A Discourse Between George Fox and Joseph Craddock

In a history of the Quakers and in particular George Fox mention is made of Joseph Craddock and his son Thomas as follows: He (George Fox)  was also a prisoner at Richmond Goal in the year 1678 and  was prosecuted by one Joseph Craddock, or his Emissaries, then Commissary at Richmond, under the Bishop of Chester, upon a writ of Excom. Capiendo for not paying the Steeple house Rate, their demand being ten pence. Thomas Craddock, Joseph's son, being a member of Parliament for the Town of Richmond, & one Wharton, of Gilling Wood Hall, the other Member for Richmond, & Knowing that the said Craddocks were bad, corrupt, persecuting men, the said Wharton moved the said Richard Robinson's Case in the parliament house, against Thomas Craddock as being a pastor, whereupon the said Craddock being ashamed, & Richard Robinson laying the matter close upon him by Letter, the said Craddock made way for Richard Robinson Release soon after, he having been a prisoner about three years. But their Mallice Ended not there, for in the year 1684, the said Richard Robinson was Commited to the said Richmond Goal again, being prosecuted by one Wm. Drummond, one of the prosecutors of the same Court of Richmond, upon the writ Qui Tam for soil p Month, where he continued a Strait prisoner for about other three years, and then Sett at Liberty, the prosecutors Loosing all their charges of prosecution.

(NOTE The following extracts are from Quaker sources and cast Fox and other Quakers in an excellent light - George Fox (1624-1691) was the founder of the Quakers.

In the meanwhile, Fox continued prisoner in 1665 in Scarborough Castle, where the access of his friends was denied him, though people of other persuasions were admitted.

Once came to him one doctor Cradock with three priests, accompanied with the governor and his wife, and many besides.

Cradock asked him, what he was in prison for? He answered, for obeying the command of Christ and the apostle in not swearing: but, if he, being both a doctor and a justice of peace, could convince him, that after Christ and the apostle had forbidden swearing, they commanded Christians to swear, then he would swear.

'Here's a bible,' continued he, 'show me any such command if thou canst.'

To this Cradock said, 'It is written, ye shall swear in truth and righteousness.'

'Aye,' said G. Fox, 'it was written so in Jeremiah's time, but that was many ages before Christ commanded not to swear at all: but where is it written so since Christ forbade all swearing? I could bring as many instances out of the Old Testament for swearing as thou, and it may be more too, but of what force are they to prove swearing lawful in the New Testament, since Christ and the apostles forbade it? Besides, where it is written, "Ye shall swear," was this said to the Gentiles or to the Jews?'

To this Cradock would not answer; but one of the priests said, it was to the Jews.

'Very well,' said G. Fox, 'but where did God ever give a command to the Gentiles to swear? For thou knowest that we are Gentiles by nature.'

'Indeed,' said Cradock, 'in the gospel-time everything was to be established out of the mouths of two or three witnesses, and there was to be no swearing then.'

'Why then,' returned G. Fox, 'dost thou force oaths upon Christians, contrary to thine own knowledge in the gospel-times? And why dost thou excommunicate my friends?'

Cradock answered, 'For not coming to church.'

'Why,' said G. Fox, 'ye left us above twenty years ago, when we were but young, to the Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists, many of whom made spoil of our goods, and persecuted us because we would not follow them: now we being but young, knew little then of your principles, and those that knew them should not have fled from us, but ye should have sent us your epistles or homilies; for Paul wrote epistles to the saints, though he was in prison; but we might have turned Turks or Jews for aught we had from you for instruction. And now ye have excommunicated us, that is, ye have put us out of your church, before ye have got us into it, and before ye have brought us to know your principles. Is not this madness in you to put us out, before we were brought in? But what dost thou call the church?' continued he. 'That which you,' replied Cradock, 'call the steeple-house.'

Then G. Fox asked him, 'Whether Christ's blood was shed for the steeple-house, and whether he purified and sanctified it with his blood?' 'And seeing,' thus continued he, 'the church is Christ's bride and wife, and that he is the head of the church, dost thou think the steeple-house is Christ's wife and bride; and that he is the head of that old house, or of his people ?'

'No,' said Cradock, 'Christ is the head of the people, and they are the church.' 'But,' replied G. Fox, 'ye have given that title to an old house which belongs to the people, and ye have taught people to believe so.'

He asked him also why he persecuted his friends for not paying tithes; and whether God did ever give a command to the Gentiles, that they should pay tithes; and whether Christ had not ended tithes, when he ended the Levitical priesthood that took tithes; and whether Christ when he had sent forth his disciples to preach, had not commanded them to preach freely, as he had given them freely; and whether all the ministers of Christ were not bound to observe this command of Christ.

Cradock said, he would not dispute that; and being unwilling to stay on this subject, he turned to another matter; but finding G. Fox never to be at a loss for answer, and that he could get no advantage on him, he at length went away with his company.

Also Craddock had arrested a Quaker by the name of Ralph Richardson whom he held prisoner at Richmond in the year 1664 and whom he prosecuted upon a writ of "Qui tarn" for £20 per month and where he continued a prisoner three years; and again in about the year 1678, he was prisoner at Richmond jail for about three years, for refusing to pay the steeple-house rate; they demanded 10 and proceeded against him upon a writ of "Excommunicatio capieudo" by Joseph Craddock or his emissaries, then commissary to the Bishop of Chester. Thomas Craddock, Joseph's son, being a member of parliament for the town of Richmond, and one Wharton of Gilling Woodhall, the other member for Richmond, knowing that the said Craddock was a bad, corrupt, persecuting man, the said Wharton moved the said Richard Robinson's саsе in the parliament house, against T. Craddock as being a persecutor, whereupon the said Craddock being ashamed, and Richard Robinson laying the matter close upon him by letter, the said Craddock made way for Richard Robinson's releasement soon after.