A. Cr. Svo., 7s. bd. [Stonyhurst Philosophical Series.) Dewey. — Financial History of the United States. By Davis Rich Dewey. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. net. Lawrence. — Local Varia tions in Wages. By F. W. Lawrence, M.A. With Index and iS Maps and Diagrams. 4to.,Ss.6rf. Leslie. — Essays on Political Eco nomy. By T. E. Cliffe Leslie, Hon. LL.D., Dubl. 8vo., los. bd. Macleod (Henry Dunning). Bimetallism. Svo., 5s. net. The Elements of Banking. Cr. §Y9., gs. bd, I., IOS. net. Vol. IL, Part Vol II., Part II. IOS. net. Indian Currency. Svo., is. 6d. net. Mill. — Political Economy. By John Stuart Mill. Popular Edition. Cr. 8vo.,3S.6rf. Library Edition. 2 vols. Svo.,30s. Mulhall. — Industries and Wealth of Nations. By Michael G. Mulhall, F.S.S. With 32 Diagrams. Cr. Svo., Ss. bd. Symes. — Political Economy : a Short Text-book of Political Economy. With Problems for Solution, Hints for Supplementary Reading, and a Supple mentary Chapter on Socialism. By J. E. Symes, M.A. Crown Svo., 2s. bd. Toynbee. — Lectures on the In dustrial Revolution op the 18th Cen tury IN England. By Arnold Toynbee. 8vo., IOS. bd. Webb (Sidney and Beatrice). The History of Trade Unionism. With Map and Bibliography. Svo., 7s. bd. net. Industrial Democracy: a Study in Trade Unionism. 2 vols. Svo., 12s.net Problems of Modern Industry, Svo., §s. n?t, MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 21 Evolution, Anthropology, &e. Avebury. — The Origin of Civilisa tion, and the Primitive Condition of Man. By the Right Hon. Lord Avebury. With 6 Plates and 20 Illustrations. Svo., iSs. Clodd (Edward). The Story of Creation: a Plain Account of Evolution. With 77 Illustra tions. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. A Primer of Evolution : being a Pbpular Abridged Edition of ' The Story of Creation '. With Illustrations. Fcp. 8vo., IS. bd. Lang and ' Atkinson. — Social Origins. By Andrew Lang, M.A., LL.D. ; and Primal Law. By J. J. Atkinson. 8vo., los. bd. net. Packard. — Lamarck, the Founder of Evolution : his Life and Work, with Translations of his Writings on Organic Evolution. By Alpheus S. Packard, M.D., LL.D. With 10 Portrait and other Illustrations. Large Crown 8vo., gs. net. Romanes (George John). Essays. Ed. by C. Lloyd Morgan. Crown Svo., 5s. net. An Examination of ISM. Crown 8vo., 6s. Weismann- Darwin, and after Darwin: an Exposition of the Darwinian Theory, and a Discussion on Post- Darwinian Questions. Part I. The Darwinian Theory. With Portrait of Darwin and 125 Illustrations. Crown Svo., los. bd. Part II. Post-Darwinian Questions : Heredity and Utility. With Portrait of the Author and 5 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., IOS. bd. Part III. Post-Darwinian Questions : Isolation and Physiological Selection. Crown Svo., 5s. The Seienee of Religion, &e. Balfour. — The Foundations of Belief: being Notes Introductory to the Study of Theology. By the Right Hon. Arthur James Balfour. Cr. Svo., 6s. net. Baring-Gould. — The Origin and Development op Religious Belief. By the Rev. S. Baring-Gould. 2 vols. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. each. Campbell. — Religion in Greek Li terature. By the Rev. Lewis Campbell, | M.A., LL.D. Svo., 15s. I Davidson. — Theism, as Grounded in Human Nature, Historically and Critically j Handled. Being the Burnett Lectures ior i8g2 and iSg3, delivered at Aberdeen. 1 By W. L. Davidson, M.A., LL.D. Svo., 15s. , James. — The Varieties of Re ligious Experience : a Study in Human i Nature. Being the Gifford Lectures on Natural Religion delivered at Edinburgh in | igoi-igo2. By William James, LL.D., etc. Svo., I2S. net. Lang (Andrew^). Magic AND Religion. Svo., los. 6d. Custom and Myth : Studies of Early Usage and Belief. With 15 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Myth, Ritual, and Religion. 2 I vols. Crown 8vo., 7s. I Lang (Andrew) — continued. Modern Mythology : a Reply to Professor Max Miiller. 8vo., gs. The Making of Religion. Cr. Svo., 5s. net. Leighton. — Typical Modern Con ceptions Of God; or, The Absolute of German Romantic Idealism and of English Evolutionary Agnosticism. By Joseph Alexander Leighton, Professor of Philo sophy in Hobart CoUege, U.S. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. net. Max Miiller (The Right Hon. F.). The Silesian Horseherd (' Das Pferdebvrla ') : Questions of the Day answered by F. Max Muller. Trans lated by OscAR A. Fechter, Mayor of North Jakima, U.S.A. With a Preface by J. Estlin Carpenter. Chips from a German Workshop. Vol. IV. Essays on Mythology and Folk lore. Grown Svo., 5s. The Six Systems of Indi a a Philosophy. Svo., iSs. Contributions to the Science of Mythology. 2 vols. 8vo., 32s. The Origin and Growth of Reli gion, as illustrated by the Religions of India. The Hibbert Lectures, delivered at the Chapter House, Westminster Abbey, in 1878. Grown Svo., 5s. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. The Seienee of Reli Max Miiller (The Right Hon. F.)— continued. Introduction to the Science of Religion : Four Lectures delivered at the Royal Institution. Crown Svo., 5s. Natural Religion. The Gifford Lectures, delivered before the University of Glasgow in 188S. Grown Svo., 5s. Physical Religion. The Gifford Lectures, delivered before the University of Glasgow in iSgo. Grown Svo., 5s. Anthropological Religion. The Gifford Lectures, delivered before the Uni versity of Glasgow in iSgi. Cr. Svo., 5s. Theosophy, or Psychological Re ligion. The Gifford Lectures, delivered before the University of Glasgow in iSg2. Crown Svo., 5s. gion, Sre. — continued. Max Miiller (The Right Hon. F.)— continued. Three Lectures on the Vedanta Philosophy, delivered at the Royal Institution in March, iSg4. Cr. Svo., 51. Last Essays. Second Series — Essays on the Science of Religion. Crown Svo., 5s. Oakesmith. — The Religion of Plutarch : a Pagan Creed of Apostolic Times. An Essay. By John Oakesmith, D.Litt., M.A. Crown Svo., 5s. neL Wood-Martin (W. G.). Traces of the Elder Faiths of Ireland : a Folk-lore Sketch. A Hand book of Irish Pre-Christian Traditions. With ig2 Illustrations. ^ vols. Svo., 30s. net. Pagan Ireland : an Archseological Sketch. A Handbook of Irish Pre- Christian Antiquities. With 512 Illus trations. Svo., 15s. Classical Literature, Translations, &e. Abbott. — Hellenica. A Collection of Essays on Greek Poetry, Philosophy, History, and Religion. Edited by Evelyn Abbott, M.A., LL.D. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. iEschylUS. — EUMENIDES- OF ^SCHY- LUS. With Metrical English Translation. By J. F. Davies. Svo., 7s. Aristophanes. — The Acharnians OF Aristophanes, translated into English Verse. By R. Y. Tyrrell. Crown Svo. , is. Becker (W. A.), Translated by the Rev. F. Metcalfe, B.D. Gallus : or, Roman Scenes in the Time of Augustus. With Notes and Ex cursuses. With 26 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Charicles : or. Illustrations ot the Private Life of the Ancient Greeks. With Notes and Excursuses. With 26 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Campbell. — Religion in Greek Li terature. By the Rev. Lewis Campbell, M.A., LL.D., Emeritus Professor of Greek, University of St. Andrews. Svo., 15s. Cicero. — Cicero's Correspondence. By R. Y. Tyrrell. Vols. I., II., III., 8vo., each I2S. Vol. IV., 15s. Vol. V., 14s Vol, VI,, I2S. Vol. VII. Index, 7s. bd. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. Edited by a Committee of the Classical Instructors of Harvard University. Vols. XI., igoo ; XIL, igoi ; XIII., 1902. Svo., 6s. bd. net each. Hime. — Lucian, the Syrian Sa tirist. By Lieut.-Col. Henry W. L. Hime, (late) Royal Artillerv- Svo., 5s. net. Homer. — The Odyssey of Homer. Done into English Verse. By William Morris. