The civil power was at once brought into play. Williams was cited to appear, and the town of Salem was denied title to certain lands which it claimed as its own, until it should discard its teacher.[396] Williams then endeavored to have the Salem church separate from all the others, and the congregation addressed a sharp letter of reproof to the magistrates. The final triumph was, of course, on the side of the established authorities. Williams, after what seems to have been a fair trial, was ordered to be banished,[397] the decree being subsequently revised to take effect in the spring, provided Williams would refrain from attempting to spread his opinions, which, apparently, he was unable to do. The authorities, having heard that he was planning to lead a colony to Narragansett, and fearing that the “infection” would spread from there throughout the churches, undertook to ship him back to England; but he escaped in the middle of January, making his way through the snow-filled forests to the safe confines and hospitable savages of Rhode Island.[398] Footnote 396: _Ibid._, vol. I, p. 195. Footnote 397: _Massachusetts Records_, vol. I, p. 161. Footnote 398: J. Winthrop, _History_, vol. I, p. 209. His subsequent prominence as the founder of that state, and his written advocacy of the principle of toleration, have tended to overemphasize the contemporary importance of the proceedings just described.[399] The authorities had a fair basis for their action, on civil grounds alone; and although the religious aspect undoubtedly entered largely into the case, it marked, in that respect, no new departure in policy.[400] It merely showed somewhat more clearly, perhaps, that, in any case which threatened to weaken the established relations of church and state or to question the right of the latter to require the most rigid conformity to the doctrines and practices of the former, the magistrates and clergy could be counted upon to act rigorously together. Although personally popular, Williams had acquired few adherents who were willing to follow him beyond a certain point in his struggle, and the victory of the court created but a slight disturbance. The colony, however, in order to avoid even the possibility of strife, had lost what it could ill afford to spare—a mind of wider vision than its own. Footnote 399: Besides his works already referred to, his doctrine of religious liberty found expression in _The Bloody Tenent of Persecution_, 1644, and _The Bloody Tenent yet more Bloody_, 1652, reprinted as vols. III and IV of the _Narr. Club Pub._ Footnote 400: