Laymen also deplored the severities of the measure. Hale, Boyle, and Sir Peter Pett did so; whilst Locke's earliest work, written in 1660, aimed at reconciling the Puritans to submission in things indifferent.[402] A strong conviction existed in the minds of Episcopalians and Royalists that Nonconformity was disloyal and insurrectionary; and this conviction, then, and long afterwards, operated as a power in the Church of England, destructive of social peace and union, far beyond what is generally supposed. The rumours about plots in the earlier period of the reign of Charles II. have not much occupied the attention of historians. They are commonly dismissed as idle tales. No doubt they were such in most instances; and not in a single instance did any actual insurrection occur. But in history, it is important to notice, not only what men have done, but what men have believed to be done. Beliefs, however absurd, have been to those who entertained them, just the same as facts, and these beliefs have actually been factors of great power: as such they claim to be noted by the historian. I have too much faith in the English spirit of the seventeenth century, in the generosity which mingled with the High Churchmanship of the best of the Cavaliers, and in the thorough conscientiousness of many of the Conformists, to believe that they could have acted towards Dissenters as they did, unless they had been hood-winked by people who persuaded them, that Dissenters were not true-hearted Englishmen, but only so many wretched rebels. It so happens that the _State Papers_, as already indicated, afford almost innumerable illustrations of the extent and operation of these prejudices, and I make no apology for employing many of these documents in subsequent pages as useful contributions to English history. [Sidenote: RUMOURED PLOTS.] [Sidenote: 1662.]