A bold step taken by the Nonjurors in the year 1694 deepened and perpetuated their schism, and some circumstances tainted their proceedings with more disloyalty than could be involved in the mere refusal of an oath. Sancroft, as if copying Romish pretensions, had appointed Lloyd, ex-Bishop of Norwich, his “Vicar,” “Factor,” “Proxy-General,” or “Nuncio.” Lloyd accordingly proceeded, in concert with the deprived Prelates of Peterborough and Ely, to appoint two Bishops. To soften appearances and to avoid collisions, they gave the persons appointed the titles of Suffragans of Thetford and of Ipswich, and, in keeping with their own Jacobitism, they consulted the Royal Exile respecting those who should fill the offices. Dr. Hickes was despatched on a visit to St. Germains, with a list of the Nonjurors, to ask James to exercise the prerogative by nominating two clergymen for these posts. He graciously received the delegate, who spent six weeks in travelling that short distance, and in overcoming the difficulties of access to his Court. Having consulted the Pope, the Archbishop of Paris, and Bossuet of Meaux, whether it would be consistent with loyalty to the Church to do what was asked, James, with their sanction, nominated Hickes as Suffragan of Thetford, and Wagstaffe as Suffragan of Ipswich.[455] It is plain that James made capital out of this to further his own designs, for he was at that time deep in plans of invasion, and his correspondence with Hickes and the Bishop of Norwich points to them as accredited agents.[456] On the 24th of February, 1694, Hickes and Wagstaffe were admitted into the Episcopal order by the three deprived Bishops, and the ceremony took place in a private house in London, where the Bishop of Peterborough lodged, the Earl of Clarendon being present on the occasion. [Sidenote: NONJURORS.] [Sidenote: 1694–1702.] Great care was taken by some of the Nonjurors to ascertain the number and circumstances of clergymen included within their party. It is the effect of such ecclesiastical divisions to bring into bonds of closest acquaintance those who agree upon some distinctive principle. Amongst the _Baker MSS._ is a document containing a long list of those who forfeited their preferment rather than take the new oath,[457] and among them the following names occur, with some indications of character and position appended:--