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Horace. — The Works of Horace, rendered into English Prose. With Life, Introduction and Notes. By William Coutts, M.A. Grown Svo., 5s. net. Lang. — Ho. MER and the Epic. By Andrew Lang. Crown Svo., gs. net. Lucian. — Transla tions from Lucian. By .\ugi'sta M. Campbell Davidson, M.A. Edin. Grown Svo., 5s. net. Ogilvie. — -Horae Latinae : Studies in Synonyms and Syntax. By the late Robert Ogilvie, M. A., LL.D., H.M. Chief Inspector of Schools for Scotland. Edited by Alexander Souter, M.A. With a Memoir by Joseph Ogilvie, M.A., LL.D, Svo., I2S. bd. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. n Classieal Literature, Translations, ka.— continued. Rich. — A Dictionary OF Roman and Greek Antiquities. By A. Rich, B.A. With 2000 Woodcuts. Crown Svo., 6s. net. Sophocles. — Translated into English Verse. By Robert Whitelaw, M.A., Assistant Master in Rugby School. Cr. Svo., 8s. bd. Theophrastus. — The Char a cters OF Theophrastus : a Translation, with Introduction. By Charles E. Bennett and William A. Hammond, Professors in Cornell University. Fcp. Svo., 2S. bd. net. Tyrrell. — Dublin Transla tions into Greek and Latin Vbrsb. Edited by R. Y. Tyrrell. Svo., 6s. Virgil. The Poems of Virgil. Translated into English Prose hy John Conington. Crown 8vo., 6s. Virgil — continued. The ^Eneid of Virgil. Translated into English Verse by John Conington. Crown Svo., 6s. The ^neids of Virgil. Done into Enghsh Verse. By William Morris. Crown Svo., 5s. net. The ^neid of Virgil, freely trans lated into English Blank Verse. By W. J. Thornhill. Grown Svo., 6s. net. The ^Eneid of Virgil. Translated into English Verse by James Rhoades. Books I. -VI. Crown Svo., 5s. Books VII. -XII. Crown Svo., 5s. The Eclogues and Georgics of Virgil. Translated into English Prose by J. W. Mackail, Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. i6rao., 5s. Wilkins. — The Growth of the Homeric Poems. By G. Wilkins. Svo., 6s. Poetry and the Drama. Arnold. — The Light of the World: or, The Great Consummation. By Sir Edwin Arnold. With 14 Illustrations after Holman Hunt. CrOwn Svo., 5s. net. Bell (Mrs. Hugh). Chamber Comedies : a Collection of Plays and Monologues for the Drawing ~ ~ 5s. net. Room. Grown Svo., Fairy Tale Plays, and How to Act Them. With 91 Diagrams and 52 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. net. Rumpelstiltzkin : a Fairy Play in Five Scenes (Characters, 7 Male ; i Fe male). From ' Fairy "Tale Plays and How to Act Them '. With Illustrations, Diagrams and Music. Cr. Svo., sewed, bd. Bird. — Ronald's Farewell, and other Verses. By George Bird, M.A., Vicar of Bradwell, Derbyshire. Fcp. Svo., 41. bd. net. Cochrane. — Collected Verses. By Alfred Cochrane, Author of ' The Kes trel's Nest, and other Verses,' ' Leviore Plectro,' etc. With a Frontispiece by H. J. Ford. Fcp. Svo. Dabney. — The Musical Basis op Verse : a Scientific Study of the Prin ciples of Poetic Composition. By J. P. Dabney. Crown Svo., 6s. bd. net. Graves. — Clyt.emnestra : a Tragedy. By Arnold F. Graves. With a Preface by Robert Y. Tyrrell, Litt.D. Crown Svo,, 5s. net. Hither and Thither: Songs and Verses. By the Author of ' Times and Days,' etc. Fcp. Svo., 5s. Ingelow (Jean). Poetical Works. Complete in One Volume. Crown Svo., gilt top, 6s. net. Lyrical and other Poems. Selec ted from the Writings of Jean Ingelow. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. cloth plain, 3s. cloth gilt. 24 MESSRS. LON(iMANS ^ CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Poetry and the Drama — continued. Keary. — The Brothers : a Fairy Masque. By C. F. Keary. Cr. Svo., 4s. net. Lang (Andrew). Grass of Parnassus. Fcp, 8vo., 2s. bd. net. The Blue Poetry Book. Edited by Andrew Lang. With 100 Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. Lecky.— /'o.EAf^. By the Right Hon. W. E. H. Lecky. Fcp. 8vo., 5s. Lytton (The Earl of), (Owen Meredith). The Wanderer. Cr. 8vo., 105. 6ona.\±— A Book OF Strife in THE FORM OF THE DiARY OF AN OLD Soul . Poems. By George MacDonald LL.D. iSmo., 6s. ' Morris (William). POETICAL works-Library Edition Complete m 11 volumes. Crown Svo price 5s. net each. '' The Earthly Paradise. 4 vols. Crown Svo., 5s. net each. The Life and Death of Jason. Crown Svo., 5s. net. The Defence of Guenevere, and other Poems. Crown Svo., 5s. net. The Story OF Sigurd THE Volsung and The Fall of thb Niblungs. Gr' Svo., 5s. net. Morris (William) — continued. Poems by the Way, and Love is Enough. Grown Svo., 5s. net. The Odyssey of Homer. Done into English Verse. Crown Svo., 5s. net. The ^Eneids of Virgil. Done into English Verse. Crown Svo., 5s. net. The Tale of Beowulf, sometime King op the Folk op the Wedergea ts. Translated by William Morris and A.' J. Wyatt. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. Certain ofthe Poetical Works may also be had in the following Editions : The Earthly Paradise. Popular Edition. 5 vols. i2mo., 25s.; or 5s. each, sold separately. The same in Ten Parts, 25s.; or 2s. 6d- each, sold separately. Cheap Edition, in i vol. Crovra 8vo., 6s. net. Poems by the Way. Square crown Svo., 6s. *»* For Mr. William Morris's other Works, see pp. 27, 28, 37 and 40. Morte Arthur: an Alliterative Poem of the Fourteenth Century. Edited from the Thornton MS., with Introduction, Notes and Glossary. By Mary Macleod Banks. Fcp. Svo., 3s. bd. Nesbit. — Lays and Legends. ByE. Nesbit (Mrs. Hubert Bland). First Series. Crown Svo., 3s. 6d. Second Series. With Portrait. Crown 8vo., 5s. Ramal. — Songs of Childhood. By Walter Ramal. With a Frontispiece from a Drawing by Richard Doyle. Fcp. Svo., 3s. bd. net. Riley. — Ciz. Fashioned Roses: Poems. By James Whitcomb Riley. i2mo., gilt top, 5s. Romanes. — A Selection from the Po^Ms OP George John Romanes, M.A.,: LL.D., F.R.S. With an Introduction by 1 . Herbert Warren, President of Mag dalen College, Oxford. Crown Svo., 4s. U. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 25 Poetry and the ViYs^vaSi— continued. Savage-Armstrong. — Ballads of Down. By G. F. Savage-Armstrong, M. A., D.Litt. Grown Svo., 7s. 6rf. Shakespeare. Bowdler's Family Shakespeare. With 36 Woodcuts, i vol. Svo., 14s. Or in 6 vols. Fcp. Svo., 21s. The Sha kespea re Bir thd a y Book. By Mary F. Dunbar. 32mo., is. bd. Stevenson. — A Child's Garden of Verses. By Robert Louis Stevenson. Fcp. Svo., gill top, 5s. Trevelyan.— C£c/i/.4 Gonzaga .- a Drama. By R. G. Trevelyan. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. net. Wagner,— Z:^^ Nibelungen Ring. Done into English Verse by Reginald Rankin, B.A., ofthe Inner Temple, Barris ter-at-Law. Vol. I. Rhine Gold, The Valkyrie. Fcp. Svo., gilt top, 4s. bd. Vol. II. Siegfried, The Twihght of th Gods. Fcp. Svo., gilt top, 4s. bd. Fiction, Humour, &e. Anstey (F.). Voces Populi. (Reprinted from 'Punch'.)First Series. With 20 Illustrations by J. Bernard Partridge. Gr. Svo., gilt top, 3s. net. Second Series. With 25 Illustrations by J. Bernard Partridge. Cr. Svo., gilt top, 3s. net. The Man from Blankley's, and other Sketches. (Reprinted from ' Punch '.) With 25 Illustrations by J. Bernard Partridge. Cr. Svo., gilt top, 3s. net. Bailey (H. C.),. My Lady of Orange : a Romance of the Netherlands in the Days of Alva. With 8 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 6s. Karl of Erbach : a Tale of the Thirty Years' War. Crown Svo., 6s. Beaconsfield (The Earl of). Novels and Tales. Complete in II vols. Grown Svo., is. bd. each, or in sets, 11 vols., gilt top, 15s. net. Vivian Grey. The Young Duke ; Count Alarcos : a Tragedy. Alroy ; Ixion in Heaven ; The In fernal Marriage ; Popanilla. Tancred. Contarini Fleming ; The Rise of Iskan- der. Sybil.Henrietta Temple. V^etia. Coningsby. Lothair.Endymion. Novels and Tales. The Hugh- endbn Edition. With 2 Portraits and II Vignettes. 