About midsummer, Daniel Baker returned into England, (who, as hath been related, had been at Malta,) and about a fortnight after his arrival, he, with four others, were taken by a band of soldiers from the Bull and Mouth meeting, and carried to Paul’s yard, where having been kept for some hours, they were brought to Newgate; but in the evening they were had before alderman Brown, to whom Baker with meekness said, ‘Let the fear of God and his peace be set up in thy heart.’ But Brown fell a laughing, and said, ‘I would rather hear a dog bark;’ and using more such scoffing expressions, he charged Baker, &c. with the breach of the king’s law in meeting together. To which Baker said, ‘The servants of God in the apostles’ days, were commanded to speak no more in the name of Jesus; and they answered, and so do I too, whether it be better to obey God than men, judge ye.’ He also instanced the case of the three children at Babylon, and Daniel who obeyed not the king’s decrees. But Brown grew so angry, that he commanded his men to smite Daniel on the face. This they did, and pulling him four or five times to the ground, they smote him with their fists, and wrung his neck so, as if they would have murdered him. This these fellows did to please Brown, showing themselves to be ready for any service, how abominable soever. And Baker reflecting on his travels, signified, that even Turks and heathens would abhor such brutish actions. His fellow-prisoners were also abused by Brown, and then sent to Newgate again. And after some days, they were called to the sessions, where their indictment was read, which like others in such cases, did generally run in these terms: that the prisoners, under pretence of performing religious worship, otherwise than by the laws of the kingdom of England established, unlawfully and tumultuously did gather and assemble themselves together, to the great terror of his majesty’s people, and to the disturbance of the peace of the king, in contempt of our said lord the king, and his laws, to the evil example of all others in the like case offending, &c. The indictment being read, no witness appeared against the prisoners, save Brown, who sat on the bench: and therefore the oath, as the ordinary snare, was tendered to them; for it was sufficiently known, that their profession did not suffer them to take any oath. They denying to swear, were sent back to prison, to stay there until they should have taken the oath.
If I would here set down all such like cases as have happened, I might find more work than I should be able to perform: for this vexing with the oath was become so common, that some have been taken up in the streets, and brought to a justice of the peace, that he might tender the oath to them, and in case of denial, send them to prison, though this was directly contrary to the statute of Magna Charta, which expressly saith, ‘No freeman shall be taken or imprisoned, or be disseised of his freehold or liberties, but by the law of the land.’ But this was not regarded by Richard Brown, who did whatever he would; for force and violence were now predominant: and sometimes when the prisoners were brought to the bar, for frequenting meetings, freedom was denied to them to justify themselves; but to be hectored and baffled was their lot.
Once it happened, that a prisoner, who had been a soldier formerly under Brown, seeing that no justice or equity was observed, called to him, saying, ‘That he was not fit to sit on the bench; for he made the son to hang the father at Abingdon; so that he could prove him to be a murderer.’ This bold saying caused some disturbance in the court, and Brown, how heavy soever the charge was, did not deny the thing in court, nor clear himself from it: yet the other Quaker prisoners did not approve this upbraiding, but signified, that though the fact were true, yet they were not for reproaching any magistrate upon the bench, whose place and office they did respect and honour. But I do not find that Brown, (on that account,) ever prosecuted him that spoke so boldly, although otherwise he did whatever he would, without fearing that his fellow-magistrates, (who respected him that was a favourite at court,) would disclaim it, as may appear by this following instance.
A certain person who had been in a very violent and abusive manner taken to prison by the soldiers out of a meeting, because he was not willing to go, said in the court, that his refusing to go, was because they would not show him any warrant for their apprehending him: since for aught he knew, they might be robbers or murderers, with whom he was not bound to go. But Brown, who was for violence, said to this, if they had dragged him through all the kennels in the street, they had served him right, if he would not go. This he spoke in such a furious manner, that one of the prisoners told him, ‘Thou hast had many warnings and visitations in the love of God, but hast slighted them; therefore beware of being sealed up in the wrath of God.’ Hereupon one of the jailers came with his cane and struck several of the prisoners so hard, that divers of them were much bruised; and it was reported by some, that Brown cried knock him down, though others, (for mitigating it a little,) would have it, pull him down. But the former seems most probable: for the blows were so violent, that some of the spectators cried out, murder! murder! and asked, ‘Will ye suffer men to be murdered in the court?’ Whereupon one of the sheriffs in person came down from his seat to stop the beating. But Brown was so desperately filled with anger, that he said to the prisoners, ‘If any of you be killed, your blood shall be upon your own head:’ and the hangman standing by with his gag in his hand, threatened the prisoners to gag any of them that should speak any thing. Thus innocence was forced to give way to violence. And once, when one at the common juridical question, guilty, or not guilty, answered, I deny I am guilty, and I can say I am not guilty; and also in Latin, non reus sum. Yet he was sentenced as mute, and fined accordingly, though the words he spoke, fully signified not guilty, albeit he had not expressed them in the same terms. But now they were for crossing the Quakers in every respect.
