The Ecciesiastical courts.

only records the deprivation of one clergyman, and that for open and unblushing drunkenness. The books of the Official's Court of the Archdeaconry of Colchester tell much the same tale. The time of the court was mainly occupied with those cases of immorality which would have been even more severely visited by the Puritan clergy than by the Laudian courts. Amongst the charges of another description were complaints against persons who behaved indecently in church, who refused to bow at the name of Jesus, who worked in the fields on saints' days, and even on one occasion on the day of Gunpowder Plot. Women were reprimanded for chattering or sewing in church, and more frequently for refusing to appear veiled when returning thanks after childbirth: a practice on which Laud insisted with unusual vehemence, and to which they objected strongly, apparently from the imaginary resemblance of the required veil to the linen sheet worn in penance by the unchaste. Many persons, too, were summoned for absenting themselves from church; but their excuses and promises of amendment were readily admitted. The fines imposed were small, and penalties infrequent; though they undoubtedly caused considerable irritation whenever they were inflicted.2

The dissatisfaction called forth amongst the Puritan clergy was suppressed rather than overcome. Hundreds unwillingly administered the Communion at the rails. In one part of England the ill-feeling of the clergy was peculiarly strong Wren had lately been removed from Norwich to Ely, and the Puritan diocese of Norwich was handed over to of Norwich. Montague, the chief mover in the scheme for the reconciliation of the Churches of Rome and England. Yet

The diocese

Sentence on Rawson, Feb. 6. High Commission Book, S. P. Dom. ccccxxxiv. fol. 92.

2 The Act Books are kept in a room over the porch of the parish church at Chelmsford, and are in the charge of the registrar. I have to thank the Rev. Sir J. Hawkins, Bart., and F. T. Veley, Esq., for their kind assistance in helping me to see these books at a time when the illness of the late registrar made it difficult for me to procure access to them in the ordinary way. Extracts from the books are given by Archdeacon Hales, in his Series of Precedents and Proceedings.

1639

LAUD AND THE SECTS.

81

even Montague was deceived by the external signs of quiet, "This diocese,” wrote Laud in his report, "my lord the Bishop assures me is as quiet, uniform, and conformable as any in the kingdom, if not more; and doth avow it that all which stood out in Suffolk as well as Norfolk at his coming to that see, are come over, and have now legally subscribed and professed all conformity, and, for aught he can learn, observe it accordingly. Yet his lordship confesses that some of the vulgar sort in Suffolk are not conformable enough, especially in coming up to receive at the steps of the chancel where the rails are set; but he hopes by fair means he shall be able to work upon them in time."

Indictment

Some, indeed, whether of the vulgar sort or not does not appear, attempted a counter-stroke. They indicted at the assizes a minister who had declined to administer of a minister. the Communion to them in their seats. The judges, as might have been expected, refused to interfere in a matter purely ecclesiastical, but the attempt was significant of the spreading feeling that the institutions of the Church ought to te brought into closer harmony with the religion of the laity.

August. Spread of

the sects.

The sullen ill-feeling of the gentry and middle class gave encouragement to the wilder and more vehement Puritanism of those whom Laud contemptuously styled the vulgar sort. The excitement amongst these men was evidently rising. The Archbishop was forced to confess that even in his own diocese the Church courts were unable to keep down the Separatists and the Anabaptists, and that, if they were to be got rid of, it would be necessary to force them to abjure the realm.' In London one of these men died in prison. His corpse was followed by two hundred members of his own sect. To questioners who inquired the name of the deceased, they answered fiercely, that he was 'one of the Bishop's prisoners.' When they reached the burial-ground 'they, like so many Bedlams, cast the corpse in, and, with their feet instead of spades, cast and thrust in the mould till the grave was almost full; then they paid the grave-maker for his pains, who

told them that he must fetch a minister; but they said he might spare his labour.'1

Trendall's

case.

