HUNTLEY. .501 1640, having been often brought before the king's-bench, but still a prisoner for his nonconformity, he presented his petition to the parliament for relief; when he was look pro- bably released.. In the year 1644 Mr. Snelling appeared as witness against the archbishop at his trial ;t but when he died we are unable to ascertain. GEORGE HUNTLEY was minister in Kent, a noncon- formist to the superstitious ceremonies, and grievously censured in the high commission court. In the year 1627, for refusing to preach at a visitation, though his body was in a weak state, and he sent twenty shillings to the arch- deacon to pay another for preaching, he was convened before the high commission for contempt ; when he was fined a- great sum and cast into prison. Having lain in prison about two years, he was brought to the bar upon his habeas corpus ; when the cause of his commitment was returned, a default in his canonical obedience. He was at first bailed, because the breach of canonical obedience was an offence punishable by the ordinary, by ecclesiastical censure only ; and not by the commissioners ecclesiastical, by fine and imprisonment-4: But afterwards, by the solici- tations of Bishop Laud, he was again delivered, and again brought into the high commission court ; when a great fine was imposed upon him. He was deprived of his living, degraded from the ministry, and committed to a loathsome prison, where he continued about ten years, to the impover- ishing of himself and family. What inhuman and shocking proceedings were these ! A t the same time Mr. Austin, the archbishop's chaplain, was presented to his living.§ Upon this barbarous usage Mr. Huntley brought his action of false imprisonment against the keeper and several of the commissioners. The business was carried into the king's-bench ; when the attorney-general, by command of the king, moved that the commissioners might be spared, and the proceedings be only against the keeper. At length, after much debate, it was ordered that only two of the commissioners should answer. It was Archbishop Abbot who blew the coals in this business, and engaged the com- missioners in these mad courses. He pressed the by Rushworth's Collec. vol. v. p. 51. -1 Wharton's Troubles of Laud, vol. i. p. 344. Whitlocke's Memorials, p. 13. 1, Huntley's Prelates' Usurpations, p. 161, 185, 186.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=