a marriage, or interfere in a betting transaction, or prohibit the publishing of a book.[72] At first reading, some of the _Ascamoth_ may seem arbitrary, and at first sight some of the actions of the _Mahamad_ may appear tyrannical, but the circumstances must be remembered. These early settlers in England dwelt ‘in the midst of alarms,’ they were tolerated, not welcomed, and in their precarious position it would not have been wise for frequent appeal to have been made to the law of the country, in cases of dispute or of wrong-doing among themselves. The _Mahamad_ had practically no means of punishment for erring members but moral law and communal opinion. It certainly brought these down, on occasion, rather heavily, and dealt out excommunication and money fines in cases which would, in these days, be adequately met by argument, or even by a gentle policy of letting alone. Such stringent regulations, however, kept up a high, if somewhat narrow, tone in the community, and the general morality of these early Jewish residents left nothing to be desired. Moreover, this heedfulness concerning the things they were not to do, made them by no means neglectful of the things they were to do; and schools, and a society for visiting and relieving the poor and sick, were set on foot by Ben Israel’s countrymen before they had been ten years in England. The Restoration made no change in the position of the new-comers. The Stuarts, in their light-hearted fashion, took the Jews lightly, and their courtiers seemed to find in the Jewish synagogue a novel and rather amusing sort of entertainment. In ‘Pepys’ Diary,’ under date October 14, 1663, there is a full account of a visit paid by Charles II. and some friends, during the Tabernacle holydays, to the little place of worship in King Street. The fashionable visitors, by degrees, became an interruption both to worship and to decorum, and a law, in 1665, had to be added to the _Ascamoth_, to the effect that, however flattered members of the congregation might feel at this interest shown in them, they were to give their feelings no outward expression during service by moving from their seats to greet their visitors. In 1673 there was an attempt made to take from the Jews the right of public worship. Strong in their confidence in King Charles’ good nature, and in his freedom from religious prejudices, the community petitioned him on the subject, and an order in council set things right at once. It is possible that Queen Catherine’s influence may have had something to do with this fortunate result. On impersonal matters, and on subjects which did not affect his own pleasures, it is not unlikely that the king was ready to gratify the wishes of his much-enduring consort; and it is certain that Catherine employed and much valued a Jewish physician, one Antonio de Mendes, who took an interest in the affairs of his co-religionists. James II. was also amiably disposed towards the Jews, and during his reign the alien