The yearly-meeting at London, at which he was, being over, he returned again to Worcester, where the sessions being held in the month called July, and he called to the bar, and the indictment read, justice Street caused the oaths to be read also, and tendered to him again. G. Fox then said, that he was come to traverse his indictment. But when he began to show the errors that were in the indictment, viz. such as were sufficient to quash it, he was soon stopped, and the oath required of him; and he persisting in the refusal, was by the jury found guilty. The chairman, how active soever he had been against G. Fox, yet was now troubled, and told him of a sad sentence he had to speak against him. To which G. Fox returned, that he had many and more errors to assign in the indictment, besides those he had already mentioned. Whereupon the chairman told him, he was going to show him the danger of a premunire, which was the loss of his liberty, and all his goods and chattels, and to endure imprisonment during life. ‘But,’ added he, ‘I do not deliver this as the sentence of the court, but as an admonition to you.’ Then the jailer was bid to take him away; and G. Fox afterwards understood concerning this pretended admonition, that the chairman had said to the clerk of the peace, that what he had spoken should stand for sentence.
Now whilst G. Fox was in prison, there came to him, amongst others, the earl of Salisbury’s son, who was very loving, and much concerned that they had dealt so with him; and he himself took a copy in writing of the errors that were in the indictment. And G. Fox afterwards got the state of his case, drawn up in writing, delivered to judge Wild. He also wrote a letter to the king, wherein he gave an account of the sentiments of those called Quakers concerning swearing; and how they abhorred all plottings and contrivances against the king. Not long after he fell into such a sickness, that some began to doubt of his recovery; and then one of his friends went to justice Parker, by whose order he had been first committed to prison, and desired him to give order to the jailer, that he might have liberty to go out of the jail into the city. Whereupon Parker wrote the following letter to the jailer.
‘Mr. Harris,
‘I have been much importuned by some friends to George Fox, to write to you. I am informed by them, that he is in a very weak condition, and very much indisposed. What lawful favour you can do for the benefit of the air, for his health, pray show him. I suppose the next term they will make application to the king. I am,
Sir, your loving friend,
HENRY PARKER.’
Evesham, the 8th of October, 1674.
This letter was sufficient warrant for the jailer to permit G. Fox to be brought from prison to the house of one of his friends. His wife was come to him before that time, and after having been with him about seventeen weeks, and no discharge like to be obtained for him, she went up to London, and being come to Whitehall, and meeting with the king there, she gave him an account of her husband’s long imprisonment, and how weak he was, and not without danger of his life. To which the king said, he could do nothing in it, but she must go to the chancellor. And so she went to the lord Finch, who was then chancellor; and having given him an account of the matter, she told him that the king had left it wholly to him; and if he did not show pity, and release her husband out of prison, she feared he would end his days there. But the chancellor said to her, that the king could not release him, otherwise than by a pardon. Now G. Fox could not resolve to be freed thus, as well knowing he had done no evil; and therefore he would rather have lain in prison all his days, than to be thus set at liberty; otherwise he needed not to have lain so long, since the king had been willing long before to have given him a pardon; and also had said to one Thomas More, that G. Fox needed not scruple being released by a pardon; for many a man, that was as innocent as a child, had had a pardon granted him. G. Fox unwilling to have a pardon, but desiring to have the validity of his indictment tried before the judges, the lord chancellor, who showed himself a discreet man, procured that an habeas corpus was granted to bring G. Fox to London, once more to appear before the king’s bench. The habeas corpus was with the first opportunity sent down by his wife to Worcester; but there they would not part with him at first, (being now recovered a little of his sickness,) under a pretence that he was premunired, and was not to go out in that manner. Thus it became necessary to send to London again; and another order was got and sent down, to bring up G. Fox before the king’s bench. Being still weak, he was carried up to London in a coach, the under-sheriff and the clerk of the peace accompanying him.
Being come down, he was brought before the four judges at the king’s bench, where counsellor Thomas Corbet pleaded his cause, and acquitted himself exceeding well; for he started a new plea, and told the judges, that by law they could not imprison any man upon a premunire. The judges then saying they must have time to look in their books, and to consult the statutes, the hearing was put off till the next day. And since it appeared that Corbet was in the right, they chose to let their plea fall, perhaps for fear of worse consequences. And thus they began to examine the errors of the indictment, which proved to be so many and so gross, that all the judges were of opinion, that the indictment was quashed and void, and that G. Fox ought to have his liberty. The same day several lords and other great men, had the oaths of allegiance and supremacy tendered to them in open court; and some of G. Fox’s adversaries moved the judges, that the oaths might be tendered to him again, saying, he was a dangerous man to be at liberty. But judge Matthew Hale, who was then lord chief justice of England, and really an excellent and pious man, as hath been hinted already here before, said, he had indeed heard some such reports of G. Fox, but he had also heard more good reports of him. This saying was serviceable; and Hale and the other judges ordered G. Fox to be freed by proclamation. Thus he was set at liberty in an honourable way, and his counsellor Corbet, who had pleaded for him, got great fame by it; for many other lawyers told him, he had brought that to light, which had not been known before. And after the trial, one of the judges said to him, ‘You have obtained a great deal of honour by your way of pleading G. Fox’s cause in court.’
The year was now come to an end. But before I go over to the next, I am to mention that the Baptists in England, losing from time to time some of their best members, wrote therefore very fiercely against the Quakers, endeavouring thereby to render them no Christians. But those writings were continually answered, and that with so many convincing reasons, that the Quakers got more adherents by it. The consequence of this was, that a public dispute was appointed to be held between the Baptists and the Quakers, in the meeting-house of the Baptists at London. For the Quakers, there spoke by turns, George Whitehead, Stephen Crisp, William Penn, and George Keith; and the opponents were Jeremy Ives, William Kiffin, Thomas Plant, Thomas Hicks, and Robert Ferguson, a Presbyterian, afterwards eminently known in Holland, by the fierce declaration drawn up by him in the name of the duke of Monmouth, when that unhappy prince went over to England with forces, to dispute the throne against king James.
Jeremy Ives was an eminent teacher among the Baptists, that had been in prison in London fourteen years before on a religious account, and chiefly because for conscience-sake he refused to take the oath.