initial commit of ebook 28659HEADmain

5 files changed, 1457 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/28659.txt b/28659.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7e32679
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28659.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1441 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Acts of Uniformity, by T.A. Lacey
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Acts of Uniformity
+       Their Scope and Effect
+
+Author: T.A. Lacey
+
+Release Date: May 2, 2009 [EBook #28659]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ACTS OF UNIFORMITY ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Elaine A. Laizure
+
+
+
+
+The Acts of Uniformity
+
+Their Scope and Effect
+
+By
+
+T. A. LACEY, M.A.
+
+VICAR OF MADINGLEY
+
+
+
+RIVINGTONS
+
+34, _KING STREET, COVENT GARDEN_
+
+LONDON
+
+1900
+
+_Price One Shilling: net_
+
+
+
+NOTE
+
+
+The following paper, read at Oxford
+before certain members of the University,
+in November, 1899, is published at the
+request of some who heard it.
+
+
+
+THE ACTS OF UNIFORMITY
+
+
+The Acts of Uniformity are incidents in a great
+movement. They are far from being the most important
+of its incidents. Their importance has perhaps
+been exaggerated, and their purport is commonly
+misunderstood. My object is to place them in their
+true relation to other incidents. It is useless to study
+them apart; they cannot be understood except as
+details of a connected history. I shall confine myself,
+however, to a narrow, question: assuming the general
+history, I shall ask how the several Acts of Uniformity
+come into it, with what purpose and with what ultimate
+effect. To study immediate effects would be to
+engage in too wide an inquiry.
+
+We owe thanks to the men who drafted the
+statutes of the sixteenth century for their long argumentative
+preambles. These are invaluable as showing
+the occasion and purpose of the Acts. We shall not
+go to them for an uncoloured record of facts--their
+unsupported assertions will hardly, indeed, be taken as
+evidence for facts at all; but they tell us to what facts
+the legislator wished to call attention, and in what
+light he would have them regarded. The preamble
+of the first Act of Uniformity is among the most
+illuminating, and with its help we can assemble the
+facts in relation to which the purport of the Act must
+be determined.
+
+We are in the year 1548. Important changes in
+matters of religion had taken place; greater changes
+were in prospect. The processions before High Mass
+on Sundays and Festivals, conspicuous and popular
+ceremonies, had been stopped on rather flimsy grounds,
+and a Litany in English substituted--the "English
+Procession," as it was called. Many images in the
+churches had been destroyed, as superstitious; the
+censing of those remaining had ceased. The peculiar
+ceremonies of Candlemas, Ash Wednesday, and Palm
+Sunday had been omitted in many places. A chapter
+of the Bible in English was being read after the
+lessons at Mattins, and at Evensong after _Magnificat_.
+
+It was not very clear by what authority these
+innovations had been made. There had been royal
+proclamations and injunctions; episcopal injunctions
+and orders on visitation. There was another change,
+perhaps the most striking of all, in which Parliament
+had intervened. The first Act of the first Parliament
+of Edward VI. required the administration of the Holy
+Sacrament of the Altar in both kinds. No penalties
+were annexed, though elsewhere in the same statute
+severe penalties were appointed for depravers of the
+Sacrament. Convocation had concurred, adopting on
+December 2, 1547, a resolution of some sort in favour
+of communion in both kinds. [1] The records are too
+scanty to show exactly what was done. An _Order of
+the Communion_ with English prayers, to be inserted
+in the usual order of the Mass, was afterwards published,
+and brought into general use, on the command
+apparently of the King and his Council. Nothing
+was said in the Act of Parliament about the mode of
+giving communion, and therefore,
+
+  lest every man phantasing and devising a sundry way by
+  himself, in the use of this most blessed Sacrament of
+  unity, there might thereby arise any unseemly and ungodly
+  diversity,
+
+the King put forth this Order to be exclusively
+followed. [2] A letter from the Council to the bishops
+of the realm explains the source of the Order. It was
+drawn up at the King's desire, by
+
+  sundry of his majesty's most grave and well learned
+  prelates, and other learned men in the scripture. [3]
+
+This, then, was commanded by public authority. But
+there were other innovations of more doubtful origin.
+On May 12, 1548, at the commemoration of Henry
+VII. in Westminster Abbey, Wriothesley tells us of
+
+  the masse song all in English, with the consecration of the
+  sacrament also spoken in English,
+
+the priest afterwards "ministering the communion
+after the Kinges booke." In September, at the consecration
+of Fernir by Cranmer, Holbeach and Ridley,
+something of the same kind was done. The account
+in Cranmer's Register is confused, but it says distinctly
+that the Holy Eucharist was _consecrata in lingua vernacula_.
+The churchwardens of St. Michael's, Cornhill,
+this same year paid five shillings
+
+  to the Scolle Mr of Polles, for wrytyng of the masse in
+  Englysh & ye benedicites;
+
+doubtless for use in church. [4] In May, again, according
+to Wriothesley,
+
+  Poules quire and dyvers other parishes in London song all
+  the service in English, both mattens, masse, and evensonge.
+
+At St. Michael's, "viii Sawtters in Englyshe" were
+bought. [5] In September, Somerset, as Chancellor,
+wrote to the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge that in all
+the Colleges they should
+
+  use one uniform order, rite, and ceremonies in the mass,
+  mattins and evensong, and all divine service in the same
+  to be said or sung, such as is presently used in the king's
+  Majesty's chapel, and none other. [6]
+
+There is nothing to show what was specially intended
+here, but a copy of the order in question was sent with
+the letter for more information.
