The Parliament of France was originally, like the Parliament of England, a national council with functions both legislative and judicial.[69] In the course of time a separation of classes and powers took place: in England the judicial power fell into disuse, and the Parliament became a mere legislative body; in France, the Parliament lost its legislative authority, and subsided into a high court of justice of last resort, and a court of revenue. It consisted of a fixed number of churchmen, lay peers, and councillors--all equal in voice and authority. Each province had its independent Parliament, over which that of Paris asserted, but was rarely able to enforce, its authority. In the early days of the new religious movement, the Parliament of Paris was hardly less hostile than the Sorbonne to the new doctrines; but as time rolled on and the principles of the Reform were better known, the Parliament became divided in opinion. As in all similar bodies, there were three parties: those who sympathized with the religious reform movement, those who were opposed to it, and those who, either from policy or coldness of temper, floated between the two. To this party belonged the elder De Thou, Harlay, and Seguier, all members of the Tournelle. On the last Wednesday in April, 1559, Bourdin, the king’s proctor-general, made a proposition that as the laws were enforced so irregularly--the Grand Chamber burning heretics implacably, the Tournelle only banishing them, to the great scandal of justice--the two courts should come to some arrangement by which uniformity of action would be insured. Each judge gave his opinion, and there was naturally great diversity of sentiment. Arnauld du Ferrier proposed the convocation of a general council for the settlement of all religious controversies, and that in the mean time all measures against the Reformed should be suspended. This learned lawyer, like many others of his day, not only did not appear to contemplate the possibility of the Romish and the Reformed religions existing quietly side by side in France, but thought the differences between the two were so trifling that union might be restored by a few mutual concessions. Arnauld’s proposal was supported by a majority of the meeting,[70] and, among others, by Anthony Fumée, whose father and grandfather had filled the highest judicial offices. He not only vindicated the Calvinistic interpretation of the doctrine of the Lord’s-supper, but advised an address to the king, praying him to summon a general council, in which all erroneous doctrines should be exposed, and all heresies condemned; and that the persecution of those who held heterodox opinions upon secondary points should cease. The matter began to look so serious that the Duchess of Valentinois urged Henry II. “to hang half a dozen at least of the councillors as heretics,” and show Spain (with whom the marriage-treaty between Philip II. and Isabella was going on) that he