him for some days to me. So as out of the same, I can truly affirm, that such burgesses and knights were cunningly packed out of every shire and borough-town in the lower house, as for their inclination to the protestant religion, or other private respects, would easily conform themselves to the queen's intentions; and amongst the lords in the higher house, many great ones, loath to be long absent from their country sports, or by their first acts to distaste the young queen, absented themselves from parliament, and gave their proxies to the old earl Arundel, a known catholic, and to the duke of Norfolk, his son-in-law, not doubting but that they would do all things to maintain their religion against all undermining thereof. But it proved not so; for the earl put into a vain hope of marrying the queen, when by his age he might have been more than her father, and the duke of Norfolk being neither sound in religion, and for other ends of his own, not sincere in his proceedings, prevailed by their many proxies to exclude the bishops from sitting in parliament, all holy and learned men, able to have turned the business as they listed. After which vote passed, the queen's party in both houses still prevailed, so as not long after, new bishops, in place of the old, were chosen, some from Geneva, others out of Germany, of different religions; yet contented for honor, wealth and wives, to join in any profession, Seven of them were apostate monks and friars, and most of the rest mere laymen, having neither ordination nor jurisdiction, besides that which the queen and parliament could give them; commonly, therefore, called the parliament-bishops, and patent prelates."-Legacy left to Protestants, p. 83-4-5.

With this account that of Heylin seems in a great measure to agree."Nor could the queen's design, says he, to bring about the reformation of religion, be so closely carried, but that such lords and gentlemen as had the management of elections in their several counties, retained such men for members of the house of commons, as they conceived most likely to comply with their intentions for a reformation. Amongst which none appeared more active than Thomas Howard, duke of Norfolk, whom the queen had taken into her council; Henry Fitz-Allen, earl of Arundel, whom she continued in the office of lord steward; and sir William Cecil, whom she had restored to the place of secretary, to which he had been raised by Edward VI. besides the queen was young, unmarried, and like enough to entertain some thoughts of an husband. So that it can be no great marvel, not only, if many of the nobility, but some even of the gentry also, flattered themselves with possibilities of being the man whom she might chuse to be her partner in the regal diadem, which hopes much smoothed the way to the accomplishment of her desires, which otherwise might have proved more rugged and unpassable than it did at the present. Yet, notwithstanding all their care, there wanted not some rough and furious spirits in the house of commons, who eagerly opposed all propositions which seemed to tend unto the prejudice of the church of Rome."-History of Queen Elizabeth, fol. 107.

There were but fifteen bishops then actually in England, all the other sees being vacant by the death or flight of their possessors, of whom four

teen were deprived for refusing to take the oath of supremacy to the queen. Kitchin alone, bishop of Landaff, took it, "who," says Heylin, "having formerly submitted to every change, resolved to shew himself no changeling in not conforming to the pleasure of the higher powers.”—Ib. p. 114.

I will here subjoin the account given by the above anonymous author, of the manner of providing successors to those deprived bishops, because it is particular, and seems authentic, and the book in which it is contained is not easily met with.

"I know," says he, "they have tried many ways, and feigned an old record, to prove their ordination from catholic bishops; but it is false, as I have received from two certain witnesses, the former of them was Dr. Darbyshire, then dean of St. Paul's, and nephew to Dr. Bonner, bishop of London, who almost sixty years since lived at Meuse-pont, then an holy religious man, very aged, but perfect in sense and memory, who speaking what he knew, affirmed to myself and another with me, that like good fellows, they made themselves bishops at an inn, because they could get no true bishops to consecrate them. My other witness was a gentleman of known worth and credit, dead not many years since, whose father, a chief justice of England, visiting archbishop Heath, permitted by queen Elizabeth to live in Surry, at the parsonage house of Cobham, saw a letter sent from bishop Bonner, out of the marshalsea, by one of his chaplains to the archbishop, read whilst they sat at dinner together, wherein he merily related the manner how these new bishops (because he had dissuaded Oglethorp, bishop of Carlisle, from doing it in his diocese) ordained one another at an inn, where they met together; and whilst others laughed at this new manner of consecrating bishops, the archbishop himself gravely, and not without tears, expressed his grief to see such ragged companions, come poor out of foreign parts, appointed to succeed the old clergy in rich deaneries, prebendaries, and canons places, who had such ill luck in meeting with dishonest wives, as an ordinance was put out by the queen and parliament, that no woman should, for a wife, be commended to any minister, without her honesty withal could be sufficiently testified unto him. And many who had been clergymen before, were urged either to take wives, or lose their be nefices, as many were content to do, and follow those bishops' example.”— A Legacy to Protestants, p. 85.

Heylin himself owns, "that partly by the deprivation of these bishops, deans, prebends, &c. there was not a sufficient number of learned men to supply the cures, which, says he, filled the church with ignorant, illiterate clergy, whose learning went no farther than the liturgy, or the book of homilies. And that many were raised to great preferments, who having spent their time of exile in such foreign churches as followed the platform of Geneva, returned so disaffected to episcopal government, as not long after filled the church with sad disorders.-History of Queen Elizabeth, fol. 115.

What wonder then, if men so principled and needy, would submit to be made bishops in the manner above-mentioned, merely for the sake of the temporal emoluments and dignity, and without any real regard to the sa credness of the order?

CHAP. IV.

Sir Arthur Chichester's government.

IN the year 1605, "lord deputy Chichester, (who had been a pupil of the famous arch-puritan Cartwright, and was himself a great patron and encourager of that sect,) having ordered the Roman catholic aldermen, and some of the principal citizens of Dublin, to be called before the council, exemplified under the great seal, and published the above-mentioned act of uniformity; in regard," says my author, " there was found to be a material difference between the original record and printed copies; that none might pretend ignorance of the original record; and added thereto the king's injunction for the observance of it."

