taste inclined to the roman-catholic, and her interest to the protestant; that Leicester, Cecil and Walsingham, her principal ministers, were influenced, in their opposition to the catholic religion, both by inclination and interest; that they had a strong bias towards the puritan faith and discipline; and that they possessed, in a great degree, a degree, perhaps, much greater than their sovereign, the spirit of intolerance, which tarnished the character of the first reformers?

XV. 2.

Summary of the Laws passed in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth against Roman-catholics.

I SHALL first mention, as succinctly as possible, the principal laws, which were passed against the romancatholics during the reign of queen Elizabeth; then show, in what manner they were executed.

1. By an act passed in the first year of her reign, and usually called the " Act of Supremacy," archbishops, bishops, and other ecclesiastical officers and ministers, and generally all persons receiving the queen's fee, were required to take the oath of supremacy prescribed by it: such as refused were incapacitated from holding any office; and all, who denied the queen's supremacy, were, for the first offence, punishable by forfeiture of goods and chattels; for the second, subjected to the penalties of a premunire; and, for the third, rendered guilty of high treason.

It is proper to observe, in this place, that the oath of supremacy, prescribed by this act, was essentially different from the oath of supremacy in present use. By the latter oath, the person swears negatively, that no foreign prince or potentate hath any authority within this realm; by the former, he swore affirmatively, that the queen was head of the church. The present oath is taken without scruple by the protestant dissenters; and it was to favour them, that the negative form was adopted in the reign of William III: the affirmative form was as inconsistent with the principles of the protestant dissenters, as with the principles of the roman-catholics.

I beg leave to call your attention to this observation, when you prepare a new edition of your work.

2. By another act, passed in the first year of queen Elizabeth,-then usually called "the Act of "Uniformity,"-all ministers of the church were enjoined to use the Book of Common Prayer, under certain penalties; others were inflicted on those who spoke in derogation of it, or prevented its use: Those, who absented themselves from church, were subjected to a forfeiture of one shilling to the poor for every Sunday upon which they should so absent themselves; and of twenty pounds to the king, if they continued such absence for a month together; and, if they kept in their house an inmate guilty of such absence, they were to forfeit ten pounds for every such month: Every fourth Sunday of absence was held to complete the month; and thus, in

relation to these penalties, thirteen months were supposed to occur in every year.

3. By an act passed in the fifth year of the queen, persons maintaining the authority of the pope, were subjected to the penalties of a premunire; and ecclesiastical persons, fellows of colleges in the university, and officers of courts of justice, were compellable to take the oath of supremacy, under the same penalty of premunire for the first offence, and the penalties of high treason for the second and persons, who had said or heard mass, might have the oath tendered to them; and their refusal of it was punishable by the same penalties.

4. The act of the thirteenth of her majesty enacted, that persons who affirmed that queen Elizabeth was not a lawful sovereign; or that any other had a preferable title; or that she was an heretic, schismatic, or infidel; or that the right to the crown and the succession could not be determined by law; and persons bringing or receiving bulls, briefs, or absolutions, from the pope,-were to be deemed guilty of high treason; their aiders or abettors were made guilty of a premunire; persons concealing them were punishable for misprision of treason; and priests bringing Agnus Deis, or similar articles, blessed by the pope, were subjected to premunire.

The pecuniary mulcts for recusancy were rigidly required. The money thus raised from the catholics amounted to a large sum; it was chiefly levied on the poor, the rich purchasing, from Elizabeth, dispensations from attendance at the protestant

service. Mr. Andrews computes the annual amount of the money, thus received by Elizabeth for dispensations, at twenty thousand pounds.

5. The act of the twenty-third of queen Elizabeth subjected all persons, pretending to have power to withdraw her majesty's subjects from their allegiance, or from the established religion, or moving them to promise obedience to the see of Rome, or any other potentate, to the punishment of high treason: Persons so withdrawn, their aiders and abettors, and persons knowing of such practices and not disclosing them, were rendered guilty of misprision of treason. Every priest saying mass, was to forfeit two hundred marks; every person hearing it, was to forfeit one hundred; and each was to be imprisoned for a year, and till he had paid the fine. This statute also aggravated the penalties of recusancy, and contained other severe inflictions.

6. The still severer act of the twenty-seventh year of her majesty's reign, enacted, 1. that all jesuits, seminary and other priests, within the realm, should depart out of it, under pain of being judged traitors, and suffering death, as in the case of treason; and jesuits, seminary and other priests, coming into the realm, were subjected to the same penalties: 2. Persons receiving or maintaining them, were to be adjudged felons, without benefit of clergy: 3. Persons sending money to the seminaries, or to any of their inmates, were subjected to the penalties of a premunire: 4. And persons knowing of any such priest, and not discovering him within

* Continuation of Henry's Hist. vol. 2, p. 35.

twelve days, were to be fined and imprisoned at the king's pleasure.-It should be observed, that the punishment of premunire, mentioned in this and the other statutes, to which I have referred, was, that, from the time of conviction, the convict should be out of the protection of the king, and his lands and goods forfeited to him; and that his body should remain at the king's pleasure.

7. To these inflictions we must add, the court of high commission, established by queen Elizabeth, under the provisions of an act passed in the first year of her reign. Agreeing in little else, Hume * and Neale perfectly accord in their accounts of the unconstitutional nature and arbitrary rules of this tribunal, and of the enormities of its proceedings. "It was," says the former of these writers,

a real inquisition, attended with all the iniquities "as well as cruelties inseparable from that tribu"nal." It was aimed against all dissenters from the established religion; but the roman-catholics were the principal sufferers under it. Permit me to express some surprise, that I do not find, in the present chapter of your work, a single word of bitter condemnation of the institution of this unconstitutional, cruel, and iniquitous tribunal.

t

You say, that "the proceedings of Elizabeth's government, both towards the papists and puritans, were grounded upon these principles: that "conscience is not to be restrained, but won by "force of truth, with the aid of time, and use of all * Hist. of England, c. 12.

+ History of the Puritans, vol. 1, p. 10.