+
+Meanwhile steps were being taken for a thorough
+reform of the customary services. A committee of
+Convocation had been appointed for "examining, reforming,
+and publishing the divine service." In
+November, 1547, the clergy of the lower house of Convocation
+petitioned to have the result submitted to them,
+with what success is not known. [7] The _Order of Communion_
+was not improbably the work of this committee.
+During the year 1548 we know that several divines--probably
+the same committee still continuing [8]--were
+engaged in the task of drawing up an order of service,
+which at a meeting of the bishops held in October
+or November was subscribed by all, with the single
+exception of Day of Chichester. This was the order
+afterwards brought into use, apparently with some
+verbal alterations, as the Book of Common Prayer. [9]
+
+Here we see things in great confusion. The cause
+of the confusion is not far to seek. The services of
+the Church were regulated by custom, and custom
+was crumbling to pieces. Uniform in the main, the
+services in different places had varied in detail. The
+tradition of each place had been maintained partly
+by conservative instinct, partly by the pressure of
+ecclesiastical discipline. The conservative instinct
+was now giving-way to a temper of innovation;
+ecclesiastical discipline was paralyzed by the interference
+of the Crown. Men could see no reason why
+they should not innovate, and the authorities of the
+Church were powerless to restrain them. England
+was threatened with the state of things prevailing in
+Germany, where the clergy and magistrates of every
+free town took it upon themselves to revise the order
+of divine service; where the bishop of Strassburg, for
+example, even in his own city and his own cathedral,
+could not prevent the introduction of a strange and
+novel ritual. [10]
+
+Into this environment the first Act of Uniformity
+was projected. In the preamble of the Act we find
+the state of things not unfairly described, with a
+discreet avoidance, however, of all reference to the
+causes of confusion. Mention is made of the old
+diversity of use, and then of the new and far greater
+diversity that was coming in. The godly care of the
+King, the Protector and the Council, in setting the
+bishops and divines to work at reforming the service
+of the Church, is gratefully acknowledged. This work
+was now concluded "by the aid of the Holy Ghost,
+with one uniform agreement." The title of the book
+so prepared is recited: _The Book of Common Prayer,
+and Administration of the Sacraments, and other Rites
+and Ceremonies of the Church, after the Use of the
+Church of England_. The enactment then proceeds:
+
+"All and singular ministers in any Cathedral or
+Parish Church, or other place within this realm of
+England, Wales, Calice, and Marches of the same,
+or other the King's dominions, shall from and after
+the Feast of Pentecost next coming, be bounden to
+say and use the Mattins, Evensong, celebration of
+the Lord's Supper, commonly called the Mass, and
+administration of each the Sacraments, and all their
+common and open prayer, in such order and form as
+is mentioned in the same Book, and none other, or
+otherwise."
+
+Then follow the penalties. Any minister refusing
+to use the Book, or using any other, or
+speaking in derogation of the Book, for the first
+offence is to forfeit to the King one year's profits
+of some one of his spiritual promotions, if he have
+any, and to suffer six months' imprisonment. For a
+second offence he is to lose all his promotions and
+suffer one year's imprisonment. For a third offence
+the penalty is imprisonment for life. If he have no
+promotion, he is for the first offence to suffer six
+months' imprisonment; and for a second, imprisonment
+for life. There are penalties for laymen also.
+Any person speaking in derogation of the Book, or
+interrupting its use, or causing a minister to use any
+other form, is for the first offence to forfeit ten pounds,
+for a second offence twenty pounds; on a third
+occasion he is to forfeit all his goods and chattels and
+suffer imprisonment for life. These penalties are to
+be enforced by judges of assize, proceeding in the
+manner customary on indictment for trespass.
+
+What have we here? A purely penal statute,
+imposing the crushing penalties usual at the time.
+My purpose is to show the relation of the statute to
+the Book of Common Prayer. I observe, then, that
+the Book did not originate with the Act. It was
+already in existence, the fruit of the work of certain
+divines, which is spoken of in the preamble as concluded.
+The book was not authorized or brought
+into use by the Act. It was already in use, though
+by no means in general use. This fact is illustrated
+by the title of the Book itself, which sets forth the
+contents with some audacity as being _After the Use
+of the Church of England_. I am not here concerned
+with the question--the very difficult question--of the
+authority by which the Book came into existence and
+into use. I am only concerned to show that the
+authority in question was not the authority of Parliament.
+The Act of Uniformity did not authorize the
+use of the forms contained in the Prayer-book, for
+that was needless; it forbade the use of any other
+forms. It did not bring the Book into use, for that
+was already done; it brought it into exclusive use,
+which is not the same thing. It was not an enabling
+Act, but a prohibitory Act. It did not propose or
+command a reform; it found the reform already
+made. It did not purport to set forth an order of
+divine service; it found an order already in existence,
+and forbade the use of any other. It was frankly
+a persecuting law, and as such may fairly be compared
+with the statute of the Six Articles. In that case the
+doctrinal articles, as in this case the forms of worship,
+were not invented or introduced by authority of
+Parliament; the statute in each case merely imposed
+a penalty on all who impugned or refused them. The
+purpose of the Act was to secure by temporal penalties
+an uniformity which the ecclesiastical authorities of
+the time were unable to compass, and which it is
+possible they did not greatly desire.
