A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



and by proclamation, to put down the more brutal forms of Sunday sports. 

 When such action was taken in Lancashire in 1579, it was taken, not by the 

 Puritans but by the Chester Ecclesiastical Commission, the local mouthpiece 

 of the central executive. Similarly, the memorial of March, 1589, on the 

 enormities of the Sabbath '" did not emanate from the Puritan clergy but 

 from the gentry of the county. When, therefore, on his progress through 

 Lancashire in 16 17 James was presented with a petition by divers peasants, 

 tradespeople, and servants praying the removal of the restrictions of the late 

 reign on their lawful Sunday recreation, it is clear that the movement was a 

 civilian movement against a civilian ordinance. If it was not that, it could 

 only have been a thinly-veiled Roman Catholic scheme to discredit the local 

 Protestant justices. James appears to have been taken off his guard, and to 

 have given his decision offhand by word of mouth. ' On our return out of 

 Scotland last year,' he says in his proclamation of the following year, ' we did 

 publish our pleasure touching the recreation of our people in those parts 

 (Lancashire).' The proclamation of 24 May, 161 8, dated from Greenwich, 

 containing the recital just quoted, merely made general to the whole kingdom 

 the decision thus announced. There is no trace in James's reign of an agita- 

 tion in Lancashire against this proclamation. And when, on 18 October, 

 1633, Charles I republished his father's proclamation, the only traceable 

 instance of resistance to it in Lancashire was that of the magistrate Henry 

 Ashurst of Ashurst. The agitation against the so-called Book of Sports only 

 gathered significance later, when the combination of Puritanism with consti- 

 tutional grievances was producing the rebellion. 



It seems probable that the comparatively lenient treatment of the Puritans 

 in the county which characterized the episcopates of Lloyd and Morton would 

 have endured under Bishop Bridgeman had it not been for the rising influence 

 of Laud. Bridgeman's early action against Paget of Blackley, just described, 

 and against James Gosnell of Bolton and the Bolton parishioners in 1620 for 

 not receiving the Communion kneeling had been moderate to a degree. But 

 in 1630 Laud made himself felt in the county. In that year John Angier 

 was twice inhibited at Ringley before he had run the race of twelve months 

 there. The reputed conversation between Angier and Bridgeman rests on 

 the authority of Oliver Hey wood's Life of Angier, but bears every mark of 

 inherent prohability. ' Mr. Angier,' said the bishop, 



I have a good will to indulge you but cannot, for my Lord's Grace of Canterbury hath 

 rebuked me for permitting two nonconforming ministers, the one within a mile on one hand, 

 Mr. Horrocks of Deane, on the other yourself, and I am likely to come into disfavour on 

 this behalf. As for Mr. Horrocks my hands are bound, I cannot meddle with him [it is 

 thought by some promise made to his wife], but as for you, Mr. Angier, you are a young 

 man and may doubtless get another place ; and if you were anywhere at a little further 

 distance I could better look away from you, for I do study to do you a kindness, but cannot 

 as long as you are thus near me. 



Angier accordingly moved to Denton, where he tells us (Help for Better 

 Hearts) : \ r j 



though in 9 or 10 years I preached not above 2 separated years without interruption and in 

 that time was twice excommunicated, though Sabbath assemblies were sundry times distrac- 

 tedly and sorrowfully broken up and my departure from habitation and people often forced 

 no means left in sight for return, yet through the fervent prayers of the church God wa^ 

 graciously and effectually moved continually to renew liberty. 



"' Lanes. Lieut, ii, 2 1 7. 

 62 



