218 BISHOP TRELAWNY. 



The watchfulness of Trelawny and others was aroused. Some 

 of the bishops and clergy obeyed the injunction without question- 

 ing its legality — others took a medium course. One minister 

 before he began to read it, told his flock that he could not disobey 

 the order to read it, but there was no order binding them to hear 

 it. In most cases it happened similarly, that where a clergyman 

 proceeded to read it, the congregation immediately left the 

 church. Only a few of the bishops and clergy obeyed the 

 order at all. The conduct of the chief opposers is thus described : — 

 When the king issued his order, several bishops who happened 

 to be in London assembled at the Aa-chiex^iscopal Palace, on the 

 18th of May, 1688, to consult. They were Sancroft, Archbishop 

 of Canterbury, and the following six Bishops ; Lloyd (St. Asaph), 

 Kenn (Bath and Wells), Turner (Ely), Lake (Chichester), White 

 (Peterborough), and the Cornishman Trelawny (Bristol). 



Their right course, they considered, would be — not to stir up 

 rebellion, but respectfully to entreat the king to withdraw what 

 they regarded as his illegal and unconstitutional command — 

 neither the Parliament, nor Convocation having given their 

 sanction to the measure. At the same time they expressed their 

 inability, on legal and conscientious grounds, to yield obedience 

 to it. Thus resolved, they crossed the Thames, from Lambeth, 

 and held a confidential interview with the king, presenting to 

 him their petition which ran thus : — 



To THE King's Most Excellent Majesty. 



Ubc fFjumble Ipetition of William, Archbishop of Canterbury, and divers of 

 the Suffragan Bishops of that Province present with him, on behalf of themselves 

 and others of their absent brethren, and of the inferior Clergy of their respective 

 Dioceses Humbly Showeth that their remonstrance proceeds not from any want 

 of duty or loyalty, nor from any want of tenderness to Dissenters, they being 

 willino' to obey the constituted authority of the King, in conjunction with the 

 Parliament and Convocation, but with respect to the King's illegal Indulgence, 

 they could not in prudence, honor, or conscience, make themselves a party to it ; 

 they therefore, most humbly besought His Majesty not to insist upon their 

 publicly distributing and reading it. 



King James, it is stated, was surprised and incensed. ' 'I have 

 heard of this before," he said, angrily, "but I did not expect it 

 from the Church of England, especially from some of you. If I 

 change my mind you shaU hear from me, if not, I expect to be 

 obeyed." The king made some mention of the word "rebellion," 

 whereat Bishop Trelawny was deeply affected, and fell on his 

 knees, exclaiming, " Eebellion, Sir ! I beseech your majesty do 



