AN EPISTLE TO FRIENDS.  
BRIEFLY Commemorating the Gracious Dealings of the Lord with them; and warning them to beware of that Spirit of Contention and Division Which hath appeared of late in George Keith.  
And some few others that join with him, who have made a Breach and Separation from FRIENDS in some Parts of AMERICA.  
By THOMAS ELLWOOD.  Now I beseech you, Brethren, mark them which cause Divisions and Offences, contrary to the Doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them, Rom. 16.17. 
London, Printed by T. soul at the Crooked-Billet in Hollywell-lane, Shoreditch, and near the Meeting-House in White-Hart-Court in Grace-Church-Street. 1694.   

AN EPISTLE TO FRIENDS, &c.  
Dear Friends,  
WHOM the Lord hath called with an holy Calling, and who, through faithfulness to the Heavenly Call, are become the Chosen of the Lord, it is in my Heart, in the openings of the Love of God, to sand these few Lines amongst you, as a Salutation of true and hearty Love unto you, and in the tendering sense of the Lord's unspeakable Goodnes● unto us, which at this time rests, with an affecting weight, upon my Spirit, briefly to commemorate the gracious Dealings of the Lord with us, since we have been his People.  
Great and manifold have been the Mercies of our God, unto us his People, in this his day; and his loving kindnesses are beyond expressing. When we were young and little, his Fatherly care was over us; he preserved us, and nourished us, and caused us to grow up before him. How did he carry his Lambs in his Bosom, when the Beasts of Prey roared on every side seeking to devour! Who can rehearse the many Deliverances he hath wrought for his People, in their passage from Spiritual Egypt! How hath he girded their Loins with strength, and covered their Heads in the day of battle! How hath he subdued their Enemies before them, and put to flight the Armies of Aliens! How hath he fed them with Bread from Heaven, and made them to suck Honey out of the Rock! Yea, he hath caused the Rock to give forth Water abundantly, and hath been to his People as a Brook in the way: So that, from a sensible Experience, we can say to his praise, Our Bread hath been sure, and our Water hath not failed, as we have singly relied on him. Oh! his goodness is unutterable, and his faithfulness hath never failed them that have trusted in him. When have we ever been in Prison for his sake, and he hath not visited and comforted us there? What Sufferings have any un●ergone on his account, and he hath not abun●antly recompensed the Loss? Nay, hath he not often stopped the Mouths of Lions, and reproved ●ulers for the sake of his People, saying, Touch ●ot mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm? In ●ll our Exercises he hath been with us, and he ●ath stood by us in our sorest trials; yea, he o caused his Angel to Encamp round about us, 〈◇〉 th●t no Weapon formed against us hath pro●ered, but every Tongue that hath risen up against us, the Lord hath given us power to con●●mn, blessed be his holy Name, and exalted ●●d magnified be his glorious Power for ever.  
These things, and much more than I can writ, I doubt not but ye, my dear Friends, are witnesses of, ye especially, my Elder Brethren, who were called early in the Morning of this day, and have stood faithful in your Testimony for God until now; who from your own both early and late Experiences can set your Seals to the Truth hereof. And unto you I do believe this brief Commemora●ion of the Goodness and loving Kindness of the Lord to his People will be pleasing and delightful, as I hope it may prove useful and profitable unto us all, in the stirring up of the pure Mind, and putting us in fresh remembrance of the Lord's manifold Favours towards us, a●d gracious Dealings with us; which should be as a renewed Engagement upon us to cleave fast unto the Lord, and in humility of Heart, to walk closely with him, both that we may, as far as in us lies, answer his great loving kindnesses to us-ward, and receive from him still da ly strength and ability to stand, and withstand the Assaults and Temptations of the Enemy, and escape his Snares, wherewith he is, at this time, as busy and industrious to betray, and draw aside from the simplicity of the Truth, as ever he was.  
For Friends, ye know we have a restless Adversary to watch against, and to War with; one that sometimes walks about, as a roaring Lion, seeking whom he m●● devour; and s●●●times creeps about, as a s●●●●el Serpent, seekin● whom he may betray; whom, in ●●ch ap●ea●●n●e, 〈◇〉 our Duty and interest to r●●●st, s●d ●●t i● 〈…〉 Faith which overcomes. I ●eed no● recou● 〈…〉 you, my Friends, the many Winds and Floods, Storms and Tempests, of open and cruel Persecutions, which this roaring Adversary hath often raised, and caused to beat upon us, to have driven us( if possible) from off our Foundation; ye cannot have forgotten it, nor that noble Arm of the Lord, which was made bare for our preservation, and by preserving us against the most furious shocks, gave evidence, even to the World, that we are that People whose House is founded, and built upon the immovable Rock, Christ Jesus. At this sort of Fighting the Enemy has been foiled; which has made him shift his Hand, and like a cunning Hunter spread his Nets, set his Snares, lay his Baits, to catch the simplo and unwary ones. Thus wrought this subtle Enemy in the early Times of Christianity, sometimes stirring up the Rulers, both Jews and Gentiles to fall, with violent and bloody Hands, upon the little Flock of Christ; and sometimes in the intermissions of those Storms, covering his Hooks with the taking Baits of Pleasure, Profit, Preferment, catched some,( perhaps of those that had withstood the strongest Storm of outward Persecution) and made them Instruments for himself to work by, to betray others. Such was Dio●●e●hes of old, whose aspiring Mind, loving and seeking Pre-eminence, laboured to make a Schism in the Church, prating against even the Elders thereof with malicious words, &c. John 3. What mischief the wicked One hath wrought in our day, by such Ambitious Spirits, I need not recount, nor is it pleasing to me to remember, ye know it, to your grief, as well as I. But this in all such cases is observable, that such as have made Disturbances in the Church, and have run into Divisions and Separations from Friends, have f●amed to themselves some specious pretence or other, as the inducement to their undertaking, which they have industriously spread abroad, a●d varnished over with the fairest Colours they could, to 'allure and draw others to join with them. Thus they who some Years ago, after long and hot Contention, went out from Friends, and set up, in divers parts of this Nation, separate Meetings for themselves, in opposition to the Meetings of Friends,  told their deluded Followers, that Friends were departed from the Power of God, and were sitting down in a Form without it; and that They stood for the Power against Formality: Whereas indeed, under pretence of standing for the Power, they opposed the Power, and the Work thereof, rejecting that Discipline which the Power had brought forth, and lead Friends into, as a suitable help and means to keep all that profess Truth, in a due subjection to the Power. This they whose Eye was kept single to the Lord saw all along: And this some of them who were taken with that painted Bait, and thereby betrayed into the Enemies Snare, since the Lord, in tender Mercy, hath opened again that Eye in them which the Enemy had darkened, and brought them, through judgement,( the only right way of returning) to the true Fold again, have also seen, and with sorrow acknowledged. And blessed be the Name of the Lord, his Compassion hath reached to many of them, and some he hath even plucked as Brands, out of that Fire of Contention, wherein they that wilfully and obstinately remain without Repentance, will assuredly be consumed. O that all would take warning in time!  
But, alas! my Friends, so great is the Malice and Craft of the E●il One, who always envies the Prosperity and Peace of Sion, that seeing his former Design against the Discipline of the Church discovered, and defeated, and the best of them whom he had drawn th●reinto, and engaged therein, recovered from him, he hath formed a new design, to raise another Division, and make a fresh Breach amongst the People of God. Which although begun in another part of the World, AMERICA; yet in as much as George Ke●th, who is the Principal Agent in it, hath sometime ago written several Books, and Papers, which being Printed have been sent over, and spread through this Nation, and other parts of Europe, to give the World an Account thereof; and is also since come over himself, to maintain and carry on the Work he hath begun: I find my Spirit the more engaged to warn all Friends every where to be watchful, and wary how they lend an Ear to that Spirit( whatever the Instruments may have been, in which it now works) that would sow dissension amongst Brethren, and labours to make Divisions, Rents and Breaches in the Church of Christ. Ah Friends, this is the work of the old Enemy, the Troubler of Israel, the Distu●ber of the Churches Peace in all Ages. And although he hath now entred into, and appears and works in and by other Instruments and Agents, and hath set up another pretence for his work; yet it is the same Spirit which hath given so great Trouble and Disturbance to the Church of God, in this Nation, for divers Years past, and the old Separatist's Flock to it, and after it. They have been great Promoters and Spreaders of G. K's Books, even before he himself came over. One of the Chief of them, in the County of Bucks, hath taken no small pains, nor spared charge, to fill the Country with them; so acceptable is the work of Co●tention and Division to them. And indeed, this Dish of Discord of G. K's Dressing, hath made a Feast for them, as well as for the most envious Professors, and the profane. Yet( as I hinted before) the pretence for this is quiter different from that, which they set up for their Separation. Theirs related to Discipline, This to Doctrine: They alleged that Friends were gone too much from the Inward to the Outward; This that Friends were gone too much from the Outward to the Inward. For G. K's complaint and charge is, That Friends do not Preach the outward Appearance and Manifestation of Christ in the Flesh enough, or oft enough. And so vain he is to think, and say, That God hath raised him up for that service. But, my dear Friends, as ye well know this Charge of his to be false, and that the Testimony of Truth hath always been acknowledged and born by Friends from the beginning, as occasion has offered, to the Outward Manifestation and Appearance of Christ, as well as to the Inward: So we may well and reasonably conclude, that if God had raised him up for, or employed him in any such servi●e as he pretends to, he would have been endowed with Patience and Christian Meekness suitable for such a work, and not have run on in such an impetuous height of Mind, as he has done, to break the sacred Bond of Union, disjoint himself from Friends by open Separation, and publish to the World whatsoever he thought might tend to the defamation of those Friends, against whom he had taken offence, thereby giving occasion to the Adversaries of Truth to despise it, and reproach its Followers. But alas, alas! it is too evident that he hath set himself, in an exalted Spirit of Pride and Self-conceit, above and against not only the Friends in America, but the Body of Friends in this Nation. For at the Yearly Meeting, lately holden in London, where most of the Ancient ministering Friends were present, and many other weighty Friends from the several Counties of England( who were chosen by the Friends of their respective Counties to attend the service of that Meeting) the differences in America being taken into consideration, and several Days spent about them; after a full hearing of what G. K. had to offer in his own defence, the sense and advice of that Meeting was( particularly with respect to the Separation in America, and to G. K's printed Books, about the differences) that the Separation lay at his Door, and that he ought sincerely to use his utmost Endeavours and Interest with his Friends concerned, to remove it, &c. And that the exposing the differences in Print to the World, to the view of our Enemies, both in America and Europe, hath been of great disservice to the Truth, and given great occasion of Offence and Stumbling to many, and of great Sorrow and Grief to us, and many Faithful Friends, opening the Mouths o our Adversaries, Professors and others, to reproach the Truth and Friends thereof: And it wao the clear and general sense of that Meeting, that G. K. and the rest concerned with him, were not acted in God's Wisdom and Counsel therein, &c. And therefore it was the tend●r Advice and Counsel of that Meeting, that G. K. should either Call in his Books, or at least publish something innocently, and effectually to clear the Body of the People called Quakers, and their Ministers, from those gross Errors charged on some few in America; and retract the bitter Language in them, &c.  
