146 
of August last, 1670; and that William 
Mead is not guilty of the said indict- 
ment, ‘ 
Foremen. Thomas Veer. 
Edward Bushel,” &c. 
Lord Mayor. “What! will you be 
led by such a silly fellow as Bushel? An 
impudent canting fellow; E warrant you, 
you shall come no more upon juries im 
haste: you are a foreman, indeed! [ 
thought you had understdod your place 
better.” 
Recorder. ‘‘ Gentlemen, you shall 
not be dismissed till we have a verdiet 
that the court will accept, and you shall 
be locked up without meat, drink, fire, 
“and tobacco; you shall not think thus to 
-abuse the court; we will have a verdict 
_by the help of God, or you shall starve 
for it.” 
Penn. My jury, who are my judges, 
ought not to be thus menaced ; their ver- 
dict should be free, and not compelled ; 
the bench ought to wait upon (for) them, 
but not forestal them. I do desire that 
justice may be done me, and that the 
arbitrary resolves of the bench may not 
be made the measure of my jury’s ver- 
dict.” 
Recorder. Stop that prating, fellow, 
‘or put him out of the court.” 
Lord Mayor,‘ You have heard that 
she preached, that he gathered a com- 
pany of tumultuous people, and that they 
not only did disobey the martial power, 
but the civil also.” 
Penn. ‘It is a great mistake ; we 
did not make the tumult, but they that 
interrupted us! The jury cannot be so 
ignorant as to think that we met there 
with a design to disturb the civil peace, 
since, first, we were by force of arms 
kept out of our lawful house, and met as 
near it in the street as their soldiers 
would give us leave; and secondly, be- 
cause it was no new thing, and it is 
known that we are a peaceable people, 
and cannot offer violence to any man, 
The agreement of twelve men is a ver- 
dict in law; and such a one being given 
by the jury, L.require the clerk of the 
peace to record it, as he will answer at 
is peril. And if the jury bring in ano- 
ther verdict, contradictory to this, I 
affirm they, are perjnred. men in law.” 
Then, looking towards them, he empha- 
tically added, ‘* You. are Englishmen! 
mind your privilege, give not away your 
right !” § aged . 
“One of the jury having pleaded indis- 
Infamous Trial of Penn. 
[March 1, 
position, and desired to be dismissed, the 
Lord-mayor said, “ You are as strong as 
any of them; starve them, and hold your 
principles.” 
Recorder. ™ Gentlemen, you must be 
contented with your hard fate, let your 
patience overcome it; for the court is re- 
solved to have a verdict, amd that before 
youcan be dismissed.” 
Jury. “We are agreed !” 
«Fhe court now swore several of its 
officers to keep the jury all night, withour 
meat, drink, fire, &c. and adjourned to 
seven o'clock next morning, which 
proved to be Sunday. They were then 
brought up as before, when, having per- 
severed in their verdict, Mr. Bushel was 
reproved as a factious fellow, by the 
lord-mayor; on this he replied, that he 
acted “conscientiously.” The other 
observed, that such a conscience would 
eut his throat; ‘* but F will cut your’s,” 
added he, © so soon as I can,” 
“ Mr. Penn now asked the Recorder 
if he allowed the verdict given in respect 
to William Mead? That magistrate re- 
plied, No; as they were both indicted for 
a conspiracy, and one being found “* Not 
guilty,” and not the other, it could not 
be a verdict. ©’ 
“ Penn. “If Not guilty be not aver- 
dict, then you make of the jury, and 
Magna Charta, but a mere nose of war! 
{ afirm, that the consent of a jury isa 
verdict in law; and if William Mead be 
not guilty, I am clear, as I could not pos- 
sibly conspire alone.” 
“The jury again received a charge; 
were sent out; returned, and presented 
the same verdict. On this, the Recorder 
threatened Mr. Bushel, and said, ** While 
he had any thing to do in the city, he 
would * have an eye upon him? The 
lord-mayor tetined him a pitiful fellow, - 
and added, “I will cut his nose.” 
Penn. “tis intolerable that my jury 
should be thus menaced: Is this according 
to the fundamental laws? Are not they 
my proper judges by the Great Charter 
of England? What hope is there of ever 
having justice done, when juries are 
threatened, and their verdicts rejected? 
Tam concerned to speak, and grievous to 
see sach arbitrary proceedings. Did not 
the lieutenant of ‘the ‘Tower render 
(treat) one of them (the jury) worse 
than a felon? And do you not plainly 
seem to condemn such for factious fel-_ 
lows who answer not your ends? Un- 
happy are. those juries who are threat- 
ened to be fined, and starved, and ail 
; ed, 
