reached on the 3rd of May; here James met the lords of the late queen's council. During the four days the king stayed here, his host secured the remodelling of the cabinet, by which Cobham, Grey, and Raleigh were excluded from the royal favor. On the 7th, James reached London and lodged at the Charter House.

3. The Coronation of James. The king had been joined by his wife and children in June, and in the month following the court removed from Windsor to London. In the garden of the palace, James knighted all the judges, many serjeants at law, doctors of civil law, gentlemen ushers, and others. The plague then raging, the people were forbidden by proclamation to attend the coronation, which took place at Westminster on the 25th July. In October, 1604, James was proclaimed "King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland;" the title before had been "King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland.” In April, 1606, a national flag for great Britain was announced by proclamation; this was a combination of the crosses of St. George for England, and of St. Andrew for Scotland, to which that of St. Patrick for Ireland was added in 1801.

4. Of the King's Counsellors. James left almost all the chief offices in the hands of Elizabeth's ministers. Dorset was the lord-treasurer, but secretary Cecil, created successively Lord Cecil, Viscount Cranborne, and in 1605, Earl of Salisbury, was always regarded as his prime minister and chief counsellor. Cecil had been in secret correspondence with James before his coming to the throne, and had much contributed to the easy reception of that prince in England; he was therefore treated with the greatest confidence and regard. The wily secretary had successfully employed his influence with James during his stay at Theobalds, to remodel the ministry so as to exclude Northumberland, Grey, Cobham, and Raleigh. Great jealousy and discontent were excited by the admission of several Scots into the new council.

SECTION II. THE MAIN AND BYE PLOTS. 1603.

1. The Main Plot in favor of Arabella Stuart. Arabella Stuart was next to James in the succession, being descended from Charles, Earl of Lennox, a younger brother of Darnley, the son of Margaret Douglas, the daughter of Margaret (by her second husband, the Earl of Angus), the daughter of Henry VII. The defect of primogeniture was held by her supporters to be balanced by "her birth within the realm, according to the principle of law that excluded aliens from inheritance". Several desperate men associated themselves to disturb the government of James, and made the claims of Arabella a pretence for doing so. Chief among them was Raleigh, who through the jealousy of Cecil had been deprived

of the monopoly of licensing taverns and retailing wines throughout the kingdom, of his lucrative office of Warden of the Stanneries, and of his post as captain of the guard, though he was allowed to retain the government of Jersey. His associates were Lord Cobham, a disappointed and desperate man; Lord Grey, of Wilton, also disgraced by Cecil, and the Earl of Northumberland, the adversary of the Secretary. This party first intrigued with Beaumont, the resident French ambassador, but met with only moderate success. Proposals were then made to Aremberg, ambassador of the archduke, who was ordered by the court of Brussels to give them encouragement, as they professed an intention of setting up Arabella under the protection of Spain.

2. The Bye Plot to obtain religious toleration. In this, "the surprising treason", the leaders were Markham, and Brooke, the brother of Cobham, both Puritans, and Watson and Clarke, two Catholic priests. Co-operators were sought for among those two classes of dissenters, who, though enemies to each other, were equally dissatisfied with the pressure of the penal statutes. To secure their object, the conspirators proposed to seize the king, while pretending to present a petition for toleration. Lord Grey promised to aid with a hundred horsemen. Cobham and Raleigh were privy to the plot, but it does not appear that they took any active part in it. When the time came (June 24) for seizing the king, Grey was not there, and Watson and his party of catholic friends were too weak to attempt anything. Gage, one of the conspirators, told the whole matter to the bishop of London, and a proclamation being issued, the principal persons implicated were soon in custody.

3. The fate of the Conspirators. The commoners connected with the "Bye" were tried at Winchester on the 15th of November. Brooke, Markham, Brookesby, Copley, and the two priests were condemned upon their own confessions, "for practising to surprise the king's person, the taking of the Tower, the deposing of counsellors, and proclaiming liberty of religion". The two priests suffered the extreme penalty, both were cut down alive and "bloodily handled"; of the lay conspirators, only Brooke, the relative of Cecil, was executed.

Raleigh was tried by a jury. The case against him rested mainly on the declaration af the shuffling Cobham, a part of whose statement was retracted, and a part contradicted. Sir Edward Coke, the attorney-general, sought to strengthen his case against the prisoner by invectives and abuse. "He called Raleigh a damnable atheist, a spider of hell, the most vile and execrable of traitors. I want words to express thy viperous treasons." To which Raleigh, with ready wit, replied: "You want words

indeed, for you have spoken the one thing half a dozen times". The prisoner defended himself with eloquence, but the fact of his soliciting a pension from Aremberg influenced the jury, and a verdict of guilty was reluctantly returned. Cobham and Grey were tried by their peers, and both condemned. Now commences the most singular part of the whole affair, a part in which James was to show his skill in king-craft, for the purpose of testing the truthfulness of the prisoners' declarations, more particularly that of Cobham with respect to Raleigh. Two days after the signing of the death-warrant, Markham was brought out to the scaffold, and when ready for the block, (a king's messenger having arrived at Winchester, and secretly instructed the sheriff,) the execution was stayed and the prisoner removed, on the pretence that he was to be allowed two hours for further preparation for death. Grey was next brought up, and when ready for the axe, was removed, that Cobham might be the first to be executed. Cobham now came, and in the presence of death affirmed the guilt of Raleigh. Grey and Markham were now brought forward, and being confronted, looked upon each other with wild astonishment.

