ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY province. In the metropolitan area sixty conventicles were reported, beside ' others ... of less note, too long to enumerate, and many not yet discovered doubtless : and the more of late because they having received some disturbance in the counties have made flight to London.' Possibly as a result of the returns thus obtained, a second and more severe Conventicle Act wras passed on lo May 1670.° This Act contained provisions designed to stimulate the activity of informers, who were encouraged by Sir Samuel Starling during the continuance of his mayoralty, but repressed by Sir Richard Ford, who occupied the chair in 1671.^^ An Order of Privy Council on 10 June 1670 directed that all lately erected meeting-houses in and about London should be dismantled, and by another Order of 22 June a building so used in Rotherhithe called Jamaica Barn was pulled down. On 15 June public notice was given that seven places ' late made use of for conventicles and unlawful assemblies ' were ' by His Majesty's particular command in Council appointed to be used every Lord's day ' for worship and preaching ' by approved orthodox ministers approved by the Bishop of London, to commence on the Sunday following,' ^^ for the convenience of parishes where the church had been burned. The meeting-houses seized were Kiffin's in Fisher's Folly (afterwards called Devonshire Square) ; Vincent's in Hand Alley, Bishopsgate Street ; Doolittel's in Monkwell Street ; the Cockpit in Jewin Street ; places in St. Nicholas Lane, Salisbury Court, and between Shoe Lane and Fetter Lane ; and one in Meeting-house Court, Blackfriars. In 1670 Quakers' meetings were raided in Gracechurch Street, Devonshire House, the Peel in St. John Street and Westminster, and a meeting-house in Ratcliff Street was demolished. Many Quakers were fined and their goods seized. Early in September of this year occurred the memorable trial of William Penn and William Mead for preaching in the meeting-house in Gracechurch Street.^ The jury acquitted the defendants, insisting, in spite of intimidation by the Recorder, that the evidence did not prove an unlawful assembly. Both jurors and defendants were consigned to prison for contempt of court, but the commitment was declared illegal in the Common Pleas, and the principle for which the jury contended has never since been called in question. On 15 March 167 1—2 the king, in the exercise of his alleged ' Dispensing Power,' issued a Declaration of Indulgence to such ministers and others ' as do not conform to the Church of England.' Licences were to be granted to ministers and to places of assembly, and the licensed ministers and meetings were not to be molested. The Quakers made no applications for such licences, refusing thus to recognize the right of the civil power to permit, and by implication to forbid, religious assemblies : but the Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists gladly availed themselves of the Indulgence.'* '"Stat. 22 Chas. II, cap. I. B.M. Stowe MS. i86. "Maitland, Hist, of Lond. i, 452. '^ Be^se, op. cit. i, 415-16. The total number of licences issued was about 3,500, of which those relating to the metropolitan area may be thus classified : — Sixty-four meeting places were licensed in the City, seven in Westminster, eleven in Southwark, and thirty-four others within the Bills of Mortality ; total 116. Of these, sixty-five were Presby- terian, thirty-six Congregational or Independent, four Baptist, and eleven more or less indefinitely des ribed. The licensed teachers were : sixty-seven Presbyterians, thirty-eight Independents, five Baptists, and five uncertain ; total 115. Of these four Independents and one Baptist appear as assistants or colleagues with others, and twenty-five Presbyterians and two Independents held ' general ' licences authorizing them to preach in any allowed place. 'Sec Cal. S.P. Dom. l6j 1-2, paisim. 379
