ce gravely repeated such nonsense, the vulgar should
believe it. Still less can we wonder that wretches tortured by a disease
over which natural remedies had no power should eagerly drink in tales
of preternatural cures: for nothing is so credulous as misery. The
crowds which repaired to the palace on the days of healing were immense.
Charles the Second, in the course of his reign, touched near a hundred
thousand persons. The number seems to have increased or diminished as
the king's popularity rose or fell. During that Tory reaction which
followed the dissolution of the Oxford Parliament, the press to get near
him was terrific. In 1682, he performed the rite eight thousand five
hundred times. In 1684, the throng was such that six or seven of the
sick were trampled to death. James, in one of his progresses, touched
eight hundred persons in the choir of the Cathedral of Chester. The
expense of the ceremony was little less than ten thousand pounds a year,
and would have been much greater but for the vigilance of the royal
surgeons, whose business it was to examine the applicants, and to
distinguish those who came for the cure from those who came for the
gold, [498]

William had too much sense to be duped, and too much honesty to bear a
part in what he knew to be an imposture. "It is a silly superstition,"
he exclaimed, when he heard that, at the close of Lent, his palace was
besieged by a crowd of the sick: "Give the poor creatures some money,
and send them away." [499] On one single occasion he was importuned into
laying his hand on a patient. "God give you better health," he said,
"and more sense." The parents of scrofulous children cried out against
his cruelty: bigots lifted up their hands and eyes in horror at his
impiety: Jacobites sarcastically praised him for not presuming
to arrogate to himself a power which belonged only to legitimate
sovereigns; and even some Whigs thought that he acted unwisely in
treating with such marked contempt a superstition which had a strong
hold on the vulgar mind: but William was not to be moved, and was
accordingly set down by many High Churchmen as either an infidel or a
puritan, [500]

The chief cause, however, which at this time made even the most moderate
plan of comprehension hateful to the priesthood still remains to be
mentioned. What Burnet had foreseen and foretold had come to pass. There
was throughout the clerical profession a strong disposition to retaliate
on the Presb