escape; but he learned that his wife was safe in London, and that his two daughters were with her. He was unable to stay more than two hours in Bordeaux, and from thence he went to St. Foy. A friend, whom he found by the way, gave him hopes that it would be possible for him to embark at Bordeaux, and that something might be done if he returned there in a fortnight; but this required money. The travelling, which he had now had for three months, had exhausted his purse. He employed six weeks to raise money; but now M. de Bonfleur, having heard that he did not go to mass, and that he was supposed to encourage others to resist the Roman Catholics, issued orders to seize him. He nevertheless continued for three weeks longer in the useless endeavour to raise some money, and at last escaped the search which was made for him.
.......
[Here there is a digression on the sin of apostacy, and the necessity of taking refuge in a Protestant country, in order to exercise the duties and privileges of true religion.]
“Notwithstanding he had still the tie of a part of his family whom he must leave behind him, he at last determined on trying to get off from France, per Bordeaux, but being too well known to think of venturing to go there himself, he applied to a friend for his assistance in negotiating the business for himself and his son. His friend could not go; but at his house there was a young relation, who was about to set out immediately with a party of recruits (une recreue) for the frontier of Switzerland. Amongst these the young man hoped to escape. M. Descairac and his son were suffered to join the party, which consisted chiefly of persons who thought with him, and the commander happened to be an acquaintance. This was fortunate, as M. Descairac could not well have passed for a common soldier; and he was permitted to lead the rest, while his son acted as his servant. In forty-five days they reached Zurich, where they were received with Christian charity by the Swiss, who likewise furnished them with the means of getting to Holland. After remaining at Zurich only five or six days, they set out in the month of June, and in about a month after, they reached England.”
This summary brings the narrative down to July 1686. It appears from an ecclesiastical document that M. Descairac had voluntarily appeared before the consistory of the Church of Zurich and professed his repentance for his act of abjuration; this consistory restored him to the position of a church-member, and gave him a written témoignage (a certificate of full communion). He arrived in London in July, and presented the témoignage to the consistory of the French Church in Threadneedle Street, by whom he was received into congregational fellowship, and was encouraged to hope that he would be re-installed in the pastoral office. The following is the Minute:—
“25e Juillet 1686. — M. Descairac ministre de Bergerac a presenté a la Compe. - un témoignage de l’église de Zurich par leq il paroit qu’etant en danger d’être envoié en galères pour avoir faire la prière dans une maison à Bordeaux, on l’a sollicité à abjurer notre religion, et qu’enfin il le fit mais en protestant qu’il n’iroit jamais à la messe, et que sur la repentance qu’il fit paroitre il a eté admis à la communion de nos Eglises; que même on lui a temoigné qu’après quelque temps on ne doutoit pas qu’on ne dût le retablir au ministère.”
Huguenot refugees had flocked into Bristol in great numbers. The famous bishop of the diocese, Sir Jonathan Trelawny, interested himself in procuring church accommodation for them, and the mayor and magistrates co-operated with him. The Church of St. Mark-the-Gaunt was granted, and the opening services are narrated in the first page of the register of the congregation. Mr. Tinell, a refugee pastor from the Province of Guienne, conducted the devotional exercises, and Mr. Alexandre Descairac preached the sermon; and these two were declared to be the ministers of the French Church of Bristol, Tinell signing first, and Descairac second. M. Descairac during his lifetime attended to the registrations. But another hand had to record his burial on 16th June 1703, “aged about sixty-six.” Professor Rigaud has noted as to his death, the cause of which was apoplexy, “He died in his pulpit at Bristol; he had had a lap-dog with him at the time, which could not be driven from his corpse. His daughter married M. Triboudet Demainbray, himself a refugee from France in consequence of the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, and their granddaughter was my mother.”
