Legal Battles
On the 6th day of the 10th month, 1682, Samuel Astie by the order of Henry Shelley, justice, delivered the following papers:-
Sussex Sessions.
To Ambrose Galloway, the elder of Lewes, tailor, Thomas Moseley, of St Thomas in the Cliffe, woollen draper, Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Robinson, felt maker, and Thomas Akehurst, of the same parish, mercer, and Henry Gates, of Cuckfield, yeoman.
Whereas, John Eresby, and Samuel Astie, notary public, both of Lewes, have this present day taken their corporal oaths before me, Henry Shelley, one of Her Majesty‘s Justices of the Peace for the County of Sussex, that upon Tuesday, the 10th Day of October last past, an unlawful conventicle or meeting was held in a house called Puddle Wharf, in the Parish of All Saints in Lewes under colour and pretence of exercise of religion, in other manner than according to the liturgy and practice of the Church of England, and that Henry Agates, then and there did take upon him to preach or teach in the conventicle, assembly or meeting, contrary to the laws and statutes in that case made and provided, and Ambrose Galloway, the elder, Thomas Moseley, Elizabeth Robinson, and Thomas Akehurst, were at that time hearers of, and present at, the pretended exercise of religion.
These are therefore to give notice and warning to you and every one of you that I do intend to hear the said cause at my house on Friday next ensuing the date hereof, between the hours of three and four of the clock in the afternoon, where you and every one of you may be present, if you will, and show cause, if you can, why you, and every one of you, should not be convicted of the offences and fines or sums of money forfeited thereby, be levied upon you for the same, according to law. Given under my hand and seal of 6th day of November, 1682.
HENRY SHELLEY
Friends replied, denying that they had been at any conventicle or unlawful meeting on that day, and saw nothing unlawful done in that house. They asked the informers to state exactly what they alleged had been said or done against the liturgy or practice of the Church of England. They also pointed out that the law did not forbid all meetings, and that the meeting which they had attended would only have been illegal if they had done some illegal act. To meet to seek God‘s guidance was not illegal, and the liturgy itself said it is both meet and right and our bounden duty at all times and in all places to give thanks and praise to Almighty God. They argued that speaking and preaching are not the same thing, and that their speaking should not be counted as preaching unless the informers could prove that scripture had been expounded. Finally they denied that they knew any Henry Agates who had preached. (They all knew Henry Agates, otherwise known as Henry Gates, but he had not preached that day).
When they appeared before Mr Justice Shelley they demanded of the two informers what words they heard preached at 'the said pretended meeting,‘ but the informers seemed loathe to say. At last, with much bogling, the priest said he heard Henry Gates preach that the soul of man was of great concern, and then Ambrose Galloway answered that 'they might convict them for that, but the priest had little to say for himself, nor could not deny the truth of them words. Yet, nowithstanding all that they could say in their own defence, together with the small account that they informers could give, the Justice issued his warrant, imposing fines, upon Henry Gates the sum of twenty pounds for preaching, and upon Ambrose Galloway, Elizabeth Robinson, Thomas Akehurst, and Thomas Moseley, upon each of them the sum of five shillings for being present.
And on the same day for the fine of five shillings imposed on Thomas Akehurst, they took a small cask of soap, to the value of seven shillings. Richard Knight intended to have gone in as he had done at Thomas Moseley‘s shop, but by a strange providence was hindered before the soap was distrained, as just at his stepping into the shop his foot slipped and he broke and put out of joint his leg, and was fain to be carried home by men. Yet, notwithstanding, the rest failed no to carry on the wicked work.
Friends refused to pay tithes on a principle which now is easy to understand, but others were simply tax evaders. Church officials may have seen no difference between Friends and the splendidly contumacious John Farley (not a Quaker) who lived in South Street in the Cliffe and had there bought a small cottage which for the meanness thereof had never been chargeable with any tax. Now John Farley had pulled down that shed and on the same ground built a good tenantable house worth four pounds a year, for which the priest demanded tithes. Being denied by John Farley, he proceeded against him for non payment in the Bishop's Court of Excommunication.
