which our predecessors have so long and peace

ably enjoyed."

The rejection of this bill was the first check the commons met with in this parliament: and they were not a little disconcerted at it. The resolute conduct of the bishops at this time in defending their rights and privileges, so inflamed the enemies of the church, that they came to a conclusion that there was no hope of obtaining their end as long as a root and branch of episcopacy remained. Some of their leading members therefore brought in a bill for "the utter extirpation of all bishops, deans, chapters, archdeacons, prebendaries, chaunters, with all chancellors, officials, and officers belonging to them; and for the disposing of their lands, manors, &c. as the parliament should appoint." This extraordinary bill was drawn up by Mr. St. John, and was delivered to the speaker by Sir Edward Dering from the gallery, with a short speech, in which he quoted two verses from Ovid, the application of which, it is said, was his greatest motive:

"Cuncta prius tentanda: sed immedicabile vulnus
Ense recidendum, ne pars sincera trahatur.”

Sir Edward observed, that the moderation and

* Bishop Hall's Works, vol. x, pp. 70–72.
+ Nalson's Collections, vol. ii, pp. 248-300,

candour of the house were great in applying so gentle a remedy by the late bill; as pruning and taking off a few unnecessary branches from the bishops was likely to make the tree prosper the better: but since this soft method proved ineffectual by reason of their (the bishops') incorrigi ble obstinacy, it was now necessary to put the axe to the root of the tree.” I never was for ruin," said he, "as long as there was any hopes of reforming; and I now profess that if these hopes revive and prosper, I will divide my sense upon this bill, and yield my shoulders to to underprop the primitive, lawful, and just episcopacy."

66

66

There was a great opposition to the reading of this bill, because it was not introduced in a parliamentary way, viz. without first asking leave; and because its tendency was to overthrow and disannul so many acts, and to change the constitution in church and state. But, as there were many very desirous of hearing it merely out of curiosity, and others from worse motives, it was read once, and then adjourned for nearly two months.

A little before the king went into Scotland in the beginning of Aug. 1641, it was carried by a majority of thirty-one voices to read it a second time, and deliver it to a committee of the whole house, of which Mr. Hyde, afterwards Lord

Clarendon, was chairman, who so dexterously managed the matter, that in about twenty days the bill was dropt, and was not resumed till the civil war commenced.*

When it was debated in the house of commons to abolish deans and chapters, and to apply their revenues to better purposes, the cathedral clergy exerted themselves to the utmost to ward off the impending danger: they drew up a petition to both houses of parliament; and for this end, one divine was deputed from each cathedral to solicit their friends on behalf of their respective foundations. They intended to retain council to plead for them, but being informed that the parliament would not allow them that benefit, but that they must appear and plead their own cause. Upon this, Dr. John Hacket, prebendary of St. Paul's and archdeacon of Bedford, was selected as their advocate, who, being admitted to the bar of the house, May 12, 1641, "Spoke with so much strength of reason and argument, with so much learning and courage, that it was not without its effect on the house, and seemed to put the business to a stand for the present. It was then thought by some, that had the question been then

* Walker's Sufferings Eccles. Hist. of Eng. Puritans, vol. ii, p. 426. 881. Ed. 1814.

of the Clergy, part i, p. 11. Warner's vol. ii, p. 540. Neal's Hist. of the

Harris's Life of Charles I. pp. 379

put, it would have been carried in favour of the cathedrals by a great majority.* Petitions were also presented by the two universities; "but,' says Heylin, "neither of them could prevail so far as take off the edge of the axe, which had been thus laid at the root of the tree, though it present. For they, who

did blunt it at the managed the design, finding that the cathedral churches were too strongly cemented to be demolished in an instant, considered that the farthest way about, did many times prove the nearest way to the journey's end." A bill was therefore prepared, by which it was to be enacted that the bishops should have no votes in parliament, &c. of which we shall have occasion to speak more at large hereafter.

After a long debate upon the bill for abolishing deans and chapters, the commons passed the following resolutions or votes, which did not pass into a law, as the house of lords would not concur in an act so detrimental to the interest of the church:-"That all deans and chapters, archdeacons, prebendaries, chanters, canons, and

See Dr. Hacket's incomparable speech in his Life by Dr. Plume, prefixed to his Sermons in fol. and in Nalson's Collection, vol. ii, p. 240. See also Fuller's Church Hist. cent. 17, b. xi, pp. 176, 177. Walker's Sufferings of the Clergy, part i, p. 9. Heylin's Life of Laud, p. 475.

+ Heylin's Life of Laud, p. 476.

their officers, shall be utterly abolished out of the church, and the lands taken from them, put in the hands of trustees, in order to support a fit number of ministers for the service of the church, and the reparation of the cathedrals."

As long as the bishops were in the house of lords, they stood like a strong bulwark or wall against every attempt of the commons to subvert the church; but when they were forced out of the house, the commons carried all before them, and accomplished all their iniquitous designs against the church.

In the month of March, 1640--1, the lords ordered that a committee of ten earls,ten bishops, and ten barons should be nominated to settle the affairs of the church: this was denominated the Committee of Accommodation. At their first meeting they appointed a sub-committee of bishops and divines of different persuasions, to consider such innovations in religion as were proper to be taken away. Dr. Williams, bishop of Lincoln, was chairman to both, and was ordered to summon the committee, which he did by the following circular:

"I am commanded by the lords of the committee for innovation in matters of eligion, to let you know, that their said lordships have assigned and appointed you to attend them, as assistants in that committee; and to let you know in