the penal laws which had been enacted against all nonconformists or recusants soever; Protestant dissenters were permitted the public exercise of their form of religion; and Romanists the exercise of theirs in their private houses. But the parliament saw that the king's design, though in appearance liberal, was to protect his brother. Remonstrances were made; and the king was obliged to withdraw the declaration. A law was forthwith passed, which imposed a test upon all who should enjoy any public office. They were to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, to receive the Holy Eucharist at the hands of a minister of the Church of England, and to abjure the doctrine of transubstantiation.

In 1679 the Long Parliament, as it was called, because it had sat by prorogations ever since the Restoration, was dissolved. A new one was summoned forthwith. It met under great excitement. The fear of popery was strong in the minds both of the people and of their representatives. Of this the immediate causes were as follows.

It had been alleged that just before the dissolution of the late parliament, a popish plot, on a very extended scale, had been discovered. The informer was one Dr. Titus Oates, who had been in turns an anabaptist preacher, a clergyman of the Church of England, and a papist. Through all his changes he had borne a most corrupt character, and was, consequently, unworthy of credit. But, such was the temper of the time, his testimony, though to the highest degree suspicious, brought many innocent persons to the scaffold. New perplexity was created by information of another plot, called the Mealtub Plot, from the reported discovery of some treasonable papers in a barrel of flour. Under the panic occasioned by these real or pretended conspiracies, a bill of exclusion3 was brought forward by Lord Shaftesbury (who had turned against the Court) and Lord Russell. It was carried in the House of Commons, but rejected in the House of Lords by a considerable majority, much to the chagrin of its promoters, especially of Lord Russell. That nobleman

2 This parliament passed a Bill to render the operation of the Habeas Corpus Act more easy and effectual.

3 Its object was to exclude the Duke of York, as being a papist, from the succession to the throne.

himself was soon afterwards implicated in a conspiracy which was formed by some of the republican faction, who began to despair of the liberties of England. This party contained persons of various ranks and opinions; and some of the more desperate had planned to shoot the king, from a building called the Rye-house, near Newmarket; and the plot is therefore known as the Rye-house Plot. It does not appear that Lord Russell was privy to this part of the scheme; and the evidence against him was very questionable. His wife, a lady of distinguished excellence, acted as his secretary on the trial; the result of which was that he was beheaded in Lincoln's-Inn Fields. He was a man of sincerity and virtuous private life, and met his end with Christian resignation and cheerfulness. Algernon Sidney, a decided republican, who was implicated in the same conspiracy, was executed on Tower-hill, a few months after the death of Lord Russell (1683).

Soon after the king's return, episcopacy' had been restored in Scotland; and throughout the greater part of this reign it was upheld by a persecution of the Presbyterians which was carried on with the most revolting cruelty. An insurrection took place, but was crushed with great severity by Graham of Claverhouse, who became Lord Dundee. It was at length put down by the Duke of Monmouth, an illegitimate son of the king; who would have dealt more gently with the insurgents, had he not been controlled by the influence of Graham and the Duke of Lauderdale. On the other hand, Archbishop Sharpe was murdered in cold blood by a party of the class of fanatics called Cameronians; and the whole history of these troubles exhibits a picture of the worst parts of human nature; relieved only by the faith and courage with which many of the persecuted Presbyterians submitted to torture and death.

The king had probably injured his constitution by early excesses, and had a fit of apoplexy in the 55th year of his age. He died Feb. 6, 1685, and was succeeded by his brother James.

In this reign the clergy first ceased to tax themselves in their own convocation; an arrangement was made between Sheldon, archbishop of Canterbury, and the Lord Chan

4 See p. 110, note.

cellor Hyde, by which it was settled, that the clergy should be included in the money bills passed in parliament. From this period the convocation gradually lost its civil importance as a part of the constitution.

It may be mentioned also, that the appellations of Whig and Tory began to distinguish the two great political parties in the country in this reign. The former is said to have been a nickname of the ultra-Protestant fanatics in the west of Scotland, and the latter to have been a familiar designation of certain Popish outlaws in Ireland. Whig was used, at this time, to designate those who were opposed to a Roman Catholic prince. Tory, those who had no objection to see such a person on the throne.

But we shall see that

these terms expanded in signification soon afterwards.

CHAPTER XXXIV.

JAMES II.

Born at St. James's Palace.

Buried in the Nunnery of the Benedictines, at Paris. Reigned 4 years. From A.D. 1685 to A.D. 1689.

Archbishop of Canterbury.