John Farly took no notice thereof, but came again to church (called), as he was wont to do, where John Eresby was preaching. The sight of an excommunicate person interrupted him, so he commanded John Farley to be hauled out of the steeplehouse, which was done once or twice. The old man came in again, alleging that he had gone to church for forty or fifty years or more and would not now be hindered, which caused a further disturbance. One Thomas Wood, the overseer of the poor, beat John Farley in the steeplehouse, and beat out one or two of his teeth, and the priest to do the business more effectually came out of the pulpit to help get him out, which with the noise of the men scuffling together, and the fear and hurry the people were in, caused many of them to depart, and soon after the priest followed all in a confusion, (or else he must have preached to the walls). This course John Farley held on for several days.
And other days when the priest went to the steeplehouse he has been fain to go to some other steeplehouse hearing that John Farley was got in there. Sometimes by fair means and flattery he desired John Farley not to disturb him, and promised him an absolution for nothing, which when John Farley went to demand it, would not be granted (except he would pay the charge of the court, which he refused to do). The priest having a desire to be quiet on that day called Christ mass day, to perform their wonted service in the steeplehouse of the Cliffe, sent the following warrant to John Heaver, then steeplehouse Warden.
To the churchwardens of the Cliffe
Since there is no other course to be taken with Goodman Farley, but down right force, and since your office does oblige you to see that no excommunicate person come into the church, these are to command and charge you that you take care Farley make no disturbance; which to prevent, you are both to stand at the entrance, and not suffer him to approach.
John Eresby
December 25th, 1682
The priest made offers for a composition with John Farley, offering to abate him a great part of the money first demanded, but no end could be put to it till the next sessions following, when some justices (on petition of John Farley), took up the business, so that he was readmitted into the church. If the priest‘s envy and rash proceedings had not turned him out that labour for an indulgence might have been saved.
On the 5th day of the 10th month, 1682, Friends being met together to wait upon the Lord in their usual Meeting House in Lewes, the informers, John Eresby, the priest, and Samuel Astie, the proctor, came in amongst them, and took the names of Thomas Robinson, Ralph Akehurst, Thomas Akehurst (who was not at the meeting), Benjamin Moseley, Henry Agates alias Gates, and went to Henry Shelley and informed him thereof, whereupon Justice Shelley issued a summons:
Sussex Sessions
To Jane Kidder, of Lewes, Spinster.
Whereas, John Eresby, Clerk, and Samuel Astie, of Lewes, Sussex, have formerly taken their corporal oaths before Henry Shelley, Esquire, on of his Majesty‘s Justices of the Peace for the county of Sussex, that upon Tuesday, the 10th day of October last past, an unlawful conventicle or meeting was held in a house called Puddle Wharf, commonly reputed the house of you Jane Kidder, in the parish of All Saints. These are therefore to give you notice and warning to you that you may have a personal hearing of the cause before Henry Shelley, Esquire, at his house in Lewes, between the hours of three and four of the clock in the afternoon of this present 5th day of December, 1682, and where you may shew cause, if you can, why you should not be convicted of the crime aforesaid, and the sum, fine, or sums of money forfeited thereby be levied upon you for the same, according to law.
By the order of the said Mr. Shelley,
Sam Astie
December 5th, 1682
This summons to Jane Kidder was for that same day, but the rest of Friends were not to appear till some days after. The informers being impatient of their prey went before the day of appearance came to Richard Bridger (called) a Justice, and there they gave him information against the same they had done before to Justice Shelley, and about eighteen more unknown, which now they swore also to have been there. Richard Bridger imposed fines as follows:-
On Henry Gates, of Cuckfield, for his second offence (called) of preaching, forty pounds. On Thomas Akehurst (although at neither of the meetings) for his second offence ten shillings. And twenty pounds fine for the house, with five shillings a piece as hearers, was laid upon Thomas Robinson, Benjamin Moseley, and Ralph Akehurst, but by reason the warrant came not to the hand of Friends, we are not certain as to each one the particular sum to be levied.
But here it may be observed that the first warrant granted by Henry Shelley was not as yet levied (which imposed on Henry Gates the sum of twenty pounds for the meeting held the 10th day of the 8th month 1682). These informers wanted to have both the warrants to execute together. When they had this last warrant for forty pounds the informer, Samuel Astie, and Caleb Fuller, of Fletching, assisted by the constable of Cuckfield, went to the house of Henry Gates, and in a most rude and threatening manner demanded for the two warrants three score pounds, which not being paid they seized fatting beasts, which were a few days before bought by butchers, and other goods. Not being satisfied with what they had, they returned for another warrant:
Sussex Sessions
To the Constables, Headboroughs, Church-wardens, and Overseers of the poor for the Parish of St Thomas in the Cliffe.