+
+I shall not deal with the fortunes of the Prayerbook
+under the Act, or with the violent changes
+effected apart from the Act during the two or three
+years that followed. One incident, however, calls for
+notice. There were in London at this time numerous
+refugees of the reformed persuasion, chiefly from the
+Belgic provinces. These men organized themselves
+into a congregation, worshipping after their own
+rites. The King granted them the disused church
+of the Austin Friars. Here they came under the
+notice of the Lord Mayor, and of Ridley, the bishop
+of London, who attempted to enforce the Act of
+Uniformity against them. The matter was debated
+with much acrimony, and the Council intervened with
+a royal letter forbidding any interference with the
+congregation. So far as I know, this was the only
+act of toleration perpetrated during the reign of
+Edward VI. [11]
+
+The second Act of Uniformity need not detain
+us. The Prayer-book had been elaborately revised,
+still without the initiative or concurrence of Parliament.
+The statute of 1549, however, hindered the use of the
+revised Book; to use it was a penal offence. It was
+therefore necessary to put the revised Book in the
+legal position occupied by the unrevised Book. This
+was done by the Act of the fifth and sixth of
+Edward VI., in which opportunity was taken to add
+some pious reflections, which may breathe the spirit
+of Northumberland and the Council, and some further
+penalties, which may seem to us more in accordance
+with the spirit of the time. There was a clause
+cautiously relaxing the bonds in which the ecclesiastical
+jurisdiction was held, in order that it might
+come to the assistance of the champions of Uniformity.
+The only other point of interest is the statement that
+the revised Book was "annexed and joined" to the
+statute, a precedent which was followed in 1662.
+
+In the second session of Mary's first Parliament
+the Acts of Uniformity were repealed. But the
+appetite for legislation was aroused. Mary, too, had
+ideas about legal uniformity. She had no handy and
+comprehensive service-book, the use of which could
+be enforced; but the vague standard of what was
+customary at a certain date was set up:
+
+  All such Divine Service and Administration of Sacraments,
+  as were most commonly used in the Realm of
+  England in the last year of the reign of our late
+  Sovereign Lord King Henry the Eight,
+
+were alone to be used. Strangely enough, no penalties
+were appointed for the disobedient. [12]
+
+Elizabeth, immediately upon her accession, began
+to take measures quietly and cautiously for returning
+to the Edwardian position. She revived the use of
+the English Litany in her chapel, and encouraged it
+elsewhere. So far nothing was done seriously contrary
+to the statute of Mary, for the Litany as now
+used varied but little from that used under Henry
+VIII. Others, however, went further. The returning
+exiles, and those who had secretly sympathized
+with them, began to use the Edwardian Prayer-book. [13]
+There were no statutory penalties to restrain them,
+and the bishops looked on helpless, or acquiescent.
+Even in the Queen's chapel, it is said, the English
+service was used on Easter Day. [14] Long before the
+Prayer-book was restored to its legal position. Parkhurst
+was able to write to Bullinger, perhaps with
+some exaggeration, that it was again in general use:
+_Nunc iterum per totam Angliam in usu passim est_. [15]
+
+It was the Prayer-book as used in the last year
+of King Edward which was thus revived. But meanwhile
+a committee of divines was at work revising it.
+Little is known of their proceedings, or of the authority
+under which they acted, nor am I concerned with this
+question. [16] There is in the Record Office a paper
+which roundly asserts that Convocation went over the
+Book and approved the alterations before it was
+brought into Parliament. The document is undated,
+but the calendar assigns it to the year 1559. It
+is, however, certainly not of this date, and though
+interesting from another point of view, it cannot be
+taken to have any value as evidence of fact. [17] The
+statement cannot be reconciled with what we know
+of the proceedings of Convocation at the time.
+
+Parliament met on the 23rd of January, 1559, and
+after some abortive attempts at legislation a Bill for
+Uniformity was brought into the House of Commons
+on April 18, and passed within two days; in the
+House of Lords it was keenly debated, but passed
+without amendment on April 28, [18] all the bishops
+present dissenting. By this third Act of Uniformity
+all the provisions of the former statutes were revived.
+The same penalties were enacted, with one addition--a
+fine of one shilling for absence from church on
+Sundays or holy days, to be levied by the churchwardens
+of each parish. The Prayer-book is not
+said to be annexed to the Act, [19] but is identified by
+reference to the statute of the fifth and sixth of
+Edward VI., by which it is said to have been
+"authorized." Certain changes to be made in the
+Book so identified are specified: it is to be used
+
+  with one alteration, or addition of certain Lessons
+  to be used on every Sunday in the year, and the form
+  of the Litany altered and corrected, and two sentences
+  only added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the
+  communicants.
+
+The alterations are said to be "appointed by this
+statute." I call attention to these points, because
+they seem to show that Elizabeth and her Parliament
+assumed the function of amending the Book, and
+claimed for it a purely statutory authority. Such an
+assumption is strangely inconsistent with the subsequent
+actions of the Queen, and we are the more
+struck by the contrast if we reflect that the Act was
+introduced in the House of Commons. In 1571, when
+the Commons began to stir matters of the same kind,
+Elizabeth sent them more than one sharp message
+forbidding them to meddle with such concerns. The
+speed, moreover, with which the Bill passed the
+Commons leaves little room for doubt that all was
+fully prepared beforehand, the revision of the Book
+completed, and the enforcement of its use alone
+made matter of parliamentary debate. In the
+Lords there was considerable discussion, and the
+Book was roughly handled by the opposing bishops;
+but the debate proceeded on the Book as a whole,
+and there is no trace of any legislative action dealing
+with its details. At the same time it is right to observe
+that the power of Parliament to impose the Book was
+challenged, and no other sanction appears to have
+been contemplated. [20] The only possible conclusion
+seems to be that the Book was revised by the committee
+of which I have spoken, and that as very few
+changes were made, no fair copy of the whole Book
+was submitted to Parliament, but the alterations were,
+for the purpose of reference, mentioned in the Act.
