Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	ireland_n	king_n	statute_n	2,756	5	8.4949	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A31659	A true relation of the unjust proceedings, verdict (so called) & sentence of the Court of Sessions ... against divers of the Lord's people called Quakers, on the 30th day of the 8th month, 1662 / published for the honour of God, the vindication of the innocent, and the information of people, by John Chandler.	Chandler, John, 17th cent.	1662 (1662)	Wing C1929; ESTC R35804	14,248	24

A TRUE RELATION OF THE Unjust Proceedings VERDICT so called SENTENCE OF THE Court of Sessions AT MARGARETS HILL IN SOUTHVVARK Against divers of the Lord's People called Quakers on the 30 th day of the 8 th Month 1662. Published for the Honour of GOD the Vindication of the Innocent and the Information of People By JOHN CHANDLER Printed in the Year 1662. A true Relation of the unjust Proceedings Verdict so called and Sentence of the Court of Sessions at Margarets Hill in Southwark against divers of the Lord's People called Quakers on the 30th day of the 8th Month 1662. AFter our appearance at the Sessions at Kingston having been Prisoners at the White Lion in Southwark above nine weeks we were indicted for unlawfully and tumultúously gathering and assembling our selves together by Force and Arms c. under pretence of performing Religious Worship c. Which Indictment Richard Onzlow who sate Judge of the Sessions said was according to a Statute made in the 35th year of Queen Elizabeth the late Act of Parliament made purposely against the Meetings of the Quakers and others being by them laid aside whereunto although most of us were willing to plead and desired a Tryal as knowing our Innocency as to what was laid to our charge which although it was at first promised us yet at last would not be granted us but except we would give Bond to answer at the next Quarter-Sessions we were to return to Prison again and there to remain till that time At length through urgency and importunity for a present Tryal that Justice might not be delayed as it ought not to have been the Sessions was adjourned till the 28th day of the 8th month and because we could not come under Bond for our appearance contrary to our Christian Liberty and Consciences we were remanded to Prison till that time So when we to the number of thirty two persons appeared before the Court in the Sessions-house at Magarets-hill on the 30th day of the same month for Tryal the former Indictment unto which for not giving Bond to appear to plead were committed was laid aside and another Indictment was drawn up against us and presented to the Grand Jury upon the same Statute the form whereof is as followeth Surrey THe Jurors for our Lord the King do present upon their Oath that Arthur Fisher late of the Parish of S. Olave in the Burrough of Southwark in the County of Surrey Yeoman Nathaniel Robinson of the same Yeoman John Chandler of the same Yeoman and others being wicked dangerous and seditious Sectaries and disloyal persons and above the age of sixteen years who on the 29th day of June in the year of the Reign of our Lord Charles the second by the grace of God King of England Scotland France and Ireland and the fourteenth have obstinately refused and every one of them hath obstinately refused to repair unto some Church Chappel or usual place of Common-Prayer according to the Laws and Statutes of this Kingdom of England in the like Case set forth and provided after forty dayes next after the end of the Session of Parliament begun and holden at Westminster on the nineteenth day of February in the year of the Reign of our Lady Elizabeth late Queen of England the thirty fifth and there continued until the dissolution of the same being the tenth day of April in the 35th year abovesaid To wit on the third day of August in the year of the Reign of the said Charles King of England the fourteenth abovesaid in the Parish of S. Olave aforesaid in the Burrough of Southwark aforesaid in the County aforesaid of themselves did voluntarily and unlawfully joyn in and were present at an unlawful Assembly Conventicle and Meeting at the said Parish of S. Olave in the County aforesaid under colour and pretence of the exercise of Religion against the Laws and Statutes of this Kingdom of England in contempt of our said Lord the King that now is his Laws and to the evil and dangerous example of all others in the like case offending against the Peace of our said Lord the King that now is his Crown and Dignity and contrary to the form of the Statute in this same case set forth and provided This Indictment being read it was replied That this was not the same Indictment with that at Kingston unto which we desired to plead Richard Onzlow answered that they had quashed or nulled that and that they had power to quit one Indictment and to draw up another if the former were not sufficient Then it was required that we might be tryed by the late Act of Parliament Whereto he answered They might try us by what Act they would that was in force So after we saw their bad intent towards us the Country was bid to take notice that there was another Indictment formed against us at Kingston to which we pleaded Not guilty and some that is six Baptists were tryed and cleared by that which they perceiving refused to try us according to their Promise but adjourned the Court that so they might draw up another and that for ought we knew if some of us should be cleared by this they would draw up another that so they might ensnare us To which Richard Onzlow said we should all be tryed by this Then it was desired that that Statute might be read to see whether it contained all the particulars of this last Indictment So then he caused but a part of the Statute to be read saying to the Clerk it was enough whereby the penalty and other particulars were concealed from the Prisoners and from those that were to be of the Jury Then it was openly declared as a Testimony against that wicked Law that the Parliament that made that Act did at that time take counsel against the Lord and against his Anointed Also that it was made in the time of ignorance when that people were newly stept out of Popery but now there was more knowledge Also by this the Reader may take notice how unjustly and falsely the first Indictment was framed on the same Statute which mentions nothing of tumultuously gathering and assembling together or by Force and Arms c. or of performing Religious Worship After this we were urged to plead guilty or not guilty to the Indictment Then one desired a Copy of the Indictment and the Court promised it him but instead of giving him the Copy they thrust him out of the Court because he did not plead guilty or not guilty before he had the Copy notwithstanding they promised it him and so bad take him Goaler and bad the Clerk to give the Copy to another because he understood it it being in Latine Then calling another who standing in the fear and counsel of the Lord not daring to answer hastily they bad take him Goaler These with others to the number of ten were violently haled out of the Court as taken as they say pro confesso or for guilty

