io7

MATTHEW WREN, D. D.

godly Sermons, at Norwich, St. Paul's, and other Places, and so was namedto be one of the rural Commissioners, but never was his Chaplain.

So was Mr. Dun, more upon Recommendation from others, than uponKnowledge. Nevertheless, soon after knowing that the said Mr. Dun hadassumed to use the Employment committed to him indiscreetly, and not ac-cording to the Directions which were given to him, this Defendant forthwithtook Order to discharge him wholly from it.

But this Defendant denieth, that he then knew any one of them all to beerroneous and unsound in Judgment, or Practice ; neither can he yet believeany such Thing of them, but if in any Kind it shall be so proved againstany of them, he humbly conceiveth himself to be no further obliged to an-swer for them, than in his heavy Grief and Sorrow for the same.

Sure he is, that some of his Commissioners were employed by him to theMayor, and others of the City of Norwich, to incite them to a more dili-gent Enquiry after the popish Recusants there lurking, than had been ac-c ustomed ; and they lo faithfully fulfilled this Employment, that at two Ses-sions soon after held, about Michaelmas 1636, for that City, there was fortypopish Recusants indicted, whereas before them, as the Citizens themselvesacknowledged in a Petition to the King, not above three or four at any Ses-sions, and many Times none at all, had been presented for Recusants.

To the twenty-first Article, this Defendant anfwereth and denieth, that heVery much oppressed divers Patrons of Churches, unless it be meant by hisconstant Care, which he had to discover simoniacal Compacts, if there wereany ; so r he claimed nothing among them, but the Right of Institution.

He also denieth, that he admitted his own Chaplains or others, withoutany Colour of Title ; so unjustly inforcing the right Patron to chargeableSuits. For, he faith, that of his own Chaplains he never admitted any, but'John Nouell, to the Vicarage of Felixtow upon the Presentation of Sir An-tony Cage, jure uxoris ; unto which there was another then pretended, butdid not pursue it, and the Clerks of the said Sir Antony have twice since thenbeen presented, and have quietly enjoyed the same.

Also he admitted John Duncon to the Rectory of Stoke, after three MonthsVacancy thereof, at the Presentation of the Dean and Chapter of Ely, thetrue original Patrons; unto which the Lessee of the Manor did after Institu-bon lay a Claim, but before Institution was given, he neither had enteredany Caveat, nor presented any Clerk to the same.

■ He also admitted the said John Duncon to the Rectory of Sutton, in thePresentation of the King’s Majesty, but because he suspected the Right ofTitle, he caused him to forbear his Induction, and upon further Discussion*° yield up his Institution.

.■ Mr. Gea/l also was instituted by him to the Rectory of Garboldjlmm ; but

was upon a Judgment against another that had intruded.

Others of his Chaplains he instituted none, nor any other Clerks, when* n y Controversy arose, but, as near as he could judge upon hearing of Coun-upon the fairest Title. So that he believeth, that of no Admissionswhich he gave while he was Bishop there, however very many of them werehtigious, yet such was his Care to admit according to the truest Right, thatn °t six of them all were afterwards by Law evicted.

[But all this notwithjianding he leaveth to his Counsel, to consider howfar he Jhall cjfer to make any Answer to this Article, which is sogenerally and uncertainly laid, not naming which Patrons, or ofwhich Churches, nor which Chaplains , or who else , and into whatLivings .]

He