^{page 25 note 2} This “order” is almost literally an order for a “prophesy,” like those suppressed by the Government in 1577; the only essential difference is that the authority then assigned the moderator is here shared by the assembled ministers. It had been usual at the “ prophesy”to examine the conduct of the varioils ministers concerned. At the beginning, then, this was no attempt at a presbytery but simply an unauthorised “ prophesy.” Fuller, Church History, Bk. ix. sect. iv. 2 ; Strype, Grindal, pp. 260, 441, 566 ; ibid. Annals, iii. pt, i. 477; MSS. Caius College, Camb, 103, f. 17.

^{page 26 note 1} For biographical data see Introduction, p. xxxv.

^{page 26 note 2} “ to come ” struck out.

^{page 26 note 3} “ of ” struck out.

^{page 27 note 1} “ and ” struck out.

^{page 27 note 2} Here follow the autograph signatures. Those written below the line were admitted at a later date.

^{page 27 note 3} The dates and sentences placed as headings before the various meetings are in the manuscript written at the side of the sheet. The parts heavily bracketed are a different ink and larger characters than the rest.

^{page 27 note 4} For some of their arguments on this question see pp. 75, 76.