A True Hero | Page 6

the grave and
ascended into heaven, is now seated at the right hand of God; so we
require no person to pray for us, or allow that it is according to God's
will that persons should receive payment for praying, exhorting, or
preaching, or in any other way spreading God's truth. We believe, too,
that the water-baptism, so generally administered, is not according to
God's mind; that the baptism spoken of in the Scriptures is that of the
Spirit,--the answer of a good conscience towards God by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ; that by one Spirit we are all baptised into
one body; while, with regard to the Lord's Supper as it is spoken of, we
do indeed deem that the supper of the Lord is needful, but that it is
altogether of a spiritual nature. We object altogether to oaths, because
our Lord says, `Swear not at all.' We hold war to be an abomination to
God, and contrary to that new commandment given us by Christ, `That
ye love one another, even as I have loved you.' We hold, too, that a
civil magistrate has no right to interfere in religious matters, and that
though `Friends' may admonish such members as fall into error, it must
be done by the spiritual sword; and as religion is a matter solely
between God and man, so no government consisting of fallible men

ought to fetter the consciences of those over whom they are placed."
"No, indeed," exclaimed Christison. "To the latter principle I have long
held; and it seems to me that there is much sense and truth in the other
tenets which you have explained. I, as you know, am a blunt man, not
given to book learning; but, in truth, old friend, I should like to hear
from you again more at large of these matters."
"There seems every probability that thou wilt know where to find me
for some time to come," answered Mead; "and I shall be heartily
well-pleased further to explain to you the principles we hold to be the
true ones for the guidance of men in this mortal life."
"Father," said young Wenlock, as he and the elder Christison were
returning to their lodgings; "I should like to take service with young
Master Penn, should he require a secretary. Your old friend, Captain
Mead, has also taken my fancy; but yet I feel I would go anywhere with
so true-hearted and noble a man as the other."
"You have formed a somewhat hasty judgment, Wenlock," said his
father. "We have been but a couple of hours in his society, during
which time he spoke but little; and though, I grant you, he is a true
gentleman, and would have made a fine soldier, yet his temper and
habits may be very different to what you suppose."
"Oh! no, no, father. I know I could trust him; I watched him all the time
he was writing. He said he was addressing his father, and I saw his
change of countenance; sometimes he was lost in thought, sometimes
he seemed to look up to heaven in prayer; and more than once I saw his
eyes filled with tears, and a firm, determined look came over his
countenance; yet all the time there was nothing stern or forbidding,-- all
was mild, loving, and kind. I have never seen one I would more
willingly serve."
"I hope that you may see him frequently, Wenlock," said his father,
"and you may thus have an opportunity of correcting or confirming
your judgment. I purpose visiting my old friend Mead whenever I can."

Captain Christison kept to his word. The result of those frequent
interviews with the worthy Quaker, as far as Wenlock was concerned,
will be shown by-and-by.
The first of September, 1670, the day fixed for the trial of William
Penn and Captain Mead, arrived, and the prisoners were placed in the
dock to answer the charge brought against them. Christison and his son
were at the doors some time before they opened, that they might,
without fail, secure a place. "Now most of these people, I warrant,
fancy that they have come simply to witness the trial of the son of one
of England's brave admirals for misdemeanour. The matter is of far
more importance, Wenlock. Master Penn disputes, and so do I, that this
`Conventicle Act' is legal in any way. We hold it to be equally hostile
to the people and our Great Charter. Is an edict which abolishes one of
the fundamental rights secured to the nation by our ancient Constitution,
though passed by Crown and Parliament, to be held as possessing the
force of law? If this court cannot show that it is, the question is, will a
jury of Englishmen, when the case is