religious
character which it has never since lost--learned that they had been
falsely accused of having revolted from the king, and of having elected
a governor of their own, established a polity similar to that of the
Swiss cantons, and coined money as an independent state, they not only
refuted the charges to the satisfaction of the royal lieutenant sent to
investigate the truth,[1039] but they discontinued the _public_
celebration of the Lord's Supper, in order to avoid even the appearance
of unwillingness to obey the king's commands. At the same time they
wrote to Geneva an earnest request that, notwithstanding the need of
teachers in France, no persons that had been monks or chaplains should
be admitted to the ministry unless after long and careful scrutiny. They
did more harm, they disquieted the churches more, they said, than the
most violent persecutions that had befallen the Protestants. For they
refused to submit to discipline, made light of the decisions of their
brethren, and, while seeking only their own pleasure, drew odium upon
the ministers who endeavored to uphold good order among the
people.[1040]

[Sidenote: Inconsistent laws and practice.]

[Sidenote: Judicial perplexity.]

The position of the Huguenots was certainly anomalous, and presented the
strangest inconsistencies. The royal letters enjoined that no inquiries
should be made with the view of disturbing any one for religion's sake;
the Parliament of Paris refused to register these letters and obey the
provisions; the still more fanatical counsellors of the Parliament of
Toulouse rather increased than diminished their severities, and daily
consigned fresh victims to the flames.[1041] It was natural that the
clergy should take advantage of these circumstances to renew their
remonstrances against the continuance of the existing toleration. The
Cardinal of Lorraine seized the opportunity afforded him by the solemn
ceremonial of Charles's anointing at Rheims (on the thirteenth of June,
1561) to present to the queen mother the collective complaints of the
prelates, because, so far from witnessing the rigid enforcement of the
royal edicts, they beheld the heretical conventicles held with more and
more publicity from day to day, and the judges excusing themselves from
the performance of their duty by alleging the number of conflicting
laws, in the midst of which their course was by no means easy. He
therefore recommended the convocation of the parlia