Chap. I. 7he HIS T 0 R Y of the PuRITANS. 23 timony is more particular and decifive, who f.1ys, "that in all the coun- K. Charles I, " tries where he was acquainted fix to one at leafl, if not many more, ~ " that were fequeftered by the committees, were ~y the .oaths of wit- Baxter's " neffes proved infufficient or fcandalous, or efpecially guilty of drun~- L•fe, p. 7+– " ennefs and (wearing. Cf'his I know (fays the reverend author) wzll ~' difp!eqfe the party, but I am Jure that thi~ is true." . 'Tis irnpoffible to account for the particular proceedmgs of all the Thci; pro– committees, of which great outcries have ~e~n mad~ ~y the friends of fo~~~:gs cen• the fufferers. " If the meaneft and moft VICIOl.lS panfiuoners could be Suff. Cler• .. brought to prefer a petition againfl- their parfon to the houfe of corn- p. 65. " mons, how falfly foever, (fays lord Clarendon ) he was fore to be "profecuted for a fcand alous miniller." His l<?rdlhip adds, " that the '< committees accepted of the evidence not only of mean people, but of '' them who were profeifed enemies of the difcipline of the church ; that they baited the clergy with rude and uncivil language ; that they " obliged them to a long and tedious attendance, and were very partial « in voting them out of their livings, right or wrong." In another place " he fays, " that thefe complaints were frequently exhibited by a few of " the meanefl: of the people againfl- the judgment of the pariil1." The like reprefentation is made by mofl: of the royalifl-s; but the writers on the fide of the parliament deny the charge, and complain as loudly of the contemptuous behaviour of the king's clergy to the commiffioners, treating them as a combination of illiterate laymen, who had nothing to do with the church; nay, as rebels and traytors. Some refufed to obey their fummons, and others who appeared took up their time in examining the fpelling of words, the propriety of grammar, and other little evafions, foreign to the porpofe. They declared roundly, they did not own the tribunal before which they fl:ood; they infulted the witnefTes, and threatened reprifals out of court, when things lhould revert to .th eir former channel ; and upon the whole behaved as if they had engroffed all the law, learning, and good fenfe of the nation to themfclves. The commifiioners, provoked with this ufage, were obliged to behave with fome _lharpnefs, in order to fupport their own authority; th~y would not indulge them the peculiar privilege they claimed as clergymen, nor allow them as.. fcholars to debate the truth of thofe doctrines of which they were accu fed, but confined them to matters of fact. When they excepted againflthe witn'effes as ignorant mechan icks, factious, fchifmatical , enemies to the church, &c. they over-ruled their exceptions, as long as there were no legal objections to their competency or credibility. With
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=