Mr. Carte3 has discovered no less ignorance than partiality in his manner of justifying the execution of this penal statute, at that juncture. "The Irish catholics," says he, " became accidentally subject to the small pecuniary penalties of it, forty years after it was made, upon their separation from the public worship of the (established) church of Ireland; and it was reasonable to imagine, that such a sudden defection should have irritated the government, and put them upon somet wholesome severities, to stop it in the beginning." Here is a cause assigned for inflicting this penalty, which never existed

1 Presbyterian Loyalty, p. 161.

3 Life of Ormond, vol. i.

2 Harris's Hist. of Dublin. This Cartwright was so staunch a non-conformist, even as to ceremonials, that in his reply to archbishop Whitgift, he makes use of these words: "Certain of the things we stand upon are such, that if every hair of our heads were a life, we ought to afford them, for the defence of them." Sir George Paul, in his life of archbishop Whitgift, tells us, "that in his prayer before his sermons," he used to say, "because they (meaning the bishops) which ought to be pillars of the church, do band themselves against Christ, and his truth, therefore, O Lord, give us grace and power, as one man, to set ourselves against them.”—p. 47.

Yet, in another place, he owns, "that the penalties of this act were raised for the private gain of ministers; and had always occasioned a clamor abroad, of a terrible persecution; and if rigorously executed (adds he) it would be a force upon the consciences of the poor ignorant Irish, as they stood informed.”—Cart. Orm. vol. i. fol. 523.

but in the historian's brain. For their separation, and sudden defection, from the public worship of the church of Ireland, necessarily supposes their former agreement and conformity to it; but this he could not suppose of the Irish in general, without a barefaced contradiction to known facts. For so stedfastly did these people adhere to their antient religion in that, and the former reign, notwithstanding the many alluring offers, and terrifying punishments made use of to withdraw them from it, that Chichester himself, who had often employed both means of seduction, was heard to exclaim, in the rage of disappointment," that he believed the very air and soil of Ireland were infected with popery." The barbarous incivility, already mentioned, which the young earl of Desmond met with from his countrymen and followers, after they were convinced of his conformity to the public worship of the church of Ireland, is a sufficient refutation of this mistake.

The king about this time, sent instructions to the state, for ministering the oath of supremacy to the catholic lawyers and justices of peace; and for putting the laws against recusants in strict execution. Accordingly," "of sixteen aldermen and citizens. of Dublin, summoned before the privy council, nine were censured in the castle chamber; and six of the aldermen were fined, each in one hundred pounds; and the other three, in fifty pounds each; and they were all committed prisoners to the castle, during the pleasure of the court. It was at the same time ordered, that none of the citizens should bear offices until they had conformed. For which reason the cities and towns were obliged to take up with very unfit persons for magistrates. "In the year 1614, Edward O'Molownie, an al5 Carte ubi supra, vol. i. fol. 21. 6 Harris ubi supra.

4 Analecta Sacra.

"It is notorious," says Abbe Geoghegan, "that notwithstanding the severity of the laws made in Ireland against the Roman catholic religion, during the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. and Elizabeth, even to that of James I. not sixty of the Irish embraced the protestant religion, though Ireland contains more than two millions of souls."-Hist. of Irel. p. 422.

And when the same deputy made a present of a fine horse to the king, being asked by his majesty, whether it was of Irish breed, and being answered in the affirmative, his majesty swore aloud, that then certainly it must be a papist, for that he believed all things produced in Ireland, even the very animals were papists.—Analect. Sacra.

derman of Dublin, was chosen to be mayor of that city, but because," says my author, " he would not go to church, nor take the oath of supremacy, he was laid aside, and Richard Foster, a young man, was permitted to take the office upon him. And when, on the accustomed day, he was presented at the exchequer bar, sir William Methold, lord chief baron, in his speech on that occasion, said among other things, "that this mayor had leapt a salmon-leap, for that he saw many grave and grey-headed men there standing about him, whose turn was to have been mayors before him; but he said the cause of their not being mayors, in plain terms was, because they would not take the oath of supremacy, which he was sorry for."7

On this occasion, "all the old English families of the pale, took the alarm, and boldly remonstrated against the severity of these proceedings. They denied the legality of the sentence by which these severities were inflicted, and urged, that by the statute of 2d of Elizabeth, the crime of recusancy had its punishment ascertained, and that any extension of the penalty was illegal and unconstitutional. Their remonstrance was presented to the council by an unusual concourse of peo ple, but the chief petitioners were confined in the castle of Dublin; and sir Patrick Barnwell, their great agent, was, by the king's command, sent in custody into England."**

7 Desid. Cur. Hib. vol. ii. p. 284-5.

8 Lel. vol. ii. p. 421-2.

• The zeal of this deputy (sir Arthur Chichester) was so intemperate and forward, that even the king and council of England found it neces sary to restrain it. In a letter of July 3d, 1606, to him, containing some complaints against his administration by sir Patrick Barnwell (then prisoner in the tower for having made such complaints), viz. the deputy's sending for those precepts under the great seal, to compel men to come to church, the denying private men to see their indictments, and of raising new and excessive fecs, they tell him " that they thought it good, before they fall to any usual order with him (sir Patrick Barnwell), to be somewhat cleared in the first important matter, to the intent that when they knew his ground, they might the better pronounce and publish the offence of any that had, or should presume to censure his proceedings; and this they did the rather, because they pre-supposed he would not have taken that course, but that he found there some particular authority by law or precedent, which as yet was unknown to them in England. They add, that to the other exceptions, they send him what sir Patrick Barnwell sayeth, and what he offereth to prove; to which they would have the