which had brought him from Maryland in America, whither he had gone some months before on a religious errand. All the parties staid at Bristol during the fair, and, uniting their religious labours, they brought over many to their persuasion.

As a writer, there was no end of his em ployment this year. The first who called him forth was Thomas Hicks, a Baptist preacher in London. Alarmed, like those mentioned in the preceding chapter, at the defection of many of his congregation, this person began his attack upon the Quakers by writing a Dialogue between a Christian and a Quaker, which he forged so well, that many considered it not as a fiction, but as a discourse which had actually taken place between the parties described. By making, too, his Quaker say every thing that was weak and silly, he paved the way for such answers from his Christian as ensured the victory on his own side. This publication being such, William Penn could not but notice it; and he brought out accordingly "The Christian Quaker and his divine Testimony vindicated," by way of reply.

This work contained an explicit statement

of

of the religious creed of the Quakers in those points which were then matter of controversy between them and those of Hicks's persuasion. The great subject of it was the Light of Christ within, which he handled thus. He began by explaining what this Light was, calling it among other things The Principle of God in Man, and asserting it to be the same as the Word, Spirit, Life, Light, Seed, Truth, as used in the holy Scriptures.- This Light manifested and reproved sin and led to salvation; to salvation, first, from sin, and, secondly, from the wrath to come. -The argument that men were wicked notwithstanding they had this Light within them, was no more an argument against its existence, than that men were wicked was an argument against the existence of the Scriptures, which also they had in their possession.-Neither, because all matters were not revealed by it, was this an argument against its sufficiency.As this Light had manifested and reproved sin and led to salvation since the coming of Christ, so it had performed the same offices before; namely, from Adam through all the patriarchs and prophets and as the Jews

had

had a certain measure of this Light, so had the Gentiles also.-This was manifest from the tenets of their wise men, who acknowledged one God; who believed that the same God had imprinted the knowledge of himself on the minds of all mankind; that it became men to live piously; that the soul was immortal, and that there was an eternal recompense; tenets which were professed by Orpheus, Hesiod, Thales, Sybilla, Pythagoras, Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, Socrates, Timæus, Antisthenes, Plato, Zeno, Chrysippus, Antipater, Bias, Sophocles, Menander, Chilon, Pittacus, and many others.This was the Gentile divinity; and though Jews and Christians had the advantage of the Gentiles in the measure of this Light, yet the latter had sufficient for their own salvation. -Some of them had a Light of the coming of Christ-Christ was this Light according to the Scriptures.- It was no argument against this, that he was not so called either by Jews or Greeks-nor was it an argument against this, that he was typified to come, when he was come before-nor did a belief that Christ was this Light in man invalidate his life, death, or resurrection, or the doctrine that he bore our iniquities,

or

།

or that men were redeemed by his blood. As Christ then was the Light within, so this Light had been given without exception, that is, to mankind universally.

It had been given to them also in a measure sufficient for their salvationand all those who obeyed it forsook their evil ways, and became transformed in their lives and characters.

These were simply the heads of the work, in which he conducted himself with great dignity; for instead of launching out against Hicks in terms of severity, he no where * mentioned his name, but satisfied himself with giving a compendium of the principles of his own society in those points which were then at issue between them, leaving him and others to compare the substance of it with that of the Dialogue in question.

In a short time after this, Hicks produced another publication. It was a continuation of the same Dialogue by the addition of a second part. It is remarkable that he took no notice whatever in this of "The Christian Quaker and his divine Testimony vindicated." This unfair treatment offended William Penn, who immediately attacked him by opposing to his Dialogue a little work, which he called

"Reason

"Reason against Railing and Truth against Fiction." But Hicks was not even yet silenced; for he resumed his operations egainst the Quakers, by adding a third part to the Dialogue. The part now mentioned, when published, produced from William Penn, in return, "The Counterfeit Christian detected, and the Real Quaker justified.” Hicks after this appeared no more in print. The controversy, however, did not end here; for he had fabricated so many falsehoods respecting the Quakers, that they appealed as a society to the Baptists themselves against him; in consequence of which a meeting was appointed at Barbican, where both parties might be heard. But it was fixed so as to take place in the absence of George Whitehead and William Penn, who, it was known, were then travelling; so that great attendance having been procured on one side, and there being but little on the other, Hicks was declared by a majority of voices to be acquitted.

These proceedings were soon sent to William Penn, who on receiving them hastened to London. On his arrival there, he laid his complaint before the public in a printed paper,