Whereas, Ralph Akehurst and Thomas Akehurst, both of the said Parish of St Thomas in the Cliffe, mercers, and Thomas Robinson, of the same parish, feltmaker, together with several other persons, were met together in an unlawful assembly or conventicle, contrary to the form of the Statute in that case made and provided, in a house called Puddle Wharf, within the Parish of All Saints, in Lewes and in the occupation of Jane Kidder, spinster, on Tuesday the 5th of December, and have been duly convicted thereof before Richard Bridger, esquire, one of her Majesty‘s Justices of the Peace, by the oaths of John Ereseby, clerk, and Samuel Astie, notary public, both of All Saints, and because the sum of twenty pounds are forfeited by law, become due from Jane Kidder, for wittingly and willingly suffering the unlawful conventicle to be held but Jane Kidder, by reason of poverty and inability, cannot satisfy the said sum, I have therefore imposed the sum of nine pounds and fifteen shillings of good and lawful money of England upon Thomas Robinson, being part of the sum of twenty pounds forfeited from Jane Kidder.
I have likewise imposed the sum of five shillings apiece upon Ralph Akehurst and Thomas Robinson, for being present at the unlawful conventicle, assembly, or meeting, and because Thomas Akehurst was formerly convicted, I have therefore imposed the sum of ten shillings upon Thomas Akehurst, for his second offence.
These are therefore in the King's name, to will, require, and command you and every of you respectively that upon sight hereof that you levy by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of Ralph Akehurst, Thomas Akehurst, and respectively imposed as aforesaid, and upon receipt thereof you are hereby required and commanded to pay the same in unto me that I may dispose thereof according to the directions of Act of Parliament in that behalf; and hereof fail not at your peril.
John Stapley
Another warrant was issued to the constables to levy the fine of ten pounds imposed on Benjamin Moseley, and a smaller fine on Jane Kidder. They went to Moseley‘s shop but looking more closely at the warrant they realised that a warrant already existed for the offence named so they left the shop without taking anything. The officers of the Cliffe were less particular:
For, about the 6th day of the 11th month of 1682/3, Richard Stonehors, Constable, and John Olive, Headborough, with Thomas Wood, Overseer of the poor, and John Heaver, steeplehouse warden, came to Thomas Robinson‘s shop, and by colour of the said warrant seized and carried away eighty hats, to the value of thirty pounds, nineteen shillings, which were carried to the Red Lion to the house of Richard Knight, with the rest of Friends‘ goods.‘
Thomas Robinson, aggrieved by these illegal proceedings, since Justice Shelley had issued a third warrant for the same offence, and as the informers had perjured themselves, entered an appeal on the 9th day of the 11th month, as follows:
Whereas, Richard Bridger, Esq., one of his Majesty‘s Justices of the Peace has upon the oath of John Eresby, clerk, and Samuel Astie, notary public, convicted Thomas Robinson, of the parish of the Cliffe, of being present at a conventicle or meeting at a house in All Saints in Lewes, in the occupation of Jane Kidder, spinster, on the 5th day of December last, under colour of exercise of religion in other manner than according to the liturgy of the Church of England, and whereas Sir John Stapley, Knight and Baronet, one other of his Majesty‘s Justices of the Peace, has upon Richard Bridger‘s conviction by his warrant under his hand and seal, bearing date the first day of January instant, imposed upon me five shillings, for being present at the conventicle or meeting; and in respect of the poverty of Jane Kidder, has likewise imposed upon me the sum of nine pounds and fifteen shillings more, for her suffering a conventicle or meeting to be in her house, which sums of money were, by virtue of Sir John Stapley‘s warrant levied on my goods and chattels on Wednesday, the 3rd day of January instant; now I do hereby appeal from conviction of Richard Bridger, to the judgement of the Justices of the Peace, in their next Quarter Sessions, to be held for the East part of the County of Sussex. In witness wherof, I have hereunto set my hand, the 9th day of January, 1682.