11 vols. Grown Svo., 42s. Bottome. — Life, the Interpreter. By Phyllis Bottome. Crown Svo., 6s. Churchill. — Savrola : a Tale of the Revolution in Laurania. By Winston Spencer Churchill, M.P. Gr. 8vo., 65. CrscwiorA.—THE Autobiography of A Tramp. By J. H. Crawford. With a Photogravure Frontispiece ' The Vagrants,' by Fred. Walker, and 8 other Illustra tions. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Creed. — The Vicar of St. Luke's. By Sibyl Greed. Crown Svo., 6s. Davenport. — By the Ramparts of Jezreel : a Romance of Jehu, King of Israel. By Arnold Davenport. With Frontispiece by Lancelot Speed. Grown Svo., 6s. Dougall. — Beggars All. By L. Dougall. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Doyle (Sir A. Conan). Micah Clarke: A Tale of Mon mouth's Rebellion. With 10 Illustra tions. Cr. 8vo., 3s. bd. The Refugees: A Tale of the Huguenots. With 25 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. The Stark Munro Letters. Cr. 8vo., 3s. bd. The Captain of the Polestar, and other Tales. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. 26 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Fiction, Humour, &c. — continued. Dyson. — The Gold-Stealers : a Story of Waddy. By Edward Dyson, Author of 'Rhymes from the Mines,' etc. Crown Svo., 6s. Farrar (F. W., late Dean of Can terbury). Darkness and Dawn: or, Scenes in the Days of Nero. An Historic Tale. Cr. Svo., gilt top, 6s. net. Gathering Clouds : a Tale of the Days of St. Chrysostom. Cr. Svo., gilt top, 6s. net. Fowler (Edith H.). The Young Pretenders. A Story of Child Life. With I2 Illustrations by Sir Philip Burne-Jones, Bart. Crown Svo., 6s. The Professor's Children. With 24 Illustrations by Ethel Kate Burgess. Crown Svo., 6s. Francis (M. E.). . Fi ander' s Widow. Cr. 8vo., 65. Yeoman Fleetwood. With Fron tispiece. Crown Svo., 3s. net. Pastorals of Dorset. With 8 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 6s. The Manor Farm. With Frontis piece by Claud C. du Pre Cooper. Grown 8vo., 6s. Froude. — The: Two Chiefs of Dun- boy: an Irish Romance ofthe Last Century. By James A. Froude. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. Haggard (H. Rider). Allan Quatermain. With 31 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Allan's Wife. With 34 Illustra tions. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Haggard (H. Rider) — continued. Beatrice. With Frontispiece and: Vignette. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Black Heart AND White Heart,. AND OTHER Storibs. With 33 Illustra tions. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Cleopatra. With 29 Illustrations.. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Colonel Quaritch, V.C. Witb Frontispiece and Vignette. Gr. Svo., 3s. bd. Dawn. With 16 Illustrations. Or. Svo., 3s. bd. Dr. Therne. Crown 8vo., 35. bd.. Eric Brighteyes. With 51 Illus trations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Heart of the World. With 15 Illustrations. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Joan Haste. With 20 Illustrations- Grown 8vo., 3s. bd. Lysbeth. With 26 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 6s. Maiwa's Revenge. Cr. 8vo., is. 6d. Montezuma's Da ughter. With 24. Illustrations. Grown 8vo., 3s. bd. Mr. Meeson's Will. With 16 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Nada the Lily. With 23 Illustra tions. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Pearl-Maiden . Fall of Jerusalem. Crown Svo., 6s. a Tale of the With 16 Illustrations. She. With 32 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Swallow : a Tale of the Great Trek. With S Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. 6d. The People of the Mist. Witb 16 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. The Witch's Head. With i5 Illustrations. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 27 Fiction, Humour, &e. — continued. Haggard and Lang. — TheWorld's Desire. By H. Rider Haggard and Andrew Lang. With 27 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Harte. — In the Carquinez Woods. By Bret Harte. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Hope. — The Heart of Princess OsRA. By Anthony Hope. With g Illus trations. Grown 8vo., 3s. bd. Howard. — The Failure of Success. By Lady Mabel Howard. Crown Svo., 6s. Hutchinson. — A Friend of Nelson. By Horace G. Hutchinson. Cr. Svo., 6s. Jerome. — Sketches in Lavender: Blub and Green. By Jerome K. Jerome, Author of ' Three Men in a Boat,' etc. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Joyce. — Old Celtic Romances. Twelve of the most beautiful of the Ancient Irish Romantic Tales. Translated from the Gaelic. By P. W. Joyce, LL.D. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Lang (Andrew). A Monk of Fife ; a Story of the Days of Joan of Arc. With 13 Illustra tions by Selwyn Image. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Disentanglers. With 7 Full-page Illustrations by H. J. Ford. Crown 8vo., 6s. Lyall (Edna). The Hinderers. Crown Svo. ,2s.6(f. The Autobiography of a Slander. Fcp. Svo., IS. sewed. Presentation Edition. With 20 Illustra tions by Lancelot Speed. Grown 8vo., 2s. bd. net. Doreen. The Story of a Singer. Crown Svo., 6s. Wayfaring Men. Crown Svo., 65. Hope the Hermit : a Romance of Borrowdale. Grown 8vo., 6s. Marchmont. — In the Name of a Woman: a Romance. By Arthur W. Marchmont. With 8 Illustrations. Grown 8vo., 6s. Mason and Lang. —Parson Kelly. By A. E. W. Mason and Andrew Lang. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Max Muller. — Deutsche Liebb (German Love) : Fragments firom the Papers of an Alien. Collected by F. Max Muller. Translated from the German by G. A. M. Grown Svo., gilt top, 5s. Melville (G. J. Whyte). The Gladiators. The Interpreter. Good for Nothing. The Queen's Maries. Crown 8vo., is. bd. each, Holmby House. Kate Coventry. Digby Grand. General Bounce. Merriman. — Flotsam: A Story of the Indian Mutiny. By Henry Seton Merriman. With Frontispiece and Vig nette by H. G. Massey. Gr. Svo., 3s. bd. Morris (William). The Sundering Flood. Cr. 8vo., 7s. bd. The Water of the Wondrous Isles. Grown Svo., 7s. bd. The Well a t the World's End. 2 vols. Svo., 2Ss. The Wood Beyond the World. Grown Svo., 6s.' net. The Story of the Glittering Plain, which has been also called The Land of the Living Men, or The Acre of the Undying. Square post Svo., 5s. net. The Roots of the Mountains, wherein is told somewhat of the Lives of the Men of Burgdale, their Friends, their Neighbours, their Foemen, and their Fellows-in-Arms. Written in Prose and Verse. Square crown Svo., Ss. 28 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Fiction, Humour, &e. — continued. Morris (William) — continued. A Tale of the House of the Wolfings, and all the Kindreds of the Mark. Written in Prose and Verse. Square crown 8vo., 6s. A Dream of John Ball, and a King's Lesson. i6mo., 2s. net. News from Nowhere ; or, An Epoch of Rest. Being some Chapters from an Utopian Romance. Post Svo., IS. bd. The Story of Grettir the Strong. Translated from the Icelandic by Eirikr Magnusson and William Morris. Gr. Svo., 5s. net. Three Northern Love Stories, AND O THER TALES. Translated from the Icelandic by Eirikr Magn6sson and William Morris. Grown 8vo., 6s. net. *,j* For Mr. William Morris's other Works, see pp. 24, 37 and 40. Newman (Cardinal). Loss and Gain: The Story of a Convert. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Callista : A Tale of the Third Century. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Phillipps-WoUey. — Snap: a Legend ofthe Lone Mountain. By C. Phillipps- Wolley. With 13 Illustrations. