He then goes on to produce examples from the writings of James I. and Charles I. of England; Constantius the Emperor, Augustinus, Irenæus, Eusebius, Emperor Maximilian, and various others, and concludes in these words:

"Now, O King, seeing these noble testimonies concerning liberty of conscience, of kings, emperors, and others, and the liberty that Paul had at Rome in the days of the heathen emperor, our desire is, that we may have the same liberty at Dantzic to meet together in our own hired houses; which cannot be any prejudice either to the king or the city of Dantzic, for us to meet together to wait upon the Lord, and pray unto Him, and to serve and worship Him in spirit and in truth in our own hired houses; seeing our principle leads us to hurt no man, but to love our enemies, and to pray for them: yea, them that persecute us. Therefore, O king, consider, and the city of Dantzic, would you not think it hard for others to force you from your religion to another, contrary to your consciences? And if it be so, that you should think it hard to you, then 'do you unto others as you would have them do unto you;' for that is the royal law, which ought to be obeyed. And so in love to thy immortal soul, and for thy eternal good this is written.

"GEORGE Fox."

This letter was sent over to the care of three Friends in Holland, and by them was translated and delivered to the King of Poland, who received it and read it through; but from the complaints which still continued to come from Dantzic, it appears that it was unsuccessful in engaging the king's interference; for the magistrates still continued to pursue the same cruel treatment, and the Quakers were everywhere driven from their houses, and immured in dungeons.

About this time, the attention of G. Fox was directed to the settlement of a considerable dissension, which had again sprung up respecting the separate meetings for the women, and also upon other matters connected with the discipline of the Society. As this discontent was principally confined to the county of Buckingham, he appointed two meetings, near High Wycombe, for a full consideration of these differences; one of which was held

at the house of Thomas Ellwood, once amanuensis to the poet Milton, and was so numerously attended, that the meeting could only be accommodated in a large barn. Upon this occasion, he so fully confuted the objections of the dissentients, as to confirm the minds of those already contented, to recover those who had been wavering between the two opinions, and to cause those whom it was impossible to satisfy, to leave the Society altogether; who very soon afterwards came to nought. These meetings had a very beneficial effect, since they were the means of more closely uniting those Friends who were faithfully inclined, and of ridding the Society of those who found the plainness and simplicity of their precepts too strait a path.

Some of the separatists still continuing to raise a clamour against their wholesome laws, he published an address for the purpose of exposing the errors of their statements. It begins, "All that deny prescriptions without distinction, may as well deny all scriptures, which were given forth by the power and Spirit of God. For do not they prescribe how man should walk towards God and man, both in the Old and New Testament." It finishes as follows:-"There is a loose spirit that cries for liberty, and against prescriptions, yet the same is prescribing ways, both by words and writings. The same spirit cries against judging, and would not be judged, yet is judging with a wrong spirit. This is given forth in reproof of that spirit.

"GEORGE FOX."

CHAPTER XIX.

1678-1685. His prosecution for the small tithe of Swarthmore-Fresh troubles befall the Quakers-Writes a cautionary letter to them-His second trip to Holland, and letter to the Duke of Holstein in defence of women's preaching-His second letter to the King of Poland.

"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected. Hereby know we that we are in him."-1 John ii. 3—5.

1678. The vocation and duties of George Fox were chiefly directed to the metropolis and its vicinity, till about the middle. of this year, when he once more went down to his wife's estate at Swarthmore; where he continued to reside rather better than a twelvemonth, keeping himself very much at home, and employing his time in epistolary communication with Friends in various parts of the globe, and in writing many papers, concerning the affairs and the well-ordering of the Society.

In January, 1680, he again left his residence in Lancashire, to which he never after returned; for the interests of the Society, during the renewed persecutions which befell it at the latter end of Charles the Second's reign, required his almost constant presence in the capital; so that his labours were mostly confined to London, with occasional excursions to some of the surrounding counties.

In his journey from Swarthmore, he passed once more through Westmoreland into Yorkshire, and then through most of the intervening counties on his route to London, holding meetings at every suitable place on his road, according to his usual practice.

