What the judge had said, that they had had late experience of the danger of such meetings under colour of religion, was of no force at all; for it never had appeared that the Quakers in religious meetings did any thing else than the performing of their worship, though there were other evidences concerning the Fifth monarchy-men; but it was universally known that the Quakers had no part therein, nor joined with them in the least degree. It was also a very absurd saying of the judge, that this law did not touch conscience: for it was merely for conscience-sake that the Quakers frequented not the public service and liturgy of the church of England, and kept religious meetings by themselves. But the jury seemed well satisfied with what the judge had told them; and he having thus obtained his aim, read the prisoners’ names, and said to them, ‘What can ye say for yourselves, that judgment of transportation should not pass, or be given against you?’ To which they said, ‘We are innocent, and have transgressed no just law; if we must have that sentence, we give up our bodies freely into the hands of the Lord; the will of the Lord be done.’ ‘Have ye nothing more to say?’ said the judge. ‘Nothing, but that we are innocent,’ replied the prisoners, ‘we have wronged no man.’ ‘Then hearken to your sentence,’ said the judge. ‘Ye shall be transported beyond the seas, to the island of Barbadoes, there to remain seven years.’
Then Jeremiah Hern and Thomas Wood were called to the bar, and their indictment read, to which they pleaded, ‘Not guilty, but innocent;’ and Jeremiah said, he was no such person as the act mentioned, for plotting and contriving insurrections. Then the judge interrupting him, said, ‘You are a forward man, you have an estate;’ and so he caused him to be set by: and to Thomas Wood he said, ‘I hear a good report of you; consider what you do; I am sorry, seeing you have a good report among your neighbours, that you should be found guilty, which I fear you will if you put yourself upon trial: I am willing to show you favour; and it may be one man may fare the better for another.’ This reflected on Jeremiah, who, by the malice of one John King, had been falsely represented to the judge. Yet Jeremiah having shown how he had been wronged, the judge said, they should both partake of his favour, if they would but desire it, and this favour consisted in this, as he himself said, that he would wave the proceedings of the court, and give them till the next assizes, to consider better with themselves. ‘What say you, (thus he continued,) will ye have it deferred till the next assizes? for if the jury find the bill, you will be sent to Jamaica; ye must not all go to one place.’ To this the prisoners returned, ‘We have transgressed no law of God, nor wronged any man: we leave it to the court; we desire it not.’ ‘If you will not desire it,’ replied the judge, ‘I cannot, nor will do it.’
Then three other prisoners were brought to the bar, among whom was one John Reynolds, who, according to the deposition of the witnesses, had been within a yard of the door of the meeting-place, with his face from it. The judge then said, ‘God forbid that I should do any thing that is not right and just against my conscience; there is that which is written upon the wall before me, which puts me in mind, that I should not judge for man, but for God.’ Then turning to the jury, he spoke to them almost after the same manner, as he did concerning the other four prisoners: and to induce them to declare Reynolds, (who was taken but not in the meeting,) guilty, he spoke thus: ‘Suppose a man be killed in a house, and nobody saw him killed, but a man is met coming out of the house with a bloody knife in his hand, it is a very probable evidence that he is guilty of the murder. So though the witnesses do not say that they saw and took him in the meeting, yet they swore he was within a yard of the door with his face from the place where they usually met; and he hath been taken twice already, and convicted upon record. My masters, I leave it to you, go forth.’ Then a bailiff was called, and charged to provide the jury a room, and to let none speak with them, nor to let them have either bread, drink, or candle, till they brought in their verdict. The jury being gone out, soon agreed, and after they were returned said, that four of the five prisoners were guilty, and that the other who stood without the door was not guilty. So he was acquitted; but the other four being brought to the bar, the judge asked them, what they could say why judgment of transportation should not be given against them. Their answer was, ‘We are innocent, and have not offended any just law of God or man, to deserve that sentence; we leave it to the witness of God in thy or your consciences.’ Then the judge said, ‘Ye have offended against this law, (having the act before him,) which is made by the king and parliament, and executed by us their subordinate ministers: if it be not righteous and just, we must answer for that.’ One of the prisoners had said before, ‘If I have transgressed any just law, let me suffer; and if not, he that judgeth for God will not condemn me.’ To which the judge returned, ‘You do well to put me in mind of my duty; pray think of your own.’ And now he asked the prisoners, ‘Have you any more to say?’ To which they answered, ‘Nothing, but that we are innocent.’ Then he said, ‘Hear your sentence: you shall be transported beyond the seas, to the island of Jamaica, being one of his majesty’s foreign plantations, there to remain seven years. Now I have this one thing to acquaint you with, that if you, and either of you, will pay down here into the court, an hundred pounds before the court riseth, you and every one of you shall be discharged, and clearly acquitted for what is past. And I will show you this favour, not to discharge the court at this present, but shall adjourn it till afternoon.’ This was done; and the court being met again, the judge sent to the condemned prisoners to know if they would pay down the hundred pounds; but they answering, ‘No,’ the court was then soon discharged.