How frowardly he received this Soft and easy judgement, delivered in the most gentle terms, such of you, my Friends, as were then present, will not, I suppose, soon forget. How far he hath since been from following the advice therein given him, Nay how greatly he, and his companions have abused both it, and the Yearly Meeting from which it came, their late works manifest. For soon after that Meeting was over, a Copy of the Proceedings thereof( which was delivered to him in Manuscript) was Printed, with a most Scandalous Preface before it, and certain Queries behind it, both subscribed by one Robert Hannay( who came out of America with him. How far G. K. had an hand, or was concerned, in the writing of that Book, I will not here say. But I may say the matter of the Queries in that Book, is so much the same with the matter of the other Book, published soon after with G. K's name to it, and the style thereof so agreeable to his style, in that and his other writings, that whoever shall take him for the Author of it, will, I think, be very excusable, though he should prove in part mistaken. But be it as it will; I will not insist on what I have heard, of G. K's. laying the manscript on his Cupboard, and anothers taking it thence, while his back was turned( which looks but like a Cupboard-Shift:) But in as much as they are both of a Party, and R. Hannay is at G. K's. right hand in his work of contention and division, and G. K.( though often put upon it) hath not publicly disowned that Pamphlet which R. Hannay's name is to, I do not think I shall wrong G. K.( as indeed I would not) in supposing him to have at least a share therein; and in applying it accordingly. The Preface to that Pamphlet tells the Reader, In the following Account, thou mayst find a Party of them, of the Yearly Meeting at London, are proved guilty of endeavouring to cloak, and cover the Antichristian Errors, and persecuting practices of their Appostate Brethren in Pensilvania, &c. And the Proceedings of the Yearly Meeting are there called partial, and their judgement false; which is also repeated, in very unseemly terms, in the Queries. By this Friends, ye may clearly see, that it is not only some few Friends, in America, that G. K. and and his Abettors Strike at, but the Body of Friends here; and that, as they have made a Division and Breach amongst Friends there, so they design and endeavour to do the like here, representing the Yearly Meeting, to the World, as divided, and calling the sense and advice thereof, the judgement of a Party, or Faction, of the Yearly Meeting, which in their Queries is often repeated. I need not spend time to refute this falsehood, there being so many Witnessess present at that Meeting, who can testify the good Agreement thereof, and G. K. himself knows that when the sense and Advice of the Meeting was, in the Meeting openly red and delivered in writing to him, there was not any one Member of the Meeting that Objected against it, or expressed any dissent from it; but on the contrary, some who had shewed the most of tenderness towards him, did declare their Satisfaction therein, and warned him not to kick against it,( as he hath done) but to Receive it as the council of God to him. But Friends, that which is chiefly in my mind at this time, with relation to this matter, is, to manifest unto you the falseness of that Spirit, by which these men are lead and acted, and that the design thereof is to break, divide and scatter the Flock of God, and render us a Reproach and Derision to the World; that ye being sensible thereof, and seeing the Insincerity of these men in their work, may be armed against their Mischievous Attempts, and preserved out of the Snares, which the Wicked one hath made, and is still making use of them to lay.  
Quickly after the Publication of the fore-mentioned Paper, signed by R. Hannay, another Book came forth in Print, with George Keith's name to it, called the causeless Ground of surmises &c. removed. In the introduction to which( next after the Title) he hath these words, viz. I tenderly entreat and desire that none apply or construe any words containing in these following lines, as intended by me in way of Reflection, Blame or Charge, against either the Body of Friends in general, or any particular Meeting, or Meetings of Friends in particular, or against any singular, faithful Friend or Friends whatsoever, &c. Though this relates more immediately to that Book which G, K's name is to, yet compare this with what I recited before out of the other Book, published under Hannay's name, and how plainly doth it show double-dealing, and want of Sincerity in him, or them, that wrote them! Under his Friend Hannay's name we are  told, the judgement given by the Yearly Meeting at London, was the judgement of a Party or Faction; that their Proceedings were Partial, and their judgement False; that they are therein proved guilty of endeavouring to cloak and cover the Anticristian Errors, and persecuting practices of their Apostate Brethren in Pensilvania, &c. In his other Book( which his one name is to) he tenderly entreats and desires that none may apply, or construe any words contained therein, as intended by him in way of Reflection, Blame or Charge, against either the Body of Friends in general, or any praticular Meeting, or Meetings of Friends in particular, or against any singular, faithful Friend or Friends whatsoever. Was it then no Reflection, Blame or Charge, against either the Body of Friends in general, or any particular Meeting, to charge the Yearly Meeting at London, in that false, foul and base manner, as is before recited out of that Book, which was published with Hannay's name to it! What greater Charge, what fouler Reflection, can be made against a Body of People in general, or a particular Meeting, than is contained in that scurrilous Pamphlet against the Yearly Meeting! It is not unlikely that he will here endeavour to acquit himself from the imputation of Insincerity, by casting that Pamphlet upon his Friend Hannay,( whose name is to it) and alleging that the Caution given in the other Book( to which his own name is set) is restrained to what is contained in that Book. But considering the manner of that Pamphlets, coming forth, the matter and style thereof, and his refusing to to disown it, I shall leave it( my Friends) to to your inpartial judgement, whether the Reflections contained in that Pamphlet against the Yearly Meeting are not justly to be charged upon him; and if so, whether it could stand with sincerity and and plain dealing, to inveigh so bitterly against the Yearly Meeting in the one, and immediately after, to desire so demurely that none would apply, or construe any words contained in the other, as intended by him in way of Reflection, &c.  
But to manifest his insincerity more directly and fully, I shall offer you some Passages out of that Book itself, to which he hath set his name, in which I Question whether there be many free from Reflection against the Yearly Meeting. In p. 4. and 5. he says, It was therfore a great surprisal to us, to find some so to misconstrue our real and sincere intention, and so greatly to misunderstand us, as to charge it upon us, that our late Printed Book, have tended to give great cccasion of offence, and stumbling to many, &c. Opening the mouths of our Adversaries, Professors and others, to reproach the Truth and Friends thereof.( These latter words are taken out of that Paper, which the Yearly Meeting drew up, and delivered to G. K. as their sense and advice in that matter; so that in this he must refer to the Yearly Meeting.) Then within four or five lines after, he adds, Is it not more apparent that to pass by in silence, without any censure or public Testimony, gross and vile Errors,— doth bring Reproach upon Truth and Friends thereof, and doth open the Mouth of Adversaries to reproach us, as being guilty of cloaking such gross Errors amongst us. That this Charge of passing by in silence, without any censure or public Testimony, gross and vile Errors, and clo●king them( as his common phrase is) is intended by George Keith against the Yearly Meeting, is plain by what he says in p. 14. where speaking of the Yearly Meeting, he says, In order to make up the Breach in America, and to prevent any hurt here, THEY ought to pass an Express, Censure, and judgement upon all and every one of these gross and vile Errors, that I have proved divers of them guilty of in Pensilvania, &c. Now is not this a Reflection, and a very foul one too, upon the Yearly Meeting, to insinuate that they pass by in silence, covered and cloaked, gross and vile Errors, without any Censure or public Testimony. And is it not then great hypocrisy in G. K. to say in his Introduction to the same Book, I tenderly entreat and desire, that none apply, or construe any words contained in these following Lines, as intended by me in way of Reflection, Blame or Charge, against either the Body of Friends in general, or any particular Meeting, or Meetings of Friends in particular, & c?  
Again, in p. 6. he says, It had been but reasonable and convenient for such as have so positively blamed me, and them concerned with me, both for the Printing and Separation, to have answered our Reasons, &c. and also to have given us plain Reasons and Proof from Scripture whereby to convince us of sin, and that we were not acted in God's Wisdom and Counsel therein( the very words in the Yearly Meeting's Paper to him.) And a few Lines after, They must convince us by stronger and better Arguments, than to say, It is their clear and general sense,( which are the express words of the Yearly Meeting Paper to him also.) And going on, in p. 7. with the same matter, he compares the Meetings, saying, That he, and the rest therein concerned with him, were not acted in God's Wisdom and Counsel, in their Printing and Separating, to the Papists, saying the like of the Protestants, viz. That their Printing against, and Separating from the Church of Rome, and one another, is not of God, nor is acted in the Wisdom and Counsel of God. Is not this Reflection, Blame, and Charge in every part of it? And is it not then great Deceit in G. K. so smoothly to bespeak his Reader in the entrance into the same Book, in these words, I tenderly entreat and desire that none apply, or construe any Words contained in these following Lines, as intended by me in way of Reflection, Blame or Charge, against either the Body of Friends in general, or any particular Meeting, or Meetings of Friends in particular, &c.  
Again, in p. 10. he says, And as concerning the Advice given me by some to retract the bitter or severe Language that I have given to some of my Opposers, in some of the late Printed Books, which Advice they gave with telling me, and many others, that I have confessed my human Imperfections and Passions:( This relates to the Yearly Meeting's Paper of Advice, given to him.) To this( says he) I answer, some who have so advised me, should give me their good Example, by retracting their much more bitter Language, and more hard and severe Names they have given to some who have differed from them in less matters. And p. 11. As to my confessing my human Imperfections, it is not well so to glory over me, &c. while they are silent wholly of some of their own far greater Imperfections and Passionate Behaviour used towards me. And again, I judge it more Christian, and a greater Argument of a Man's growth towards Perfection, to aclowledge his sinful Infirmities in the sight of God or Men, and to be humbled under the sense of them, than like the proud Pharisee to justify ones self, when he may be, and is really guilty of greater Evils. Is not here Reflection upon Reflection, and Charge upon Charge? Judge then, my Friends, what Conscience this Man must have, who in the same Book could say, I tenderly entreat and desire that none apply, or construe any words contained in these following Lines, as intended by me in way of Reflection, Blame, or Charge against either the Body of Friends in general, or any particular Meeting, or Meetings of Friends in particular, or against any singular, faithful Friend or Friends whatsoever.  
I think the Instances I have produced out of his own Book( that I mean which has his Name to it, for I take the other to be his too, though Hannay's Name be to it) are sufficient to prove the points for which I brought them, namely, that G. Keith hath not only run into Opposition to the Friends in America, but also runs against and opposes the Body of Friends here, rejects and sleights the sense and advice of the late Yearly Meeting at London,( which I hope I may with as good ground say, was the only Representative of the Church here at that time, as he doth, p. 5. That the Monthly Meeting at Philadelphia, in the 12 Month 91.( though denied by the Quarterly Meeting there to be an orderly and rightly constituted Meeting at all) was the only Representative of the Church in that place at that time.) And that he is deeply guilty of Insincerity and Double-dealing.  
