The mission was
not agreeable; Norton especially was reluctant, and with reason, for he
had been foremost in the Quaker persecutions, and was probably aware that
in the eye of English law the executions were homicide.
However, after long vacillation, "the Lord so encouraged and strengthened"
his heart that he ventured to sail. [Footnote: Feb. 11, 1661-2. Palfrey,
ii. 524.] So far as the crown was concerned apprehension was needless, for
Lord Clarendon was prime minister, whose policy toward New England was
throughout wise and moderate, and the agents were well received. Still
they were restless in London, and Sewel tells an anecdote which may partly
account for their impatience to be gone.
"Now the deputies of New England came to London, and endeavored to clear
themselves as much as possible, but especially priest Norton, who bowed no
less reverently before the archbishop, than before the king....
"They would fain have altogether excused themselves; and priest Norton
thought it sufficient to say that he did not assist in the bloody trial,
nor had advised to it. But John Copeland, whose ear was cut off at Boston,
charged the contrary upon him: and G. Fox, the elder, got occasion to
speak with them in the presence of some of his friends, and asked Simon
Broadstreet, one of the New England magistrates, 'whether he had not a
hand in putting to death those they nicknamed Quakers?' He not being able
to deny this confessed he had.
Pages:
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375