Page:VCH Norfolk 2.djvu/318

 A HISTORY OF NORFOLK Pawle, lo June, 1636, it was ordered 'that all the highe pewes of the church be reduced to the height of the women's pews,' and other orders were given for pewing.' The step taken in the latter part of August, 1635,' of sending directions to the strangers in the diocese that natives after the first descent shall conform to the English discipline and liturgy in their several parish churches, has been animadverted upon as an act of tyranny and one which produced a disastrous exodus of these desirable citizens, who in consequence returned to their native land. But it is evident from previous proceedings that the order was quite in harmony with the wishes of a large number of the persons concerned, and it was only to be expected that foreigners who had left their native land on account of religious persecution would take the first opportunity that offered of returning there. The letters of Peter Delawne and John Ellison, ministers of the French and Dutch congregations, in Norwich, in reply to Archbishop Laud's letter enclosing these directions, show no resentment, but on the contrary are couched in terms of gratitude.' It is hardly to be supposed that this simply shows the servility of these ministers.* Matthew Wren, bishop of Hereford, was translated to Norwich, 10 November, 1635. His was another very short occupation of the see, which he held for little over two years, being removed to the richer see of Ely in 1638. He had been chaplain to Charles, and the king had always a high respect for him. His ideal was ' uniformity of doctrine and uniformity of discipline,' and he had to deal with lecturers who were busily occupied in his diocese in working up the Sabbatarian agitation, and in inveighing against the sinfulness of removing to the east end of the chancel the communion table, whose position in the aisle led to so many unseemly consequences, such as its use for the deposit of all kinds of burdens, hats, cloaks, etc., the inevitable rubbing and defilement of the communion cloth in the continual passing to and fro, and even in some cases to its being used as a bench and sat upon when seats were all full. Such a temper was working up ° that only a cipher could have failed to be the object of bitter animosity, and any cipher could obtain his share of the same, if he wore the title which was the head and front of all offending — that of bishop. Wren was no cipher, but a capable governor, who at Hereford had digested and reformed the statutes of the cathedral, and improved its revenues, and the public mind was soon excited against him after his removal to Norwich by William Prynne, who wrote against him under the name of Matthew White in News from Ipswich. ' Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. ix, App. i, 3 1 1 a and b. ' Cal. S. P. Dom. 1635, p. 340. ' Ibid. p. 371. complaint, and it figures as one of the articles of impeachment against Bishop Wren. Even Clarendon accepts without questioning their assertion that he drove the foreign congregations out of the kingdom {Hist, vi, 183). ' In November, 1637, Henry Tailer of Hardingham, and Susan his wife, were before the High Commission Court for having uttered factious and seditious words. Henrj' had insinuated that the archbishop was a favourer of popery. Susan had jeered at the service of the Church of England, and said it were as good to be at mass as at such service ; she had also denied the right of the clergy to tithes, and affirmed that it was utterly unlawful for priests to have wives {Cal. S.P. Dom. 1637, p. 582). A news letter from C. Rossingham, 15 June, 1637, says that Alderman Atkins had removed from Norwich to London (l) because he was imprisoned for refusing to wear his arms at a general muster ; (2) because of a prosecution of very many of the citizens of Norwich for not conforming to orders made by the bishop at his visitation ; (3) also because there is ver)' little preaching in that city (ibid. p. 219.) 284
 * The Puritans, however, could not refrain from making use of their enforcement as a ground of