I will yet mention some more instances of Brown’s brutality, before I leave him. Another being demanded to answer to his indictment, guilty, or not guilty, and not presently answering, but thinking a little what to speak safely, Brown scoffingly said, ‘We shall have a revelation by and by.’ To which the prisoner said, ‘How long will ye oppose the innocent? How long will ye persecute the righteous seed of God?’ But whilst he was speaking, Brown indecently began to cry in the language of those wenches that go crying up and down the streets, ‘Aha, aha! Will you have any Wellfleet oysters?’ And, ‘have you any kitchen-stuff, maids?’ And when a prisoner at the bar said he could not for conscience-sake forbear meeting among the people of God, Brown scurrilously returned, ‘Conscience,—a dog’s tail.’ And when alderman Adams speaking to one of the prisoners said, ‘I am sorry to see you here.’ ‘Sorry!’ said Brown, ‘What should you be sorry for?’ ‘Yes,’ said Adams, ‘He is a sober man.’ But Brown, who could not endure to hear this, replied, that there never was a sober man amongst them, meaning the Quakers. The spectators, who took much notice of him, discommended this his carriage exceedingly. But he seemed to be quite hardened; for at a certain time two persons being upon their trial for robbing of a house, he told them, they were the veriest rogues in England, except it were the Quakers.
Sometimes it happened that the prisoners were brought to the bar without being indicted; and when they said, ‘What have we done?’ and desired justice; Brown, having no indictment against them, often cried, ‘Will you take the oath?’ And they then saying, ‘that for conscience-sake they could not swear,’ were condemned as transgressors, though such proceedings as these were directly against the law. But this seemed at that time little to be regarded.
However, sometime before, it happened at Thetford in the county of Norfolk, that judge Windham, at that time showing himself just in the like case, sharply reproved the justices upon the bench, for having not only committed some persons to prison, but also had them up to the bar, when no accuser appeared against them. But Richard Brown did whatever he would, and showed himself most furiously wicked, when any prisoner was brought before him with his hat on.
One John Brain, being taken in the street, and not in any meeting, was brought by some soldiers before Brown; who, seeing him with his hat on, ordered him to be pulled down to the ground six or seven times, and when he was down, they beat his head against the ground, and stamped upon him; and Brown, like a madman, bade them pull off his nose; whereupon they very violently pulled him by the nose. And when he was got up, they pulled him to the ground by the hair of his head, and then by the hair pulled him up again. And when he would have spoken in his own behalf against this cruelty, Brown bade them stop his mouth. Whereupon they not only struck him on the mouth, but stopped his mouth and nose also so close, that he could not draw breath, and was like to be choaked: at which actions Brown fell a laughing, and at length sent him to jail.
Thomas Spire, being brought before Brown, he commanded his hat to be taken off; and because it was not done with such violence as he intended, he caused it to be put upon his head again, saying, ‘It should not be pulled off so easily.’ Then he was pulled down to the ground by his hat, and pulled up again by his hair. William Hill being brought before him, he commanded his hat to be pulled off, so that his head might be bowed down: whereupon he being pulled to the ground, was plucked up again by the hair of his head. George Ableson was thus pulled five times one after another to the ground, and plucked up by his hair, and so beaten on his face, or the sides of his head, that he staggered, and bled, and for some days was under much pain.
Nicholas Blithold being brought before Brown, he took his hat with both his hands, endeavouring to pull him down to the ground; and because he fell not quite to the ground forwards, he pushed him, to throw him backwards; and then he gave him a kick on the leg, and thrust him out of doors. Thomas Lacy being brought before him, he himself gave him a blow on the face; and Isaac Merrit, John Cook, Arthur Baker, and others, were not treated much better; so that he seemed more fit to have been hangman, than an alderman, or justice. But I grow weary of mentioning more instances of his cruelty. These his abominable achievements were published in print, more at large than I have mentioned them: and the book, as hath been said already, was dedicated to him. And yet I do not find any have been prosecuted on that account; though his wickedness was extravagant, and such as if he wanted to have stakes erected at Smithfield to vend his wood; being by trade a woodmonger.