On the 11th day of the 11th month of 1682 began the Quarter Sessions, held at Lewes, where the matters transacted in relation to Friends were as follows:
Some time past, before the sessions, John Eresby (the informing priest of Lewes) came into the shop of Thomas Robinson, in the Cliffe, and cheapened a fine caster hat, to the value of fourteen shillings, and after some slight discourse, carried it away by force, telling him that he took it for Parson Snat. Thomas called after him, 'Stop, thief.' Notwithstanding, there was no getting of it again. Whereupon, Thomas Robinson, for recovery of his right (and not for revenge) indicted him the first day of the sessions, for a trespass. He was found guilty, ordered to pay the charge of the Court, and Thomas Robinson for his hat, and so was discharged.
And the next day, being the second day of the sessions, John Eresby, priest, and Samuel Astie, proctor, and both informers, were jointly indicted by Friends as they had wickedly and maliciously sworn wrongfully against Thomas Akehurst thereby making him guilty of being present at two meeting, (when there was sufficient witness to prove that he was at home all the time of the meeting), a false oath, so often repeated before several magistrates. This bill of indictment for perjury preferred against them by Friends, was found to be a true bill by the jury.
Another jury tried the appeal by Henry Gates. The statute applied only to meetings at which five or more people were present. Without Thomas Akehurst there would have been only four, and only an hour before the witnesses to his presence at the meeting had been convicted of perjury. Nevertheless the jury found that he was present - on the evidence of the same witnesses.
But the court ordered the Constable to return the fourscore hats which were taken from Thomas Robinson. On the same 12th day of the 11th month, 1682, the priest Eresby, and Samuel Astie, informers, indicted most people about the town of Lewes that did not go to the steeplehouse, to the number of near one hundred. Friends were indicted separately, and the jury rejected the bills against other dissenters as they were not certain that they would not go to church, but, as for the Quakers, they knew that they would not. So they found the bills against the several persons following, viz., Henry Gates, Ambrose Galloway, senior, Thomas Moseley, Ralph Akehurst, Benjamin Moseley, Nicholas Beard, senior, John Ellis, of Warbleton, Elizabeth Robinson, for being absent from church (called) for the space of one month, and for being present, some at the meeting on the 10th of the 8th month, 1682, contrary to the Statute made in the 35th year of the late Queen Elizabeth. The bill found against them was a trap laid by the wicked informers to take away their lives, but the Lord delivered them.
The persons hereunder named were also indicted, and the Bill found against them:
Thomas Robinson
Ambrose Galloway, junior
Ruth Galloway
Elizabeth Galloway for absenting themselves
Thomas Beard from Church (called) for
Mary Akehurst the space of nine months.
Thomas Akehurst
Alexander Akehurst
Jane Kidder
Jane Eager was indicted for three months.
At this point it may be interesting to see just how the 'Statute made in the 35th year of the late Queen Elizabeth' related to Friends. There were, in fact, two statutes, parts of which read as follows:-
For the preventing and avoiding of such great inconveniences and perils as might happen and grow by the wicked and dangerous practices of seditious sectaries and disloyal persons; be it enacted that if any person above the age of sixteen years, which shall obstinately refuse to repair to some church, chapel, or usual place of common prayer, to hear divine service established by her Majesty‘s laws ... That then every such person, being thereof lawfully convicted, shall be committed to prison, there to remain without bail or mainprize. Provided also, That every person that shall abjure by force of this Act, or refuse to abjure being thereunto required as aforesaid, shall forfeit to her Majesty all his goods and chattels to ever; and shall further lose all his lands.
For the better discovering and avoiding of such traitorous and most dangerous conspiracies and attempts, as are daily devised and practised against our most gracious Sovereign Lady the Queen‘s Majesty and the happy state of this Commonweal by such sundry wicked and seditious persons, who terming themselves Catholics and being indeed spies and intelligencers not only for her Majesty‘s foreign enemies but also for rebellious and traitorous subjects born within her Highness' dominions, and hiding their most detestable and devilish purposes under a false pretext of religion and conscience do secretly wander and shift from place to place within this realm, to corrupt and sedcue her Majesty‘s subjects, and to stir them to sedition and rebellion ...
And be it further enacted, That if any person which shall be suspected to be a jesuit, seminary or massing priest, being examined, shall refuse to answer directly and truly whether he be a Jesuit or [&c] as is aforesaid, every such person so refusing to answer shall be committed to prison until he shall make true and direct answer to the said questions whereupon he shall be so examined.