+Even this was done without much precision. The
+wording of the alterations is not specified. More
+remarkable still is the fact that in all the printed
+copies of the Book yet other alterations were imported,
+by what authority is not known. It would seem that
+no copy of the Prayer-book ever existed which
+answered exactly to the description given in the Act
+of 1559. [21] It is impossible, therefore, to say that the
+form of the Book was precisely determined by authority
+of Parliament. The purport of the Act was to enforce
+the use of the Book in a form otherwise determined.
+That form was settled, with some measure of ecclesiastical
+sanction, in the time of Edward VI. What
+sanction there was for the trifling changes now made
+is not very clear, and possibly men were not meant
+to inquire too closely.
+
+The obscurity which veils the proceedings of 1559
+does not reappear on the occasion of the next revision.
+In 1660, on the restoration of the monarchy, the use of
+the Book of Common Prayer, which had been forbidden
+under severe penalties during the rule of the Long
+Parliament and of Cromwell, revived as a matter of
+course. The Ordinances of the previous eighteen
+years were void in law. Indeed, the Elizabethan Act
+of Uniformity remained theoretically in force. Charles,
+however, in the Declaration of Breda, had intimated
+in some ambiguous words that no attempt should be
+made to compel conformity. [22] The presbyterian divines,
+Reynolds, Calamy and others, who waited upon him
+in Holland, begged him not to insist on the use of the
+Prayer-book, even in his own chapel. He refused
+their request, replying that
+
+  though he was bound for the present to tolerate much
+  disorder and undecency in the exercise of God's worship,
+  he would never in the least degree, by his own practice,
+  discountenance the good old Order of the Church, in
+  which he had been bred. [23]
+
+The discussions that followed the Restoration
+turned chiefly on the question of church-government,
+with which I am not concerned, except so
+far as to point out that until the powers of the
+bishops were thoroughly re-established they were
+practically unable to enforce, by spiritual censures,
+the use of the prescript order of divine worship. Still
+it remained as prescribed, and was gradually returning
+to general use.
+
+In October, 1660, the divines of the presbyterian
+party once more approached the King with suggestions
+for a settlement of uniform practice. In regard to the
+Liturgy, they had no objection to a fixed form imposed
+by law, provided it was not too rigorously
+insisted upon; but to the forms contained in the Prayer-book
+they were rootedly opposed. The King seized
+the opportunity, and in his declaration of October 25
+undertook to appoint a committee of divines of both
+persuasions to review the Book; in the mean while,
+he wrote---
+
+  Our will and pleasure is, that none be punished or
+  troubled for not using it, until it be reviewed, and
+  effectually reformed. [24]
+
+On the 25th of March following were issued Letters
+Patent for the committee thus promised. The conferences
+held at the Savoy were, however, practically
+fruitless, and the committee was dissolved by lapse of
+time on the 24th of July. In the mean time, however,
+the Convocation of the province of Canterbury had
+been busy. Meeting on the 8th of May, 1661, the
+Synod drew up a form of prayer for the 29th of May,
+the anniversary of the Restoration, and also an office
+for the baptism of adults, which was approved on the
+31st of May. [25] In another group of sessions beginning
+on the 21st of November, the Synod, in accordance with
+letters of business received from the Crown, took in
+hand an exhaustive revision of the Prayer-book. This
+was completed on the 20th of December, when a fair
+copy of the Book as revised was subscribed by the
+whole Synod. [26]
+
+All this was done without the consent or concurrence
+of Parliament. The Commons became suspicious.
+Action under the statute of Elizabeth was
+suspended by royal command, and the Convocations
+were proceeding as if it were no longer in force. On
+June 25, 1661, a committee of the House of Commons
+was appointed
+
+  to view the several laws for confirming the Liturgy of
+  the Church of England, and to make search, whether
+  the original Book of the Liturgy annexed to the Act
+  passed in the fifth and sixth years of the reign of King
+  Edward the Sixth, be yet extant; and to bring in a
+  compendious Bill to supply any defect in the former
+  laws, and to provide for an effectual conformity to the
+  Liturgy of the Church, for the time to come. [27]
+
+This resolution begins the history of the fourth and
+last Act of Uniformity, which deserves a detailed
+examination. A Bill was introduced on June 29, and
+since the original Book could not be found, a printed
+copy of the year 1604 was annexed. It was read a
+third time on July 9, and sent up to the Lords. [28]
+Nothing more was heard of it for several months.
+The object of the Commons was simply to enforce
+with greater efficacy the existing law. But this would
+have rendered futile the labours of Convocation in
+revising the Prayer-book. The use of the revised
+Book would be forbidden under penalty. The Lords
+therefore held their hand. The Bill sent up from the
+Commons was at length read the first time on January
+14, 1662. Three days later it was read a second time
+and committed. [29] The committee met several times
+and adjourned, waiting until they might see the revised
+Book prepared by Convocation. [30] At length, on
+February 24, this Book, certified under the Great
+Seal, was sent by the King to the House of Lords.
