Page images

the community were joined by the jurats, and not discouraged by the queen.

Her successor was less inclined to let matters take their course; and with the accession of James I. begins a notable divergence between the history of the two chief islands, a divergence of which definite and decided traces are still to be found. The key to it lies in the patent difference between Anglicism, in church matters, and Presbyterianism. Of Romanism, there was little left; but, of a predilection for those portions of Romanism which were compatible with the doctrines of the Church of England, and of a repugnance to them simply because they were Romanist, there was, at the death of Queen Elizabeth, as there is at the present moment, more than enough. Nor is it easy to account for them a priori. Heylin's view of the matter, which leads us but a little way towards the solution, suggests that accident had a good deal to do with it. The king, with his strong Episcopal views, was enough of a North Briton to know that Anglicism was not easily forced upon a population which was unwilling to receive it; and that, if it were to be forced at all, the process must be carried on covertly. He meant, then, to deal with one island at once,-taking each in its turn. For some reason or other that of Jersey came first. Hence, it is chiefly in its ecclesiastical aspects that the reign of James I. is important.

On his accession, he was greeted by both islands with a loyal and congratulatory address, not unaccompanied with a memorial in favour of a confirmation of their privileges. These were duly set forth, examined, and ratified. The royal court was empowered to levy dues on both foreign merchandize and home products for the maintenance of the necessary public works; and when complaints (in Guernsey, at least) had arisen concerning the powers of the governor, and a limitation was demanded, it was ordered that he was not to overstep the boundaries of the constitution. Upon his either pressing, or appearing to press,



his prerogative, Sir Robert Gardiner and Dr. Hussey were appointed commissioners with power to settle disputes. The same names, however, will re-appear in the ecclesiastical contests, of which a short notice may now be given.

In the first year of the king's reign, the Dean of Jersey, Dr. Bandinell, along with other clergymen of the island, drew up a body of canons agreeable to the discipline of the Church of England, and submitted them to the king. They were approved in England, but objected to in the island, especially by the Carterets, who were then not only the leading men in Jersey, but Jerseymen of a Presbyterian turn of mind. These objections were referred by the king to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishops of Lincoln and Winchester, who succeeded in modifying them in such a manner as to bring about a compromise. On the 30th of June, 1603, they were confirmed and accepted,—accepted in Jersey, but not in Guernsey. Nor did the Guernseymen change their mind on the matter, notwithstanding both pressure on the part of the king, and persuasion on the part of some of their fellow islanders.

The details of this change in Jersey are given by Heylin. The curate of St. John's parish died, and the colloquy appointed to the vacant benefice. Their nominee was the learned and courageous Brevint.

However, under James I., the bias in Jersey was for the king, in Guernsey for their own opinions; and this dualism between the chief islands, which existed in the matter of Episcopacy and Presbyterianism, existed in their political bearing during the wars between Charles and the Parliament. Jersey was for the king; Guernsey for the protector. There was, of course, a loyal minority on the one, and a republican minority on the other hand. The preponderating feeling, however, on each side was decided.

The war declared by Charles I. against France, in which the descent of the duke of Buckingham on the Isle of Rhè was

followed by a discreditable repulse, was the harbinger to the Channel Islands of the most important events of their history. The civil war was only in prospect, and had yet to break out; but the earl of Danby was governor of Guernsey, and it was the earl of Danby, as a royalist, whom the parliament, after the war had broken out, superseded by the earl of Warwick, as a constitutional, governor. In 1628, however, it is for protection against the French that the earl of Danby applies; and it is only partially and incompletely that his request is attended to. Troubles threaten, money is scarce, the sea is stormy, and it is in the month of December, A. D. 1628, that the squadron is due. It is not got together. The Assurance, of forty-two guns, two pinnaces, a ketch, and a merchantman, transport four companies, of which two are landed in Jersey, two in Guernsey. Peace, however, was made early in the following year, and the danger that threatened the islands from the side of France blew over. Nevertheless, the voyage of Danby was an important one. A vates sacer accompanied him,—Heylin.