The Acts were directed against Catholics, but lawyers used them as precedents for the prosecution of Quakers. Perhaps the prosecutors were attracted by the draconian penalties permitted by the Act. It may seem incredible now that the authorities should confuse the Quakers with the 'Jesuits and massing priests.' The authorities maintained that the Quakers could easily identify themselves by 'answering directly and truly', but this had to be done on oath and the Quakers would not swear.
When the Sessions began in Lewes on the 19th day of the second month of 1683 the parties indicted at the previous Sessions were called, most of them for nine month's absence from church. Friends claimed that the court was not competent to deal with the offence. This plea was entered in Latin, engrossed on parchment and signed by Councillor Darnell. Councillor Henry Bish tried to enter a demurrer [a statement agreeing to the facts, but denying legal liability] to the plea, but it was not accepted, and the indictment was withdrawn.
In consequence John Eresby and Samuel Astie brought in a certiorari [an appeal to a higher court against the procedure in a lower one] to remove the counter-claim which Friends had brought against them for perjury. Later they put in a demurrer against the Friends' plea, arguing that the court was competent to deal with the former indictment, but the hearing of the demurrer was deferred until the next sessions.
Six months later Thomas Moseley, Thomas Beard, Mary Akehurst, widow, and Mary Akehurst, spinster, Thomas Robinson and his wife, and Thomas Akehurst were sent before Sir John Stapley, Justice, on the information of John Eresby, priest, that they had absented themselves from church on three Sundays. They pleaded that they had been convicted before and were thus not liable to be prosecuted again for the same offences, yet Sir John Stapley issued a warrant to levy three shillings each on their goods. As some did not have goods to be distrained, the Justice, arguing that a warrant levied on all had to be satisfied by all, issued a further warrant to imprison all of the defendents, but the constable did not execute it.
On the 16th of the 8th month, 1683, Ambrose Galloway, junior, was presented at the Bishop's Court, by John Eresby, priest of the parish of All Saints, for not going to the parish church to hear divine service, and for not receiving the Sacrament according to church law. Ambrose appeared and alleged that:-
and other arguments which he had put into writing. It is likely that these defences were prepared on the advice of Meeting for Sufferings which had circulated legal advice to many meetings. He was allowed time to bring a certificate of his former conviction, and this absolved him from further punishment on account of not attending church. Since this was his first prosecution for not receiving the Sacrament he was admonished to receive the Sacrament at Easter next. He was later brought to court for not having done so, but pleaded successfully that he could not do so as he was in prison at the time. He was discharged, but ordered to receive it at the next Whitsunday. After failing to do so he pleaded that receiving the Sacrament would have been against the law as he had not been baptised. This was accepted, but he was admonished to learn the Catechism and be baptised before Michaelmas. Nevertheless, he was excommunicated immediately. Although it might appear that excommunication was just what he wanted, Ambrose would have also lost valuable civil rights
On the 5th day of the 2nd month, 1684, Amrose Galloway, senior, Ambrose Galloway, junior, Richard Stephens, Benjamin Moseley, all of Lewes, Nicholas Beard, senior, and Nicholas Beard, junior, of Rottingdean, were all arrested and kept close prisoners at the White Horse Inn until the 10th of the month because they would not promise to appear at the sessions. When the bailiffs brought them before the sessions the prisoners were freed and the bailiffs were denied their expenses.
The Friends indicted the previous year were recalled and there were further arguements about their liability under the Statute of the 35th of Queen Elizabeth. they argued that if they were found guilty and would not abjure their offence would be a capital one which was beyond the jurisdiction of the Quarter Sessions. The Justices left the matter until they could seek the opinion of the Judges and at the next Assizes held at East Grinstead Judges Carleton and Pemberton gave their opinion that the matter was not one for Quarter Sessions, and Friends were not called again.
On the first day of the 4th month 1684 the excommunication of Richard Stephens was published for the non-payment of four shillings and 6 pence towards the repairs of the church of St Michael. A neighbour paid the money on his behalf but the write of excommunication was taken against him by Walter Willard and Thomas Verall the wardens and Benjamin Henshaw a proctor of the same parish. On this writ he was taken by Richard Browne, a bailiff, to the common gaol at Horsham where he was detained until the 22nd day of the first month 1685/6 when he was discharged by the Declaration of Liberty by King James the Second. A further warrant for a sum of twenty pounds, for not going to church, was taken out against him. The Sheriff was empowered to secure costs of 140 pounds but the process was not executed.