+On March 13 the committee reported the Bill with
+several amendments and additions. Before these were
+considered, the alterations in the Book were read over
+to the House, but not in any way discussed, and a vote
+of thanks to the Convocation for the pains taken in
+the matter was adopted. [31] On April 9 the Bill passed
+the third reading, with the revised Book annexed in
+place of the former printed copy, and so was returned
+to the Commons. [32]
+
+Meanwhile the Convocation had, on March 5,
+commissioned three bishops to watch any alterations
+which might be imported into the Book by either
+House of Parliament. [33] On April 15 the Commons
+appointed a committee to compare the revised Book
+with the copy of 1604, and on the following day, upon
+the report of the committee, resolved by a narrow
+majority not to allow any debate on the alterations
+made. They reserved, however, the right to do so
+had they wished. [34] The clauses of the Bill were carefully
+gone through; a proviso inserted by the Lords,
+that no man should be deprived for not using the
+surplice or the Cross in Baptism, was thrown out; [35]
+several amendments were carried, and a conference of
+the two Houses was held for their consideration. [36]
+
+On this occasion occurred two most significant
+incidents. The first arose out of the wish of the
+Commons to insert a proviso for
+
+  reverend and uniform gestures and demeanours to be
+  enjoined at the time of divine service.
+
+It was agreed in Conference that this matter was more
+proper for Convocation than for Parliament, and, therefore,
+by a vote of the House of Lords, Convocation
+was requested
+
+  to prepare some canon or rule for that purpose, to be
+  humbly presented unto his majesty for his assent. [37]
+
+The other incident arose from the discovery of the
+Commons' committee that in one of the rubrics of the
+revised Book the word _persons_ appeared to be written
+by mistake for _children_. On this
+
+  the Lord Bishop of Durham acquainted the House that
+  himself, and the Lord Bishop of St. Asaph, and the
+  Lord Bishop of Carlisle, had authority from the Convocation
+  to mend the said word, averring it was only a mistake
+  of the scribe, and accordingly they came to the
+  clerk's table, and amended the same. [38]
+
+In fact, on April 21, the bishops in Convocation had
+heard from the Chancellor of the mistake, and had
+taken measures accordingly, adding Cosin of Durham
+to their committee of March 5 appointed for such
+an emergency. [39]
+
+The Act received the royal assent on May 19.
+I have dealt so fully with its course through Parliament
+because of the character of the incidents. In
+itself it does not contain much that is new as regards
+my subject. The preamble recites the statute of
+Elizabeth, and relates the fact of its non-observance,
+and the neglect of the Book of Common Prayer during
+the late troublous times; takes note of the King's
+commission for the review of the Book and its subsequent
+revision by Convocation; and records the
+message in which the King recommended to Parliament
+that the Book so revised should "be the Book"
+appointed to be used everywhere in the kingdom.
+This accordingly is enacted, and in the twenty-fourth
+section all the existing laws on the subject, including
+of course the statute of Elizabeth, are confirmed as
+referring to the revised Book and none other. The
+revised Book, as in 1552, is thus put in exactly the
+same legal position as the original, and the authentic
+copy, as on that occasion, is, for the purpose of
+reference, annexed and joined to the Act. The other
+lengthy clauses of the Act contain elaborate provisions
+for preventing nonconformity, but with one exception
+they do not throw any further light on the relation of
+the legislature to the Prayer-book. The exception is
+the fifteenth section, which provides
+
+  that the penalties in this Act shall not extend to the
+  Foreiners or Aliens of the Forein Reformed Churches
+  allowed, or to be allowed by the King's Majesty, his
+  heirs and successors, in England.
+
+An exception which had hitherto been made, as we have
+seen, by a stretch of prerogative, was now established
+by law. The exception illustrates the purpose of the
+Act. No sect or congregation of native-born dissenters
+was to be allowed any relief from the penalties imposed
+by law. The guarded promise of toleration made by
+the King before and after his restoration was ignored.
+The use of the forms of worship provided by the
+authorities of the Church was to be forced on the
+whole nation.
+
+The conclusion that I would draw from this
+analysis of proceedings will be fairly obvious. The
+Prayer-book did not originate with Parliament, nor
+was it in any true sense authorized by the Crown in
+Parliament. The action of the legislature on the first
+and the last occasion is perfectly intelligible. A Book
+of Common Prayer was in existence, drawn up and
+approved by ecclesiastical authority, on the first
+occasion it is not quite clear after what fashion, on the
+last occasion by the unquestioned exercise of synodical
+powers. This Book, so approved, was then, by
+authority of Parliament, imposed upon the whole
+nation. This being clearly the case on the two
+occasions when the procedure is free from ambiguity,
+I think we may fairly argue for the same construction
+of those proceedings, on the other two occasions, which
+are more open to question. The policy of the Acts
+of Uniformity is to be taken as a whole. The writer
+of the paper in the Record Office to which I have
+referred, purporting to give an account of what was
+done in 1559, explains that parliamentary action is
+limited to enforcing the use of the Book by penalties.
+Further authority than this, he says emphatically, is
+not in the Parliament. Writing early in the seventeenth
+century he sets out exactly the procedure
+followed in 1662. He describes, in fact, the policy of
+Uniformity, which was, therefore, not peculiar to the
+last occasion. [40]
+
+I shall describe it negatively. The Parliament
+was not legislating for the regulation of divine worship.
