Page:VCH Herefordshire 1.djvu/450

 A HISTORY OF HEREFORDSHIRE that the Cardinal Archduke Albert was advancing to Boulogne with a design to invade England, 150 men were levied from the county /^^ and when the apprehension was over the troops were employed under Essex in the expedi- tion to the Azores.''^^ Almost from the commencement of Elizabeth's reign Herefordshire was disturbed by difEculties with the Catholic recusants. In July, 1569, the justices of the peace reported to the council that John Scudamore of Kent- church and others refused to subscribe to the Act of Uniformity/^^ At an earlier date recusants were reported to be lurking secretly in the county sup- ported by the inhabitants.'^' On 28 August, 1576, the Privy Council directed the mayor and officers of Hereford to see that no one was elected mayor who would not take the oath and uphold the established religion, and to send recusants to the council.**^^ In September, 1581, the council intimated that it was dissatisfied with the lenient treatment of recusants in Herefordshire by the sheriffs and that the bishop of Hereford had complained concerning it. These recusants had been suffered to remain in their own houses under colour of being in custody, and thus they had evaded the fine which they would otherwise have incurred for non-attendance at church. " In December, 1588, the sheriff was definitely instructed that recusants were not to be allowed to remain free prisoners, but to be committed to prison until further orders from the Privy Council.^ In 1605, at the time of Gunpowder Plot, there were serious fears of an armed rising.'**^ The religious feeling reacted on the general condition of the county, which was one of great disorder. In June, 1571, a great riot occurred in Bromyard against the bishop of Hereford who was lord of that town,'^' while ten years later the Privy Council was informed that there were more murders committed daily in the shire than in any two 'thereabouts or in all Wales.' '^* In May, 1586, the Privy Council directly imputed these disorders to the evil example of disregard for law in the case of the recusants. Thefts and burglaries they asserted were daily committed without punishment through the negligence and faction of the justices of the peace. In consequence they ordered the Council in the Marches to call offenders before them and to take steps for reforming and punishing disorders,''^ while the president was appointed lord lieutenant of Worcestershire, Herefordshire, and Shropshire. **'* This was a distinct extension of the authority of the Council in the Marches, such jurisdiction in the case of 'mere' English shires being uni- versally exercised by a temporary commission of oyer and terminer directed to all or some of the members of that body.'" It is true that in May, 1574, the Attorney and Solicitor-General had given an opinion at the request of the Privy Council in favour of the jurisdiction of the Council in the Marches over the city and county of Worcester,^ which necessarily involved a like jurisdic- tion over Hereford; but in July, 1596, the sheriff of Herefordshire was rebuked by the Privy Council for not enforcing an order of the Court of ^^' Cal. S.P. Dom. 1595-7, p. 400 ; Acts ofP.C.xxvu, 101-5. '^^ Ibid, xxvii, 160-4; xxviii, 250-1 "" S.P. Dom. Eliz. Ix, 22.  Ibid. Additional, xi, 45. =' Jcls ofP.C. ix, 197. ™ Ibid, xiii, 1 9 1-3. 3^1 Ibid, xvi, 402. ^' S.P. Dom. Jas. I, xiv, 40, 52.  Jets ofP.C. viii, 33. =« ji,;^. ^iii, 246. "" P.C. to Council of Marches, 25 May, 1586; Jets ofP.C. xiv, 124-5. "■^^ S.P. Dom. Sign Manual, viii, No. 63. ^'■'Jcts of P.C. v, 112. ^'» Ibid, viii, 236-8. 380