Dr.Trimnel, bishop of Norwich, expatiated on the insolence of Sacheverel, who had arraigned archbishop Grindal, one of the eminent reformers, as a perfidious prelate, for having favoured and tolerated the discipline of Geneva.

He enlarged upon the good effects of the toleration.

He took notice of Sacheverel's presumption in publishing inflammatory prayers, declaring himself under persecution, while he was prosecuted for offending against the law, by those who in common justice ought to be thought the fairest accusers, and before their lordships, who were justly acknowledged to be the most impartial judges.

In discussing the fourth article, the bishop of Salisbury spoke with great vehemence against Sacheverel, who, by inveighing against the revolution, toleration, and union, seemed to arraign and attack the queen herself; since her majesty had so great a share in the first, had often declared she would maintain the second, and that she looked upon the third as the most glorious event of her reign.

He affirmed that nothing could be more plain than the doctor's reflecting upon her majesty's ministers; and that he had so well marked out a noble peer there present, by an ugly and scurrilous epithet which he would not repeat, that it was not possible to mistake his meaning.
Some of the younger peers could not help laughing at this undesigned sarcasm upon the lord-treasurer, whom Sacheverel had reviled under the name of Volpone; they exclaimed, "Name him, name him;" and in all probability the zealous bishop, who was remarkable for absence of mind and unguarded expressions, would have gratified their request, had not the chancellor, interposing, declared that no peer Was obliged to say more than he should think proper.
After obstinate disputes, and much virulent altercation, Sacheverel was found guilty by a majority of seventeen voices; and four-and-thirty peers entered a protest against this decision.