Now that it may also appear, that he is the principal Person that hath begun, and carried on the work of Contention and Division in America, and that the sense of the Yearly Meeting, with respect both to his late printed Books, and to the Separation, is just, and rightly grounded, I shall offer to your consideration such Observations, relating thereunto, as I have made out of his own, and his Parties Books. First, I observe that one Cause or Occasion, which G. K. assigns for the Difference between him, and Friends in America, is, that one W. Stockdale having taken some Exception at his manner of Preaching, and he complaining thereof to a Yearly Meeting of ministering Friends in Philadelphia, they were not so expeditious in giving their judgement therein, as he expected. For he says( in his Book called, The Plea of the Innocent, &c. p. 3.) no less than six several Meetings were had about this matter, in that time of the Yearly Meeting. For which delay( though occasioned by his own unruliness, in refusing to withdraw, at the Meetings desire, that the Meeting might consider of his Charge and Proof; which refusal of his to go forth, himself acknowledges, and attempts to vindicate, in his Book called, Some Reasons and Causes of the late Separation, p. 14.) he upbraids the Meeting most shamefully thus, Is it not matter of astonishment, that such an easy Question being proposed to so many Men called Ministers of Christ, all highly pretending to the Spirit's immediate Teachings and Leadings, and to be in a degree of Christianity above all other Professions in Christendom ( there being assembled of these called Ministers out of these three Provinces, about Forty, or Fifty, if not more) six Meetings could not determine it, viz. Whether to preach Faith in Christ within us, and Faith in Christ without us, was to preach two Christs, or one? What could any open Opposer, or the greatest Despiser of the Spirit's Teachings, have reflected more scornfully! So again he says, It will be matter of admiration to all impartial Persons that hear it, who have the least true knowledge in the Mystery of Christ, this great and solemn Assembly of so many high Pretenders to be Ministers of Christ, were at a great stand and demur to determine, and in the conclusion of the sixth Meeting gave but a very slender and partial determination and judgement concerning it. A determination it seems then( by his own acknowledgement) was given in the sixth of those Meetings; though he said before, Six Meetings could not determine it, which had another said, he would have been ready to have called it a Contradiction. And if, as he says, the Determination was partial, surely it leaned to his part; for it was given against W. Stockdale, and in favour of him; as appears by that little of it which he recites in his said Book called, The Plea, &c. p. 22. where he says, They give their judgement, that W. S. is reprovable and blame-worthy for uttering the said Words, viz. That G. K's preaching Christ within and Christ without, was preaching two Christs) they being an offence to many sound and tender Friends, and that he condemn the same. And in his other Book called, Reasons of the Separation, p. 11. some other parts of that Meetings judgement, in that case, being recited, it is said, they did deliver it as their Sense and judgement, That the said W— had abused G. K. thereby, and that G. K's Doctrine was right and true in preaching Faith in Christ within, and Faith in Christ without. Much to the same purpose he repeats in p. 14. of the same Book, saying, At the last of six Meetings it was declared, That G. K's Doctrine concerning Christ within and Christ without to be one Lord Jesus Christ, was true, and that therefore W— was blame-worthy. So that by these pieces of that judgement, which I have gathered out of those two Books of his, it appears that that Yearly Meeting did receive G. K's Complaint against W. Stockdale, did hear and examine the matter, and in the same Meeting did proceed to give judgement against W. Stockdale, as having abused G. K. and did order him to condemn the same. And they restend not there; but to remove all occasion of doubt or offence from G. K's Mind, they did, it seems, at the same time justify and assert the Doctrine which G. K. had preached, declaring the Doctrine, That Christ within and Christ without is one Lord Jesus Christ to be true and right Doctrine. By which also it doth appear, that that Meeting of ministering Friends were not( as G. K. abusively represents them) at a stand and demure to determine whether the Doctrine was true or false: But if they were at a stand at all, it was to determine whether the Charge exhibited by G. K. against W. S. was true or false; W. S. then( and to his dying day) denying that he spake those words, which G. K. charged him with. Now Friends, what ground G. K. could have from hence to Unchristian that Meeting, writ and print against those Friends, as Heathens, and charge them with covering and cloaking gross and vile Errors, tolerating damnable Heresies and Doctrines of Devils, as he has done, I leave to you to consider; and how little regard he hath therein had to the Honour of God, and the Peace of the Church.  
Nor had he more reason to run against and revile( as he has done) the Monthly Meeting at Philadelphia, for not condemning T. Fi●zwater, for charging him with denying the sufficiency of the Light without something else( which he assigns for another Cause of his Quarrel) since it appears by the Act( as he calls it) of that Monthly Meeting( as he has printed it in his Book called, The Plea of the Innocent, p. 10.) That four credible Evidences gave Testimony, that they heard him( G. K.) say, He did not believe the L●●ht was sufficient, without something else. So that it seems, T. F. sufficiently proved the words he charged G. K. with speaking, and G. K's explaining afterwards, what he mean'd by that something else, could be no just ground for that Meeting to have condemned T. F. as if he had falsely accused G. K. of speaking words he had not spoken.  
Then as to the Separation in America, which he would fain cast off from himself, I shall also show, from his own Books and Papers, that He, and They that are joined with him, are in it, and began it. In his late printed Book called. The causeless Ground of Surmises, &c. removed, p. 6. he says, For the first separate Meeting at Philadelphia, we began it not, but they of the other side, as I have made to appear before many Witnesses. If in this he refers to what he said, on that subject, in our Yearly Meeting at London, I deny it, and affirm, that the contrary was made appear in and to that Meeting; for which I refer to the Friends then present. I remember indeed, he alleged in that Meeting, that at a Monthly Meeting in Philadelphia, T. Lloyd went away, and took away a Skirt, or Wing( as he called it) of the meeting with him; and that that meeting afterwards adjourning itself to another time and place, was denied by the Quarterly Meeting to be a right Monthly Meeting; and this we would have taken for for the beginning of the Separation. But this was easily refuted from his own Book called, Some Reasons, &c. of the Separation, in p. 8. of which, he assigns this for the first Cause of the Separation. And he was then  told, that if this Act of T. L's was the Cause of the Separation, then it could not be the Separation itself: But the Separation must come after this, as the Effect follows the Cause. Nay in p. 15. of the same Book, he assigns another Act, which fell out some time after this( and of which more anon) as a second Cause of the Separation; which plainly shows the Separation was not then begun, and consequently that Act of T. lloyds going from the Monthly Meeting( supposing it true in fact) was not an Act of Separation, and therefore the Separation not begun by that. And indeed, whoever shall considerately red the Account G. K. himself hath given of that Monthly Meeting at Philadelphia, in his Book before-cited, may easily see that this Allegation of T. L's going away, and drawing off a Skirt or Wing of the Meeting, is but a late invented pretence, since that other Book called, Some Reasons and Causes of the late Separation, was written. For in that, though he gives a particular Account of that Meeting, yet he mentions nothing of T. L's going off and drawing a Skirt of the Meeting with him. But, having mentioned a Controversial Debate that was in that Meeting between T. Fitzwater and himself, he says, After much discourse about these matters, the Meeting did adjourn with unanimous consent of them that stayed, which( he says) was the far greatest part, and these who went away before the adjourn●ng of it said nothing against it, nor was the Meeting understood to be broken up before the Adjournment, only some few did go away, it being could weather, and growing dark. What appearance is here of any breach made by them that went away, or that they went away in disunion, or discontent? But rather that the weather being could, and the Meeting having sat till Night came on, did rise and break up in course; and that after some were gone away, others that remained took upon them to adjourn the Meeting to another time and place. And if so, it is no wonder, that they who were gone before the adjourning of it, said nothing against it: For how should they say any thing against that they knew not! But it is observable, G. K. doth not say, the Meeting was not broken up before the Adjournment; but that it was not understood to be broken up before the Adjournment. But surely, if T. L. had gone away in the Meeting time, and had drawn off a Skirt or Wing( as he calls it) of the Meeting; and this had been done in an abrupt disorderly manner, and in way of Breach, it may well be supposed that the rest that remained at the Monthly Meeting, and as such adjourned themselves to another time and place, would have taken notice of this as a great disorder, and have called them to an Account for it, which yet we find no mention of in the Account he gives of their adjourned Meeting, though he particularizes the several Judgments given in it. But on the contrary, at the next Quarterly Meeting, the Friends disowned the Acts of that adjourned Meeting, on that very score, of its being unduly appointed after the Monthly Meeting was ended and risen. And as that adjourned Meeting's not calling those Friends to an Account, who he says went off from the Monthly Meeting, is an Argument that they went not off in a disorderly manner, before the Meeting was ended; especially since it appears by him, that the clerk of the Meeting was one of them that was gone before the Adjournment, and took the Meeting's Book with him: So the departure of the clerk, with the Book, unblamed, is an evidence that the Meeting was ended before they went, and consequently that the Adjournment was irregular, and without Authority. From all which Premises the Conclusion will be, that that which G. K. calls T. lloyds departing, and taking with him a Skirt or Wing of the Meeting was no Act of Separation, nor had any tendency thereunto. Besides, it is not so much as alleged by G. K. that T. L. and they that went with him, went to any other place to meet apart from them: And certain it is he and those other Friends continued to keep their Monthly Meeting afterwards in its former regular course. And if at the Quarterly Meeting the Friends refused to own or recognise the Acts of that adjourned Meeting, as G. K. complains; yet as their so refusing was no Act of Separation in those Friends, so neither was it a just ground or provocation to the others to separate: For the not owning the Acts of that Adjourned Meeting was not a disowning of them to be Friends, though it was a disowning of them to be a rightly Constituted and authorised Monthly Meeting; which they might not be, and yet might have a place among Friends. And therefore G. K's way of Reasoning here is not Reasonable, nor will hold: For he says,( p. 9. of some Reasons of the Separation) there is no equity or reason why they having denied us to be a Meeting, that we should own them, &c. I say yes, there is equity and reason why these should own them to be Friends, notwithstanding their denying these to be a Meeting, seeing they did not deny these to be Friends: For the question then, and upon that Act, was not whether these were Friends, or no; but whether these were a rightly constituted Monthly Meeting, or no. His saying we were really a Meeting, lawfully Adjourned, neither makes, nor proves them so. And truly the time, manner and circumstances, of that Adjournment considered; it seems to me that this was an Irregular Meeting, Surreptitiously obtained, to serve a private end, and the rather for that I observe, when he sets forth( to grace it) the Number of them that met upon that Adjournment, consisting of( he says) at least Sixty Persons, he adds( which as much disgraces it) most of which used to keep monthly Meetings. So that Nine and twenty of those Sixty might be raw or loose Persons, brought in to do a job, or serve a turn: And that they were so, I am the more induced to think, from his giving the Names of some of them, but not of them all, Reason of Separation p. 19.  
A Second Cause which G. K. assigns for the Separation( hinted before) and by which he would cast it off from himself upon Friends, is the removing of a Meeting from one place to another without his, and some others Consent. Of this he complains in p. 15. of the Reasons and Causes of the Separation thus, That whereas in the Monthly Meeting in the first Month last( but no Year set, either when that was, or when his Book was Printed, as there is scarce to any of his late Printed things, which renders him and his work more Obscure) a Proposition being made to change the Meetings, both at the Centre and in the Town, and some being for the said Change, and others against it, and having good reasons why they were against the said Change, yet a Party in the Meeting, contrary to our declared mind and assent, assumed a power over them that dissented, to change the said Meetings; a thing we have not known formerly allowed by Friends any where in their monthly Meetings, that one Party( suppose equal or greater in Number than the rest) should assume a power to appoint or change places and times of Meetings, without the consent of their Brethren. For things of that Nature especially, use always to be done with unanimous consent, and not by plurality of votes, which is not the way of Truth; And because we were not free to stand to the arbitrary and rash Determination, as to that change, therefore we met at the ordinary Meeting place, as formerly practised, and they began the Separation, in keeping a public Meeting in the After-Noon at the Bank, contrary to our declared sense and mind, only some of us, met at a private Family Meeting in the Evening, at the House of G. K. that could be counted no Separate Meeting for that day.  
Instating this matter, G. K. hath used a Fallacy which by some is called, A concealing of the Truth, which he hath done to that Degree, that I do not think the most piercing apprehension can make a right judgement upon it, without further information. Therefore, Friends, that ye may have a Right understanding of the matter, I shall give you as plain an Account thereof as I can, according as I observed it was opened to us in the Yearly Meeting, and as I collect it from his own Books. The Friends at Philadelphia have two Meeting-Houses, one at a place called the Bank or Front; the other, about a Mile from that, at a place called the Centre. In the Summer time, the Days being long and the ways and Weather good, they used to meet at each of these places ever First-Day of the Week, viz. At the Centre in the Fore-noon, and at the Bank in the Afternoon. But in the Winter, when Days were short, and the ways and Weather foul and bad, they used to with-draw the Meeting from the Centre to the Bank; and so met not at all at the Centre in the Winter time, but at the Bank only: And of this Change of place, they used to give public Notice both Spring and Fall. This, which was the most Material part of the Account, he has concealed( for what reason ye may guess) and says, a Proposition was made to change the Meetings; as if it had been a New Proposition, never known or heard of before, when as indeed it was but a publishing, or giving notice of the removal of the Meeting from one House to the other, according to the ordinary and usual course, and that by a former settled Agreement, which had been held and observed for divers years, before there was any breach, or public difference among them. And ye may observe he says, the Proposition( as he calls it) for changing the Meetings was made in the First Month; a suitable time for the Meeting to return to the Centre again, the Winter being over. Now upon this publication of the Meetings return to the Centre,( where it used to be kept in the Forenoon during the Summer Season) he, I perceive, and some others were against it, and had good Reasons( he says) why they were against it. But as he has not given us those Reasons, that we might judge of their goodness: So the proceeding shows they were not good enough to prevail with the Monthly Meeting, to alter the settled Course of returning to meet at the Centre in the Summer, but they did remove the Meeting thither, and held it there in the Forenoons, while the Summer lasted, and at the approach of Winter, came back to the Bank again, as they used to do in other Years, both before and since. So that here was not only no Separation made by the Friends in this removing of the Meeting, but not so much as any alteration or change from their usual course and method. I remember indeed( which I would here note) G. K. did object, That the Meeting was removed that Year somewhat earlier, than it had been some other Years. But to that it was replied, by the Friends of Pensilvania then present, that there was no certain day prefixed and settled for the removing thereof; but it was either earlier or later in the Year, according as the Seasons of the Year proved, fair or foul for weather. G. K's saying, therefore, that They( meaning the Friends there whom he opposes) began the Separation in keeping a public Meeting in the Afternoon at the Bank, has neither truth nor force in it; since it is evident they used to keep a public Meeting in the Afternoon, during the Summer time, in other Years both before and after. Yet it plainly contradicts and overturns what he alleged before, in that which he assigned as the first Cause of Separation, namely, T. lloyds going out of the Monthly Meeting, and taking a Skirt or Wing of the Meeting away with him; and the Quarterly Meeting's refusing to Record the Acts of the Adjourned Meeting, or to own that for a right Monthly Meeting: For if( as he would have his Reader believe) that was the first cause of the Separation, and the Breach and Separation was then and thereby begun, then the removing of the Meeting afterwards could not be the beginning of it: And if the Friends that removed the Meeting, did thereby begin the Separation, then what was done before that time, at the Monthly and Quarterly Meetings, could not be the beginning of it. So that in this G. K. plainly interferes. But when he says that( upon the Meetings being removed) We( meaning himself and his Party) met at the ordinary Meeting-place, as formerly practised, he foully prevaricates; for he knows that was not the ordinary Meeting-place for those Times and Seasons wherein he and his met in it; and that it was not the former practise to meet there at those Times and Seasons. But the ordinary Meeting-place for those Times and Seasons was that to which the Meeting was then removed, according to former practise. And whereas he charges a Party in the Meeting( where he says, the Proposition was made for changing the Meetings) with assuming a power over them that dissented, to change the said Meeting, and complains of it as a thing we have not known formerly allowed by Friends any where in their Monthly Meetings, that one Party should assume a power to appoint or change Places and Times of Meetings without the Consent of their Brethren; in this he has drawn up his own Charge, and the Complaint turns upon himself. For that Meeting, which was removed, being, by former, both Agreement and practise, to be removed from that place to the other, he and his Party, in opposing that removal, assumed a Power over the Friends of the Meeting, to appoint that Place for the Meeting, without and against the consent of the Brethren, whereas the other was its right and proper place for that time. And therefore he, and they that were with him, continuing to meet there, when the Meeting in course was not, nor should be there, and doing this in Opposition to the Friends of the Meeting, he and they that joined with him therein, made and began the Separation. And indeed, in this he is the more to be blamed, that he should urge the removing of that Meeting as an instance, or proof, that the Friends began the Separation, when as he himself declared soon after to Tho. Wilson in Pensylvania,( asking him what End he thought the Friends had in removing that Meeting) that he believed they did it to force him to meet with them( as Tho. Wilson testified to his Face in the Yearly Meeting at London) by which it is evident, that G. K. himself was sensible the Friends had no intention or desire either ●o separate from him, or to have him separate from them. And this further shows his Insincerity. He makes a very lame Excuse for their meeting at a private Family-meeting in the Evening at his House, which, he says, could be counted no separate Meeting for that day. But as he gives no account by whose Appointment, or what Authority that Meeting was held; so he offers no reason why it could not be counted a separate Meeting. He is no more plain in what follows. He says, Afterwards, We finding they were resolved to continue in their way of Separation, and that some had endeavoured to Lock us out from meeting at the Bank in the Forenoon, this put us upon seeking a new place to meet in, in case we had been disappointed of the other. But how did they find the Friends were resolved to continue in their way of Separation( as he calls it?) If they would have found that, they should have stayed till the Season of the Year had come for the Meeting to return in course to the Bank again, and if the Friends had not then return'd, he might have had some pretence for his Suggestion: But he well knows they did return in their ordinary Course, and at the usual Season of the Year; and that he and his Party, who had kept up a separate Meeting there in their absence, did, before the Friends return'd, provide themselves another House to meet in, an absolute separate Meeting place,( usually called The Barbadoes-House) wherein he cannot pretend any Meeting of Friends was ever held before. It is a shame therefore he puts upon his Reader( and it is a shane for him to do it) in saying, They sought a new place to meet in, in case they had been disappointed of the other; since he knows, and it is evident that they were not disappointed of the other, and yet they left the Afternoons Meeting at the Bank, and met at the other place which they had provided, though the Meeting-house at the Bank was open, and Friends met therein, as they were wont to do in other Summers. This manifests, he and his Party had a design of Separation, in that they would neither go with the Meeting to the Centre in the Forenoon, nor stay with it at the Bank in the Afternoon; both which they should have done, if they would have observed the usual Course of the Meeting, according to former practise. This will yet further appear by G, K's following words, viz. And though some of us did declare our sincere intention and sense, that it were good but to have one public Meeting on First Days, to end about the second hour, and the remaining part to be used for private Meetings in Families, yet their keeping up their public Afternoons Meeting, hath given us just occasion at present to have a public Afternoons Meeting as well as they. Reas. of Separ. p. 16. By this it appears that G. K. and his Party would have assumed a Power to alter, chop, change, appoint, pull down, set up Meetings, as they pleased. They would have pulled down the public Afternoon Meeting, and laid it quiter aside, and have set up private Meetings in Families instead thereof: But the Friends would not part with their public Meeting so. This was a settled, established Meeting; the Friends did not then set up a new Meeting of their own Heads, but they kept up their old settled public Meeting, as before. And for their so doing, he charges them with beginning the Separation, saying, p. 15. They began the Separation in keeping a public Meeting in the Afternoon at the Bank, contrary to our declared sense and mind. Observe, he says in keeping, not in setting up, but in keeping up that Meeting which had been set up long before. This public Meeting which he blames the Friends for keeping, was the old constant settled Meeting, which he would have thrown down, and set up private Family-meetings instead of.( By which, Friends, ye may clearly see how unjust he is, in charging the Friends there with beginning the Separation.) And when he found the Friends would not let go their public Meeting, nor change it for his private Family-meeting, then he withdrew himself and his Party, and refused to meet with the Friends in their old public Afternoons Meeting; and in pursuance of his own project, for setting up private Family-meetings, he and they that joined with him, set up first a private Family-meeting in his own House,( some of us, says he, met at a private Family-meeting in the Evening, at the House of G. K.) but finding this would not do, but that the public Afternoons Meeting would bear this down, he then would have a public Afternoons Meeting too; yet would not meet with the Friends in their public Afternoons Meeting,( which was the old settled Meeting) but having provided another place to meet in in opposition to the Friends Meeting, he and his Party assume a Power to set up another public Afternoons Meeting too, in opposition to the Afternoons Meeting of Friends. Can any thing bear a more exact Character of Separation than this? Thus he who just before said, Some of us did declare our sincere intention and sense, that it were good but to have one public Meeting on First Days, forthwith sets up another, that he might have two like his Neighbours. If his sense was that it was good to have but one, why did he not keep to that sense? If his Intention of having but one was sincere, why did he depart from that Intention, and set up two? Do●h not this show that either his Intention and Sense were not sincere, or he was not sincere in departing from them? Nay, the Reason he gives for his setting up that public Afternoons Meeting, contrary to his declared Intention and Sense, plainly shows he was not sincere. It is this, For we hope they shall not have any cause to say against us, that we are short of them in our Zeal for good Meetings. See here the ground of their setting up their public Afternoons Meeting! Not a sincere, godly, conscientious ground, respecting the Honour of God, the propagation of Truth, the Edification and Benefit of the Church. But a political, popular, worldly ground, respecting his own Reputation and Honour, that he, and they with him, might not be thought less Zealous, than the Friends they had separated from; and that he might increase, at least keep, and strengthen his Party. We hope( says he) they shall not have any cause to say against us, that we are short of them in our Zeal for good Meetings. Doth he not use the word ( good) here to deceive and abuse his Reader? He declared his sense before that it was good to have but one public Meeting on First Days; then it was not good, in his sense, to have two; but rather than he will come behind, or be thought less Zealous than those whom he opposes, he will have two public Meetings a Day, as well as they, and call them both good too, though against his own before declared sense. Is there any thing like Sincerity in this? From whence sprung his Zeal for those good Meetings( as he calls them) but from imitation, or Envy and Strife? The Friends had two public Meetings during the Summer on the First Days, he thought it was good to have but one, and would have had them let one fall; they would not loose one of their Meetings; when he saw that, he set up another Meeting too, that he might have as many as they. See now the Root of his Zeal for good Meetings. But to return to the Separation.  
I think what is already said may satisfy any reasonable Person, that G. K. began, and is in the Separation. But to make it yet further appear, how unjust he is in charging the Separation upon Friends there, I shall instance some passages in his own Book, which plainly shows not only that he and his Party are in the Separation, but that he endeavours to Justify it. Indeed, the very Title of his Book is enough of itself to show on whom the Separation lies, it being, Some Reasons and Causes of the late Separation, &c. For if the Friends had made the Separation, what reason had G. K. who is their Opposer, to undertake the Defence of it, and to bring forth Reasons for it? He knew the Separation was his own Work, and therefore he wrote that Book to defend it. And in p. 17. he says, A third and main Reason that we give for this Separation, well, Warranted both by Scripture Testimony, and command of Christ, &c. Here he pretends, to give a Reason for the Separation( though it be a False Reason, viz. That Gross and Unchristian Errors are tolerated and upheld by the Society of Friends there) which shows he takes the Separation upon himself: For it were an apparent Self-condemnation in him to say, the Friends had Separated from him, and that their so Separating was well warranted by Scripture and Command of Christ. He must be understood therefore to mean, that the Separation which he and his have made is well warranted, &c. And towards the Bottom of the same page., citing divers Scripturers( most of which are nothing to his purpose) he says, now the Scripture that warrant us in this Separation, &c. This is a sufficient Warrant sure to lay the Separation at his door; for here is a plain acknowledgement that he is in it, though he idly pretends that others began it. In p. 22. he says, We are convinced and persuaded in our consciences, that God calleth us to Separate from such unbelievers, and not to be yoked together in Church-Fellowship and Disupline with any, that we have not proof of by confession of the mouth, that they are sound in Faith, &c. This sure is a full proof not only that they are in the Separation, but that they began it: For if the Friends( whom he calls believers) had first Separated from them, then how could he say God called them to Separate from the believers when the Unbelievers( in his sense) had Separated from them before? A Separation from a thing or Person in plies, a being joined to that thing or Person before, and till such Separation be made. But if the Friends there had begun the Separation before, then they had thereby disjoined themselves from G. K. and his Party, and G. K. and his Party could not have afterwards Separated from them, because they were not then joined to them; consequently it could not be that God should call them to Separate from the others, if the others had Separated themselves from them before. If therefore they are convinced and persuaded in their Consciences( as G. K. says they are) that God called them to Separate from these whom he calls Unbelievers, and that they answered that Call, they must then aclowledge that they began the Separation. And that they did so, his following words show, p. 23. where he says, We have great clearness and peace in the Lord, to retire and separate from such disorderly Walkers and Talkers as we have formerly done from other Professions. Hence it appears the Friends kept their standing, stood their ground; and G. K. and his Party retired, drew back, or withdrew, and separated themselves, and that purposely and with design to separate; for he adds,( a little after) Yet we design not any Separation from our faithful Brethren here, or any where else. A Separation then it seems they did design( tho' not from such as they account their faithful Brethren, such as will stick faithfully to them, and approve them in their Separation) and having designed it, they began it,( withdrawing themselves from the usual settled Meeting of Friends, and setting up first a private Family-meeting in G. K's House, afterwards public Meetings in an House provided for that purpose) and having begun it, they continue it, and G. K. hath written that Book called, Some Reasons and Causes of the late Separation, to justify and defend it.  
