1. Samuel Langhorne Clemens [Mark Twain],A Connecticut Yankee at King Arthur’s Court, ed. A. R. Ensor (1982), 137. Ensor suggests that Twain became aware of the story by reading the account in W. E. H. Lecky,A History of England in the Eighteenth Century, 8 vols (New York, 1882), vol. 3, 538.
2. The only extensive examinations of this case are: W. Pierce, ‘The Contributions of the Nonconformists to the Building of the Mansion House’,Transactions of the Congregational Historical Society, 9 (1924–1926), in 1925; 146–69; and C. F. Mullett, ‘The Legal Position of English Protestant Dissenters, 1689–1767’,Virginia Law Review, 23 (1936–1937); in 1937; 389–418. A largely descriptive account can also be found in B. Manning,The Protestant Dissenting Deputies(Cambridge, 1952), 119–29. The case is also located within the wider history of dissent in M. Watts,The Dissenters: From the Reformation to the French Revolution(Oxford, 1978). The definitive eighteenth-century report (later incorporated into theEnglish Reportsseries at vol. 1, 1437) is found in J. Brown,Reports of Cases, upon Appeals and Writs of Error, in the High Court of Parliament, 6 vols (1779–1783), vol. 6, 181–96.
3. W. Blackstone,Commentaries on the Laws of England(1765–1769), vol. 4, 52. Under 1 Eliz. I, c. 2 (1558) — ‘The Act of Uniformity’ — the fine had been introduced at twelve pence per week; this was increased to £20 per month under 23 Eliz. I, c. 1 (1580).
4. 13 Cha. II. St 2 c. 1.
5. W. Blackstone,Commentaries, vol. 4, 58.