In the town of Hereford the meetings were also disturbed from time to time, chiefly by boys, who threw among those that were met, not only stones, and excrements, but burning squibs; and used all manner of insolency and mischief they could think of, against these harmless people, either by breaking the glass windows, or the forms and seats. One of the leaders of this turbulent company, was the son of one Abraham Seward, who about this time was elected mayor; but when complaints were made to him of the outrageous actions of the said wicked crew, he pretended to be ignorant of his son’s doings, and for all that threatened those that came to him, with the execution of the law upon them, if they did not leave off to keep meetings. And as it was well known that the chief master of the town-school was displeased at the extravagant insolency of some of his scholars, so it was reported also, that he was forbidden to correct them for it; and that the college priests had set them on, and said they would hear them out in what they did; for some of those brutish boys were choristers. Two friends went to the justices, Robert Simons and Thomas Simons, to acquaint them with the excessive abuses they met with. But the justices not at all regarding their complaint, the said Robert endeavoured to draw some confession of a meeting from one of them, intending, as he himself said, immediately to have fined him, if he had confessed; but he was wary. Now since the insolency of the boys was thus encouraged by authority, it was no wonder it continued there a whole year. At length eight men were taken from the meeting, by the aforesaid mayor, Abraham Seward, and carried to the town-hall; and in their passage along, he said, they should never meet there more. To which a friend, going with him, said, ‘We are a people gathered by the power of the Lord; and therefore the power of man cannot scatter us.’ Being come to the town-hall, the oaths of allegiance and supremacy were tendered to them, on which they said, ‘We are Christians, therefore cannot break the command of Christ, which forbids to swear at all; but to render just and lawful allegiance to the king, we do not deny, nor refuse.’ And they persisting in their refusal to swear, were committed to prison. The next day after, one Walter Rogers, a prebend, walking by the meeting-house, and observing how it was broken, said to some, that they were very good boys, and had done their work better than he thought they had.
At one of the quarter-sessions in Nottingham, one John Sayton appeared, who, being fined twenty pounds for suffering a conventicle at his house, in the parish of Blyth, came to appeal for justice. The witness produced against him, said, ‘I was there on that day, and there were several people met, but were all silent, and no words spoken amongst them; but I did not see John Sayton there.’ And that the said John Sayton was above sixty miles from home the same day, for which he was fined twenty pounds, was made appear in open court by substantial evidence. Then the counsel for the appellant said, in the first place, forasmuch as there was neither preaching, praying, nor reading, as their own witness doth testify, therefore it was no conventicle. Secondly, being they cannot prove he was there, therefore how can it be judged, that he did either wittingly or willingly consent to that meeting, if they could make it a conventicle? To this the informer’s counsel objected, that although there was neither preaching, praying, nor reading, yet it was evident enough that they met under a pretence of religious exercise; and seeing there were more than five, and not of John Sayton’s family, therefore it must needs be a conventicle. And as to the second, seeing they cannot prove he was there, we must leave it to the consciences of the jury, whether he did willingly consent to that meeting or no. After the counsel had spoken on both sides, Peniston Whaley, one of the justices, who sat in the chair as judge of the court, stood up, and said to the jury, ‘Although there was no visible exercise that can be proved, yet the Quakers say, they worship God in spirit and truth; and we know their manner is to sit sighing and groaning,’ &c. The jury returning, and being asked by the court, ‘Do you find it for the king, or for the appellant,’ answered, ‘For the appellant.’ This so displeased the said justice Whaley, that he bid them go forth again. But one of the jurymen saying, they were agreed, and they had considered the thing very well, he thereupon fell into such a rage, that he said, ‘You deserve all to be hanged; for you are as ill as highwaymen.’ Perhaps he himself was either an informer, or a special friend to such, and therefore was sorry that the jury deprived him of the booty, or a share of it.
There was now great persecution in all parts of England, neither did it go better in the principality of Wales. Nine persons being taken prisoners, and brought this summer to the assizes held for the county of Merioneth, in the town Bala, upon an indictment for not resorting to their parish churches, the oaths of allegiance and supremacy were tendered to them, Kemick Eyton, and Thomas Walcot being judges; and upon their refusal of taking these oaths, the said judges declared it as their opinion in open court, that in case the prisoners would refuse the oaths the second time, they should be prosecuted as traitors, the men to be hanged and quartered, and the women to be burnt. But this threat could not make them afraid; for at the next assizes the oaths being tendered them again, they continued in refusing, though they solemnly acknowledged allegiance to the king as supreme magistrate; and thereupon were remanded to close imprisonment, where Edward Rees, one of them, being above sixty years of age, and not able to hear the cold, died about the height of the frost, not having been allowed the use of fire.
