Here he was joined on Wednesday by Makemie, who by public appointment was to preach that day. But no sooner had he arrived than he and Hampton were both apprehended by the sheriff Cardale, acting under the authority of a warrant from Lord Cornbury.

The prisoners were taken before the Governor at Fort Anne, New York. Cornbury demanded of them how they dared preach under his government without a license. Makemie referred him to the Toleration Act of King William in 1689. He told them this did not extend to the American Plantations. Makemie replied that it was not a limited or local act, and adduced his certificates of license from courts of record in Maryland and Virginia. Worsted in the argument, Cornbury appealed to the act of Parliament directed, as he said, against strolling preachers, and told Makemie and Hampton that they were such. "There is not one word, my lord," said Makemie, "mentioned in any part of the law, against travelling or strolling preachers." To this the Governor could only reply, "You shall not spread your pernicious doctrines here." Makemie told him that the doctrines he taught were found in "our confession of faith," and challenged all the clergy of New York to show any thing false or pernicious in them, adding that he could make it appear that they were agreeable to the established doctrines of the Church of England. "But these Articles," replied the Governor, "you have not signed." "As to the Articles of religion," said Makemie, "I have a copy in my pocket, and am ready at all times to sign, with those exceptions specified in the law."

Upon this, the Governor charged him with preaching in a private house. Makemie replied that his lordship had denied him permission to preach in the Dutch church, and hence he had been necessitated to do as

VOL. I.-2

he had done; but he had preached "in as public a manner as possible, with open doors."

Again Cornbury fell back upon his instructions, declaring none should preach without his license. Makemie replied that the law, and not his instructions, was the rule for him. He could not be guided by what he had never seen and perhaps never should see. "Promulgation," said he, "is the life of the law." The Governor then demanded that they should give bonds and security for good behavior and not to preach any more under his government. "For our behavior," said Makemie, "though we endeavor to live always so as to keep a conscience void of offence towards God and man, we are willing to give it; but to give bond and security to preach no more under your Excellency's government, if invited and desired by any people, we neither can nor dare do." "Then you must go to jail," said the Governor. It was in vain that Makemie remonstrated. Lord Cornbury sat down to write out the necessary papers for their discharge from the custody of Cardale and their commitment in New York. While he was doing so, Hampton demanded of him a license, but it was peremptorily denied. Makemie moved that it was highly necessary that the law should be produced before their commitment, and offered to remunerate the attorney if he would produce the limiting clause of the act. But the motion was disregarded. In a contemptuous tone, the Governor asked Makemie if he knew law. "I do not," replied Makemie, "pretend to know law; but I pretend to know this particular law, having had sundry disputes thereon." He had quite a large collection of law-books in his library.

The copy of their commitment was made out. It was illegal in several respects. It was granted and signed by the Governor, and not by any sworn officers appointed and authorized by law. The queen's name

or authority was not mentioned in it. No crime was alleged as a ground of commitment, and the direction. to the sheriff to keep them safely was not, "until they are delivered by due course of law," but, "until further orders."

Thus Makemie and Hampton found themselves imprisoned with no prospect of immediate release. They petitioned the Governor for a knowledge of their crime, and, as they were strangers on their way to New England, and four hundred miles from their habitations, for "a speedy trial according to law," which they humbly conceived to be "the undoubted right and privilege of every English subject." To this petition. a verbal but unsatisfactory reply was returned through the sheriff. They could not learn "the right way to have a trial." Petitioning to be admitted, in the custody of the sheriff, to make application to the Quarter Sessions in order to offer themselves "for qualification as the law directs," they were again rebuffed, and the messengers who presented the petition were severely threatened.

They now resolved "to trouble his Excellency with no more petitions," but presented their application to the Quarter Sessions. Their petition was looked at and handed about, but allowed no reading in open court. To the chief-justice, Roger Mompesson, they made application after an imprisonment of several weeks, and a writ of habeas corpus was granted. But when it was to be served, the sheriff told them he had a new mittimus, wherein their crime was specified, by which it was evident that for more than six weeks they had been subjected to false and illegal imprisonment. To complete the iniquity, the sheriff demanded the payment of twelve dollars for the commitment, and as much more for the return of the writ,-refusing, moreover, receipts for the money when it had been paid.

The case was now brought before the grand jury, and a true bill found against Makemie; for though Hampton was equally an offender, he was dropped from the indictment. The trial came on upon the 4th of June. The iniquity of the prosecution was abundantly shown, and after his attorneys had concluded their arguments, Makemie arose and spoke in his own defence. With great force of argument he vindicated himself from every charge, and showed himself more than a match for the prosecuting attorney. He showed great familiarity with the English laws bearing upon the subject of toleration, and effectually set aside the authority of the Governor's instructions as a rule of law. The jury brought in a verdict of not guilty, and solemnly declared that they believed the defendant innocent of any violation of law. Yet in spite of the verdict, and his own plea for moderate charges, the bill of costs which he was forced to pay amounted to more than eighty-three pounds.

Even after this, Makemie was not left unmolested. He narrowly escaped a second prosecution, based, if possible, on even weaker grounds than the first. A strange intolerance pursued him as a chief offender, but the object was to obstruct the preaching of all Presbyterian ministers. The Dutch and other Dissenters neither asked nor would receive a license; yet they were not disturbed. But any attempt of Presbyterian ministers to extend their Church was seriously obstructed.

Nor was New York the only province in which they had to encounter gross and severe intolerance. The statutes of Virginia, as we have already seen, were so framed as scarcely to recognize even the existence of the Toleration Act of 1689. In Maryland the petitions of Hampton and Macnish for licenses to preach in accordance with the act, were opposed by Episcopal in

fluence. The vestry of the parish of Coventry appeared against them, encouraged, as is supposed, by Rev. Robert Keith, of Dividing Creek. The petitions were referred to the Governor and Council, and were finally granted, Mr. Hampton settling at Snow Hill. Still the hardships imposed upon Dissenters even in this colony, established originally on principles of equal liberty, but where the Episcopal Church was now established, were by no means light. A tax of forty pounds of tobacco was imposed on every "taxable," to meet the expense of building and repairing churches and supporting ministers. The meeting-houses of Dissenters were to be "unbarred, unbolted, and unlocked." The nature of the obstacles thrown in the way of the Presbyterians and other Dissenters may be judged from the character of the Episcopal clergy of that day in Virginia as well as Maryland, the off-scouring of the English Church,— men, for the most part, according to Bishop Meade, far more worthy to be ejected from society than to lead or instruct the flock.

In the Carolinas, moreover, Presbyterians were made to feel the edge of intolerant legislation. During the troublous period from the Restoration to the Revolution (1660-1688) they had sought a shelter from persecution in a colony in which civil and religious rights were solemnly guaranteed to them. They had increased in numbers, and amounted in South Carolina to several thousands. But in 1703, by methods that savored of the brutality of Jeffries and the bigotry of James II., the Episcopal was made by law the established Church. Dissenters of all classes were taxed for its support, and those who did not conform were disfranchised. They who had left England for freedom of conscience were pursued by English intolerance across the ocean, and, in spite of their earnest remonstrance and appeal to Parliament, the yoke was fastened to their necks, and