Thus, Friends, I have given you such an Account of this matter, as I have been able to gather, both from the discourse that was had upon it at the Yearly Meeting, and G. K's own printed Book concerning it. And as I doubt not but this will satisfy you, and all who seek the plain and naked truth; so if any will shut their Eyes against so clear Evidence and Demonstration, I shall rather pity than contend with such.  
In the tracing this matter through G. K's Book, I observe he makes a great noise and outcry of gross and vile Errors held by some, and them upheld by others, which he gives for one Reason or Cause of the Separation. But in as much as this is only his Charge, without due proof; and the Persons, by him charged with those vile Errors, are not here present, to make Answer to his Charge, and defend themselves, or to show the Occasions that lead to, and Circumstances that attended those Discourses, from which he picked the words he charges them with, and to explain their meanings therein, I have not thought it fit, or becoming me, on no better ground, to meddle with those matters, being alike unwilling to justify them, if in any thing they have done or said amiss, as to condemn them unheard upon the report of another, and him their professed Adversary. But if I should judge of his Dealing with the rest, by what I find he hath done by one of them, viz. William Southebe. I might well conclude his Outcry against them, for holding and cloaking gross and vile Errors, hath more of noise in it, than real ground for it. For by a Letter which I have seen, written in the Seventh Month 1692. from W. Southebe to G. Keith and others, I find, that G. K. having charged him with denying any general Day of judgement, and the Resurrection of the Dead, but only what every one witnesseth within here; W. Southebe solemnly denies the Charge, calls that Doctrine Damnable and Atheistical, declares that he believes the Resurrection, according to the Scriptures, and the Ancient Doctrine of Friends concerning it; and shows how G. K. framed that Charge against him, only from his saying( in private Conference with him) that he did not own it now, in or after the same manner, as he did when he was a Papist( he had been a Papist, it seems, before he received the Truth:) For then, says he, I owned it very carnally and outward, viz. That the great judgement should be in an outward Valley, called the Valley of Jehoshaphat, in the Land of Israel; and that we should see with these outward Eyes: But I believe now it will be more spiritual. And in the same Paper, he declares his Faith thus, viz. I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our only blessed Saviour, who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and laid in a Sepulchre, arose again the third Day from the Dead, was conversant Forty Days with his Disciples, ascended into Heaven, sitteth at the Right Hand of the Majesty on High; and that every one must appear before his judgement-seat to receive their Reward, according to their Deeds done in this mortal Body, even at that great and dreadful Day of a general Account, &c. Is it not strange, that this Man should be charged with denying the General Day of judgement, and the Resurrection of the Dead! In another Paper also, which I have seen, subscribed by Tho. Lloyd, Arthur Cook, Samuel Jenings, and John Delavall, on behalf of themselves, and many others, and directed to G. Keith himself, I find they say, As to Unity in Doctrine, so much seemingly professed by you, to the amusing of many unwary People, we hereby sincerely declare, that we are herein one with our ancient and faithful Brethren, firmly believing what is upon Record in the holy Scriptures, concerning God, concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, both with respect to his Appearance in the Flesh, and to his Appearance in the Spirit; concerning the Holy Ghost, the Resurrection-state, and Eternal judgement. Which, though offered unto you, to the same purpose, and that several times; yet was rejected, as insufficient, by you. Some of these are the men he charges with either holding or cloaking the gross and vile Errors, damnable Heresies, and Doctrines of Devils, which he fills his Books with Clamour against, and that in some of the Doctrines here mentioned. What likelihood of Truth there is in that Charge, as to their holding such gross Errors, I leave you, my Friends, to consider, having given you what the Persons themselves say, under their own Hands. And as to covering or cloaking gross Errors, &c.( which is the other part of his Charge) I observe the same Persons, in the same Paper, say, We offer unto you, That if any of us, or any countenanced by us, have given you any offence, either by any unsound Expressions, or by any ungospel-like Conversation, and the same be made to appear by Credible Testimonies, We promise unto you, that if the Parties concerned do not condemn the same, they shall be disowned therein. But that which, with me, hath abated much of the Noise of his Clamour against the Errors of others, especially as to his making them a Cause or Reason of his Separation, is, that after the Separation was actually begun, and he and his Party met apart from Friends, he went to the Friends Meeting,( as he says himself, Reasons of the Separation, p. 28.) and did there declare that He and his Friends had Unity with the most there, as to the main. Now if there had been such gross, vile, and unchristian Errors, against the Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith, such Damnable Heresies and Doctrines of Devils, held amongst them, as he suggests, and cloakt or covered, and tolerated by them, how could he say that he and his Friends had unity with the most there, as to the main? Truly, with me, his going to the Friends Meeting, after he had retired( as his word is) and separated from them, and telling them, he and his Friends had unity with the most there, as to the main, hath mainly abated his clamorous Charge against the Friends of that Meeting, for holding and tolerating gross, vile and unchristian Errors, against the Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith. But indeed I do not see with what pretence of Reason he can justify himself, in separating from that whole Society, or Meeting of Friends, with the most of whom he declared he had Unity in the main, even after he had separated from them.  
But leaving what is already said, to your judicious and weighty Consideration, my dear Friends, for whose Information I have undertaken this work, I shall now make some further Observations on some other passages in G. K's late Book called, The Causeless Ground of Surmises, Jealousies, and unjust Offences removed; which very Title carries in it a Reflection upon Friends, and the Yearly Meeting particularly, as if he had given no Just Offence by the Separation he has made, and the Scandalous Books he has printed; but Friends had taken Offence thereat unjustly, and without cause.  
In that Book he says, p. 1. In the first place, I cannot but greatly blame them, who have reprinted divers of my late Books, with other Titles than the Titles first given them. To print, or reprint any thing of anothers, with other Titles, or the same, without his consent or leave, is indeed a thing to be blamed. But if he were impartially Just, he would in the first place have blamed himself, for publishing in print the Divisions among the Quakers in Pensilvania( which he himself had the chief hand in making) and his, or his Printers, or others of his Party, their sending the Books over hither to be spread, thereby giving both opportunity, and a sort of Invitation or encouragement to the Adversaries of Truth here, to reprint them, making that the Title, which they found to be the Contents and Design of the Books, and of the sending them thither, viz. to give an Account of the Divisions amongst the Quakers in Pensilvania. For it is to be noted, that considerable numbers of those Books, which G. K. hath written in America( laying open the Division and Differences betwixt him and Friends there, and exposing both many particular Persons, and whole Meetings of Friends, to the Scorn of the World, in the most Reproachful terms and manner) were sent over hither, consigned to one of London,( who is well known not to be, or ever hath been in the Profession, or under the Denomination of a Quaker) and left to him to expose them to sale as he would, by the Booksellers of the Town, or the Hawkers, who cry the idle Pamphlets about the Streets. Judge then who was most worthy of blame, they that sent them in that manner hither, or they that having the disposing of them, or to whose hands any of them came, reprinted them with such fresh Titles as they thought most suitable to them. And indeed I do not observe G. K. blames any for reprinting or spreading his Books here, but only for reprinting them with other Titles than those he had at first given them. Of which that which he seems most to resent, is that they gave to one of his Treatises this Title, The Christian Quaker, or George Keith's Eyes opened, as if( says he) the Name Christian Quaker were peculiar to me, and some few others called Quakers, or as if I had been formerly blind till of late days; the but supposing of which, doth so sensibly touch him, that he takes occasion from thence to tell the World how long it is since his Eyes were opened. But when he comes to apply the Name Christian, he is very could and stiff, and does it very scantily. It is my charitable sincere persuasion( says he, p. 2.) that the worthy Name of Christian doth truly belong to very many of that People, as well as unto me. He will not allow it( it seems) to the People called Quakers, or to the Body of Friends, as a People, no not so much as from a Charitable persuasion: And how sincere he is in pretending to allow it to very many of that People, his following words show, for he adds, Having an experimental proof, through intimate Conversation, and frequent verbal Communication with many of them, that they are sincere in the Christian Faith &c. See now to what a narrow scantling he has reduced his application of the Name Christian among the Quakers, and how few he meant by very many; even just so many as he hath an Experimental proof of, through intimate Conversation, and frequent verbal Communication with them, which how many they may be, judge ye, considering how short a time he had then been in England, and in that time scarce or little out of London, nor very conversant with Friends there.  
His saying p. 2. It hath been said, that he hath Printed several Books against the People called Quakers, charging them with holding and cloaking more damnable Heresies and Doctrines of Devils, than any Protestant Profession would Tolerate; but that, a great search having been made by many into all his Printed Books, it hath not been found, and he says it is not to be found, that any where in all his Books he hath charged the People called Quakers either in general, or in the plurality, with any such things; This I say, has more of Art than Plainness in it. It may possibly, yea probably be so, that he hath not charged those things upon the people called Quakers in those very Terms, of either in general, or in the plurality. But certain it is that he hath laid his charge in such terms, and after such a manner, as hath given occasion and advantage to all sorts of Truths Adversaries, whetherenvious Professors, Profane Scoffers, or old cankered Apostates, to reproach the People called Quakers in general with it: So that by means of his scandalous Books, the Holy Name of God hath been greatly Dishonoured, the precious Truth and way thereof despised, and the Friends thereof reviled and vilified in the Nations. This Friends, ye know, by sad experience, and to your Grief and Sorrow, in the several Cities, Towns and Places where ye dwell, or deal., This is that hurt and disservice to Truth, which the Yearly Meeting had a deep and weighty sense of, and in the sense thereof advised G. K. either to call in those Books, or at least publish something innocently, and effectually, to clear the Body of the People called Quakers, and their Ministers, from those gross Errors charged on some few in America. Which he hath hitherto been so far from doing, that as he here says, it hath not been found in all his Books, that he hath charged the People called Quakers either in General, or in the Plurality: So I may say, I have not found in this last Book, which he hath published since the Yearly Meeting, that he hath cleared or attempted to clear, the People called Quakers, either in General or in the Plurality; Nay he is scarce willing to allow the Name Christian to any more of them, than he has had Experimental proof of, through intimate Conversation, and frequent verbal Communication with them( as I noted before) so contracted and narrow is his Charity towards Friends. 'Tis true, he quotes a passage or two out of his former Book, called Some Reason, &c. of the late Separation, pretending that he hath therein cleared the Quakers in general; but his style there also is ambiguous and equivocal: For he mentions not Quaker or Friends in General, or Friends Indefinitely, but says, We remain in dear Unity with our faithful Friends, and we are one with our faithful Brethren in all parts of the World, and this after he had made his Separation from Friends there. How then could these Expressions serve to clear Friends in General, when they have a restrictive application to such as should prove faithful to them in their Separation.  
