Scory, and Holbeach, two of whom were, in the following reign, themselves burnt for heresy. When this poor woman had been convicted, and condemned as an obstinate heretic, she was given over to the secular power, and Cranmer was employed to persuade the king to sign the warrant for her execution. But the young monarch was so struck with the cruelty and unreasonableness of the sentence passed upon her, that when he was requested to sign the warrant for her execution, he could not, for some time, be prevailed on to do it. Cranmer argued from the law of Moses, according to which blasphemers were to be stoned: he said, he made a great difference between other points of divinity, and those which were levelled against the Apostles' creed--that there were impieties against God, which a prince, being his deputy, ought to punish, just as the king's deputies were obliged to punish offences against the king's person! These certainly were very futile pleas, and bishop Burnet says, they rather silenced than satisfied the young king; who still thought it a hard thing, as in truth it was, to proceed so severely in such cases. Accordingly, he set his hand to the warrant with tears in his eyes, telling Cranmer, that if he did wrong, as it was done in submission to his authority, he (the archbishop) should answer for it to God! This struck the prelate with much horror, so that he was very unwilling to have the sentence carried into effect. Every effort was now made to induce the woman to recant: both Cranmer and Ridley took her in custody to their own houses, to try if they could prevail upon her to do so; but remaining inflexible, she was executed May 2, 1550, bishop Scory preaching at her burning.

It would seem, at first sight, a little remarkable, that so much pains should have been taken with Joan Boucher to make her retract her opinions: but our surprise will cease when we attend to the account which Strype gives of her in his Annals of the Reformation: "She was (says he) a great disperser of Tyndal's New Testament, translated by him into English, and printed at Cologne; and was moreover a great reader of Scriptures herself. Which book also she dispersed in the court, and so became known to certain women of quality, and was particularly acquainted with Mrs. Anne Askew. She used, for greater secrecy, to tie the * Burnet's Hist. Reformation, vol. 2. part 2. p. 110.

books with strings under her apparel, and so pass with them into court."* From this it would appear that she was a person of no ordinary rank in life, but one whose sentiments on religious subjects were entitled to respect; and that, having tasted of the good word of God herself, and knowing its ineffable value to the souls of her fellow-creatures, she was not afraid of hazarding her own personal safety, in those perilous times, to put others in possession of the oracles of eternal truth.

There is a remarkable circumstance connected with the burning of this illustrious female, related by Fox, which is worth inserting in these pages. I extract it from Crosby's History, vol. 1. p. 59, who tells us, that he has taken it from Peirce's Answer to Nichols. "When the Protestant biships (says Fox) had resolved to put [this woman] to death, a friend of Mr. John Rogers, the divinity-reader in St. Paul's church, came to him, earnestly entreating him to use his interest with the archbishop, that the poor woman's life might be spared, and other means used to prevent the spreading of her opinions, which might be done in time; urging, too, that though while she lived she infected few with her opinions, yet she might bring many to think well of them, by suffering for them. He therefore pleaded, that it was much better she should be kept in some prison, where she had no opportunity of propagating her notions among weak people, and thus she would be precluded from injuring others, while she might live to change her own mind. Rogers, on the other hand, pleaded, that she ought to be put to death. Well then, said his friend, if you are resolved to put an end to both her life and her opinions, choose some other kind of death, more consonant to the gentleness and mercy prescribed in the gospel, there being no need that such tormenting deaths should be resorted to in imitation of the Papists. Rogers answered, that burning alive was not a cruel death, but easy enough! On hearing these words, which expressed so little regard to the poor creature's sufferings, his friend replied with great vehemence, at the same time striking Rogers's hand, which before he had held fast, "Well, perhaps it may so happen, that you yourselves will one day have your hands full of this mild burning!"

* Eccles. Mem. vol. 2. p. 214. ›

+ Supposed by Mr. Peirce to be Fox himself!

And so it came to pass, for Rogers was the first man who was burnt in queen Mary's reign!

The pious bishop Latimer lived during the reign of Edward VI. and has borne a very honourable testimony to the Baptists of his day. In his Lent-sermons preached before the king, he says, "The Anabaptists that were burnt [during the reign of Henry VIII.] in divers towns in England, as I heard of credible men, for I saw them not myself, went to their death intrepidly, as ye will say, without any fear in the world, but cheerfully."

