Page:Notes and Queries - Series 2 - Volume 5.djvu/482

 ), who gives "London, 1713," as the date of publication. This, however, is a digression from the original subject of my Query. "Roger Laurence, Esq., created M.A. July 16, 1713," occurs in the Catalogue of Graduates of the University of Oxford (edit. 1851, Oxford, p. 398.); and from the coincidence of time and name it was most probably Mr. Roger Laurence, of whom I am writing. Roger Laurence was consecrated, in the year 1733, as a bishop of a new and separate line of Nonjuring prelates, which was not recognised by the original body of nonjurors, by reason of the consecration having been performed by a single bishop, who was on this occasion Bishop Archibald Campbell (a Scotish prelate, and scion of the noble house of Argyle; who was incorporated M.A. of University Coll. Oxon., from Edinburgh, Oct. 10, 1693; had been long in priest's orders; was for some years chaplain at Surinam in South America, and was consecrated as one of the "college bishops" of the Episcopal Church in Scotland, at Dundee, Aug. 28, 1711; elected Bishop of Aberdeen May 10, 1721, but resigned that see April 3, 1725, in London, where he almost entirely resided for many years; and in which city he died, June 16, 1744. at an advanced age). This new line of bishops is stated by Mr. Perceval, in his valuable work on Apostolical Succession (2nd edit., 1841, Appendix, p. 249.), to have commenced in the consecration of 'Roger Laurence, "who appears to have taken the opposite extreme to Bishop Blackburn" (on the much agitated questions of the Rites, &c.), "and to have insisted upon the cup being mixed openly" in the sacrament of the Eucharist; a compromise having been arranged shortly before, one of the conditions of which was that the water should be mixed privately; and it is mentioned that in 1733 all the Nonjuring bishops were in communion at that time, with the exception of Bishop Blackburn, who stood alone, and refused the mixed cup altogether. Bishops Campbell and Laurence kept up the separation, by consecrating, shortly afterwards, Dr. Thomas Deacon, of whom there are several interesting particulars in "N. & Q." (1st S. xii. 85.). Bishop Deacon died Feb. 16, 1753, an. ætat. 56. et epis. 20. (?), at Manchester, and was interred in St. Anne's churchyard there. As he is styled a D.D., it should be stated, if known, from what University he obtained his degree in divinity his name is not in the Cat. of Oxford Graduates, and my edition of Graduati Cantabrigiensis by Romilly (edit. 1846) only extends back to the year 1760. This succession was perpetuated by Deacon, who, alone, consecrated (when?) P. J. Brown, "whose real name is supposed to have been Johnstone, a brother of the Earl of Annandale" (Perceval): and, in 1780, it is stated, that the two last bishops of this separate line of Nonjurors, Kenrick Price and William Cartwright, were consecrated by Deacon, but this must be incorrect, at least if the consecration took place in 1780 ; for, as already mentioned, Deacon had died twenty-seven years previously to that date, so that it must surely have been Bishop Brown (or Johnstone) who officiated as consecrating prelate on the occasion. The subject, however, is very obscure, and beset with chronological and other difficulties, upon which Mr. Lathbury throws no light whatever in his History of the Nonjurors, as might have been expected from the character of his work. Perhaps there still exist MS. authorities, which might assist researches in these points, and I rely on some contributor to "N. & Q." for additional information regarding the consecrations of the eminent artd learned men who composed the Nonjuring hierarchy during the last century; their history is still a desideratum in our literature. The Rawlinson MSS., referred to in "N. & Q." (2nd S. V. 141.), appear to be a mine of curious historical and biographical information, hitherto but little explored; but of course they can only extend to the year 1755; Inter collections must be searched for the subsequent history of the Nonjuring body.

My Query has resulted in a Note, and too long a one, I fear, for the plethoric columns of "N. & Q.;" however, I must, in conclusion, again solicit information about Bishop Roger Laurence, who was certainly one of the "giants of those days." All the information I have been able to collect is given above; and I ought not to omit mentioning that the chief particulars (meagre though they be) are extracted from that storehouse lor literary inquirers, Nichols's Literary Anecdotes and Illustrations of the Eighteenth Century, which I am