“2. That such a conference might with great advantage consider the lamentable ignorance and indifference as to religion which prevails amongst masses of the community, and the best modes of meeting these evils. “3. That such a conference might also with advantage consider what efforts are needed to rouse the classes above the artisan class to a greater appreciation of the realities of religion. “4. That it would be desirable that at such a conference those present should come prepared to state their experience as to the difficulties to be met, and the proposed remedies. It was agreed that a day after the first week in July would be suitable for such a conference. “The result of this was reported by the Archbishop to an informal meeting of certain bishops at the Room of the House of Lords: present, the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of London, Winchester, St. Asaph, Llandaff, Gloucester and Bristol, and Carlisle; and Monday, July 4th, at twelve noon, was fixed for our gathering.” We assembled accordingly on July 4th, and there were present besides the Primate, the Bishops of London, Winchester, Peterborough, Gloucester, Bath and Wells, Drs. Allon, Raleigh, Punshon, Rigg, Aveling, Angus, Cumming, Robertson of Edinburgh (an old schoolmate of Dr. Tait); the Revs. J. C. Harrison, Newman Hall, Josiah Viney, and several others whom I cannot call to mind as, unfortunately, I have not kept a list. The Archbishop presided, read the Scriptures, and offered prayer. He opened the proceedings by an appropriate address, and then requested me to give some account of the steps which had led to our meeting together. I could not help referring to some remarkable gatherings in the Jerusalem Chamber, March 1640–1, convened by Dr. Williams, at that time Bishop of Lincoln, and also Dean of Westminster, when several other dignitaries met certain Presbyterian divines. “This,” I remarked, “was done by order of the House of Lords, with a view to settling points of difference between ecclesiastical parties of that day. A scheme of comprehension was contemplated. It came to nothing, though the intercourse seems to have been pleasant, and they were hospitably entertained by the convener.” “This was the last course of all public Episcopal treatments,” said the witty Thomas Fuller, who added: “The guests may now soon put up their knives, seeing, soon after, the voider was called for, which took away all bishops’ lands.” I emphasised the fact that we had assembled for a very different purpose, not to discuss any plan of comprehension, but to see how parties, remaining ecclesiastically as we were, could, notwithstanding, _unite_ in defence of our common faith against those who opposed it.