of Bristol, Dr. Hacket, Dr. Morley, Dr. Saunderson, Dr. Hammond, Dr. Holdsworth, &c.Archbishop Usher condescended to appear for a little while in the assembly: they did justice to that most learned prelate in expelling him from the assembly for his attending the king at Oxford, and refusing to return; by so doing they honored him and scandalized themselves.-Dr. Featley continued to attend, till he was imprisoned by the parliament on account of his attachment to episcopacy, and for holding a correspondence with Dr. Usher.

The parliament finding themselves unable to contend with the royal forces, had solicited, as it was before observed, the assistance of the Scots. But they were not disposed to form any alliance, except parliament would engage to establish the presbyterian form of government in the church of England. The English Commissioners agreed to these terms, and accordingly a solemn league and covenant was drawn up, agreed to by the convention of the states, and the general assembly of the church of Scotland; and, being approved of by the Westminster assembly, it was sworn to, and subscribed by both houses of parliament, and by the assembly,

*

* See this Covenant at large in Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. iii, pp. 66-70, and the mode of taking it.

with great solemnity, Monday, Sept. 25, 1643, in the church of St. Margaret's, Westminster.*

This "solemn league and covenant," besides mutual defence against all opponents, bound the subscribers to endeavour the extirpation of popery and prelacy, superstition, heresy, schism, and profaneness-to maintain the rights and privileges of parliament, together with the king's authority-and to discover and bring to justice all incendiaries and malignants.

It was ordered to be taken by all persons above eighteen years of age; and the assembly were commanded to draw up an exhortation to persuade the people to it. Orders also were issued by the Commons to disperse the covenant throughout the whole kingdom; and the names of those who refused it, were to be returned to the house.

As this covenant contained obligations upon conscience, which honest persons might scruple as contrary to the laws, so the imposing of it as a test was very oppressive:-it was truly a great

* Dr. Walker describes the proceedings at taking this covenant thus-"Two or three divines successively "went up" into the pulpit to pray: others to make orations upon the work of the day, where they uttered such extravagant things in commendation of the covenant, as cannot easily be imagined; Mr. Henderson concluding the solemnity with as extravagant commendations of what they had done.”

Sufferings of the Clergy, part i, p. 34. + See the Exhortation in Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. iii,

p. 71.

abuse of that sovereign power, which so was much complained of in the king.

His Majesty issued a proclamation to forbid the taking of this covenant, but it was of no effect. However, many and heavy complaints were made of the grievances and oppression which this test inflicted upon the clergy throughout the kingdom. It proved a weapon in the hands of the Commons, enabling them with more ease and certainty to discover malignant or disaffected ministers-the modest appellation given now to all the episcopal and loyal clergy. When this covenant was tendered, and any of the clergy refused it, they were upon this turned out of their livings.

From the time of taking this covenant, we may date the dissolution of the hierarchy; though as yet it was not abolished by an ordinance of parliament. There were now no ecclesiastical courts, no visitations, no regard to the canons, ceremonies, nor even to the liturgy itself.

The assembly of divines now did all the business of the church: the parishes chose their own ministers, the assembly examined and approved them, and the parliament confirmed them in their livings. But in order to secure a succession of ministers trained up in the principles which the parliament had adopted, the earl of

Manchester was ordered to purify the university of Cambridge, the head quarters of the forces under his command. Accordingly, the earl requested the attendance of the masters, fellows, and scholars, on a certain day, and the covenant was tendered to all, who were suspected of disaffection to the parliament, that is, to all those who had any regard to the ancient constitution in church and state. A great number of graduates were despoiled of their livelihood, and banished the university, merely for refusing the solemn league and covenant.

But

It is difficult to compute the number of clergymen who suffered severely, and lost their livings by order of parliament during the civil war. whether more or fewer suffered, the arbitrary power was the same; and the not executing it, might be for want of opportunity, in many instances, or because they could not. According to the best computation, the number of suffering clergy could not be less than TWO THOUSAND, whom the parliament ejected out of their livings, for their obedience to the laws and constitution of their country. A fifth part of the revenues of these ejected clergy was reserved for the maintenance

*The Earl of Manchester, in the life-time of his father, was styled Lord Kimbolton, and was one of the members impeached by the king.

of their families, which, in such calamitous and tumultuous time, was a charitable act; but it does not appear that due and proper attention was observed that such destitute families should be paid this pittance of fifths.

It is truly deplorable that many pious, worthy, and learned bishops and clergymen, who withdrew from the world, and were desirous to live peaceably, suffered dreadfully in these timestheir estates and livings were sequestered, their houses and goods ransacked and plundered by disorderly soldiers, and they themselves and families reduced to live upon the fifths, or a small pension from parliament, because they continued firm in their attachment to the constitution of church and state, and would not take the covenant, or sanction the new directory * for public worship, which was introduced after abolishing our venerable liturgy. Among these sufferers, the most reverend Archbishop Usher, Bishop Morton, Bishop Hall, and many others, may be reckoned as some of the chief. To take away the whole property of these divines, only for obedience to the laws of their country, and reduce them to a fifth, and even this at the mercy of sequestrators, was extremely rigorous, cruel, and oppressive.†

* See the New Directory, in Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. v, p. 52, Appendix.

+ See Neal's Hist. of the Puritans, vol. iii, p. 37.