not however to be prevented by this usage from going on; for they continued their defence in the dark, and many stayed to hear them, though it was already after midnight. Vincent now came back among them with a candle, and, CC addressing himself to the Quakers, desired them to disperse. To this they at length consented, but not till Vincent gave them a promise that another meeting should be granted them for the same purpose in the same place.

William Penn and George Whitehead having waited many days, during which they could not make Vincent perform his promise, went to the meeting-house again on a lecture-day. They waited till the service was over, wher. they rose up, and begged that they might be permitted to resume their defence. Vincent however left the pulpit,

and made the best of his way home; nor would any other of the congregation, though repeatedly called upon, supply his place, either to defend his conduct, or to argue the point in question.

William Penn, deprived of an opportunity of discussing the doctrine which had been the subject of so much warmth during the controversy, determined upon an appeal to the public. Accordingly he brought out "The Sandy Foundation Shaken." He introduced it by a preface, in which he noticed the proceedings relative to Vincent as now mentioned, and made remarks upon the arguments then adduced. He then refuted "the notion of one God subsisting in three distinct and separate persons;" as well as "the notion of the impossibility of God pardoning sinners without a plenary satisfaction," and the "notion of the justification of impure persons by means of an imputative righteousness." This he did by quotations from the Scriptures, by right reason, by the history of these doctrines, and by the consequences which must flow from them if admitted. This work gave great offence. It was then a high crime, according to the laws of the land, to defend publicly the simple Unity of God. Hence Penn was apprehended, and sent as a prisoner to the tower.

Here he was treated with great severity. He was kept

in close confinement, and not one of his friends was permitted to have access to him. To aggravate his sufferings, a report was conveyed to him that the bishop of London had resolved that he should die in prison, or publicly recant. But Penn was too sincere in his faith, and too firm to be changed by such treatment. The law of force, the old state-argument in such cases, could not conquer truth. Instead of making any mean concession, Penn gave the bishop to understand, "that he would weary out the malice of his enemies by his patience; that he owed his conscience to no man; and that his prison should be his grave, before he would renounce his just opinions.

While in the tower, he applied himself to writing. His first effort ended in the production of "No Cross no Crown," a work which gave general satisfaction, and which in his own life-time passed through several editions.

This work naturally arose out of his situation. He was a prisoner for conscience-sake, and he saw that this must be the lot of all who would be faithful. He was enduring hardships for the sake of his religion. And to enforce this great doctrine, that unless men are willing to lead a life of self-denial, and to undergo privations and hardships in the course of their Christian warfare, they cannot be Christ's disciples; or in other words, that unless they are willing to bear the cross of Christ, they cannot become capable of wearing the crown of eternal glory, was the great object of this work.

Taking it altogether, it was a great work, especially when we consider the youth of the author, and the short time in which he composed it. It was rich in doctrine, rich in Scriptural examples, and profuse in lessons from history. It discovered great erudition, extensive reading, and a considerable knowledge of the world.

Penn also wrote to Lord Arlington, while in the tower, then principal secretary of state, by whose warrant he had been sent there. The more Penn considered his case, the more was he convinced that the government, by depriving him of his liberty, had sinned both against the laws of the Christian religion and those of the realm. He

therefore wrote to desire his release. This letter contained many just and noble sentiments. He tells Lord Arlington "that he is at loss to imagine how a diversity of religious opinions can affect the safety of the state, seeing that kingdoms and commonwealths have lived under the balance of divers parties.-He conceives that they only are unfit for political society, who maintain principles subversive of industry, fidelity, justice, and obedience; but to say that men must form their faith of things proper to another world, according to the prescriptions of other mortal men in this, and, if they do not, that they have no right either to be at liberty or live in this, is both ridiculous and dangerous.-He maintains that the understanding can never be convinced by other arguments than what are adequate to its own nature. Force may make hypocrites, but can make no converts; and if, says he, I am at any time convinced, I will pay the honour of it to truth, and not to base and timorous hypocrisy.-He then desires, as many of his enemies have retracted their opinions about him, and as his imprisonment is against the privileges of an Englishman, as well as against the forbearance inseparable from true Christianity, that he may receive his discharge. Should this be denied him, he begs access to the King; and if this should be denied him also, he hopes Lord Arlington will himself hear him against such objections as may be thought weighty; so that if he is to continue a prisoner, it may be known for what. He makes no apology for his letter, the usual style of suppliants, because he conceives that more honour will accrue to Lord Arlington by being just, than advantage to himself as an individual by becoming personally free.'

