cleared their minds from every vulgar passion and prejudice, and raised them above the influence of danger and corruption. It sometimes might lead them to pursue unwise ends, but never to choose unwise means. They went through the world, like Sir Artegal's iron man Talus with his flail, crushing and trampling down oppressors, mingling with human beings, but having neither part nor lot in human infirmities, insensible to fatigue, to pleasure, and to pain, not to be pierced by any weapon, not to be withstood by any barrier.

Such we believe to have been the character of the Puritans. We perceive the absurdity of their manners. We dislike the sullen gloom of their domestic habits. We acknowledge that the tone of their minds was often injured by straining after things too high for mortal reach: and we know that, in spite of their hatred of popery, they too often fell into the worst vices of that bad system, intolerance and extravagant austerity; that they had their anchorites and crusades, their Dunstans and their De Montforts, their Dominics and their Escobars. Yet, when all circumstances are taken into consideration, we do not hesitate to pronounce them a brave, a wise, an honest, and a useful body."

THE COMMONWEALTH A PERIOD OF GREAT RELIGIOUS EXCITE-. MENT. The history of the twenty years ending in 1660, can be but imperfectly understood without some regard to the religious element, as the entire series of events were influenced, as well by the religious, as the political fervour of the period. All the leading men professed to be acting on conscientious principles, and to some of them it may be conceded that they did so. The Puritans made the strictest profession, and the Independents, who became the dominant party, professed to be above worldly considerations altogether. Nothing was to be done but for the glory of God and the good of the "cause"; which they held to be the same thing. The parliament men fasted and prayed, heard lectures, and at the opening of the session listened to the Protector, who read a portion of Scripture and gave an exposition. None but God-fearing men were supposed to be admitted to the office of Senator, and when Cromwell expelled the Rump, it was on the plea that he was charged to do so because of the vices of the members. The Little Parliament was composed of men recommended for their piety by the congregational churches, and in Cromwell's parliaments large numbers were excluded on the ground of their want of character. No inconsiderable part of the sessions of parliament was employed in casting about how they could improve the Lord's vineyard, to do which they passed laws of the most stringent character against immorality. Adultery and incest were made punishable with death, and the same punishment was inflicted on those who kept houses of ill-fame, if convicted a second time. Swearing was made punishable by fine, and entertaining blasphemous opinions by imprisonment, banishment, and death. Neglect of the Lord's day, or days of humiliation or thanksgiving, subjected to a fine, which extended also to magistrates who did not exert themselves to prevent such irregularities. In the councils of state, the discussion of weighty questions was preceded by "seeking the Lord", an exercise which sometimes lasted for hours.

All public correspondence partook of the same tone. That Cromwell's letters should be full of Scripture quotations, and expressions

of praise for God's mercies, in giving him the victory over the enemies of the church, is not surprising; but it was scarcely to be expected that Monk should have so completely mastered the phraseology of the "saints". During the Dutch war, he writes home in the following strain; "Great was the Lord and marvellous, worthy to be praised for His appearance on our behalf. I am in good hopes that the same mighty presence of the Lord will still follow us to the disabling, taking, or destroying of some more yet". Among the soldiers the same show of piety prevailed. Parade exercises, preachings and prayers were commingled. The officers possessed of the "gifts and graces", or the common soldiers similarly favored, performed the duties of chaplain, and on some occasions displaced the minister of the parish, and held forth" to the people in full regimentals. Some writers contend that all this was insincere; a part, perhaps much, of it may have been so, but there must be some prejudice when it is maintained, that men of the stamp of colonel Hutchinson and his friends, were hypocrites. Many, when the excitement of the period had cooled, declared they had acted conscientiously throughout; we think they did, though mostly with a large admixture of mistaken zeal.