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Portman. — Station Studies : being the Jottings of an African Official. By Lionel Portman. Grown Svo., 5s. net. Sewell (Elizabeth M.). A Glimpse of the World, Laneton Parsonage. Margaret Percival. Katharine Ashton. The Earl's Daughter. The Experience of Life. Amy Herbert, Cleve Hall. Gertrude. Home Life. After Life. Ursula. Ivors. Cr. Svo., cloth plain, is. bd. each. Cloth extra, gilt edges, 2s. bd. each. Sheehan. — Luke Delmege. By the Rev. P. A. Sheehan, P.P., Author of ' My New Curate '. Crown Svo., 6s. Somerville (E. CE.) and Ross (Martin). Some Experiences of an Irish R.M. With 31 Illustrations by E. CE. Somerville. Grown Svo., 6s. All on the Irish Shore : Irish Sketches. With Illustrations by E. CE. Somerville. Crown Svo., 6s. The Real Charlotte. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Silver Fox. Cr. 8vo., 35. bd. Stebbing. — Rachel Wulfstan, and other Stories. By W. Stebbing, author of ' Probable Tales ' Crown Svo., 4s. bd. Stevenson (Robert Louis). The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll AND Mr. Hyde. Fcp. Svo., is. sewed. IS. bd. cloth. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; with other Fables. Crown Svo., bound in buckram, with gilt top, 5s. net. ' Silver Library ' Edition. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. More New Arabian Nights — The Dynamiter. By Robert Louis Steven son and Fanny van de Grift Steven son. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. The Wrong Box. By Robert Louis Stevenson and Lloyd Osbourne. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 29 Fiction, Humour, &c. — continued. Walford (L. B.)— continued. Suttner. — Lay Down Your Arms [Die Waffen Nieder) : The Autobiography of Martha von Tilling. By Bertha von Suttner. Translated by T. Holmes. Cr. 8vo., IS. bd. Trollope (Anthony). The Warden. Cr. Svo., is. 6d. Barchester Towers. Cr.Svo., is.6(i. Walford (L. B.). Stay-at-Homes. Crown 8vo., 65. Charlotte. Crown 8vo., 6s. One of Ourselves. Cr. Svo., 65. The Intruders. Crown Svo. , 25. 6(£. Leddy Marget. Crown Svo., 2s. 6 j. IvA KiLDARE : a Matrimonial Pro blem. Crown Svo., 2S. bd. Mr. Smith: a Part of his Life. Crown Svo., 2s. bd. The Baby's Grandmother. Cr. 8vo., 2s. bd. Cousins. Crown Svo., 2s. 6d. Troublesome Daughters. 8vo., 2s. bd. Cr. Pauline. Crown Svo., 2s. 6d. 'Dick Netherby. Cr. Svo., 2s. 6d. The History of a Week. Cr. 8vo. 2s. bd. w\ A Stiff-necked Genera tion. Cr. ' 8vo. 2s. bd. Nan, and other Stories. Cr. Svo., 2s. bd. The Mischief of Monica. Svo., 2S. bd. Cr. The One Good Guest. Cr. Svo. 2s. bd. ' Ploughed,' and other Stories. Crown Svo., 2s. bd. The Ma tchmaker. Cr. Svo. , 25. 6d. Ward. — One Poor Scruple. By Mrs. Wilfrid Ward. Crown Svo., 6s. Weyman (Stanley). The House of the Wolf. With Frontispiece and Vignette. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. A Gentleman of France. With Frontispiece and Vignette. Cr. Svo., 6s. The Red Cockade. With Frontis piece and Vignette. Grown Svo., 6s. Shrewsbury. With 24 Illustra tions by Ci AUDE A. Shepperson. Cr. Svo., 6s. Sophia. With Frontispiece. Crown Svo., 6s, Yeats (S. Levett). The Chevalier UAuriac. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Traitor's Way. Cr. 8vo., bs. Yoxall.— ^T'^-E Rommany Stone. By J. H. YoXALL, M.P. Crown Svo., 6s. 30 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Popular Science (Natural History, &e.). Butler. — Our Household Insects. , Hudson (W. H.). An Account of the Insect-Pests found in Dwelling-Houses. By Edward A. Butler, B.A., B.Sc. (Lond.). With 113 Illustra tions. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Furneaux (W.). The Outdoor World; or The Young Collector's Handbook. With iS Plates (16 of which are coloured), and 549 Illustrations in the Text. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. net. Butterflies and Moths (British). With 12 coloured Plates and 241 Illus trations in the Text. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. net. Life in Ponds and Streams. With 8 coloured Plates and 331 Illustra tions in the Text. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. net. Hartwig (George). The Sea and its Living Wonders. With 12 Plates and 303 Woodcuts. Svo., gilt top, 7s. net. The Tropical World. With 8 Plates and 172 Woodcuts. Svo., gilt top, 7s. net. The Polar World. With 3 Maps, S Plates and S5 Woodcuts. Svo., gih top, 7s. net. The Subterranean World. With 3 Maps and So Woodcuts. Svo., gilt top, 7s. net. Helmholtz. — Popular Lectures on Scientific Subjects. By Hermann von Helmholtz. With 6S Woodcuts. 2 vols. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. each. Hampshire Days. With numer ous Illustrations from Drawings by Bryan Hook, etc. Svo., los. bd. net. Birds and Man. Svo., 6s. net. Large crown Nature in Downland. With 12 Plates and 14 Illustrations in the Text by A. D. McCormick. Svo., ios. bd. net. British Birds. With a Chapter on Structure and Classification by Frank E. Beddard, F.R.S. With 16 Plates (8 ofwhich are Coloured), and over 100 Illus trations in the Text. Crown 8vo., gih edges, 6s. net. Millais. — The Natural History ot THE British Surface Feeding-Ducks. By John Guille Millais, F.Z.S., etc. With 6 Photogravures and 66 Plates (41 in Colours) from Drawings by the Author, Archibald Thorburn, and from Photo graphs. Royal 4to., £b bs. Proctor (Richard A.). Light Science for Leisure Hours. Familiar Essays on Scientific Subjects. Crown 8vo., 3s. bd. Rough Ways made Smooth. liar Essays on Scientific Subjects. Svo., 3s. bd. Fami- Crown Pleasant Ways IN Science. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Na ture Studies. By R. A. Proc tor, Grant Allen, A. Wilson, T. Foster and E. Clodd. Gr. 8vo., 3s. bd. Leisure Readings. By R. A. Proc tor, E. Clodd, A. Wilson, T. Foster and A. C. Ranyard. Cr. 8vo., 3s. bd. *,* For Mr. Proctor's other books see pp. 16 and 35, and Messrs. Longmans &• Co.'s Cata- . logue of Scientific Works. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 31 Popular Science (Natural History, &e.) — continued. Stanley. — A Familiar History of Birds. By E. Stanley, D.D., formerly Bishop of Norwich. With 160 Illustrations. Or. 8vo., 3s. bd. Wood (Rev. J. G.). Homes without Hands: A Descrip tion ofthe Habitations of Animals, classed according to their Principle of Construc tion. With 140 Illustrations. Svo., gilt top, 7s. net. Insects at Home : A Popular Ac count of British Insects, their Structure, Habits and Transformations. With 700 Illustrations. Svo. , gilt top, 7s. net. Wood (Rev. J. G.)— continued. Insects Abroad: A Popular Ac count of Foreign Insects, their Structure, Habits and Transformations. With 600 Illustrations. Svo., 7s. net. Out of Doors; a Selection of Original Articles on Practical Natural History. With 11 Illustrations. Cr.Svo., 3s. bd. Petland Revisited. With Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. 33 Strange Dwellings : a Description of the Habitations of Animals, abridged from ' Homes without Hands '. With 60 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 3s. bd. Works of Reference. Gwilt. — An ENCYCLOPyEDiA OF Ar chitecture. By Joseph Gwilt, F.S.A. With 1700 Engravings. Revised (1S88), with Alterations and Considerable Addi tions by Wyatt Papworth. 8vo., 21s. net. Longmans' Gazetteer of the World. Edited by George G. Chis holm, M.A., B.Sc. Imperial Svo., iSs. net cloth ; 21S. half-morocco. Maunder (Samuel). Biographical Treasury. With Supplement brought down to 18S9. By Rev. James Wood. Fcp. Svo., 6s. The Treasury of Bible Know ledge. By the Rev. J. Ayre, M.A. With S Maps, 15 Plates, and 300 Woodcuts. Fcp. Svo., 6s. Treasury of Knowledge and Lib rary OF Reference. Fcp. 8vo., 6s. Maunder (Samuel^ — continued. The Treasury OF Botany. Edited by J. Lindley, F.R.S., and T. Moore, F.L.S. With 274 Woodcuts and 20 Steel Plates. 2 vols. Fcp. Svo., 12s. Roget. — Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases. Classified and Ar ranged so as to Facilitate the Expression of Ideas and assist in Literary Composition. By Peter Mark Roget, M.D., F.R.S. Recomposed throughout, enlarged and im proved, partly from the Author's Notes, and with a full Index, by the Author's Son, John Lewis Roget. Grown Svo., gs. net. 