That which he says is Greatly to be noticed, has nothing worthy of note in it, viz. That notwithstanding the objections and severe Accusations that some have made against my late Books, and a strict Examination of them, by some that have so complained, there is not any line or sentence in any of them, that they have made to appear to contain any Untruth or falsehood in them, either in matter of Doctrine or Fact. I say, this has nothing of note in it: For( supposing it were true in Fact, that no Untruth or falsehood in matter of Fact, had been discovered in his Books) it was not the proper Business of the Yearly Meeting( which here, as elsewhere, he Strikes at) to judge of the matters of Fact, contained in his Books, which were alleged to have been done in America, by Persons not here to answer to, or give account of them. Yet that there is Untruth or falsehood in his Books, in matter of Fact, with respect to his vain endeavours therein to cast the Sepa●ation off from himself, and lay it upon Friends, did appear in the opening and stating that matter in the Yearly Meeting, and will, I believe more fully appear by what is herein written on that Subject Therefore let none think that because the Yearly Meeting did not declare the Matters of Fact in his Books to be false, therefore they are all true. They remain to be proved by him that has affirmed them; and to be answered by them who are charged therein. The Matter then before the Meeting was the hurt and mischief those Books of his had done, the great dishonour to God, disservice to Truth, reproach and grief to Friends, the printing and publishing those Books had brought. Nor did it, or can it excuse him, to say his Books are but an improper and accidental Cause of the Hurt done by them; since it is apparent they are the proper and direct Cause thereof. The Hurt, the Mischief, the Dishonour, Reproach, Grief, that have thereby fallen on the Holy Name of God, his Truth and People respectively, are the proper and direct Effects of the printing and publishing those Scandalous Books of his; nor could any good Effects have been produced, or reasonably expected from them, whatever he may pretend. And indeed, it appears by the Apology made for the publishing of them, that he himself had some sense and foresight of the Mischief they were likely to do, when he said,( Reas. of Separation, p. 2.) It is too probable the Enemies of Truth, and of all true Religion, will seek to take advantage therefrom, and think themselves greatly gratified thereby, so as to rejoice the more in their Iniquity, and glory over the sincere Lovers and Professors of Truth: Which makes his Iniquity in publishing them the greater.  
But it is evident he has been so far from endeavouring to wipe away the Reproach his Scandalous Books have cast on Truth and Friends, that in his last he hath sought occasions, by se●ret Flurts, to throw more on; suggesting as if the Yearly Meeting( in opposition to whose Ad●ice to him, this late Book of his is apparently ●evelled) was guilty of covering or cloaking ●hose vile Errors he exclaims against, and of ●essening them with the smooth Name of Weakness. This he hath done by a sly way of Insinuating: But in that which came out a little before with R. Hannay's Name to it,( in which, to show ●heir Art and Delight in Dividing, they endea●our to represent the Yearly Meeting also as di●ided) the Reader is  told, that therein he shall ●nd a Party of them of the Yearly Meeting at London, are proved guilty of endeavouring to cloak and ●over the Antichristian Errors, and Persecuting Practices of their Apostate Brethren in Pensilvania, ●eferring for proof to certain Queries there fol●owing, which for matter are much what the ●ame with that other Book which G. K's, Name ●s to.  
And in this last, p. 3. G. K. insinuates as if ●hose great and necessary Doctrines, there and in his ●ther Books mentioned, concerning the Man Christ Je●us, his dying for our sins, rising again, ascending in ●he true and perfect Nature of Man, and being in Heaven our High-Priest, Mediator and Advocate with the Father, &c. And that by this Man Jesus Christ, God will raise the Dead, and Judge the World at the last Day. And that the Deceased Saints have not yet( generally) received the Resurrection of the Body, but wait for it at Christ's la● Coming and Appearance without us in his glorified Body, to Judge the quick and the dead. I say he insinuates, as if these Doctrines had been dead an● butted among the Quakers. For he says, p. ●● Hundreds of Friends have signified their great satisfaction and joy, that God had raised me up, and so● others with me, to appear in a Zealous, plain a● clear Testimony to those great Truths of christianity, plainly asserted in my late Books, &c. And ha● blessed God, on our behalf, for his giving us Z●● and Courage to appear in such a public Testimony these great Truths of Christ that had been as it we● butted in silence by some, and opposed by others, t● reviving and raising up of which, God w● pleased to show me in a Heavenly Vision, that 〈◇〉 would make me an Instrument thereof, &c. Ho● great and high a Charge is implied in these wor● against the Quakers in general! What saving here, what Exception made, either of the Qu●kers in general, or in the plurality, or inde● of any at all. These great important doctrine of Christianity he represents as butted in silen● by some, opposed by others; nay, that they we● let fall and become dead among the Quakers, f●● he says, he was raised up and made an instrument to revive and raise up these Doctrines again: Now ye know, Friends, that reviving i●plies a bringing to life again that which was de● and a raising up implies that the thing to be r●●sed up was fallen down. Judge now what a conceited Opinion this man hath of himself, a● what evil thoughts he hath let in concerni●● Friends, that he could thus let fly a Slande● which affects not only all our ministering Friends, 〈◇〉 the many faithful, worthy and honourable La●ourers in the Lord's Viney●rd) but even the Body of Friends in general, as if they had suffer●d those great and weighty Doctrines of Christi●nity to fall and die amongst us, so that there ●eeded one to be raised up on purpose to revive ●nd raise them up again. But Friends, ye know, ●nd are Witnesses( and the Spirit of the Lord, ● know doth and will bear witness with and to ●our Spirits, as to mine) that this suggestion is ●s false as it is foul. For these great and weigh●y Doctrines not only always( since we were 〈◇〉 People) have been, but still are at this day ●wned, received, believed, confessed to, and ●cknowledged by the Body of Friends, and de●lared and set forth in our public Meetings, ●n the openings of the Divine Life, and in the ●ovings, guidance and direction of the Holy spirit, which is the Heavenly Key, by which God opens his Divine Treasures to, and through ●is Servants. This, my Brethren, ye know. ●nd if it shall be objected, that those Doctrines ●elating to the Birth, Death, Resurrection, A●cention, &c. of Christ as to the Outward Body, ●re not so frequently or constantly declared or ●eld forth in our public Meetings, as those that ●elate to the inward Appearance and Work of ●hrist in the Heart. Ye know also, that the ●ervant is not to frame his Message himself, but ●o deliver the Message his Lord gives him to de●●ver; and as the Ministers of Christ may not ●●eak when they will, but must speak when their ●ord bids them; so neither may they speak what they will, but must speak what he gives 'em t● speak; who is not to be directed by Man, bu● is to be the director of Man; and is so of a● them that wait aright upon him, to receive th● word from his Mouth. And if any should wonder, and reason in themselves, why those Doctrines relating to the outward Appearance an● Work of Christ for our Redemption, are no● so frequently opened, and insisted on in public● Meetings, as the other that relate to his inwar● Appearance, and Work of Sanctification in th● Heart; let such consider, that the Dispensatio● we have received from God is the Dispensatio● of the same Gospel, which was committed t● the Apostles of our Lord, and to the Saints o● old: The Doctrines whereof( as well thos● that related to the outward Appearance an● Work of Christ in the Flesh, as those that related to his inward Appearance and Work o● Sanctification in the Hearts of his People) were in the first Ages of the Christian Church full● and clearly held forth, received and believed▪ And although in the succeeding Ages, as th● apostasy from the Life and Power of Christiani●● gained place, and corruptions crept in and prevailed, whereby a thick Cloud of Darkness cam● to be spread over the Church, for many hundred Years( which Protestants acknowledge● the inward Appearance and Manifestation o● Christ by his Spirit in the Heart, was departe● from, and the Doctrines thereof generally lo●● and forgotten: Yet the Doctrines relating to the outward Appearance of Christ in the Flesh and what he therein did and suffered for Man● Redemption, were not lost, but retained and preached, through all Ages, and by every Sort or Sect of Professed Christians; insomuch that G. K. now calls those Doctrines, which he pretends to be raised up to revive and raise up, such Doctrines as are held in common by us, with all other Professions. Now when it pleased God to raise up and sand forth a true Gospel Ministry again, in this latter Age of the World, to restore true Christianity to the World again, and to gather out of the many Professions a peculiar People to himself; it was agreeable to the Divine Wisdom, to bring to light that which had been hidden, to restore to the Nations that which had been lost, to turn People to that which they had been turned from, to instruct them in that which they were most ignorant of, which was the inward Appearance, Manifestation and Work of Christ, by his Light, Grace and Spirit in the Heart, for the Sanctification and Salvation of Men. Hence( with re●erence and submission to the supreme Disposer) 〈◇〉 conceive it hath come to pass, that they whom ●he Lord hath sent forth to preach the Everlast●ng Gospel in this Day, have been lead and guided by him, to teach People that which they knew not, rather than that which they professed to know before; to open those Doctrines of Life and Salvation, which the People were ignorant of, and Strangers to, rather than those which they were acquainted with, and had been all along trained up in. And this I take to be the reason why, though these Doctrines, which G. K. says we hold in common with other Professions, have always from the beginning been asserted, and on all occasions maintained and defended, and sometimes more particularly opened; yet those Doctrines that respect the inward Appearance and Manifestation of Christ Jesus, by his Light, Grace and Spirit shining and working in the Hearts of Men and Women, from the beginning, carrying on, and perfecting the Work of Regeneration, Sanctification and Salvation, have been more largely insisted on, and more frequently inculcated to the Hearers, as being Doctrines either not at all, or not rightly understood by those of other Professions, and for that reason disallowed and opposed by most. And surely this can be no cause of wonder, much less of stumbling, to any that shall well consider the consistency of it with right Reason, and its agreeableness to the End for which the Ministry is given, viz. to turn People from Darkness to the Light, to inform and instruct them in those necessary Truths which they are most ignorant of and to bring them to know the inward Mystery, of Christ being formed in them, and so becoming the hope of Glory to them; as they before knew, and professed the History and Doctrines of the outward Mystery of Christ's Incarnation, Birth, Passion, Resurrection, Ascention, Mediatorship, &c. And therefore, dear Friends, I cannot but think,( and conclude that ye also will think) G. K. the more to be blamed, in taking occasion to stumble and cavil at this, and giving thereby occasion to the Adversaries of Truth, in all Professions, to stumble and cavil also, who had no ground for their Jealousies and Dissatisfactions before. For though he, to excuse his Books, pretend they have been, and will be of great service for the removing those Jealousies and Dissatisfactions that many of all other Professions have entertained against us, occasioned( he says) either by the obscure and unwary Expressions of some of the same Profession with us, or by the ignorance or unsoundness of some others: Yet it is plain enough, that whatever Jealousies or Dissatisfactions any of other Professions had entertained against us, on this account before, they had no ground nor occasion given them therefore; whereas now he has given them occasion, though unjustly and without cause, to entertain wrong Jealousies of us; wherein the real disservice and mischief of his Books is far greater, than his imagined service could be. And he, by passing that rash Censure, of obscure and unwary Expressions upon some, and Ignorance or Unsoundness upon some others, of the same Profession with us, has shew'd a proud Conceit of himself, rendered himself an Accuser of the Brethren, and an Informer against them, and taken upon him to abet and justify the Jealousies and Dissatisfactions of our Adversaries, which none but an Adversary, how covertly soever masked for a Friend, would have done.  
