The Bishop, therefore, was determined, if possible, to obtain those powers. He had the entire bench of prelates on his side; and Lord Howard, the Earl of Bedford, and others of the lay lords who would have been on the side of humanity, were absent. The opposition had to be conducted under the greatest difficulties. Paget, however, fought the battle, and fought it on broad grounds: the Bishops' bill was read twice; May 1.on the third reading, on the 1st of May, he succeeded in throwing it out: May 2.the Lollards' bill came on the day after, and here his difficulty was far greater; for toleration was imperfectly understood by Catholic or Protestant, and many among the peers, who hated the bishops, equally hated heresy. Paget, however, spoke out his convictions, and protested against the iniquity of putting men to death for their opinions.[1] The bill was read a first time on the day on which it was introduced; on the 4th of May it was read again,[2] but it went no further. The next day Parliament was dissolved. The peers assured the Queen that they had no desire to throw a shield over heresy; the common law existed independent of statute, and the common law prescribed punishments which could still be inflicted.[3] But, so long as heresy was undefined, Ana-
- ↑ Quant l'on a parlé de la peyne des hérétiques, il a sollicité les sieurs pour non y consentir, y donner lieu à peynede mort.—Renard to Charles V., May 1.
- ↑ Lords' Journals.
- ↑ There can, I think, be no doubt that it was this which the peers said. The statute of Henry IV. was not passed; yet the Queen told Renard, 'que le peyne antienne contre les hérétiques fut agrée par toute la noblesse, et qu'ilz fairent dire expressement et publiquement