Sometime before, it happened within the corporation of Pool, in Montgomeryshire, that the justice, David Maurice, coming into a house where a small number of people were peaceably met, and all silent, required them to depart. Hereupon Thomas Lloyd, one of the company, began to speak a few words, by way of defining true religion, and what true worship was; and what he said was so reasonable, that the said justice approved of it as sound, and according to the doctrine of the church of England; yet notwithstanding he fined the said Thomas Lloyd in twenty pounds for preaching.
This year died in prison John Sage, being about eighty years of age, after having been in prison at Ivelchester in Somersetshire, almost ten years, for not paying of tithes. And it appeared that since the restoration of king Charles, above two hundred of the people called Quakers, died in prisons in England, where they had been confined because of their religion. I could relate abundance of occurrences this year, if I had a mind to extend my work, but I study brevity; yet cannot omit to mention, that in this year, in the island of Barbadoes, in the West Indies, a law was made to prevent negroes coming into the meetings of the Quakers, which was of this tenor:
‘Whereas of late, many negroes have been suffered to remain at the meetings of the Quakers, as hearers of their doctrine, and taught in their principles, whereby the safety of the island may be much hazarded: be it enacted, that if at any time after publication hereof, any negro, or negroes, be found with the people called Quakers, at any of their meetings, as hearers of their preaching, he or they shall be forfeited, one half to such as shall seize, or sue for him or them, if belonging to any of the Quakers, and the other moiety to the public use of the island; provided that if he or they be seized, such as seize, shall bring their actions upon this statute, within three months, against the owner of the negro, or negroes: wherein the defendant having ten days summons, shall appear, plead, and come to trial at the first court after summons, or judgment to be given by nihil dicit, and execution immediately to issue. And if such negro, or negroes, do not belong to any of the persons present at the same meeting, any person or persons may bring an action upon this statute, against any of the persons present at the said meeting, at the election of the informer, and so recover ten pounds for every negro, or negroes, present at the said meeting as aforesaid, to be divided as aforesaid, and in such actions proceedings to be as aforesaid. And no person whatsoever, shall keep any school, to instruct any child in any learning, unless within one month after the publication hereof, he first take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, before some justice of peace of the parish where the party lives, and have a certificate thereof, or have a special license from the governor, on pain of three months imprisonment, and forfeiture of 300 lbs. of Muscovado sugar, the one moiety to the informer, and the other to the public use of the island, to be recovered as aforesaid. And no person whatsoever, who is not an inhabitant and resident of this island, and hath been so for twelve months together, shall hereafter publicly discourse, or preach at the meeting of the Quakers, on pain of six months imprisonment, and forfeiture of 1000 lbs. Muscovado sugar, the one moiety to such as sue for it, the other to the public use of the island, to be recovered as aforesaid: provided that all actions upon this statute, be brought within six months after the offence.
‘Read, and passed the council the 21st of April, 1676, and consented to by his excellency [the governor] the same day.
EDWARD STEED, Deputy-secretary.’
Although in the beginning of this statute, the instructing of the negroes in the doctrine of the Quakers, is represented as a thing whereby the safety of the island might be much hazarded, yet the sequel shows that this was not the matter, but that it was endeavoured to deprive the Quakers of their due liberty. What was the issue hereof I am unacquainted with.
This year Robert Barclay wrote a letter to the heer Adrian Paets, with whom he had some discourse when the said heer returned from Spain, where he had been ambassador for the States of the United Provinces. This Paets having a strange opinion of the doctrine of the Quakers, had a good while ago wrote a letter[41] to Christian Hartzoeker, at Rotterdam, about their doctrine; and having afterwards discoursed with Barclay concerning the inward and immediate revelation of the Spirit of God, this induced Barclay to write a letter on the said subject in Latin, to the aforementioned heer, wherein he made a more large reply to his arguments, than he had done by word of mouth. This letter being sent over from Scotland to Holland, was delivered by Benjamin Furly at Rotterdam, to the said heer Paets, with a desire that he might be pleased to return an answer to it, which he promised he would. But he continuing deficient in the case, Furly at last published the said letter in print, but without mentioning the name of him to whom it was written, only his character, viz. Cuidam legato.[42]