Page images
PDF
EPUB

and art thou so certain of thy time and station, above all that have gone before thee, whom justice hath cut down, and given them their due, that thou shalt never be called to an account, nor with its long and sure stroke be reached? Deceive not thyself, God is come nearer to judgment than the workers of iniquity in this age imagine; who persecute and evil-intreat those that witness the Just and Holy One, for their witnessing of him who is come to reign for ever and ever. Saith he not, he will be a swift witness against the false swearers? God is not mocked.

Surely, friend, that must needs be a very great offence which deprives a man of justice, of being heard as to wrong, of the benefit of the law, and of those laws aforerehearsed, to defend the justice and equity of which a man hath adventured his blood and all that is dear to him. But to stand covered (or with the hat on) in conscience to the command of the Lord, is made by thee such an offence (which is none in law) and rendered upon us (who are innocent, serving the living God) effectual to deny us justice, though the laws of God, and of man, and the oath, and equity, and reason, saith the contrary, and on it pronounceth such a penalty. If ye will be uncovered (uncovered, saidest thou) I will hear you, and do you justice; but justice we had not, nor were we heard, because Jesus Christ, who is the higher power, the law-giver of his people, in our consciences commanded us not to respect persons, whom to obey we chuse rather than man. And for our obedience unto him hast thou cast us into prison, and continuest us there till this very day, having shewed us neither law for it, nor scripture, nor instances of either, nor example of heathens or others. Friend, come down to that of God, that is just in thee, and consider, was ever such a thing as this heard of in this nation? What is become of seriousness, of true judgment, and of righteousness! An unrighteous man, standing before thee with his hat off, shall be heard; but an innocent man, appearing with his hat on in conscience to the Lord, shall neither be heard nor have justice. Is not this regarding of persons contrary to the laws aforesaid, and the oath, and the law of God? Understand and judge: Did we not own authority and government oftentimes before the court? Didst not thou say in the court, thou wast glad to hear so much from us of our owning magistracy? Pleaded we not to the indictment, though it was such a new-found one as England never heard of before? Came we not when thou sentest for us? Went we not when thou badest us go? And are we not still prisoners at thy command and at thy will? If

the hat had been such an offence to thee, couldest not thou have caused it to have been taken off, when thou heardest us so often declare we could not do it in conscience to the commands of the Lord, and that for that cause we forbore it, not in contempt of thee or of authority, nor in disrespect to thine, or any man's person: (for we said, we honoured all men in the Lord, and owned authority, which was a terror to evil-doers, and a praise to them that do well; and our souls were subject to the higher powers for conscience-sake) as thou causedest them to be taken off, and to be kept so, when thou calledest the jury to find us transgressors without a law? What ado host thou made to take away the righteousness of the righteous from him, and to cause us to suffer further, whom thou knewest to have been so long wrongfully in prison contrary to law? Is not liberty of conscience a natural right? Had there been a law in this case, and we bound up in our consciences that we could not have obeyed it, was not liberty of conscience there to take place? For where the law saith not against, there needs no plea of liberty of conscience; but the law have we not offended, yet in thy will hast thou caused, and dost thou yet cause us to suffer for our consciences, where the law requires no such thing; and yet for liberty of conscience hath all the blood been spilt, and the miseries of the late wars undergone, and (as the Protector saith) this government undertakes to preserve it, and a natural right, he saith, it is; and he that would have it, he saith, ought to give it. And if it be a natural right, as is undeniable, then to attempt to force it, or to punish a man for not doing contrary to it, is to act against nature; which, as it is unreasonable, so it is the same as to offer violence to a man's life. And what an offence that is in the law thou knowest; and how, by the common law of England, all acts, agreements, and laws, that are against nature, are meer nullities; and all the judges cannot make one case to be law that is against nature. But put the case, our standing with our hats on had been an offence in law, and we wilfully, and in contempt, and not out of conscience had stood so, (which we deny as aforesaid) yet that is not a ground wherefore we should be denied justice, or to be heard as to the wrong done to us. If ye will not offend in one case, I will do you justice in another; this is not the language of the law or of justice, which distributes to every one their right; justice to whom justice is due, punishment to whom punishment is due. A man who doth wrong may also have wrong done to him; shall he not have right wherein he is wronged, unless he right him

whom he hath wronged? The law saith not so; but the wrong-doer is to suffer, and the sufferer of wrong to be righted. Is not otherwise to do a denying, a letting, or stopping of even law and execution of justice, and a bringing under the penalties aforesaid? Mind and consider.

