agreed or disagreed with the movement. He was at any time ready to speak out on the side of justice when any political trouble agitated the nation. Abbot had accidentally killed a gamekeeper while out hunting. This was a serious offence in the eyes of ecclesiastical law. The question was as to whether a Bishop with blood on his hands, even though brought there by accident, was worthy of continuing in his episcopal office. Andrewes used his influence on behalf of Abbot. [1]"Brethren," he said, "be not too busy to condemn any for uncanonicals according to the strictness thereof, lest we render ourselves in the same condition."
Andrewes, unlike Laud, found the policy of rigour uncongenial. Had he lived in such troubles as Laud subsequently passed through, we cannot say what his conduct would then have been. That he would have been gentler in reform than Laud was there can be no doubt. And we cannot doubt, too, that he would not have sacrificed his principles, even though he should be called upon to be severe.
Now, in the last place, let us look at Andrewes from another point of view. He was a man of the most cultivated tastes. He was acquainted with, and could number among his personal friends, some of the foremost men of his time. He knew such men as Nicholas Fuller, and the great Bishop Cosin, of Durham. He knew Casaubon, Grotius, Bacon, Hooker, and George Herbert. He was called by Casaubon [2]"The most wise and learned Bishop of Ely." "I acknowledged," he said, "his extraordinary courtesy and kindness towards me." Again, "He is a man whom, if you knew, you would take to exceedingly. We spend whole days in talk
