650 
N A Y 
NAY 
Gifford’s Hall, the feat of the Monnocks, who have been 
proprietors of it fince the time of Henry VI. is a confpi- 
cuous example of the fine old manfions. The fhape of 
this houfe is quadrangular, with an open court in the 
middle, and the chief entrance under a tower-gateway, 
faid to have been built in the reign of Henry VIII. by 
Peter Gifford, elq. a diftant relation of queen Anne 
Bullen. The whole is conftrufted of brick, and the 
mouldings of the doors and window's are of the fame ma¬ 
terial. Oppofite to the gateway are the remains of an old 
chapel. 
From the high grounds in the neighbourhood, a prof- 
peft is commanded to Harwich harbour, upwards of 
twenty miles; and many beautiful views enrich its vici¬ 
nity. Bniton's Architectural Antiq. vol.ii. Wilkes's Britt/h 
Direflory, vol. iv. 
NAY'LAND PO'INT, Kent, is near Margate-bay. 
NAY'LER (James), an Englifh Quaker, remarkable 
both on account of the extravagance of the delufions 
which fora time poffeffed him and his followers, and the 
exceflive feverity of the punifhment which w'as infli&ed 
upon him. He was the fon of an induftrious farmer, who 
fupported his family by the cultivation of his own fmall 
eftate; and was born in the parifli of Ardfley, near Wake¬ 
field, in Yorkfhire, about the year 1616. He had a good 
natural capacity, and received the elements of a common 
education. About the age of twenty-two he married, 
and removed into the parifli of Wakefield, where he con¬ 
tinued till the breaking out of the civil wars in 1641. 
He then entered into the parliament-army, and ferved as 
a foldier for eight or nine years, at firft under lord Fairfax, 
and afterwards as quarter-mafter in Lambert’s troop in 
Scotland ; till, being difabled by ficknefs, he returned 
home about the year 1649. At this time he was a mem¬ 
ber of the independent party, and continued fo till the 
year 1651, when the preaching of George Fox at Wake¬ 
field made him a convert to the communion of the Qua¬ 
kers, as they are called. Among them he foon com¬ 
menced preacher, and acquitted himfelf well both in 
fpeaking and w'riting. In the beginning of the follow¬ 
ing year he imagined that he heard a voice, calling upon 
him to “ renounce his kindred and his father’s houfe, 
and go into the weft,” promifing that God would be with 
him, In obedience to this voice, which he believed to 
be the voice of God, he went about preaching from place 
to place, and greatly increafed the numbers of the new 
fe£L Towards the dole of the year 1654, or early in 1655, 
he came to London, where he found a meeting of Friends 
which had been eftablilhed by Edward Burrough and 
Francis Plowgill, among whom he fo greatly diftinguifhed 
himfelf by his preaching, that many began to draw in¬ 
vidious comparifons between him and his brethren,'which 
created uneafinefs and differences in the fociety. To 
fuch a length did thefe proceed, that fome women, ad- 
mirers of Nayler, affumed the liberty of interrupting and 
difputing with Howgill and Burrough in the midft of 
their preaching, and thus difturbed the peace of the 
meetings. For this conduct they were reproved by thofe 
preachers; upon which they complained fo loudly and 
paflionately to Nayler, that he was weak enough to take 
their part, and was fo intoxicated with their flattering 
praifes, that he became eftranged from his beft friends, 
who ftrongly difapproved of, and lamented, his conduft. 
In the year 1656, we find him in Devonfhire, where he 
was committed to Exeter-jail for propagating his opinions. 
Here he received letters from fome of his female admirers 
and others, written in the moft extravagant ftrains, call¬ 
ing him “ the everiafting Son of Righteoufnefs ; the Prince 
of Peace; the only-begotten Son of God; the faireft 
among ten thoufand, &c.” and fome of his followers 
kneeled before him in the prifon, and killed his feet. 
Before he could have fuffered fuch language to be applied 
to him, the intoxication of his brain muft have rifen to 
frenzy; of which he foon afforded additional evidence. 