Seven of these prisoners not long after were carried on ship-board to be transported to the West Indies; but (which was remarkable,) the ship by contrary winds and stormy weather was hindered going to sea. Not only the master, whose name was Thomas May, but also his men, grew very uneasy at this: for they believed that Heaven was against them: nay, the sailors threatened to leave the ship, if the master would not set those prisoners ashore. And he himself, considering how after having lain long in the Downs, and more than once set sail, they were hindered to go on by contrary winds, resolved at length, after having lingered about two months, to set the banished ashore; and so he did, giving them a certificate, of which I have a copy in my custody, that they were not run away, but freely put ashore by him, for which, among others, he gave these reasons, that seeing the great adversities they had met with, he concluded from thence, that the hand of God was against him, and that therefore he durst not go off with these prisoners, because he found them to be honest men, who had not deserved banishment. And also that there was a law extant, that no Englishman might be transported against his mind. And that his men refused to proceed on the voyage if he would carry away these people. This certificate he gave under his hand, and so let them go away free; and not long after the ship set sail with a fair wind. I do not find that the banished, who returned home again, were prosecuted on this account: for the sentence against them was executed as far as it could at that time, and they had made no opposition, but had been sufferers.
Persecution in the meanwhile did not cease: but this did not discourage those called Quakers; they continued valiant, as I have seen in many letters sent about that time to some of my acquaintance. One said in the court of justice, ‘We are in the service of the Lord, and may not leave it;’ another who was offered to be freed of banishment, if he would pay down an hundred pounds, said, ‘Though I had an hundred lives to lose, and could redeem them all for an hundred pence, yet I would not do it.’ But this could not stop the violence of the persecutors; till an heavier hand reached them, as may be related hereafter.
In the months of October and December many were condemned to transportation, and among these several women, whose trials I shall but cursorily speak of: for if I should relate all particulars, the description would far exceed my limits; and therefore I will but touch upon some few things.
On the 13th of October, sixteen of those called Quakers were tried at Hicks’s Hall, in Middlesex, for the third offence, as they called it.—The grand jury consulting together about finding the bill of indictment, could not well agree. And the justices giving them a check, one of the jurymen desired to know, by what law they ought to find a bill against any persons, without witnesses to testify the fact committed. To which answer was made by the court, that their records testified the crime or fact, and that such their record was a sufficient witness without the testimony of any man. And for a proof of this it was further said, ‘The records in Chancery serve as a sufficient testimony; and if it be so in Chancery, why not here?’ The jury having been twice upon this business, was sent up a third time; and Edward Shelton, the clerk, said he would go up also to help them, and so he did; it having been threatened, that if the jurymen did not find a bill, they should be fined. Nevertheless, at their return they answered, ‘No verdict.’ Whereupon the justices finding the jurymen not to answer their ends, took them apart, and examined them one by one, telling them that the only thing they were to look upon was, that they did assemble together above the number of five in company; which, according to what they said, their records showed. This made some of the jury comply; but others stood it out, and signified that in conscience they could not consent to what was required of them. But the major part complying with the justices, upon their threatening them, and the others being strongly pressed, the bill was, by a kind of force, accepted at length. But how hard a case this was to some, appeared by the mournful confession of one of the jury, who to ease his conscience published in print a small book, with the title of ‘The Wounded Heart, or The Juryman’s Offences,’ &c. in which he openly disapproved the fact, to which he had been induced by human fear. The pains had been so great to persuade the jury to bring in a verdict according to the mind of the court, that the clerk, as was reported, said, he had rather have given twenty pounds, than have been so troubled.
