‘Gentlemen,
‘The King being informed, that some goods belonging to John Wales, and other Quakers of Leeds, which were seized and taken from them upon the account of their religious worship, do remain unsold in the hands of John Todd, who was constable at the time of the seizure, or in the hands of some other persons; and his majesty’s intention being, that all his subjects shall receive the full benefit of his declaration for liberty of conscience, his majesty commands me to signify his pleasure to you, that you cause the goods belonging to the said John Wales, and all other Quakers of Leeds, which were heretofore seized upon the account of religious worship, and are unsold, in whose hands soever they remain, to be forthwith restored to the respective owners, without any charge.
I am, gentlemen,
Your affectionate friend and servant,
SUNDERLAND.’
By such means some got their goods again, that had been taken from them upon the account of religious worship; for in many places they lay long unsold, because few would buy goods so taken. And that the king by these his favours, drew the love and affection of many of his subjects towards himself, none need to wonder; for whatever his religion was, he delivered them from that grievous burden, under which they had been oppressed so many years. To this may be added, that he used them kindly in all respects; and would not suffer his servants to molest any for not pulling off their hats, when they came near his royal person. Nay, so far went his condescension, that a certain countryman of the Quakers’ persuasion, coming to him with his hat on his head, the king took off his own hat, and held it under his arm; which the other seeing, said, ‘The king needs not keep off his hat for me.’ To which that prince returned, ‘You do not know the custom here, for that requires that but one hat must be on here.’ I have been told of more such like occurrences, which I pass by; but it appears from thence that the king endeavoured to have among the Quakers the repute of a mild and courteous prince. And this year he gave also full liberty of conscience in Scotland, and freed those that were still under sufferings, granting them the free liberty of their religious meetings. The said liberty he also allowed to the Presbyterians, provided they should not meet in the fields, or in sheds, as some did.
1688.
The king having thus granted liberty of conscience to people of all persuasions, did whatever he could to introduce popery in England; for he permitted the Jesuits to erect a college in the Savoy at London; and suffered the friars to go publicly in the dress of their monastical orders. This was a very strange sight to Protestants in England, and it caused no small fermentation in the minds of people, when the fellows of Magdalen College at Oxford, were by the king’s order dispossessed, to make way for Romanists. This was such a gross usurpation, that W. Penn, who had ready access to the king, and who endeavoured to get the penal laws and test abrogated, thinking it possible to find out a way whereby to limit the Papists so effectually, that they should not be able to prevail, did, for all that, not omit to blame this usurpation at Oxford, and to tell the king that it was an act which could not in justice be defended, since the general liberty of conscience did not allow of depriving any of their property, who did what they ought to do, as the fellows of the said college appeared to have done. But this could not cool the king’s zeal for popery, for he drove on so fast, without disguise, to that degree, that the pope’s nuncio, D’Ada, this summer made his public entry at Windsor in very great state.
Great endeavours were now made to repeal the penal laws and tests; for when this point was gained, then Papists might be admitted into the government as well as others; and such a general liberty of conscience making an alluring show, several dissenters, as Baptists and others, served the king with their pens on this account: and W. Penn, who always had been a defender of liberty of conscience, was also not inactive in this affair, though with a good intent, howbeit he might have failed in his expectation. I remember when in those days the patrons of the church of Rome asserted liberty of conscience to be a Christian duty, I heard somebody say, “Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the Leopard his spots?” The king laboured also to persuade the prince and princess of Orange, to give their assent to the repealing of the test and penal laws; but this could not be obtained of them. And since the king caused the advocate James Stuart, to write concerning this matter to the heer Fagel, counsellor and chief pensionary at the Hague; Fagel answered this paper in a letter to the said James Stuart, wherein he declared the judgment of the prince and princess in this case; and signified that they were willing to assent to the repealing of the penal laws, as far as they had any tendency to the exercise of worship; but as for those that debarred Papists from sitting in parliament, of which the test was not the least, they could not give their assent to the repealing of such limitations. This letter was generally approved by the Protestants in England, but the king for all that went on with the introducing of popery; and about the beginning of the year 1688, he not only put in several Romanists to be fellows of Magdalen College at Oxford, but endeavoured also to usher those of his persuasion into the magistracy; and the better to cloak this design, he would have other dissenters also chosen: but they generally rejected this offer, as did also Stephen Crisp, at Colchester, who was too circumspect to be caught thus, and therefore he declined the offer.
The king’s declaration for liberty of conscience was, on the 27th of the month called April, published again, to show that he was firm and constant in his resolution, and that his intentions were not changed since he issued it out, to excite his subjects to join in it, and to choose such members of parliament as might do their part to finish what he had begun. Hereto was annexed an order of the council, for reading this declaration in all churches and chapels throughout the kingdom; and ordering the bishops to send and distribute the declaration throughout their several dioceses, to be read accordingly. But they refused to do so, pretending it was not legal, (though some there were who thought it was,) because they were against liberty of conscience. Now the archbishop of Canterbury, and six other bishops, petitioned the king not to insist on the distribution and reading of his declaration; alleging that their great averseness to the distribution and publication of it in their churches proceeded neither from any want of duty and obedience to his majesty, nor yet from any want of due tenderness to dissenters; but because it was founded upon such a dispensing power, as had been often declared illegal in parliament.
This refusal the king so resented, that he sent these bishops to the tower. Whilst they were thus confined, there was much discourse every where about this matter; and since it was well known that some bishops had been the promoters of the former persecutions, some it seems spoke also in prejudice of these that were now in confinement. This being reported to them, they said that the Quakers belied them, and divulged that they, (the bishops,) had been the cause of the death of some. This gave occasion to Robert Barclay to visit the bishops in the tower; and speaking with them, he gave them undeniable proofs of some persons who, by order of bishops, had been kept in prison till death; though they had been told of the danger of those persons by physicians, that were not Quakers. This was so evidently manifested by R. Barclay, that they were not able to deny it: yet Barclay told them, that since they themselves were now under oppression, the intention of the Quakers was in no wise to publish such matters, lest thereby they should exasperate the king against them. And they were careful indeed not to do any thing that might aggravate the case of these prisoners; for it was not time now to rub old sores, since the bishops themselves seemed to be inclined to declare for liberty of conscience. And since this liberty was now enjoyed all over the kingdom, those called Quakers thought it convenient at their yearly meeting, which was held this summer at London, again to draw up an address to the king, and to acquaint him of one thing more, which continued to be troublesome to them. This address they presented to him, and was as followeth:
To King JAMES II. over England, &c.