But this sort of Detraction is so grateful to his Humour, that he forbears not publicly in his ●ate Book, p. 10. to propose the noting, correcting, and amending of whatever weak, and unsound or unjustifiable Expressions, Sayings, or Passages are to be found in any Books among us, that have happened through human Weakness, or Inadvertency, that are offensive and stumbling to other Professions, and hurtful to the weak among ourselves; whereby he suggests that such unsound or unjustifiable Expressions there are in Friends Books, and he pretends that this correcting work( which his Fingers seem to itch to be doing) would be an imitation of the Example of blessed Sem and Japhet, who taking a garment went backward, and covered their Fathers nakedness. But he should remember and consider, that blessed Sem and Japhet did therefore go backward, that they might not see their Fathers nakedness, which execrable Ham had discovered and exposed, and was therefore by his Father cursed. Whereas his Proposition of going backward( to revise and correct the Books of Friends) is with purpose to hun● for, discover and expose, if he can, the nakedness of such, as in comparison of himself, may justly be reputed and called Fathers in the Truth 〈◇〉 wherein he has greatly mistook his point, and ha● taken up Ham's work, instead of Sem's and Japhet's. But for all his talk elsewhere, p. 9. o● the Collections he has made out of Friends printed Books, he doth not seem here to have been heedfully conversant in them, when he says, Is it not high time that by the general consent, advice and approbation of the most judicious, wise and understanding Friends now alive, all the most necessary Principles and Doctrines of our Faith, both common and peculiar, should be published and made known. Is that, as a new thing, to be done now? What Principle, or Doctrine of our Faith, either common or peculiar, can he assign, that hath not been published and made known, perhaps before he knew either our Faith or us, as early as he endeavours to render himself amongst us?  
In his eighth and ninth pages, he labours to acquit himself from having imposed upon Friends in Matters relating to Faith or Discipline. He mentions a Form of Confession, which he calls, An Account of our sincere Faith, which he says he writ, but never imposed. He mentions also another Paper of his called, Gospel Order and Discipline improved, which he would not have taken for imposition, because he says it was propounded by way of Query. But if this be the same which I saw at the Yearly Meeting, among many other particulars in it, tending to run us ●nto the Professors formal way of Church-Fellow●hip and Communion, one is to make a verbal Confession of our Principle and Chief Doctrines, the Door of Admittance into our Society, either ●y making a Declaration thereof at length, or ●y answering Yea, or Nay to Questions put for that end. And though that whole Paper be, as and saith, proposed by way of Query, from whence and would infer it is no imposition; yet, with respect to a verbal Confession of Faith, I observe he ●ays in p. 22. of his Reasons and Causes of the ●te Separation, We are convinced and persuaded in ●ur Consciences, that God calleth us to separate from ●●ch Unbelievers, and not to be yoked together in ●hurch-Fellowship and Discipline with any that we ●ave not proof of by Confession of the Mouth, that ●●ey are sound in Faith, touching these necessary and ●●ndamental parts of Christian Doctrine. By which 〈◇〉 I do not, as I would not, and think I do not, mistake him) he imposes a verbal Confession of Faith upon all, who would be admitted into his Society, which is a principal Article in his Paper before-mentioned, called, Gospel Order and Discipline improved.  
In what he infers from R. Barclay he mistakes him, I suppose; I am sure he wrongs him. He says p. 8. That some Principles and Doctrines, and Points of Faith are necessary to be agreed upon, together with the Practices necessary depending thereupon, and to be owned, professed and declared by us, to be as it were, the Terms that draw us together, and the Bond by which we become centred into one Body and Fellowship, and distinguished from others,( yet not this so the Bond, but that we have a more inward and invisible, to wit, the Life of Righteousness) is the express Doctrine and Testimony of R. Barclay his Book, called, The Anarchy, &c. p. 48. These are neither R. B's words nor sense in that place. His words are these; We being gathered together into the Belief of certain Principles and Doctrines, without any constraint or worldly respect, but by the mere force of Truth upon our understanding, and its power and influence upon our Hearts, these Principles and Doctrines, and the Practices necessary depending upon them, are as it were the Terms that have drawn us together, and the Bond by which we became centred into one Body and Fellowship, and distinguished from others. Yet this not so the Bond, but that we have also a more inward and invisible, to wit, the Life of Righteousness, &c. Now observe, R. B. doth not here say, as G. K. says his express Doctrine and Testimony here is, that some Principles, and Doctrines, and Points of Faith are necessary to be agreed on,( as if Men were to contrive and cut out their own Terms, and before they entred into a Society or Fellowship, should consider, consult and conclude among themselves what Principles, Doctrines and Practices they would have to be the Terms and Bond of their Society) much less that an owning, professing and declaring those Principles, Doctrines and Practices, should be the Terms of that Communion. But that those Principles and Doctrines, and the Practices necessary depending upon them, which we, by the mere force of Truth upon our Understanding and its power and influence upon our Hearts, without any constraint or worldly respect, are gathered into the belief of, are as it were the Terms and Bond, &c. So that he does not make a bare Profession, verbal Confession, or Declaration of those Principles, Doctrines and Practices to be any Terms at all. The Principles, Doctrines and Practices themselves, he calls not the Terms and Bond strictly or properly, but as it were. But the Terms and Bond, strictly and properly speaking, are, with R. B. The Life of Righteousness, which is inward and invisible. So that from this place of R. B. rightly given, and truly stated, G. K. hath no strength or countenance for imposing a verbal Confession or Declaration of Principles, Doctrines, and Points of Faith, as Terms of Fellowship among us.  
But I observe he uses to make bold with his Country-man R. B. by the Credit of his Name to impose upon his unwary Reader. For in his Book, called, Some Reasons and Causes of the late Separation, p. 16. he proposes, That we agree together to put Robert Barclay's Doctrine into practise, in his Book called, The Anarchy of the Ranters, &c. § 4. p. 32, 33. § 6. p. 48, 49. which( says he) is, To declare our Faith and persuasion in certain Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith and Religion, that by the same, as well as by a good Life and Conversation, it may be known who are qualified to be Members of our Church; and that every one owned to be a Member of our Church, declare his Faith and persuasion in every one of these Fundamentals, which is a secondary Bond of our Union, the Spirit being the Principal, which may be easily done by answering to some plain Questions with Yea or Nay. What Reader would doubt but that this was Robert Barclay's Doctrine, and that G. K. had taken the words before recited out of R. B's Book before cited. But I assure you, Friends, upon my own diligent search, these are neither the words, nor the Doctrine of R. B. in that place, as any of you, that have that Book of his may see, and which I desire you to see, that ye may thereby more fully see G. K's unfair Dealing.  
His urging lesser matters, as plain Language and Habit, refusing to salute with the Hat and Knee, and Mens and Womens Meetings, to be made and accounted by Friends Terms of their Communion, and his appealing to all intelligent Friends, whether it be not so, shows his Ignorance and Error. I believe he will find no intelligent Friend, that will own any of those things to be Terms of Communion among us. Fruits, Effects and Signs, I grant they are( where they are sincerely and honestly performed) of that inward and invisible Life of Righteousness, which is indeed the true and proper Term and Bond of our Communion. But if every one that would speak plain Language, wear plain Habit, refuse to salute with Hat and Knee, and go to Mens or Womens Meetings, should be thereby entitled to our Communion, we should be in an ill case; there being many, who out of sinister Ends, are forward enough to come into those things, without regard to the Life of Righteousness mentioned before. And of those who have gone out from Friends, and wholly renounced their Communion, some retain some of these things, others other; and I suppose G. K. himself, and divers of them that are joined to him, may be willing for a while to retain them all, notwithstanding their being gone into an open Separation from Friends. But although we do not make those outward things( mentioned before) the Terms or Bond of our Communion; but that Divine Life and Power which brings them forth( where they are rightly brought forth): Yet in as much as we assuredly know, that the Testimony born in those outward things( plain Language, plain Habit, and refusing to salute with Hat and Knee) is of God, and is that which God hath lead his People into, and required us to bear; and that our Mens and Womens Meetings are of God's Institution, for the service and benefit of his Church; if any would pretend to be of us, and by practise contradict our Testimony in the former, or oppose the latter, such would thereby manifest to us, that they were either not come to, or departed from, that divine Power and Life of Righteousness, which is the Term and Bond of our holy Fellowship and Communion; and might therefore be justly refused by us, without making those outward things, the Terms of our Communion.  
That Christian and gentle advice which the Yearly Meeting gave him, to retract the bitter Language in his Books, he Spurns disdainfully at, and flies at some that gave it; pretending also that he can prove that Language to be due unto them to whom he hath given it. Yet in his Plea of the Innocent, p. 11. says, As for his giving hard Names and Words to any, it was but conditional, upon Supposition of their holding such Errors, which they did seem to favour, &c. So liberal he has been, it seems, of his ill Language, that he stuck not to bestow his hard Names and Words, on such as displeased him, conditionally, and upon Supposition of their holding Errors, or Seeming to favour them. But though he like not to retract his bitter Language: Yet the acknowledgement he made in the Yearly Meeting of his Passions, Weaknesses and Infirmities, he readily retracts; thereby showing, that either he was not sincere and plain in his then making it, or is since grown worse, in endeavouring to Justify those unruly Passions, which he then Seemed Sensible of, and made a show to condemn. He says, For my inward Defects and Infirmities I am only accountable unto God— but to Men I am only accountable for my Words and Deeds; and as I have not acknowledged to any( nor seen just cause so to do) so they have not proved me guilty of either Words or Deeds, that the Truth condemneth in relation to those matters, whereof some have accused me. How can this hang together? That he did aclowledge his Passions, &c. In the Yearly Meeting, is known to many, and not denied by himself; that he is Accountable to Men for his Words and Deeds he now grants; That Railing and Reviling Language, Rude, Unruly and Turbulent behaviour are Word and Deeds, every Man knows; and every Body that Reads his Books, may find him therein Guilty of the one; and every one that was present during the Yearly Meeting, must needs see him Guilty of the other, and that to a very high degree: Yet here he says, He hath not acknowledged unto any( nor seen just cause so to do) himself guilty of either Words or Deeds, that the Truth condemneth in relation to these matters, &c. What was it then, for which he did aclowledge his Passions, if it was not for either Words or Deeds, that the Truth condemneth? Is there not Praevarication and falsehood in this? I Judge it is more Christian( says he) and a greater argument of a Man's Growth towards perfection, to aclowledge his Sinful infirmities, in the Sight of God or M●n, and to be Humbled under the Sense of them, than like the proud Pharisees to justify ones self, &c. This acknowledgement of his Sinful infirmities, must needs be understood of the acknowledgement he made in the Yearly Meeting; for it is here urged by himself in commendation of himself, for having made it:( and he had said in the Period just before) As to my human Imperfections, it is not well so to glory over me, &c. This is an acknowledgement plain enough, that he did make such an acknowledgement, and that he reckoned ( as I also should, if he had been sincere therein) that he did well in making it. But why then doth he now deny it again, and say, As I have not acknowledged unto any( nor seen just cause so to do) so they have not proved me guilty of either Words or Deeds, that the Truth condemneth in relation to these matters, & c? Doth not the Truth condemn Sinful Infirmities? Yes sure. And as it is truly Christian, to aclowledge them sincerely: So it is a truly Unchristian to deny that acknowledgmen● again; which he would not have done, had h● indeed been sincere in making it, and rightl● Humbled under the sense of them: Much les● would he have smitten secretly, and in the Dar● as he has done, at others, whom he compares t● the Proud Pharisee, and whom he charges wit● having greater and more human weaknesses th● he, though they have neither the Sincerity nor Humil●● to aclowledge it. Whereby he again implies th● he had both the Sincerity and Humility to aclowledge his own human Imperfections or Sinful I●firmities; which if he had, he hath now show the greater Insincerity and Pride in denying 〈◇〉 It was not to Glory over him( as he misrepresen● it) that that acknowledgement of his in the yearly Meeting was mentioned in the Account of th● business; but to do him right; that since the 〈◇〉 order of his Spirit, and his unruly Behaviour w● so great and notorious, the Sense he seemed sometimes to have, and the acknowledgement he ma● thereof, might be taken notice of also, as a native to others( as well as it had been to t●● Meeting) to exercise the more Compassion, charity and Patience towards him. But he see● to be apprehensive, that the mentioning thereof May lessen his Reputation and Christian Testimony among Friends. So that as loudly as he exclaims( without cause that appears) against others, for covering and cloaking gross and vile Errors, he would have been willing, I perceive, to have had his own disorderly Passions, and turbulent Behaviour covered and cloaked, for his own Reputation sake, and Christian Testimony( as he calls it) among Friends. But as well may a Fountain sand fotrh at the same place sweet Water and bitter, salt and fresh( which the Apostle James denies it can, Jam. 3.11, 12.) as a Christian Testimony proceed from that Spirit, which lead him into those unruly Passions, beyond what I have lightly seen in Men of the lowest pretences to Religion. And if( as the same apostle says, chap. 1. ver. 26.) that Man's Religion is vain, who seeming to be Religious, bridleth not his Tongue, but deceiveth his own Heart: surely vain it is to expect a Christian Testimony from such an one.  