THE COMMONWEALTH A PERIOD OF MIXED RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE. Party writers have taken two extreme views on this point, and have found no difficulty in supporting them. By one party the Commonwealth is made to be a period of unparalelled religious tolerance, while the other proves it one of cruel intolerance. It was really neither one or the other, but a singular union of both. The universal tolerance claimed for it, did not comprehend the church of England and the Roman Catholics, and thus excluded the majority of the people. The use of the Common Prayer was proscribed with great strictness, and those clergymen who retained their incumbencies were compelled to give it up, or use it evasively. The "Board of Triers" appointed in 1653, to examine candidates for the ministry, were instructed in ejecting scandalous ministers, to include among others, the friends of the Common Prayer Book. Dr. Gauden stated in a petition, that eight thousand of the episcopal clergy had been ejected. The Roman Catholics were in a worse case, for several priests were condemned to death for exercising the functions of their priestly office, and one actually suffered the extreme penalty. Neither did tolerance always extend to the sects which characterised this period. Fry, a member of parliament was expelled for holding Socinian opinions, and Biddle for the same offence tried for his life, The case of James Naylor was a cruel one. At one time he had been an officer in the parliamentary army; for professing some extravagant religious fancies, he was sentenced by a vote of the House, to be pilloried at Westminster, whipped thence to the Exchange in the City and there pilloried again; that at the latter place his tongue should be bored with a red hot iron, and his forehead branded with a B; he was then to be sent to Bristol where he was apprehended, and in that place be carried on horseback, riding backwards, through the city, publicly whipped, and then sent back to Bridewell in London, there to be kept to labor during the pleasure of the parliament. With the exceptions given, there was a pretty fair tolerance, which extended by connivance to certain clergymen of the church of Eng

land. Cromwell himself is said to have desired a further measure of toleration, but was overborne by his council, on the plea that the excepted parties were implacable enemies to him and his government -the standing reason for religious oppression, and a sufficient proof that the subject was not yet understood.

THIS PERIOD MARKED BY THE APPEARANCE OF MANY SINGULAR FORMS OF SECTARIANISM. The appearance of the numerous Sectaries after the assembling of the Long Parliament, was but a natural result of what was termed Independency or religious liberalism. The trammels of established opinions were thrown off, and many thought themselves free and of sufficient ability, to construct a religious system for themselves. So early as 1646, a writer gave a list of no less than sixteen sects then flourishing in England, and the number was afterwards greatly increased. The most singular were the Quakers, the Muggletonians, and the Millenarians. The Quakers were founded by George Fox, a shoemaker of Drayton, Leicestershire, and distinguished by depending not upon the Written Word, but internal illumination; the disuse of the sacraments, and ordinary modes of worship; and by their extraordinary conduct. Neal in his "History of the Puritans" says, "they disturbed the public worship by appearing in ridiculous habits they also gave to ministers the reproachful name of hirelings, and some of them went through divers towns and villages naked, denouncing judgments and calamities upon the nation". The Muggletonians professed to be believers in John Reeve and Ludowick Muggleton, "the two last prophets and messengers of God". Muggleton states his creed thus: "Knowledge of the true God, and the right devil, with the knowledge of the place and nature of heaven, and the place and nature of hell, with the persons and nature of angels, and the mortality of the soul; upon the knowledge of these six principles dependeth the eternal happiness of man". The heads of this singular sect could both cast out devils, and deliver men without fail to be damned, body and soul, to eternity. The Millenarians or Fifth-Monarchy Men, were those who believed in the coming of Christ to reign on earth for a thousand years, during which they themselves should be kings and priests. This sect gave Cromwell much trouble. By their creed the government of a single individual was a sacrilegious assumption of the authority belonging to the only king, the Lord Jesus. Although not a numerous party, they armed in confident expectation of assistance from on high, but were crushed by a military force.

CHAPTER IV.

CHARLES II. JANUARY 30, 1648-9-FEBRUARY 6, 1685.

Nicolas in his "Chronology of History" says, "Although Charles II. did not become King, de facto, until the 29th of May, 1660, his regnal years were computed from the death of his father, 30th of January, 1648-9, so that the year of his restoration is called the twelfth of his reign. This was done under the opinion of the judges, who resolved, that from the instant of his father's death, though excluded from the kingly office, he was king both de jure and de facto; and therefore, that all who had taken part against him, and kept him out of possession, were guilty of treason,-a decision founded on the absurd pretence, that no one had, in the interval between the death of Charles I. and the restoration of his son, assumed the title of King."