'WiWich.-PopuLAR Tables for giving information for ascertaining the value of Lifehold, Leasehold, and Church Property, the Public Funds, etc. By Charles M. Willich. Edited by H. Bence Jones. Crown Svo., los. bd. 32 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Children's Books. Adelborg. — Clean Peter and the Children of Grubbylea. By Ottilia Adelborg. Translated from the Swedish by Mrs. Graiiam Wallas. With 23 Coloured Plates. Oblong 4to., boards, 3s. bd. net. Alick's Adventures. — By G. R. With 8 Illustrations by John Hassall. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Brown. — -The Book of Saints and Friendly Beasts. By Abbie Farwell Brown. With 8 Illustrations by Fanny Y. Gory. Grown Svo., 4s. bd. net. Buckland. — Two LittleRunaways. Adapted from the French of Louis Des- NOYERS. By James Buckland. With no Illustrations by Cecil Aldin. Cr. Svo., 6s. Crake (Rev. A. D.). Edwy the Fair; or, The First Chronicle of .(Escendune. Cr. Svo. , silver top, 2S. net. Alegar the Dane ; or, The Second Chronicle of yEscendune. Cr. Svo., silver top, 2s. net. The Rival Heirs : being the Third and Last Chronicle of .(Escendune. Gr. Svo., silver top, 2s. net. The House OF Walderne. A Tale of the Cloister and the Forest in the Days ofthe Barons' Wars. Crown Svo., silver top, 2S. net. Brian Fitz- Count. A Story of Wallingford Castle and Dorchester Abbey. Gr. 8vo., silver top, 2s. net. Henty (G. A.). — Edited by. Yule Logs : A Story-Book for Boys. By Various Authors. With 61 Illus trations. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. Yule Tide Yarns: a Story-Book for Boys. By Various Authors. With 45 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. Lang (Andrew). — Edited by. The Blue Fairy Book. With 138 Illustrations. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. Tle Red Fairy Book. With 100 Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Green Fairy Book. With 99 Illustrations. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Grey Fairy Book. With 65 Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Yellow Fairy Book. With 104 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Pink Fairy Book. With 67 Illustrations. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Violet Fairy Book. With 8 Coloured Plates and 54 other Illustrations. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Blue Poetry Book. With 100 Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The True Story Book. With 66 Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Red True Story Book. With 100 Illustrations. Gr. Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Animal Story Book. With 67 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Red Book of Animal Stories. With 65 Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. The Arabian Nights Entertain ments. With 66 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges,. 6s. The Book of Romance. With 8 Coloured Plates and 44 other Illustrations. Crown Svo., gilt edges, 6s. Lyall. — The Burges Letters: a Record of Child Life in the Sixties. By Edna Lyall. With Coloured Frontispiece and 8 other Full-page Illustrations by Walter S. Stacey. Crown Svo., 2S. bd. Meade (L. T.). Daddy's Boy. With S Illustrations. Grown Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. Deb and the Duchess. With 7 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. The Beresford Prize. With 7 Illustrations. Cr. Svo., gilt edges, 3s. net. The House of Surprises. With 6 Illustrations. Gr. 8vo., gilt edges, 3s. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 33 Children's Books— continued. Murray. — Flower Legends for Children. By Hilda Murray (the Hon. Mrs. Murray of Elibank). Pictured by J. S. Eland. With numerous Coloured and other Illustrations. Oblong 4to., 6s. • Penrose. — Chubby : a Nuisance. By Mrs. Penrose. With 8, Illustrations by G. G. Manton. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Praeger (Rosamond). The Adventures of THh Three Bold Babes: Hector, Honoria and Alisander. a Story in Pictures. With 24 Coloured Plates and 24 Outline Pic tures. Oblong 4to., 3s. bd. The Further Doings of the Three Bold Babes. With 24 Coloured Pictures and 24 Outline Pictures. Oblong 4to., 3s. 6(i. Roberts. — The Adventures of Captain John Smith : Captain of Two Hundred and Fifty Horse, and sometime President of Virginia. By E. P. Roberts. With 17 Illustrations and 3 Maps. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. Stevenson. — A Child's Garden of Verses. By Robert Louis Stevenson. Fcp. 8vo., gilt top, 5s. Tappan. — Old Ballads in Prose. By Eva March Tappan. With 4 Illus trations by Fanny Y. Gory. Crown Svo., gilt top, 4s. bi. net. Upton (Florence K. and Bertha). The Adventures of Two Dutch Dolls and a ' Golliwogg'. With 31 Coloured Plates and numerous Illustra tions in the Text. Oblong 4to., 6s. The Golliwogg' s Bicycle Club. With 31 Coloured Plates and numerous Illustrations in the Text. Oblong 410., 6s. The Golliwogg at the Seaside. With 31 Coloured Plates and numerous Illustrations in the Text. Oblong 4to. , 6s. The Golliwogg IN War. With 31 Coloured Plates. Oblong 4to., 6s. The Golliwogg's Polar Adven tures. With 31 Coloured Plates. Ob long 4to., 6s. The GoLLiwoGds Auto-go-cart. With 31 Coloured Plates and numerous Illustrations in the Text. Oblong 4to., 6s. The Golliwogg's Air-Ship. With 30 Coloured Pictures and numerous Illus trations in the Text. Oblong 4to., 6s. The Vege-Men's Revenge. With 31 Coloured Plates and numerous Illus trations in the Text. Oblong 4to., 6s. Wemyss. — ' Things We Thought of' : Told from a Child's Point of View. By Mary C. E. Wemyss, Author of 'All About All of Us ' With S Illustrations in Colour by S. R. Praeger. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Silver Library. Grown Svo. 3s. bd. each Volume. Arnold's (Sir Edwin) Seas and Lands. With 71 Illustrations. 3J. bd. Bagehot'3 (W.) Biographical Studies. 3s. bd. Bagehot's (W.) Economic Studies. 3s. bd. Bagoiiot's (W.) Literary Studies. With Portrait. 3 vols., 3s. bd. each. Baker's (Sir S. W.) Eight Tears in Ceylon. With 6 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Baker's (Sir S. W.) Rifle and Hound in Ceylon. With 6 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Bailng-Oould's (Rev. S.) Curious Myths of the Middle Ages. 3s. bd. Bating-Gould's (Rev. S.) Origin and Develop ment of Religions Belief. 2 vols. 3s. 6rf. each. Becker's (W. A.) Gallus : or, Roman Scenes in the Time of Augustus. With 26 lUus. 3s. bd. Becker's (W. A.) Charicles : or, Illustrations of the Private Life of the Ancient Greeks. With 26 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Bent's (J. T.) The Ruined Cities of Mashona- land. With 117 Illustrations, y. bd. Brassey 's (Lady) A Voyage in the ' Sunbeam '. With 66 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Buckle's (H. T.) History of Civilisation in England. 3 vols. lo^. bd. Churchill's (Winston S.) The Story of the Malakand Field Force, 1897. With 6 Maps and Plans. 3s. bd. Clodd's (E.) Story of Creation: a Plain Account of Evolution. With 77 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Conybeare (Rev. W. J.) and Howson's Ofery Rev. J. S.) Life and Epistles of St. Paul. With 46 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Dougall's (L.) Beggars All : a Novel. 3s. bd. Doyle's (Sir A. Conan) Micah Clarke. A Tale of Monmoutn's Rebellion. With 10 lUusts. zs.bd. 34 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. The Silver Library — continued. Doyle's (Sir A. Conan) The Captain of the Polestar, and other Tales. 3s. bd. Doyle's (Sir A. Conan) The Refugees: A Tale of the Huguenots. With 2,1; Illustrations. 