but by the judgment of his Peers or Jury; since it expressly contradicts the fourteenth and twenty-ninth Chap. of the great Charter of England, which say, No Free-man ought to be amerced, but by the Oath of good and Lawful men of the Vicinage.

Rec. Take him away, Take him away, take him out of the Court.

Pen. I can never urge the fundamental Laws of England, but you cry, Take him away, take him away. But it is no wonder, Since the Spanish-Inquisition hath so great a place in the Recorders heart. God Almighty, who is just, will judge you all for these things.

Obser. They haled the Prisoners into the Bale-dock, and from thence sent them to New-Gate, for non payment of their Fines; and so were their Jury.

An Appendix, by way of Defence for the Prisoners, as what might have been offered against the Indictment, and illegal Proceedings of the Court thereon, had they not violently over-rul'd and stopp'd them.

U

Pon a sober disquisition into the several parts of the Indictment, we find it so wretchedly defective, as if it were nothing else but a meer composition of error, rather calculated to the malitious designs of the Judges, then to the least verity of fact committed by the Prisoners.

To prove this, what we say, will be a main help to discover the Arbitrary proceedings of the Bench in their frequent Menaces to the Jury; as if it were not so much their Business to try, as to condemn the Prisoners; and that not so much for any Fact they had committed, as what the Court would have suggested to the Jury to have been their Fact.

§. I. It is the constant Common Law of England, that no man should be Taken, Imprisoned, Amerced, Deseized of his Free-hold, of his Liberties or free Customs, but by the judgement of his Peers, which are vulgarly called a Jury, from Jurare, because they are sworn to do right.

§. 2. The only assistance that is given the Jury, in order to a Verdict, is,

First, The Evidence given of the Fact committed, by the person indicted.

Secondly, The knowledge of that Law, Act or Statute the Indictment is grounded upon, and which the Prisoners are said to have transgressed.

§. 3. We shall neglect to mention here, how much they were deprived, of that just advantage the ancient equal Laws of England do allow; designing it for a conclusion of the whole, and shall only speak here to matter of Fact and Law.

§. 4. The Evidence, you have read in the Tryal, the utmost import of which, is more then this, That William Penn was speaking in Gratious-street, to an Assembly of people, but knew not what he said, which is so great a Contradiction, as he that runs may read it; for no man can say another man Preaches, and yet understand not what he saith; he may conjecture it, but that is a lame evidence in Law, it might as well have been sworn, That he was speaking of Law, Physick, Trade, or any other matter of civil concernment. Besides there is no Law against Preaching what is Truth, whether it be in the Street, or in any other place; nor is it possible, that any man can truly swear, That he Preacht Sedition, Heresie, &c. unless he so heard him, that he could tell what he said.

8.

§. 5. The Evidence further saith, That W. Mead was there, but till being in Gratious-street be a fault, and hearing a man speak the Witness knows not what, be contrary to Law, the whole Evidence is useless and impertinent; but what they want of that, they endeavour to supply with Indictment; whose parts we proceed to consider.

Exceptions Against the Indictment.

§. 6. It saith, That the Prisoners [were met upon the 15th day of August, 1670] whereas their own Evidence affirms it to be upon the 14th day of August, 70.

§. 7. [That they met with force and Arms] which is so great a Lye, that the Court had no better cover for it, then to tell the Jury, it was only a piece of Form, urging that the man tried for clipping of money this present Sessions had the same words used in his indictment.

But that this Answer is too scanty, as well as it was too weak to prevail with the Jury; we desire it may be considered, that the same words may be used more of course, and out of form at one time, then at another: And though we grant they can have little force with any Jury in a Clippers case, for meer Clipping; yet they are words that give so just a ground of jealousie, nay, that carry so clear an Evidence of illegallity, where they are truly proved and affirmed of any Meeting, as that they are the proper Roots, from whence do spring those Branches which render an Indictment terrible, and an Assembly truly to the terror of the people.

§. 8. [Unlawfully, and tumultuously to disturb the Peace] which is as true, as what is said before, (that is, as false) this will evidently appear to all that consider how lawful it is to assemble, with no other design then to worship God, and their calling a lawful Assembly an unlawfull one, no more makes it so, then to say Light is Darkness, black is white, concludes so impudent a falsity true.

In short, because to worship God can never be a crime, no Meeting or Assembly, designing to worship God, can be unlawfull. Such as go about to prove an unlawfull Assembly, must prove the Assemblers intent not to Worship God, but that no man can do, because no man can know another mans intentions, and therefore its impossible that any should prove such an Assembly unlawful. That is properly an unlawful Assembly, according to the definition of the Law, when several persons are met together, with design to use violence, and to do mischief, but that Dissenters meet with no such intention,

is manifest to the whole World, therefore their Assemblies are not unlawful; he that hath only right to be worshipped, which is God, hath only right to institute how he will be worshipped; and such as worship him in that Way they apprehend him to have instituted, are so far from being unlawful Assemblies, that therein they do but express the duty they owe to God.

[Tumultuously] Imports as much as Disorderly, or an Assembly full of Noise, Busle, and Confusion, using force and violence, to the injury of Persons, Houses, or Grounds. But whether Religious Dissenters, in their peaceable Meetings, therein desiring and seeking nothing more then to express that duty they owe to God Almighty, be a Tumultuous action or meeting in the sence exprest (and which is the very definition of the Law) will be the question. Certainly such as call these Meetings tumultuous, and to break the peace, offer the greatest violence to common words, that can be well imagined; for they may as rightly say, such persons meet adulterously, thievishly, &c. as to affirm they meet tumultuously, because they are as truly applicable; in short, such particulars, as are required to prove them such Meetings in Law, are wholly wanting.

§. 9. [To the disturbance of the peace.]

If the disturbance of the peace be but matter of form with the rest, as is usually pleaded; leave out this matter of form and then see what great matter will be left.

Certainly such Assemblies, as are not to the breach and disturbance of the peace, are far from being unlawful or tumultuary: but if the peace be broken by them, how comes it the evidence was so short? We cannot believe it was in favour of the Prisoners. This may shew to all the reasonable World, how forward some are, to brand innocency with hateful Names, to bring a suspition, where there was none deserved.