In the month of March, in the following year, (1681) he was put to some trouble about the small tithes of Swarthmore. He says, "About this time I had occasion to go to several of the judges' chambers upon a suit about tithes. For my wife and I,

Z

with some other Friends, were sued in Cartmel-Wapentake-Court, in Lancashire, for small tithes, and we had demurred to the jurisdiction of that court. Whereupon, the plaintiff prosecuted us in the Exchequer Court at Westminster; where he ran us up to a writ of rebellion, for not answering the bill upon oath, and got an order of court to the sergeant to take me and my wife into custody. This was a little before the Yearly Meeting, at which time it was thought they would take me up; and according to outward appearances it was very likely, and very easy for the sergeant to have done it, I lodging at the same places where I used to lodge, and being very public at meetings. But the Lord's power was over them, and restrained them, so that they did not take me. Yet, understanding that a warrant was out against me, as soon as the Yearly Meeting was over, I took William Mead with me, and went to several of the judges' chambers, to let them understand both the state of the case, and the ground and reason of our refusing to pay tithes. The first we went to, was Judge Gregory, to whom I tendered my name and my wife's answer to the plaintiff's bill; in which was set forth, that my wife had lived three and forty years at Swarthmore, and in all that time there had been no tithe paid nor demanded; and an old man, who had been a tithe gatherer, had made affidavit, that he never gathered tithe at Swarthmore Hall, in Judge Fell's time nor since. There were many particulars in our answer, but it would not be accepted without an oath. I told the judge, that both tithe and swearing among christians came from the pope; and it was a matter of conscience to us not to pay tithes, nor to swear: for Christ bid his disciples, who had freely received, give freely; and He commanded them, not to swear at all.' The judge said there was tithe paid in England before popery was. I asked him, by what law or statute they were paid then? but he was silent. Then I told him, there were eight poor men brought up to London out of the north, about two hundred miles, for small tithes; one of them had no family but himself and his wife, and kept no living creature but a cat. I asked him also, Whether they could take a man and his wife, and imprison them both for small tithes ; and so destroy a family? If they could, I desired to know by what law?' He did not answer me, but only said, "That was

answer.

a hard case.' When I found there was no help to be had there, we left him, and went to Judge Montagu's chamber. With him I had a great deal of discourse about tithes. Whereupon he sent for our adversary's attorney; and when he came, I offered him our He said, if we would pay the charges of the court and be bound to stand trial, and to abide the judgment of the court, we should not have the oath tendered to us. I told him, they had brought those charges upon us, by requiring us to put in an answer upon oath; which they knew before we could not do for conscience' sake; and as we could not pay any tithe, nor swear, so neither should we pay any of their charges. Upon this, he would not receive our answer. So we went from thence to Judge Atkins; and he being busy, we gave our answers and our reasons against tithes and swearing to his clerk; but neither could we find any encouragement from him to expect redress. Wherefore, leaving him, we went to one of the most noted counsellors, and showed him the state of our case, and our answers: he was very civil to us, and said, 'This way of proceeding against you is somewhat like an inquisition.' A few days after, those eight poor Friends, that were brought up so far out of the north, appeared before the judges; and the Lord was with them, and his power was over the court, so that these Friends were not committed to the Fleet. Our cause was put off till the next term, and then it was brought before the four judges again. William Mead told the judge, I had engaged myself never to meddle with my wife's estate. The judges could hardly believe that any man would do so; whereupon W. Mead produced the writing under my hand and seal; at which they wondered. Then two of the judges and some of the lawyers stood up and pleaded for me, that I was not liable to the tithes; but the other two judges and divers lawyers pressed earnestly to have me sequestered, alleging, 'that I was a public man.' At length, they prevailed with one of the other two judges to join with them, and then granted a sequestration against me and my wife together. By advice of counsel, we moved for a limitation, which was granted, and that much defeated our adversary's design in suing out a sequestration; for this limited the plaintiff to take no more than was proved. One of the judges, Baron Weston, was very bitter, and broke forth in a great