for boasting that their system was adopted in preference to Episcopacy. It certainly was not chosen on account of its purity, as they choose to imagine or to assert, but because King William found them more ready to render him their support, than the Bishops and Clergy. Whether the refusal of the latter was a blot upon their memory, posterity will decide. At all events, they were honest in their course, for it led to the loss of all their worldly goods. The Bishop of Edinburgh's reply was frank and open. He had not expected any such Revolution, and he had the courage to say so. Perceiving that the Bishops and Clergy would not support him, the King threw himself into the arms of the Presbyterians.
Not a few Presbyterian writers pretend, that the bulk of the nation were Presbyterians. This assertion, however, is contrary to the fact. Candid persons even on the Presbyterian side of the question admit, that Scotland was almost equally divided between the friends of Prelacy and Presbytery; the lower and middle classes adhering to the latter, the nobles and gentry to the former.[1] Carstairs used his influence with the King, alleging two special reasons in favour of Presbytery—First, that the Presbyterians were generally Whigs: Secondly, that the settlement of Presbytery in Scotland would shew the Dissenters in England what they might expect, when the King should be able.[2] Carstairs introduced the
- ↑ Dalrymple's Memoirs, i. 418. It was truly remarked by the author of the Life of Kettlewell: "Episcopacy was abolished, and Presbytery established upon the inclinations of the people, though not a third part at that time were Presbyterian, and some say not a fourth." Life, 124.
- ↑ Dalrymple, i, 551.