That the Baptists were very numerous at this period, is unquestionable; and that many of those who were led to the stake in the reign of queen Mary were of that persuasion, is equally clear; though historians have not been very careful in recording their opinions on that point. Indeed, there is no want of proof concerning the hatred in which they were held by the ruling party, one instance of which may be mentioned. In the year 1550, after much cavilling in the state, an act of grace was passed, extending the king's general pardon to all persons, those confined in the Tower for crimes against the state, and also all Anabaptists being excepted! In the same year, Ridley, who had recently been raised to the bishoprick of London, held a visitation of his diocess; and among other articles, enjoined on his clergy this was one: "to see whether any Anabaptists or others held private conventicles, with different opinions and forms from those established by law." This excellent young prince, who was of the most promising expectations, and, in the judgment of many impartial persons, the very phoenix of his time, was removed by death in the seventeenth year of his age, and the seventh of his reign; by some, suspected to be owing to poison. Dr. Leighton, speaking of his premature death, says, "This king, a gracious plant, whereof the soil was not worthy, like another Josiah, setting himself with all his might to promote the Reformation, abhorred and forbid that any mass should be permitted to his sister. Farther, he was desirous not to leave a hoof of the Romish beast in his kingdom, as he was taught by some of the sincerer sort. But as he wanted instruments to effect this good, so he was mightily opposed in all his good designs by the prelatists, which caused him, in

his godly jealousy, in the very anguish of his soul, to pour out his soul in tears."*

Of the short and sanguinary reign of queen Mary, Mr. Neal has furnished a faithful compendium, vol. 1. p. 70– 104, and we have little to add to his narrative. In the first year of her reign, a person of the name of Woodman was cited before the bishop of Winchester, to answer to certain allegations touching his orthodoxy. "Hold him a book (said the bishop): if he refuse to swear, he is an Anabaptist, and shall be excommunicated." This criterion for ascertaining whether or not the poor man was or was not infected with heresy, is no farther entitled to notice than as it proves two things; namely, the existence of Baptists at that time in the country, and the severity of the penal laws against them. On another occasion, when Mr. Philpot was under examination by the lords of the council (November 5, 1555), it was remarked by one of his judges, that "all heretios boast of the Spirit of God, and every one would have a church of his own, as Joan of Kent, and the Anabap tists!" A pretty plain indication that the Baptists of that day were not only contending for the divine authority of that institution; but also for the necessity of their separating themselves unto the law of the Lord, and maintaining the importance of their own principles. It is painful to dwell upon the merciless proceedings of this reign, and we shall dismiss it with a few additional remarks.

In the beginning of June 1558, a proclamation was issued, of which the following is a copy.

BY THE KING AND QUEEN.

"Whereas divers books, filled with heresy, sedition, and treason, have of late, and be daily brought into this realm, out of foreign countries, and places beyond the seas; and some also covertly printed within this realm, and cast abroad in sundry parts thereof, whereby not only God is dishonoured, but also encouragement given to disobey lawful princes and governors: the king and queen's majesties, for redress hereof, doth, by their own proclamation, declare and publish to all their subjects, that whosoever shall, after the * For Dr. Toulmin's Reflections on the state of the Baptists during the reign of Edward VI. see vol. 1. p. 69, 70, of this work.

proclaiming hereof, be found to have any of the said wicked and seditious books, or, finding them, do not forthwith burn the same, shall, in that case, be reported and taken for a rebel, and shall, without delay, be executed for that offence, according to martial law.”

A week after the publishing of this proclamation, a meeting of Protestants was detected at Islington, and twenty-two individuals, men and women, were seized and taken before sir Roger Cholmley, who turned them over to the bishop of London, who, in the cruelty of his tender mercies, turned thirteen of them over to the executioners, seven of them to be burnt in Smithfield, and six at Brentford !*

Among those who were committed to the flames in Smithfield, on this occasion, was, Mr. Roger Holland, a gentleman descended from a very respectable family in Lancashire, where several of his predecessors are to be found enrolled in the list of sheriffs for the county. At a hearing before bishop Bonner; lord Strange, son of the earl of Derby; sir Thomas Gerrard; Mr. Eccleston of Eccleston, with many other gentlemen of the county, appeared to speak on his behalf. In his youthful days, Mr. Holland had been, not only a bigoted Papist, but also a very dissipated and profligate young man. He was, however, converted from the error of his way by the pious instructions of a servant-maid, in the family in which he resided. She put into his hands some books both in defence of the truth of the gospel, and against the errors of Popery. These means were, through the blessing of Heaven, so efficacious, that he became the member of a congregational church in London, married the female to whom he was under such lasting obligations, and sealed the profession of the gospel with his blood: his wife also suffered great affliction for maintaining the same truths. Two others, of the Islington congregation, were taken by Bonner, stripped naked, and flogged in his garden at Fulham, in a most unmanly posture, to such a degree, that a bundle of rods was worn out in scourging them! But on the character of this queen, and the general complexion of her reign, let it suffice in this place, to give an extract from an oration, composed by the learned John Hailes, esq.† and * Oldmixon's England, vol. 1. p. 284, folio.

Mr. Hailes, the writer of this oration, was bred at Oxford, and deservedly beld in high reputation for his learning. He was highly esteemed by the lord-keeper, sir Nicholas Bacon, and by lord Burleigh; two of the greatest men of that age.