ich could
cause him to offend. An apostle had declared that, though he had himself
no misgivings about the use of animal food or of wine, he would eat
herbs and drink water rather than give scandal to the feeblest of his
flock. What would he have thought of ecclesiastical rulers who, for the
sake of a vestment, a gesture, a posture, had not only torn the Church
asunder, but had filled all the gaols of England with men of orthodox
faith and saintly life? The reflections thrown by the High Churchmen on
the recent conduct of the dissenting body the Low Churchmen pronounced
to be grossly unjust. The wonder was, not that a few nonconformists
should have accepted with thanks an indulgence which, illegal as it
was, had opened the doors of their prisons and given security to their
hearths, but that the nonconformists generally should have been true
to the cause of a constitution from the benefits of which they had been
long excluded. It was most unfair to impute to a great party the faults
of a few individuals. Even among the Bishops of the Established Church
James had found tools and sycophants. The conduct of Cartwright and
Parker had been much more inexcusable than that of Alsop and Lobb. Yet
those who held the dissenters answerable for the errors of Alsop and
Lobb would doubtless think it most unreasonable to hold the Church
answerable for the far deeper guilt of Cartwright and Parker.

The Low Church clergymen were a minority, and not a large minority, of
their profession: but their weight was much more than proportioned to
their numbers: for they mustered strong in the capital: they had great
influence there; and the average of intellect and knowledge was higher
among them than among their order generally. We should probably overrate
their numerical strength, if we were to estimate them at a tenth part
of the priesthood. Yet it will scarcely be denied that there were among
them as many men of distinguished eloquence and learning as could be
found in the other nine tenths. Among the laity who conformed to the
established religion the parties were not unevenly balanced. Indeed
the line which separated them deviated very little from the line which
separated the Whigs and the Tories. In the House of Commons, which
had been elected when the Whigs were triumphant, the Low Church party
greatly preponderated. In the Lords there was an almost exact equipoise;
and very slight circumstances sufficed to turn the scale.

The head of