CHAPTER VIII,

A. 1695—writes "A Reply to a pretended Answer to William Penn's Key"—delivers a paper to the House of Commons on the subject of making the Quakers' affirmation equal to their oath-travels in the ministry -is present at a religious dispute at Melkshampreaches at Wells-some curious particulars during his stay there-affairs of Pennsylvania.

WILLIAM PENN employed himself in the beginning of the present year in answering a pamphlet which had been written against one of his own works that had appeared in 1692. This production he called "A Reply to a pretended Answer by a nameless Author to William Penn's Key." I shall attempt no analysis of it, because its general contents may be imagined by referring to those of "the Key," which I have already laid before the reader. There is one passage, however, in it, which I shall transcribe. His opponent had charged him with prevarication in the late reign, and with having shown an intemperate zeal for a boundless liberty of conscience. To the charge he replied thus: "And if it be possible or worth while to reconcile him (my opponent) better to my conduct,

L2

conduct, let him peruse my "Great Case of Liberty of Conscience," printed in 1671, and my "Letter to the States of Embden," 1672, and my "Present State of England," 1675, and he will find I was the same man. then, and acted by the same principles; not more intemperate in the reign that favoured it, than in the reign I contended with (the preceding) that did not favour it. And no man but a Persecutor, which I count a beast of prey, and a declared enemy to mankind, can without great injustice or ingratitude reproach that part I had in King James's Court: for I think I may say without vanity, upon this provocation, I endeavoured at least to do some good at my own cost, and would have done more. I am very sure I intended, and I think I did, harm to none, neither parties nor private persons, my own family excepted; for which I doubt not this author's pardon, since he shows himself so little concerned for the master of it."

About this time the Quakers petitioned Parliament for an Act to make their affirmation equal to their oath. William Penn was appointed to act for them on this occasion. This he did by appearing at the House of Commons,

Commons, and by delivering there the fol- .

lowing paper:

"That the request of the people called Quakers may be indulged by the Members of this Honourable House, it is humbly proposed to them to consider the nature and fulness of the security they offer; and, if it be found to amount to the weight and value of an oath, it is hoped there will be no difficulty in accepting it in lieu of an oath.

"The pledge, that every man upon oath gives of his truth, is his soul. He means, that God should deal with him according to the truth of his affirmative or negative given by him in the name of God. Now to show that the said people do as much; that is, that they pledge their souls too in their way; that they mean the same caution with them. that swear; and are under the same reverence in their simple and solemn aye or no; and therefore give the same security; I shall beg this Honourable House to consider three things.

"First, this people make it an article of their faith and practice, and a great part of their characteristic, not to swear at all. They think, whether mistaken or not, that

the

the righteousness of Christianity does not need or use an oath; so that you have their religion in the highest exercises of it in human affairs for your security.

Secondly, they have often and at very dear rates proved to the world they mean what they say, since they have frequently chosen to lose their estates, and lie and die in gaol, rather than save the one or deliver themselves from the other by deviating from their principle and since, in such cases, integrity is the security all aim at, it is hard to conceive which way any man can give a greater nor are they so insensible as not to know that untruth in them, after this great indulgence, is a more aggravated crime than. perjury in others, since they excuse themselves from not swearing by a profession of an exacter simplicity and greater strictness.

Lastly, they humbly hope that, being to suffer for untruth as for perjury, their request will not be uneasy, since they subject their integrity to trial upon the hazard of a conviction that is so much greater than the offence in the eye of the law would bear. Let them then, we pray, speak in their own way, and, if false, be punished

in yours. And since this Honourable House has testified an excelling zeal to secure the rights and privileges of that great body they represent, these inferior members, with all due respect, claiming a relation to it, request that they may not be left exposed in theirs, but that by your wisdom and goodness they may be provided for in true proportion to the exigencies they are under; which will engage them in the best wishes. for your prosperities."

Soon after this he travelled as in the former year in the work of the ministry. We first trace him at a meeting at Henley upon Thames. From thence he passed into Wiltshire. While he was at Melksham, a dispute was held between John Plympton, a Baptist, and John Clark of Bradford on the part of the Quakers, in the court-yard belonging to Thomas Beaven's house. The Baptist had challenged the Quakers to a public conference on five subjects: the Universality of Grace, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Perfection, and the Resurrection. Clark is said to have answered the objections of Plympton notably: but Plympton would not allow it; and though the auditors

were