Heylin's stay in the island was but short, not exceeding a fortnight. Hence, it is not for any minute details, or for information otherwise unattainable, that his work (with the exception, of course, of the narrative of the special business which brought him over) is referred to. It is little more than a book of travels, founded on an excursion in France; the first, or nearly the first, of a long, but not honoured, line of successors. As this, it is curious; curious for showing how things foreign to England struck an observant, learned, and acute Englishman.

The density of the island population excited his wonder; though, in putting the sum total of the inhabitants at 20,000, he has, doubtless, fallen into an exaggeration. But, though thick, the population was poor; and both the poverty and the populousness he attributes to the law of inheritance (the gavelkind of the islands, as he calls it), with its minute division and sub-division of the land. He finds the belief in witches and the



vulgar forms of sorcery prevalent; and, as he could not but have seen something of the same kind in England, we must suppose that it was excessively so.

He admires the patriotism and the English nationality of the people; along with the utter absence of any French sympathies. Though French in language, they are English in everything else; under a libera custodia and "not in any way acquainted with taxes." In the privileges that cut them off from this acquaintance, and in the devoted Protestantism of their creed, he saw the chief elements of their English feeling.

To all this he speaks as a personal observer. As a retailer of anecdotes he is less unexceptionable. The worst of the stories concerning the martyrs to Protestantism under the reign of Mary is due to Heylin; and for this he went by hearsay.

The account to which this remark more specially refers is so horrible and revolting that we are both bound and willing to take every legitimate exception to the evidence on which it rests in the hope of finding it inaccurate. One of the martyrs was a Perrotine Massey whose husband was a minister. Whilst bound to the stake and burning, she gave birth to a child; "a goodly boy, which was presently snatched up by W. House, one of the bystanders. Upon the noise of this strange incident, the cruel bailiff returned command that the poor infant must be cast again into the flames, which was accordingly performed; and so that pretty babe was born a martyr, and added to the number of the innocents." Duncan, as every one would be, willing to invalidate this shocking statement, appends to his extract from Heylin, some remarks by Mr. William Le Marchant, and by Mr. J. B. Tupper, both independent critics. The former are chiefly in excuse of the bailiff, under the plea that he was only acting under the orders of the spiritual court. The latter denies the fact, stating that, on the evidence of Parsons, Perrotine Massey was a prostitute who had concealed her pregnancy, but who was, nevertheless, delivered of the child before she went to the stake.


It is clear, that the likelihood or unlikelihood of this rests on the value of Parsons as a witness.

Now, every known detail of his life is against his credibility. He was not only a Jesuit, but an apostate; not only an apostate, but an apostate because he had been detected in dishonesty. He was, moreover, an acknowledged advocate, and a very unscrupulous one. The act which he wishes to get rid of was sufficiently odious to require either defence or denial; and to the defence of it, with such a man, the rule qui s'excuse s'accuse must apply. As he wrote before Heylin, we must cite his defence as evidence to the original charge having been made; a circumstance which Heylin most likely knew.

Heylin, then, as to the fact, is scarcely an authority at all. Nor is Parsons a sufficient authority for the denial of it. Both were decided partizans: the one ready to either suppress or invent anything which would tell against his new creed; the other, willing to hear and record of anything against Queen Mary; so much so, that the part of his book which bears upon her persecutions is little more than a rhetorical exercise. It begins in prose; but concludes in an outburst of very indifferent poetry:

"Si natura neget facit indignatio versum."

Hearsay evidence, too, must have entered largely in the opi- . nions he forms as to the relative merits of the Guernseymen and the Jerseymen; to the former of which he gives the preference; a preference, however, which rests more on their good fortune than their merits. They were more commercial, and, as such, wealthier and more conversant with foreign countries, more sociable and more generous. The Jerseymen, on the other hand, were poorer, and more exclusively addicted to the tillage of the soil; whence came a melancholy surliness, a destitution of humanity, and swarms of beggars, of which there were none in Guernsey. Whatever may be the difference of disposition at the present time, the influences, whether good or bad, of com

« PreviousContinue »