quarter, this is a very full admission, and it is no more than is demanded by the actual state of things. From this time on, the presence of a cardinal or a legate or a cardinal-legate in England is almost continuous, and the antipapal statutes, though still in force, and although their repeal was resolutely refused by the Parliament, fall more and more out of use. There is therefore no dispute as to the correctness of the view which Dean Hook gives of the condition of the Church of England between the time with which we are now dealing and the separation under Henry VIII. The question is, whether the facts known to history, some few of which only I have just passed in review, are such as to justify his assertion as to its previous condition of independence; and the only possible answer is that they are not. It is clearly shown that there was throughout the period which I have reviewed a constant and close relation between the ecclesiastical authorities of England and Rome, and that that relation was one of dependence and deference on the part of England, and of authority on that of Rome.
The general tax of the Peter's-pence, trifling as it was in amount, was not trifling as a principle, and still less so as an evidence of the kind of relation subsisting; and this, be it remembered, continued from the remotest period down to the separation. So also did the much more formidable taxation of the clergy, of which I have given several instances above. Again, we find that the appointment of bishops, although it was formally disputed from time to time between the Pope, the King, and the Chapters, lay for the most part in the hands of the King; yet this was not without exception, and even throughout the period of the lowest depression of the papal power, the Pope's