Friends were not strangers to Horsham Gaol. For a while they paid the gaoler a small sum to keep a room there for them and to provide it with fresh straw until the justices heard of the practice and brought it to an end, sending Richard Luckins, the gaoler, to the House of Correction in Lewes for three weeks. The Crime that was layd to his Charg beeing only that he had given more Liberty to the people Called Quakers (who were then in his keeping) than they were willing they should have had, a very Remarkable Cruelty.
Mary Akehurst was one of the last prisoners there. It is recorded above that John Eresby's accusation against her son Thomas was proved false and Eresby was indicted for perjury. Friends assumed that it it was from motives of revenge that Eresby sued her for tithes and excommunicated her for refusing to pay. On Sunday morning, 10th July 1687, although poor and weak, she was taken on horseback to Horsham Gaol, one of the bailiffs drunk with many oaths threatening that if she could not hold on he would have her dragged at the horse‘s tail. Eventually they got her to the gaol where she remained a close prisoner for 7 months and was afterwards committed to the Kings Bench prison in London.
The Kings Bench prison was for debtors. It is not surprising that Friends who had been fined and had the tools of their trade taken from them should find themselves unable to pay their creditors, but it is surprising that they counted it a kindness when one of these creditors sued them. The debtor‘s prison was a much more comfortable place than Horsham Gaol!
Soon afterwards in 1689 the Act of Toleration released Friends from the obligation of attending church and taking the sacraments. This ended the worst of the persecution, but they were still liable for the payment of tithes and suffered much financial loss during the next two centuries.
One remaining source of friction with the community was the refusal of Friends to celebrate religious festivals. On the 25th day of the 10th month [of the old calendar] 1689, called Christmas, the shop window of Richard Stephens being open a at other times, came James Browne, a tinker, with a rabble of other loose persons, pretending orders from the Constables of the town, William Read and James Bridger, and beat and broke down his windows, broke an iron wire grate and spoiled much of his goods; whereuopn he went and made complaint to Henry Pelham (Justice, so called), who told him that he might have kept his shop shut.‘
Richard Stephens was also much abused by the rabble in the street the third and fourth day of the month, called the 'fast days', by throwing down his windows and damaging his goods. Many other Friends suffered in the same way. On the 14th day of the 12th month 1688 the thanksgiving day for the Prince of Orange, Benjamin Moseley‘s shop windows were open and his goods set out as usual, although he was not at home. Walter Rowe the younger and one Kennard and many more of the rabble came with them and they threw his goods in the street and dirt and broke his iron grate and threw down his windows and nailed some of them up.
Friends were also penalised for their refusal to enlist or pay for the militia. The 11th day of the 5th month 1690 Major Monk came with his troop of soldiers assisted by William Read and James Bridger, constables, and Robert Collgeat, headborough, to search the house of Ambrose Galloway for arms, and finding none they demanded and seized his horse which was at pasture close by. The Major ordered his soldiers to take him to the Star Inn [now the town hall] taking from him a new boot (the fellow of it not being at home) and a fowling piece which they carried to the Turk's Head [on the corner of Albion Street and School Hill] where the Deputy Lieutenants at that time were sitting. Ambrose Galloway appeared before them demanding his goods. After many disputes and words used to entangle him about the lawfulness of the government and the rights of King James and King William, Ambrose, alleging them to be matters which did not concern him,nobody accused him of anything relating thereto, nor had found any cause of suspicion of his disturbing the government. After about 3 hours he had his goods returned.
He had refused to pay about seven shillings, a part of a musket [the cost of maintaining a soldier] charged on him by Captain Walter Dobell's company. The same day William Read and James Bridger, constables, and Robert Collgeat and John Walter, headboroughs, by warrant from the deputy Lieutenants took from him fourteen pewter plates, ten large pewter dishes, a pair of brass candlesticks, a pewter basin, six pewter porringers, a pewter still and other goods to the value in all of about five pounds. About two weeks later Robert Collgeat the headborough returned everything except the fourteen pewter plates which they had sold. Ambrose had no notice that he was charged with any part of a soldier until the night before, and no money had been demanded previously, but he was told that he must defend himself immediately.
Back to contents