The next day the prisoners were brought to the bar, and William Proctor, of Gray’s Inn, sat as judge in the court. The questions and answers I pass by for brevity sake. One Hannah Trigg pleading she was innocent, was asked how old she was; to which she saying she was not sixteen years old; one of the justices did not stick to say, she told a lie; and that he thought the Quakers would not lie. In the meanwhile it appeared, that he only said so by guess to baffle her; for by a certificate of some that were present at her birth, (which was divulged in print,) it was proved that she, being the daughter of Timothy Trigg, was born at London on the 20th of the month called August, 1649; and so was but fifteen years of age, and dealt with against the law; which was the harder, because this maid falling sick, died in prison, after the sentence of banishment had been past upon her: which sentence was now pronounced against twelve persons, among whom were four maids; and four married women were condemned to a confinement of eleven months in Bridewell. The judge in the pronouncing the sentences was so disturbed in his mind, that ordering some to be transported to Virginia, and others to Barbadoes, he condemned some also to be sent to Hispaniola; at which the people were not a little surprised, for he made it plainly appear, that he did not consider what he said; since Hispaniola was no place in the dominions of the king of England: but he was so confounded, that he also accused the prisoners of having transgressed the laws of the commonwealth, forgetting that England was no more a commonwealth, as it was before the restoration of king Charles II.
On the 15th of October above forty of the prisoners called Quakers, were tried before the judges Hide and Keeling. To mention all the exhorbitances of this trial, which were not few, I count needless; for as to the questions and answers, and the passing of sentence, the reader may form to himself an idea of it from what hath been said already of the trial at Hertford, &c. A maid being asked, guilty, or not guilty, answered, ‘I never was taken at any seditious meeting or conventicle in my life.’ To which the judge said, ‘But, woman, were not you taken at the Bull and Mouth the 21st of August?’ She answered, ‘I am innocent in the sight of God and all good people.’ That this was true the judge did not deny, but said, ‘I believe that, woman, but you have transgressed a law.’ She replied, ‘As for the Bull and Mouth. I believe I have been there an hundred times, and if the Lord permit me life and liberty, I do not know but I may go there an hundred times more.’ The judge then saying, ‘Woman, will you plead or no, guilty or not guilty, or else I must pass sentence upon you.’ She answered, ‘The will of the Lord be done, I am innocent.’ Yet this could not avail her, though judge Hide had said a little before concerning the prisoners, ‘If they are innocent, then they are not guilty.’ But she was set by as mute, or pro confesso, as to the fact charged against her in the indictment. Others who complained of the unreasonableness of the proceedings, were hectored as impudent: and the jury showing themselves dissatisfied concerning the witnesses, judge Hide said to them, it was no untruth if a man did mistake in the time, and that his evidence was good, though he did not see one in the house: ‘For,’ said he, ‘if forty men be in a room, and one is brought out of the room to me, standing at the door, cannot I swear that he was in that room, if I see him come out? You must not make such scruples.’
In the meanwhile there were some among the witnesses who did not know the prisoners by face; so that there was reason enough to disprove their testimony. But whatever was objected, the business must go on: for though one of the witnesses declared that the meeting, from which the prisoners had been taken was peaceable; and though one of the prisoners said, that the law was made against seditious meetings, and that nothing of sedition had been proved against them: yet judge Keeling said, the act was made to prevent such meetings, because under colour and pretence of religion, plots and conspiracies might be carried on. And when a prisoner said, that he was at a peaceable godly meeting, and received much comfort there; the judge returned, ‘That is as much as we desire. You confess you were there; and though it was a peaceable meeting, yet it was an unlawful one.’ Another of the prisoners who pleaded that the law the court acted by was contrary to Magna Charta, and the ancient fundamental laws of the land, was answered by judge Hide, ‘If the king and parliament should make a law that two justices without a jury should adjudge a man to death for the third offence as a felon, without benefit of clergy, it would be a good law, and according to Magna Charta, and the law of the land; and we should be bound to execute it.’ It seems this judge, (who not long after was suddenly summoned hence to appear before the divine assizes,) was of opinion, that since the legislative power resided in the king and parliament, all that they resolved and enacted, must pass for good law. But if I should mention all the absurdities I meet with in these proceedings, when should I come to an end? True it is, that sometimes a show was made of pity: for judge Keeling said to two maids, ‘We are sorry that such young maids should be thus deluded.’ But because they would not promise to go to the public church, though they declared themselves ready to assist at divine service, they were deemed as guilty. Another prisoner being asked by judge Hide, whether he would go to church, answered, ‘If I have my liberty, I shall go to church.’ But when it appeared that he did not mean the established or public church, this promise could not save him. One Richard Poulton, a lad of fifteen years of age, who by a certificate showed, that he was not yet sixteen years old, and therefore no transgressor of the law, was asked, if he would swear he was not sixteen, just as if he could have remembered the time of his birth; to which he answered, that he was not brought up to swearing: and being asked, whether he would promise to go to church, he answered, he should promise no such thing. Then he was returned to the rest that were to be sentenced.