+In 1662, as we have seen, both Houses, while stiffly
+maintaining their right to interfere, expressly declined
+that task, and declared it the proper work of Convocation.
+This was not from want of interest. The
+Commons were eager to have some further rules for
+"reverend gestures." But these things were to be
+regulated rather by canon than by statute. The Convocation
+was not even asked to prepare something for
+submission to Parliament; "some canon or rule,"
+enacted by Convocation with royal assent, would be
+the sufficient and proper authority. [41] There could be
+no clearer proof, that, according to the mind of Parliament,
+Convocation has full powers, and is the proper
+authority, for dealing with such matters.
+
+But even if this be so, it is urged, on the other
+hand, that what is contained in the Prayer-book is
+actually prescribed and stands by authority of Parliament.
+The Book annexed is treated as a schedule
+of the Act of Uniformity. It is, says Dr. Stephens,
+
+  part of the statute law of the land; and all the legal
+  and equitable principles of construction which apply
+  to statutes in general, equally apply to the Book of
+  Common Prayer. [42]
+
+This opinion, supported as it is by a general
+consent of high authorities, I venture to contest.
+What is meant by the Book being "annexed" to
+the statute? Physically, it was attached by strings
+to the parchment on which the Act was engrossed.
+Was it legally a part of the statute? Was it a
+schedule? The procedure in Parliament, I submit,
+makes against this opinion. Can the schedule of a
+Bill in Parliament be amended otherwise than by the
+vote of the two Houses? But when a mistake was
+found in the Book annexed, it was corrected, as we
+have seen, not by the clerk under authority of Parliament,
+but by three bishops under authority of Convocation.
+Could any part of a Bill in Parliament
+have been so amended? The matter was trivial;
+there was the less reason for abnormal measures;
+and Parliament has always been jealous about small
+matters of procedure, and never more so than at that
+period. I submit that the Book annexed cannot be
+regarded as an integral part of the statute.
+
+But if the Prayer-book is thus external to the
+statutes which require its use, can its meaning be
+affected by any of the provisions of those statutes?
+If the wisdom of Parliament had enacted on some
+occasion that Aldrich's Logic and the Elements of
+Euclid should be read in the Universities, would it
+follow that the rules of the syllogism and the axioms
+of geometry are to be interpreted by "the principles
+of construction which apply to statutes"? Or since
+geography is by statutory authority taught in our
+elementary schools, are we to infer that the world
+revolves on its axis subject to the British Constitution?
+
+The Prayer-book is a liturgical document, and surely
+it should be interpreted by the principles which apply
+not to statutes, but to liturgies in general.
+
+If the Acts of Uniformity are not laws for regulating
+divine worship, what are they? I should call
+them, briefly, laws of persecution. They were intended
+to enforce on all men by criminal process the
+observance of the Church's forms. That is persecution,
+I suppose, if anything can be so called. I shall
+not indulge in any moral reflexions on persecution.
+They may be taken for granted. I shall only note
+the dry fact that within thirty years of the last enactment
+the whole purpose of the statutes was destroyed
+by the Act of Toleration. A good part of them has
+been formally repealed, as may be seen by a glance
+at their text as printed in the Revised Statutes.
+What remains? A singular ruin. The effect of the
+law has been turned upside down. It was intended
+only to restrain dissenters; dissenters are now the
+only people to whom it does not apply. It was intended
+only to prevent unauthorized variations from
+the Prayer-book; it is effective now to prevent
+authorized variations alone. The one effect of the
+Acts of Uniformity at the present time is to render
+it practically impossible for the authorities of the
+Church to make the smallest amendment of the text
+of the Book of Common Prayer. In doing this they
+would run counter to the law which orders the use
+of this Book and none other. Unauthorized variations,
+on the other hand, are unchecked by the Acts
+of Uniformity. So far as they are restrained at all,
+they are restrained by the general disciplinary powers
+of the Church. Theoretically those who indulge in
+them are liable to the statutory penalties imposed by
+the Act of Elizabeth. Practically these cannot be
+enforced; their savagery makes it impossible. They
+stand as they were enacted in 1549, and again ten
+years later; they are now intolerable. I am told that
+no attempt has been made to enforce them since the
+year 1796, nor is there any chance of their being
+revived. The Acts of Uniformity, so far as they
+relate to the Prayer-book, have therefore no present
+effect but to hinder the activity of the Church. They
+began with fierce persecution on behalf of the Church.
+They end by being merely a nuisance.
+
+
+
+APPENDIX
+
+
+State Papers, Domestic, Elizabeth, Vol. VII., No. 46.
+
+Ther returned into England upon Queene Maryes death
+that had bin Bishops in K. Ed. 6 tyme
+
+1. Coverdale.
+
+2. Scorye.
+
+3. Chenye.
+
+4. Barlowe.
+
+Ther remaned Bishops for some tyme that were Bishops
+in Queene Maryes tyme,
+
+1. Oglethorpe, B. of Carleile who crowned Q. Eliz.
+
+2. Kichin, B. of Landafe,
+
+Ther were Bishops in the Parlament holden primo Eliz.
+and in the Convocation holden at the same tyme
+
+Edmunde B. of London.
+
+John B. of Winton.
+
+Richard B. of Wigorne.