Notwithstanding this letter, Penn still continued in prison. Understanding that "The Sandy Foundation Shaken," which had occasioned such an outcry against him, had been misrepresented, he wrote a little tract called "Innocency with her Open Face." In this new tract he reviewed the three subjects of the former work. He argued, as before, against the notion of God pardoning sinners without a plenary satisfaction, and also against

that of the justification of impure persons by an imputative righteousness, and appealed to the high authority of Stillingfleet in his late discourse about Christ's sufferings against Crellius, in favor of his views. With respect to the third notion, he maintained that he had been misrepresented. A conclusion had been drawn that, because he had denied one God subsisting in three distinct and separate persons, he had denied the divinity of Christ. He cited, therefore, several passages from Scripture, to prove that Christ was divine. This doctrine, he asserted, was an article of his own faith; and, as a proof that it had been so, he desired those who thought otherwise, to consult his "Guide Mistaken," which he had published before "The Sandy Foundation Shaken," and in which they would find that he had acknowledged both the divinity and eternity of Christ. His enemies now contended that he had disgraced himself; that he had recanted; and that from a Socinian he had all at once become the defender of the Trinity. This, however, was a wicked slander. The doctrine of three separate persons in one God, he uniformly rejected; but he never denied the divinity of Christ, or of that good spirit which dwelt in Jesus, and to which he and his friends gave the name of Christ.

Soon after the publication of this tract, he was discharged from the tower, after having been kept there on terms of unusual severity for seven months. His discharge came from the king, who had been moved to it by the intercession of his brother, the Duke of York, a great friend of Penn's father.

CHAPTER IV.

A. 1669.

THE first place in which we find William Penn after his liberation from the Tower, was at the bed-side of Thomas

Loe, who was then on the eve of departing from the world. It will be remembered that Thomas Loe was the person, who, while William Penn was at Oxford, confirmed the religious impressions he had received at Chigwell school. He was the person also who had given a bias to his mind while in the city of Cork, by which he was led, at a time when looking out for some practical system of religion, to fix upon that of the Quakers. Here then we see the teacher and the learner brought together at this awful crisis. It must have been exceedingly gratifying to Thomas Loe, when he considered the imprisonment of William Penn, the undaunted manner in which he had borne it, and the useful way in which he had spent his time while under it, but particularly in the production of "No Cross, No Crown;" to have him by him at this solemn moment. And that thoughts of the trials and triumphs of Penn were then uppermost in the mind of the dying minister, there is no doubt; for in taking his final leave of Penn, he gave him the following exhortation: "Bear thy cross, and stand faithful to God; then he will give thee an everlasting crown of glory that shall not be taken from thee. There is no other way that shall prosper, than that which the holy men of old walked in. God hath brought immortality to light, and life immortal is felt. His love overcomes my heart. Glory be to his name for evermore!

It is pleasing now to relate that Admiral Penn, though he had discarded his son, began again to relent. He could not help thinking that however his son might have been mistaken, he was at least sincere, and that his steady perseverance in the course he had taken in spite of persecution, was a proof of his integrity. He now allowed him to be at his own house, though he did not see him, and caused it to be signified to him through his mother, that he might return to Ireland if he would, there to execute a commission for him.

William Penn was greatly cheered by this gleam of returning love on the part of his father, and accordingly prepared for his journey, In the month of August he