fighting in the cause of the Bishops he was really fighting in the cause of God. Yet the controversy had a political as well as a religious side. In Scotland Presbyterianism meant the predominance of the clergy. In England, it would mean the predominance of the country nobility and gentry, who, either in their private capacity, or collectively in Parliament, presented to benefices, and in Parliament kept the final control over the Church in their own hands. Episcopacy, on the other hand, meant that the control over the Church was in the hands of men appointed by the King.

The folly of the Presbyterians appeared, not in their maintenance of their own views, but in their fancying that if they could only persuade Charles to agree to give them their way temporarily, they would have done sufficient to gain their cause. Early in 1647 they proposed that Presbyterianism should be established in England for three years, and that the militia should remain in the power of Parliament for ten. They could not see that at the end of the periods fixed Charles would have the immense advantage of finding himself face to face with a system which had ceased to have any legal sanction. Common prudence Common prudence suggested that whatever settlement was arrived at, it should, at least, have in favour of its continuance the presumption of accorded to every permanency established institution which is expected to remain in possession of the field till definite steps are taken for its abolition.

It is possible indeed that the Presbyterians calculated on the unpopularity of episcopacy and of all that episcopacy was likely to bring with it. It is true that it is impossible to give even an approximate estimate of the numerical strength of ecclesiastical parties. No religious census was taken, and there is every reason to believe that, if it had been taken, it would have failed to convey any accurate information. There is little doubt that very considerable numbers, probably much more than a bare majority of the population, either did not care for ecclesiastical disputes at all, or at least did not care for them sufficiently to offer armed resistance to any form of Church-government or Church-teaching likely to be established either by Parliament or by King. Yet all the evidence we possess shows

MRS. IRETON BRIDGET CROMWELL),

Eldest daughter of Oliver Cromwell.

From the Painting by Sir Peter Lely, in the collection of Mrs. B. M. Beadnell, (née Polhilly, at Sundridge, Kent.