While he continued in this prilon, George Fox called 
upon him, and reproved him for his defection and lofty 
pretenfions: but without effect. At parting, Nayler 
would have kifled Fox; but the latter told him, that, 
fince he had turned againft the power of God, he could 
not receive his fliow of kindnefs. And it is but juftice 
to the Quakers in general to mention, that they had now 
difowned Nayler and his adherents. 
Soon afterwards, Nayler was releafed from imprifon- 
ment, and intended to return to London ; but, taking 
Briftol in his way, as he palled through Glaftonbury and 
Wells, his deluded attendants ftrewed their garments 
before him. When they came to Bedminfter, about a 
mile from Briftol, they carried their extravagance to the 
higheft pitch : for they formed a proceflion, in imitation 
of our Saviour’s entrance into Jerufalem, in which a man 
walked bare-headed before Nayler, and a women led his 
horfe, while other women fpread their fcarfs and hand¬ 
kerchiefs in the road, and the company fung, “ Holy^ 
holy, holy, is the Lord God of Hofts: Plofanna in the 
higheft; holy, holy, is the Lord God of Ifrael.” In this 
manner thefe mad people made their entrance into Briftol, 
marching through the mire and dirt, to the amazement 
of fome, and the diverfion of others; but the magiftrates 
thought proper to interfere, and, after an examination 
into what had paffed, committed them to prifon. Soon 
afterwards they were fent to London, and a committee 
W'as appointed by parliament to examine witneffes againft 
Nayler, upon a charge of blafphemy, for admitting reli¬ 
gious worlhip to be paid to him, and for affuming the 
names and incommunicable titles and attributes of our 
bleffed Saviour. Before the committee he did not deny 
what was alleged concerning the extraordinary proceed¬ 
ings in Exeter-jail, and at his entrance into Briftol; but 
he defended himfelf by maintaining, that the honours 
which he received were not fhown to him, but to Chrift 
who dwelt within him; and that, if they were offered to 
any other than to Chrift, he difowned them. However, 
the committee having made a report to the houfe on the 
5th of December, declaring the charge well founded, on 
the following day he was fent for and heard at the barf 
and on the 8th they refolved, “ that James Nayler is 
guilty of horrid blafphemy; and that he is a grand im- 
poftor, and a great feducer of the people.” The next 
bufinefs to be determined was the nature of the punilh- 
ment to be inflicted on him ; which occupied the debates 
of the houfe, both on forenoons and afternoons, till the 
16th of December: many members being for putting him 
to death, and lofing their vote, as fecretary Thurloe in¬ 
forms us, only by fourteen voices; while many other 
members totally difapproved of the feverity which was 
ufed againft him. At length, on the following day, after 
a confiderable debate, the majority came to the refolution, 
“ that James Nayler be fet on the pillory, in the Palace- 
yard, Weftminfter, during the fpace of two hours, on 
Thurfday next; and be whipt by the hangman through 
the ftreets from Weftminfter to the Old Exchange, and 
there likewife be fet on the pillory, with his head in the 
pillory, for the fpace of two hours, between the hours of 
eleven and one on Saturday next : in each place wearing 
a paper, containing an infcription of his crimes. And 
that, at the Old Exchange, his tongue be bored through 
with a hot iron; and that he be there alfo ftigmatized in 
the forehead with the letter B. That he be afterwards 
fent to Briftol, and be conveyed into and through the 
faid city on horfeback, and his face backward ; and there 
alfo publicly whipt the next market-day after he comes 
thither. And that from thence he be committed to 
prifon in Bridewell, London, and there reftrained from 
the fociety of all people, and there to labour hard, till 
he be releafed by parliament. And, during that time, 
be debarred the ufe of pen, ink, and paper; and (hall 
have no relief but what he earns by his daily labour.” 
This fentence was repugnant to humanity, equity, and 
wifdom. For, though the religious extravagancies of 
Nayler might reafonably fliock pious and fober minds, 
yet 