William Sancroft, A.D. 1677-1691.

Ar the council which assembled on the death of Charles, the new king declared his purpose of maintaining the Church and constitution of the country as established by law. His conduct soon made his people mistrust the sincerity of this declaration. He went publicly to Divine service celebrated according to the Romish ritual, relaxed the enforcement of laws against Romanists, and sent the Earl of Castlemain as his ambassador to Rome. His measures for the reconciliation of his kingdom to that see appeared so imprudent to the pope, that the earl was coldly received; and though a nuncio was sent to England, he did not openly assume that character at first. Monks in the habit of their order now appeared at court, as well as in all parts of London; and the alarm which was excited by these signs of the king's intention was greatly increased, when he claimed the power of dispensing by his own act with the execution of all laws.

The opponents of James in the late reign had on several occasions put forward the Duke of Monmouth as his rival,

though Charles invariably declared that he was never married to that nobleman's mother. The discontent, however, which was felt at James's evident design to introduce popery into his kingdom, encouraged Monmouth to raise his standard against his uncle. He was assisted in his enterprise by the Earl of Argyle, who had long been in exile; but the scheme was ill prepared, and Argyle, who landed in Scotland, was taken and executed in Edinburgh. Monmouth collected some troops, but they dispersed at the approach of the royal army; and the duke was himself taken in the fields, with nothing but some peas in his pockets, the only sustenance which he had had for some days. He was beheaded on Tower-hill, to the great regret of the people, with whom he was generally a favourite.

The king was relentless, not only in the case of his nephew, but also in wreaking his vengeance on all who had assisted his rebellion. Judge Jeffries (who was soon afterwards made lord chancellor) was sent into the west, and behaved with the most savage insolence and cruelty in the trials over which he presided. In his circuit, which James always spoke of as Jeffries' campaign," more than 250 prisoners were executed with dreadful severity, and vast numbers sent as slaves to the plantations.

Elated by his success in putting down Monmouth's rebellion, the king was less careful to conceal the purpose which he had in view. The army was filled with papists, and persons of the same persuasion were promoted to the highest offices in the state. The Church was next attacked in the universities, and on the death of the president of Magdalene College (Oxford), the fellows were commanded to elect one Anthony Farmer, a man of dissolute character, who had become a proselyte to the Church of Rome. college disregarded this mandate, and elected Mr. Hough as their president. For this disobedience, twenty-five of the fellows, with Hough himself, who afterwards became Bishop of Worcester, were expelled from the university. The king issued an order in council, that a declaration which he had put forth in favour of liberty of conscience, should be read in all churches. Seven of the bishops refused to

5

The

5 Sancroft, archbishop of Canterbury; Lloyd, bishop of St. Asaph; Turner, bishop of Ely; Lake, bishop of Chichester; Ken, bishop of

obey this proclamation, and presented a petition to the king. James sent them to the Tower, and caused them to be prosecuted for sedition. As they were conducted down the river, the banks were lined with people, who fell on their knees, and implored the blessing of their spiritual fathers, who thus suffered for the truth. "The demeanour of the seven prelates strengthened the interest which their situation excited. On the evening of the Black Friday, as it was called, on which they were committed, they reached their prison just at the hour of Divine service. They instantly hastened to the chapel. It chanced that in the Second Lesson were these words: In all things approv. ing ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments.' All zealous churchmen were delighted by this coincidence, and remembered how much comfort a similar coincidence had given, near forty years before, to Charles the First, at the time of his death"." Notwithstanding the efforts of the court, the bishops were acquitted on their trial; and the acclamations of the people at their escape reached even to the camp at Hounslow, where the king was dining in the tent of Lord Feversham. Inquiring the cause of the shouts which he heard, he was told that they were nothing but the acclamations of the people at the acquittal of the bishops. "Call you that nothing?" said the king; "but so much the worse for them."

The birth of a Prince of Wales (June 10, 1688) seems to have convinced the principal people in the country, that it was now necessary to act with energy, if the Church and liberties of England were to be preserved. An invitation was sent to William Prince of Orange, (the Stadtholder, and chief officer of the government of the Dutch provinces,) who was the son-in-law of James, as well as the grandson of Charles I., to request his aid in preserving the religion and laws of the land from the danger which threatened them. Every thing was prepared for the arrival of the prince, before James was aware of the estrangement of his people. On learning it, he endeavoured to regain their affections by

Bath and Wells; White, bishop of Peterborough ; Trelawney, bishop of Bristol.

6 Macaulay, Hist. of England, vol. ii. p. 367.