us And whereas we declared against the Forgery contained in the Indictment they said we were uncivil We said it was not uncivil to say a Lye was a Lye The Jury being called and sworn they also swore two Witnesses The first swore we were at a Meeting at Horsey-Down to the number of about three-score The Court demanded what we were doing He said we were doing nothing nor he heard nothing spoken The second Witness whose name is Crosswell he swore we were met at Horsey-Down to the number of about an hundred and that a Woman was preaching before he came into the Meeting and continued speaking a good while after he came in although the former Witness being asked how long he came in after Crosswell He said he came in within three minutes after him and heard nothing spoken And when it was demanded of Crosswell what was spoken he could give but a slender account but said she spoke out of Jeremiah But this Testimony was forged by the Devil the father of lyes in the heart of this his servant which was signified to the Jury and also that this Crosswell who lives at the Horns in Kent-street is generally known to be a very wicked man and to keep a wicked house of entertainment for Drunkards and all manner of wicked persons who was a Constable at the time when we were brought to Prison he took us out of our peaceable Meeting where we were in silence waiting upon the Lord which was testified in open Court and this false Witness was objected against as not being a Competent Witness because he is known to be a man of a wicked Conversation and one that is a Common Swearer and not making conscience of an Oath It was also pleaded to the Jury that they ought to take notice of the Confutation of the Witnesses the first affirming that nothing was spoken the last affirming that a Woman spake It was also questioned whether that Court had any lawful Authority to proceed against us seeing it is enacted in a Statute made and provided in the first year of Queen Elizabeth That no matters of Religion or Causes Ecclesiastical shall be judged Errour Heresie or Schism but by Ecclesiastical Authority by especial Commission by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England The Court said that Statute of the thirty fifth was since To which it was answered that this Statute of the first of Queen Elizabeth is not repealed but is yet in force John Lenthal said that should not hinder their proceedings John Lenthal asked us wherefore we were met together We said the end of our meeting together was to wait upon the Lord to feel his Power and Presence in our hearts and that we were neither wicked seditious nor Hereticks but were in the fear and counsel of God bearing Testimony against those things in our Conversation whereof we were accused in the Indictment Then John Lenthal said directing his speech to the Jury that one Witness said we were at the Meeting and the other said that a Woman spake and thirdly that we confessed that we were there worshipping of God which he charged against us as matter of fact They also charged us of obstinately refusing to hear the Common-Prayer Some of us said we were in Prison before it was in being Others of us bid them produce Evidence that we did not hear it They answered that we should prove that we did hear it We said that did not belong to us nor the Law doth not require it Then we directing our speech to the Jury bid them take notice of the Confutation of the Evidence and that it was a weighty matter they went upon that not only our Liberty but our Lives also were concern'd in it for they sought our Blood and that the End and Issue of it was to take away our Lives for we see the end of their Proceedings by this Act is to make us abjure the Realm which is to swear which we must rather die than do Oh! must you so said the Cryer We said we were innocent men fearing God and because of that they sought our lives but if we had been Drunkards or Swearers we might have our Liberty They said if we would conform we might have our Liberty It was answered we might obtain our Liberty for our bodies for a time and bring our souls in bondage to all eternity So they sent forth the Jury who remained together till the Court adjourned to Dinner and after they were set again the Jury came down the Court asked them if they were agreed They said No. Some of them questioned whether a Woman speaking might be called the Worship of God John Lonthal said it was all one for that whether Men or Women But after some time the Jury came in again and brought us in guilty as the Court said We demanded their Verdict but they would give us no answer Then John Lenthal pronounced the Sentence That we must return to Prison for three months without Bail or Mainprize if in that time we did not recant we must abjure the Realm We asked them what benefit we might obtain by such Submission They answered we might have our Liberty We answered that they could afford us no more than the Divil offered Christ All this will I give thee if thou wilt fall down and worship me One of them said that was not a fit comparison Whereupon we answered If we should say that with our mouthes which we did not believe with our hearts we should be Hypocrites and Children of the Devil falling down to worship him So as we passed from before the Court we bid them remember Cain who was the first that persecuted about Sacrifice and Worship who flew his righteous Brother Now let the impartial Reader take notice of the slender ground that either the Jury had to bring us in guilty of that Indictment or the Court to pass such a cruel Sentence there being only two Witnesses The first swore that a Woman was speaking before he came into the Meeting and a good while after and the other came within three minutes after and heard nothing spoken This was all the Evidence that was against us as the Auditors that were present at the Court can witness Now whether this Evidence was a sufficient ground for such a Verdict so called and Sentence let all sober-minded people judge they could not prove us either wicked dangerous seditious nor Sectaries neither have the effects of our meeting ever at any time tended to any such consequence but our Meetings do and alwayes have tended to Peace and to the rooting out the ground of Wickedness Sedition and Heresie therefore not guilty of this Indictment Secondly There was no Evidence against us that we did obstinately refuse to hear Common-Prayer neither was it in being at those places which they call Churches and Chappels till after we were in Prison therefore we are not guilty of this Indictment Thirdly They did not swear that we were