The duke of Leeds distinguished between resistance and revolution; for had not the last succeeded, it would have certainly been rebellion, since he knew of no other but hereditary right.

The bishop of Salisbury justified resistance from the book of Maccabees; he mentioned the conduct of queen Elizabeth, who assisted the Scots, the French, and the states-general, in resisting their different sovereigns, and was supported in this practice both by her parliaments and her convocations.

He observed that king Charles I.had assisted the citizens of Rochelle in their rebellion; that Manwayring incurred a severe censure from the parliament, for having broached the doctrine of the divine right of kings; and that though this became a favourite maxim after the restoration, yet its warmest asserters were the first who pleaded for resistance when they thought themselves oppressed.

The archbishop of York, the duke of Buckingham, and other leaders of the tory interest, declared that they never read such a piece of madness and nonsense as Sacheverel's sermon; but they did not think him guilty of a misdemeanor.
Next day, Dr.Wake, bishop of Lincoln, accused Sacheverel of having made a strange and false representation of the design for a comprehension, which had been set on foot by archbishop Sancroft, and promoted by the most eminent divines of the church of England.

He was of opinion that some step should be taken for putting a stop to such preaching, as, if not timely corrected, it might kindle heats and animosities that would endanger both church and state.