In January, 1604, the king held a formal conference at Hampton Court between eleven of the Anglican party on one side, nine of them being bishops, and four Puritan divines, representing the petitioners. Assuming at first the air of playing the arbiter, James, who dearly loved a puttering theological debate, could not refrain from taking the cause of the churchmen out of their hands and arguing it himself. The reports of the conference are most interesting as showing the paradoxical qualities of James, who, by his action at this meeting, unwittingly made himself a conspicuous figure in the history of America. The great churchmen were surprised at the display made by the king of dialectic skill. They held Scotch learning in some contempt, and were amazed that one bred among the "Puritans" should know how to handle questions of theology so aptly. James, though he had declared the Church of Scotland "the sincerest kirk in the world" because it did not keep Easter and Yule as the Genevans did, now had the face to assure the prelates that he had never believed after he was ten years old what he was taught in Scotland. His speeches in the conference are marked by ability, mingled with the folly which vitiated all his qualities. Quick at reply and keen in analysis, he even shows something like breadth of intelligence, or at least intellectual toleration, but without ever for a moment evincing any liberality of feeling. His manifest cleverness is rendered futile by his narrow and ridiculous egotism, his arrogance in the treatment of opponents, and his coarse vulgarity in expression. "In common speaking as in his hunting," says Fuller, "he stood not on the cleanest but nearest way." The Puritans were no more able to answer the arguments of the king than was Æsop's lamb to make reply to the wolf. Laying down for his fundamental maxim "No bishop, no king," he drew a picture of the troubles that would beset him when "Jack and Tom and Will and Dick" should meet and censure the king and his council. He would have no such assemblage of the clergy until he should grow fat and pursy and need trouble to keep him in breath, he said. It could not occur to his self-centered mind that so grave a question was not to be settled merely by considering the ease and convenience of the sovereign. "He rather usede upbraidinges than argumente," says Harrington, who was present. He bade the Puritans "awaie with their snivellinge," and, in discussing the surplice, made an allusion that would be deemed a profanation by reverent churchmen of the present time. [Sidenote: The king and the bishops.] [Sidenote: Note 1.] [Sidenote: Compare Nugæ Antiquæ, ii, 25, 26.]