Raleigh had seen the whole of these proceedings from his prison window, and was not a little puzzled to make out their meaning. His execution was ordered to take place three days later, but he, with the other three, had his life granted him of the king's mercy. They were removed and confined in separate prisons. Cobham, after a few years, obtained his liberty, and died a beggar (1619) in a loft in the Minories. Grey expired in the Tower after eleven years confinement. Raleigh endured a long imprisonment, and then appeared again on the stage. Markham, Brookesby, and Copley were banished the kingdom.

SECTION III. THE PURITANS AND THE HAMPTON COURT CONFERENCE, 1604.

1. Origin and growth of Puritanism. Puritanism may be said to have had its origin in the reign of Mary, though some tendency in that direction is to be found in the time of Edward VI., as is seen in the case of bishop Hooper. During the Marian persecution, numbers of English refugees assembled at Frankfort, and disagreed among themselves respecting the mode of conducting public worship. This led many of them to go to Geneva, where they became impregnated with Calvin's views of doctrine and church organisation. In the early part of Elizabeth's reign, this party existed in the church, but the decided efforts to secure uniformity, led to their withdrawal or expulsion, and to their setting up separate conventicles. Severe penalties were enacted against them, but while persecution drove some to Holland, it

consolidated those that remained. Their growth may be partly attributed to the liberal principles which they held, in reference to civil as well as to religious government. Hence they had many friends on political grounds, who had no sympathy with them in matters relating to the church. The Puritans became distinguished in the latter years of Elizabeth, as the steady opponents of mere prerogative, and when James came to the throne, their leaven was much more extensive than was imagined.

2. The dislike of James to the Puritans. James told the English bishops, that though he had lived among Presbyterians and Puritans, he was never of them. How far this was true is rendered somewhat doubtful by the following passage from Calderwood. In 1590, in the General Assembly at Edinburgh, James "stood up with his bonnet off, and his hands lifted up to heaven, and said, he praised God, that he was born in the time of the light of the Gospel, and in such a place as to be king of such a church, the sincerest (purest) kirk in the world. . . . . As for our neighbour kirk of England, their service is an evil-said mass in English; they want nothing of the mass but the liftings". A few years after this, there is evidence that a great change had come over the mind of the king, and that he looked upon this party as the main cause of his mother's ruin, and the source, as it undoubtedly was, of much disquiet to himself. Hence from the year 1596, the course of his ecclesiastical policy was to transform the Scottish establishment from a Presbyterian to an Episcopal church. In his "Basilicon Doron," written in 1599, for the instruction of his son Henry, he advises the prince "to take heed to such Puritans, very pests in the church and commonwealth, whom no deserts can oblige, neither oaths nor promises bind. . . . that ye shall never find with any highland or border thieves, greater ingratitude, and more lies and vile perjuries, than with these fanatic spirits". Some writers think it probable, that James had a more distinct perception of the political tendencies of Puritanism, than he has credit for, and that he felt assured that their notions of civil freedom and his of kingly prerogative, were sure to clash sooner or later.

...

3. The Millenary Petition. This petition was so called because said to be signed by nearly a thousand ministers of the Puritan party; the real number of signatures amounted only to about seven hundred and fifty. Great hopes were entertained that the King, having been educated a Presbyterian, would be favorably disposed to some changes in the Establishment, and they grounded their hopes further, on certain promises which James was said to have made to their party. "This document," as Bishop Short observes, "is chiefly valuable in presenting to us the

most important points complained of by the Puritan party". This question becomes more than one of church history. The Puritans were shortly to appear as the principal actors in the nation's historical drama, and no complete view of the times can be obtained, without understanding the Puritan element. Everything therefore that helps to enlarge our knowledge of that party is important. The following mere outline of the petition, will give some idea of the topics contained in it. "(1) Objections to the church service. (2) Pluralities, non-residence, and unpreaching ministers. (3) The better maintenance of the parochial clergy, which might be effected by restoring to them the greater part of ecclesiastical impropriations, and a sixth or seventh of all the lay ones. (4) The redress of church discipline."

4. The Hampton Court Conference. The King consenting to take into consideration the complaints of the Puritans, issued a proclamation in which he declared his approbation of the doctrine and discipline as by law established; and that the object he had in view in the assembly to be held "was to reform such corruptions as had been introduced by time, as well as to furnish himself with information, in order that he might be able to judge of the enormities which were objected against the ecclesiastical government, and the services". In the conference the Establishment was represented by Whitgift of Canterbury, Bancroft of London, and seventeen other persons, mostly bishops or deans. The puritans were represented by Reynolds and Sparks from Oxford, and Knewstubbs and Chaderton from Cambridge.

The first day (Jan. 14) was spent by the king in private consultation with the bishops and his council, before whom James declared himself a sincere convert to the Church of England. But, as many imperfections were complained of, he invited those present to determine beforehand what it might be prudent to concede to the other party. The bishops gave their consent to certain alterations; the principal subject of debate was private baptism, and it was only after long argument, that the bishops' consent was obtained for the exclusion of the laity.

On the second day (Jan. 16) the Puritans were admitted. Their demands were reduced to four heads :-(1) purity of doctrine, (2) a learned ministry, (3) reconstruction of the Book of Common Prayer, (4) the reform of the ecclesiastical courts. The chief debate was on the lawfulness of ceremonies, and the obligation of subscribing to the Articles. James is said to have shown considerable ability in argument, and to have taunted the bishops with the weakness of their reasons. Sometimes he forgot the dignity of his subject, and fell into levity and buffoonery. It was in closing his speech on the ordination of bishops, that the king repeated his favourite maxim-“ No bishop, no king.

The third day (Jan. 18) commenced with an enquiry into the abuses of the High Commission Court, which it was resolved should