3s bd. Doyle's (Sir A. Conan) The Stark Munro Letters. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) The History of England, from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat of the Spanish Armada. 12 vols. 3s. bd. each. Froude's (J. A.) The English in Ireland. 3 vols. IOS. bd. Froude's (J. A.) The Divorce of Catherine of Aragon. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) The Spanish Story of the Armada, and other Essays. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) English Seamen in the Sixteenth Century. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) Short Studies on Great Sub jects. 4 vols. 3s. bd. each. Froude's (J. A.) Oceana, or England and Her Colonies. With 9 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) The Council of Trent. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) The Life and Letters of Erasmus. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) Thomas Carlyle : a History of his Life. 1795-1835. 2 vols. 7s. 1834-1881. 2 vols. 7s. Froude's (J. A.) Ceesar : a Sketch. 3s. bd. Froude's (J. A.) The Two Chiefs of Dunboy : an Irish Romance of the Last Century. 3J. td. Froude's (J. A.) Writings, Selections from. 3s. bd. Gleig's (Rev. G. R.) Life of the Duke of Wellington. With Portrait. 3s. bd. Oreyille's (C. 0. F.) Journal of the Reigns of King George IY., King William IY., and Queen Victoria. 8 vols. , 3s. bd. each. Haggard's (H. R.) She : A History of Adventure. With 32 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Allan Quatermain. With 20 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Colonel Quaritch, V.C. : a Tale of Country Life. With Frontispiece and Vignette. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.)|Cleopatra. With 20 Illustra tions. 3^. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Eric Brighteyes. With 51 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Beatrice. With Frontispiece and Vignette. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Black Heart and White Heart. With 33 Illustrations. 3S._bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Allan's Wife. With 34 lUus- trations. 3s. bd. Haggard (H. R.) Heart of the World. With IS Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Montezuma's Daughter. With 25 Illustrations. 3J. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Swallow : a Tale of the Great ' Trek. Whh 8 Illustrations. 3s. 6d. Haggard's (H. R.) The Witch's Head. With 16 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Mr. Meeson's WUL Witb 16 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Nada the Lily. With 23 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H.R.) Dawn. With i6Illusts. 3s. 6d. Haggard's (H. R.) The People of the Hist. With 16 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Haggard's (H. R.) Joan Haste. With 20 Illus-. trations. 3s. bd. Haggard (H. R.) and Lang's (A.) The World's Desire. With 27 Illustrations. 3s. 6rf. Harte's (Bret) In the Carquinez Woods and other Stories. 3s. bd. Helmholtz's (Hermann von) Popular Lectnret- on Scientiflc Subjects. With 68 Illustrations. 2 vols. 3s. bd. each. Hope's (Anthony) The Heart of Princess Osra/- With 9 Illustrations. 3s. 6d. Hewitt's (W.) Visits to Remarkable PiaceBt: With 80 Illustrations. 3s. 6d. Jefferies' (R.) The Story of My Heart: Myj Autobiography. With Portrait. 3s. 6d, Jefferies' (R.) Field and Hedgerow. Witt Portrait. 3s. bd. Jefferies' (R.) Red Deer. With 17 Illusts. ji. bd Jefferies' (R.) Wood Magic: a Fable. Witl Frontispiece and Vignette by E. V. B. y.id- Jefferies (R.) The Toilers of the Field. Witl Portrait from the Bust in Salisbury Cathedral- 3s. bd. ij Kaye (Sir J.) and Malleson's (Colonel) Histor; of the Indian Mutiny of 18S7-8. 6 vols* 3s. bd. each. Knight's (E. F.) The Cruise of the 'Uertt' the Narrative of a Search for Treasure 01 the Desert Island of Trinidad. With ' Maps and 23 Illustrations. 3s. bd. ' MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 35 The Silver Library — continued. Knight's (E. F.) Where Three Empires Meet : a Narrative of Recent Travel in Kashmir, Western Tibet, Baltistan, Gilgit. With a Map and 54 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Knight's (E. F.) The ' Falcon ' on the Baltic : a Coasting Voyage from Hammersmith to Copenhagen in a Three-Ton Yacht. With Map and 11 Illustrations. 3s. bd. KoBtlin's (J.) Life of Luther. With 62 Illustra tions and 4 Facsimiles of MSS. 3s. bd. Lang's (A.) Angling Sketches. With 20 Illustra tions. 3s. bd. Lang's (A.) Custom and Myth : Studies of Early Usage and Belief. 3s. bd. Lang's(A.)CockLaneand Common-Sense, 3s. bd. Lang's (A.) The Book of Dreams and Ghosts, JI. bd. Lang's (A.) A Monk of Fife : a Story of the Days of Joan of Arc. With 13 Illustrations. 3J. 6A Lang's (A.) Myth, Ritual, and Religion. 2 vols. -js. Lees (J. A.) and Ciutterbuck's (W. J.) B.C. 1887, A Ramble in British Columbia. With Maps and 75 Illustrations. 3s. bd Leyett-Veats' (S.) The Chevalier D'Auriac. 31. bd. Macaulay's (Lord) Complete Works. ' Albany ' Edition. With 12 Portraits. 12 vols. 3s. bd. each. Hacaulay's (Lord) Essays and Lays of Ancient Rome, etc. With Portrait and 4 Illustrations to the ' Lays '. 3s. bd. Hacleod's (H. D.) Elements of Banking. 3s. bd. Harshman's (J. C.) Memoirs of Sir Henry Havelock. 3s. bd. Hason (A. E. W.) and Lang's (A.) Parson Kelly. 3s. bd. Herivale's (Dean) History of the Romans under the Empire. 8 vols. 3s. bd. each. Herriman's (H. S. Flotsam : A Tale of the Indian Mutiny, '^y. bd. Hill's (J. S.) Political Economy. 3s. bd. Hill's (J. S.) System of Logic. 3s. bd. Winer's (Geo.) Country Pleasures : the Chroni cle of a Year chiefly in a Garden. 3s. bd. Hansen's (F.) The First Crossing of Greenland. With 142 Illustrations and a Map. 3s. bd. PhilllppB-Wolley's (C.) Snap : a Legend of the Lone Mountain With 13 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) The Orbs Around Us. 3J. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) The Expanse of Heaven. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Light Science for Leisure Hours. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) The Moon. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Other Worlds than Ours. y.bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Our Place among Infinities : a Series of Essays contrasting our Little Abode in Space and Time with the Infinities around us. 3J. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Other Suns than Ours. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Rough Ways made Smooth. 3s. bd. Proctor's(R.A.)PleasantWayBln Science. 3s.6if. Proctor's (R. A.) Myths and Marvels of As tronomy. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Nature Studies. 3s. bd. Proctor's (R. A.) Leisure Readings. By R. A. Proctor, Edward Clodd, Andrew Wilson, Thomas Foster, and A. C. Ranyard. With Illustrations. 3s. bd. Rossetti's (Maria F.) A Shadow of Dante. 3s. bd. Smith's (R. Bosworth) Carthage and the Cartha ginians. With Maps, Plans, etc. 3s. bd, Stanley's (Bishop) Familiar History of Birds. With 160 Illustrations. 3s. bd. Stephen's (Sir Leslie) The Playground of Europe (The Alps). With 4 Illustrations, y. bd. Stevenson's (R. L.) The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; with other Fables, ¦y.bd. Stevenson (R. L.) and Osbourne's (Ll.) The Wrong Box. 3s. bd. Stevenson (Robert Louis) and Stevenson's (Fanny van de Grift) More New Arabian Nights.— The Dynamiter. 3J. bd. Trevelyan's (Sir G. 0.) The Early History of Charles James Fox. 3s. bd. Weyman's (Stanley J.) The House of the Wolf : a Romance. 3s. bd. Wood's (Rev. J. 0.) Petland Revisited. Witb 33 Illustrations 3s. bd. Wood's (Rev. J. G.) Strange Dwellings. With 60 Illustrations. 35. bd. Wood's (Rev. J. G.) Out of Doors. With 11 Illustrations. 3s. bd. