adherence to what they conceived to be their duty, they would now, since they could transfer their allegiance to the Sovereign, become some of the most faithful subjects of his Majesty. In the Lords, however, the Bill was opposed by Thurlow, the Lord Chancellor.
As the chief men among the Presbyterians were friendly to the measure, it seemed strange, that it should meet with opposition from English Churchmen.[1] An account of the whole proceedings was left in MS. by Bishop Skinner, which was afterwards published by his son in the Annals of Scottish Episcopacy. The Bishops, in an address to the Archbishop of Canterbury, stated, that the penal laws were only intended to repress the political disaffection ascribed to the Clergy and lay-members of the Episcopal Church, and they only asked to be placed on the same footing, as to toleration, with English Dissenters. They expressed their approval of the English Liturgy: and added, that, though they used generally the Scottish Office, the Clergy had a discretionary power to adopt either, and that some actually did use the English Form. The Archbishop, Horsley, Bishop of St. David's, and indeed most of the Anglican Prelates, maintained a friendly intercourse with their Scottish brethren, during their stay in London. A case was drawn up, in which the penal laws were enumerated, and the compliance with the acts in praying for the King and Royal Family was specified.[2] The Bishops also addressed Thurlow, having been apprised of his dislike of the measure before Parliament. In a second letter to his Lordship, they confess the political scruples, which
