nning at almost any price the good will of
his brethren, argued with all his constitutional warmth for the clause
as it stood. The numbers on the division proved to be exactly equal. The
consequence was that, according to the rules of the House, the amendment
was lost. [97]

At length the Comprehension Bill was sent down to the Commons. There it
would easily have been carried by two to one, if it had been supported
by all the friends of religious liberty. But on this subject the High
Churchmen could count on the support of a large body of Low Churchmen.
Those members who wished well to Nottingham's plan saw that they were
outnumbered, and, despairing of a victory, began to meditate a
retreat. Just at this time a suggestion was thrown out which united all
suffrages. The ancient usage was that a Convocation should be summoned
together with a Parliament; and it might well be argued that, if ever
the advice of a Convocation could be needed, it must be when changes in
the ritual and discipline of the Church were under consideration. But,
in consequence of the irregular manner in which the Estates of the Realm
had been brought together during the vacancy of the throne, there was
no Convocation. It was proposed that the House should advise the King
to take measures for supplying this defect, and that the fate of the
Comprehension Bill should not be decided till the clergy had had
an opportunity of declaring their opinion through the ancient and
legitimate organ.

This proposition was received with general acclamation. The Tories were
well pleased to see such honour done to the priesthood. Those Whigs who
were against the Comprehension Bill were well pleased to see it laid
aside, certainly for a year, probably for ever. Those Whigs who were
for the Comprehension Bill were well pleased to escape without a
defeat. Many of them indeed were not without hopes that mild and
liberal counsels might prevail in the ecclesiastical senate. An address
requesting William to summon the Convocation was voted without a
division: the concurrence of the Lords was asked: the Lords concurred,
the address was carried up to the throne by both Houses: the King
promised that he would, at a convenient season, do what his Parliament
desired; and Nottingham's Bill was not again mentioned.

Many writers, imperfectly acquainted with the history of that age,
have inferred from these proceedings that the House of Commons was an
assembly of High Churchmen: