ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 



letter and the final legislative enactment of the Presbyterian system. This 

 interim period was no doubt mainly occupied by a severe triangular struggle 

 betv^een the few leading active Presbyterians, the generally apathetic body of 

 the clergy, and the Independents. The leaders of the high Presbyterian 

 faction in the county were Richard HoUinworth of Manchester, John 

 Harrison of Ashton-under-Lyne, and John Tilsley of Deane. As against 

 them such men as Warden Heyrick and John Angier of Denton represented 

 the Latitudinarian type. The Independents were championed by Samuel 

 Eaton and Timothy Taylor at Dukinfield, and John Wigan at Gorton and 

 afterwards at Birch. The ensuing struggle is vividly described by Martindale.*"" 

 It found expression also in a small flood of pamphlet literature. Putting aside 

 Charles Herle's Independency on Scripture of the Independency of churches, 

 which was published in 1643, the battle was opened by Richard Hollin- 

 VfOTth\ Examination of Sundry Scriptures, 1645 (17 December, 1644). This 

 was replied to by Eaton and Taylor in 1645 by their Defence of sundry 

 positions and scriptures alleged to justifie the Congregational way, 1645. 

 HoUinworth in turn replied in 1646 by his Certain queries modestly pro- 

 pounded to such as affect the Congregational way. To this Eaton and Taylor 

 rejoined in the same year in their Defence of sundry positions . . . justified. 

 To this HoUinworth replied in 1647 in his Rejoinder to Master Samuel 

 Eaton and Master Timothy Taylor s reply. The answer from the other 

 leading Presbyterians was more practical. It took the form of a peti- 

 tion to ParUament, which was set on foot in June, 1646. A true copy 

 of the petition of 12,500 and upwards of the well affected gentlemen, ministers 

 . . . of Lancaster . . . was published by John Tilsley in 1646. The 

 petition is attested by Robert Ashton, John Tilsley, and WiUiam Booth, 

 and it is evident that these were the three entrusted to deUver it to the 

 ParUament. The Lords acknowledged the petition on 25 August, 1646, and 

 Tilsley's Paraenetick to Lancashire, with which the printed tract ends, is dated 

 'From my lodging at the Golden Fleece,' in Tuttle Street, Westminster, 

 27 August, 1646. 



The petition begged for a settlement of church government and for 

 the suppression of all separated congregations. It was a demonstration 

 of the harmony between the London and the Lancashire Presbyterians, being 

 intended to answer the ' new birth of the City Remonstrance ' and to voice 

 the support of the Lancashire Presbyterians to the London Remonstrance. 

 The same tone of vehement protest was continued by the Presbyterians 

 in The harmonious consent of the ministers of the Province . . . of 

 Lancaster with . . . the ministers of the Province of London, 18 January, 

 1647-8. 



But the logic of events proved stronger than the logic of the press. 

 For although it is known that the Presbyterian system in the county was so 

 far established as that all the classes were constituted and also the Provincial 

 Synod for the whole county, yet the power of the sword, which remained 

 in the hands of the Independents, cut short the triumph of Presbytery. The 

 new-born system indeed had to contend with a twofold opposition. In spite 

 of the conversion of the bulk of the clergy there stiU remained a strong 

 undercurrent of apathy or even of hostility on the part of individual parishes 



"^ Autobiography (Chet. Soc), 61-4. 

 2 65 9 



