drops of the thunder cloud, which was rolling on surcharged with its electric bolts, in the Act of Uniformity. The act was worthy of the day of its birth. Bartholomew day, or at any rate the eve of it, had already been rendered by the Papists dark and infamous in the calendar of bigotry and intolerance. It was a little less than a century before that, on the memorable evening of the 24th of August, 1572, orders were issued for extending the massacres of the Huguenots which had commenced in Paris, and which did not stop till, in the space of two months, thirty thousand Protestants had been butchered in cold blood, if indeed that expression appropriately describes the mind of those who were influenced by passions set on fire of hell. On the 24th of August, 1662, was passed by the British Parliament an act which required perfect conformity in practice, and in opinion, to the Book of Common Prayer, and to all the rites and ceremonies of the Church of England, under pain of expulsion from their livings of all clergymen who would not swear their unfeigned assent and consent to all things contained in this unbending rule of faith and practice. In many parts of the kingdom the ministers could not procure the book before the time within which the law required them to swear to it, or resign their livings; so that in their farewell sermons they had to tell their flocks that they were obliged to leave them for not swearing to a book which they had not been able to see.

Upon the passing of this act more than two thousand of the best and holiest ministers of the national church threw up their livings, and cast themselves upon the providence of God, for the support of themselves and families, rather than violate their consciences by swearing their assent and consent to all that was contained

in a directory which they did not approve. Of the suf ferings of nonconformists in consequence of this act, only an imperfect statement can be made. The exact record is on high. Mr. Jeremy White is said to have collected a list of sixty thousand persons who had suf fered for dissent between the Restoration and the Revolution, of whom five thousand died in prison. Lord Dorset was assured by Mr. White that King James offered a thousand guineas for the manuscript, but that in tenderness to the reputation of the Church of Eng land, he had determined to conceal the black record. In the preface to the Plea for the Nonconformists, by Mr. Delaune, that gentleman is said to have been one of eight thousand who, in the reign of Charles II. had, for dissenting from the Church of England, perished in prison. It is added that, within three years, property was wrung from them to the amount of two millions sterling. But who could calculate the total loss of lives and of substance which the dissenters sustained from the first rise of the Puritans to the triumph of toleration under King William? It it justly questioned whether the annals of the Christian Church, since the Reformation, contains any instance of persecution equally The multitudes who fled from their oppressors peopled a considerable part of the new world, while the English refugees, who formed churches in all the principal towns of Holland, added to the strength and industry of that rising state. Yet from these accumulated injuries, the dissenters were at the revolution little diminished in strength, numbers, or spirit, and capable of turning either scale, into which they might choose to turn their weight.*

severe.

But to return to the Act of Uniformity, and its con* Bogue and Bennet, vol. I. p. 8.

sequences. "The world," says Bishop Kennet, "has reason to admire not only the wisdom, but even the moderation of the act, as being effectually made for ministerial conformity alone and leaving the people unable to complain of any imposition." Such were episcopal views of moderation, in those days; which makes it very easy for us to credit all that history has recorded of prelatical cruelty during the ages of intolerance, for as moderation is the attainment of very few, what must have been the tender mercies of the many? However, even this moderation was soon withdrawn from those who were the objects of it; for in addition to the loss of their beloved pastors, expelled from their churches by the operation of this statute, they were soon forbidden, by "The Conventicle Act," under severe penalties, to assemble for worship in any other place than the parish church, and were commanded by statute not to neglect assembling there. So that intolerance did not restrict itself to the ministers, but extended its cruelty to the people. By "The Conventicle Act," it was enacted, "That if any person, above the age of sixteen, shall be present at any meeting for worship different from the Church of England, where there shall be five persons more than the household, they shall for the first offence suffer three weeks' imprisonment, or pay five pounds; for the second, the punishment is doubled; and for the third, they shall be banished to America, or pay a hundred pounds, or if they return from banishment, suffer death." The oath of any common informer was sufficient to inflict all the severity of this statute of Draco. In consequence of this, multitudes of the best men in the kingdom were filling our jails, while the vilest of the human race were rioting in debauchery by the money obtained as spies and informers.

There have not been wanting writers to represent and justify these measures, as only an imitation and a righteous retribution of the measures pursued by the Puritans during their domination, in compelling so many of the Episcopal clergy to resign their livings. We pretend not to justify that measure, and we have already condemned much that was done by the Long Parlialiament, and the Westminster Assembly of Divines: but still there are some differences in the two cases which ought not to be overlooked. The first is that the clergy ejected by the Puritans were deprived of their livings not upon the ground of nonconformity to religious rites and ceremonies, but either for incompetency or gross immorality; and secondly, even when expelled they were allowed, as a means of support, one fifth of the produce of their sequestered livings. "This example," says Macaulay, "the Cavaliers, intoxicated with animosity, had not the justice and humanity to follow."

The name of PURITAN was now dropped, and that of NONCONFORMIST assumed, by those who dissented from the Church of England. Among the many who thus, for their adhering, at the dictation of conscience, to what they believed to be the principles of the New Tes tament, were suddenly deprived of their means of subsistence, and of what they felt still more bitterly, their opportunities of usefulness, were Owen, Baxter, and Howe; Bates, Manton, and Henry; names that will be dear to every lover of evangelical truth as long as there shall be any who understand the English language, and hold the doctrines of Protestantism.

One act of oppression followed another in rapid succession to torment and crush the nonconformists. Though many of their ministers remained in London while the plague was raging, and preached to the peo

ple in the pulpits which the clergy had deserted; though God had visited London with the awful fire which consumed so large a part of the city, the hearts of the persecutors were not softened, for the Parliament which sat at Oxford while God was consuming the people by his judgments, was busy in passing what is called "The Five Mile Act," a statute which required the nonconformist ministers to swear that it is not lawful, on any pretext whatever, to take up arms against the King, nor to endeavour at any time to make any alteration of the government, either in church or state; which if they refused they must not come, unless upon the road on a journey, within five miles of any city, corporation, or any place that sent burgesses to parliament, or any place where they had been ministers, or had preached after the Act of Oblivion. "This was a most cruel statute, and reduced the objects of it to great distress, by driving very many of them from their places of abode and the circle of their friends, and turning them out upon the world homeless and pennyless, to live upon Providence. And Providence did not forsake them, for we are informed, by Mr. Francis Tallents, of Shrewsbury, who reckoned up as many as a hundred that were ejected within a few miles round, that though many of them were brought very low, had many children, were greatly harrassed by persecution, and their friends. generally poor and unable to support them, he never knew, nor heard of, any nonconformist minister in prison for debt."

As a proof of the good disposition of the nonconformist body, and their zeal for Protestantism, it might be mentioned, that they concurred in the Test Act, which was passed in 1673, and remained in force till the reign of GEORGE IV. This celebrated statute