The feeling engendered by such manifestations in the minds. of the supporters of established order was one of angry vexa tion at the presence of an unpalatable evil against which it was impossible to guard. Even the Privy Council was at one moment carried away so far as to meditate an act of abnormal cruelty. In July information was brought to Laud that a certain stonemason of Dover, named John Trendall, had refused to take the Oath of Supremacy, and had expounded the Scriptures in his own house. Further, he had denied that the Lord's Prayer ought to be used, had expressed disapproval of the Creed, and had kept away from church on the ground that it was against his conscience to worship under the authority of the bishops. Laud referred the matter to the Council, and, after consultation with the Attorney and SolicitorGeneral, the Council actually applied to Archbishop Neile, who had been Bishop of Lichfield at the time sulted. when Wightman was burnt in his diocese in 1612, to certify the nature of the proceedings in that case.2

Aug. 3. Neile con

Precedents

Neile was not content to give a simple answer to the ques tion put to him. He not only gave a full narrative of the cir cumstances attending the execution of the two heretics, for burning but he declared his conviction that the punishment of the two men 'did a great deal of good in this Church.' "I fear me," added the Archbishop, "the present times do require like exemplary punishment." 3

heretics.

By the time that Neile's report arrived, the Council had returned to a better frame of mind. Trendall was ordered to take the Oath of Supremacy, and this time he did not refuse. Subsequently he was sent to give an account of himself before the High Commission. At first he refused to acknow

Memorandum to Dr. Alsop, Aug. 31, S. P. Dom. ccccxxvii. 107. The Mayor and Jurats of Dover to Laud, July 27. Examination of Trendall, July 27, S. P. Dom. ccccxxxii. 27 i. 27 I. i. Council Register, July 31, Aug. 2.

Neile to Laud, Aug. 23. ccccxxvii. 78, ccccxxxii. 27.

Becher to Mottershed, Nov. 9, S. F. Dom. See Vol. II. p. 130.

1539

Subsequent

TRENDALL'S CASE.

83

ledge the jurisdiction of the court; but, as its records are silent on his subsequent fate, it is probable that he history of gave way and was released. At all events, there Trendall. was no longer any thought of sending him to the stake, and there is reason to believe that he became a Puritan minister under the Long Parliament, and lived on into the reign of Charles II.2

Little did Charles imagine that such men as Trendall would be a power in England before many years were over. If he felt any apprehension of the coming Parliament, it was of a different kind. Whatever that apprehension may have been, he looked with confidence to Wentworth to overcome opposition in England as he had formerly overcome opposition in Ireland. At last he was prepared to confer upon his faithful Minister that token of his confidence which he had twice refused before. On January 12 Wentworth to be Earl of received the Earldom of Strafford, and a week later he exchanged the title of Lord-Deputy of Ireland for the higher one of Lord-Lieutenant, which had last been borne by Devonshire, when he lived in England and governed Ireland by a deputy.

1640 Jan. 12. Wentworth

Strafford.

1 Council Register, Aug. 18. Day to Coke, Aug. 25, S. P. Dom. ccccxxvii. 80. The extracts from the High Commission Book are in Mr. Hamilton's Preface.

2 A petition from a John Trendall to Charles II., asking not to be turned out of his cure, has recently been discovered by Mrs. Everett Green.

84

1640. Jan. 10.

An army to be raised.

Appoint

CHAPTER XCI.

THE SHORT PARLIAMENT.

BEFORE the new earl left England arrangements were made for levying the army which was to march against Scotland in the summer. According to the scheme adopted by the Council of War, it was to consist of 23,000 men.' This time there was to be no attempt to save a few thousand pounds by calling upon the peers to serve at their own expense. Neither Arundel nor Essex nor Holland was to receive a command. The Lord-General was to ment of com- be the Earl of Northumberland, in whom Strafford manders. placed his confidence. Another of Strafford's friends, Lord Conway, the son of the secretary of Charles's earlier days, was to command the Horse. Strafford himself was to serve as Lieutenant-General under Northumberland, and to take the field with a force of 1,000 men, which was to follow him from Ireland. Sir John Conyers, a military man of reputation in the Dutch service, was to take the command of the garrison at Berwick. With such appointments there was likely to be less personal rivalry between the superior officers than in the preceding year.

Jan. 14. Death of Coventry.

Civil offices which fell vacant about this time were less wisely filled. On January 14 the death of Lord Keeper Coventry deprived Charles of the services of the most prudent amongst his counsellors. As a lawyer of the old school, Coventry had been on the side of the prerogative against the new ideas of Parliamentary supremacy, but 'Resolutions at the Council of War, Jan. 10, S. P. Dom. ccccxli. 83. Cave to Roe, Jan. 10; Northumberland to Conyers, Jan. 12, S. P. Dom. ccccxli. 92, 110 i.