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Cookery, Domestic Management, &e. Acton. — Modern Cookery. By Eliza Acton. With 150 Woodcuts. Fcp. Svo., 4s. bd. Angwin. — Simple Hints on Choice j OP Food, with Tested and Economical Recipes. For Schools, Homes, and Glasses for Technical Instruction. By M.G. Angwin, Diplomate (First Class) of the National 1 Union for the Technical Training of Women, etc. Crown Svo., is. Ashby. — Health in the Nursery. By Henry Ashby, M.D., F.R.C.P., Physi cian to the Manchester Children's Hospital. , With 25 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. net. ' Bull (Thomas, M.D.). Hints to Mothers on the Man- AGEMBh T OP their HEALTH DURING THE Period OP Pregnancy. Fcp. Svo., sewed, j IS. bd. ; cloth, gilt edges, 2s. net. The Maternal Management of\ Children in Health and Disease. ' Fcp. Svo., sewed, is. bd. ; cloth, gilt De Sails (Mrs.). [ A LA Mode Cookery : Up-to- date Recipes. With 24 Plates (16 in Colour). Crown Svo., 5s. net. Cakes and Confections X la Mode. Fcp. Svo., is. bd. Dogs: A Manual for Amateurs. Fcp. Svo., IS. bd. Dressed Game and Poultry a la Mode. Fcp. Svo., is. bd. Dressed Vegetables a la Mode, j Fcp. Svo., IS bd. Drinks ^ LA Mode. Fcp.8vo.,i5.6rf. i De Salis (Mrs.) — continued. Entries a la Mode. Fcp. 8vo., IS. bd. Floral Decorations. Fcp. 8vo., IS. bd. Gardening a la Mode. Fcp. Svo. Part I., Vegetables, is. bd. Part II., Fruits, IS. bd. National Viands a la Mode. Fcp. 8vo., IS. bd. New-laid Eggs. Fcp. Svo., is. 6d. Oysters ^ la Mode. Fcp. Svo., IS. bd. Puddings and Pastry a la Mode. Fcp. Svo., IS. bd. Savouries a la Mode. Fcp. Svo., IS. bd. Soups and Dressed Fish a la Mode. Fcp. 8vo., is. bd. Sweets and Supper Dishes jI la Mode. Fcp. Svo., is. bd. Tempting Dishes for Small In comes. Fcp. Svo., IS. bd. Wrinkles and Notions for Every Household. Crown Svo., is. bd. Lear. — Maigre Cookery. By H. L. Sidney Lear. i6mo., 2s. Poole. — Cookery FOR the Diabetic. ^ By W. H. and Mrs. Poole. With Preface " by Dr. Pavy. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. ; Rotheram. — Household Cookery Recipes. By M. A. Rotheram, First Class Diplomee, National Training School of Cookery, London ; Instructress to the Bed fordshire County Council. Crown Svo., 2s. The Fine Arts and Music. Burne-Jones.— 2>.£' Beginning of the World: Twenty-five Pictures by Sir Edward Burne-Jones, Bart. Medium 4to., Boards, 7s. bd. net. Burns and Colenso. — Living Ana tomy. By Cecil L. Burns, R.B.A., and Robert J. Colenso, M.A., M.D. 40 Plates, iij by S| ins., each Plate containing Two Figures— (n) A Natural Male or Female ] Figure ; (b) The same Figure Anatomatised. 1 In a Portfolio, 7s. bd. net. Hamlin. — A Text-Book of ths History op Architecture. By A. D. F.. Hamlin, A.M. With 229 Illustrations.' Grown Svo., 7s. bd. Haweis (Rev. H. R.). Music and Morals. With Portrait , of the Author. Grown Svo., 6s. net. My Musical Life. With Portraif;^ of Richard Wagner and 3 IllustrationS(»s, Grown Svo., 6s. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 37 The Fine Arts and yixxsio— continued. Huish, Head, and Longman. — Samplers and Tapestry Embroideries. By Marcus B. Huish, LL.B. ; also ' The Stitchery of the Same,' by Mrs. Head ; and ' Foreign Samplers,' by Mrs. C. J. Longman. With 30 Reproductions in Colour, and 40 Illustrations in Mono chrome. 4to., £2 2S. net. HuUah. — The History of Modern Music. By John Hullah. Svo., Ss. bd. Jameson (Mrs. Anna). Sacred and Legendary Art, con taining Legends of the Angels and Arch angels, the Evangelists, the Apostles, the Doctors of the Church, St. Mary Mag dalene, the Patron Saints, the Martyrs, the Early Bishops, the Hermits, and the Warrior-Saints of Christendom, as repre sented in the Fine Arts. With 19 Etchings and 187 Woodcuts. 2 vols. Svo., 20s. net. Legends of the Monastic Orders, as represented in the Fine Arts, com prising the Benedictines and Augustines, and Orders derived from their Rules, the Mendicant Orders, the Jesuits, and the Order ofthe Visitation of St. Mary. With II Etchings and 88 Woodcuts. i vol. 8vo., IOS. net. Legends of the Madonna, or Blessed VirginMary. Devotional with and without the Infant Jesus, Historical from the Annunciation to the Assumption, as represented in Sacred and Legendary Christian Art. With 27 Etchings and 165 Woodcuts. I vol. Svo., IOS. net. The History of Our Lord, as ex emplified in Works of Art, with that of His Types, St. John the Baptist, and other persons of the Old and New Testa ment. Commenced by the late Mrs. Jameson ; continued and completed by Lady Eastlake. With 31 Etchings and 281 Woodcuts. 2 vols. Svo., 20s. net. Kristeller. — Andrea Mantegna . By Paul Kristeller. English Edition by S. Arthur Strong, M.A., Librarian to the House of Lords, and at Chatsworth. With 26 Photogravure Plates and 162 Illustrations in the Text. 410., gilt top, £3 los. net. I Macfarren. — Lectures on Har mony. By Sir George A. Macfarren. 8V0., I2S. Morris (William). Architecture, Industry and Wealth. Collected Papers. Crown Svo., 6s. net. Hopes and Fears for Art. Five Lectures delivered in Birmingham, Lon don, etc., in 1S78-1SS1. Cr Svo., 4s. bd. An Address delivered at the Distribution op Prizes to Students OP THE Birmingham Municipal School OP Art on 21ST February, 1894. Svo., 2s. bd. net. [Printed in ' Golden ' Type.) Some Hints on Pattern-Design ing : a Lecture delivered at the Working Men's College, London, on loth Decem ber, 1881. Svo., 2s. bd. net. (Printed in ' Golden ' Type.) Arts and its Producers (1888) AND THB Arts and Crafts of To-day (1SS9). Svo., 2s. bd. net. [Printed in ' Golden ' Type.) Architecture and History, and Westminster Abbey. Two Papers read before the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. Svo., 2s. bd. net. [Printed in ' Golden' Type.) Arts and Crafts Essays. By Members ofthe Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society. With a Preface by William Morris. Crown Svo., 2s. bd. net. *,* For Mr. William Morris's other 1 Works, see pp. 24, 27, 28 and 40. Robertson. — Old English Songs AND Dances. Decorated in Colour by W. Graham Robertson. Royal 4to., 42s. net. Vanderpoel.' — Colour Problems: a Practical Manual for the Lay Student of Colour. By Emily Noyes Vanderpoel. With 117 Plates in Colour. Square Svo., 2IS. net. Van Dyke. — A Text-Book on the History of Painting. By John C. Van Dyke. With no Illustrations. Cr.Svo., 6s. Wellington. — A Descriptive and Historical Catalogue op the Collec tions of Pictures and Sculpture at Apsley House, London. By Evelyn, Duchess of Wellington. Illustrated by 52 Photo-Engravings, specially executed by Braun, Clement, & Co., of Paris. 2 vols., royal 4to., £b bs. net. Willard. — History of Modern Italian Art. By Ashton Rollins Willard. Part I. Sculpture. Part II. Painting. Part III. Architecture. With Photogravure Frontispiece and numerous full-page Illustrations. Svo., 21s. net. 38 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Miscellaneous and Critieal Works. Auto da Fe and other Essays : some being Essays in Fiction. By the Author of ' Essays in Paradox ' and ' Ex ploded Ideas '. Crown Svo., 5s. Bagehot.— Literary Studies. By ; Walter Bagehot. With Portrait. 3 vols. ' Grown Svo., 3s. bd. each. Baker. — Educa tion and Life : Papers and Addresses. By James H. Baker, M.A., LL.D. Grown Svo., 4s. bd. Baring-Gould. — Curious Myths of THE Middle Ages. By Rev. S. Baring- Gould. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Baynes. — Shakespeare Studies, and other Essays. By the late Thomas Spencer Baynes, LL.B., LL.D. With a Biographical Preface by Professor Lewis Campbell. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. Bonnell. — • Charlotte BrontS, George Eliot, Jane Austen: Studies in their Works. By Henry H. Bonnell. