xlii
INTRODUCTION
division throughout the three lists. In the case of London prisoners this offence was regularly described in the Newgate calendars (temp. James the First) as " pro Causa Romana." Another fact which deserves comment is that although this oath was designed with particular reference to Catholics, some Protestant Dissenters in the reign of Charles the Second were likewise prosecuted for refusing it (cf. pp. 366 seq.). The case of the Quakers is remarked upon on pages 154 and ISS. (vi) Indictments for recusancy.-Similarly, the indictments for not attending the Anglican service are found to include both Catholic and non-Catholic Dissenters. Thus William Atterbury, described elsewhere as an " obstinate Brownist," was indicted in Middlesex under the statute of recusancy at the sessions of May, 1619. ift Among the present records there is an indictment for recusancy dated January, 1684/5 (cf. p. 373), against \Villiam Kiffm, who is almost certainly to be identified with a prominent London Anabaptist. No distinction appears to have been made with regard to the particular religious opinions of the offender. It is even possible that in some cases sheer laxity was the cause of nonattendance at · church and of subsequent prosecution. The exact proportion of Catholics among these indicted recusants can therefore be gauged only by further genealogical research, and to this the obscurity of so many of the offenders presents an almost insuperable difficulty. Nevertheless, since the" Act to retain the Queen's Majesty's subjects in their due obedience" (statute 23 Eliz., cap. I), which originated these indictments, was aimed primarily at Catholics,:t there can be little doubt that most of the persons so prosecuted were firm adherents of the ancient Faith. Bearing in mind, moreover, the history of the development of Protestant Dissent, we may go so far as to say that of the recusants who appear in the reign of James the First the vast majority were Catholics. § The procedure in prosecutions for recusancy is outlined in the " records of proceedings" which were drafted in certain cases (e.g., the case of William Roper, p. 164), and was pursuant to the statute 29 Eliz., cap. 6, § 5, which enacts "that upon the indictment of such offender a proclamation shall be made at the same Assizes or Gaol Delivery in which the indictment shall be taken . . . by which it shall be commanded that the body of such offender shall be rendered to the Sheriff of the same County before the next Assizes or General Gaol Delivery to be held in the same County. And if at the said next Assizes or Gaol Delivery the same offender
*
* Cj. Calendar for the sessions of January, 1615/16: pp. 90, 91. ~
lVI.C.R., II, pp. 146 and 235.
:t There was a special statute against Protestant Dissenters, viz., 35 Eliz., cap. 1. In the reign of Charles the Second they were prosecuted in great numbers under the two Conventicle Acts of 1664 and 1670-particularly the latter. § This conclusion is reached also by J eaffreson with regard to the Middlesex records. lvI.C.R., II, p. xli,