Agreed that a Testimonie be drawne up Against the Spirit that Leads Sammuell Hooten To pay tythes (& justifie his paying of them) and to be giuen him by Robert Grace and William Malson, a Coppy as followeth:
“A Testimonie from the people of god (in scorne called Quakers) Against Tythes & Tithe takers & all that pay them in Generall (whoe denie Christ Jesus come in the flesh—who hath Ended the Law & the Changable preisthood, and is becom the unchangable high preist over the house of god for Euer) But more Especialy against the Spirit that now acts in & by Sammuell Hooten.
“Whereas Sammuell Hooten hath Long beene a professor of gods blessed truth and hath borne a Larg verball Testimony thereunto & not onely soe but hath suffered much thereby, by all which according to outward Apearance he was Looked upon by many to be a faithfull wittness for god, but Alass as a flourishing tree which brings forth noe good fruite, soe is a profession without the possession of the truth, & as Euery Tree is knowne by his fruite soe is Euery spirit knowne by its Action, and though the said Sammuell hath walked Long in apearance as aboue said, yet hath he Lately brought forth bad fruit to the dishoner of god in paing Tiths to an Jmpropriator and though he hath beene tenderly dealt withall yet he still persists to manetaine the thing as Lawfull, soe that wee are constrained for the truth sake to giue forth this testimony against that Spirit that Led him to pay tiths (and plead for them) and doe foreuer judg it, & Condemne it in him or in whome-soeuer it is found, being the same Spirit with them that takes Tithes by whome many of our deare friends haue suffered Jmprisonment unto death & sealed there testimoney with there Bloud, and this is to goe forth into the world that truth may be cleared, & all false Reports stopped & Judged, who now say we alow what we formerly declared against, noe more but in true Loue to all people we Reste.”
ffrom the Quarterly Meeting at Maunsfeild, the 29ᵗʰ day of the 1ˢᵗ month 1675.
It is possible that the family emigrated to the Western World. Mrs. Amelia Mott Gummere, of Haverford, Pa., contributes the following, which may refer to the above Samuel:
“Elizabeth Hooton, wife of Samuel Hooton, of Shrewsbury, New Jersey, with her daughter Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Hillborne, were appointed guardians of Samuel Hooton, when the latter became insane in 1694. Thomas Hillborne and Elizabeth Hooton, both of Shrewsbury, N.J., were married 12th December, 1688, at the house of her mother, Elizabeth Hooton. The original marriage certificate was in the possession of Thomas Darlington, of Birmingham, Pa., in 1863.”
Of the Hootons of N.J., Mrs. Kate B. Stillé wrote in the Jnl. F.H.S. iv. 50: “Their descendants hold the land near Burlington and Evesham, which was bought from the Indians.”
Elizabeth Hooton, Jr., Afterwards Lambert.
The marriage of the younger Elizabeth with Thomas Lambert, of Tickhill, 21st of September, 1669, is recorded in the Registers of Nottinghamshire, but there is no entry therein of any children or of the deaths of Thomas and Elizabeth Lambert.