Page:VCH London 1.djvu/424

 469 A HISTORY OF LONDON. canonical obedience, and the use of various ceremonies.*" The ejected ministers and the Nonconformists generally appear to have been treated on the whole with kindness and consideration.*" The love of sermons survived the Restoration, and the bishops, in spite of vigorous efforts, found it difficult to control the lecturers, who now formed a well-established and powerful body."* The Puritan party in the Church naturally desired their retention in all their independence ; *^^ while equally of course stricter churchmen objected to these free-lances, who were for ever finding fault with the offices and officials of the Church.*" In January 1660— i London was disturbed by a riot on the part of the Fifth-monarchy men, which led to the unjust imprisonment, as suspected persons, of a number of Quakers, who, however, were released in the follow- ing March. *^* The Fifth-monarchists joined with the Presbyterians in en couraging the people to stand out against the Book of Common Prayer, which, in March 1 660-1, was said to be in use in a minority only of the London churches.*" The king, however, when granting*'^ the French con- gregation in London permission to worship in the Savoy Chapel, made it a sine qua non that they should use a French translation of the Prayer Book.*'* The passing of the Act of Uniformity in 1662 drew forth a petition from a number of London ministers who felt unable to conform to all that was required by that Act, and who begged that notwithstanding they might be allowed to retain their livings.*" The king was quite willing to grant an indulgence if possible,*'* and the question was fully debated in Council, but Bishop Sheldon strongly urged the danger of an uncertain and vacillating policy in the matter. The law, he said, was passed, and it should be main- tained at all costs. He himself had already ejected such of his clergy as would not comply with its requirements.*" His arguments prevailed, and it was decided that no indulgence could be granted.*'^ It has been stated that at the time of the great plague of 1665 many of the City rectors left their posts and fled for safety into the country, while their pulpits were seized upon by Presbyterian ministers.*" The evidence of the parochial records on this point is chiefly negative, but it must be owned that it supports this statement. There were, however, a few honourable exceptions, amongst whom we may name Mr. Austin, rector of St. Mary Staining, who died at his post ; *" Peter Lane, rector of St. Benet Paul's Wharf ; *" Dr. Anthony Walker, of Aldermanbury ; *^'' Mr. Meriton ; *" Dr. Thomas Horton,*^^ and Timothy Long, rector of St. Alphage,**' who "' Overton, op. cit. 34.4-7 ; Calamy, Acct. of Ejected Ministers (ed. 1 71 3), ii, 31. '" Overton, op. cit. 190-2. '" Kennett, Hist, of Engl, iii, 298. ^'^' See Wharton, Defence of Pluralities, 7. '^ Sharpe, Lond. and the Kingdom, ii, 386-8. S.P. Dom. Chas. II, xlii, 38. Ibid, xxxli, 97. It was not in use in Westminster Abbey, i July 1660 ; Pepys, Diary, q.v. for par- ticulars of the irregularities which still prevailed. *" 10 Mar. 1 660-1. ''' S.P. Dom. Chas. II, xxxii, 36. See Bodl. Lib. Rawlinson MS. C, 984, where further particulars about the French congregation will be found. '" Calamy, Contin. of Acct. of Ejected Ministers (ed. 1727), i, 10. *'* Ibid. 11. '"' Burnet, Hist, of own Time (ed. 1897), i, 400-1 ; Calamy, Contin. of Acct. of Ejected Ministers, i, 31-3 ; see Overton, op. cit. 339—41. •«' Ibid. *« Ibid. «' Vest Min. 1665. 469 470
 * " Rdiq. Baxterianae, 284-5.
 * ^' See Hennessy, Novum Repert. *■* Calamy, loc. cit.
 * " Lond. and Midd. Arch. Soc. Proc. 1905 (New Ser.), i, 277.
 * '' Vest. Min. 1665 ; Newcourt, Repert. *^ Calamy, loc. cit.