two sufficient witnesses, one of them to be known either to the Judge himself, or to some other person of good reputation then present, and known likewise to the said Judge, that the express consent of the parents or parent (if one of them be dead), or guardians or guardian of the parties, is thereunto had and obtained." JOHN SHAKESPEARE, RECUSANT (?) In a document preserved at Warwick Castle it is recorded that certain persons were reported at Stratford under the Act 23 Elizabeth c. 1, which imposed a fine of £20 for non-attendance at church. The local return is as follows: Wee suspect theese nyne personns next ensuinge absent themselves for feare of processes. Mr. John Wheeler John his sonne Mr. John Shackspeare Tho. James alias Giles Rychard Harington The return was probably sent to the Commissioners shortly before September 25th, 1592, for the names were included in the return made on that date to the Privy Council by Sir Thomas Lucy and others of "The names of all such recusantes as have bene heartofore presented for not comminge monethlie to the churche according to hir Majesties lawes, and yet are thought to forbeare the church for debtt and for fear of processe, or for soom other worse faultes, or for age, sicknes, or impotencye of bodie." It is not known why John Shakespeare failed to make the prescribed attendances at church; but it has been assumed that adherence to the old faith or to the new Puritanism was the cause. Arguments on each side of this question are to be found in The Religion of Shakespeare, by the Revd. H. S. Bowden, and in Shakespeare, Puritan and Recusant, by the Revd. Thomas Carter. The reference to the "fear of processes" is difficult to understand. Halliwell-Phillipps observes, "How much of local favouritism there was in this, or what hopes of establishing conversions may have been based on pressure to be employed during the exercise of a temporary leniency, it is now impossible to say," and he calls attention to the fact that "there was no action of any kind against him in the Court of Record throughout the year in question, and, from the last day of June to the end of 1591, the only suit that affected him was one in which he was the plaintiff and recovered a debt with costs.' "2 The date at which John Shakespeare was first reported for not attending church is unknown; but his name may have been included in a return to Bishop Whitgift under the Order in Council received in 1582: "As the Lords of the Council had written to our Bishop last year, for making enquiry after Popish recusants in his diocese. they thought not fit to let this weighty matter drop; but in the beginning of this year sent again to the Bishop (as they did to all the rest) to return an exact account of such in every parish as still refused coming to church; and of such as being convicted, did not conform themselves: so that certificates thereof might be returned into the King's Bench next term." 8 See also Joseph Gillow, A Literary and Biographical History of the English Catholics, v. 498. 2 Outlines, ii. 397-8. 3 Strype, Life of Whitgift, i. 195. XXVI REASONS FOR MARRIAGE LICENCES IN the episcopal registers at Worcester the only direct reference to the reason for granting a marriage licence appears in the record of a grant, dated August 4th, 1531, to Richard Wheler alias Quyller and Elizabeth Brode, between whom the third and fourth degrees of affinity existed.1 Blackstone says: "in times of popery, a great variety of degrees of kindred were made impediments to marriage, which impediments might however be bought off for money." Commentaries, 1826, i. 434. Reasons for marriage dispensations are mentioned in the Articles drawn up by Archbishop Whitgift and the bishops in September 1583, but in terms too general to be of much service in this enquiry: "As persons of Honest Worshipful and Honourable calling may necessarily and reasonably have occasion sometimes to solemnize Marriage by Licence for the Banns asking or for once or twice without any great harm."2 The following reasons in favour of licences to marry were given in answer to a bill in parliament against them. The document bears no date, but was probably prepared by the bishops about the year 1597: "I.-Licences to marry according to the form set down without banns, are no cause of disordered marriage, but rather the contrary. For they express all causes that might be any let of the marriage in law: and yield no licence to marry in those cases; but add to the prohibitions of the law a restraint by a bond also. And if one may speak a truth, it may be said justly, that it is a matter, not only not hurtful, but also very profitable to be continued in the commonwealth. 1 Register, Jeromini, No. XXVIII., fo. 48a. Worcester Diocesan Registry. Strype, Life of Whitgift, i. 232. 2 For first, seeing consent in marriage is the matter specially to be regarded, and credit of kindred, honour, wealth, contentment, and pleasure of friends, be rather matters of conveniency than necessity in matrimony; it were better to tolerate the means wherewith consent of the parties themselves may more freely effect an honest matrimony, than by tract of time publishing a marriage before-hand, either the parties be occasioned to stay through bashfulness themselves, or their friends or enemies, by forbidding the banns, should give let thereunto. And touching parents, for whom especially the respect is had. Parents oftentimes measure their affections rather according to the humour they have themselves, (being old,) than regard the good liking of the young folks to be matched. And therefore rather seek to bestow their children in wealth or honour, or strength of friends, than are willing to suffer them to bestow themselves according to their own choice; although they chuse never so well, in respect of vertue and honest education. Divers times men of honourable degree have liking of mean persons. So sometimes rich have of poor, and old of young, masters and mistresses of their servants; and, to conclude, superiors of their inferiors; parties in disparity of each other. All which will willinglier marry secretly, than make public declaration before-hand of their liking thereunto. Which cannot be but a let often unto honest marriage. Likewise sometimes it may fall out, that a lame or impotent man for comfort; a man who hath lived loosly many years of his life with some one woman, may be desirous even in the very point of death to marry her, either in remorse of conscience, to make some part of amends unto her, or for the good of his children he had by her, which cannot be effected, if he must stay till banns be solemnly pronounced. Also, the friends, or the parties themselves, being desirous to avoid charge, would be glad to match secretly, which cannot justly be reprehended, if there be no other let. And therefore in many respects it may be concluded, that licences for marryages are not so hurtful as some would have them accounted." 1 'Strype, Life of Whitgift, iii. 380. |