A HISTORY OF HERTFORDSHIRE 



of residence and the number of vacant cures." The presentments for Hert- 

 fordshire are neither numerous nor important. If they are to be beheved as 

 the whole truth the people of this district practised the old rehgious manners 

 and devotions with little hesitancy. At Hatfield, indeed, Agnes Mery had 

 not received the sacrament at Easter and was put to penance. There was 

 more difficulty about the observance of Candlemas. At Hemel Hempstead 

 Robert Rosse had stayed away from church on that day ; at St. Andrews, 

 Hertford, Robert Webbe refused to carry a candle; at Abbots Langley 

 Anthony Bonning did the same, while Alexander Allison told the vicar 

 roundly ' that a wiser vicar than yee will not require them.' ^^ 



In the face of presentments such as these it is curious to find that a 

 parish church in December 1557 could lack alb, surplice, light before the 

 rood, the image of the patron saint and a lantern, and that the archidiaconal 

 court imposed the comparatively light penalty of 40J. should these not be 

 obtained by Christmas Day.'" Yet this was the state of affairs at Bushey. 

 At Newnham ^^ even more necessary things seem to have been wanting, but 

 both here and at Norton the churchwardens were given until the Annun- 

 ciation to make good the deficiencies." 



Queen Mary did not live another year, and with her death came the 

 restoration of the English service and the reformers' triumph. By Elizabeth's 

 Injunctions '' issued in 1559 no altar was to be ' taken down but by the over- 

 syght of the curate of the churche, and the churchwardens, or one of them 

 at the least, wherein no riotous or disordred maner to be used ' ; moreover, 

 ' the holy table in every church ' was to ' be decently made and set in the 

 place where the altar stood, and there commonly covered as thereto belongith, 

 and as shall be appointed by the visitors.' At Bishop's Stortford the altars 

 stood until at least March 1558-9, and the rood-loft remained for another 

 year.'* Indeed, although many of the rood-lofts were then destroyed, the 

 general order for their destruction was not given until 1561," when the 

 archdeacon directed that the rood-loft at Bushey must be destroyed before 

 the following September.'^ 



On the question of the clerical deprivations at the beginning of the 

 reign of Elizabeth the evidence is unfortunately inconclusive. It has been 

 recently remarked " that owing to the break in the registers for the diocese 

 of Lincoln no less than thirty-five Hertfordshire parishes ' show lacunae in the 

 lists of their incumbents just for this period ' of 1559-71, but the estimate 

 of the number of deprivations must necessarily be imperfect. 



The Act of Supremacy received the royal assent on 8 May i559'" 

 while the Act of Uniformity'' passed its third reading on 28 April and came 

 into force on 24 June of that year. To these as an exposition were added 

 the Royal Injunctions drawn up by Cecil.*" The visitation at which these 

 were promulgated followed the precedent of 1 547, and was essentially civil 



^^ For the reports on the fabric see above, p. 3 1 1 ; the last two questions seem to have been ignored 

 (Strype, op. cit. ii [2], 404, &c.). ^ Strype, loc. cit. 



30 Hale, Precedents in Causes of Office, 78. " Ibid. '=* Ibid. 77. 



3' Iniunctlons geven by the Queues Maiestie, iSS9' 



^* Glasscock, op. cit. 54. 



25 Gee, Enzabethan Prayer Book, 175 n., 186. ^ Hale, Precedents in Causes 0/ Office, 78. 



3^ Birt, The ERzabethan Reliffous Settlement, 199. ^ Stat, i Eliz. cap. i. '» Ibid. cap. i. 



*" Iniunctims geven by the Quenes Maiestie, IS59 ; Gee, Elixuibethan Clergy, 41-70. 



318 