SECTION I. THE SETTLEMENT OF THE NATION.

1. The King's Council. Next to the throne stood the royal brothers James and Henry; after them Hyde the chancellor, Ormond the steward, Culpepper master of the rolls, and the secretary Nicholas, all four having been with the king in his exile; to these were added Monk and a few of his friends, together with the surviving counsellors of the late king. But this council was controlled by a kind of cabinet, consisting of Hyde, Ormond, Southampton the treasurer, Monk, and two others, who being a committee for foreign affairs, took the opportunity when meeting for foreign business, to discuss home affairs. Their conclusions were adopted by Charles, and carried by superior influence through the ordinary council.

2. Settlement of the revenue: abolition of the old feudal revenues, 1660. Before other business could be done, the power of the Convention Parliament required to be determined. It was held to be illegal, because not summoned by the king's writ, but the defect was supposed to be remedied by an act declaring that the two Houses then sitting were the two Houses of Parliament. This being done, the revenue received immediate attention. It will be remembered, that the policy of parliaments had been so to apportion the public grants, as to keep the sovereign in some measure dependent on his subjects, and hence likely to endeavour to maintain friendly relations with his parliaments. This Convention however distinguished itself by an

opposite policy, and avowedly placing the king in easy circumstances. The annual revenue was set at the unprecedented amount of £1,200,000. Tonnage and poundage were voted for the king's life. But the most remarkable change in the revenue was that of making the excise a permanent tax, in lieu of the old feudal revenue derived from tenure by knight's service. A special burden was imposed for the purpose of paying off the army of the Commonwealth, which consisted of sixty thousand men, and was already beginning to show signs of dissatisfaction. It was gradually disbanded, with the exception of five thousand, and the men soon became absorbed in the general population.

The abolition of the old feudal revenue for the new method of excise requires further notice. After the spirit of feudalism had died out, the incidents remained to be burdensome to the landed gentry, and the occasion of disputes with the crown. An attempt was made in 1610 to get rid of them, but it failed; Charles I. by the treaty of Newport agreed to give them up for a fixed payment of £100,000 per annum. At the Restoration this mode of revenue had been in disuse for nearly twenty years, as had also that of subsidies, for the Long Parliament had of necessity adopted the plan of monthly assessments, and an excise on the common necessaries of life. The landed proprietors were naturally anxious that the old mode should not be rẹvived, and Charles was agreeable to a change, on promise of an equivalent, the same as his father had agreed to. A bill therefore passed enacting "that the court of wards and liveries, and all wardships, liveries, seisins, and ousterlemains, values and forfeitures of marriage, by reason of any tenure of the king or others, be totally taken away. And that all fines for alienation, tenures by homage, knight-service, and escuage, and also aids for marrying the daughter or knighting the son, and all tenures of the king in capite, be likewise taken away. And that all sorts of tenures, held of the king or others, be turned into free and common socage; save only tenures in frankalmoin, copyholds, and the honorary services (without the slavish part) of grand serjeanty." To provide a commutation revenue it was suggested that there should be a permanent tax on lands in chivalry, or an excise on beer, &c. Not much to the credit of the parliament, the latter plan was adopted, which threw a burden on the people, that equitably belonged to the lords of manors. The excise then produced £300,000, it now produces about £18,000,000.

This change in the revenue drew after it another. Up to this period the clergy had been a separate estate of the realm, and had in their Convocation, or clerical parliament, the privilege of taxing themselves, but when grants were no longer by subsidies or fifteenths, it was found that considerable difficulty lay in the way of separate taxation. An arrangement was therefore made between Clarendon and archbishop Sheldon that the clergy should henceforth be taxed with the laity, and in exchange should have the privilege of voting as freeholders at elections. From this time the Convocation became of little service to the crown, and lost its influence and authority as a separate estate; and this by no legislative enactment, but by a mere verbal agreement.