And shouldest thou have accused when no witness appeared against us, as in the particulars of striking Peter Ceely, and dispersing books (as thou saidest) against magistracy and ministry, with which thou didst falsely accuse one of us? Saith not the law, the judge ought not to be the accuser, much less a false accuser. And wast not thou such an one, in affirming, that he dispersed books against magistracy and ministry, when as the books were violently taken out of our chamber (as hath been said), undispersed by him, or any of us? Nor didst thou make it appear in one particular, wherein those books thou so violently didst cause to be taken away, were against magistracy or ministry? or gavest one instance, or reply, when he denied what thou chargedst therein, and spake to thee to bring forth those books and make thy charge appear. Is not the sword of the magistrate of God to pass upon such evil-doing? And according to the administration of the law, ought not accusations to be by way of indictment, wherein the offence is to be charged, and the law expressed against which it is? Can there be an issue without an indictment? Or can an indictment be found before proof be made of the offence charged therein? And hast not thou herein gone contrary to the law and the administration thereof, and thy duty as a judge? What just cause of offence gave George Fox to thee, when, upon thy producing a paper concerning swearing, sent by him (as thou saidest) to the grand jury, and requiring him to say whether it was his hand-writing? he answered, read it up before the country, and when he heard it read, if it were his, he would own it? Is it not equal, and according to law, that what a man is charged with before the country, should be read in the hearing of him and of the country? When a paper is delivered out of a man's hand, alterations may be made in it to his prejudice, which, on a sudden looking over it, may not presently be discerned, but by hearing it read up, may be better understood, whether any such alterations have been made therein? Couldest thou in justice have expected or required him otherwise to do? Considering also, that he was not unsensible how much he had suffered already, being innocent, and what endeavours there were used to cause him further to suffer? Was not what he said, as aforesaid, a plain and single answer, and

sufficient in the law? Though (as hath been demonstrated) contrary to law thou didst act, and to thy office, in being his accuser therein, and producing the paper against him. And in his liberty it was whether he would have made thee any answer to all, to what thou didst exhibit, or demand, out of the due course of law: for to the law answer is to be made, not to thy will. Wherefore then wast thou so filled with rage and fury upon that his reply? Calmly, and in the fear of the Lord, consider, wherefore didst thou revile him, particularly with the reproachful names of juggler and prevaricator? Wherein did he juggle? wherein did he prevaricate? Wherefore didst thou use such threatening language, and such menacings to him and us, saying, thou wouldst ferk us, with such like? Doth not the law forbid reviling, and rage, and fury, and threatening, and menacing of prisoners? Soberly mind, is this to act like a judge or a man? Is not this transgression? Is not the sword of the magistrate of God to pass on this as evil-doing, which the righteous law condemns, and the higher power is against, which judgeth for God? Take heed what ye do, for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in the judgment. Wherefore now let the fear of the Lord be upon you, take heed and do it; for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts, said Jeho shaphat to the judges of Judah. Pride, and fury, and pas sion, and rage, and reviling, and threatening, is not the Lord's; it, and the principle out of which it springs, is for judgment, and must come under the sword of the magistrate of God; and it is of an ill savour, especially such an expression, as to threaten to ferk us. Is not such a saying more becoming a pedant, or schoolmaster with his rod or ferula in his hand, than thee, who art the chief justice of the nation, who sittest in the highest seat of judgment, who oughtest to give a good example, and so to judge that others may hear and fear? Weigh it soberly and consider, doth not threatening language demonstrate an inequality, and partiality in him, who sits as judge? Is it not a deterring of a prisoner from standing to, and pleading the innocency of his cause? Provides not the law against it? Saith it not, that irons and all other bonds shall be taken from the prisoner, that he may plead without amazement, and with such freedom of spirit, as if he were not a prisoner? But when he, who is to judge according to the law, shall before-hand threaten and menace the prisoner contrary to the law, how can the mind of the prisoner be free to plead his innocency before him? or expect equal

judgment from him, who, before he hears him, threatens what he will do unto him? Is not this the case between thee and us? Is not this the measure we have received at thy hands? Hast thou herein dealt according to law, or to thy duty? Or as thou wouldest be done unto? Let that of God in thy conscience judge.

And didst not thou say, there was a law for putting off the hat, and that thou wouldst shew a law? and didst not thou often so express thyself? But didst thou produce any law, or shew where that law might be found? or any judicial precedent, or in what king's reign, when we so often desired it of thee, having never heard of, or known any such law, by which thou didst judge us? Was not what we demanded of thee, reasonable and just? Was that a savoury answer, and according to law, which thou gavest us, viz. 'I am not to carry the law-books at my back, up and down the country; I am not to instruct you?' Was ever such an expression heard before these days to come out of a judge's mouth? Is he not to be of counsel in the law for the prisoner, and to instruct him therein? Is it not for this cause that the prisoner, in many cases, is not allowed counsel by the law? In all courts of justice in this nation, hath it not been known so to have been? And to the prisoner hath not this been often declared when he hath demanded counsel, alledging his ignorance in the law, by reason of which his cause might miscarry, though it were righteous, viz. the court is of counsel for you? Ought not he that judgeth in the law, to be expert in the law? Couldest thou not tell by what act of parliament it was made, or by what judicial precedent, or in what king's reign, or when it was adjudged so by the common law, (which are all the grounds the law of England hath) had there been such a law, though the words of the law thou couldest not remember? Surely, to inform the prisoner when he desired it, especially as to a law which was never heard of, by which he proceeds to judge him, that he may know what law it is by which he is to be judged, becomes him who judgeth for God; for so the law was read to the Jews by which they were to be judged, yea, every Sabbathday; this was the commandment of the Lord. But instead thereof to say, I am not to carry the law-books at my back up and down the country; I am not to instruct you to say, there is a law, and to say thou wilt shew it; and yet not to shew it, nor to tell where it is to be found; consider whether it be consistent with savouriness, or with truth, or justice?

• Have not thy whole proceedings against us made it evi

« PreviousContinue »