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. net. Booth. — The Discovery and De cipherment OF THE Trilingual Cunei form Inscriptions. By Arthur John Booth, M.A. With a Plan of Persepohs. Svo. 14s. net. Charities Register, The Annual, AND Digest: being a Classified Register of Charities in or available in the Metropolis. Svo., 5s. net. Christie. — Selected Essays. By Richard Copley Christie, M.A., Oxon. Hon. LL.D., Vict. With 2 Portraits and 3 other Illustrations. Svo., 12s. net. Dickinson. — King Arthur in Corn wall. By W. Howship Dickinson, M.D. With 5 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 4s. bd. Essays in Paradox. By the Author of ' Exploded Ideas ' and ' Times and Days '. Crown Svo., 5s. Evans. — The Ancient Stone Im plements, Weapons and Ornaments op Great Britain. By Sir John Evans, K.C.B. With 537 Illustrations. Svo., IOS. 6d. net. Exploded ldea.s,AND Other Essa ys. By the Author of 'Times and Days' Gr. Svo., 5s. Frost. — A Medley Book. By j George Frost. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. net. Geikie. — The Vicar and his Friends. Reported by Cunningham Geikie, D.D., LL.D. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Gilkes. — The New Revolution. By A. H. Gilkes, Master of Dulwich College. Fcp. Svo., is. net. Haggard (H. Rider). A Farmer's Year : being his Com monplace Book for 189S. With 36 Illus trations. Crown Svo., 7s. bd. net. Rural England. With 23 Agri cultural Maps and 56 Illustrations from Photographs. 2 vols., Svo., 36s. net. Hoenig. — Inquiries concerning THE Tactics op the Future. By Fritz Hoenig. With i Sketch in the Text and 5 Maps. Translated by Captain H. M. Bower. Svo., 15s. net. Hutchinson. — Dreams and their Meanings. By Horace G. Hutchinson. Svo. , gilt top, gs. bd. net. Jefferies (Richard). Field and Hedgerow : With Por trait. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. "- The Story of My Heart: my' Autobiography. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Red Deer. With 17 Illustrationsfi; Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Toilers of the Field. Crowr ¦ 8vo., 3s. bd. ^- ' Wood Magic : a Fable. Crowr.. Svo., 3s. bd. ^ Jekyll (Gertrude). Home and Garden: Notes arn^ Thoughts, Practical and Critical, of *"' Worker in both. With 53 lUustratior,'; from Photographs. Svo., los. bd. net. Wood and Garden: Notes an Thoughts, Practical and Critical, of Working Amateur. With 71 PhotograpHuj, Svo., IOS. bd. net. MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. 39 Miseellaneous and Critieal 1^ o'ck.s— continued. Johnson (J. & J. H.). The Patentee' s Manual : a Treatise on the Law and Practice of Letters Patent. Svo., los. bd. An Epitome of the Law and Practice connected with Patents FOR Inventions, with a reprint of the Patents Acts of 1S83, 1885, 1886 and 1888. Grown Svo., 2s. bd. Joyce. — The Origin and History OF Irish Names op Places. By P. W. Joyce, LL.D. 2 vols. Crown Svo. , 5s. each. Lang (Andrew). Letters to Dead Authors. 8vo., 2S. bd. net. Fcp. Books and Bookmen. With 2 Coloured Plates and 17 Illustrations. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. net. Old Friends. Fcp. Svo., 25. 6rf. net. Letters on Literature. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. net. Essays IN Little. With Portrait ofthe Author. Crown 8vo., 2S. bd. Cock Lane and Common-Sense. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Book of Dreams and Ghosts. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Maryon. — How the Garden Grew. By Maud Maryon. With 4 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 5s. net. Matthews.— -/Vbr^^ on Speech- Making. By Brander Matthews. Fcp. 8vo., IS. bd. net. Max MiiUer (The Right Hon. F.). Collected Works. 18 vols. Crown Svo., 5s. each. Vol. I. Natural Religion: the Gifford Lectures, 1SS8. Vol. II. Physical Religion: the Gifford Lectures, 1890. Vol. III. Anthropological Religion: the Gifford Lectures, 1S91. ¦"-¦ Vol. IV. Theosophy; or, Psychological Religion : the Gifford Lectures, 1892. Chips from a German Workshop. Vol. V. Recent Essays and Addresses. Vol. VI. Biographical Essays. Vol. VII. Essays on Language and Litera ture. Vol. VIII. Essays on Mythology and Folk-lore. Vol. IX. The Origin and Growth of Religion, as Illustrated by the Re ligions of India : the Hibbert Lectures, 187S. Vol. X. Biographies of Words, and THE Home of the Aryas. Vols. XL, XII. The Science of \XLanguagb: Founded on Lectures de- '"'livered at the Royal Institution in 1S61 and 1S63. 2 vols. los. Vol. XIII. India : What can it Teach Us? Vol. XIV. Introduction to the Science op Religion. Four Lectures, 1S70. Vol. XV. RamaKRISHNa : his Life and Sayings. Vol. XVI. Three Lectures on the Vedanta Philosophy, 1894. Vol XVII. Last Essays. First Series. Essays on Language, Folk-lore, etc. Vol. XVIII. LaStEssays. Second Series. Essays on the Science of Religion. 40 MESSRS. LONGMANS & CO.'S STANDARD AND GENERAL WORKS. Miscellaneous and Critieal Works — continued. Soulsby (Lucy H. M.) — continued. Milner. — Country Pleasures : the Chronicle of a Year chiefly in a Garden. By George Milner. Grown Svo., 3s. bd. Morris. — Signs of Change. Seven Lectures delivered on various Occasions. By William Morris. Post Svo., 4s. bd. Parker and Unwin. — The Art of Building a Home : a Collection of Lectures and Illustrations. By Barry Parker and Raymond Unwin. With 68 Full-page Plates. Svo., los. bd. net. Pollock. — Jane Austen: her Con temporaries and Herself By Walter Herries Pollock. Gr. Svo., 3s. bd. net. Poore (George Vivian, M.D.). Essays ON Rural Hygiene. With 13 Illustrations. Crown 8vo., 6s. bd. The Dwelling House. With 36 Illustrations. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. The Earth in Relation to the Preservation and Destruction of Contagia : being the Milroy Lectures delivered at the Royal College of Physi cians in iSgg, together with other Papers on Sanitation. With 13 Illustrations. Crown Svo., gs. Colonial and Camp Sanitation.- With II Illustrations. Cr. Svo., 2s. net. Rossetti. -A Shadow of Dante : being an Essay towards studying Himself, his World and his Pilgrimage. By Maria Francesca Rossetti. Crown Svo., 3s. bd. Seria Ludo. By a Dilettante. Post 4to. , 5s. net. %* Sketches and Verses, mainly reprinted from the St. James's Gazette. Shadiwell. — Drink : Temperance AND Legislation. By Arthur Shadwell, M.A., M.D. Crown 8vo., 5s. net. Soulsby (Lucy H. M.). Stray Thoughts Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. net. Stray Thoughts FOR Girls. IS. bd net. 10,000/5/03. — A. u. p. ON Reading. i6mo., Stra y Tho ughts for Mo thers and Teachers. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. net. Stray Thoughts for Invalids. i6mo., 2s. net. Stray Thoughts on Character. Fcp. Svo., 2s. bd. net. Southey. — The Correspondence of RobertSouthey withCarolineBowles. Edited by Edward Dowden. Svo., 14s. Stevens. — On the Stowage of Ships AND THEIR CARGOES. With Information re garding Freights, Gharter-Parties, etc. By Robert White Stevens. Svo., 21s. Thuillier. — The Principles of Land Defence, and their Application to the Conditions of To-day. By Captain H. F. Thuillier, R.E. With Maps and Plans. Svo., I2S. bd. net. Turner and Sutherland. — The De velopment of Australian Literature. By Henry Gyles Turner and Alexander Sutherland. With Portraits and Illustra tions. Crown Svo., 5s. Warwick. — Progress in Women's Educa tion in the British Empire : being the Report of Conferences and a Congress held in connection with the Educational: Section, Victorian Era Exhibition. Edited by the Countess of Warwick. Cr. Svo. 6s. Weathers. — A Practical Guide to Garden Plants. By John Weathers, F.R.H.S. With 159 Diagrams. Svo., 21s. net. Whittall. — PREDERICK THE Great ON Kingcraft, from the Original Manu^ script ; with Reminiscences and Turkish Stories. By Sir J. William Whittall, President of the British Chamber of Com merce of Turkey. Svo., 7s. bd. net. YALE UNIVERSITY ,Tgi r