followed, then a benediction, and then the Holy Communion. Kettlewell is described as a man of a peaceable. disposition; but it is clear from his Memoirs that the ardour of his affections led him to speak and act with a vehemence not agreeable to those who differed from him, and "the true effigies" of his face prefixed to the book, confirms the inference which in this respect must be drawn from the narrative. He was unquestionably a man of enthusiasm, and his enthusiasm had a capacity for becoming fanatical.

The Nonjurors were not so numerous as Kettlewell and others wished. Only six joined him in his own county. In the diocese of Lichfield and Coventry there might be twenty. In one archdeaconry in the diocese of Norwich there might be half that number, owing to the influence of a nonjuring Bishop. In one College at Cambridge there was a considerable majority of Nonjurors, attributable to the party spirit they managed to maintain. Altogether, about 400 Clergymen quitted the Establishment. When we remember how prevalent had been the doctrines of the Divine right of Kings, and of the absolute submission of subjects; when, besides this, we recollect the nature of the education given at Oxford, where the decree against the opposite doctrines had been daily read, and constantly hung up in the Colleges, we wonder that the Nonjurors were not more

numerous.

Dignitaries were not so submissive as their inferior brethren. In defiance of the Act of Parliament, nonjuring Bishops retained their palaces; and so lenient was the Government, that, at the eleventh hour, forms of proviso were proposed, under which Nonjurors might

Life of Kettlewell, 134.

continue to enjoy their benefices. The suspicion with which all such overtures of kindness were regarded appears in a letter to Sancroft written by Lloyd, the Coryphæus of the obstinates:

"Mr. Inch called upon me last Monday, and showed me a protest contrived by him, and some of our good friends (as he styled them), in order to fend off our deprivation. I thanked him and our good friends for their kind designs, but at the same time I could not well resolve. what it might import, Timeo Danaos et dona, and I dread lurking and consequential snares. It is therefore necessary to consider well of this protest before any determination about it.

"I must confess to your Grace, that I do not think it fit for us to appear in it, or to push it on, as it took its rise from our friends' kindness; for it is most proper for them to manage it.

"Again, it may be very improper to stir the point, till we see in what temper the gentlemen are that meet at St. Stephen's Chapel. The giving of a recognizance for the good abeaving, or quiet peaceable living, is a point that deserves to be well weighed, especially since the interpretation of it depends much on the mercy of the gentlemen that sit in Westminster Hall. On the other hand, the circumstances of our poor noncomplying brethren in our respective dioceses, must be considered, for (if I mistake not) the benefit of the protest concerns them more than us.

"My Lord, upon the whole matter, I designed this day to have waited upon your Grace and my Lord of Ely, but, in good truth, I am not able to stir abroad. I took physic last Monday, and I have been feverish ever since; but as soon as it shall please God to enable me, I shall

wait upon your Grace and my Lord of Ely. In the meantime, with the tender of my humble duty and service,

"I remain,

"Your Grace's most obedient servant

to command, "WILLIAM NORWICH."1

This secession from the Church on a question touching the Crown could not but be a trouble to William; at the same time he had other troubles. The intrigues and trials between Whigs and Tories were the plague of his reign. He wished he were a thousand miles away, and that he had never become King of England. He thought he could not trust the Tories--he resolved he would not trust the Whigs; and once he was on the point of going back to Holland, leaving the Government here in the hands of the Queen. He and his Ministers had warm debates, and it is said that amongst them tears were shed. At last William made up his mind to go to Ireland, and there put an end to the war.2

He assembled a new Parliament on the 2nd of April. Terrific excitement prevailed at the elections. The Whigs denounced the Tories as Jacobites, and the Jacobites as Papists. The Tories denounced the Whigs as Republicans, Fanatics, Latitudinarians, and Atheists. The Tories had the best of it, and returned a majority. Four Tories were declared to be at the head of the poll for the City of London. Prominent and noisy Whigs were excluded from their old seats; liberal men, disgusted at the excesses of their own party, voted on the other side; even Sir Isaac Newton declined a contest at Cambridge, and recorded his name in favour of Sir Robert Sawyer, who had been expelled from the Whig Convention. Yet in spite of defeats, the Whigs took heart and concocted

119th February, 1689-90. Tanner MSS., xxvii. 91;92.

2 Burnet, ii. 39.

plans, hoping to frustrate the opposite policy. This subject, however, it is not necessary to pursue, neither need we describe the changes which took place in the Ministry. Before the Revolution, the conduct of the Ministry affected most materially the affairs of the Church and the condition of Dissenters; after the passing of the Allegiance Act, the Church was little affected by the policy of the Government, except as connected with Convocation; still less did that policy touch the Dissenters after the passing of the Toleration Act.

In anticipation of the Irish campaign, a national fast was fixed for the 12th of March, when prayers were offered for the personal safety of William. Immediately afterwards, a form of prayer of a very different description was printed and circulated. It referred to England as in a state of religious apostacy, and it sought the restoration of James without mentioning him by name. He was referred to as the stone which the builders rejected, and which God would make the head of the corner. There could be no mistake as to what was meant by the petitions, "Give the King the necks of his enemies;" "Raise him up friends abroad;""Do some mighty thing for him, which we, in particular, know not how to pray for."1

This inflammatory performance under a devout disguise aroused indignation, and numbers of the adherents. of William ascribed its composition to the Nonjurors. The excitement against the Bishops of that party was increased by a publication, in which they were styled “ the Reverend Club of Lambeth," "the Holy Jacobite Club,"

wretches, great contrivers, and managers of Cabals," who loved "to trample on the Dissenters, now happily out of their clutches." The new prayers are called

1 State Tracts, ii. 95.

the Bishops'" Great Guns ;" and Ken is alluded to as a fellow who had eaten King William's bread. The most shameful passage is one in which, under a covert allusion. to the massacre of the De Witts in Amsterdam, a violent assault upon the individuals abused is obviously suggested.1

The Bishops published a vindication of themselves, denying that they had any share in the recent form of prayer, or that they had any knowledge as to who were the writers. In reference to the attack upon them they said, "Who the author of the libel was they did not know; but whoever he might be, they desired, as the Lord had taught, to return him good for evil, and recommended. him to the Divine mercy." They had all, they went on to declare, actually or virtually, hazarded whatever they possessed in opposing Popery and arbitrary power; and were still ready to sacrifice their very lives in the same noble cause. In conclusion, they lamented the misfortune that they were unable to publish full and particular replies to the many libels which were industriously circulated by enemies, to the injury of their reputation. The authorship of the prayers being denied by the Bishops, it was attributed to Hickes, or to Sherlock, or to Kettlewell; on their behalf a protest was entered against such a suspicion in the Life of the last of these persons; but some sympathy with the New Liturgy itself is betrayed by the writer, when, without any condemnatory or qualifying remark, he calls it "as solemn and expressive as any could well be;" nor does he hint at its being the work of Roman Catholics-an origin which, by some writers, has been suggested without sufficient reason.2

1

1 A Modest Enquiry, printed in State Tracts, vol. ii.

See Life of Ken, by a Layman, 370-376. Compare Life of Kettlewell, 255-263.