On William Penn's trial (Test Wiki page)

Central Question: What contributed to the not-guilty verdict in William Penn's trial, when most other trials of Quakers that are of the same facts (illegal gathering under the Conventicle Act) all resulted in a guilty verdict.

Structure: 1. Introduction 2. Background (How Quakers are being persecuted and why so) 3. Trials in comparison (Brief description of one typical trial of Quakers that result in imprisonment (I'm now trying to pick one from Horle's book), and Penn's trial) 4. Analysis

1. Crown's attitude (Charles II, need more reading) B. Judge's attitude (Didn't change much I guess) C. *Jury's attitude (Don't know where this is leading to yet, need to read more about William Penn) Some thoughts now: a. the gradual development of Quaker's legal response (that the Act should require proof of seditious intent, laid the theory foundation for jurors to give such verdict. b. difference of COA. Penn was not charged for unlawful meeting but unlawful assembly causing disturbance of the peace

5. Beyond the Trial I think it will be too shallow an analysis of the trial and not law-related enough if this paper just end up being an analysis of how charismatic William Penn is. I don't know where I'm going but I guess there should be something to be said about the role of the jury.

Candidate trials 1. Hertford summer assizes, presided by Orlando Bridgeman (Verdict, pg. 205 fn 16)2 2. Wagstaffe's Case (Rex v. Wagstaffe, 83 Eng. Rep. 1328)

Reference found

• Thomas Green, Verdict According to Conscience
• Thomas Green, Lights Hidden Under Bushel's Case
• Craig Horle, The Quakers and the English Legal System 1660-1688
• Vincent Buranelli, The King & The Quaker, A Study of William Penn and James II
• Mary Dunn * Richard Dunn, The Wolrd of William Penn
• A Complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes and misdemeanors : from the earliest period to the year 1783, with notes and other illustrations / Compiled by T.B. Howell item
• Kelyng, John, Sir, A report of divers cases in pleas of the crown, adjudged and determined in the reign of the late King Charles II.
• The Reports and Arguments of that learned Judge Sir John Vaughn

Other Reference on the list 1. Joseph Besse, A Collection of the Sufferings of...Quakers, from ... [1650 to 1689]. 2. Alexnder Scherr, The Genesis of Bushell's Case: John Vaughan and Legal Change

Potentially useful citations 1. Thomas Green, Verdict --"Restoration persecution of the Quakers began with the 1662 Quaker Act and reached its height in 1664, the year in which Parliament passed Conventicle Act, which made most nonconformist religious meetings unlawful."

--"The Act to prevent and suppress seditious conventicles was literally interpreted by the Stuart bench. The Act's preamble declared that Parliament sought to suppress seditious conventicles, but the body of the Act proscribed meetings, "under pretense or color of religion" without repeating the adjective "seditious". The bench concluded that the jury must convict if there was manifest proof that the defendant had taken part in what appeared to be such a meeting, unless the defendant showed either that the meeting was not under pretense of religion or that it was not nonconformist. Conviction did not require proof of seditious purposes. That, the bench ruled, was presumed by law. (pg. 204)

--Description of what Penn did. pg 222

2. State Trial (Original text of Penn's trial) --Court fails to state a specific law on which the indictment is based (WHY?)

--Court then stated one (after pulling Penn and Mead down to the dock), that "You have heard what the Indictmet is, It is for preaching to the people, and drawing a tumultuous company after them

-- DaihuiMeng - 04 Nov 2019