It is strange that G. K. complaining so oft, as he doth in his Books, of his having been condemned in America without all hearing, Conviction, or trial( though that is both denied and disapproved by the Friends there) should also complain of the Yearly Meeting, for not condemning the Friends there, Without all hearing, Conviction, or trial, which it must have done, had it condemned them there, who are absent, and distant several thousand Miles. But it is more strange, that after he hath broken from the Unity, and gone out into an open Separation from Friends, he should have the hardness, to say in his Postscript, I declare my Real and Sincere intention, i● remain in Unity with all faithful Friends and Brethren every where. His declared intention to continue to meet with Friends, is that, my Friends which I doubt not ye will be so far from denying to him, that ye will desire he may so meet with you, that he may come to be Bowed and truly Hum●led before the Lord, and made effectually sensible of, sorry and truly penitent for, his out-going from Truth, and the Unity of Friends, both in Spirit and practise: Which if he come not to, but continue to meet with you in the same Spirit and Mind, in which he went out from Friends, and made the Breach and Separation elsewhere, his Meeting with you will be but a Burden to you, and an aggravation of Condemnation to himself. But his continuing to exercise his Gift of Ministry( as he expresses it) amongst you, while he continues in that evil Mind, and Spirit of Contention, Division and Discord, wherein he hath of late appeared, must needs be a very great Ex●rcise and Burden to you, till the Lord shall be pleased to ease you of it.  
He says, It hath not been his way, to use any interruption or disturbance towards any, but to behave himself orderly and peaceably towards all. This is smoothly, but falsely said, and by this may his Truth and Sincerity be judged of. For at the very first public Meeting he appeared in at London, after his last arrival in England, he gave such Interruption, and made so great Disturbance, as the like hath scarce been ever known in any Meeting in that City. This many that were at those Meetings are witnesses of: Yet hath he the confidence now to say, It hath not been my way to use any Interruption or Disturbance towards any, but to behave myself orderly and peaceably towards all. Which single Passage is of itself enough to render his whole Books Nauseous, to as many as have the knowledge of the disturbance he made at those Meetings. Besides what he hath done at other Meetings since:  
Again he says, I would have none to entertain Jealousies and evil thought concerning me, as if I did design any Breach among faithful Friends; when as he has already made a great and open Breach in America, and is with his Copartners, Labouring and Endeavouring to make the like here; and that with such( I hope, groundless) hopes of Success that some of them have adventured to represent the Yearly Meeting as divided, and call the judgement given therein, the judgement of a Party, or Faction of that Meeting. And G. K. himself, in his late Book, called The causeless Ground of Jealousies, &c. removed, p. 6. having recited part of that Sentence in the Yearly Meeting's Paper of advice to him, viz. It is the clear and general sense of this Meeting, that G. Keith and the Rest concerned therein with him, were not Acted in God's Wisdom and Counsel therein, &c. Says, But we do well know it is not the general sense of Friends to blame us. This shows he not only Laboured to make, but thought also he had made some Breach among Friends concerning him, ●nd had drawn some to be of a contrary sense, to the clear and general sense of the Yearly Meeting ●n that matter, and yet at the same time says, I would have none to entertain jealousies & evil thoughts concerning me, as if I did design any Breach among faithful Friends. What he adds of his Thirty Years Labour in the Work of the Ministry, and his great success therein, in being an Instrument to the bringing Many into the Blessed Unity, savours of a boasting Spirit, and had been more comely from anothers Pen, than from his own: I would by no means detract from, or depreciate his former Labours: Yet I cannot but express my fear, that he hath been Instrumental to draw many more from the Blessed Unity and Fellowship of the Gospel, than ever he brought into it: For which the Doom was long since set, Ezek. 18.24. But that he may proceed no further therein, nor any more be beguiled by him, is my Earnest Desire, and the End of this my Undertaking. For I felt a Concern upon my Spirit, in the universal Love of God, to salute the whole Flock of God by way of Epistle, and therein to lay open something of the Nature, Work, and mischievous Design of that Spirit, which now works in these Instruments of Discord and Division; and to warn all Friends to beware thereof.  
Wherefore, dear Friends. every where, be y● warned, be ye warned; and being warned, be ye armed against the Assaults and Allurements of the Enemy, into whatsoever Appearance he transform himself, and by whatsoever Instruments he works: For he is a subtle Adversary, a Cunning Hunter, an Adulterated Spirit, that hunts for the precious Life to destroy it. But, Friends, ye have an Unction from the Holy One; and as the Anointing, which ye have received of him, abideth in you, abide ye in it, and keep close unto it, so shall ye not need that any Man teach you; but the same Anointing which is Truth, and no lye, will teach you, will led you, will direct, guide, keep, and preserve you out of the power and reach of the Destroyer, and will give you a savour in yourselves, and a Discerning of this Spirit, and its work of Division and Separation not to be of God; but to be the old rending Spirit, that would lay waste the Heritage of God, and scatter what God has gathered. Which having been discovered and laid open in its former appearances, hath now put on a new Dress, and taken up a new Pretence, different from the former, and works in and by new Instruments, that it may the more easily deceive. But the Light discovers it, and its Instruments, to be Enemies to God, and their works manifest them to be out of the holy peaceable Truth, who are in the Heats, Passions, Rage and Fury one while, and by and by Soothing, Fawning, Flattering. Therefore, Friends, dwell in the Light, which makes all things manifest; and keep your Habitation therein, and your Eye single; so shall ye see plainly the way of the working of this Carping, Cavilling, Treacherous Spirit, which hath laid Trains to ensnare and betray the simplo, putting Captious Questions, in dark and ambiguous Terms, on purpose ●o get advantage on the Answerers; who though ●onest, sincere and conscientious to God, yet through unskilfulness in such Questions and Terms, might haply drop some weak Expression, which the Adversary forthwith catching, and perversely straining to the worst Construction, published to the World, thereby exposing not the particular Persons only, but even our holy Profession, and the blessed Truth itself which we profess, to the scorn, derision and contempt of the World. Ah Friends, can such work be of God? Ye know it cannot. The Light hath discovered whence it arose, how it hath been wrought, and for what end; and the Lord is greatly offended with it, and with all that have an hand therein; and sore, and heavy will his judgement be, in the great Day of account, upon all that shall be found joined to this Treacherous Spirit. Therefore, Friends, in the tender Love of God, I beseech and warn you all, stand clear of it, join not to it, touch not with it, nor give any countenance or encouragement to it, or to any that are Agents for it, or Instruments in its Work. But stand up in the Testimony of God against it, and travail in Spirit with the Lord for the recovery of those simplo ones ou● of its snare, who through the subtlety of its working, and the cunning Craftiness of some of its Instruments, have been beguiled and drawn thereinto. And this know for certain, Friends, tha● the way to recover the deceived, is to discover, la● open and witness against the Deceivers. The Go● of Peace be with you all, direct, guide and keep you all in his peaceable Wisdom, and fill you more and more with his heavenly Power, that therein ye may stand up faithful Witnesses for him, and be instrumentally Saviours unto others. This is the sincere Desire, and earnest Breathing of  
Your Friend and Brother, in the Fellowship of the Gospel of Christ Jesus our Lord, T. E. The 25th. of the 6th. Month 1694.   

POSTSCRIPT,  
TWO things I take notice of, in the Pamphlet Subscribed by R. Hannay, which I thought not so proper to be meddled with before, because I would not interweave them with the foregoing Discourse. One is, that in the Introduction to the Queries, p. 9. the Yearly Meeting at London is blamed because the several Members thereof did not set their Hands to their Paper of Advice and judgement given to G. K. but ordered the Clerk of the Meeting to Sign it on the Meeting's behalf. This is there urged as a just cause of Suspicion, that they were not acted by the Counsel of God. But in this the Caviller is both weak and unjust. Weak, in not considering that in great Assemblies, whether Civil or Religious, it is both usual and convenient that the Acts of the Assembly be signed by the Clerk belonging to it, or by some one Member, in the Name of the whole. Unjust, in blaming the Friends of the Yearly Meeting for that, which( it seems) was the practise of their own Adjourned Monthly Meeting( as they call it) at Philadelphia, where three several Judgments, given in three several Cases, were Signed, by Order of that Meeting, by J. W.( whether their Hired Clerk, or a Member of that Meeting, is not material) as G. K. hath set them forth in his Book called, Some Reasons, &c. of the late Separation, p. 11.  
The other thing that I take notice of is, Their opposing the judgement of a Yearly Meeting( as they call it) at Burlington, to that of the Yearly Meeting at London; whereas upon inquiry I find that that Meeting at Burlington, from which that judgement was given in favour of G. Keith, was a separate Meeting, made up mostly of such as used to go to their separate Meetings in those parts,( and some others, who seldom or never went to Friends Meetings at all) in opposition to the Yearly Meeting of Friends, holden in the same Town, at the same time. And how properly it is called a Yearly Meeting, that never was before, nor perhaps may ever be hereafter, deserves to be considered.  
The END.   

ERRATA.  
page. 13. line 12. red contained: p. 15. l. 21. r. many Pages: p. 16. l. 4. r. Mouths: l. 19. r. passed: p. 17. l 9. after Meetings, deal the Comma: l. 12. after Papists, deal the Comma: p. 23. l. last, f. we, r. he: p. 25. l. 28. f. at, r. as: p. 39. l. 7. r. Scriptures: l. 14 and 15. r. Discipline: p. 45. l. 26. f. thither, r. hither: p. 46. l. 2. f. hath, r. have: p. 49. l. 2. r. Quakers: p. 56. l. 7. f. from r. for.