At this date, namely March 1559, the preaching agitators were at liberty, nor were they again put at for any of their previous proceedings.

But defiances had been exchanged.

The Reformers in their Protestation (December 1558) had claimed it as lawful, we know, that they should enjoy their own services, and put down those of the religion by law established, until such time as the Catholic clergy "be able to prove themselves the true ministers of Christ's Church" and guiltless of all the crimes charged against them by their adversaries.
{93c} That was the challenge of the Reformers, backed by the menace affixed to the doors of all the monasteries.

The Regent in turn had thrown down her glove by the proclamation of February 9, 1559, against disturbing services and "bosting" (bullying) priests.

How could she possibly do less in the circumstances?
If her proclamation was disobeyed, could she do less than summon the disobedient to trial?
Her hand was forced.
It appears to myself, under correction, that all this part of the history of the Reformation has been misunderstood by our older historians.