ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 



the corroboration of it in set terms is to be found wherever the sessional 

 papers of that period are extant. 



In 1655, one Richard Clayton, with two other Quakers, affixed to the 

 ' steeple-house ' l door of Bures a document full of the strongest abuse of 

 ministers of religion, couched in Biblical language. Clayton was taken 

 before a magistrate, whipped, and sent out of the town as a vagrant, whilst 

 his companions, who offered some resistance, were committed to Bury gaol. 

 At the sessions the two latter were fined twenty nobles each as, says Besse, 

 ' disturbers of magistrates and ministers,' with imprisonment till the fine was 

 paid. In gaol they experienced the harshest treatment, being herded with 

 felons and sleeping on rye straw. The gaoler treated them after a brutal 

 fashion, because they, being water drinkers, would not purchase ' strong 

 liquors,' on whose sale he made much profit. 



About the same time William Seaman, of Mendlesham, was committed 

 to Ipswich gaol for speaking to a ' priest ' in church, as the Quaker historian 

 puts it. 



The Restoration made no improvement in the position of the Quakers, 

 but indirectly increased their troubles. The oath of allegiance was imposed 

 on all, and their scruples as to oaths, and not any objection to the revival of 

 the monarchy, caused the committal of increased numbers to prison. In 

 1660 there were thirty-three of the Friends in gaol at Bury, nine at Blyth- 

 burgh, thirteen at Melton, and twenty-three at Ipswich. The majority were 

 indicted for refusing to take the oath of allegiance, one for refusing to 

 swear at a court leet, and others for non-attendance at church. Their 

 refusal to pay tithes, both under the Commonwealth and the Monarchy, 

 brought about considerable distraining of goods. 



They had a brief respite in 1672 ; for at that date, during the short- 

 lived indulgence of Charles II, ' the peaceable people called Quakers,' as they 

 termed themselves in a petition, were all released from the Suffolk gaols and 

 elsewhere, under a special royal warrant. 2 But the continuance of their 

 objection to paying tithes and ' steeple-house rates ' soon brought them again 

 into gaol. When the proclamation of James II, of 8 April, 1685, made 

 another gaol deliverance, seventy-four Quakers obtained their freedom from 

 Suffolk gaols, namely thirty-one from Ipswich county prison, thirteen from 

 Ipswich town prison, thirteen from Bury, nine from Melton, and eight 

 from Sudbury. 



After the Restoration, Dr. Edward Reynolds was appointed bishop of 

 Norwich ; he was consecrated on 6 January, 1661. He had been for many 

 years identified with Presbyterian theology, but his change of faith seems 

 to have been genuine. He made a conscientious, earnest bishop, whilst his 

 earlier belief made his action towards the nonconformists conciliatory 

 throughout. Hence the harshness of the Conventicle Act and the Five-Mile 

 Act was much mitigated in East Anglia. When the time came, on St. 

 Bartholomew's Day in 1662, for the removal from their benefices of those 

 Commonwealth ministers who refused to accept episcopal ordination, sixty- 

 seven ministers were ejected from their cures in the widespread diocese of 



1 According to the Quaker nomenclature a church was always termed a ' steeple-house,' and a minister of 

 any kind, even if Independent, Presbyterian or Baptist, was known as a ' priest.' 

 ' S. P. Dom. Entry Book xxxiv, 171. 



47 