+
+Ralph B. of Covent and Lichfeilde.
+
+Thomas B. of Lincolne.
+
+James B. of Exon.
+
+The Booke of Comon Prayer, published primo Eliz.
+was first resolved upon and established in the Church in
+the tyme of K. Ed. 6. It was re-examined with some small
+alterations by the Convocation consistinge of the said
+Bishops and the rest of the clergy in primo Eliz. which
+beinge done by the Convocation and published under the
+great scale of Englande ther was an Acte of Parlament for the
+same booke which is ordinarily printed in the beginninge of
+the booke; not that the booke was ever subjected to the
+censure of the Parlament but being aggreed upon and
+published as afforesaid, a law was made by the Parlament
+for the inflictinge of penalty upon all such as should refuse
+to use and observe the same; further autoryty then so is
+not in the Parlament, neyther hath bin in former tymes
+yealded to the Parlament in thinges of that nature but the
+judgment and determination therof hath ever bin in the
+Church, therto autorised by the Kinge which is that which
+is yealded to H. 8. in the statute of 25 his raygne.
+[Endorsed] Bishops.
+
+******
+
+Another copy follows, No. 47, written with modernised
+spelling. It is endorsed as follows:
+
+(1) _Bishops_.
+
+(2) _Power of the Convocn in framing the Book of Common
+Prayer &c. and of the Act of Parlt Sr. Th. Wilson's hand_.
+
+The second endorsement of No. 47 (wrongly given in the
+Calendar as "Progress of the Convocation, etc.") is in the
+handwriting of Sir Joseph Williamson, Keeper of the State
+Paper Office, and from 1674 to 1679 Secretary of State. Sir
+Thomas Wilson was a confidential servant of Robert, Earl of
+Salisbury, who often employed him in matters of secret
+police. He was made Keeper of the S.P. Office in 1605 and
+died in 1629. A comparison with his letters and notes
+preserved in the Record Office shows that the copy in his
+handwriting is the earlier one, No. 46. It is written, however,
+more formally and with more archaic spelling than his
+original papers. It would therefore seem to be a copy of an
+older original. I venture to suggest that it may have been
+written for Salisbury's use in 1604, when revision of the
+Prayer-book was being discussed. There is nothing to show
+the provenance of the original, but the errors in point of fact
+make against an early date. Cheney is said to have been
+a bishop in the time of Edward VI.; he was in fact raised
+to the episcopate in the year 1562. Oglethorpe is said, like
+Kitchen, to have retained his bishopric under Elizabeth. He
+was in fact deposed on June 21, 1559, and died in the following
+December. The statement that the Prayer-book was
+submitted to the Convocation, "consisting of the said
+Bishops," is all but demonstrably false.
+
+
+
+[1] Wilkins, _Concilia_, iv. 6; Strype, _Cranmer_, vol. i. p. 156; Cardwell,
+_Synod_., p. 421.
+
+[2] Proclamation prefixed to _The Order of the Communion_, printed by
+Grafton, March 8, 1547/8.
+
+[3] Cardwell, _Doc. Ann_., vol. i. p. 72. As the bishops were required
+"to cause these books to be delivered to every parson, vicar, and curate,"
+within their several dioceses, the more scrupulous among these might
+fairly argue that they accepted the order on the authority of the diocesan.
+But it may be doubted whether such a refinement occurred to many at
+that time.
+
+[4] Overall, _Accounts of the Churchwardens_, etc., p. 67.
+
+[5] _Ibid_., p. 68. There exist among the MSS. of the British Museum
+many English renderings of parts of the Mass and the Divine Service,
+anterior to the Book of Common Prayer, with musical notation. These
+will shortly be discussed by Mr. W. H. Frere in the _Journal of Theological
+Studies_.
+
+[6] C.C.C.C. MSS. 106, fo. 495, cited in Gasquet and Bishop, _Edward
+VI. and the Book of Common Prayer_, p. 147, from Cooper's Annals of
+Cambridge, ii. p. 18.
+
+[7] Cardwell, _Synod_., p. 420; Strype, _Cranmer_, vol. i. p. 155. The
+petition of the clergy expressly says that this had been done _ex mandato
+convocationis_. Cranmer's notes on the proceedings, given in Cardwell,
+make them say that "by the commandment of King Henry VIII. certain
+prelates and other learned men were appointed to alter the service in the
+Church." It is probably an instance of two ways of regarding the same
+thing, and is not uninstructive.
+
+[8] I venture on this suggestion as to the character of the much discussed
+"Windsor Commission," but it is beside my subject to debate the
+point. It seems to reconcile the many assertions that the Prayer-book
+was prepared by authority of Convocation with other assertions that all
+was done by a committee appointed by the Crown. See the preceding
+note. The statements are collected in Gasquet and Bishop, pp. 148-156.
+
+[9] See Gasquet and Bishop, p. 178, and the notes of the debate on the
+Sacrament printed by them from MS. Reg. 17 B. xxxix., in their Appendix
+v. pp. 403, 404.
+
+[10] The _Interim_ of 1548 was an attempt of Charles V. and the Diet of
+Augsburg to grapple with this state of things, and was so far analogous
+to the English Act of Uniformity, and a precedent for it.
+
+[11] See the letters of Micronius and Utenhovius to Bullinger, _Orig.
+Lett_, pp. 568, 570, 587. The patent for the incorporation and protection
+of the congregation is given in French by Collier, _Records_, vol. ii.
