exposed to every species of insult, depriva- 
tion, and distress, Tlius did the hypocri- 
ticahCharles reward those to whom he was 
indebted for his restoration to the throne 
of England! The Presbyterians had now 
no hopes of justice left, except what they 
owed to the King’s private attachment to 
the Roman Catholics, and to the exercise 
of an illegal power in their sovereign, by 
which the entire liberties of the country 
might one day be destroyed. This was 
called the King’s dispensing power, under 
colour of which he pretended to dispense 
with the execution of the established laws of 
tlie realm ; thereby, in effect, creating a 
power above that of the law, and making 
the monarch an absolute sovereign. It was 
a painful alternative to the Presbyterians, 
either to suffer the most shameful depriva- 
tions, or countenance the exercise of this 
usurping power, and thereby endanger the 
liberties of their country by a kind of unna- 
tural union with the Roman Catholics. In the 
succeeding reign, when this artifice of uni- 
versal toleration, and the dispensing power, 
was again attempted to betray the Pro- 
testant interest, the Presbyterians manifest- 
ed the most honourable disinterestedness, 
and refused to accept any toleration for 
themselves that might endanger the general 
interests of religion, or give countenance 
to those popish sentiments that had so often 
deluged their country with the blood of its 
inhabitants. 
In the year 1666 happened the memor- 
able fire of London, a calamity so great 
and humiliating, that the rancour of bigotry 
and persecution was somewhat abated by 
it. This heavy judgment taught the perse- 
cutors some useful lessons of righteousness, 
and the despised Presbyterians were for a 
time connived at. They built wooden ta- 
bernacles to preach in, and their places of 
worship were crowded with penitent and 
devout auditors. In tw'o years, however, 
after the fire of London, their persecutions 
were revived, and their private-fl'semblies 
were dissolved. Drs. Patrick and Parker, 
afterwards bishops, wrote bitterly against 
them ; but Parker met with a formidable, 
though a sarcastic, antagonist in the famous 
Andrew Marvel. In 1670, the conventicle 
act was revived, by which the Presbyte- 
rians again suffered the most cruel and 
vexatious persecutions. 
The last penal statute against the Presby- 
terians was the Test Act, for the repeal of 
which there was, a few years ago, a very 
warm but unsuccessful petition from the 
united body of Protestant Dissenters in 
this country. This offensive act, which was 
passed in the year 1673, imports that every 
person, in office or employment, shall take 
the oaths of allegiance and supremacy; 
“ receive the sacraments in some parish- 
church before competent witnesses,” and 
subscribe a declaration, renouncing all be- 
lief of the real presence in the eucliarist. 
From this period to tire year 1681, various 
attempts were made, by the successive par- 
liaments, for a toleration of Dissenters, 
and for putting in force the laws against 
Popish Recusants; and many books and 
pamphlets were published in their defence : 
but all in vain ; the court and the papists 
contrived, to the end of the reign, to op- 
press tlie Presbyterians in every possible 
way. In Feb. 1685 died the thoughtless, the 
merry, the dissolute Charles II. and with 
him all hopes of redress or justice on the 
pai t of the Dissenters : for whatever were 
the errors in this prince’s conduct, and the 
blemishes in his character, he was person- 
ally beloved by his people, who were over- 
whelmed with grief and astonishment at his 
death. He died in the dommunion of the 
church of Rome, having received, just be- 
fore his death, the sacrament at the hands 
of a Roman Catholic priest. 
James, Duke of York, brother to the late 
King, was crowned, with his Queen, on the 
23d of April, 1685. He commenced his 
reign by disclaiming arbitrary principles, 
and, at the same time, declaring he would 
abide by and maintain the religion esta- 
blished by law. James soon gave the na- 
tion to understand what he meant by tole- 
ration on the one hand, and an adherence 
to established usages on the other. By to- 
leration, he meant to encourage the prin- 
ciples and the practices of Popery, and 
by his support of the established religion, 
he meant the support of the doctrines of 
passive obedience, and non-resistance. 
In these principles and determinations he 
found himself supported by the articles 
of the English creed, and the importuni- 
ties of numerous hot-headed Jesuits, by 
whose influence he suffered himself to be 
almost invariably guided. 
Notwithstanding the plausible pretences 
of James II. of granting a free toleration to 
the Dissenters, his drift was easily seen 
through; and the Dissenters, much to their 
credit, as we have already remarked, joined 
with their persecutors of the established 
church, generously giving up their private 
resentments, however just, to their fears of 
Popery and slavery, which were making 
large strides towards the destruction of 
