The earl of Eochester compared the expressions in the queen's speech at the beginning of the session, to the law enacted in the reign of Charles II.

denouncing the penalties of treason against those who should call the king a papist; for which reason, he said, he always thought him of that persuasion.

He affirmed that the church's danger arose from the act of security in Scotland, the absence of the successor to the crown, and the practice of occasional conformity.

He was answered by lord Halifax, who, by way of recrimination, observed that king Charles II.

was a Roman-catholic, at least his brother declared him a papist after his death; that his brother and successor was a known Roman-catholic, yet the church thought herself secure; and those patriots who stood up in its defence were discountenanced and punished: nay, when the successor ascended the throne, and the church was apparently in the most imminent danger by the high commission court and otherwise, the nation was then indeed generally alarmed; and every body knew who sat in that court, and entered deeply into the measures which were then pursued.