+no. lxv. The date is July 24, 1550, and a _non obstante_ clause bars any
+interference "par aucun statute, acte, ordonance, provision, ou restriction,
+faits publietz, ordonnez, ou pourveus au contraire."
+
+[12] I Mariae, sess. 2, cap. 2. Gibson, p. 304.
+
+[13] And even this with some freedom. See Machyn's Diary, April 6 and
+7, 1559. Jewel wrote to Peter Martyr on April 14: "Itaque factum est
+ut multis iam in locis missae etiam invitis edictis sua sponte ceciderint."
+_Zurich Letters_, ep. vi.
+
+[14] Venetian State Papers, vol. vii. p. 57. Easter Day fell on March 26
+that year. The particulars reported by _il Schifanoya_ are interesting. On
+the morrow of St. George's Day, he reports again, mass for the dead was
+said for the chapter of the Garter in the usual manner, but the Epistle and
+Gospel were said in English. _Ibid_., p. 74.
+
+[15] _Zurich Letters_., ep. xii.
+
+[16] See Caldwell, _Conferences_, pp. 19-21, and 47-54, 2nd ed.
+
+[17] S.P. Dom. Eliz., vol. vii. no. 46. See below, p. 26, and Appendix.
+
+[18] So all authors; I can find no evidence of the date.
+
+[19] Nor was it so annexed in fact. Cardwell is here in error (_Conferences_,
+p. 30), and his mistake has been generally followed. If there were any
+doubt on the subject, it would be dispelled by the fact that in 1661 the
+House of Commons sought the Book annexed to the Act, not of 1559, but
+of 1552. See below, p. 21.
+
+[20] See the Bishop of Chester's speech against the Bill, in Cardwell,
+_Conferences_, p. 116: "Marke, my lordes, this short discourse, I beseech
+your lordshippes, and yee shall perceave, that all catholike princes, heryticke
+princes, yea, and infidells, have from tyme to tyme refused to take that
+upon them, that your lordshippes go about and chalenge to do." Collier,
+vol. ii. p. 430, conjectures that the rubric about kneeling at Communion
+was omitted by the committee of revisers, and restored while the Bill was
+passing through Parliament; but there is no evidence on either point.
+The letter of Guest, to which he refers, probably belongs to an early
+stage of the revision, and contemplates other and more striking variations
+from the Book as finally revised. See especially the paragraphs in
+Cardwell, _Conferences_, p. 51.
+
+[21] See Clay, _Liturgies, etc., of Queen Elizabeth_, pp. xii. seqq.
+
+[22] Clarendon, _History_, vol. iii. p. 747, 8vo, ed. 1707.
+
+[23] Ibid., p. 771.
+
+[24] Cardwell, _Conferences_, p. 295. The Address of the Ministers, the
+King's Declaration of October 25, and the Letters Patent of March 25,
+are given by Cardwell in full, pp. 277-302.
+
+[25] Cardwell, _Synod_., pp. 640-642.
+
+[26] _Ibid_., pp. 651-660.
+
+[27] _Commons' Journals_, viii. 247. This and the following citations from
+the Journals of the two Houses will be found collected in the Report of
+the Ecclesiastical Courts Commission, Appendix v.
+
+[28] _Commons' Journals_, viii. p. 296. The "original Book" should mean
+the copy actually tied to the Statute of 1552. It was probably intended to
+mark in it the alterations mentioned in the Act of 1559. The actual Book
+was missing, and apparently no copy of the Prayer-book of that year could
+readily be procured. A copy of the year 1604 was probably selected as
+being anterior to the changes made by James I. after the Hampton Court
+Conference, and so presumably printed in accordance with the Act of
+1559. It did not, however, as I have said above, strictly follow the Act.
+Two prayers printed "before the reading Psalms" were cancelled before
+the book was annexed to the Bill, but the other variations would probably
+be unknown to the examiners.
+
+[29] _Lords' Journals_, xi. 364, 366.
+
+[30] _Ibid_., xi. 383.
+
+[31] _Lords' Journals_, xi. 406-408.
+
+[32] _Ibid_., xi. 425.
+
+[33] Cardwell, _Synod_., p. 666.
+
+[34] _Commons' Journals_, viii. 406-408.
+
+[35] _Ibid_., viii. 413.
+
+[36] _Lords' Journals_, xi. 441-442.
+
+[37] _Lords' Journals_, xi. 451.
+
+[38] _Ibid_.
+
+[39] Cardwell, _Synod_., p. 670.
+
+[40] See Appendix.
+
+[41] This fact should suffice to dispose of a theory propounded by some
+who attempt to save the face of the Church by representing the Act of
+Uniformity as the _ratification_ in Parliament of what had been already
+done by the Church. There is no historical basis for such a theory.
+
+[42] _The Book of Common Prayer, etc., with notes, etc_., by A. J. Stephens,
+p. clxxiv.
+
+
+
+
+
+Transcriber's notes: The footnotes were moved to endnotes and renumbered.
+Some words, such as "Mr" and "Parlt" are words that have a superscript ending with
+no punctuation.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Acts of Uniformity, by T.A. Lacey
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE ACTS OF UNIFORMITY ***
+
+***** This file should be named 28659.txt or 28659.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/8/6/5/28659/
+
+Produced by Elaine A. Laizure
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/28659.zip b/28659.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..edd2ed1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/28659.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c537880
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #28659 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28659)