notwithstanding the assistance of her new associates, it being no easy matter to overcome the contrary remonstrances of nature, and to her own conscience, and to unlearn those evangelical maxims which were carefully taught her by the faithful guides of her youth.

"Others might begin to instil opposite principles into her, others might confirm her, but the finishing stroke was reserved for you. But who do you mean, sir, by 'other relations'? We may guess that you mean her royal father, her mother-in-law, and her brother; but you are at liberty to say you mean any other relations, if you please. You give us ambiguous and general words only, when you should have given us most express and particular. a comprehensive term; of that duty appear? Why are you not so just to her and to yourself as to give us some of those compassionate and melting expressions of filial duty which fell from her on that subject? Why do you not produce some instances of her 'mildness and mercifulness to her enemies'? who, you know, she treated as such, though their crime was their being her father's friends?

All the duty in the world is but wherein, sir, did any part

"It would have been much for her honour, would have given great satisfaction to all good people, would have convinced the world that the manner of her death had been in all respects truly Christian, would have been much for your own reputation, and much for the credit of the revolution in which you are as great a zealot as a gainer. If you were so well

assured of all that duty, what dreadful negligence were you guilty of in not putting her in mind of it on her death-bed? Methinks, sir, you are not just to her when you give us instances of her charity to several sorts of indigent people and to strangers, which all the world. knew, and give no instances of even her natural affection to her own royal father, of which all the world doubted; when, had you suggested that doubt to her as you ought to have done, she would have shown herself a tenderhearted daughter, and would have been extremely afflicted for having been instrumental in her father's calamity.

"It is far from my intention here to dispute the lawfulness of the revolution; yet I may say that I never met with any so bigoted to it who would undertake to justify all the part which she as a daughter had in it and I am persuaded that it would mightily puzzle you to tell us what those obligations were that she had to God and to her country which were inconsistent with her filial duty."

This rebuke, delivered in a manner that would hardly have been expected in a man of so saintly a character as Ken, was not undeserved. Tenison on other occasions had shown no unwillingness to pick up any gauntlet which a polemical adversary might throw down; but on this attack, though he complained of it in private, he was silent in public-probably because he felt that Ken's accusations were undeniably well founded. There were circumstances in Mary's conduct, especially towards her father, which cannot be excused, and which justify the

character given of her by Lady Marlborough, that “she wanted bowels."

Ken's letter produced all the more effect because it appeared at a conjuncture when the authority of William was passing through a most dangerous and trying crisis. He had all along been exceedingly unpopular, especially with the clergy and the Churchmen, who hated him on account of his foreign accent, his Dutch sympathies, and his Presbyterian proclivities. And he had been by no means as careful to conciliate this powerful party as policy and prudence required him to be. Hitherto, however, the popularity of Mary, had to a considerable extent balanced the unpopularity of her husband, and diminished the disaffection with which he had all along been regarded.

But besides this, she had given to the new settlement a sort of colourable legitimacy, of which her death altogether deprived it. It was evident that the Government of William was now entering on a new and perilous path, in which it would require all the skill and care of the king to enable him to maintain his ground, and of which it was impossible to foresee whither it would lead the Government, which depended almost entirely for its continuance on the energy, vigilance, and ability of a king who, with all his great qualities, was now thoroughly depopularized, and fast sinking under the infirmities of a premature old age. Nothing, in fact, could have prevented his overthrow but the weakness and incapacity of his deposed father-in-law, who also was himself burdened with many infirmities, and rapidly

sinking into the grave. But we must now return to Tenison's earlier history, from which we have been led away by this disgression.

The year 1683 had been remarkable for a winter of uncommon severity, during which the poor of his parish suffered cruelly, and Tenison gave them very liberal assistance. A short time before, he had preached and published a sermon on the very important subject of discretion in giving alms; and now he had an opportunity, of which he availed himself, of carrying out in his practice the discrimination he had recommended from the pulpit.

But while he was thus engaged in providing sustenance for the bodies of his parishioners, he did not neglect their minds. He endowed a charity, school and set up a free public library, the first that existed in the kingdom. He provided for the payment of a librarian, usher, and schoolmaster; but though he placed several volumes in the library, he seems to have made no sufficient provision for the future purchase of books. However, the circumstance deserves notice, inasmuch as this institution shows that the idea of free public libraries was not, as many suppose, the invention of the latter end of the nineteenth century, but was anticipated by Tenison, two centuries ago. He also provided an endowment in land, situated somewhere near Regent Street, and which, therefore, if now applicable to the purposes for which it was designed, would be of immense value, and amply sufficient for all the objects that Tenison proposed to effect; but, unfortunately, it somehow found its way

into private hands, and the place of it cannot now be discovered.

In the year 1685 he attended the Duke of Monmouth before his execution, and on the scaffold, and addressed him with a kindness and mildness which softened the rebukes he thought it his duty to press on that unfortunate nobleman.

He was appointed to take part in the review of the liturgy projected by Archbishop Sancroft, but which was prevented by the revolution of 1688 from being carried into effect. The special part of the work assigned to Tenison was to replace words in the liturgy which were hard to be understood, by other and simpler synonyms.

Meanwhile, important changes had taken place in the province of York. On the approach of William to the city of Exeter, Dr. Lamplugh, the bishop of that city, entreated the inhabitants to defend it against the invader, and then fled to James, who complimented him on his devotion to the royal cause, applauded him as a bishop of the old sort, and appointed him to the archbishopric of York, which had been kept vacant for nearly two years. Having gained his archbishopric by his supposed fidelity to James, he retained it by the promptitude of his submission to William ; but he died in 1691, having enjoyed his high dignity less than three

years.

He was succeeded by Sharp, who had been the first victim of the Ecclesiastical Commission, owing to the boldness with which he preached against Popery, and had offended the Commons by delivering before them,