Slingisby bethel, Esq HIS ENQUIRY AFTER WILLIAM BALY, The only WITNESS against him, upon the TRIAL of the RIOT, at GVILD-HALL, on the 8th of May, 1683.  
WHereas on Tuesday the 8th of May, 1683. At a Trial held at Guild-Hall London, Several persons were by a Jury found Guilty of a Riot, committed on the 24th of June, 1682. In not departing from the said Hall, upon the Lord Mayor his adjourning there by Proclamation, the Pole, which was then on Foot, for the choice of Sheriffs for London and Middlesex for the year ensuing.  
And Whereas Slingisby bethel of London, Esq is named in the Information as guilty of the said Riot, in not departing from Guild-Hall, after the Lord Mayor his said adjournment by Proclamation; And whereas upon the Oath of one, by the name of William Baly, that the said bethel did not departed according to the Proclamation, but stayed there after the same, he was found guilty by the said Jury. Now the said bethel, not only knowing himself not guilty, but being also able to prove the same, and by several credible Witnesses, that he was at the time of the Adjornement in another place, and from thence went home, without ever coming at Guild-Hall or the Yard that Evening, hath endeavoured by all manner of ways to find out the said William Baly who swore against him, but cannot learn from whence he came, nor whither he is gone; he the said bethel, doth therefore hereby Challenge the said William Baly to appear, and either to make good his Oath against him in the Face of the World, or confess his mistake, and clear him thereof; and in order thereunto, to leave word where he is to be found, either at the House called Garraways Coffeehouse in the Exchange-Ally, or at Kid's Coffeehouse, both near the Royal-Exchange; otherwise the said bethel will hope to be reckoned guiltless, and the said William Baly to have rashly sworn that which he was mistaken in, and cannot Justify.  
And now upon the whole, it may be observed, that there being at the aforesaid Adjournment (as is thought) at least One thousand persons in the Hall, whereof several Hundreds of them, may well be supposed to know the person of the said bethel, especially the Lord Mayor's Officers, and Servants, by his having been lately Sheriff of London and Middlesex: If he the said bethel had been really in the Hall or Yard, at, or after the said adjournment, there could not have wanted a Crowd of Witnesses to prove the same, instead of having the Proof thereof, to depend upon the Testimony of a Single person, that is not to be found.  
SLINGISBY bethel.   

LONDON: Printed, by J. Grantham, Anno. Dom. 1683.